Talk:The Concert for Bangladesh (album)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Seperate articles?

Good work, this is a nice album page... but, shouldn't it be The_Concert_For_Bangladesh which already has a page although this is more about the CD while that is about the concert more. gren グレン 16:07, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Not really, the seperation seems to be deliberate and both articles are substantial enough afaic. --kingboyk 19:22, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Follow the money?

If little of the money got to those in need, where did it go? Calbaer 18:58, 21 September 2006 (UTC) What happened to the child on the album cover? Where is he/she today? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.226.44.162 (talk) 18:16, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Names

Are we justified in disambiguating The Concert for Bangladesh as it is ? What is the justification for that split into two words ?

Or would it be better to have this as The Concert for Bangladesh (album) -- Beardo 23:07, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

It is confusing, but if you look at the original album cover design, you'll see a space between the two words, which I guess provided the article creator with enough reason to name it as it did. And, historically, Bangla Desh was two words. Now, how the concert/film article joined Bangladesh as one word, I don't know the history behind that. I do know, though, from watching the film and the documentary that it was presented on theater marquees as The Concert for Bangladesh. Still confused? I know I am, but I'm okay with that for now. Perhaps it would be better to move the article under the parenthetical title, or create a redirect link under that title, which reflects modern usage that most of today's Internet folks are familiar with. More discussion along these lines has been held on Talk:The Concert for Bangladesh. — WiseKwai 07:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:BanglaDeshCover.jpg

Image:BanglaDeshCover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:44, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Inclusion of 'Eric Clapton chronology'

Been meaning to question this for months, years maybe ... Personally, I think the inclusion of The Concert for Bangladesh album in a chronology of Eric Clapton releases is an absolute joke. Not only was Clapton entirely 'absent' from the event (as he's consistently admitted), but if any artists other than George Harrison merit a chronology listing, it should be Ravi Shankar and Bob Dylan, even Leon Russell, Ringo Starr and Billy Preston − certainly not EC. Yes, Clapton was/is listed as one of the 'Performers' on the album and film (rather than 'Band' member) − on one hand, a generous gesture from Harrison towards his ailing friend; on the other, a useful name to add to increase the star-power of such an important event − but crediting this album as one of Clapton's works (which the chronology effectively does) is really pushing things, in my opinion. With such an extended editorial history for the article, it's almost impossible to find the contributor who added the EC chronology, so I can only propose the idea here: okay to remove The Concert for Bangladesh from Eric Clapton's chronological list of releases? JG66 (talk) 06:05, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree that there doesn't need to be any supplemental "chronology" information in the infobox. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 14:09, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Concert for Bangladesh (album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs) 17:00, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

This is a good album. The articles become better and better :)--GoP_T^C_N 17:00, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): {{GAList/checkayeb (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Fails WP:NFCC, 3 a) and b). I think the last could be shortened, but overall meets the criteria as it is a significant re-release. I would remove the second image with the white background completely. The first is far too large. --GoP_T^C_N 13:16, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean by the last could be shortened(?), but I've removed the second image as suggested. Will look for smaller-size version of first image. Cheers, JG66 (talk) 20:13, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

1. Overall: Excellent article.

   Pass/Fail:

• Pass Good article. Sorry for the delay as I was in Olympics fever =). Regards.--GoP_T^C_N 13:36, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

And if you answer the question raised by an ip in 2011, then that would be an advantage :): What happened to the child on the album cover? Where is he/she today? . Regards.--GoP_T^C_N 13:38, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Fantastic − thanks GoP. Yes, the child on the cover: either aged in his/her early 40s now, I guess, or never made it out of the camps in northern India in 1971 (let's hope it's the first option). Good call with the album covers, by the way. The white-background CD cover really was unnecessary as an alt example, and I think the more smoky appearance of the (replaced) original cover is actually truer to how the boxed record looked (from what I've seen over the years). PS: what Olympics? ; ) ... Cheers, JG66 (talk) 01:01, 30 July 2012 (UTC)