User talk:Ojorojo/Archive 10

pictures
Hello Ojorojo, Thank you for including me in the WikiAlbums group. How can I upload a picture of an album cover to be able to be used on their particular wikipedia page? If I take a picture of the album cover art, I can upload it to wikimedia, but then I have to say who holds the copyright for it. And although I can take the picture, of course the original cover art is not mine. Or, are album covers considered to be in the public domain and can just be copied and pasted from the internet? Thank you. Have a great day. Robert Versteeg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robertversteeg (talk • contribs) 19:20, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello. It's been a while since I've used it, but I think WP:Uploading images and Help:Introduction to images with Wiki Markup/1, etc., explained it pretty well. Generally, album covers are copyrighted and not in the public domain (look for the copyright symbol and date in the cover fine print), so uploads (your photo or one from the artists's website or record company) need to comply with WP:FUR. The WP:File Upload Wizard walks you through it and provides some boiler plate language for album covers. Here's one I did that was OK for the time to give you an idea. If you don't know who the "Author or copyright owner" is, use something consistent with the standard "copyright for it is most likely owned by either the publisher of the work or the artist(s) which produced the recording or cover artwork in question", such as "The cover art copyright is believed to belong to the label, [NAME OF RECORD COMPANY], or the graphic artist(s)." Good luck. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:13, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Peer review for Mic Drop (song)
Hi Ojorojo, I noticed that you have provided peer review for several bronze star nominees and was wondering if you'd be willing to leave some comments at Peer review/Mic Drop (song)/archive1? I'm hoping to bring the article from GA to FA and would welcome your suggestions. Thank you for your consideration. Have a very happy new year. -- Ashley yoursmile!  06:32, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Done. Meanwhile, I have a pending FLC if you're interested. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:17, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for finding time to leave comments at the PR, I shall try to address them. As much as I want to review your pending FLC, I feel I'm not quite ready since I've never written a FA/FL myself nor have I ever reviewed any. Good luck with it, I'm sure its going to become a bronze star soon. -- Ashley yoursmile!  07:07, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I haven't done any reviews in a while, but saw your GAN for "View". I know absolutely nothing about Korean pop, but think I can provide a basic review (general GA practices, MOS, etc.) if that is what you're looking for. Whatever you decide, good luck! —Ojorojo (talk) 14:47, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, thank you for your interest. Please feel free to review it. Any comments would be greatly appreciated. Ashley  yoursmile!  05:06, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Do you need some time to respond to the review comments so far or should I work on through? I'm wondering if I've misread some of the refs. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:05, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, my apologies for the late response. Yes, I was kind of busy with other things and need some time to work on the changes. Hopefully that won't take much time and I'll ping you on the review page once I've done that. Again, apologies for any inconvenience. Ashley  yoursmile!  03:34, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * No problem, there is no time pressure. I just wanted to make sure we were headed in the same direction. BTW, you don't have to ping me here or the review page (they're on my watch list). —Ojorojo (talk) 13:52, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello, congrats on your RfA. I looked over the Lights Up FAC and saw a few of the concerns I raised during the View GAN. I thought I'd give you the opportunity to fix them before commenting on the nomination. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:20, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much, Ojorojo. I'd look through the GAN review again and try to resolve those as soon as I can. Ashley  yoursmile!  06:06, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, I have decided to withdraw the nomination as I do not have enough time currently to devote on the article. And I strongly feel it still needs a lot of work. Ashley  yoursmile!  06:54, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * That's too bad, but I understand. Maybe I'll catch it next time around. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:08, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, hope you are well. If you have time, I'd would be grateful if you could leave some comments here. Thank you. Ashley  yoursmile!  16:23, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Fine, hope you are too. How about if I mark up a sandbox copy? It may be easier and you can choose what you want. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:01, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. Thank you, . Ashley  yoursmile!  16:32, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
 * OK, give me a couple of days and I'll give you a link. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:10, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Sure, thanks. Ashley  yoursmile!  17:19, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I gave it a couple of tries, but turns out, it's not really needed. I'll add some comments at the PR. Hope this is OK. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:01, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , that's perfectly okay. Looking forward to your comments. Thank you. Ashley  yoursmile!  16:49, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Ojorojo, thank you for your help at the PR. :) I have nominated it now at FAC. You are welcome to comment, if you would like to. Hope you have a great day. --Ashleyyoursmile (talk) 06:16, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Done. Ojorojo

Robert Johnson's songs
Really? You want us to look up each one of Robert Johnson's 42 recordings to find out in what year it was recorded, when a simple sentence in his discography can eliminate all that work? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:283:8300:45D0:9094:59C3:4730:62E4 (talk) 22:05, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The session info is already included above the track listing in "Background and recording", as noted in my edit summary: there is no need to repeat it. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:26, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Rush
If political stuff is constantly being adding to the Rush article, request the article get semi-protected. That's logical thing to do. Mr. C.C. Hey yo!I didn't do it! 16:50, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, WP:SEMI doesn't work for registered users. One disruptive editor has been blocked another has received multiple warnings, which may lead there. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:06, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Milky Way (Red Velvet song)
Hi! I saw that you have removed all the contents for the article and was redirected. I know the reason and I understand your explanation regarding why the article has been redirected. But while reviewing the song it seems that this article (Red Velvet's version) is more notable than the original singer itself since Milky Way from (BoA's version) is a B-side track and has not been ranked on national or significant music or sales charts. Can you please elaborate. For now I undid your revision. But I'll be redirecting it once an explanation has been given. Thank you and sorry for the inconvenience! :) User:LipaCityPH (talk) 10:55, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Copied comment to and answered at Talk:Milky Way (Red Velvet song). —Ojorojo (talk) 15:31, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Regarding '68 gig at Ontario Airport
Morning I'm Jerry Smith, April 20, 1968 I was playing bass with Rod Piazza, George Smith Richard Innes Buddy Reed and Greg Schaefer in the Bacon Fat band then-I'm pretty sure Les Morrison was no longer Rod's bass player by then, although Greg Anderson did play for me while I went to school for 6 months during that timeline somewhere. I was doing a lot of drugs and alcohol during that time in my life I don't remember many details. How were you involved back then? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerry "Fireman" Smith (talk • contribs) 16:45, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I was working on a Howlin' Wolf article and noticed some inconsistencies. According to Piazza's website bio, "A few months later [after first sitting in with George Smith], still in 1968, The Dirty Blues Band opened for Howling Wolf at the Ash Grove for a full week." An Ash Grove fan site shows a June 27, 1968, date for Wolf at the club, but doesn't mention an opener. A concert poster shows the DBB on the bill at the Palm Springs Pop Festival 1968 on April 9, but doesn't list Wolf. The Ontario date was between the two, but I can't find a source about who actually played.
 * However, another fan-type site includes "Shortly after Rod and guitarist Richard Innes had formed their band Bacon Fat, they both sat in one night at a club with the extrovert Chicago harp player George 'Harmonica' Smith. When Bacon Fat got a gig opening for Howlin’ Wolf a few weeks later, George was in Wolf's band". Piazza's bio also mentions "a new band which would be the beginning of Bacon Fat" (the Rod Piazza Blues Band?). Segrest and Hoffman's Wolf bio only notes him performing at the Ash Grove in 1965 (supported by John Hammond, Jr.) and no mention of George Smith, etc. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:04, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Wolf at the Ash Grove
I remember that gig Taj Mahal was the doorman there before he got big. I remember Wolf kept a hatchet in his belt behind him. I'm not a hundred % that we opened for him or just went to see him? A long time ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerry "Fireman" Smith (talk • contribs) 16:21, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
 * A number of important and soon-to-be-important musicians crossed paths at the Ash Grove. Unfortunately, many of the details have been lost over the years. Thanks for responding. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:24, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Johnny Winter discography

 * Thanks. I'd like to see more quality discographies. The Robert Johnson discography has received a lot of IP edits without any reliable sources. Actually, it's more of a sessionography (recording dates, matrix numbers). I don't think the "Time" column is useful; the original 78s didn't list the durations and the various compilations probably show different ones. Maybe it can be redone as a hybrid and include the recording locations and first album appearances. Also, a section for the noteworthy compilations should be included. It may be nice to see the 2011 Centennial Edition for the latest and most complete info. I have the 1990 Complete box, which has a lot and the latest definite bio, thanks to a recommendation by . Maybe some sales info can be worked in, since WP seems to be so obsessed with commercial performance. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:17, 18 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Not content to rest on your laurels, you are already thinking about your next project. That's commendable.  And certainly Robert Johnson is a worthy subject.  — Mudwater (Talk) 01:32, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, I already spent my bonus check on a new walk-in humidor and need a new project... Actually, I am fishing for Johnson refs: do you have the Centennial set or other sources for a new improved discography? —Ojorojo (talk) 14:13, 19 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Although enhancing the Robert Johnson discography is a very worthwhile idea, I will probably not be much help with it, because of my many important responsibilities -- air quotes -- both on and off Wikipedia. With that being said... Yes, I do in fact have a copy of the Centennial Collection edition of The Complete Recordings.  Do you think it would have more information than the 1990 edition that's in your possession?  — Mudwater (Talk) 01:14, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I've been trying to come up with a suitable layout for a "Robert Johnson recordings"-type article to cover the discography/sessionography. Maybe start with a "List of songs recorded by Robert Johnson", with "Original album release" à la List of songs recorded by Jimi Hendrix. The box song listings credit "Johnson" as the writer for all his songs, although several have clear origins with others. Perhaps an "Antecedent(s)" column, with refs from Conforth/Wardlow, etc. I glanced through the discogs images for the Centennial edition ("Hell Hound on My Ale"?!?), but didn't see anything immediately useful. I'll try to work on a draft. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:56, 6 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Sounds good! — Mudwater (Talk) 02:06, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I've proposed a new article at Talk:Robert Johnson, if you care to review/comment. —Ojorojo (talk) 18:52, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello! Are you aware of the "Robert Johnson speed controversy"? I stumbled upon it today, and -- after listening to an RJ song on YouTube that had been slowed down somewhat -- I got all excited. Until I read this, which has me pretty much convinced that the recordings are at the right speed after all. — Mudwater (Talk) 22:13, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
 * That's one issue I was referring to in my last RJ talk page post ("playback speeds debates"). Robert Johnson has been around for 10+ years. Now it's under "Musical style", but seems more of a recording/discography topic. I was hoping to get more input before moving it (and the "facing the wall" speculation). —Ojorojo (talk) 14:17, 5 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Okay, I see. Thanks.  — Mudwater (Talk) 22:30, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

The Yardbirds discography
Hi, I just want to ask why have you changed the chart layout on the Yardbirds discography? To me the 'Other' section is messy and I don’t see what was wrong with how it was previously. The information you added is great, I’m just defensive as I had added the extra chart positions. DPUH (talk) 21:26, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The Yardbirds' records were released in over 30 countries, several of which had different tracks, were split releases with other artists, etc. Group biographies do not discuss these; for example, only two singles are included in Russo's comprehensive book as "Essential foreign issues", both of which are included in the discography. WP:PROPORTION includes: "An article should not give undue weight to minor aspects of its subject, but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight proportional to its treatment in the body of reliable, published material on the subject." For practical purposes, to include all releases would simply make the article much too long and difficult to navigate. Crowd-sourced/user-generated sources should not be used; Discogs.com is on WP:NOTRSMUSIC.
 * There were problems with some of the extra chart positions that were added: the "Flavour of New Zealand" does not meet the requirements of WP:CHARTS and Go-Set was the only Australian chart at the time (& only "Little Games" charted). The Kent Report for "retrospective charts" (1940–1973) is self-published and its methodology is unknown; it should not be used when Go-Set charts are available. The citation formats used were also problematic: "Libraries and Archives Canada" is not the author nor source (RPM is and should include more source details).
 * Generally, I approach WP articles with an eye towards FL or FA. I've gone through four discography FLs and some reviewers are sticklers for details. When adding citations, it is important to be consistent (dates, etc.). Also, layout is important for readability: the release details were squeezed in very narrow columns and the "Refs" columns were moved to the middle, giving an unbalanced, amateurish appearance. I believe the current discography is much closer to meeting the featured list criteria.
 * —Ojorojo (talk) 15:12, 30 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Okay, thank you, I take your point DPUH (talk) 17:35, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Blues
Excuse me, but why did you remove New blues, Boogie rock, Roots rock, and Rhythm and blues from the Blues template?
 * Please see WP:NAVBOX: "New blues" is a redirect; it was an unsourced article for over 12 years and was tagged as "original research". Many of the links were added by a blocked user, who was in the habit of linking subgenres/styles only marginally associated with the broader genre. As a navigational aid, only relevant articles should be linked. Otherwise, the navbox becomes just another long laundry list of unhelpful terms. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:09, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * What was the username of the blocked user? What articles did (s)he add?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.54.195.214 (talk) 14:27, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * It's in the template edit history. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:47, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd rather not slog for hours for an edit that (for all I know) could have been made half a decade ago. Could you just give me the user's name and the time that they made the edits? [added 03:17 17 June 2021 by ]
 * I'll be busy working on a review. Perhaps you should inquire at WT:Sockpuppet investigations. —Ojorojo (talk) 13:37, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Why was my source on Dazed and Confused (song) removed?
I understand that you are against me merging Hard rock and Psych together but why didn't you keep the source?--2601:3C5:8200:97E0:C5A8:806C:DDE6:70F8 (talk) 16:17, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The source did not specify "heavy psych"; terms cannot be "merged" based on an editor's preference, otherwise it's WP:SYNTHESIS (also see WP:STICKTOTHESOURCE). There are problems with the source as well. 1969: The Year Everything Changed has been tagged for a year for COI/OR concerns and many attempts have been made to add it to numerous articles, sometimes with links to retailers where it can be purchased. (see WP:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive 157). Using bare URLs is also problematic (see WP:Citing sources). —Ojorojo (talk) 17:28, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
 * What about the sources for Hard rock? couldn't they be considered unreliable as well? At least 1969: The Year Everything Changed has a wikipedia page. Those other sources dont. Maybe no genre should be included.--2601:3C5:8200:97E0:1114:1975:6284:CDD1 (talk) 18:10, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

TFL notification
Hi, Ojorojo. I'm just posting to let you know that Johnny Winter discography – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for May 24. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008  ( Talk ) 21:26, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Saw Johnny Winter on the main page! Looks great, thanks again. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:08, 24 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Hello, Ojorojo! Thanks again for all your work on the Johnny Winter discography.  It's because of your efforts that Johnny's discog is today's featured list!  — Mudwater (Talk) 22:12, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Navbox deletions
Why are you deleting my nav boxes? I was trying to put all genres that belong under Blues, Rhythm and Blues, and Folk Music, since the same had been done for Rock Music and Electronica. [added 16:31 14 June 2021 by ]
 * Several editors have been reverting the addition of navboxes that are duplicative or only have a slim connection to the subject article. Much of the activity around navboxes has been by a since blocked user and a variety of IPs (see the comments in the "Blues" section above). Are all these the same individual? —Ojorojo (talk) 13:54, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I noticed that the Rock music page is also a bit duplicative. What could we do about this little problem? [added 23:48 15 June 2021 by ]
 * I'll be busy working on a review. Perhaps you should inquire at WT:Sockpuppet investigations. —Ojorojo (talk) 13:37, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Robert Johnson recordings
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Robert Johnson recordings you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of BennyOnTheLoose -- BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:41, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Mississippi Fred McDowell
Did you mean to remove the label info in this edit? Looks like we had an edit conflict. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:12, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Not all of it, now fixed. Was he actually signed to Mississippi Records or is it another reissuer? —Ojorojo (talk) 13:20, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * It looks like a reissue label - established in 2003. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:32, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I think we should follow the template guidance "The record label or labels to which the act has been signed". Including the reissuers for artists whose work is in the public domain somewhere would lead to very long infoboxes. —Ojorojo (talk) 13:42, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Robert Johnson recordings
The article Robert Johnson recordings you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Robert Johnson recordings for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of BennyOnTheLoose -- BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 09:01, 24 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Nice!  Thanks for all your work on this. — Mudwater (Talk) 10:02, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Excellent! Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:39, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your suggestions and encouragement. Who knows, we may see some of it show up in another Johnson bio! —Ojorojo (talk) 13:48, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Indeed. I do believe that some writers take very careful note of what is written on this site.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:32, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Attenuated Music styles
On the Blues template, I read that you "removed some attenuated music styles". What exactly does that mean?
 * See WP:SIGNATURE: "Comments posted on user talk pages, article talk pages and other discussion pages must be properly signed." —Ojorojo (talk) 13:18, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

GAN Backlog Drive - July 2021
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

stone free edit
hey, Ojorojo. it's realmrkrabs. i would like to ask you why you removed my edit of the stone free article where i mentioned the song was referenced in jojo's bizarre adventure. even if you haven't read the manga, you can easily look it up, and see from multiple sources that the song was in fact used to name an ability in the series. jojo's is a series known for many musical references, one of which being the song stone free by jimi hendrix. i would like to ask if it would be ok for me to re-enter my edit. thank you. RealMrKrabs (talk) 22:15, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello, have you had a chance to read WP:SONGTRIVIA, which I linked in the edit summary? It does a good job of explaining the consensus on adding "pop culture"-type material to song articles. Basically, a reliable source is required which discusses the use of the song as somehow noteworthy. Also, please note that "The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material" (WP:BURDEN); it is not up the reader to verify article content. These should be met before re-adding the material. —Ojorojo (talk) 13:26, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Re: Jeff Beck
Please stop edit warring at this article. There is no consensus at the talk page to remove those statements. In the time you've spent denigrating the author, I've made valid points about the substance of his text, while another editor has also favored keeping it. If this means that much to you, and you are unwilling to respond any further without restoring your preferred revision, you know what to do (WP:RFC). isento (talk) 10:45, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

[Copied from Talk:Jeff Beck]


 * Piotr is making false accusations, and not following WP:Assume good faith and WP:BRD:
 * Piotr (as Dan65?) was bold
 * Three IPs partially reverted (only the Christgau comments, which were reverted)
 * I partially reverted and started a talk page discussion
 * Egghead06 (who had reverted two of the IPs) agreed with my reasoning and let my revert stand. Piotr (as Isento?) did not participate
 * THX1136 added talk page comment that "balance needs to be expressed"
 * Piotr re-added Christgau comments and then dismissed the earlier discussion on the talk page
 * I reverted
 * Piotr reverted with a false claim of WP:OWN against me and "Given how protective you are of this subject, I'm surprised to hear you didn't see I had actually seen, and addressed, the talk page.." and "Not surprised to see this poorly-synthesized boomer puffery either, given where the priorities have been at this article"
 * I reverted and noted "classic attack-the-editor rather than addressing the issue: THERE IS NO OWNERSHIP ISSUE – I rarely edit this page (I'm not even in the top 20 in the edit stats) and I removed it from my watch list long ago; try a real discussion rather than just forcing your view"
 * I added to discussion, restating that Christgau's comments were a "hatchet job".
 * Piotr responded with "You're a hatchet job ..."; the dictionary defines it as "a fierce attack on someone or their work, especially in print: the author's attempted hatchet job on the judge was totally unjustified and irresponsible." It's often used to describe critical reviews that are seen as unreasonably negative.
 * Piotr reverted with the comment "All I saw there were lame, unconvincing excuses to bar a credible critical source" and added to the existing Erlewine criticism.
 * I partially reverted (left the Erlewine criticism)
 * Piotr reverted with claim of edit war
 * I'd like to move forward on this, but refusal to consider other's opinions along with attacks and snide comments make it difficult to have a productive discussion.
 * —[original Ojorojo 14:30, 19 July 2021 (UTC)]
 * —Ojorojo (talk) 14:34, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

User-generated sources
None of the sources in "I'm Tore Down" were "user-generated". You can't just state they are and then remove on the grounds that you proclaimed them to be. Whether the renditions themselves warrant mention is another topic, but your rationale checks out. The reviews were fine to use, and you also threw out Classic Rock which was not tagged by you. Jules TH 16 (talk) 14:34, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Copied and responded at Talk:I'm Tore Down. Ojorojo

Request for feedback
Hi Ojorojo, I hope you've been well. I was wondering if you'd possibly be able to look at Peer review/I'm Goin' Down/archive1. In the past you helped me straighten out some technical points in music articles and I was wondering if you would be able to lend your expertise this time too. In particular in the Music section I have the sentence "It begins with a short guitar-based introduction featuring two string phrases" which in the source is "Its rock sound starts off with a strong introduction, giving prominence to the guitars (notably two string guitar phrases)". I think this is talking about the first approximately nine seconds of the song (before the drums kick in): []. It sounds like there are two guitars playing in the first nine seconds—is that is all that is meant? Or does it mean only two of the guitars' strings are played in the phrases? Depending on your answer, I may reword the text to make it clearer. Also any other feedback you might happen to ahve on the article would likewise be appreciated. Thank you! Moisejp (talk) 05:10, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello again. I know what the authors are saying, but their wording is awkward (French, non-guitarist/musician?). One guitar starts by playing the chords using only the root and fifth (the basis for power chords in other contexts), which they call "two string guitar phrases" (two notes can only be played simultaneously on two strings, so it really doesn't need to be stated; ). A second guitar comes in with fills or embellishments, which I don't think can be described as equally "prominent" or adding to a "strong introduction" (in this live version, Springsteen plays it alone, but stretches it out and adds a couple of licks that come in with the drums on the studio version). It sets the song up as a classic rocker – stripped down and driving (if you can find a source). Otherwise, maybe something like "It begins with a short guitar introduction, followed by Weinberg's heavy backbeat, and then the whole band and Springsteen's vocal come in." I'll look at the rest of it later. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:44, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much, Ojorojo! I'm to most likely rework that paragraph in the coming days based on your feedback. This is the writers' entire paragraph, by the way (can't remember if it is available online and hence if you may have seen it):
 * Its rock sound starts off with a strong introduction, giving prominence to the guitars (notably two string guitar phrases). This is followed by a strong rhythm section led by Max Weinberg and Gary Talient, who are both on top form. The snare drum bears the "Clearmountain" signature because of the way it cracks like a whip. He has clearly achieved a great mixing feat by creating an atmosphere typical of the times. At the keyboards, Danny Federici performs an excellent part on the Hammond B-3, the Leslie performing beautifully, and Roy Bittan accompanies his band mates with an equally astonishing piano. Clarence Clemons launches into a superb tenor saxophone solo, carried by a generous and space-like delay. The Boss and Miami Steve are on guitars, proving, if there ever was a need to, that both are excellent guitarists and too often underrated.
 * As you can see in my current version, I used many elements of this (without all the heavy praise) but also fit in a bit of citing from other authors who mention the instrumentation. Moisejp (talk) 06:02, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Their reliance on generalist terms like "top form", "great feat", "excellent part", "performing beautifully", "equally astonishing", "superb", etc., to describe technical parts is inconsistent with writers who are familiar with musical and recording concepts. For an encyclopedic article, I wouldn't put much emphasis on them.
 * This tab shows the intro: one guitar is doing all of the rhythmic work on the lower frets, while the other is simply adding occasional fills on the higher frets of treble strings. As I think the live version clearly shows, one guitar can carry the whole intro. So, the "giving prominence to the guitars (notably two string guitar phrases)" is misleading.
 * —Ojorojo (talk) 14:24, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much Ojorojo. I had a chance just now to make something close to your suggested change. If anything else jumps out at you that I should alter, please let me know. Thanks again! Moisejp (talk) 05:18, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Deletion discussion
Given this old discussion, I don't know if you've picked up on this recent one, which I've only just noticed. Interesting. I will take another look at his article. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:43, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I glanced at his WP article back when you first mentioned the book, but otherwise haven't paid any attention to it. He seems notable for WP purposes – I think Eppstein summed it up pretty well and removed the worst of the unreferenced name dropping.


 * On a different note, the list of blues standards is now a featured list candidate. The "five or more writers" criterion seems to have confused some reviewers. Any thoughts?


 * —Ojorojo (talk) 13:50, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Attenuated Music Styles
A while ago, you removed some "attenuated music styles" from the Blues template. What exactly do you mean? 47.36.25.163 (talk) 22:28, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * These questions have been asked and answered numerous times. Perhaps you should try WT:Sockpuppet investigations. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:21, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

I Want to Talk
I added more genres to the Blues template and put the template on a page, but you reverted all my edits, claiming that there was "not enough connection." What do you mean by that? 47.36.25.163 (talk) 23:38, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
 * These questions have been asked and answered numerous times. Perhaps you should try WT:Sockpuppet investigations. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:21, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Where have these questions been answered? Could you send me a link? 47.36.25.163 (talk) 16:28, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * See Template talk:Blues. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:31, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Compromise
Instead of just blindly deleting them, could you try to verify my edits? 47.36.25.163 (talk) 17:39, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Copied and responded at Talk:Live! Blueswailing July '64. —Ojorojo (talk) 18:07, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Let's Stick Together (song)
Regrading your recent removal here with the edit summary "see WP:NOTRSMUSIC again and again and again ...", here's the YT channel described as "The official YouTube channel for Bryan Ferry." So why is that Official VEVO video not appropriate? Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:15, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Youtube videos are not considered reliable sources for article content. Template:YouTube explains: "This template is used to create an external link to YouTube in the ==External links== section. It may also be used for other YouTube links such as those in External media... This is not a citation template. Use cite AV media to provide bibliographic citations in footnotes. [emphasis in original]"
 * Additionally, the actual video does not indicate that "In 1976, Island Records released a version of 'Let's Stick Together' by Bryan Ferry". So it's not a source for anything other than title by artist, which the other sources already provide. (Also, note that the text accompanying videos is not considered reliable.) Save the Vevo-type links for the "External links" sections.
 * —Ojorojo (talk) 17:56, 28 December 2021 (UTC)


 * What do you mean by "again and again and again"? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:08, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

GAN Backlog Drive – January 2022
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject Good articles at 21:18, 31 December 2021 (UTC).