User talk:GeeeFlat

Hello. The links to jazz-fusion, etc. that you added to swung note did not work, even though the articles exist. The reason is that you used too many capital letters. I've fixed them. Michael Hardy 16:46, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jazz-funk

I am trying to clean up the article Jazz-funk as per request with the Cleanup Taskforce. You made some big edits to the article, and I was wondering where you got the information you added to the article. I would like to provide references and wikify the article, but unless a reference for that information is found, it would be hard to keep. If you have any ideas or links it would be greatly appreciated. -- Heaven's Wrath ^Talk 02:56, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there

HI there,

I believe I am the main contibutor to the article, and would disagree with some of your opinions about how confusing you found the article considering the amount of people that have received it positively, but I am nevertheless happy to help and cooperate.

However I do NOT believe the UK and the US should be separated, as it is precisely what creates an important confusion around the genre itself and the way the article is written actually clarifies what Jazz-funk is, irrelevant of the frontiers, for the gobal community, not just how the UK wants to see it, or the US want to see it.

I don't believe it is a particularly opinionated (show me where) article, and believe this is a very opinionated statement. Again happy to contribute (within reason in terms of time) in terms of reference, definition, or format (this can be improved in terms of where the sources should be quoted int the wikipedia style format) Someone stated that the articles needed more references or sources. I believe there are enough, in order no to bore the reader and go into mundane details at the expense of concisiveness or understanding. But if you really feel some parts need more sources, please let me know which and I will try to bring some.

ON me: I am a musician, have been researching the genre for over 25 years, lived in France, Germany, the UK and the US and have been working in the record industry on the genre, have met and played with star musicians of the genre and posess around 10000 records of Jazz-funk (the way it is perceived around the world, not just the UK way). I believe this makes me a legitimate expert of the genre. In terms of my ability to write articles, I have a post graduate degree in management (MBA) and have been working as a global marketing manager of a corporation which is over 2 million people large. I believe that should amount to enough credentials to legitimately write an article that matches the wikipedia standards in terms of quality, since I have been asked several times to write articles for important publications before.

But again, if your criticisms are constructively supportede, founded, but more importantly, SPECIFIC, happy to help and re-write. the more opinions there are the better.

I'm sure you will be able to make a valuable contribution to this page, but Wikipedia is not about opinion, original research, nor is it a blog or forum. That's why wikipedians do not sign articles, as you did this one; the articles belong to everyone, and are expected to be of an almost academic standing, so you can't just write "The Jazz-funk genre was at it creation sometimes looked down on by jazz hard-liners..." without providing evidence to support this, and for the bulk of this article there are no references or citations. Have a look at the UK section which I wrote sometime ago - it's not perfect, but there are some links, etc to my sources. I'd struggle to edit any of the sections you've written because I don't for example know who these so-called "hardliners" are, when it was said or where it was cited. If you are so involved in a subject, maybe you shouldn't be writing about it - let those that have offered to clean this up make their edits, but continue to discuss with them points you are disputing or doubting as you have started to do. Regards --Escaper7 17:51, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. thanks for your contribution in being being much more specific. I agree that " Wikipedia is not about opinion, original research, nor is it a blog or forum" this generality has never been in question. "That's why wikipedians do not sign articles" Sorry I thought it was, happy to withdraw this signature of course. As far as academic standing, I believe we can reach this standard.

"you can't just write "The Jazz-funk genre was at it creation sometimes looked down on by jazz hard-liners..." without providing evidence to support this" Good point indeed! I will endeavour to provide some. It shouldn't be too much of an issue. There has always been resistance from straight ahead jazz towards more experimentative jazz. It's a general human trait and I supported that with strong sources I believe. And do not believe that makes thie whole article "opinionated". But I will find some specific evidence for Jazz-funk.

Besides this mild assertion of mine, can you spot any other which you strongly feel should be supported by references? that would greatly help and I would of course look into providing more sources for them.

"and for the bulk of this article there are no references or citations" I'm affraid I have to disagree with this, but if your "bulk" could turn into specific areas, I'd be happy to try and provide even more specific sources and evidence.

"Have a look at the UK section which I wrote sometime ago - it's not perfect, but there are some links, etc to my sources." Well there also are a lot of citations and sources in my article too (in the body of the text).

I understand the article is not perfect and can be improved as well, but at least I believe the content of the section is much more representative of the reality of what Jazz-funk actually is than the misleading section on the uk was as it was covering just a small local part of it, (irrelevant of the references). It presents a more comprehensive and detailed view of Jazz-funk, and therefore helps its understanding, which I beleive is the objective of any encyclopedia, including Wikipedia. The debate here is on content, not sources or editing.

Let's join forces and carry on the debate. Happy to receive specific comments on what to improve in the article indeed. actually happy with any kind of constructive comments.

Regards,

--GeeeFlat 19:29, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Welcome

I edit a lot of music and dj related pages - when I first started contributing to Wikipedia, another editor passed the sections below on to me, I hope in turn you will find them helpfu...

Hello, GeeeFlat, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. --Escaper7 17:42, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]