Talk:Gerry Rafferty/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Untitled

I'm not sure the information about Max Rafferty being Gerry's son is correct. What's the source, or who would know more about it?

Get It Right Next Time is also played a lot on Radio 2. -88.110.3.223 17:13, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Songwriting style

There should be at least a passing message about his songwriting style in that most of his songs tell a story and have few if any repeated verses, even in the chorus (baker street is a great example of this). --24.183.185.153 (talk) 15:02, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

We could do quite a bit on this. Musically-his style, his amazingly ability to arrange songs etc. Lyrically-how his songs were often autobiographical and inspired by events/places/people around him. I've tried to work in a few references connecting his songs to events in his life (e.g. the stories behind City to City, Shipyard Town, Mattie's Rag), but we might add more if it doesn't make the article too unwieldy. 82.71.0.229 (talk) 20:39, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Disappearance

I'm a little concerned with the disappearance section of the article, the actual true outcome seems rather cloudy. Spud ^Hai/_watidone 03:13, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I have done quite a bit of work on the Personal life section, adding in much more about the newspaper reports of GR's alcholism and trying to weave it all together into a coherent narrative. I do hope I have improved it and that that's OK with everyone. I apologise for the massive number of edits, but I don't think I've actually deleted any previous work at all so I hope it doesn't cause any offence. 82.71.0.229 (talk) 23:42, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Last album

The Guardian article linked to at the end says he never made his promised last album, but this article says he did. Was the Guardian writer just talking nonsense? Orlando098 (talk) 22:25, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

GR released "Life Goes On" in Autumn 2009, which was a compilation of previously released/remixed material and a few unreleased songs (largely recorded during the Another World period, I believe, and familiar to followers of the GR website, where they were originally available as free downloads). That's the album referred to in this article. Despite various suggestions that he was working on new material, nothing "new" surfaced. 82.71.0.229 (talk) 11:12, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Copyright photos

I've just removed the photo of Gerry from the Night Owl recording sessions that was posted here. The photo claims to be public domain having been posted by a Russian (?) user. It is a copyright image taken by Robert Ellis c.1979 for the Night Owl recording sessions at Chipping Norton Studios. Unless Robert Ellis or the copyright holder has granted permission (and no grant of permission is noted on the image), the image does not belong here. 82.71.0.17 (talk) 08:05, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

place of death

I think he died in Poole. See thisisdorset.net from Jan 5th. Regards, --Wolf-Dieter (talk) 23:14, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

The article is correct. Upton, Dorset is immediately adjoining Poole, but is in the Purbeck local government area. Ghmyrtle (talk) 23:57, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

It's a bloody awkward one, that (I know, I used to live there). Although administratively it's in Purbeck as far as urban development and social links are concerned it's a suburb of Poole, being at the west end of the Christchurch - Bournemouth - Poole conurbation that runs almost from New Milton to Wareham. If you were looking for it on a map Poole would be more useful than Purbeck, which covers a large area of mainly countryside. Britmax (talk) 14:25, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

It turns out the place of death was wrong anyway: GR died in Stroud at his daughter's home, though he was hospitalized in Bournemouth after collapsing while living with his fiancee, Enzina Fuschini in Upton, near Poole, which is administratively (though not geographically) part of Purbeck. The discrepancy between these two places - Dorset and Gloucestershire - may be explained by a Mirror article (31 Jan 2011) "My love for Gerry Rafferty", where Ms Fuschini tells her story, in particular the final sentence: "I desperately wanted to be by his beside when he died but I was prevented from doing so." 82.71.0.229 (talk) 14:16, 11 February 2011 (UTC) I have unearthed a little bit more about the final part of this story, alleging that there was, shall we say, tension between the parties concerned) that we can't go into in the article unless someone makes a public comment about it that can be properly sourced/referenced. I also understand that GR and EF were living in Branksome Park, Bournemouth at the time of his collapse, not in the house in Upton, Poole, which had apparently been sold. That would explain why he was admitted to hospital in Bournemouth rather than Poole, which has its own large hospital. 82.71.0.229 (talk) 19:42, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Disenchantment with music industry

The quote is nice, but we need a bit more about this, and probably its own section, noting his refusal to tour, etc. It would also be interesting to contrast his position on this with his thoughts, feelings, and ideas about music and what it means to be a musician who makes music. Viriditas (talk) 00:20, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I have gone ahead and written quite a lengthy new section on Attitude to the Music Industry. It needs some cleaning up of reference format etc but hopefully it's a start. Hope you all like it and can knock it into shape 82.71.0.229 (talk) 12:32, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

There is a little bit of new info about this (or rather, confirmation of what is already known) from Martha Rafferty in an interview from 14 August 2011:

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/2011/08/14/gerry-rafferty-s-daughter-opens-heart-on-how-baker-street-destroyed-her-dad-86908-23344048 82.71.0.229 (talk) 17:10, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

82.71.0.229 (talk) 17:11, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Further improvements

What else can we do to improve this article? More photos to help break up the text would be great, if there are any copyright-free ones we can use (I couldn't find much CC-licensed material on Flickr). I have added the Baker Street sign because it was already available. Could also add photos of places that were important in GR's life, e.g. Paisley, Hartfield, etc.?

How about a list of cover versions of GR songs too? There must have been numerous covers of Baker Street, also covers of The Right Moment (by Barbara Dickson and Olivia Newton John), and perhaps Stealers Wheel songs?

Any other suggestions for improvements? 82.71.0.229 (talk) 11:20, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

You (or anyone) could nominate it at Wikipedia:Good article nominations, and see what advice is offered from there. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:23, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I think an image of one of GR's famous album covers designed by John Byrne would be ideal for the article. Would there be a copyright issue in replicating it? John Byrne designed a cover for GR that wasn't actually used, it was published in the Herald (formerly "Glasgow Herald") as a two page spread after GR passed away and that would be a fitting and appropriate addition to the article if it could be obtained. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.26.110.185 (talk) 02:08, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I seem to remember John Byrne's cover artwork has been in and out of this article a few times. Added, deleted, added, deleted!... Strictly speaking, they are all copyright images so not allowed on Wikipedia. But you (or someone else) could obtain formal permission to use them. I presume the copyright is owned by EMI or John Byrne himself. It would be great if we could use one of those images with permission because, as you say, they are so personal, fitting, and (IMHO) quite brilliant. 82.71.0.229 (talk) 19:23, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Finally got round to nominating for "good article" status. Let's see what feedback comes back! :) 82.71.0.229 (talk) 16:24, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Can I have my money back?

We seem to have a bit of back-and-forth on the date for this album. Is it 71/72? Well... if you check out the disc label image from Discogs, it's 1971. See this image: http://www.discogs.com/viewimages?release=1505192 82.71.0.229 (talk) 21:39, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Will and legal dispute over estate

A comment is needed on this section of the Rafferty page. After all the vandalism regarding the Fuschini page, I would like to call for correctness amongst us all. I think only published information should be listed here, in order to avoid terrible confusion. The vandalistic comments inserted by the now deleted user "Marthamaryrafferty" on the Fuschini and Rafferty pages, correctly deleted because against any Wikipedia standard, cannot be inserted back on an official Wikipedia Page as reliable sources. It is not even clear wether this user/editor was actually a family member, there cannot be any identification. Or does somebody have some more information on that issue which he/she doesn't want to reveal?..........

Up to now, the legal documents related to this case are not public if I understand well. Therefore, a summary of the real facts cannot be given, only information on published interviews with the involved persons. Lets not become Wikipedia an instrument for a legal battle and make sure we as objective editors will not be involved.

--Jpvandijk (talk) 11:13, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I suspected you were going to delete this (!), but I agree with you 100% this time and support you. I have searched for definitive information about this case and found nothing. I did think of trying to contact Martha Rafferty and asking her whether she was indeed the person identified as "marthamaryrafferty", but I really don't wish to get involved. At some point, either the Raffertys or Enzina Fuschini will make a public statement and we can add the information then. Ghmyrtle left a comment on the talk page of "marthamaryrafferty" pointing out WP:COI and inviting her to revert her edits, but if she were a new user, I doubt she would have noticed it. I reverted those of her edits that seemed (IMHO) unacceptable and left those that seemed reasonable.

Since you have brought up the subject, I would also like to find information about the rumour that Enzina Fuschini was allegedly denied access to the hospital where Rafferty was being treated and allegedly prevented from entering by hospital security. Do you know if she has put that on public record somewhere? I have heard it alleged by a "friend" of hers in Bournemouth. If it is true, I would like to document it here - but we need an objective source for it. As you can see in the discussion up above, I was asking about this back in February 2011.82.71.0.229 (talk) 11:35, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I think we can all try to look for objectivity in this all, and I appreciate this highly; drawing a common line of objectivity, that I think we have reached. Yes me too I would say that what is at present known about the case are just a few newspaper articles with interviews with Fuschini, which are now correctly cited in the WP pages, without expressing any biassed opinion.

If there is a "rumour" somewhere it should have been published. And not in twitter or facebook or Wikipedia, but at least as a newspaper article I'd say. I think personally (IMHO) the rumour is actually based on a true story; if we imagine the opposite, that she was allowed without problem, why would she declare she was not? Just logic thinking I would say, but again, we must find a published account if we want to put it in Wikipedia. Me too I will do my best to find out more on this episode, for what I can do. As usual in these cases, it will all anyway depend on mutual declarations which are worth what they are, and we do not want to be involved in the court case, nor involve Wikipedia as an Institute. From my point of view, if a family member of Rafferty declares that he said this or that, it can never be verified. Eye witness is the keyword and as you may well know, eye withnesses should be reliable, with no interest, and certainly not family of the party. the same holds of course for interviews with Family members or Fuschini, but: The only thing we can due is document what is written in published form, and argue about it, confronting and evaluating what is written. --Jpvandijk (talk) 15:17, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I see that the only citation (that was already mentioned on this discussion page above in the chapter about his death), is the Daily Mirror of the 31st of Jan 2011. So let's say the "rumour" is a published statement. --Jpvandijk (talk) 10:41, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Take the Money and Run...

Is the co-writer (with Graham Nash) of "Take the Money and Run" from Crosby & Nash's Wind on the Water, Gerry Rafferty? Best Regards. DynamoDegsy (talk) 19:24, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

That's an interesting question. I don't know the answer, but I doubt you'll get one here. If you haven't already, I'd ask it on either:

The Official Gerry Rafferty Facebook page - where it will be seen by people including Martha Rafferty and Alan Rafferty: http://www.facebook.com/OfficialGerryRaffertyPage

or on the Effing Peasants Message Board - where it will be seen by Jim Rafferty: http://members3.boardhost.com/GerryRafferty/

I'm sure you'll get an exact answer at one or both of those.

Even it's just a coincidence, it's an interestng one!

82.71.0.229 (talk) 21:25, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

The single release of that song shows only "G. Nash" as the songwriter:

https://img.discogs.com/IGZ2P_VBVD8qeRcnbETm5Wca74c=/fit-in/600x598/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-2621474-1503714128-5101.jpeg.jpg

Phil Champ (talk) 16:53, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of apparently copyright image Sept 12, 2013

Per WP:CV, I've removed the image of GR and EF as a suspected copyright violation. It was apparently copied from this article: http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/3331595/Weve-lost-another-Scottish-legend-and-a-wonderful-talent.html Although it has been uploaded to Wikipedia on a user's own page, I don't believe the "own work" license tag because it was published online in numerous newspapers in 2011. Right clicking on the image in the Sun article brings up the message "Copyright 2012 News Group Newspapers Ltd and/or its licensors. No use without permission. Contact enquiries@newssyndication.com" and the newspaper article credits it to "Collect". Without proper evidence to the contrary (per WP:COPYREQ), I believe the use of this image is a copyright violation. 82.71.0.229 (talk) 07:04, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I have now labelled the photo "copyvio" on Wikimedia Commons and added a note to the uploader's talk page.

82.71.0.229 (talk) 08:04, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Sources

What's up with all the tabloid sources on this? There must be better sources out there! --John (talk) 20:02, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I have cleaned it up. Although WP:BLPSOURCES does not apply here, we should still aim to keep the article free of tabloid crap; we are not a tabloid and do not aspire to be one. --John (talk) 10:42, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

I completely understand your reservations about "tabloid crap", as you put it, but there is an absolute dearth of information about Gerry Rafferty. With the exception of a few articles in broadsheets and a few music press articles, tabloid stories are pretty much all that's been published: I know this because I've looked and searched through a huge volume of newspaper archives for material for this article over the last seven years. With the exception of one published biography, newspaper articles are the only form of non-original research available on Rafferty for this article.

It looks to me like you've knocked out some valuable material, whatever its source. For example, in the material:

"Byrne was also responsible for one of Rafferty's most prized possessions:"

We've now lost the source entirely. The source is none other than Marthy Rafferty posting on her own page and definitely explaining that the guitar was "one of Rafferty's most prized possessions". Does it matter if it's Facebook? The point is that it's Rafferty's own daughter substantiating the information in the article. Now there is no substantiation whatsoever. That information could be completely made up, for all we know. It isn't - as all Rafferty fans will know. Without the citation, we are left in doubt.

Or this: "Martha Rafferty believes her father started drinking heavily to cope with the pressures of playing on stage, but says his problem "wasn't obvious" for many years." Again, that's Rafferty's daughter explaining what she considers to be the cause of his alcoholism - a key topic in the article. "Why did a hugely rich and successful rock star suddenly become an alcoholic?" is a question everyone asks about Rafferty. Martha offers one explanation; now we've lost it.

Or this: " while his daughter Martha, interviewed by Graham Stellard after her father's death, revealed that Rafferty had "tried all the normal routes of abstaining or getting help but he wasn't able to do it... I tried everything I could. It was extremely painful to see him live out his life through alcoholism..." You don't consider that enlightening? The fact that the source is a tabloid is neither here nor there: it is Gerry Rafferty's daughter shedding light on his alcoholism and his struggle to beat it.

Any thoughts? I do understand your concern, but my concern is that we're deleting useful, sourced information and leaving the article weaker?

82.71.0.229 (talk) 14:01, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

And here's a particularly unforunate edit, IMHO: ""Baker Street still makes me about £80,000 a year. It's been a huge earner for me. I must admit, I could live off that song alone".". You've deleted the Sun reference, without really looking into it very closely. That famous £80,000 figure is mentioned here, there, and everywhere. The original, definitive source for it is that statement by Rafferty in that article in The Sun. Tabloid or not, like it or not, that is the definitive source. I know, because I spent a lot of time tracking it down. What we've done now is remove the original source - so now Wikipedia (the only place where it was possible to find out where the mythical £80,000 figure came from) is no better than all the tabloid articles that endlessly recycle the myth of the £80,000 without saying where the figure came from. 82.71.0.229 (talk) 14:12, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

• I've read everything you have written, and I appreciate the feedback. In my opinion, material that is truly only available on a tabloid or other poor source (Facebook! Come on.) does not belong on here at all. If it is worth our while as a serious tertiary source in mentioning something, it will have appeared in serious secondary sources. --John (talk) 15:13, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

I completely respect your opinion - but we'll have to agree to disagree. :) If we followed what you say: "In my opinion, material that is truly only available on a tabloid or other poor source (Facebook! Come on.) does not belong on here at all.", there would be no article at all. Rafferty was an extremely private man and, except for the last couple of years of his life, virtually nothing appeared about him in print at all. We have to work with what we have.

I think there's a huge difference between information that just happens to be published in a tabloid and "tabloid information" (salacious garbage, tittle-tattle, whatever). In the case of the £80,000 figure, for example we now have it sourced to The Guardian and The Telegraph but not to The Sun - where it originally appeared in Rafferty's own words in an interview. And the original quote is now left without a citation - so where did that quote come from? We used to know, now we don't :)

Is that not simply a bias against tabloids? I have read (more than once) WP:RS and nowhere does the word "tabloid" appear in there! Yes, the publisher of a work obviously affects its credibility, but WP:CONTEXTMATTERS - and in this case I'd argue the context (that these are direct quotes from Rafferty or his family) is the most important thing. The sources are definitive even if some people might consider the publications crap.

Anyway, it's great to have other people critically reviewing and improving the article. We are all working towards the same end - a better finished product :) 82.71.0.229 (talk) 15:55, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

References

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Gerry Rafferty/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: The wub (talk · contribs) 15:31, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

My first review. Getting some help with this from users attending m:Meetup/London/167. the wub "?!" 15:31, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   Prose is generally good, spelling and grammar are fine. Picked up a few minor style issues, but didn't complete reviewing because of sourcing issues.

   • "He joined the folk-pop group The Humblebums, (of which Billy Connolly was a member), in 1969." this feels clumsy, could be reworded
   • Under "Early years" repetition of "son" in quick succession
   • Under "Musical career" probably shouldn't include both However, and But in the same sentence/quote
   • "In 1972, having gained some airplay from his Signpost recording "Make You, Break You" - what is "Signpost" here?
   • "Rafferty and Ventilla divorced in 1990" - same phrase mentioned twice (in Personal life section, and in alcoholism subsection)

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   Lead section is too short. Some concerns about division into sections e.g. "The Humblebums/Stealers Wheel" talks about solo work quite extensively so should probably be renamed or split.

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   Thanks Femkemilene for spot checking these. Overall it appears many sources are not supporting the claims:

   I've not been able to access all sources. Of the sources I did check, the majority missed some information. Could you address those and also double check other sources you do have access to?

   • FN1: doesn't mention Irish, nor Catholic, nor 1947
   • FN10; ideally, the YouTube video should be linked, as I'm not sure there is enough information to find it. The quote from the video doesn't mention Berlin, but German.
   • FN20: http://www.redstone-tech.com/gerry_bsb/melody_maker_1979.htm: is that a reliable source? The source doesn't mention the albums, so possible WP:OR
   • FN5 doesn't mention 1980
   • FN39: generally unreliable source; is there a better one?
   • FN41 doesn't mention The Barbara Dickson Collection
   • FN49 doesn't support the first sentence of the paragraph I think: Rafferty maintained his enthusiasm for this new approach to recording for the next three years
   • FN50 does not have any information about Gerry Rafferty
   • FN13 doesn't support that Gerry died january 2011, nor that his death rekindled interest
   • FN55; generally unreliable source. It doesn't mention Night Owl, nor One Drink down
   • Ideally, more of the sourcing would be secondary. The article leans a bit too heavily on interviews with people that are closely related to the subject.

   Also many unsourced sentences. Thanks Rodw and Joseph2302 for examples:

   • In the mid 1960s Rafferty earned money, for a time, busking on the London Underground. In 1966, Rafferty and Egan were members of the band The Fifth Column. The group released the single "Benjamin Day"/"There's Nobody Here" (Columbia 8068), but it was not a commercial success.
   • Ravenscroft, a session musician, was in the studio to record a brief soprano saxophone part and suggested that he record the now famous break using the alto saxophone he had in his car.
   • Ravenscroft went on to play on Rafferty's next two albums.
   • Rafferty sang the Mark Knopfler-penned song "The Way It Always Starts" (1983) on the soundtrack of the film Local Hero.
   • His next album, Night Owl, also did well. Guitarist Richard Thompson helped by performing on the track "Take The Money and Run", and the title track was a UK No. 5 hit in 1979. "Days Gone Down" reached No. 17 in the US. The follow-up single "Get It Right Next Time" made the UK and US Top 40.
   • Rafferty sang the Mark Knopfler-penned song "The Way It Always Starts" (1983) on the soundtrack of the film Local Hero.
   • Rafferty and Ventilla divorced in 1990. (& sentence before)
   • and marked the end of a creative partnership that had lasted almost 30 years.
   • Only a handful of tracks were ever released, however, and the website eventually closed down without any explanation.
   • In September 2011, EMI issued a remastered collector's edition of City to City featuring previously unheard demo versions of "Baker Street", "Mattie's Rag", "City to City", and other tracks from the album.

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   See above

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

   Earwig turns up high similarity with [1] but it seems likely that was taken from this article. Didn't dig into history closely to check given the other issues.

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   Yes, appears to be comprehensive

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

   Some minor concern about the amount of space dedicated to the Baker Street sax solo in section "City to City / Night Owl", but it is the most famous part of his most famous work. Probably just needs some tweaking to have it fit better within the section, rather than any major cuts.

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

   Looks generally okay, but didn't review very closely given the sourcing issues

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   Checked all images in the article, looked good. Was not able to find any missing free images.

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Article is well-written, but needs a fair bit of work on referencing.