User talk:Sabrebd/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Sabrebd, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Versus22 _talk 23:54, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Re:Medieval Rock

It was decided that mittelalter rock would be the name of the article which is a genre based in Germany. Currently medieval rock is undoing most of the edits of the established mittelalter rock article. The genres mittelalter rock and neo-medieval music have yet to be set apart as two distinct genres and sound extremely similar to each other by the content of each article. It would just confuse readers as of now. FireCrystal (talk) 20:48, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

However, if mittelalter rock/metal can pass as separate from medieval rock then I guess all is well. I wasn't sure of your intention. It looked like you were replacing the content of mittelalter rock. By the way, there is no article at medieval metal. FireCrystal (talk) 20:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

What medieval metal article? there is none unless you're confusing it with Mittelalter rock? My 'reference' to neo-medieval indeed isn't. My biggest question is what is the difference between neo-medieval and medieval rock? Is neo-medieval without the guitars and such and medieval rock with guitars? Is neo-medieval different than Mittelalter rock? It's confusing to me. What you could do is better the neo-medieval article and confirm the year it started and such. It is in desperate need of a rewrite. I will revert back the medieval rock article myself once you respond once more if things come down to a full understanding. FireCrystal (talk) 21:15, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Just another question, "Move Mittelalter rock to Medieval rock and redirect." I hope this is from before? Hmm? Explain. I will undo my revert as I think this is from before since you promise not to remove it now. Just was a bit concerned. Thanks for your understanding. I will talk to you later about reworking the neo-medieval article. I still would like to understand things further (with my questions above). FireCrystal (talk) 21:43, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Metal Metal? I think you should look that over unless you meant medieval metal. I'm not convinced that medieval metal and mittelalter rock/metal should be synonymous with each other (even though the short section about it in the medieval metal section). As for what I meant before do you mean when I asked "What medieval metal article"? I'm not so sure of this part: "Perhaps we could point to Medieval Rock to understand the history of medieval metal before Mittelalter at the beginning of the Mittelalter article." I would assume you want Mittelalter rock to be moved to medieval rock in the section of medieval metal? If so, no I think the article is ok on it's own but if that's not it then explain it exactly for me. FireCrystal (talk) 23:18, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Medieval folk rock

Looks good. Much better than the original. --Bardin (talk) 01:44, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

FYI, I've requested a move/rename for the mittelalter rock article to medieval metal. That way, the German name can be redirected to the disambiguation page. --Bardin (talk) 16:04, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Five005.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Five005.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 00:42, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Blues

The blues article needs much help. Wouldn't you like to help bringing it to its former featured status? Thanks for any suggestions and hints. Vb11:26, 10 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.233.204.2 (talk)

Hedgehog Pie

Thanks. I was a fan back in the day. Didn't notice we were lacking this article. - Jmabel | Talk 06:55, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Moved page

Hello. I moved the page you created to User:Sabrebd/Archive 1/. I'm not sure what you meant to do with it, but it didn't belong in the article name space. -- Mufka ^{(u) (t) (c)} 20:47, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I see what happened. I've moved it to the proper place at Talk:Folk music of England/Archive 1. -- Mufka ^{(u) (t) (c)} 20:51, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I think you followed WP:ARCHIVE pretty well, but you may have skimmed through a little. You created the archive at /Archive 1 when the instruction was to create a link in the talk page to that to make the archive avaliable from the talk page. The new page should always be a subpage of the existing talk page like Talk:Folk music of England/Archive 1. -- Mufka ^{(u) (t) (c)} 21:00, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Folk baroque

Hi Sabrebd, and thank for the message. Some would say "eclectic tastes"....others (including my wife) say "completely lacking in taste"! Was it you who also came up with some better categorisation for Amazing Blondel? If so, good work! God Save the Queen is the last thing I would have expected to care about. But there is a continual battle with people who are sure that it was written by Henry Carey, that there is an "official version" which includes a verse about crushing the Scots, and so on. I'll look out for your work on Classical music of the UK. Going back to folk baroque, I trawled through the Dazzling Stranger book and Harper never seems to use the term at all, though there is plenty about the music of Graham, Jansch, Renbourn, et al. I was also wondering who else counted as a folk baroque exponent. Amazing Blondel were maybe more "folk renaissance", but what about Tir na Nog? They seemed to arrive at a comparable kind of music, but from a celtic origin, without such obvious Davy Graham influence. Cheers. Bluewave (talk) 10:58, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Opera and Opera in English

Hello! You wrote this excellent material and put it in the musical theatre article. I had to trim out some of the opera information, but it probably belongs in the appropriate opera articles. Here is the opera stuff, and I encourage you to work with the editors in the appropriate opera articles to integrate your new materials into what is already there. Best regards! -- Ssilvers (talk) 00:49, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

You wrote:

Court masques, an elaborate performance involving music and dancing, singing and acting, within an complex stage design, in which the architectural framing and costumes might be designed by a renowned architect, such as Indigo Jones, to present a deferential allegory flattering to a noble or royal patron. These developed out of the medieval tradition of guising in the early Tudor period and became increasingly complex under Elizabeth I, James VI and I and Charles I. Professional actors and musicians were hired for the speaking and singing parts. Shakespeare included masque like sections in many of his plays and Ben Jonson is known to have written them. The masque largely ended with the closure of the theatres in 1642 and the exile of the court under the Commonwealth. These tendencies developed into sung plays that are recognisable as English Opera's, the first usually being thought of as William Davenant's (1606-68) The Siege of Rhodes (1656), originally given in a private performance.

In France Molière turned several of his farcical comedies into musical entertainments with songs (music provided by Jean Baptiste Lully) and dance in the late 1600s. In England there Psyche was the model for and English opera by Thomas Shadwell produced in 1671. William Davenant produced The Tempest in the same year, which was the first Shakespeare play to be set to music (composed by Locke and Johnson). About 1683, Blow composed Venus and Adonis, often thought of as the first true English-language opera. Henry Purcell produced Dido and Aeneas (1689), usually thought of as the finest in the genre, in which the action is furthered by the use of Italian-style recitative, but much of Purcell's best work was not involved in the composing of typical opera, but instead he usually worked within the constraints of the semi-opera format, where isolated scenes and masques are contained within the structure of a spoken play, such as Shakespeare in Purcell's The Fairy-Queen (1692) and Beaumont and Fletcher in The Prophetess (1690) and Bonduca (1696). The main characters of the play tend not to be involved in the musical scenes, which means that Purcell was rarely able to develop his characters through song. Despite these hindrances, his aim (and that of his collaborator John Dryden) was to establish serious opera in England, but these hopes ended with Purcell's early death at the age of 36. After the death of Charles II English opera began to fall out of fashion.

Thanks for the message. I've refined the two new paragraphs a little further, adding back the jigg concept and also naming Purcell. However, I really think that the semi-opera concept is too far afield for the musical theatre article. I like the idea that you have inserted that plays with music and the masque led to English opera, but once we have gone that far, I think we have jetted past the scope of the musical theatre article, unless you can argue that semi-opera was a further step from John Blow to John Gay? Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:09, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

BTW, note the way I worked with your referencing at the musical theatre article - if a book is used, particularly if it is used more than once, it is usually added to the reference section at the end of the article, and then in the text you only need to give the author's name(s) and the page number. Best regards! -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:11, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Classical music of the UK

Nice work! I finally got to have a look at your split this morning (I was out on Friday, playing electric guitar with some friends and out all day yesterday playing recorders and viols with a rather different set of friends!) I understand why you've made the split where you did: musically, it's not ideal but, politically, it makes sense. In the end, the split has to be a compromise and this one is no worse than any other that I can think of. The early music part is looking particularly good and you've clearly put a lot of work into improving that section. I need to read it more carefully and see if I can spot any improvements but, at first reading, it seems to cover the ground pretty well. The later section (ie the new Classical music of the UK) is still very much as originally written in the original collaboration that produced the article. I think it was written by enthusiasts rather than experts (speaking for my own contribution, particularly!) It would benefit from the input of a few more editors and experts in particular. Cheers. Bluewave (talk) 12:06, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Industrial folk music?

As for your expertise in folk-related subjects, I thought that you should take a look at this. I'm not too sure of it's legitimacy but it could use some help. I originally searched "industrial folk music" to find an article about an industrial music merge of folk music but I got this instead. I was also thinking that it might be a redirect to neofolk for it's industrial elements with folk music but again it wasn't. The article could definitely use some distinguishing (and references obviously). Also, if an article on actual "industrial folk music" is ever to be created, what name would it be? It's kind of perplexing. FireCrystal (talk) 03:04, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I just wanted this article sorted out somehow. I didn't say that it was related to "industrial folk", I was merely saying that people might of been looking for that instead and the reason why I suggested a hatnote be added. As you originally thought of making an article on industrial labour songs or industrial work songs maybe you can change the title to something close to that (after you have researched it a bit) if an article for "industrial folk music" can be made or made as a disambig page. FireCrystal (talk) 22:00, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Nice work with it! It's looking good now. I think it is fine as it is unless you (or I) can find a greater ratio of the authors/reviewers/media/etc using a specific term more so than the other (which means a bolded "also known as" names in the lead would be more prominent and industrial folk music would be an a.k.a.). If this distinction can be found, then it might be best to have it moved... or that it's already ok as it is. FireCrystal (talk) 01:00, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

April Fool's DYK for Hedgehog Pie

On April Fool's, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hedgehog Pie, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thank you for your contribution to April Fool's Day 2009! Royalbroil 22:20, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

London Bridge Is Falling Down

Your're welcome :-) While adding the picture, I was wondering if the game is still played nowadays or if MMORPGs and the like have made it ancient history... - Mu (talk) 11:10, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Pop Goes the Weasel

Top job. I've been meaning to get round to that horrible mess for a while! pablo_hablo. 23:29, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Rollback

I have 1 granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:15, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Best of luck with the new tool, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:19, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

To market...

Off to bed now. As discussed, I've left some talk and have added a template for the Poetry project who might be interested. If we can sort this out between us then so much the better. Otherwise, we can add merge templates and see who else might come by and join the discussion. Colonel Warden (talk) 00:39, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Good morning. I have proposed a way forward at the talk page. Colonel Warden (talk) 10:37, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, please have a go at WP:SPLICE, if you would, as I should really get on and do some chores. I'll help out later, if needed. Colonel Warden (talk) 11:15, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed the activity last night and it didn't seem that it was being spliced - thanks for explaining. There is or was a saved version of your last version which you might cut/paste perhaps. Cut/paste is not good practise for others' work but is fine for your own. Colonel Warden (talk) 08:06, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Your last version seems to be at version 2. You can cut/paste from there, as you are the author of that version. Colonel Warden (talk) 08:33, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Category:Counting-out games

I see that you created this category and later blanked the page. A faster way to delete a category you've created yourself is to place {{db-author}} on the page. This tag attracts the attention of an administrator who can perform the deletion for you. Contact me if you have questions about this. Best regards, --Stepheng3 (talk) 20:30, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

AIM address

You seem like a great person to talk to. Maybe you could help me. Do you have an AIM address? Angie Y. (talk) 00:14, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Bobby Shafto

Hi, looks good to me. Bob talk 21:50, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Work song

Please endeavor to maintain cordial relations with other editors. Please keep criticism constructive. Referring to my edit in your edit summary as "nonsensical" is probably not the way you would like to have your efforts referred to. Please, let us try to be respectful of other editors. Bus stop (talk) 18:16, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

British rock

Possibly one of the most embarrassingly bad articles I've seen... Good luck if you're attempting to rescue it! Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:25, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Just out of interest, do you have a view on whether Van Morrison should be included in this article - in light of the controversy over whether someone born in Belfast should be described as "British"? The issue was discussed here, which appears to suggest that he does define himself as British. Could be controversial though! Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:14, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree - I'll add a ref or two to the article. Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:44, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Folk music/Sandbox

You've recently created this page. I think this would be better of at Talk:Folk music/Sandbox because the mainspace or article space is for only articles. If it's ok, I'm going to move the page to Talk:Folk music/Sandbox and nominate the original for speedy deletion. Mm40 (talk) 17:20, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Cheers. Mm40 (talk) 17:28, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: Freak Folk

Hey there, thanks for giving me a shout :) yeah, I completely agree - frankly, this is a staple problem in the vast, vast majority of music genre articles, but I must admit that one made me stop and go "...huh?" when I first saw it (Sufjan? Psychedelic? I love him, but he's no more psychedelic than Leonard Cohen :|). The problem is, freak folk and psychedelic folk are distinctly different - they're really fraternal, not interchangeable; New Weird America is a term I have no real knowledge of, frankly, but from what I can follow it isn't a genre at all but rather a movement that sparked the revival of psych folk and the creation of [the term of - I've heard the term retroactively applied to things like First Utterance which is well before the first time freak folk was ever really used] freak folk.

But ultimately, the problem is pretty fundamental: like you said, there are very few good sources out there, if any. The only reason I know what any of it is is because I'm a fan of the genre and have listened to dozens-- hundreds-- of albums and have eventually developed a certain association with the style, and obviously that's not citable...

I really don't know anything about any of counterfolk, un-folk and nu-folk, so I probably shan't touch those, and my knowledge for the others is varied (anti-folk I know super-little about; freak folk is doable, especially due to its (relative) popularity rise in the past few years; indie folk is a term I'd never actually heard of before reading the Wikipedia article but one I always *thought* should exist, heh), but psych folk will probably be the easiest to sort out. Still gonna take quite some time, and obviously any help would be much appreciated (glad to see you know about the early years as that's when I know the least about :)). Cheers! AllynJ (talk | contribs) 08:29, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

How's that? AllynJ (talk | contribs) 10:06, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks :) it's far from perfect - that Splendid e-zine is pretty dicey as to whether it would pass WP:RS but is spot on in what it says.

Yeah, I think that's pretty much right about indie folk: how I see it is that indie folk has basically combined the styles of contemporary folk along with the melodic hooks of indie rock (since about Pavement (band) onwards, that sort of era), and is the perfect tag for people such as Sufjan Stevens, Elliott Smith, etc etc; from there, a whole host of more recent psych folk and the vast majority of freak folk artists (Animal Collective's early stuff, Devendra Banhart, Joanna Newsom), have experimented and effectively made them subgenres of indie folk. Problem with all this? It's entirely WP:OR. :) There really are so few good resources for this kind of thing: AllMusic doesn't even have a genre for psych folk(!) despite referring to it rather liberally throughout the discography of people such as Tim Buckley. Nor do they make any reference to avant folk, which I thought was a relatively well-known genre (Starsailor (album), Sung Tongs, Bad Timing (album), etc), nor free folk which isn't too dissimilar...

By far the best place I've found is RateYourMusic.com's genre system, but unfortunately all the bands tagged with it are voted by the users and so anyone tagged with it would definitely not be reliable. But it's a good base to find artists that are in these genres, from where you can attempt to find sources that verify the information (though my success with this has been spotty).

(PS, hope you don't mind me extensive rambling... :)) AllynJ (talk | contribs) 10:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

(undent) Gosh, that is an incredibly good source, especially as it mentions Iron & Wine (who was another of the artists that fit perfectly in what I thought of indie folk as). Awesome :) I'm not entirely sure we do actually have two separate articles on the same thing, just that some are currently factually incorrect which may result in it looking like they are.

Yes, that's a rather sensible grouping. Also in the latter group would be turbo-folk, which is a pretty minor genre but distinct in its own right; where folktronica is electronica-driven folk, turbo-folk is eurodance pop-driven folk. It's (perhaps thankfully, ha: I've heard little bits and pieces, and, well... :)) not spread west of the Balkans, though, which makes sourcing very hard for any non-Serbian/Croatian/Bosnian, etc. etc., speaker. Neo-folk is an odd one: it doesn't really sound like folk at all. Nu-folk I've never really heard of, but I agree that putting it to the catch-all article for this scene is probably the wisest (especially since its name seems to suggest a revival, which is what indie folk really is).

Haha, by all means, feel free to ramble :) sometimes typing things out, especially in such a messy, cluttered area such as this, helps make it clearer. Unfortunately I'm about to head off for a week so I shan't be doing any major changes until I'm back, but feel free to ramble on here; I'll be sure to read it all once I'm about :) AllynJ (talk | contribs) 09:42, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

preliminary reply

just to let you know i've replied to you here, since i'm always a fan of keeping conversations in one place if possible. thanks for the work on that article Sssoul (talk) 15:22, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

not sure you saw the subsequent question to you here; there's no rush, but i did want to let you know it's there. thanks Sssoul (talk) 05:32, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Experimental pop music

Good call on that redirect. I was going to make a merge suggestion today, but there really wasn't much to merge. Experimental pop was mostly a band list, which was identical to the one over at avant pop. So, as I said, good call. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 14:16, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

No worries! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 15:07, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Baroque pop

Hi Sabrebd,

I also enjoy music and have a strong knowledge of it. I have thousands of albums, have written a bit, chatted in depth with a wide range of musicians, have tapes, CDs, videos, DVDs.

I'm not sure why you keep removing Jann Klose from the Wiki listing for Baroque Pop. I'm wagering you haven't listened to his music yet. He is worth your while, and is doing a lot for chamber pop music here in the States.

Do you understand that baroque pop is also chamber pop and vice versa? Are you open enough to give different artists a chance and actually listen to music and read articles on them? He's been cited in both blogcritics and the Washington Post by smart writers as a "chamber pop artist." I had included one of the sources in the article yesterday. He's been compared to Roy Wood (and early ELO) by Annie Haslam, herself. And he has a classical background, having started in opera.

I want to add other artists to that page, including the LEFT BANK, STORIES, CLARE AND THE REASONS, possibly RICHARD BARONE. The last two might not be famous over there, but they're working on it here in the States. I have not yet been able to find sources.

If you're located in either Dublin, Galway, Liverpool, Birmingham, London, Cambridge, Leicester or Coventry, and are around this August, I know that you could actually get Jann Klose's album at one of his shows, and hear the music for yourself.

What do you think?

Thanks,

Kato Katopedia (talk) 05:49, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

re: Baroque pop, sources & notes

Hi Sabrebd,

I wish I were a lot quicker in writing back, but I have lots of family and work obligations. Your notes were very clear. I hope mine are, as well.

As far as I can tell, Jann Klose is actually growing in popularity in the States, 'cause I've heard of him, and his web site has listed over 100 stations. Even when he's just playing with an acoustic guitar, you can hear classical influences. The last show I saw he had a violinist, oboist, keyboardist/accordionist, an upright bassist, and a drummer who also played the flute. That was in New York, and I understand he does more full band shows in the City.

The two sources I found are linked on his website:

http://blogcritics.org/music/article/music-review-indie-round-up-no/ scroll down to the review of REVERIE, and then read the first sentence. It also explains him using different instruments. (I'm not sure why more bands don't use different instruments in the studio for their recordings).

The other review is from the Washington Post, with the writer Alexander Remington. Even in skimming, you can read in the 2nd to last paragraph the comparison to Eric Matthews, and again some of the instruments they used. The last paragraph is the quote about his soaring voice which may well be a staple of chamber pop for a long time to come.

I just feel it with this guy as I do with Clare and the Reasons. Again, I'm not so sure about Richard Barone, but he is an interesting artist, tho' I feel both Jann and Clare will eclipse him in many ways--commercially and musically.

Again, thank you for your time,

Kato Katopedia (talk) 05:49, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Eeny, meeny etc.

Drawing a line on "pop culture" references is one of the hardest things in wikipedia, I find. Some people are dead against them entirely - they slap down a "trivia" tag and/or delete them on sight. I think the lists can be valuable, but drawing a line on what's useful and what is a pointless list of factorinos can be very difficult. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 22:51, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Folk Rock

I just wanted to let you know that I haven't forgotten our dialogue on Folk Rock. Like you, I've been working on a few other things, besides my personal life, which is fuller at the moment than usual. What I have been doing on Folk Rock is reading as much as I can about all the artists and developments. And the more I read, the more everything comes together and the more psyched I get. Richie Unterberger, it turns out, is pretty much to folk rock what chroniclers such as Michael Gray and Howard Sounes are to Dylan. And I know I mentioned his website before, but the best place to start is Folk Rock: An Overview, an essay he wrote for the All Music Guide.

As for production, I'd love to write all of this myself - it's that wonderful a subject - but I'm equally enthused about doing it collaboratively, because the process has its own charms. So if I might suggest, we need to develop an overview of the story from start to finish (essentially an abstract), then an outline, and finally, a dividing up of the sections for research and writing. This will take time, of course, not only because of the writing/research itself but the logistics of going back and forth between editors. Anyway, those are my thoughts. And yours? Allreet (talk) 15:43, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Having done a fair amount of homework, it's clear the subject is too complex and not well enough defined anywhere to do an outline first. There are simply too many characters, and though the Byrds deserve special attention as pioneers, the actual beginnings are somewhat difficult to pin down. Consequently, I think that note gathering is probably the best approach, because it would identify the artists and sub-topics and make the timeline clearer. At some point in the research, the outline would come together by itself. This approach also offers advantages in terms of accuracy, completeness, and flexibility, plus it facilitates collaboration since others could contribute to and share in the note pool. Good notes, too, are the best defense against naysayers. Anyway, that’s the game plan I see at this point. I'm ready to get started and expect the ground-laying research to take about 2-3 weeks. I’ll let you know early on how things are progressing and where I might need some help. Thanks for your encouragement. Allreet (talk) 20:42, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

British Invasion

Thanks for the complement, a very rare occurrence Wikipedia. Thanks for your vigilance in swatting away those edits that move us backwards. A month ago there were so many edits aiming to bring the article backwards, I was about to give up because I figured the consensus was to have an originally researched uncited article discussing every British act. But it is editors like you that kept me going. Feel free to make suggestions in the talk page as I do attempt to follow them Edkollin (talk) 05:50, 23 July 2009 (UTC).

Brit Hip Hop - Royal Albert Hall

Hiya,

Don't dispute that the Royal Albert Hall has played host to some fine hip hop talent, as it has across virtually all music genre's, but I'm still struggling to really see the relevance of including the RAH in an article about Brit Hip Hop and it's street origins?

Steve —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.194.64.145 (talk) 17:16, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

your proposed new subsection on Rock & Roll

hello again - i decided it's better to ask you here than on the Rock & roll talk page: have you read Elijah Wald's new book? i've just started it, and i can't really tell yet whether it'll be a useful souce for either Pop music or Rock & roll, but it's a good read so far. Sssoul (talk) 13:41, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for this - looks good - I think I will go order a copy.--Sabrebd (talk) 17:37, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

his Escaping the Delta is quite good - maybe a little longer than his main thesis really requires, but the details about the musical context of the times are fascinating. the cat has good insights. Sssoul (talk) 20:12, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:KellieWhileTenacious.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:KellieWhileTenacious.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 17:27, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

hail hail rock & roll!

hello Sabrebd - i hope i'm not irritating you with my little fidgets to your very cool work on the Rock and roll article. what you're adding/changing is great, so thanks & praises & carry on! i did want to note that in the "origins" section, it should state outright in the first sentence or two that the genre originated in the United States. of course that's in the article lead and the info box, but it really needs to be established in the main body of the article as well. i couldn't see an easy place to slip it in, so ... so here i am hoping you can!
in the meantime, as you see, i resorted (sorrowfully!) to creating two geographic links (to the West Coast of the US and to the Midwestern US), but it's not good style to make people hover over a link to see what a term refers to; and anyway the fact that the US is the geographic context for all this should be made explicit earlier in the paragraph. i'm sure you'll find a smooth way to do that ... and (i hope!) to clarify that interesting assertion that after the War the big jazz bands were no longer economical.
anyway thanks for all this good work, and swing on! Sssoul (talk) 15:10, 12 August 2009 (UTC) (you can reply here if that's convenient - i'll keep it on my watchlist for a while)

Hi Sssoul. No I am very happy with your corrections and suggestions (and those of Ghmyrtle), it is often hard to see your own errors or think you have made something clear when you have obscured it, so more pairs of helpful eyes the better. I take your point about origins in the US. I will try to work it in, while considering Ghmyrtle's comments on the need to comment on social and cultural change.--Sabrebd (talk) 19:00, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

re some of those recent edits: the Little Richard edit history and talk page provide some context - maybe it's good to be aware of that? or not, i'm not really sure. Sssoul (talk) 12:56, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks - its good to be aware.--Sabrebd (talk) 15:10, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

please see here and here as well Sssoul (talk) 06:18, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for adding rock and roll into the case. The situation does not seem to be showing signs of stabilising, but I am still trying to get some kind of consensus.--Sabrebd (talk) 09:24, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Fairport Convention

Hello, Sabrebd. You have new messages at Redrose64's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi - Yesterday I made an entry in Twinkle Twinkle Little Star that you removed. I would appreciate your explanation as to why you did this. The material I added was 100% accurate and I do not understand why it is not appropriate content. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atlantisau (talk • contribs) 22:36, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Honorific nicknames in popular music

I've been meaning to tell you, I love the new introduction. I had been searching for ages on more critical commentary on the subject matter but never came across anything as substantial. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 10:08, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

I doubt you're actually interested but I continued that discussion on the IPs talk page. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 23:09, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I think you can pretty much guess my views.--SabreBD (talk) 23:57, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

The Bookkeeper might also want to point out WP:Advocacy as worthwhile reading – it seems relevant to this situation. Sssoul (talk) 08:43, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 08:50, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Signatures#Customizing_your_signature

Just as a friendly thought: you may want to reconsider the 3D effect of your signature as it could be considered distracting. To be honest, I thought it was cool, but to the point where I found it more compelling than your actual response to the talk page discussion (Though that may be no fault of your own :) ). The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 05:58, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Well that's puzzling because I cannot see a 3D effect and didn't know I had one.--SabreBD (talk) 07:26, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Has it gone now? --SabreBD (talk) 07:28, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

yes, it's gone now - that "shadow" effect was a bit hard to read. Sssoul (talk) 07:31, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Its like having spinach in your teeth. Thanks guys and also for your points on the HNPM article debate.--SabreBD (talk) 07:34, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

No problem! The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 07:50, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3