Talk:Shawn Phillips

Untitled
Frankly, the article reads like a press release. Also, bad form removing the tag without actually making changes to the article. &mdash;Wrathchild (talk) 05:42, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I re-edited to try to address the concern, but I'm new to this so may not be doing the appropriate thing. Help is welcome. Mike Evangelist 13:41, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Should this page have a link to long song titles like this?
==See also== -- Gbeeker 21:52, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * List of songs with particularly long titles

Removed paragraph about Shawn's death
I removed the following:
 * On November 29, 2008, a private plane carrying Phillips had fell off of radar soon after a distress signal was sent out. Police are still searching for the plane, but the passengers are presumed dead.

This was unsourced, controversial, and couldn't find this news event anywhere else. Dinkytown (talk) 01:30, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Copyvio
I've reverted this edit at first as promotional, and then a quick google  showed almost a thousand places that exact same text appears. It's clearly unsuitable for the page as a copyright violation, not to mention completely promotional. Just clarifying here, in case further removal is needed. Dayewalker (talk) 00:18, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello Dayewalker - I am Shawn Phillips manager for the past 17 years. Shawn and I appreciate what you do here on WIKI. I admit I am new to how things are done on WIKI. I will join the project as soon as I figure it out. What I posted to Shawn's site was authorized by the artist and myself (his legal representative). What is presently on WIKI we feel is not representative of Shawn's correct biography. What is there now is extremely dated and I don't know where it came from. Please stop reverting our edits and calling it copyright infringement. We're trying to update all of Shawn's social network site in lieu of his 50th Anniversary tour in 2011. If you have any question about my authority contact me at manager@shawnphillips.com - Google me - Arlo Hennings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sflips2003 (talk • contribs) 16:31, 20 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Sflips2003, please be sure you are au fait with WP:COI before making further edits. Aside from the copyvio issue, many edits in the last few days have been of a clearly promotional nature, inappropriate for an encyclopedia. I appreciate you are new, so you were unaware of this but you must familiarise yourself with policy to avoid conflict of interest issues. Mutt Lunker (talk) 16:58, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand how what's published now got there and why you think it's correct - based on what? Many of the citations needed and quotes etc will never be resolved because they're rumor and subjective. The discography needs updating and the references and external links are fine. How do we go about getting this done. Would the editors like to see the "proposed" edit and go from there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sflips2003 (talk • contribs) 18:47, 20 February 2011 (UTC)


 * The issue here is the problematic, promotional, now evidently COI, edits of yesterday (were the ones from an IP yours also?) and does not necessarily imply a defence of what is there already. For a start, per the tag, it "needs references that appear in reliable independent and third-party publications". Anything which is not cited by these type of publications, particularly in a biography of a living person, can be and ought to to be removed, so that would be a good area for you to start.


 * On a different matter, please get into the habit of signing comments on talk pages. Mutt Lunker (talk) 19:27, 20 February 2011 (UTC)


 * You might also find this informative and useful, although any content you donate would be subject to editing to make it comply with policies regarding verifiability, neutrality etc.. Mutt Lunker (talk) 20:26, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Arlo, I appreciate you coming to the talk page here. The goal of all of us should be to work together to create the best encyclopedic article for Phillips that we can. Matt Lunker has provided some good information and links above, that's a good place to start for you. Since you have a conflict of interest here, but certainly also have access to lots of information on Phillips, I think what would be best would be for you to bring up here on the talk page any specific changes, additions, or problems you have with the article. Your prior additions were very promotional in tone, which isn't what Wikipedia is for. If you try and address specific points, we can go point-by-point on those and see what's best for the article. Thanks! Dayewalker (talk) 23:55, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Youtube links
I have reverted the recent additions of a Youtube link that contains part of what seems like a TV show from the 60s. This certainly seems like a copyright violation, so I've brought it here for further discussion. The editor has claimed the video is in the public domain, apparently because it's on the subject's website.

While a link to a particular subject's YouTube page may be acceptable, linking to individual pages is highly questionable. As per WP:YOUTUBE, "Many YouTube videos of newscasts, shows or other content of interest to Wikipedia visitors are copyright violations."

If this video is actually in the public domain, I would suggest the editor show proof of that. Otherwise, this appears to be a clear copyright infringement. Any thoughts? Dayewalker (talk) 19:42, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Arlo Hennings and I are looking into providing this proof that you ask for. Please give us a few days to do some research to find this proof.ScottRode (talk) 04:40, 7 March 2011 (UTC)] ScottRode (talk) 05:33, 7 March 2011 (UTC)} here is the rules of thumb concerning Public Domain.

Rules of thumb for public domain works

There is no easy method to determine whether a work is in the public domain because the laws are complex and have changed numerous times over the years. Here are some rules of thumb that will help you confirm the copyright status of a work:

1. If the work was published in the United States prior to 1923, it is in the public domain. 2. For works published between 1923 and March 1, 1989, it depends on whether the certain statutory formalities were observed, such as providing a notice of copyright on the work or renewing the copyright per statutory deadlines. Examples: a) If the work was published in the United States between 1923 and 1978 without a notice, it is in the public domain. (Note: If the work published during this period has a notice, it is protected for 95 years from the date of publication.)  b)  If the work was published in the United States between 1978 and March 1, 1989 without a notice and registration, it is in the public domain. (Note: If the work published during this period has a notice, but not a registration, it is protected for 70 years from the death of the author.) c) If the work was published in the United States between 1923 and 1963 with a notice, but copyright was not renewed, it is in the public domain. For more information on renewals, see How to tell if copyright has been renewed.  3.  After March 1, 1989, all works (published and unpublished) are protected for 70 years from the date the author dies. For works of corporate authorship (works made for hire), the copyright term is the shorter of 95 years from publication, or 120 years from creation. So according to this the video is still copywrighted so we wont be able to link to it. We will not make this change anyfurthure. our apologes.

Good source or no?
While checking around, I found Internet Movie Database's bio on Phillips has a considerable amount of info. The credited author is just an e-mail address, though, so that leads me to question: is IMDb a reliable source?--Martin IIIa (talk) 13:42, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Well there's hardly a music, film or celebrity article on Wiki that doesn't cite IMDB. But there's always the proviso - "may not be entirely accurate" it seems. So not sure. But reasonably safe. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:53, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

The Ballad Of Casey Deiss
I remember hearing this song on the radio in the early 1970s (Album - Second Contribution). Apparently it was never released as a single. 2001:56A:F03F:5200:787D:15B0:C7E:6DFD (talk) 00:30, 8 January 2020 (UTC)