Talk:The Australian Pink Floyd Show/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Now that we're unlocked

Some things need to be established. Certain items that are in agreement should be labelled as such in the article (Using hidden comments surrounded by <!-- and --> ). These include the photos and external links. As agreed upon, tribute hub will be added as an official fan site with content which supplements the reader's understanding of the article. I don't think we all agreed on keeping/tossing the myspace link, but we can figure that out here as well.

The new photos are much better, although it would be ideal to find one with the whole band for the lead photo. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 00:13, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I believe I may have found a better main photo with more band personal on stage. Here's a link [1] Your thoughts Floydian?(Tapgsozfan (talk) 18:18, 23 September 2009 (UTC))

Ooooh. I like! Is it a free picture though? Fair use (copyrighted) images can't be used for photographs of people. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 20:04, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

From investigation and speaking with contacts it's a free picture.I prefer it to the one we've got up now.Time for a change?(Tapgsozfan (talk) 20:24, 23 September 2009 (UTC))

• EDIT* Also I think it would be nice to include thumbnails of all the 'band members' there's no thumb of Steve Mac, Colin Wilson or Bonney-I think they should be there as they are band members???(Tapgsozfan (talk) 20:41, 23 September 2009 (UTC))

Very true. If it is free then it shall be uploaded. Who is the author?

I also agree about the thumbs. Actually, if you click on one of those thumbs, and on the file page click the source, it takes you to a flickr album with lots of pictures, all released under creative commons. I can't identify the members by looks alone, so I will leave them to you. Let me know if you need help with uploading/licencing them :) - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 03:58, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry,only just seen this reply.It's a published photo from a fan. The thumbs from that author are good,however it was from a gig in S.America and was missing key band members.The hunt will begin for good thumbs of the band.Might be worth putting a request into Wendy Wilson of Black cat photography (wife of Colin WIlson) to let her photos be used.She has some great ones on the main site(Tapgsozfan (talk) 13:43, 25 September 2009 (UTC))

Seeing as Colin himself has edited the article, I don't see why that would be turned down. I imagine you have some personal contact with the band members, correct? - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 16:55, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

I would imagine it would be fine to use the photos,there's also plenty of public fan photos on flickr etc.Maybe you could have a look and see which ones you prefer? I do have contact with the band-Just want to see this wiki page upgraded and be as accurate as can be.(Tapgsozfan (talk) 19:49, 25 September 2009 (UTC))

As do I, but I am very keen on the policies and provisions of wikipedia. Unfortunately for many editors, the aim to remove any and all information that isn't explicitly sourced by the opinion of some secondary commentator who supposedly "knows the subject". Images are also a biggie, because wikipedia won't host an image that isn't public domain or creative commons, either at the source that you obtained the photo from, or in writing in the form of an email from them stating:

"I hereby release 'photo URL' to the creative commons 3.0 by attribution license, and give all others the right to distribute, duplicate, and modify for any use laid out in that license, signed X"

If the photos are on flickr, this is easy to see or change. On the bar to the right of a photo, most of the way down the page, there will be a spot where it is indicated. If it has "All rights reserved", it cannot be used. If it has "some rights reserved", with anything except an attribution symbol or share-alike symbol (Hold your mouse over it and it will pop up saying attribution, share-alike, commercial, etc), it cannot be used. Public domain images (Historic photos, not really applicable to this article though) are always ok to use. Link me to the site with the photo rather than the photo itself. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 20:50, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

I had a quick look on Flickr and couldn't find the bar you were referring too.There's an awful lot of TAPFS photos on the site though,Maybe you could have a look and see which ones you like?Need to look at the European/Uk ones for thumbs of Steve Mac/Colin WIlson.Also needed is a thumb of Bobby Harrison and Paul Bonney.Would you have the time to do this?Would photos from tapfs.com fansite be ok to use on wiki?These are in the public domain?(Tapgsozfan (talk) 19:00, 27 September 2009 (UTC))

Floydian,just wondering if you read the last and if you've seen any photos/thumbs? (Tapgsozfan (talk) 15:51, 15 October 2009 (UTC))

Sorry, I thought I had responded and I forgot about it. The stuff from the tapfs.com cannot be used unless it says that it is public domain explicitly on the site/photos. I'll see what I can do but it may take a few days before I have the time. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 18:03, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

No problem floydian.The man to speak too on tapfs.com is Nick Cassidy.I'm sure he'll be more than willing to let you have photos from the site.He can get permission from the members that have taken them.Plus he has many excellent ones he's taken himself.(Tapgsozfan (talk) 08:44, 16 October 2009 (UTC))

Have you been in touch with the guy who runs tapfs.com about photos?he'll give you whatever you need I'm sure(Tapgsozfan (talk) 09:34, 8 December 2009 (UTC))

It really doesn't matter if the band has performed a 180 degree rotation, the past is still there

Please do not remove past members that have gone their separate ways. Instead, replace "present" with the year they departed and perhaps a Former members section can be added. Regardless, they were still in the band, and are relevant to the image of the band. It also doesn't matter if CMP are no longer promoting Aussie Floyd. In fact, this makes them a better source, as they are no longer affiliated with the subject (which would make them a primary source). The information on the CMP website linked to still backs up the information written prior to it in this article. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 16:45, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

CMP may have ulterior motives now the band have terminated the contract with them. This makes them an unreliable source. They have also started a rival band.

Tapfs (talk) 17:06, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps, but we wouldn't be posting libelous things here. For now, they are merely backing up the fact that the band played at Gilmour's party. However, this is probably the most famous fact about the band. I'm sure we can find something on ultimate-guitar or in Andy Mabbett's writing. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 18:04, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Actually, after reading this article, I think the whole history could be rewritten into a legible format instead a point form play-by-play. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 18:08, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the difference between primary and secondary sources, I think it would be a unwise to consider the CMP website to be a reliable source or even a proper 'secondary' source simply because CMP is a promoter , and in the business of promotion and advertising and so had a vested interest in promoting the band, regardless of whether the facts about the band were true or not. Given this fact, one cannot rule out the possibility of 'spin' in their statements. The story about Gilmour's party is true, and if the band's own account of the story cannot be relied upon, then I have little hope that there is any other reliable source. Perhaps the story could be written along the lines of ' The band claim to have played'.....and then the aussiefloyd website could be used as a source for the quote.Godfinger (talk) 12:55, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

The Guardian piece covers everything. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 14:48, 31 August 2010 (UTC)