Talk:Sonny Boy Williamson II/Archive 1

Infobox Section
I tried to format the infobox section, but to no avail. It now looks exactly as I found it, which is to say, it looks like there is something keeping it from properly setting up the infobox, but I'll be durned if I can figure out what it is.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Armenianthunder (talk • contribs) 04:53, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Untitled
First, let me compliment the contributor who wrote the article on Sonny Boy Williamson. Very nicely done!

My one quibble is that Sonny Boy's song, The Goat, should be listed among his most important works at the end of the article. For harp players, being able to "blow" The Goat is the Holy Grail. Plus, as poetry (the lyrics) and acoustic presentation (the band sound), The Goat is surely the one piece that best represents Sonny Boy's musical genius.

Maybe, too, there should be a strong reference to Little Walter. Although their styles were different, Little Walter and Sonny Boy Williamson pretty much defined the harmonica sound in music of their genre. Both built bands and songs around the harp, and both produced extraordinarily poetic works. For everyone else, the harp has never been more just than an "added" instrument.

Just some thoughts. ---

There should be a reference to how he died, and perhaps his influence on others. Also what type of harmonica he used, etc. And _Deep Blues_ needs to be credited properly in sources. Otherwise, though, very nice job.
 * I agree.82.41.10.26 (talk) 20:37, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Trumpet Records sonnyboywilliamson.jpeg
The image Image:Trumpet Records sonnyboywilliamson.jpeg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --18:37, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Dates Inconsistent
First of all, my compliments on a great article, but, the dates (Born/Died/Age) appear to be inconsistent. Should the Born date be 1899 (instead of 1912)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.130.19 (talk) 22:31, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Because the text of the article, which is uncontested, makes it clear that his date of birth is uncertain and unconfirmed, I changed it to "date unconfirmed". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.253.178.174 (talk) 07:23, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Eyesight to the Blind
I'm not sure if Rice M covered this song, but I think it is actually a John Long Williamson song and should be stated as such! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tornvmax (talk • contribs)
 * I'm pretty sure it is the first. I found this ref specifically saying it was the second artist to record under the name. So I'm putting it back. &mdash; RevRagnarok  Talk Contrib 12:50, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes it is, sorry, it sounded like I at first but then towards the end you can tell its Rice. Thanks for correcting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tornvmax (talk • contribs)
 * I'm no expert, I'm just saying the ref I found... ;) &mdash; RevRagnarok  Talk Contrib 13:35, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Isn't the correct title "Born Blind"? I don't want to change it without proof but it would be interesting to know which title it was first recorded under —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.96.243 (talk) 21:03, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Check the page for it. The image, as of this writing, is the original Trumpet recording under the title "Eyesight to the Blind". When he re-recorded it for Checker the title was changed to "Born Blind". All of this is on the page there.24.6.208.173 (talk) 06:59, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Title change
I was thinking Sonny Boy Williamson (Alex Miller) or Sonny Boy Williamson (Aleck Miller), whichever is right. Other possibilities, more in line with the other dab, are Sonny Boy Williamson (number two) or Sonny Boy Williamson (the second). Clarityfiend (talk) 11:46, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment. To explain...  this request arises from the renaming of the Sonny Boy Williamson I article to become Sonny Boy Williamson (original) - which I have not reverted or objected to, but it begs the question of what should happen to the title of this article.  I don't think there's an easy answer.  There doesn't seem to be much consensus over whether his original name was Aleck or Alex, though he was certainly known at one stage in his life as Rice Miller (or "Rice" Miller) - so, another possibility, one of many, is Sonny Boy Williamson (Rice Miller)..  I'm not happy with the suggestions of Sonny Boy Williamson (number two) or Sonny Boy Williamson (the second).  Indeed, I prefer the existing title, Sonny Boy Williamson II.  Obviously, we are not alone in deciding how to handle this.  Allmusic uses Sonny Boy Williamson I and Sonny Boy Williamson II.  This Blues Encyclopedia uses Sonny Boy Williamson I (John Lee Williamson), and Sonny Boy Williamson II (Aleck Miller).  This one uses John Lee "Sonny Boy" Williamson, and Sonny Boy Williamson (Rice Miller).   Another complication is that this SBW - Rice Miller - claimed on occasion to be "the original" SBW, and to have been older than John Lee SBW.  He almost certainly wasn't, but it complicates the use of the words "the original".   So.. there is no easy answer, and the more I look at it the more I think that in these unusual if not unique circumstances we should ignore whatever is "normal practice" or guidance on this site, and either keep to the article titles as they existed before today - Sonny Boy Williamson I and Sonny Boy Williamson II - or use for disambiguation purposes the alternative names which are usually used - that is, Sonny Boy Williamson (John Lee Williamson) and Sonny Boy Williamson (Rice Miller).  But I wouldn't want any decision to be taken until there has been a wider-ranging discussion involving other editors.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:31, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment (edit conflict) Article titles should follow WP policy (see WP:Article titles). WP:RECOGNIZABLE includes "Wikipedia prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in reliable English-language sources) as such names will be the most recognizable and the most natural."  A quick review of RSs shows the following used (besides than the most common "Sonny Boy Williamson"):
 * Sonny Boy Williamson II: Encyclopedia of Jazz & Blues by Keith Shadwick, Can't Be Satisfied (Muddy Waters bio by Robert Gordon), Blues Singers: Biographies of 50 Legendary Artists of the Early 20th Century by David Dicaire, Encyclopedia of African American Popular Culture by Jessie Carney Smith, Exploring Chicago Blues: Inside the Scene, Past and Present by Rosalind Cummings-Yeates, How to Play the Harmonica by Sam Berry, You Can Teach Yourself Harmonica by George Heaps-Nelson,
 * Sonny Boy Williamson [II] (Alex Ford "Rice" Miller): All Music Guide to the Blues by Cub Koda
 * Sonny Boy Williamson II (Aleck Miller): Blues Encyclopedia by Edward Komara
 * Sonny Boy Williamson (No. 2): Blues Hall of Fame, The Voice of the Blues: Classic Interviews from Living Blues Magazine by Jim O'Neal
 * Sonny Boy Williamson (Aleck "Rice" Miller): Delta Blues by Ted Gioia
 * Sonny Boy Williamson (Aleck Ford "Rice" Miller): Rock Obituaries - Knocking On Heaven's Door by Nick Talevski
 * Sonny Boy "Rice Miller" Williamson: The Encyclopedia of Popular Music by Colin Larkin
 * Rice Miller: Deep Blues by Robert Palmer, Blues Hall of Fame (they use both), Broadcast Music, Inc. (which also uses "Sonny Boy Williamson" for all songs by either SBWI or SBWII – apparently SBWII's successor's are collecting fees for both)
 * The Dictionary of Pseudonyms: 13,000 Assumed Names and Their Origins, 5th ed. by Adrian Room includes the entry:
 * "Sonny Boy Williamson: Aleck Ford "Rice" Miller (1899–1965) ... Miller claimed to be the original Sonny Boy Williamson" following the murder of blues harmonica player John Lee "Sonny Boy" Williamson (1914–1948). (The latter was known late in his career as "Sonny Boy Williamson I" to distinguish him from Miller, who was thus referred to as "Sonny Boy Williamson II.""


 * It appears that the "most commonly used" and "most recognizable" is "Sonny Boy Williamson II". Also, the most common names besides "Sonny Boy Williamson" for the first SBW are "Sonny Boy Williamson I" and "John Lee 'Sonny Boy' Williamson" (no listings for "Sonny Boy Williamson (original)"). —Ojorojo (talk) 15:34, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I very much doubt that SBW I was known by that name before his death - sources generally agree that Miller appropriated the name SBW after Williamson's death. Later research has also concluded, I think, that Miller was not born as early as 1899 - that may have been a birth year he claimed, in order to justify his (false) claim to be the "original" SBW.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 00:05, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * SBWI's first singles for Bluebird in 1937, such as "Good Morning, School Girl", use "Sonny Boy Williamson" with the songwriting credit "John Lee Williamson". This was used later for RCA Victor singles in 1946–1947. The Dictionary quote would be better with "later" instead of the "late in his career". —Ojorojo (talk) 03:34, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I may be misunderstanding what you're saying, but I don't understand where the claim that John Lee Williamson was known as "SBW I" during his career (that is, during his life) comes from. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:55, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, you missed it by a mile – the focus is on what names for the two are commonly used today. My 1/31 comment gives numerous examples of how SBWII's name currently appears in reliable sources.  I was not addressing what names were used during their careers.  For the sake of completeness, I added the Dictionary of Pseudonyms, which is the only mention of career names; it shows the common use of "Sonny Williamson I" and "Sonny Boy Williamson II".  For later clarification, I added added SBWI's singles information to show that he in fact was known both early and late in his recording career by the same name (and apparently not differently during his career as the Dictionary states).  I hope this clarifies matters. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:34, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * My misunderstanding - when you used the word "later" I assumed you meant "later in his career". A clearer wording might have been "after his death".  Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:15, 1 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I would support renaming to put last names or even full real names in parentheses. If the "original" is most notable, he could be the primary topic sans parenthetical with a hat note to distinguish on that and the other pages. If one is not substantially more notable than the others we could also turn Sonny Boy Williamson into a disambiguation with the others using real name parentheticals. Either way, I/II is misleading article title since they have a common meaning when part of a person's name (as opposed to, say, as part of an album title). "(Original)" seems clumsy. --&mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 22:01, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
 * The original SBW is not the "most notable". And, many sources do use the versions SBW I and II - regardless of how they were known in their lifetimes.   A disambiguation page already exists - but does not resolve the question of the article titles.   Ghmyrtle (talk) 00:00, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Damn. I've changed about 50 I links (and there are still a bunch more in limbo pending the result of this discussion). In any case, I also strongly object to the I/II nomenclature. That belongs to (1) kings and other aristocrats (2) popes and (3) people related to each other. One possible way around this might be to put it in brackets, e.g. Sonny Boy Williamson (I). Clarityfiend (talk) 08:19, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I understand why you might "strongly object". But, at the same time, we need to recognise that (1) in this unusual case, many reliable sources that have addressed this problem have come up with the I and II designations, (2)  it is widely known and understood by experts in the field; and (3) it has been used on this site for years without previous dissent.  It may be the best solution despite your objections.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:51, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Clarityfiend, regardless of your personal feelings, the titles should reflect common usage in reliable sources. Once that is established, then they should be implemented. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:34, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

We use common names in the sense of what people/topics are commonly known as. While I and II may be the most common ways of distinguishing these two in reliable sources, when the differentiation is not part of the conversation, he's still just called "Sonny Boy Williamson". For example the encyclopedia of arkansas history and culture has the article heading "'Sonny Boy' Williamson II" but in the article calls him "Sonny Boy Williamson." Mississippi Blues Trail calls him II throughout the article to distinguish, but his name is still given as Sonny Boy Williamson. So while he has commonly been distinguished from the other Sonny Boy Williamson as such, it's not the name he is most widely known (which is just Sonny Boy Williamson, it seems, notably not his birth name). Adding to that, WP:COMMONNAME states "Ambiguous or inaccurate names for the article subject, as determined in reliable sources, are often avoided even though they may be more frequently used by reliable sources." In other words, if the article title is made unclear by the title, it matters less that reliable sources use it. --&mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 20:08, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * It is standard practice to drop extra names in the body of an article. Hank Williams, Jr. and Frank Sinatra, Jr. are usually written as Williams or Sinatra in the text, except when it is necessary to distinguish them from their fathers.  Thus SBWI and SBWII usually become Williamson or Sonny Boy for most of the body of the articles.  The Mississippi Blues Trail (which promotes tourism in that state) is alone among the 14 plus examples given above that does not use an extra designation in the title (SBWI was from Tennessee).  Even examples that add "(Alex/Aleck/Rice Miller)" often include "II".  I don't know why this even came up.  Music writers and historians have been using I and II for decades because it's simple and effective – SBWI's recording career came first: 1937–1948, while SBWII came second: 1951–1965.  People who may be aware of "Sonny Boy Williamson II" might not recognize "Sonny Boy Williamson (Miller)", because it does not place him earlier or later.  If an extra designation is added, the I and II should remain part of the title because they have become so common. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:41, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, since nobody seems to support "(I)", which I think is the best solution, I'm going to restore it back to its previous form. (May all the George Foremans have mercy on my soul.) Clarityfiend (talk) 22:57, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I've reverted today's undiscussed move to Sonny Boy Williamson (died 1965). That was not an option discussed here previously - I don't support it, as I suspect few people looking for SBW II would actually know his death year. As the preceding discussion shows, the best option is to leave it at the established title of Sonny Boy Williamson II. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:43, 13 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Well, all you need to do to remedy the above quandary is to create a disambiguation page. I'll be happy to do it. Sorry for being overly BOLD. Quis separabit?  19:50, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * You mean Sonny Boy Williamson? This has all been discussed before - perhaps you didn't notice.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:57, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * You're right. I didn't. Never been in this neck of the woods before. A lot of redlinks and a lot of text to sift through but I see the |disambiguation page now, though. Thanks. Quis separabit?  20:01, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * No problem. Funny that this came up twice in a month though, when it's been sitting here simmering quite happily for almost 12 years!   Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:05, 13 March 2015 (UTC)