User talk:HJensen/Archives/2008/August

A little cheer
User:Epbr123 has been copy editing the Frank Zappa article. He is a FAC WP:MoS guru, so I am taking his interest in the Zappa article as a very positive sign. In my mind, he would not be bothering if the article wasn't headed for success. (I am amazed how involved in this I feel; usually I don't get so emotional, just because I copy edit an article!) Fingers crossed, &mdash; Mattisse  (Talk) 23:56, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Sounds great! Again, thanks so much for your efforts!--HJensen, talk 11:17, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Zappa legacy
According to User:Malleus Fatuorum (an FAC regular), who likes the Zappa article in spite of his criticisms, if you could put together a legacy section (not long and fancy) he would be willing to help with the article's prose issues. He thinks, with a legacy section, it will make it at FA. I would help with the legacy, but I don't know what Zappa's legacy is. Just a short paragraph or so. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 21:38, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I was thinking taking some from the cultural ref. article, and include some of the awards from the lead and add some musicians and others influenced by him (I can find several). I will look at it tomorrow. It could be farily short, albeit a few paragraphs. --HJensen, talk 22:44, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * (ec)Yes! It can be simple. And User:Malleus Fatuorum suggests the following,  "...just a small addition. Musicians who claim to have been influenced by him? The work of his trust? That kind of thing." He will help with prose problems. And, of course, I will too.  &mdash; Mattisse  (Talk) 22:50, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Mad scientist
I uploaded a few Zappa images I found to the Wiki Commons including the "mad scientist" album cover and Zappa in Buffalo, New York, 1980:. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 19:58, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Great job! You think they can be used? The latter is 100% free (not a super great photo, but it shows Zappa as a singer; so maybe good to put in), but I am a bit in doubt about the legitimacy of the Varese cover. --HJensen, talk 21:19, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes. I uploaded them to Wiki Commons in Category:Frank Zappa on the Commons from Rlickr. (There are two Frank Zappa categories for some reason; one has only two pics, the other 11.) All pics have been checked by the Commons as having the correct licensing for use on Wikipedia. (See the green check under each pic?) &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 22:09, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Excellent. I just have a bit "copyright paranoia", as I have encountered instances where people have uploeded things on Flickr under CC 2.0 without really knowing what it is. There is a guy on Flickr having made a spoof on a Mac "Think Different" ad with a Zappa picture. He has uploaded it under a CC2.0 license, but to my best judgement he has NO rights over the Zappa picture, and he doesn't obtain it by making some derivative work with it. I bet if you uploaded that image to commons you would nevertheless get a green check. Never mind. I think the Varèse cover is fine for the article, and we can let go of the Studio Z picture. Then, there are only two Fair use images left, which I would hate to lose. I am a little behind on the legacy draft - I have to work as well :-) Cheers --HJensen, talk 08:53, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Turns out you copy right paranoia was justified. the Mad Scientist pic has now been tagged with a warning to delete on the Commons. So be it, if they delete it. (The other one so far is O.K.) Phooey! &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 12:55, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * When was the Mad Scientist first released, if Zappa had a hard time finding it in the 1950s? Don't copy rights on album covers ever run out? Bad mood. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 12:58, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Bummer! I don't know when it was released. But the copyrights drag on forever, like 95 years in some cases. A great chart is this one. From this, I would guess the cover (as it is pre-1963) is in the public domain, unless copyrights were renewed. In more than 80% of the cases this never happened. But, the problem is that on wiki, it is the uploader who has the burden of proof. So how can one prove that the copyright was not renewed? One would have to hire some agency to check it, and then it costs money. :-( I also stumbled over a scan of the (now defunct) newspaper, "The Daily Report Ontario", from 1965 with a great pic of Zappa on the eve of his arrest. But again, I fear it cannot be used, as it is published after 1964 and thus don't go into the public domain until 2060. Well, I probably don't have time for that. But I have a link to it here. Nice right? --HJensen, talk 13:31, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The Varese album was released in 1950, but has been re-released on CD with the same cover in 2007. So at best, it can be used as "fair use", but then only on the page for the record. BTW: In my searching, I found that Varese looks much more a Mad Scientist in this picture :-).--HJensen, talk 20:23, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Legacy ideas
You are already aware that I know little about Zappa, but here are some ideas, just to get you going.
 * Zappa was a pioneer in multi-channel sound, overdubbing and such, mixing live and studio recorded etc., and apparently innovative in video and film also. --
 * His son, Dweezil, has dedicated himself to carrying on his father's legacy. -- --  --
 * Rock and roll star as entrepreneur - his true (most interesting legacy. --
 * Problems with the Zappa Family Trust -- -- (blog) --


 * Zappa's legacy lives on. --

Plus:
 * Eye for talented musicians -- (blog)


 * He must have been one of the first social critics/musicians along the line of Lenny Bruce and such.

Just some ideas to get you started. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 20:10, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Excellent! You will soon know much more than I. I hope to start on the section this night, but I first dig into the remaining pending issues at the FAC page (some citation issues brought up by SandyGeorgia, and a response to Malleus Fatuorum).--HJensen, talk 20:55, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

More legacy
These quotes don't speak specifically to the legacy issue, but it seem obvious to me that Zappa was at the forefront of all that came next:

(from ‘’All Music Gide to Rock’’ (1995) Miller Freeman: San Francisco ISBN 0-87930-376-X

Frank Zappa was one of the most accomplished composers of the rock era; his music combines an understanding of and appreciation for such contemporary classical figures as Stravinsky, Stockhausen, and Varese with an affection for late-50s doo-wop rock and roll and a facility for the guitar-heavy rock that dominated pop in the ‘70s. But Zappa was also a satirist whose reserves of scorn seemed bottomless and whose wicked sense of humor and absurdity have delighted his numerous fans, even when his lyrics crossed over the broadest bounds of taste. Finally, Zappa was perhaps the most prolific record-maker of his time, turning out massive amount of music on his own Barking Pumpkin label and through distribution deals with Rykodisc and Rhino after long, unhappy associations with industry giants like Warner Brothers and the now-defunct MGM. -William Ruhlmann, p. 845

Jazz-rock hasn’t been a big critical or commercial deal since the mid ‘70s, but occasional innovators have produced interesting efforts along the line of the best jazz-rock pioneers. Frank Zappa couldn’t properly be considered a jazz-rock musician, but several of his ‘70s recording, most notably ‘’Hot Rats’’, rank among the most ambitious blends of rock and jazz principles. (Mentions two of his band were of the Ornette Coleman school of harmonics.) The best of their records have melded jaz improvision, funk rhythms, and visceral electric drive. -Richie Unterberger p.908

The Mothers of Invention, let by Frank Zappa, were also concerned with social satire, with important differences. Unlike the core member of the Fugs, they were accomplished serious musicians; the issues they satirized tended to be general social conventions, not specific socio-political issues; and the simultaneously paid homage to and ripped apart rock & roll genres like love songs and doo wop. Their late ‘60s albums on Verve are perhaps the most successful sock satires ever recorded, losing little or none of their humorous bit when hear in the 1990s; ‘’We’re Only in It for the Money’’, a vicious send-up of the psychedelic counterculture is the best album-length concept comedy album of sorts ever produced. --Richie Unterberger, p.941

I know that you have said all this in your very fine article. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 22:32, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to keep plaguing you with posts
But you really should read this article for an interesting take on "the rock star as entrepreneur: That may be FrankZappa's most interesting legacy." Truly Zappa was an interesting combination. And the article gives a clue why all this fighting was going on over his estate now. To me this aspect of him makes him all the more interesting. (I read the article for free, but when I tried out the link just now, the whole article wasn't there. Don't know what the deal is.) &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 23:19, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I put some material on Talk:Frank Zappa that might be helpful for the legacy. Feel free to reword my prose; I quoted the parts from the book that are direct quotes. Maybe if it is understood how wide-ranging his influence was, the push to stick him in a "style" will cease. And it will be realized that his influence was not only musical but cultural.  &mdash; Mattisse  (Talk) 23:10, 12 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Great! I am beginning to assemble the legacy section, and has of now found a sufficient number of artist that are influenced by Zappa that comes from all over the musical spectrum. You can check out the rough draft at User:HJensen/ZappalegacyAugust2008. Gotta catch some sleep now. Later.... --HJensen, talk 23:18, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Zappa FAC failed!
I am so sorry to hear that. I don't understand the pile up of criticisms at the end of the FAC (hardly any until the end), with no allowance of time to fix the complaints. Your article was 100 times better than ones that routinely pass according to FAC formula and the cliques of supporters that favored article garnish. I think the level of sophistication is higher than 99% music articles. Much of the FAC critical time was spent on nonsense.

I personally have low opinion of the whole FAC process (as you may guess). However, I do urge you to complete the article (you really were so close!) and I will help you anyway I can to get that star. Just let me know and don't hesitate to ask. You are a wonderful person to work with and I have enjoyed it immensely. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 10:26, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks again for your efforts. It has been a great pleasure working with you! I hope we can continue on this a while still. I'll ask SandyGeorgia whether I should restart this nomination or start a new one, when I have made the final section. As for the whole process, I also find it extremely arbitrary. When I looked at the Frusciante article, I noticed it has several non-free images, and no consistent citation style. And all the time I wasted on securing that the cite template was not used along the citation template; it's not even visible to the reader. Oh well, you can't win them all. I should consider writing articles about living super stars or computer games instead.--HJensen, talk 10:49, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I am certainly willing to continue working on this article and any other article you want to write. I find you a fine writer. I think it was tricky writing about Zappa without going overboard one way or the other; you managed to do so admirably. I fired off some angry comments about FAC&mdash;this is not the first thoroughly screwed up one I have seen. I think the process needs a complete overhaul. (Did you look at my legacy suggestions on Zappa's talk page, by the way? I tried to find sources that widened his legacy scope and put him in a greater perspective.)


 * What was that whole citation thing about? It seemed like it was first one way, then another. I do not think a particular style is mandated for FAC, as long as it is consistent. However, the citation templates are screwed up so consistency is difficult if not impossible. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 11:15, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Question
Hi! Glad to see you working on the Zappa article. Let me know if there is a time I can help out. Also, I want to ask you a little formatting question. In the Zappa article, you use "{{quote box|quote=" to get that quote box to the right in the article. What is the code for getting the same type of box, only to the left side instead of the right? Thanks. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 14:07, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks again. I have almost completed the legacy section (you can look at the drafting here User:HJensen/ZappalegacyAugust2008). I have really gone into details and found scientific journals ranging from papers on classical music to extinct snails from dinosaur ages. A lot of fun. I am still in doubt about pictures. I just saw Flea as yesterday's FA with three non-free images. That made me a bit depressed. As for your question, undortunately I don't know. I tried at some point to left indent the box, but to no success. It seems to default itself at the right.
 * As for the Zappa article, I am in doubt whether I should put it for peer review before another FAC. Probably, I won't get any more comments, but I get the sense that it helps in the FA community to have followed the usual drill. What do you think? --HJensen, talk 14:16, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Addendum I think I have it: So "| align  = left " should do the trick! --HJensen, talk 14:47, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I have been noticing all those interesting "legacy" facts you have been finding. I still think the fact he was an "indie" and was part of creating an atmosphere of creativity and experimentation that is still influential today somehow needs to be conveyed, but I don't know how. It is far more than a "style". There has to be a reason that he touched so many people that stars and biological specimens were named after him! As far as PR, I suppose anything that will help in the FA community is worth doing. I do think FAC is somewhat of a jumble. The feedback was that Zappa was close to passing and just needed the Legacy section. If PR would help the credibility of the Legacy then it probably would be worth it. And thanks for the tip on align=left! &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 16:22, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. And thanks for the advice! I'll probably knock on your talk page when I submit it. Cheers. --HJensen, talk 17:31, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I just saw an FAC reviewer put on Featured article candidates/Crown Fountain that only two well-justified Fair Use images are allowed, in his opinion, so probably you should aim for that. &mdash; Mattisse  (Talk) 21:30, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Great. I am exactly down to that now! --HJensen, talk 22:43, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

About Federers/Nadal articles
I've seen you've undid one of my back-changes (what im pasteing there is NOT NEW, now I will explain it). I've done it again, I will explain you why:

Please go some weeks ago on Nadals and Federer's articles and check how they were. Check how the ATP Masters tables (When they were introduced, I think it was like 2w ago) they were like im putting em: "miami, indian wells, etc." Tennis master changed it to the key biscane things. Thats what's wrong because he didn't gain any consensus and the table format DOES NOT HAVE RELEVANT INFO TO HELP PEOPLE. He changed the formates because he wanted, please check it. 62.57.212.101 (talk) 20:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll re-check. I thought that they had the "Sponsor titles" previously. Maybe that was further back in time (+ 2 weeks). PS: Don't use capitals, it is like "shouting" :-). And why not set up an account so you will get better credit for you edits? Cheers.--HJensen, talk 21:19, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll think about the account hehe, but I'm not used to edit here, even if I followed (and got informed of) the Nadal's and Federer's articles for a long time, because I found them really interesting and with a lot of information. The format tennisexpert wants to put them its a bad one, if I read "pacific live open, key biscarne, florida, us", I would ask myself 2 things: "What is that one?" and "Where is Miami"?. Mix 2 cases like this and there's no clue about what tournament it is... it had a good format but don't know why on these weeks i've been out (doing a route for Spain hehe), there have been such important changes and now the articles sucks a little in my opinion, I just want to help making the articles understandable for everyone :P. And sorry for the capitals, I came from an arcaic forum where bold is bugged and doesn't work and u've to capitalise in order to mark something special :P. 62.57.212.101 (talk) 21:38, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No problems about CAPS! :-) About tournament titles one must (I am speaking in general here) on the English Wiki use the ones that can be verified by reliable sources; not the ones one expects to see. That can differ a lot from country to country, and we must not forget that this is the English Wikipedia. Therefore, you may also want to look at WP:UE. There are all these kinds of policies one should seek to adhere to in order to make collaboration fruitful. In the case at hand, the editor may have had valid reasons for making the name change. Try to let things run smoothly (and an account may actually help there as "IP-users" are considered sligtly less reliable than registered users). Cheers! --HJensen, talk 06:06, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Zappanale
A tag has been placed on Zappanale requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Quanticle (talk) 19:13, 28 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Explanation against deletion has been provided. Thanks.--HJensen, talk 21:06, 28 August 2008 (UTC)