User talk:Ghmyrtle/Archive 43

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 40 Archive 41 Archive 42 Archive 43 Archive 44 Archive 45 → Archive 47

Clearwell Castle

Hi Ghmyrtle - hope you are keeping well. I’ve been doing a bit of work on the above and hope it might chime with a couple of your interests. Unfortunately, what I know about rock music could easily be written on the back of a very small stamp, but I believe Clearwell Castle was quite a notable recording studio in the 1970s/80s. The article could do with a little more on what was recorded there - major albums/songs etc., and the experiences of the bands that chose to record there. And I wonder why Clearwell become a significant studio - why did bands chose it, and why does that little slice of the Marches have two (Rockfield) and was it when recording there that Robert Plant found The Argoed, Penallt? The last two queries are more my own musings than anything else. Any material you could add would be much appreciated. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 18:32, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

There's an interesting story about Black Sabbath and the ghosts (allegedly) at Clearwell in our Sabbath Bloody Sabbath article, drawing on this book, I think. The studios at Rockfield became popular at least in part because of their secluded location, where bands could "get it together" without too many distractions (or interference), and I suppose Clearwell must have had the same attraction - but I'm no expert on recording studios. A starting point might be to check the list of articles linked from the Clearwell Castle article. We should bear in mind that many tracks and albums are and were not recorded in single studios - bits were recorded in different studios at different times, and then they would have been mixed together somewhere else. But I'll give it some more thought and see if I can come up with anything. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:22, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)

The list contained in Discogs here gives some idea of the amount of albums etc., at least partly recorded at the studios. Note Discogs.com is not deemed a reliable source, but the band names/album titles may at least lead to more reliable sources. The studios seemed to be a favourite with the hard rock band clientele. If that helps. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:45, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Sorry for the edit conflict! That’s a hell of a lot of recordings, for a studio that only operated for about a decade. KJP1 (talk) 20:53, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
I'd only add that it was only used as a recording studio for relatively few years. KJP1 - are you planning to expand the History section significantly? I wouldn't want to overburden the article with too much information on Ozzy's "ghosts"... Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:56, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Sorry if I messed up your editing with my conflict - I'll leave the article now. I probably won't do that much more on the history. Who lived there and what they did interested me less than the castle's place at the birth of the Gothic Revival. Until I read the Rowan article, I'd not appreciated it pre-dated Strawberry Hill House by 20 years. So stuff it with Ozzy's ghosts, it's part of the castle's history. I rarely say that, normally fighting to remove any mention of ghosts from building articles I work on! KJP1 (talk) 21:11, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
PS: I think that the material that you removed as unreferenced in this edit is probably pretty accurate, subject to a few tweaks - all that is needed is to find suitable references. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:12, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Sorry - edit conflicting on your Talkpage now. Yes, I was a bit frustrated trying to craft a new piece out of the existing article and probably blitzed more than I should have. It probably warrants a separate section on its time as a recording studio - you could be just the man to write it! KJP1 (talk) 21:26, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Well... I've reinstated a couple of sentences, but I'm not sure it really warrants much more than that. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:47, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Excellent- it looks good and gives those interested in the music history much more of a feel for what happened than my dry list. Many thanks. KJP1 (talk) 18:15, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Sonny Scott

In my sandpit there is a draft (almost complete) for the above bluesman, who had connections with one of my favourites, Lucille Bogan. In the 'Biography' section, at the end of the third paragraph, there is a referenced (from AllMusic) sentence about the location of "Highway No. 2". I have tried using Google Maps to find the modern day equivalent, and think it is here. This then means it is now possibly Alabama State Route 156, although location-wise, the Wikipedia article's description does not seem to quite fit the bill. Interestingly, vaguely, at the easternmost end of Route 156, it becomes Romulus Road which carries the Highway No. 2 designation. This research is perhaps bordering on the original, but if it does pan out, I thought I might insert in Scott's article something along the lines of ... "which possibly accords with the present day Alabama State Route 156". Could you take a look and see if I am on the right lines. I did half wonder about posing a question somewhere on Wiki to see if there are any editors reasonably local to Choctaw County, Alabama, who could assist – but tell the truth I do not really know where to post; plus how likely an answer would be forthcoming. This is a bit different to the things I usually throw at you, so I will not take any offence if you are unable to comment. Regards,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 16:26, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I think you're right - the State Route 156 looks to be the correct location. But you could ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Roads, perhaps? Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:02, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
I did not know such a talk page existed ! Anyhow, I have taken your advice and posted there - we will see what transpires. Thanks again - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 13:25, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Rather belatedly this article is now on the mainframe. For your information, we did identify the correct road, but not the correct designation for it. One kind user of the U.S. Roads Project put me right, pretty much straight away. So all's well that... On another matter, could you take a look at recent edits on Bessie Tucker, which talk about a recently unearthed birth certificate - I wonder if this is actually correct. Thanks - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:57, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
It's clear that Eagle and LeBlanc had access to her death certificate, so it would be better to stick with the details that they published. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:19, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
PS: I've seen her death certificate online (I don't think it was "newly discovered"), so have clarified the details a little. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:40, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for that. I knew you would be the right person to ask ! - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 13:03, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Vik Records

That was long-overdue. Thank you. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 13:53, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:44, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Colston

I'd now suggest that we submit our proposed alternative wording (one that we've previously tried to use in the article) for an RfC as the closer suggests. I was just checking sources and I notice that it's US sources that normally refer to Bill Gates as a philanthropist, whilst the BBC - even this year - has just called him "ex-Microsoft boss", "Microsoft billionaire", and "US billionaire". One source calls him " multi-billionaire 'philanthropist' " (note the inverted commas!) And here's an article from 2009 that sheds another light on it! [1] But I'm not up for submitting the RfC myself - I've already had too much flak over the great "TV show/programme" debate. Deb (talk) 08:32, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, maybe someone could submit an alternative wording for an RFC. I'm sure the issue will come up again. I've added (if it hasn't been reverted) a link to the Philanthropy article - which is quite a poor article, but should at least set out alternative definitions of the word and how it was, and is now, interpreted. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:24, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
ANOTHER RfC?! I admire your persistence, Ghmyrtle, but the matter is settled! Even the rewording was largely unpopular in the previous discussion, so this would just be an old discussion under a new cloak. I for one would be willing to talk civilly, but there may be a lot of bad-tempered reactions from the rest, so I beg of you, desist. HalfdanRagnarsson (talk) 10:05, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
I'm always grateful for advice, even from editors who have been here for... four whole months! I'm not suggesting that I would instigate an RFC - but the matter is not settled, as there was deadlock at the RFC, and then a failure of the DRN on procedural grounds. The RFC closing admin suggested that there could be scope for another RFC on a different wording. Decisions on this site are taken through policy and guidance, not "votes", and bad-tempered reactions from editors are nothing to fear. It would be interesting to see what the reaction might be in the real world to a story that WP insists on describing Colston in the way it does. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:18, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
Now, let's not get into me or my account being young. The point here is that even if you see it as a "deadlock", it is seriously negative against a change to the status quo. Two discussions have ended the same way; I don't see how a third on slightly different lines would end very differently. Of course, there is no rule stopping you from opening the said RfC, but all it would result in is hot air, frayed nerves and the same result, so there's no point. HalfdanRagnarsson (talk) 16:35, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
Have you ever heard of reverse psychology? Deb (talk) 14:50, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Dale Farm

Thanks for your changes relating to my green belt edits, quite correct. 203.10.91.80 (talk) 09:32, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Secondhandsongs.com

That is the case with some but not all. Do you have a link to a specifically discussing the use of SH as an external link? The only recent discussion pertaining to the site that I came across was this. --Ascribe4 (talk) 21:37, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

That is a discussion about whether the site is a reliable source - not about an external link, which is a different matter entirely. See WP:ELYES and WP:ELMAYBE. Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:08, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
It was all could gather regarding the site. Do you have a link to a specific discussion pertaining to the usage of the site as an external link? I've come across common issues related to WP:FINDAG-EL. --Ascribe4 (talk) 17:49, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
If you are concerned about the use of the site as an external link, you need to make your case at WP:ELN. Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:55, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 August 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:25, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

no wp:self published source

Per the discussion at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Albums/Archive_46#Piero_Scaruffi_-_Final_Verdict_on_using_him_as_a_source_in_reviews there's a very clear consensus here that Scaruffi is not to be used as a source in music/album articles in any capacity. So please, do not add his opinions anymore. It is a wp:self published source. Since this is a long running dispute, any contributor warned by the situation and who doesn't respect it, would encounter sanctions and could be blocked from editing. Thanks. You've been informed because you used this source here. Woovee (talk) 22:53, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

He was not being used as a "source" for anything other than his own clearly stated opinions... but, whatever.... Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:11, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

August 2020

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed maintenance templates from Chris Christian. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Please see Help:Maintenance template removal for further information on when maintenance templates should or should not be removed. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. The template's purpose is clear and removing it because its addition was unexplained is problematic. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:03, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Please, WP:DTTR. The problem here was an unexplained discontinuity between the actual objective reliability of the source, and the question of whether the source was a "reliable source" in Wikipedia's own terms. In the circumstances I'll let it pass. Ghmyrtle (talk) 06:48, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for alerting me to your response. What is the "unexplained discontinuity" you're referencing here and the fact that a birth certificate may not actually be for the subject, and we can only assume that it is? In the circumstances, the removal of template merits a warning, which is more than a template, and a discussion. You complained about the first and didn't engage in the second. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:58, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
I haven't objected to, or changed, your edit, and I've no wish to comment on it any further. The article concerned needs a very great deal of work. Placing a standardised warning - including "Welcome to Wikipedia" - on the page of an editor who has been here for over 14 years was unnecessarily heavy-handed. Ghmyrtle (talk) 06:39, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
As for wikihounding you, I'm not. Check the history of the article. It's been on my watchlist for a while. First edits there were 2016-06-13T13:57:28, but I only tend to step-in if I see problem edits. I saw "blog" in the URL and knee-jerk reverted, but when I saw it was from a long-standing editor, I checked the source, specifically the about page, and saw that it would easily meet RS if raised at RSN and self-reverted. Can't have the knee-jerk reaction brand me as a jerk in general! Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:50, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
No problem, and apologies for any crossed wires. It will be very interesting to see what emerges in Clark's eventual obituaries, I think. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:58, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

More Fanny, of the Fanlight variety

Do you know anything about Frederick E. Cliffe or Harry Gifford (not this Harry Gifford), who were co-writers of many of the gormless Lancastrian innocent's songs; including "Fanlight Fanny" ? Plus, perhaps more pertinently, are either notable ? At least I have brought you back from the Far East ! Regards - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 22:13, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Here is something... and here is another thing. Do you want to tackle them, as I believe they say oop north, or shall I? Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:17, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
Aye, lad. They seems more like thy kind of some'at than mine. I think that is how us oop north are supposed to speak - so I will leave them to you. They wrote some excellent, albeit old fashioned these days, songs. I particularly liked Formby's "Why Don't Women Like Me"; although you will probably tell me that the twosome did not pen that one ! Still... turned out nice again. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 22:49, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
PS. If they were churning out that many 'hits' these days, Cliffe and Gifford would be millionaires - perhaps they were back then, allowing for inflation. I remember seeing a Frank Skinner TV documentary on Formby, when he described Formby's proficiency on the ukulele and banjolele as effectively being the 'Jimi Hendrix' on those instruments. Astonishing - before our time though. In our childhood, we thought dear old Frankie Howard's magnificent rendition of "Three Little Fishies" as the height of musical prowess back then. Or Terry Scott's, "My Brother". Actually, I think they still are. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 23:16, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

MigrationWatchUK

Hi, this is about your reversion of my edits on MigrationWatch UK. I understand you acted in good faith, but citations are nearly always present in the main text, just like the main body. A quick random search of featured articles will confirm this; or even the pages of other think-tanks; like Cato Institute. Another thing I fixed was that the lede was essentially a near-duplicate of the "Mission" entry; also, the founder and leading members can be mentioned in the lede; it's useful and is done frequently on the ledes of articles on other think-tanks. I've reverted it for now, but if you have any further concerns, I'm willing to discuss here. HalfdanRagnarsson (talk) 07:44, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm not necessarily opposed to all citations being removed from the lede, but to have the sheer number of citations you insist on including - five citations for a single phrase, for instance - is patently absurd, and bad practice. I'll leave it to other editors to clean up the article. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:50, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Peter Perrett

Hi. Are you able to help re the incorrect page moves? I’ve only just realised that the other article subject doesn’t even have the same surname!? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tbone556 (talk • contribs) 16:02, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Why does it need to be changed? Why does it matter? If you feel it's important, you should raise it at WP:RM#TR. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:04, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Because after 15 years, the original article has been moved for literally no reason? Thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tbone556 (talk • contribs) 16:10, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
No big deal. Ask an admin. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:12, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Record label images

I have noticed that you 'uploaded' several record label images for various articles; most recently for "A Little of What You Fancy Does You Good". Is this simple to do and how do you go about it ? I have in mind "Dear Elaine", "Forever (Roy Wood song)", "Goin' Down the Road (song)" and "Oh What a Shame"; all of which Wiki articles I created about a year or so back. An idiot's guide would be good ! Thanks, - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 16:20, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Have you seen WP:File upload wizard? It does need a bit of care, but if I don't have anything better to do (!) I'm happy to help out.... Step 1: Find an image. Step 2: Save it to your PC (and, if possible, compress its size). Step 3: Use the upload wizard, taking care to fill in all the boxes about fair use, minimal use, etc... (or copy and paste from someone else's, but don't tell anyone I told you that...) Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:33, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:32, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Billy Davis guitarist

Please note that I made changes because I am not Bill Davis aka Abdul Samad. My name is JC Davis, known as Billy (with a Y) Davis. There has been a mix up because of our names. If you look up Bill Davis, he does not look like me in any way, shape or manner! https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/group-the-drifters-rick-sheppard-bill-davis-aka-abdul-samad-news-photo/7428745

Next, whoever wrote this on me made mistakes on years, certain items so I am trying to fix them to make them correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcbilly (talk • contribs) 16:23, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

I will copy the above to Talk:Billy Davis (guitarist), and continue the discussion there. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:58, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Hugh Harris (singer)

You have probably got better things to do, but the above singer is proving, to me at least, hard to track down. I have had notice from a third party via e-mail, that his death date as shown previously was incorrect. Harris' brother (via that third party) provided the dates now shown in the article, but clearly this is not a reliable source. I can not seem to find any evidence to confirm either DOB or DOD, and wonder if Chief Inspector Guy could oblige. Thanks - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 13:41, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

I haven't been able to find anything reliable or definitive - but the birth date seems plausible (there was a Hugh A. Harris, born in Hackney, whose birth was registered in the 3rd quarter of 1964), and this edit is also plausible - on 3 January, the date of the edit, it would be easy for someone to forget that it was a new year. Maybe add a note on the talk page to explain the dates? Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:35, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for your efforts. I have added what I feel is suitable wording on the article's talk page, and made a 'non edit' on the article itself explaining that. Cheers, - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 15:54, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Bristol Beacon

I understand what you mean, and I think I overdid it, but we must avoid confusion. The building has been renamed to Bristol Beacon and yet it is not mentioned again in the rest of the article. Any reference to "Colston Hall" in any form of the present tense has good reason to be replaced with Bristol Beacon e.g. "Colston Hall has been a popular venue for many rock and pop music acts since the 1960s." I did delete some duplicate information in the Renaming section. I had added information on the new renaming announcement, but later realised the same information was present in the next paragraph - so I deleted it. I think this was perfectly reasonable. User:01234lukeorom (talk) 17:20, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

I think later edits have moved the discussion forwards - my objection was to your changing text like "Colston Hall has been a popular venue for many rock and pop music acts since the 1960s", when that was indeed the name of the venue at the time (and no acts have yet performed there under its new name). The opening sentence of the article, I think, means that there is unlikely to be any confusion to readers by sentences like that - we could simply use "The hall..." as much as possible, where the meaning is obvious. I like your new lead image, by the way. Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:14, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 September 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:53, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Rudy Clark death

Hi Mr. Ghmyrtle, Rudy died on September 3rd. He was laid to rest this past weekend in Key West. I have not seen an obituary but attended his funeral two weeks ago via Zoom. The services were held at Harmon Funeral Home in Tampa. He is survived by his wife Bernice, son Dereck, and daughters Lisa and Gina. I am his nephew living on the West Coast. I uploaded his photo to his wiki a few weeks back. Regards, Nicky Clark — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrmeltingpot (talk • contribs) 22:42, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Mrmeltingpot. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:27, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Punk subculture

I don't want to template the regulars but it appears that there is a bit of an edit war going on at Punk subculture. Please discuss your concerns on the talkpage rather than in edit summaries. I've started a discussion at Talk:Punk_subculture#Edit_warring. Woody (talk) 16:57, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Two edits to revert unsourced and partial commentary is not "edit-warring", and I have already asked the IP to explain their position on the talk page. Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:00, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
I included the original revert which was made by an IP. I'm not talking about 3RR in any case, but the three reverts on that page is edit warring. I created the IP's talk page with the edit warring warning. Edit summaries don't really count as having a discussion. I agree that their edits are highly sub-optimal but they haven't had WP:OR or any other policies explained to them. An explanation of why their edits are against policies and aren't acceptable would be a good start. If they then continue to revert against policy then they will be blocked but until they know why their edits aren't acceptable then they can't be blocked for disruptive editing. Woody (talk) 17:07, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
If the IP responds on the article talk page, we will take it from there. Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:10, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Willie Mabon - Chicago Blues Session coverart.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Willie Mabon - Chicago Blues Session coverart.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) 17:45, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Templates

Information icon Please refrain from abusing warning or blocking templates, as you did to [[:talk page]]. Doing so is a violation of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. Thank you. Cambial foliage❧ 13:32, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Bollocks. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

October harvest

treats --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:08, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 November 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:51, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Blue-eyed soul

  • Sophisti-pop - a 2010s term applied retrospectively to a number of 1980s pop acts, many of whom would have fallen under the 'blue-eyed soul' tag at the time
  • Yacht rock - another music genre term applied retrospectively to a certain group of acts by journalists and fans

Ghmyrtle why have you removed the Sophisti-pop link when a lot of UK artists who would have been referred to as 'blue eyed soulsters' or 'soul poppers' in the 1980s British music press (an era of "back Back BACK!", "Sir Billiam of Idol", "Sir Clifford of Richard", "Paul 'Thumbs Aloft' McCartney" and "Dick Spratsley" of Ruddy Big Pig fame. Pur-lease!) would be now be listed under this circa 2005 invented genre (probably by an American music blogger). This awful American term didn't exist at the time, but seems to have gained traction over the last few years especially when putting successful British Pop Soul acts on a playlist. A lot of there are a lot of these British acts were blue eyed soulsters (.e.g. The Style Council and Wet Wet Wet) with Telstar Records even using it for a British various artists compilation [1]) back in the day. However this track listing would probably be retitled 'Sophisti-pop hits' on a random American's playlist these days. I think its strange you think its irrelevant especially when it seems to be you who have resisted the change of the title "Non-black Americans in soul music" and since you live in Chepstow, Wales.

please note: I don't know who added Yacht rock...that seems to be another one of these genres that an American blogger has invented in the last 20 years — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.152.239.202 (talk) 14:25, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/BLUE-EYED-SOUL-16-TRACK-VARIOUS-ARTISTS-CD-RICK-ASTLEY-GEORGE-MICHAEL-WET-WET-/323336157509
Responding at article talk page. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:06, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Liverpool

Ta. I tried curtailing the overblown self congratulatory first paragraph years ago but people were insistent on including as many "largest in" "biggest of" qualifiers that they could with as many areas and subdivisions as they could possibly find. It needed jibbing, as do most city articles which are rife with the same kind of faux-population-virtue-worshipping mentions. Koncorde (talk) 23:36, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

If people continue to argue, we can discuss it on the talk page, on the basis of WP:LEAD. It's a nonsense to have competing, unexplained, definitions cluttering up the opening paragraph. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:43, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Agreed. I still think the ESPON Met area is problematic, firstly because it's twenty years old, and secondly as it functionally combines the traditional Liverpool Met area with the Birkenhead Met area as a super-met area. Unfortunately we're dependent on someone somewhere sometime doing a new ESPON type study to get updated info. Koncorde (talk) 18:28, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Sigfig=3

Thanks for fixing the figure at River Wye - I just couldn't recall how to get 250km to convert properly to miles whereas - annoyingly - both 251km and 250.0km would! I've asked both NRW and OS for 'robust figures' for the lengths of both the Wye and the Usk, not that I'd be able to use any resulting communication in WP, unless they were able to direct me to some published material of which I'm currently unaware. cheers Geopersona (talk) 04:00, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

I had to check how to do it! - Help:Convert#Rounding if you need it again. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:01, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Skiffle Jazz

Why do you find it hard to justify the inclusion of Skiffle in the Jazz template? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.54.195.214 (talk) 16:05, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Are there sources that state that skiffle was a form of jazz? If there are, you could try re-adding it, but I strongly suspect that others (jazz fans) would object quite strongly. It was certainly played by jazz musicians, but so was a lot of pop music in the same era (most session musicians were jazz musicians). Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:12, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:34, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:45, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

File:Only way Is Up Otis Clay.jpg listed for discussion

Hey there. I listed one of your uploads File:Only way Is Up Otis Clay.jpg at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 December 3. --George Ho (talk) 08:36, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

I've added a couple of sources to the article, and commented on the WP:FFD page. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:00, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Robert "Hutch" Davie

Robert "Hutch" Davie is an American musician, songwriter, conductor. He passed away in April, and I wanted to honor his memory by making changes to a sloppy, unfactual web page. Are you going to change everything I've done? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MML1969 (talk • contribs) 09:50, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

It would take just one click to restore it all, if that is the best way forward. But, your edits contravene all manner of guidance as to how things are done here. Firstly, a long discographical list is better as a freestanding article rather than in a biography page. Secondly, you are formatting your citations incorrectly. Thirdly, some of your citations are to sites that (rightly or wrongly) are not regarded as reliable sources. If you can address those issues, there is no problem. Finally, when you leave a comment on a talk page, please "sign" it using four of these symbols: ~ Thanks, Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:55, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I'm new to Wikipedia. Hutch Davie died last April, and you're soiling his memory with a shoddy web page. I was trying to clean it up. Are you telling me you're changing everything back to the way it was? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MML1969 (talk • contribs) 10:04, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

No-one is "soiling his memory". If there are changes to be made to the Biography section, you can ask on the talk page that changes be made (if they can be independently sourced, of course), or you can do that yourself if you have the sources and are willing to format them correctly (or, roughly correctly - other editors are always willing to help). But, what you have been doing is adding details to expand the discography - which many editors would accept is good in principle, so long as they are sourced from good sources, and the citations are formatted correctly. And, as I've said, my view is that they should be in a separate, linked, article, rather than bloating the biography page. Many experienced editors are always prepared to help out, so long as you show a willingness to take advice as to how editing is routinely done here. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:12, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
PS: I'm going to be offline for a few days. In the meantime, I've restored your version (one click, as I said), in the hope that you will learn from the experience, and improve your editing skills, based on the advice you've been given and the information in the welcome notice on your talk page. I'll monitor the situation in a few days time. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:56, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Dear Ghmyrtle

Hi, I don't know who you are, but Ghmyrtle, I hope you get COVID. You are an a - s - s - h - o - l - e. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MML1969 (talk • contribs) 10:06, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

I suggest you might like to withdraw that comment, per WP:NPA. Thanks. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:12, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Ahmadis

Dude Ahmadis are NON-MUSLIMS why are you editing it to ‘Muslims’ and ‘Mesiah’?? AjaxRock (talk) 12:00, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Just routine reverting of edits against WP:CONSENSUS. Seems to be a coordinated WP:POV attack. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:14, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Tainted Love Gloria Jones 1965.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Tainted Love Gloria Jones 1965.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) 18:51, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Been bugging me for some time now...

Once upon a time, in the dim and distant past, I briefly owned a sampler/compilation album, the title of which I can not recall. I think the track listing included King Crimson's splendidly overblown "21st Century Schizoid Man", and probably a Nick Drake track (maybe "Time Has Told Me"). I am pushing it a bit, but it may have had an Incredible String Band track and possibly Heads, Feet and Bumps-a-Daisy, or whatever it was they were called, tune. The album sleeve in question mainly had images of various tablets/drugs, none of which meant anything to me at the time, being the good boy that I was. Logically dating from 1969/70/1, it was rather stupidly lent by me to one of my 'friends' to tape, and never to return. It might have been on Island Records, or maybe Polydor. I seem to recall that the track listing was varied/eclectic, and the offerings ranged from good to bloody awful/aged very badly already/did we really listen to such tosh. AllMusic does not seem to list it, although my vague recollections are not much to go on. I reckon that 'they' only produced a few hundred pressings; but isn't it infuriating when one can not instantly recall an obscure LP from half a century ago ?

I do not want to spoil your Christmas, but any ideas ? - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 23:23, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

@Derek R Bullamore: Maybe "Nice Enough To Eat" (1969)? Carptrash (talk) 23:56, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Bugger me, that was it ! Actually the track listing was far better than I recall... Jethro Tull's excellent and rarely matched, "We Used To Know", for one. Thank you Carptrash, now my Christmas will be a little less miserable than normal. I seem to recall the back cover of the album's sleeve more than the front. Nice Enough To Eat - just enough time left before Crimble for me to sink a pint, or two, of real ale in a local pub... oh bugger again. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 00:30, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
Cheers then. Carptrash (talk) 15:17, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 December 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:25, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ghmyrtle/Archive_43&oldid=998900986"