User talk:Ojorojo/Archive 11

Wang Dang Doodle
Thanks for your updates. 

Pwslaw has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Orphaned non-free image File:Spoonful single cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Spoonful single cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:35, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

You Are My Sunshine
Not sure whether you've seen the conversation or desire to participate in it, but there's an editor talking about the previously-removed section on covers of this song and suggesting that they might restore it without apparent regard for the concerns you and I raised previously, particularly WP:SONGCOVER. Cheers! DonIago (talk) 02:57, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, here are a couple of items that may be of interest: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Springsteen1555/Archive and WT:WikiProject Songs/Archive 21. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:05, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for chiming in at the discussion! I'm not sure of the relevance of the SPI? Also, for better or worse, this time Tilly doesn't appear to be the concern, but you likely saw that for yourself. Cheers! DonIago (talk) 14:39, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

File:Bolero (Jeff Beck) UK single cover.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bolero (Jeff Beck) UK single cover.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.

''' This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. ''' Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Led Zeppelin II
Can you make the song lengths on be the same as the song length that is shown in the infobox of the article on each song? You used the 1969 UK ed for durations for songs on, so there is consistency for durations. Thank you! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 16:16, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Since you are interested in song durations, how about trying it yourself? Here are the links to the original US album labels which show the times (unlike LZ1, the UK ed doesn't show them). For "Thank You", an explanatory footnote will be needed, similar to that for the song article.  Let me know if you have any questions. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:33, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 * So the song lengths on the album article can be changed, as opposed to the song length on each individual track article? Thank you for the response! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 16:45, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Ideally, the durations should be the same for both the song and album articles. An exception would be when the song is edited (usually shortened) for release as a single. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:51, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Terraplane Blues single cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Terraplane Blues single cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:41, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended Vocal Techniques
👋 Thank u You clearly increase the amount of knowledge in Wikipedia Thanks for your great contribution Diener666 (talk) 19:34, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Space Guitar
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Space Guitar 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 ErnestKrause -- ErnestKrause (talk) 19:41, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Space Guitar
The article Space Guitar you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Space Guitar 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 ErnestKrause -- ErnestKrause (talk) 15:01, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

April 2022
Congrats on the GA for Space Guitar. I've been thinking about the article for the song All Along the Watchtower for either GAN or FAC, possibly as a co-nomination. Any thoughts? ErnestKrause (talk) 23:20, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I've been on a break, but it looks like congrats are in order for your Watchtower GA. Thanks again for your review. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:22, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Good to hear you are back from Wikibreak. When you start doing edits, then Benny and myself have listed the Watchtower GA for Peer review with an eye for going for FAC here: . If you can pick it up for a Peer review at some time, then it would be good to hear your comments about it. ErnestKrause (talk) 15:15, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Give me a few days and I'll try to go over it more carefully. —Ojorojo (talk) 13:11, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
 * It's fine for a GA, but I think it's a ways from being a FA. For one, the "Music" sections for both Dylan and Hendrix rely solely on one source (and nearly all the sentences include a variation on "Zak writes/sees/finds..."). FA criteria include "well-researched: it is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature" and "comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details". Dylan and Hendrix are probably among the most written about 1960s American rock musicians and I think there is more to say. Some of the post-GA edits have problems, which should be fixed. Also, the article may benefit from a more experienced copy edit. I'm curious what others have to say and may have some more specific comments as it goes along. Good luck. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:12, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
 * The comment you make are actually very on point in terms of the peer review, and Benny and myself can do something with them if you might be able to use your comments here as a basis to complete the peer review. It seems useful if you could indicate each of the individual paragraphs in the article which should be expanded with new citations. I've gone through about a half dozen Dylan biographies by now looking for comments about Watchtower, though many biographers seem to have passed it over. Your peer review comments would renew the search effort for Benny and myself to find new citations and biographies which comment on this song. Much appreciate your comments. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:11, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Ojorojo. Thanks for this. Is it OK if I copy your comments above over to the peer review page (with credit to you, of course)? Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 16:22, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello : I didn't want to give a bad impression for others, but Ernest also wants this, so go ahead. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:57, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this, I think it's all fair comment about the current state of the article. If you have any further observations to add to the peer review page, feel free to be blunt! Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:33, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

TFL notification
Hi, Ojorojo. I'm just posting to let you know that Jimi Hendrix videography – 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 23. 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 ) 01:36, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Contradanza
The recording is almost 100 years ago. It’s for educational purpose. What’s the point of you deleting the link? 154.126.99.27 (talk) 04:29, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
 * WP:SONG includes "When linking to a music video on YouTube use only the videos that have been uploaded by the musician(s), the record companies, or Vevo." YouTube shows that the uploader for this and several other videos recently reverted to be "Generocyclopedia". Their YouTube "About" description includes "Help me get large community to discuss music. Subscribe please." There is no indication that they meet the requirements and it appears that they are using Wikipedia to increase their YouTube presence. —Ojorojo (talk) 13:25, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Ojorojo. Thank you for creating Los Angeles Forum: April 26, 1969. User:Bruxton, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with. Please remember to sign your reply with ~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Bruxton (talk) 18:19, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Gimme Some Lovin’
Terry Reid’s cover deserves to be part of the page, despite lack of user reviews. Hamsterbird (talk) 02:25, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Copied to and responded at Talk:Gimme Some Lovin'. Please add your comments there. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:13, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Happenings Ten Years Time Ago
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Happenings Ten Years Time Ago 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 Tkbrett -- Tkbrett (talk) 13:00, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Happenings Ten Years Time Ago
The article Happenings Ten Years Time Ago you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Happenings Ten Years Time Ago for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tkbrett -- Tkbrett (talk) 22:00, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Happenings Ten Years Time Ago
The article Happenings Ten Years Time Ago you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Happenings Ten Years Time Ago 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 Tkbrett -- Tkbrett (talk) 21:41, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I've removed most of the quotation marks from the GAs I worked on. Thanks for fixing it on "Bluebird". If you see any more, please update. Also, feel free to limeup lime-up lime up my Americanisms. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:01, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Haha, I'll keep an eye out for both. Well done on another great GA read.  Tkbrett  (✉) 13:29, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Greetings, Ojorojo! Nice article. Congrats on the GA thing, for this far out song. — Mudwater (Talk) 22:44, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Sounds good! I'd rather listen to it in mono (like the original 45) than "Electronically Re-Channeled For Stereo" that was used for the early compilations (it was released after the original Yardbirds/Over Under Sideways Down/Roger the Engineer album). How about adding it as an external link? I'm never sure how much to trust Youtube, but its description page shows "Provided to YouTube by Edsel". It was/is a legit re-issuer, which should meet WP:SONG. —Ojorojo (talk) 23:35, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, the original monaural recording is the way to go, definitely. As for an external link, I'm not an expert on the subject, but it seems to me that it would be appropriate. — Mudwater (Talk) 00:08, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Misc Cu?
What did you do to the Blues template? What's "misc cu"?2600:6C5A:417F:794E:B1DD:90C8:F1F8:A069 (talk) 23:05, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Seasons greetings
Happy Holidays text.png Hello Ojorojo: Enjoy the holiday season&#32;and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers,  Tkbrett  (✉) 12:37, 27 December 2022 (UTC) Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message  Tkbrett  (✉)  12:37, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

TFL notification for January 2023
Hi, Ojorojo. I'm just posting to let you know that Muddy Waters 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 January 23, 2023. 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 ) 02:31, 31 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Hey, very nice! Thanks for your work on that discography, it looks great.  — Mudwater (Talk) 02:42, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks to all. Happy New Year! —Ojorojo (talk) 14:28, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Hendrix pages question
Hey there. Did I tidy something incorrectly on the pages for The Essential Jimi Hendrix and The Essential Jimi Hendrix Volume Two, especially with regards to the track listings? I spend about 99% of my time here editing music pages and I try to stick closely to the MOS, so if I did something wrong, please let me know. Thanks! —The Keymaster (talk) 04:46, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Hello: Sometimes, the use of track listing templates causes layout/readability problems, especially in shorter articles (see one discussion). In the case of the Hendrix albums, the infobox and ratings templates cause the track listings to be jumbled together. Adding another column just to move a couple of entries from the notes does not improve the articles and actually makes the existing problems worse. Some editors seem to add a template feature just because it is available, such as adding Template:Hlist to infobox parameters that already use class=hlist (see Template:Infobox song #2 & 4). However, in many cases it makes no difference or makes things worse.
 * If you're interested in tidying up music articles, there are reports that list template errors, such as in Template:Infobox album and Template:Infobox album. Also, WP:NOTRSMUSIC lists a number of generally unreliable sources: one, "Prog Archives", appears in 200 articles and probably could be removed and there are others. Good luck. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:29, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. I've actually been removing a lot of those track listing templates and making them simple bulleted lists if the template isn't warranted. I only reserve them for complicated cases, like when there are a multitude of writers and/or different sources for the tracks. Is the use of the "headline" parameter also discouraged?
 * That "hlist" thing drives me nuts. In fact there was an editor recently who was pretty much solely going onto music pages and changing lists in the infobox to that format for no real reason. He ended up getting blocked for a week.
 * I know about some of the unreliable sources but not all of them. I'll definitely take a look at those links. Sounds like a fun project.
 * I might consult you from time to time in the future, if you don't mind! Thanks! The Keymaster (talk) 02:07, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
 * In cases like these, the headline parameter is usually preferred (overlooked earlier, now fixed). Glad to help. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:17, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Trying to reach consensus
Would love your thoughts on this thread concerning track numbering for LPs! —The Keymaster (talk) 07:01, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Done. Thanks for the notice. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:26, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * This is the first time I've made this kind of proposal, so how does it work? Do I have to get a majority of "support" votes to add the text? I've noticed a few of the editors who've replied have kind of wandered away from the thread. Should I ping them? The Keymaster (talk) 07:50, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Starting an RfC seems to be the way to go (WP:RFC has the details). RfCs are automatically publicized and some editors reading them may be unfamiliar with the existing guidance and practices, so it's best to keep it short and simple. For example, one of the last WT:ALBUMS commenters appears to be unaware that the current guidance already advises that LP sides should be listed as "Side one" and "Side two" and that this practice is followed in numerous FA and GA rated articles (click on the "total" numbers in WP:ALBUMS table; in fact, many of those articles start at 1 for each side, so your proposed change just reflects existing practices). I'll review a proposed RfC if you want to create one in your sandbox. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:15, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Ah, thank you! That's very helpful. I think I understand how this works. So I basically insert the RFC tags at the bottom of the Wikiproject:ALBUMS talk page and come up with some neutral, simply worded proposal, like, "Should MOS:ALBUM be amended to clarify the policy on formatting and track numbering for LP era releases"? Do I have that right so far? The Keymaster (talk) 08:06, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * That's basically it, but there has been some objection to the use of "MOS:ALBUM", since it is not actually an official WP MOS, like MOS:MUSIC. Also, it's not an official policy or guideline. MOS:ALBUM is an "essay on style" and the page includes: "This information is not a formal Wikipedia policy or guideline, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community." Something closer to the title "Album article style advice" would be better, maybe: "Should WP:ALBUMSTYLE be clarified regarding track numbering for LP albums?".
 * Also, something like this may be helpful: "The current wording includes "Albums originally released primarily on vinyl or cassette should similarly list the tracks of each side separately under sub-headings named 'Side one' and 'Side two'." However, it does not indicate whether both side 1 and side 2 should start with track 1 or if side 2 should continue with the next higher track number. For example, if side one ends with track 4, should side 2 begin again with track 1 or use track 5?
 * —Ojorojo (talk) 18:04, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I noticed it only stipulates starting at track 1 again if it's multiple discs. I almost wonder if whomever drafted that was considering sides to be discs unto themselves. (It's a weird argument, but I can see someone making it.) How long should my proposal be? I get the sense they're looking for brevity in RFCs, but maybe I read that wrong.
 * I'm kind of baffled that some would object to MOS:ALBUM, since it seems to be invoked regularly by many longtime editors, myself included. Kind of wondering what has stopped it from being thoroughly vetted at this point. It's clear a lot of thought has gone into it, and I think the vast majority of it makes sense, although there are a few minor contradictions and omissions that are confusing. The Keymaster (talk) 03:27, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * 1st point: That was my first thought back when, but nobody else seemed to pick up on it. 2nd: Yes, brevity is important. I was trying to think of a lead-in to the vote on the proposed wording (which is the point of the RfC), but it may just complicate it. Go with your reading. 3rd: There hasn't been the consensus to make it official, perhaps because of the minor problems. Some proposals seem straightforward, but you never know. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:55, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Happenings Ten Years Time Ago
BorgQueen (talk) 00:02, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * R.I.P. Jeff Beck, 24 June 1944 – 10 January 2023
 * —Ojorojo (talk) 14:44, 12 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Another good DYK, which I missed at the time (and which in fact I did not know). Yes, Jeff Beck is playing in rock and roll heaven now.  — Mudwater (Talk) 16:25, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm still trying to process it. Hell of a coincidence. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:44, 12 January 2023 (UTC)


 * The timing is a bit striking, yes, but that's what it is, a coincidence. Or a synchronicity, if you like that better.  — Mudwater (Talk) 23:00, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I'd like to add an audio sample to highlight Beck's solo, but don't have the setup for it. Do you have any experience or interest in WP:SAMPLE? —Ojorojo (talk) 17:15, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

TFL notification
Hi, Ojorojo. I'm just posting to let you know that Little Walter 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 March 20. 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 ) 22:41, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Talk:The_Storm_Before_the_Calm
Hi Share your thoughts regarding the album if you wish to. 2001:D08:2900:1548:1749:BD60:7F54:62D8 (talk) 09:36, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Done on the album talk page. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:53, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Route 66 in Depeche Mode 101
So you mentioned that Route 66's appearance in the 101 documentary film wasn't mentioned in the article. Fair enough. As for a reliable source for its inclusion... I watched the movie and heard it come up several times? I'm not sure how to cite that. Hypnometal (talk) 15:13, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Hello. Usually, secondary sources, such as a professional review, biography, etc., are used for WP articles. If, as you say, it is "featured prominently in the tour documentary", there should some mention of it in reliable sources. However, AllMusic, CD Review, Rolling Stone don't have anything to say and the track listings for both the album and video do not include it.  Without published sources, there is really nothing to say about it except that it appears in the video ("prominently" would be original research). This would make it no different than the hundreds of other versions out there that appear somewhere, but have not received any critical attention. DP's version is included because it reached the charts. Linking an album on which it appears would be OK, but it's not even mentioned in the WP 101 article, so there's really nothing to add. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:04, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Advice
Hello again. I just left a lengthy talk page message for a somewhat problematic user who's been warned multiple times by multiple editors in the past. Can you take a look at it and let me know if you think I handled it okay? Part of me thinks the message I left will fall on deaf ears, as this user is completely non responsive and goes on repeating the same mistakes, but I figured I'd at least try. Thanks. —The Keymaster (talk) 03:50, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi. You've certainly gone out of your way to politely explain the issues and provide links to the applicable policies and guidelines. However, with their edit history and apparent disregard for discussions about their editing, we'll have to see if it does any good. Some editors get away with ignoring all rules for years, which can be very frustrating for those who are trying to bring articles up to GA or FA status, which require that articles only use reliable sources, not include indiscriminate information, etc.  But, WP is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, so you have to get used to it. Be careful not to edit war and continue to provide policy links, invitations to discuss, etc. in edit summaries. As difficult as it may be, sometimes it is just better to remove the pages from your watch list and forget about them.—Ojorojo (talk) 16:08, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I totally get that. That's part of why I temporarily dropped the ball on making those amendments to MOS:ALBUM. It was giving me anxiety just thinking about having to start an RFC, which I'd never done before. Thankfully, Mudwater prodded me to just follow through on the edits and I haven't seen any opposition thus far.
 * Honestly, I'm not sure why I even bothered to AGF with Lisadoop. It seems like their edit history has been really hit and miss, with more misses than hits. Those excessively long, poorly sourced (bordering on OR) tour sections they added on the Devo album pages years ago still irritate me, and I would really like to just nuke them entirely. However, when I brought it up at WT:ALBUMS a while back, I couldn't really get any decent feedback on it.— The Keymaster (talk) 03:38, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * WP concert tour articles are subject to an amazing amount of tendentious editing and sockpuppetry. has been dealing with some of it and now it looks like it's spilling over to tour sections in venues, albums, etc. I missed your post at WT:ALBUMS, but, at this point, I'm not sure what would help. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:19, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Here is a brief discussion that took place about it that I wasn't part of, and here is the later thread where I tried to bring it up, to no avail. (And actually, now I see you commented briefly in the first one!) The style guide does seem to discourage listing all the dates. Maybe this is another topic that would necessitate an RFC?— The Keymaster (talk) 00:33, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
 * In the case of Freedom of Choice, all of the information is based on one source (a fan site), and all the notes seem to constitute OR. Wonder if I should compromise and reduce it to a brief summary and simple list of dates, as it is for the 2009 album tour at the bottom (although that needs more refs, too).— The Keymaster (talk) 00:39, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The tour section in Freedom of Choice fails on several counts. First, balancing aspects advises "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." The concert section takes up about one-half of the article, which is far too much about a promotional aspect. Second, the only source is a fansite, which is self-published/user-generated and therefore not a suitable reliable source (I know for a fact that at least one concert date is missing). Third, most of the details in "Notes" are not in the source used and appear to be OR. Therefore, the whole section could be removed under WP:BURDEN ("All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports[efn] the contribution.[efn]" see link for full efns).
 * Depending on what reliable sources have to say about the tour, it might be covered by a paragraph, but collapsed material should not be used for article content (see MOS:DONTHIDE). A complete listing of dates seems indiscriminate – that's what fansites and setlist.fm are for; WP is supposed to provide "encyclopedic content". Perhaps you should remove anything that doesn't have a reliable source and make sure what is left reflects a proper balance. Then consider an RFC or other options.
 * —Ojorojo (talk) 15:35, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Wow, that's a lot of helpful information, some of which I knew, some I didn't. That will definitely help my argument if I should happen to meet any resistance cleaning up that page. I've already been drafting an overhaul of that page, as there are many other problem areas there as well. I also want to clean-up the track listing section, which became an absolute mess over time (and is also hidden, funnily enough), with endless bonus tracks and unsourced details. I also plan on adding a good amount of sourced information about the production, as there are many reliable sources with that info.
 * I plan on cleaning up the other Devo album pages while I'm at it, as almost all of them have similar issues (largely via the same editor). After that, I'd like to finally clean up all the Monkees album pages, too, which are also currently dominated by endless reissues and personnel sections with unsourced trivia that take up 2/3rds of the page. (Exhibit A.) — The Keymaster (talk) 20:50, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

It Hurts Me Too - Dylan version
Thanks for your advice - I have mentions and at least brief discussions of Dylan's version of 'It Hurts Me Too' from Self-Portrait in several biographies and critical analyses of Dylan - all books published by major publishers. If I add these as references, would the Dylan version qualify for notability? Does the song need to be singled out for special praise, or just discussed in reliable sources? Adam98764 (talk) 15:48, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Hello: The way SONGCOVER is usually applied is that the version should actually be discussed, as opposed to being listed as a track on the album. Some editors object to negative views, but I don't see why they're not fair game. Readers would find it more interesting to be able to understand something about the other versions, such as why they were chosen, how are they similar or different, etc. Your edit was better than most; otherwise, just saying that it appears on an album seems no better than trivia (appearing in a commercial, etc.). —Ojorojo (talk) 16:24, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Pejoratania
Saving Country Music is a "fansite"? mmmkay 80.3.105.120 (talk) 17:41, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm happy to be corrected, but it does appear to be a country music fansite. Anyway, the article has very little to say about Virgil's version, except that it somehow reflects his self-perception. As a blues standard, the song has been recorded by numerous musicians – secondhandsongs shows 312 versions. WP:SONGCOVER indicates that, in order to be added, "the rendition is discussed by a reliable source, showing that it is noteworthy in its own right." It doesn't appear that there is enough to justify adding it without some other reliable sources. —Ojorojo (talk) 18:12, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Rain on the Roof (song)
Aoidh (talk) 00:02, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Clapton page addition
Clapton played Dobro guitar on “The Roof is Leaking” on Phil Collins Face Value. Jthawort (talk) 06:29, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I've copied your comment to Talk:Eric Clapton albums discography and responded there. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:37, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Devo clean-up
Well, I have begun my extensive clean-up of the Devo album pages, starting with their first album. I left an exhaustive explanation in the edit history but hope I didn't just start World War III. Thank you for the motivation and advice. —The Keymaster (talk) 09:40, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
 * It looks like you've made a very good start. If there are attempts to revert or add more OR/SYN/fansites, it may be a good idea to start a talk page discussion. That way you can show that you're not engaged in an edit war, but removing unsourced/unreliably sourced material as per an attempted discussion on the talk page. Good luck! —Ojorojo (talk) 14:20, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Hello : How's the clean-up going? There's a current discussion (WT:ALBUM) that may be of interest. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:52, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi there. I made an executive decision to completely remove those tour date tables on all Devo album pages a while back and, thankfully, haven't met with any opposition. If I recall, Justin made those same kinds of arguments when I brought the issue up before and, needless to say, I agree with everyone there who isn't him. I doubt I'll jump in there unless my input is really needed, because I don't feel like going back and forth with him.
 * Another guideline that could be brought up is this one, which clearly states not to list all dates for less notable tours. If a tour was that notable—say, for instance, Taylor Swift's Eras Tour—it would have its own page. While I like Yo La Tengo, they are hardly a major or well known artist and, in my view, don't merit those kinds of tour details on an album page.— The Keymaster (talk) 07:20, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Sounds like you're making progress. Thanks for the link. I'm surprised that no one has pointed it out. I'll add it to the discussion. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:07, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Background vocals on "All Along The Watchtower"
There are none. Not by Dave Mason, nor anyone else. Please just listen to it. That's why I removed the credit and simply said, "removed false information."

If you go to the page devoted to the song, you'll see a mention of Dave Mason playing guitar, but nothing about singing. Furthermore, on the page about "Crosstown Traffic," there's a mention of him singing background vocals, but no mention of him playing guitar.

This leads me to conlude that the credit for Dave Mason should read: The way the credit stands right now looks to be poorly constructed and misleading.

If the book you cite says otherwise, I'll drop the matter. Eddie Kramer was there; he would know. I wasn't there, nor were you (as far as I know), but I trust my ears, and there just aren't any background vocals on "All Along The Watchtower."

I don't have that book, so I can't check the reference. But I found a used copy for a good price, and it should get to me in about a week. It's bound to be a good read. Journeybear (talk) 03:43, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, the construction makes it unclear. By removing "All Along the Watchtower", it makes it appear that Mason only contributed to "Crosstown Traffic" and no other songs. Twelve-string guitar on "All Along the Watchtower", backing vocals on "Crosstown Traffic" is a better wording and reflects what most reliable sources use. McDermott and Kramer's Hendrix: Setting the Record Straight was good for its time (1992), but it was updated and expanded in 2009 as Ultimate Hendrix: An Illustrated Encyclopedia of Live Concerts and Sessions. Good luck. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:15, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Re: Cross Road Blues
Hey there Ororojo! Yea, although my main edits on Wikipedia are weather-related, I am a lifelong musician, mostly a pianist. I've also taught music at the college-level, and have taught years of lessons, so I feel comfortable mentoring for a music article.
 * Thanks for taking this on. I borrowed several of the sources used for the article – to start, I'll work with what I have and later address the rest. Should I ping you when I address something or will you monitor this page and the article? If you have a better approach, let me know.

Upon first glance, the article is in good shape, rightful for its GA status. The bar for featured article status is a bit higher, so I'm gonna be nitpicky with my review.


 * Link "acoustic slide guitar" in the lead
 * Linked.


 * "Johnson auditioned for music store owner and sometime talent scout H. C. Speir in Jackson, Mississippi" - why the "sometime"?
 * Unnecessary, removed.


 * Reference for - In Johnson's time, "cross road" was the preferred usage for "crossroads"?
 * I think this was more from observation, so removed until an actual source is found.


 * In note B - Patton referred to a crossroads in his 1929 song "Joe Kirby", although the verse mentions a railroad crossing. - who is Patton? Charley Patton, mentioned in the previous section? I'm not sure why this note is needed if the reference backs it up.
 * Unnecessary, removed.


 * So clearly the biggest angel in the song is the devil-dealing. You start getting into it, but then you say the lyrics don't make any references, followed by "Music historians believe that Johnson's verses do not support the idea." Now I get why you do it this way. I did a bit of Googling, and yes, this song indeed is part of the mythology of Johnson selling his soul. So I wish you could mention some sort of source that backs this up a little bit more - what were the elements in this song that so contributed to the mythology? Was it Johnson's style of singing? (he's singing high notes) Was it the guitar work? You say - Delta bluesman Tommy Johnson (no relation to Robert) promoted himself as having made a deal with the Devil and Southern folklore identifies a crossroads or graveyard as the site of such a pact, which Wald identifies as likely sources of the myth. - this is the first mention of Wald btw, so perhaps this needs some minor reworking.
 * See rewritten paragraph below.


 * "Johnson later recorded two songs that include Satanic references" - given you just mentioned Tommy Johnson right before this, I think you need to clarify that this is Bobby here.
 * Done.


 * although many agree "the 'devil angle' made for good marketing" - who is many? And who said this quote? You should never have an unattributed quote in an article. If you're paraphrasing from a book, try finding another way of wording to avoid the exact quote.
 * How about a rewritten paragraph to address your points: The song has been used to perpetuate the myth of Johnson selling his soul to the Devil for his musical ability. Folklore of the southern United States identifies a crossroads or graveyard as the site of a pact with the Devil, which music writer Elijah Wald identifies as a likely source of the myth. Another source may be Delta bluesman Tommy Johnson (no relation to Robert), who promoted himself as having made a deal with the Devil. Wald writes: "As for 'Cross Road Blues', the satanic connection has to be made by first citing the Tommy Johnson story, tracing it through the ancient beliefs in a dark spirit who appears at the meeting of pathways, then jury-rigging it to fit a song that never suggests any such theme." Robert Johnson later recorded two songs that include Satanic references: in "Hellhound on My Trail" tells of trying to stay ahead of the demon hound which is pursuing him and in "Me and the Devil Blues" he sings, "Early this mornin' when you knocked upon my door, and I said 'Hello Satan I believe it's time to go'". These songs contribute to the Faustian myth, but how much Johnson promoted the idea is debated. Music historian Ted Gioia believes that the use of satanic themes and imagery generated much needed publicity for blues musicians who were struggling through the Great Depression.


 * So I got to the end of the "Lyrics and interpretation" section before wondering about Johnson's race. IDK if it's necessary to include somewhere, but that bit of context certainly makes the unexpected N-word make a bit more sense. And I even gotta ask, given the context behind the sun down laws, do you really need to include the N word? You already mention the sundown laws in the previous sentence.
 * I was hesitant about including it and now it seems unnecessary, so I removed it. Would Johnson, as an African American, may be expressing... help?
 * Assuming that would leads into the following, yea that works: "Johnson may be expressing a real fear of trumped up vagrancy charges or even lynchings that still took place." ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 17:14, 4 July 2023 (UTC)


 * "Harp-style playing employs sharp percussive accents on the bass strings" - I'm not sure "sharp" is the right word here. Sharp in music has a specific context, referring to being on the high side of the pitch. I think the line works just as fine without the word "sharp"
 * I believe this was in the source, but agree that "percussive accents" adequately describes it, so removed "sharp".


 * " This facilitates Johnson's use of a slide, which features as prominently in the song as the vocal." - does this mean slide on the guitar, or the voice, or both?
 * Changed to "Johnson's use of slide guitar..."


 * "Clapton has also used the name for the Crossroads Centre, a drug rehabilitation facility he founded, and for the Crossroads Guitar Festivals to benefit it." - source?
 * Added.


 * Any other covers? If so, you could move the Homesick James version to there, since that shouldn't be in the section named for his cousin. Apparently Lynyrd Skynyrd and Rush did covers.
 * Not sure if they meet WP:SONGCOVER, will address later. See July 6 comment below.

So that's it for my first review of the article. The article is certainly good, but there are some things that stood out to me for an aspiring FAC. Please let me know if have questions about my review. I think with a bit of work it could be a successful FA candidate. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 18:22, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I made some changes based on your suggestions and raised a couple of questions. Again, let me know if this approach works OK. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:27, 3 July 2023 (UTC) Ojorojo (talk) 14:39, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Yea this approach works great. It's essentially a peer review without having a formal page for it. I appreciate your quick replies. The rewritten part works a lot better explaining the devil connection - that's kind of the hook of the article, and I think you do a better job selling it now. As for the other cover songs, that makes sense. Here is something from Classrockhistory.com about the ten best versions of the song, and this book mentions several covers. Also, for what it's worth, the German Wikipedia article for the song has a list of artists who covered the song. And here is another magazine article about the song.
 * So far, so good. Thanks for the links. A popular covers site lists 141 versions. Although most probably follow Cream's arrangement, maybe something about the variety of artists (Buckwheat Zydeco to Turtle Island Quartet) can be added if individual versions don't meet the guidance. I'll work on it. See July 6 comment below. —Ojorojo (talk) 18:18, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Awesome work on the article. Few more notes.
 * So I checked the images, I believe their fair use is well-explained.
 * Since you're doing some routine checks, did you notice this?


 * The article seems fairly comprehensive, especially once you add the cover artists. So I noticed that this song would be one of the oldest featured songs. I checked out other older featured songs, such as Amazing Grace, which includes "in popular culture". Now, you already weave the culture of the song into the history, so I think you're good not having pop culture section. Like_a_Rolling_Stone has a legacy section, which you kind of do already in this article. There's no music video for the song, so that's not applicable. I also checked out Imagine (John Lennon song), which has a "Personnel" section. This reminds me that you should include the drummer and any other musicians for the Cream cover.
 * I moved a couple of passages and added a "Other versions and appearances" to a draft version. It's not finished, but see if it addresses some of your concerns. —Ojorojo (talk) 18:13, 6 July 2023 (UTC) Now added to the main page. I notice the FA reviewed version of "Imagine" did not contain a personnel section (personnel sections are often added by drive-by editors – no refs required!). I usually don't add these when an article discusses several versions (2 for James and 1 each for Powerhosue and Cream). Clapton, Bruce, and Baker are mentioned and linked and adding several new short subsections might add to clutter and inhibit the flow (MOS:OVERSECTION). —Ojorojo (talk) 15:59, 8 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Given the performance of the Cream cover on the charts, I think that should be mentioned in the lead, to help emphasize how important this later cover was in the history of the song. I also think that you should mention this part in the lead - Clapton has also used the name for the Crossroads Centre, a drug rehabilitation facility he founded, and for the Crossroads Guitar Festivals to benefit it.
 * I save the lead for the very last and try to follow MOS:LEAD: "a concise overview of the article's topic. It should identify the topic, establish context, explain why the topic is notable, and summarize the most important points... the emphasis given to material in the lead should roughly reflect its importance to the topic".
 * The lead is now expanded and mentions Clapton's further use. As a late-1960s act, Cream was more of an album-oriented group. The single only saw limited release as a single (no UK release) after they broke up and only reached No. 28 in the US. If it had reached the top 5 or so in several countries, it would be worth mentioning, but otherwise it doesn't seem important enough for the lead. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:29, 12 July 2023 (UTC)


 * One other thing I noticed. In the section for the cover by Clapton, you say - Their attention turned to Robert Johnson songs and Boyd proposed "Crossroads"[c] and Clapton chose "Traveling Riverside Blues". By saying Clapton chose Traveling, it seems like Crossroads wasn't included, but the next sentence (first in the next paragraph) does make it clear. Also, there's a reference to Led Zeppelin - Led Zeppelin later used lyrics from "Traveling Riverside Blues" with Howlin' Wolf's "Killing Floor" set to a rock arrangement for "The Lemon Song". - Why is this relevant?
 * Changed "chose" to "favored" and eliminated the paragraph break to connect it better. Also, I added a subsequent Powerhouse appearance and removed the unnecessary efn. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:10, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 22:18, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

So from my eye (oromarron) the article looks to be in good shape for FAC. Again, good work on the article. Lemme know when you decide to nominate it. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 18:05, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * It's been nominated @ Featured article candidates/Cross Road Blues/archive1. Thanks for your review and suggestions. —Ojorojo (talk) 19:37, 21 July 2023 (UTC)