Talk:Hank Williams/Archive 3

Infobox
the infobox isnt working. can anyone fix? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.125.211.130 (talk) 03:57, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. L Kensington (talk • contribs) 04:35, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Better
There's a lot of key information but the article is not well written. Could this be fixed. Gingermint (talk) 08:30, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Contradiction
The article says Lillie opened a boarding house in Greenville, then later states she opened her first in Garland. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:19, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

The contradiction is now clarified.-- GD uwen    Tell me!   17:35, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Propose to merge/redirect Death of Hank Williams
A new spin-off article has been created on the topic of the Death of Hank Williams. I believe that this is an inappropriate split, and I have proposed that it be merged and redirected back to this article. "Death of" articles typically are created for situations where a person's death was a notable event, but the person themselves was not otherwise notable. They also are created for exceptional deaths, such as assassinations. Neither is the case here; the end of Hank Williams' life is notable as an important part of his biography, but it is not independently notable. --Orlady (talk) 14:49, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Hank Williams' death was a notable event on its own is music history, especially the history of country music, beyond merely being an event in Williams' life. It's mentioned in song and film in a surprisingly large fraction of those that mention Hank Williams at all. Compare, for example, articles such as Death of Kurt Cobain, Death of John Lennon (a GA), Death of Marvin Gaye, or of course The Day the Music Died. Compare also music "events" (like Altamont Free Concert or 1979 The Who concert disaster) which are not merged into the articles on the people or bands involved, as they are important events in their own right. I believe Williams' death to be similar. – Quadell (talk) 15:40, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Hidden admiration in the word 'though'
Hello to you all,

Firstly, I want to say that my native tongue isn't English, but please consider my contribution for this article. Secondly en thirdly, I think it's a great article and I'm an admirer of Hank Williams.

The point I want to make, concerns the sentence:

He had 11 number one songs between 1948 and 1953, though he was unable to read or notate music to any significant degree

The causality that's hinted by the word 'though' doesn't exist. It's a very common misconception: the unabilty to notate or read music adds something to the greatness of a musician. I my language we say: the wish is the father of the thought, in English I guess you'd call it 'wishful thinking'. There is no connection whatsoever. I don't have the statistics, but I'm confident to state here that the vast majority of musicians in non-classical music, beit country, pop rock, jazz, is unable to read or notate music. So it would be far more interesting if Hank Williams did know how to read or write sheet music. Notating or reading music isn't an artistic merit or value. It's not a musical skill. It's a tool musicians can use to learn or spread music. It's not a compositional tool. In this context, you could compare it to a recording.

This kind of statements are very common in wikipedia music articles. I suspect that in most cases the drive or motivation behind it is the urge to make the musician yet even greater than he/she already is. There's no need for that, especially not in Hank William's case.

For understanding, it helps to invert the statement: the ablity to read and write sheet music leads to a higher frequency of number one songs...

Two suggestions:

- Remove the causality;

- Remove the sentence about the unability to read/write in it's entirity, because it's nothing special.

Dunglisher (talk) 18:03, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Drug abuse in lead section
Should we include "Several years of back pain, as well as recreational and prescription drug abuse, severely deteriorated Williams' health" in the lead section? I think that Alcohol is a recreational drug, and should be mentioned as such, but if not, I think keeping Alcoholism as is would be fine with me. Thoughts? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 05:50, 17 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I think it would be proper to just keep alcoholism there.-- GD uwen    Tell me!   16:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Garden Spot Recordings
I thought this may be of interest -- it's from a program on NPR's All Things Considered Sunday program. The title is: "Six Decades Later, A Long-Lost Hank Williams Recording Resurfaces."

http://www.npr.org/2014/05/18/313714331/six-decades-later-a-long-lost-hank-williams-recording-resurfaces

I don't know if is possible to incorporate this into the entry here or not. Rissa, copy editor 22:11, 18 May 2014 (UTC)


 * It sure is, thanks for the hint. I just added a paragraph on it under "Legacy".-- GD uwen    Tell me!   17:58, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

SOUND SPELLINGS
DO YOU REALLY THINK PEOPLE ACTUALLY CANNOT PRONOUNCE HANK WILLIAMS? How badly are you looking to insult the people who view this site?--24.186.96.236 (talk) 18:23, 21 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Not everybody who reads the English Wikipedia is a native speaker of English. A person might be able to read and understand English, but nobody said that everybody knows the pronunciation. To a native speaker it might sound ridiculous, but you can see anyway in dictionaries and encyclopedias that the IPA tends to be included. Besides, does it really help to delete content that really does not do any harm?-- GD uwen    Tell me!   19:13, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't think a soul on Earth would have trouble pronouncing a name as easy as this. When did Wikipedia become so condescending?--24.186.96.236 (talk) 14:03, 10 June 2015 (UTC)


 * It's not condescending, as I said, you can see the IPA in a number of dictionaries and encyclopedias. You may think that pronouncing the name is actually easy, but believe me that many non-native speakers can't nail the sound on that "a" in "Hank" (I heard a couple of cases). Anyway, I don't see why so much fuzzing about a little IPA thing next to the name! It doesn't seem a big deal to me. I don't see why to delete it, but I'm not about to restore it every single time it gets erased anyway.-- GD uwen    Tell me!   18:23, 10 June 2015 (UTC)