Talk:See See Rider

Untitled
An infobox for the 1925 Ma Rainey recording of "See See Rider Blues" was requested at WikiProject_Missing_encyclopedic_articles/List_of_notable_songs/12.

- The song C.C. Rider supposedly referred to a County Circuit Rider that could either be an attorney following the circuit judge or a traveling preacher following a circuit within a county. Ken Cochran  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cochran524 (talk • contribs) 18:56, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Emphasis on the "supposedly". That theory, along with others, is mentioned in the article.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:19, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Ben Jaffe (Creative Director of Preservation Hall and someone who nearly literally grew up in the Hall surrounded by Jazz & Blues titans --> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Jaffe) says he has been told that it stands for "Church Circuit Riders".

While he admits that he doesn't know the truth of the term as used in the song, the reference in this wiki article that labels these interpretations as "confused" is editorializing. They are interpretations that are being discussed by Jazz professionals.

Unless the original writer who used "confused" in the sentence can back that description up somehow, I suggest it is more accurate as well as kinder to say these are alternate interpretations.

IronStrikesIron (talk) 21:50, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Bill Broonzy
Wait--what the heck happened to my change regarding the Big Bill Broonzy interview about the song? What was the justification for removing it, reverting back to information without a citation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.79.110.13 (talk • contribs) 22:47, 29 July 2011


 * The reference you provided for the information was not able to be validated. If you would the information to be added, please add the information to the talk page so other Wikipedia members can discuss if it should be added.  Also, I posted why it was reverted on both the history page and your talk page. Housewatcher (talk) 04:38, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Broonzy's story is mentioned here, so it could be included in my view, but only as one of a number of competing stories, not as authoritative information. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:22, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * (1) The reference shouldn't have to be only available for lazy folks looking it up on the Internet. That's not an obscure recorded interview.  Learn how to do traditional research.  (2) It's not a democratic decision whether the information is accurate, and the goal of the page should be to provide accurate information.  Why is it my problem that you or whoever else is too lazy to seek out the reference if you must check it to be comfortable with it?  (Anyway, there actually was a lazy man's way to check it via the Internet; I provided enough detail about it for that.) (3) There's absolutely NO reference for "the song is likely to be traditional in origin", checkable via traditional means or not.  How in the world would that be a better version of the article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.79.110.13 (talk • contribs) 12:57, 30 July 2011
 * I suggest that you read up a little on how Wikipedia works. You say that "the goal of the page should be to provide accurate information."  That is not wholly correct - the goal of the page is to provide verifiable information - "verifiability not truth".  But, as I said, my view is that Broonzy's story should be included in the article, together with other theories, including the suggestion that the song is "traditional" (such as indicated here).  I was waiting to see if other editors had a view on that.  And please be civil towards other editors, and remember to sign your posts with four tildes (~).  Thank you.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:48, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree that the information should be added if there is a verifiable source. I just want to make sure that people can read up on the alternate theory of the origin of the song so they do not just think it is an unverifiable rumor.  Thanks for the contribution to the discussion Ghmyrtle. Housewatcher (talk) 15:13, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I've added a brief mention of Broonzy's claim to the text. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:51, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Alex Washburn and Alan Lomax
I am working on improving citations for the etymplogy of the term. Does anybody have any leads on who this Alex Washburn is who originated a hypothesis that c.c.rider stood for cavalry corporal during the Civil War? It appears that he might have been a participant of some chat or message board where the subject was discussed.

Since Alan Lomax is mentioned as the primary source for this theory, did anybody else come across the actual primary source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MtUllaHistorian (talk • contribs) 16:16, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Recording
It appears that this recording may now be in the public domain. It is linked to in a New York Times article, which lends it some credibility. However, I am unable to verify that this recording was made before January 1, 1926. Any efforts to source a verifiably public domain recording, which should exist and would greatly enhance this article, would be much appreciated.  Mysterymanblue  01:19, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
 * It has come to my attention that the copyright for audio recordings is different than that for other works, and thus recordings of this work made from 1923 to 1946 will actually enter the public domain 100 years after publication.  Mysterymanblue  02:09, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Snooks Eaglin
Hello : "See See Rider" is an early blues standard that has been recorded by numerous artists (secondhandsongs lists 440 verions). In order to be included in the article, other renditions/versions/covers should have reliable sources that show that they have received some critical attention, such as a professional review or singles chart, to show that they are somehow noteworthy (see WP:SONGCOVER). Otherwise, an article about a popular song or standard could be overwhelmed with long lists of unremarkable versions and contrary to WP:NOTEVERYTHING.

The sources used for Eaglin (an album track listing and a youtube album upload) only show that his version exists. This would be no different than the other 400+ versions that also exist. I looked for an album review and only found a 1959 album with a different track listing that doesn't include the song. The upload does not contain any commentary and YouTube should not be used as an inline source (see entry on WP:NOTRSMUSIC). Also, the full-album upload by Bill Beaumont gives no indication that he is associated with the artist or record label and is a potential WP:COPYVIO (see also WP:SONG). Unless there are reliable sources that actually discuss Eaglin's version, it shouldn't be added to the article.

—Ojorojo (talk) 15:57, 22 May 2023 (UTC)