User talk:Tkbrett/Archive 3

Promotion of I've Just Seen a Face

Congratulations, Tkbrett! The article you nominated, I've Just Seen a Face, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Buidhe (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats Tk! – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 02:17, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, zmbro. I guess this means it’s time for me to stop slacking and get back to writing some song pages! Tkbrett (✉) 12:05, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea for you!

Nice work adding those charts and review to Aftermath (Rolling Stones album) and making it an even more complete article! Piotr Jr. (talk) 20:13, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Piotr Jr., I'm happy to contribute what I can. Wonderful work on the page by the way, it's a great read.

I take from your editing history that you're a Coltrane fan as well. Did you see the deluxe edition of Coltrane for Lovers that popped up on Spotify not too long ago? I figured you may be a fan of the album since you mostly wrote its GA. Tkbrett (✉) 20:30, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you ! :D

Nope, haven't seen it before, but the additional tracks look lovely <3 Lately, I've been knee deep in vinyl and actually got an original pressing of Africa/Brass Vol. 2 that sounds absolutely wonderful :) Piotr Jr. (talk) 20:44, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just heard Ornette Coleman's Change of the Century on the radio -- it's his birthday today apparently -- and that's an even bigger fandom for me! I really wanna get it on vinyl. Personally, I think it's a better record than Kind of Blue, although that one goes for far more on historicity alone. But I can hear sonorities in Change that don't sound like 1959; they portend futuristic experimental music... Piotr Jr. (talk) 03:08, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Or evocative of sirens. At least if I had to guess how they'd actually sounded, I would say like those echo-ey horn notes. Piotr Jr. (talk) 03:40, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Piotr Jr.: very cool! That Africa/Brass Vol. 2 vinyl is very difficult to find, at least in Canada. As for Coleman, I haven't listened to him much beyond Something Else!!!! and The Shape of Jazz to Come, though both are two of my favourite records. I've tried Free Jazz and Of Human Feelings, but they both seem a little too "out there" for my tastes. I'll have to give Change a go. I got very into Coltrane a few years ago. I found that some of his earlier, more accessible material (say Soultrane or Ballads) served as a good gateway into his more experimental stuff. You need to take baby steps before you can listen to something like Offering, I think. Ultimately though, I think my favourite is where he sits on the precipice between the conventional and the avant-garde. Basically any live recording from 1963, where he has one foot in each. Newport '63 and Afro Blue Impressions are what I end up listening to the most. I think of this as his sort of Paul Cézanne period – in visual art, it seems like everything can be divided into "pre-Cézanne" and "post-Cézanne", and I think for Coltrane you could similarly split his playing into pre-1963 and post-1963. Tkbrett (✉) 13:24, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes! I definitely feel you on that. Coleman was hard at first for me too, but lawd have mercy, when it breaks through is it ever worth it ! ! ! Piotr Jr. (talk) 13:56, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I first fell in love with Coltrane through his 1962 self-titled Impulse album. That felt like the sweet spot between his ballads and avant-garde stuff, as you intimated. Piotr Jr. (talk) 13:58, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March songs

Thank you for your comment on my talk! Listening to the charity concert mentioned here. I created the articles of the composer and the soprano. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:24, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Gerda Arendt, wonderful stuff. Hope you are doing well. Cheers. Tkbrett (✉) 16:38, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Now, you can also listen on YouTube, and more music, the piece by Anna Korsun begins after about one hour, and the voices call "Freiheit!" (freedom, instead of "Freude", joy). Music every day, pictured in songs. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:36, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Gerda Arendt. I initially found other versions to listen to, but this gives me a good excuse to listen again! Tkbrett (✉) 11:41, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

St. Patrick's Day, more music and today's sunset --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:13, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Prayer is on the Main page, finally + new flowers --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:56, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ruby Tuesday

Dear Tkbrett, I did not know a source is needed for this. Nobody does it. I find it a bit stupid to mention an album or CD as a source... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guy Van Kerckhoven (talk • contribs) 15:51, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Guy Van Kerckhoven, thanks for reaching out. WP:COVERSONG lays out the criteria pretty well, but essentially, just because a band or artist covered a song, doesn't mean it's notable enough to be mentioned on the corresponding song's Wiki page. A cover needs to have received secondary source coverage to warrant inclusion. Check out "Within You Without You", for example. Good articles and featured articles never stoop to just including lists of artists. Tkbrett (✉) 16:22, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Tkbrett, sorry for my ignorance and many thanks for your clarification. I will pay more attention next time. Wikipedia is great!!! Guy Van Kerckhoven (talk) 17:44, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Re: OK Computer track listing

Hello, I probably should have explained my reasoning. OK Computer is the only Radiohead album without the track listing template, so I added it for greater consistency. If you believe it should stay as it was before, that's ok, as I didn't read MoS for that and just went with my gut. Thought i may as well explain myself too -- WeInTheUSA (talk) 04:30, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WeInTheUSA. Its usually best to have these sorts of discussion on the article's talk page, that way other users can chime in. Anyway, I wouldn't worry too much about that sort of consistency, WP:OTHERCONTENT and all. The formatting itself isn't really needed for simple cases like that. Tkbrett (✉) 11:39, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:02, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you today for I've Just Seen a Face, "about a song by the Beatles, composed by Paul McCartney and credited to Lennon–McCartney. It first appeared in August 1965 on the album Help!, and most people today know it from there, but its first release in North America came as the opening track of Rubber Soul."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:36, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Gerda Arendt. The best part of TFA-day is waking up to a kind message from Gerda! Tkbrett (✉) 11:54, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

blushing a bit, thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:37, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	This was inspired. A genuinely funny April Fools! (Particularly as it's almost believable!) SN54129 12:46, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Serial Number 54129! Glad you enjoyed it. Perhaps we should archive the discussion now since the consensus (one vote to zero) is for remove. Tkbrett (✉) 15:08, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image

Hello, I saw that you have twice erased an image that I included on Silly Boy Blue. A discussion may be a better way to deal with an album image. If you have a better image - it would be good for our readers to include one. because it is allowed as a non-free. Background: This article appeared on DYK and it was at that time that I added the image. I often go through our DYKs and add images if there are none. Many of our readers enjoy an image more than a wall of text-I do too. Thanks. Bruxton (talk) 18:35, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bruxton. I agree it's best to have a discussion, rather than reverting a revert (WP:BRD and all that). With that in mind, it makes more sense to have the discussion at the article's talk space, that way other editors can chime in. Tkbrett (✉) 18:37, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Brilliant work on the Aftermath writing credit 👏 can't find the barnstar option here in mobile view, so I'll just give you this invisible one ... from my heart ❤️ Piotr Jr. (talk) 05:08, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again Piotr Jr.! I'm just happy to have solved the issue. From how many times I've seen a 45 or LP on Discogs captioned with "Richards misspelled 'Richard' on label", I always thought it was a mistake. But I was becoming quite incredulous at how the A&R people at every one of the Stones' labels made this mistake every single time. At this point, if you can find an original copy that spells it with the s, you'll probably make a pretty penny. Tkbrett (✉) 11:51, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not in it for the pennies 🙏😏 Piotr Jr. (talk) 18:50, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Piotr Jr., I thought you may be interested in my recent article expansion: "Mother's Little Helper", probably my favourite "band" off the LP. I've got it up for GA now – I'm not asking for a review, given your semi-retired status, but I'm wondering if you see anything obvious that I've missed. Cheers. Tkbrett (✉) 23:14, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looks solid! Nothing glaring or any oversights as far as I can tell. Only thing I would suggest is to capitalize "eastern" in reference to Eastern music, as explained by this writing guide. Piotr Jr. (talk) 01:18, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 2022

Started on Mothers Little Helper, some prep notes for you there. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:40, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, ErnestKrause. I’m away for the Easter weekend, so I’ll get through it after the holiday. Tkbrett (✉) 15:48, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on the GA. I've been thinking about the article for the song All Along the Watchtower for either GAN or FAC, possibly as a co-nomination. Any thoughts? ErnestKrause (talk) 22:53, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, ErnestKrause. I'm not especially versed in the literature around Dylan or Hendrix, so I'm not sure how much help I'd be there. In my opinion, Ojorojo is Wiki's best writer of Hendrix related articles, so he may be interested in expanding it. When you feel like the article has come along, I will be more than happy to go through and make prose improvements and other suggestions. Tkbrett (✉) 23:11, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on MLH Tk :-) – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 15:28, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks zim. I decided to take a page from your book and extend beyond where I normally end up editing (loving those Costello articles, btw). I was surprised how much great stuff is written about the song – maybe I'll tighten it up further to get it to FA, I dunno. There's some other stuff by the Who and especially the Kinks I want to work on – a lot of the articles for the latter are painfully undeveloped. Tkbrett (✉) 18:29, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :-) After I did like ten Bowie things in like three weeks I wanted to do something completely different. After I heard "Red Shoes" I thought, yeah that works xD. I may do more EC in the future but I haven't decided yet. I agree Who and Kinks are underdeveloped, esp Who's '60s stuff. Kinks it comes across as someone started but never finished. After I finish Next Day (final Bowie album btw), I gotta do that one PPM section then we'll see. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 20:33, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've Just Seen a Face

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 14 June 2022. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 2022, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/June 2022. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before it appears on the Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work!—Wehwalt (talk) 04:53, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Wehwalt! Tkbrett (✉) 12:41, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Big Sky is a GA!

Congrats! I finally finished the review, but for some reason the bot’s not telling you about it even though it marked the article as a GA. Speatle (talk to me)(read all about it) please ping me when replying to something I said. 11:54, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much, Speatle, I appreciate it. Cheers. Tkbrett (✉) 14:00, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kinks help

Hey Tk I was scrolling through Mojo mag on Apple News+ and found a newer issue on the Kinks, with an article by David Cavanaugh on Village Green. Do you have access or want me to try to email it to you? – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 19:41, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey zim, if you could email it along that'd be great! I don't have access to Mojo at all, so any help would be much appreciated. The album's influence and legacy has been a pain to write about as its renaissance has been occurring since the late 1990s and a lot of the authors haven't had enough time to digest the subject. It mostly ends up being a couple lines in a Pitchfork or Billboard article that I have to work with.

Anyway, I appreciate your continued interest in what I'm working on, especially since I feel like I've been moving at a glacial pace of late. I have a newfound respect for all your great work on album articles as this one feels much more difficult to write than some song article. Tkbrett (✉) 01:10, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Mojo issue also has a section on Face to Face so I can send you that one too. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 19:17, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That'd be awesome Zim! If it's too much work don't worry about it – I can just get a one month subscription and cancel it afterwards if need be. Oh, and if you're interested, I opened up a peer review of Village Green. I'd love to hear what someone with as much experience writing album articles as you thinks about it. Tkbrett (✉) 20:34, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yep I can help ya out there. You could say I have some experience writing albums xP – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 20:53, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Tk sorry for the delayed response on the PR. Been pretty busy this week but I promise I'll check it out this weekend. Gotta finish some GA reviews too. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 14:26, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Face"

It's been on my watchlist for at least two years, and i have enjoyed watching as you developed and improved our article on one of my favourites (certainly in my top 30 list!) of The Beatles' songs. Congratulations on its being TFA. Happy days ~ Lindsay^Hello 07:27, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks LindsayH, that's kind of you. I'm glad you've enjoyed it. Now I guess it's time to get to work on the other 29 articles! Tkbrett (✉) 11:51, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May Pang article

Greetings, I'm not too wiki savvy so perhaps you can help as you seem to be quite savvy ;-) Someone with an axe to grind made a million edits to the "good article" May Pang and I don't know how to revert a block of inappropriate edits. There's too many to do one at a time. If you get a moment, check it out. Thank you! Hotcop2 (talk) 17:45, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Hotcop2. If you don't have rollback rights, it's not too hard to reverse multiple edits. This will work if you're on a desktop, no promises about mobile. Select the differences between all the revisions in the page history, in this case it'll look like this. You can then hit "edit" on the revision of the earlier page (it will look like this), then copy-paste the entire page (Ctrl+A, Ctrl+C). Then go back to the current version of the page and paste it all in. At that point you could go to "Show Changes" at the bottom to see what you're changing it back to. Make sure you don't just blindly revert though, since the other editor may have made improvements. Tkbrett (✉) 18:01, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll give it a go. P.S. there were no improvements and dubious sources abound. Hotcop2 (talk) 18:04, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations

It looks like the songs good article nominations are starting to create a backlog, I was wondering if you were interested in reviewing my two submissions in exchange of me reviewing two of yours. Next week I won't be around, but a week's wait may be better than several months ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. Anyway let me know if you're interesting. Have a good weekend. —VersaceSpace 🌃 03:18, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

VersaceSpace, I've been very good at adding to backlog lately, but not so much at cutting it down. Thanks for reaching out – I'll try to get to some of your pages when I can. Tkbrett (✉) 12:24, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

		The Music Barnstar
		A huge thank you to all the work you've done on Kinks articles. When I first joined this site years ago, one of my pet projects was expanding the Kinks pages here and for a while it felt largely like I was the only one touching them. Seeing all the excellent research and writing you've done (specifically on the VGPS song pages) is awesome. Keep up the great work! Beatleswhobeachboys (talk) 22:44, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Beatleswhobeachboys! It's tough for Kinks editors because if you don't have Doug Hinman's 2004 or aren't willing to spend on AbeBooks, you're kind of out of luck.

At this point, I think I have to finish everything around Village Green. That album is really as important to me as Pet Sounds or Pepper, so I was always disappointed its article wasn't on the same level as those two. It's something that has annoyed me in band biographies too – like many, I feel the album is Ray's creative peak, yet some authors will say as much but then discuss it only in passing. It feels important to give the album the coverage it warrants. Tkbrett (✉) 12:34, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. VGPS is a marvelous album and deserves a comprehensive chronicling (or kronikling?) on this website. If I stumble on anything new for the VGPS material, I'll make sure to add it to the relevant article. Every once in a while there will be a new interview or anniversary piece that has a quote worth saving. Beatleswhobeachboys (talk) 18:29, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading Billboard images

Hey Tk. This may be a really dumb question but is there a certain way to upload free images from old issues of Billboard? Or is it the same way as any other image on WP? I've never done it before but I found an ad for Imperial Bedroom I think warrants uploading but I wanted to be sure I didn't have to do anything special. Thanks! – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 20:29, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

zmbro, do you mean licensing wise or something else? The particular licensing is the PD-US-no notice advertisement template, which lays it out. You'll see there that it only applies for things published in collective works between 1927 and 1977, which I don't think would work for Imperial Bedroom as I'm guessing the particular advertisement came out in 1982.

You may be able to use Template:PD-US-1978-89, provided it doesn't have a copyright notice printed directly on the ad. I haven't used that particular licensing before though, so maybe read a bit more into it. If it doesn't end up being in the public domain but is still significant, you'll have to resort to applying fair use criteria with a low resolution, but if the ad itself isn't really significant, then you're out of luck. Tkbrett (✉) 20:43, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah gotcha, I'll have to investigate more. Thanks. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 20:53, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Could you check out page 2 of this and see if it qualifies? Thanks. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 00:18, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for not responding right away Zmbro, I must have missed this one. I don't think that ad would qualify since it has a copyright notice at the bottom of the page. Tkbrett (✉) 20:04, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for albums, particularly British ones

Hi... just wanted to expand on my comment on the peer review for the Kinks album. Although I don't live full-time in the UK any more, I'm still a member of the British Library and visit it whenever I'm in the country. Its collection of UK music publications is amazingly good - an almost complete collection of NME and Melody Maker (yes, right back to the 1920s), almost all of Q, Mojo and Vox, most of Sounds apart from a four-year gap between 1980 and 1984, a decent collection of Record Mirror and Disc, almost all of Record Retailer/Music Week, plus The Face, Kerrang!, Let It Rock, Jazz Times, Gramophone, Downbeat, The Listener and many others. The two major publications missing for the type of music that you are writing articles about are Uncut (only 1997 to 2000) and Select (nothing). In addition, several UK newspapers such as The Times, The Guardian, The Daily Telegraph and The Independent have/had weekly album review columns, and these newspapers are also in the Library.

However, the US collection is basically Billboard and Rolling Stone, and for the latter it's really only comprehensive from about 1987-1988 onwards... before this it's extremely patchy. And no Creem, Circus, Crawdaddy! or Trouser Press, unfortunately. This is why I was very doubtful about finding the RS article you asked me about, but fortunately you found a preview.

What I was going to say is that as you are interested in Britpop, if there are any albums/singles you would like me to look up next time I am in there, I'll be happy to do so, as I'm guessing coverage in the US music press is less than ideal for this genre, and as you can see, there is a wide selection of UK publications available. It was me who added most of the UK reviews to Different Class and Definitely Maybe, which I think can be considered two of the "holy trinity" of Britpop albums, along with Parklife. Richard3120 (talk) 21:17, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, Richard3120, that's superb! I'm not sure what to look for regarding Britpop – Village Green's influence on the genre seems like it may be better dealt with in books written after the fact.

I may take you up on finding some original UK reviews of Village Green though. Several of them seem to have been lost to history. For example, in his 33⅓ book on the album, Andy Miller writes there was only one contemporary UK review – a positive write-up in Disc and Music Echo. But as you can see in the critical reception section of the album's article, that's not quite true. Using WorldRadioHistory.com, I've only found the Melody Maker and NME reviews. The other ones are there only because band biographers have quoted a few sentences from each. I'm not sure if the original reviews are only a couple sentences long and are quoted in full, or if the pieces are longer with track-by-track breakdowns. The ones I'd be interested in seeing are the following:

Disc and Music Echo (23 November 1968 issue)
Top Pop (Unknown date. ~~I've never even heard of this magazine and can't find any mention of its existence, but Kinks researcher Doug Hinman quotes from a review. Maybe you know which publication he's talking about.~~ Edit: I'm guessing it was a typo and he was talking about Top Pops.)
Daily Express (Judith Simons, unknown date).

I don't know if Record Mirror or Record Retailer reviewed the album, as no Kinks authors make mention of reviews appearing, but it's always possible. The other magazines seem to have published their pieces the week of release (22 November 1968) or the week after. If you could find even one of those, that would be fantastic! I'll look deeper into Top Pop and Daily Express reviews to see if I can find which issue they appeared in. Tkbrett (✉) 12:34, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and I'm guessing it's unlikely to be in the UK, but I've also been on the lookout for a review in The Village Voice, written by Johanna Schier and published in the 27 February 1969 issue. Tkbrett (✉) 12:41, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Record Retailer, which became Music Week in 1972, is the UK's equivalent to Billboard – in other words, it's a trade paper and its focus is more on sales stats and ins and outs at record labels rather than reviews... like Billboard, it has brief one-paragraph reviews of the week's new releases but nothing detailed. It's much more likely that Record Mirror reviewed the album, and unlike, say, Disc or Melody Maker at the time, its reviews tended to be lengthier. It would not surprise me if the biographers have quoted the entire review on occasions (I have found this in biographies of Nick Drake) because they were so short – British music journalism at this point was still very conservative, polite and often completely uninformative, with lots of reviews going no further than "good tunes and interesting lyrics" or words to that effect.

I'm sure you're right about Top Pops being a typo but it has never been considered one of the major music magazines of the UK, so I wouldn't worry too much about finding the review from there, and I don't think the British Library has it anyway. I'll definitely have a look for Disc and the Daily Express next time I'm in the UK (probably around Christmas time)... I would think some of the other UK newspapers might have reviewed it as well so I'll check them too.

I can see that Village Green has been reissued many times – 1998, 2004, 2010, 2014, 2018... you have the 2018 review from Uncut, but it's likely that Q or Mojo reviewed some of these reissues as well, I'll have a look. Richard3120 (talk) 13:43, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Richard3120, that'd be wonderful. Thanks very much for your generosity. Tkbrett (✉) 15:02, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I found the Disc and Music Echo review - here it is in its entirety, and you can decide which parts you want to use:

The Kinks Are the Village Green Preservation Society is a strangely apt title. For Kink leader and inspiration Raymond Douglas Davies, who wrote and produced all 15 of the completely new tracks on this album, is something of a preservationist. He managed to by-pass everything psychedelic and electronic, and has always concentrated on simple, even rustic, melodies with words of wisdom! Apart from the title tracks, the most memorable items on the album are "Village Green", "People Take Pictures of Each Other" and "Do You Remember Walter?" which almost makes you want to cry, it's so sad! Kinks may not be on the crest of the pop wave these days, but Ray Davies will remain one of our finest composers for many years. (Disc and Music Echo, 23 November 1968, page 2)

I looked through editions of the Daily Express for both September and November 1968, but I didn't find the review, so I'm guessing it must have appeared during December. I can tell you it will certainly be brief, as they reviewed one record per day of various genres, and none of them are longer than a short paragraph.

I did find some reviews in Q magazine of various reissues:

Paul du Noyer, "Quizzical", Q no. 44, May 1990, page 115 - 3/5. Part of a batch review of several Kinks reissues. Lumped it together with Arthur as part of the era when Kinks were out of favour, and stated that Arthur had aged the better of the pair... he said nothing about Village Green itself.

Dave Henderson, Q no. 145, May 1998, page 125 - 4/5. "...an astonishing English musical play ... a breathtaking Alan Bennett-styled scan of middle England, a psychedelic musical history".

Ted Kessler, Q no. 218, September 2004, page 135 - 4/5. "the quintessential British album" "He [Davies] rejected The Kinks' US influences, honing a wistfully English, Introspective style instead." "This three-disc reissue, including out-takes and new mixes, reveals a monumentally brilliant folly." "With it, Davies traced a new vernacular for future generations, with Paul Weller and Damon Albarn paying particular attention. It deserves a place alongside the decade's best." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard3120 (talk • contribs) 16:59, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Richard3120, this is superb! I imagine the Daily Express review is basically entirely covered in the secondary sources I have then. Was there any hint of a Record Mirror review? Thanks again, this must be the kindest thing anyone has done for me on this site. Tkbrett (✉) 14:48, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Really no problem at all - I've always estimated that there are 1200-1500 albums that should be "top" or "high" priority to get to GA level, and this is certainly one of them, so I'm happy to help out to achieve that aim. I think you are right, the Daily Express review will have already been covered almost in its entirety already, but it would be nice to locate a date for it. I can't find a Record Mirror review - the Library's archive more or less covers 1976 to 1980, and then 1984 to the magazine's closure in 1991... outside of these dates coverage is extremely patchy, and in fact World Radio History has more copies. I also had a look in Record Retailer from September to December 1968, but found nothing in there. Richard3120 (talk) 22:08, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I also have some "best albums of all time" type rankings from British music magazines, if you're interested in adding them to the article. Richard3120 (talk) 22:17, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Richard3120: That would be perfect because the only thing I really think is holding back the article from a Featured Article candidacy is the weak Influence and legacy section, especially the Rankings subsection. Any help expanding that would be greatly appreciated, as this is my first time writing a big album article and I feel a little unsure on how to write that part of it. Tkbrett (✉) 23:04, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Bulldog Key

Greetings Tkbrett,

I just didn't think a citation was needed to talk about the key of a song. I pay it often on my piano, and B minor/major is what sounds correct.

The thing is, when they mixed it, the must've sped it up a little bit, so it's not exactly B minor/major, it's between B and C. But definitely way closer to B than C. The original recording has to be in B, otherwise it would sound very differently. In fact, It sounds like Paul and Lennon's voices are a little more pitched up than normal.

And by the way, the verses are not exacly major, they're in Mixolydian mode. I don't know if it's worth recalling that or not in the original page.

I guess some good sources are Hooktheory or even some transcription on Ultimate Guitar.

I wouldn't recommend relying on many automatic key detectors, since they don't really work when there's multiple keys and other modes different to major/minor.

Anyway, let me know what you think about this.

Jurymax99.

JuryMax99 (talk) 15:51, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

JuryMax99, I can’t respond until after this weekend (Canadian Thanksgiving), but I’d appreciate if you post this on the Hey Bulldog talk page instead, that way other editors can chime in. Thanks. Tkbrett (✉) 20:07, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Village Green

Congrats on the FA! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:36, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks ♠PMC♠ for your help and encouragement! Tkbrett (✉) 01:55, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion of Village Green (song)

Congratulations, Tkbrett! The article you nominated, Village Green (song), has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

		The Featured Article Medal
		By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this special, very exclusive award created just for we few, we happy few, this band of brothers, who have shed sweat, tears and probably blood, in order to be able to proudly claim "I too have taken an article to Featured status". Gog the Mild (talk) 13:20, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much Gog the Mild. Cheers. Tkbrett (✉) 14:17, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We Love You/Redlands Bust page

Hey, I saw you reverted my folding in information for We Love You into the Redlands Bust page. I wasn't solely trying to repeat the same information of We Love You on the Redlands page, I suggested merging the two pages together both because of the close proximity of the topics and because of issues that the We Love You page has flagged as an independent page. Should I open it to a broader discussion further amongst editors?

By the way, didn't mean to step on your toes over on the Village Green editing, your articles are of very high quality. Hartcanyon (talk) 05:01, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hartcanyon. I think it's probably better to bring up the idea on a talk page before, though I guess WP:BRD worked here too. Anyway, I don't think it makes much sense to repeat a ton of information across both pages though, or even to merge them. The pages for Our World and "All You Need Is Love" are prime examples of a better way to handle this. Tkbrett (✉) 16:05, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response, I think the situations are a bit different, since Our World and All You Need Is Love are basically concurrent events, while Redlands and We Love You have more of an A-B chronological relationship. Thinking as a reader, I think merging the pages would be easier to follow. Regardless, I won't pursue it further. Hartcanyon (talk) 23:30, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Michelle

I have posted many hundreds of the same style cites over many years with no problems. How can a cite that shows the chart and date not be better than one that shows nothing. All the Kruth cite shows is his name and a link to wiki about how ISBN numbers work. With mine, one click is all that it needed to see the chart. AMCKen (talk) 04:53, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AMCKen: The citation is fully filled out at a page like "Penny Lane" since it uses the single chart template. It also includes links to RPM, Library and Archives Canada and mentions the retrieval date.

Anyway, regarding which citation to use, I think it'd be better to have this discussion at Talk:Michelle (song), that way other editors can participate. Tkbrett (✉) 13:43, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And my cite and the Penny Lane one both link to an image of the chart. What's the difference? A retrieval date means little. The chart won't change if an earlier or later retrieval is used. Either is better than the Kruth one which, as I say, shows nothing. :) AMCKen (talk) 04:17, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Studio lists

Hi Tkbrett, I've just made a change on top of yours to the list of studios in Houses of the Holy. I'm following the guidelines at the template. What do you think? Cheers, Kiwipete (talk) 21:52, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Kiwipete, I didn't see your talk page post here until I made another edit back. The way I see it, per the template, each entry should corresponds to a studio at in a different city. In the case of HotH, there were ~~three: (1) the Rolling Stones Mobile Studio at Stargroves, Headley Grange; (2) Island Studios in London and (3) Olympic Studios in London.~~ I've seen some editors suggest that even studios in the same city should have separate entries, but that seems excessive to me. An FA like Sgt. Pepper gets by with one entry. Tkbrett (✉) 22:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, I didn't realize Headley Grange and Stargroves were separate houses. My mistake. Tkbrett (✉) 22:23, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I see your understanding. I'm not sure I agree, though, maybe it should be discussed at the template's talk page? Thanks also for clarifying the use of Rolling Stones Mobile Studio at the two different houses. Kiwipete (talk) 22:38, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, Tkbrett!

Happy New Year!

Tkbrett,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 02:47, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 02:47, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

reverting edits

Excuse me for miswording several edits. The dates I gave were publication dates

"Date of publication as given in the application."

I assume that's why you reverted Tillywilly17 (talk) 17:08, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you wasting our time reverting my edits that are based on hard facts? We are missing three dates for Creedence Clearwater Revival's single "Proud Mary / Born On the Bayou"; when the studio musicians laid down the backing tracks, John Fogerty vocal track, and the release date. Why aren't you reverting the unsourced release date of "Born On the Bayou", January 5, 1969, when that's the date the album was released. If it was correct for the single, why isn't it on the flip side, "Proud Mary" with a citation? I know the guy who signed Fogerty to that awful contract, and owns the publishing company, has the dates, as well as Fogerty. I spent hours looking for them on album liner notes and anywhere else I could think of, only to have you revert edits from your cell phone. The publishing date is a solid clue towards the events of Dec 68-Jan 1969. The rules do not outlaw my edit, they say "usually", which is fine, I will only add it when it makes a difference to the learning of our readers. You should be my best friend, because I am a good editor who keeps all his educated guesses to himself, and only adds what he is sure of, and that comply with our rules, which I am also concerned about. I am not going to waste any more time on this because it makes my heart beat fast, and wonder why I waste my time here, with people who don't appreciate and understand what working together means. That's how I feel, don't mean to insult you or argue. I understand why you reverted, but being technically right is not always productive, and there is room here for you to reconsider, which I am not counting on. Have a nice day. Tillywilly17 (talk) 20:53, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kinks 1965 tour article

Hi! Just wanted to let you know I really enjoyed reading your article on the Kinks' 1965 tour. I had of course stumbled on a few of those anecdotes in the past, but a lot of the details on the business end are new to me. It's great knowing there's another Kinks fan on here—let alone one who does such thorough research. I corrected a typo somewhere but otherwise it read very nicely. I'm assuming by the dead links that you're planning on doing a page for their '69 tour? If so, count me as excited to see it!

And of course, if you ever need an extra set of eyes, I'm happy to help. Thanks again! Beatleswhobeachboys (talk) 03:40, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Beatleswhobeachboys, I'm glad you enjoyed it. I have plenty of big plans for their articles, including one for the '69 tour, though I'm not sure when I'll get around to that one in particular. I think I'd like to work on other stuff first like improving Face to Face, which is actually probably my favourite LP of theirs. Tkbrett (✉) 13:10, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on another well-done GA. I hadn't seen the whole story before and it explained a lot. Also, thanks for tidying up the captions on Purple Haze and the rest. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:24, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much, Ojorojo, glad you enjoyed it. Tkbrett (✉) 13:41, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking of reviewing one of your GANs that have been up for a while. You may prefer a fresh set of eyes, so I thought I'd ask. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:41, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Ojorojo, that'd be great. Let me know if you have any going up ... I don't think I've actually reviewed any of your nominations yet. Tkbrett (✉) 16:58, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Any preference? I'm leaning towards Rain on the Roof. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:20, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ojorojo: Yeah, I think that one would be more up your alley – there's some interesting studio trickery there about manipulating the guitar and amp's settings to make it sound like a French horn. I play guitar, but only acoustic, so I'm relying on the descriptions of secondary sources for that one rather than personal knowledge. If you could make sure I'm not screwing something up there that would be helpful. Tkbrett (✉) 18:31, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Beatleswhobeachboys and Ojorojo: After doing plenty more expanding and rewriting, I've put the US tour article up as a Feature Article candidate. I'm not sure if either of you do much reviewing there, but if you're so inclined that could prove helpful as I don't think there are many there who are knowledgeable about '60s music. I also tossed together a short article on the band's 1965 UK tour which you may find a fun read. Ojorojo, did you know that Mitch Mitchell almost joined the Kinks? Wild. Tkbrett (✉) 16:44, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! I'm trying to imagine what he would have done. He later said that he often overplayed on the early Hendrix songs. The Kinks had a more basic approach and I suppose he could have dialed it back. We'll never know ... I'll work on some comments for your FAC. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:51, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ojorojo: I have a hard time imagining how Mitchell in the Kinks would have worked – I saw one biographer point out that while Avory basically operated as a session man, doing whatever Ray told him to do, Mitchell was much more opinionated in his own playing and therefore likely to grate on Ray. Maybe Ray and Dave would have respected him more though, since I think a lot of the disconnect in the band was because Avory was not on the level of the Davies brothers as a musician.

I was meaning to ask you, do your Yardbirds sources have any info on their 1965 UK tour supporting the Kinks? This happened weeks after "For Your Love" hit number one on NME, and it sounds like Ray was acutely aware of the challenge from a more technically skilled British R&B group. There's a story in one Kinks biography recounted by their road manager of Ray going into the dressing room's shower, pulling metal off the walls, and then throwing it onto the stage during the Yardbirds' set. I wonder if any of the Yardbirds remember that. Chris Dreja has a wonderfully vivid recollection of Avory whacking Dave in the head, which I've already included in the article.

I was looking at buying a Yardbirds book and was wondering if you had any recommendations? I saw Alan Clayson's book was reasonably priced on used books sites, whereas Greg Russo's book is much more expensive. Tkbrett (✉) 11:59, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I double checked to be sure, but none have anything of substance. Clayson and Russo only include a list of dates. I remember seeing somewhere that Jim McCarty felt that the two groups were on friendly terms, but he doesn't have anything to say in his autobiography. He quotes Ray Davies in Keith Relf's biography, when Relf's father was replaced as the Yardbirds' tour manager, "That's really sick, sacking your dad! That's sick!"[David French 2020, pp. 43–44] This happened around June 1965 after the tour with the Kinks.

Clayson's book only includes 121 pages on the group before the breakup and has large type and photos. He drops lots of names of other groups and personalities, which provides some context for the scene at the time. Russo goes into a lot of detail on recording and releases, which some may find uninteresting. Maybe borrowing them from the library would be better. P.S. Your FAC seems to be going well. Linking was not really an issue, but I felt I had to say something before adding my support.

—Ojorojo (talk) 16:41, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tkbrett! Sorry for not getting around to this sooner. I took another look at the article and the progress on the FAC page and I can only reiterate that it's a really great, comprehensive take on the '65 tour. As Ojorojo noted, this article does a good job making sense of the somewhat ambiguous rationale for the band's banning from the US, which is greatly appreciated. Also funny to hear Mitch Mitchell almost worked with the Kinks, since his style really doesn't fit at all what the band would end up doing. I'm pretty sure Mitchell also almost joined Paul McCartney and Wings, but lost the job in a coin flip or something crazy like that. Evidently he's not the luckiest guy with job interviews! Beatleswhobeachboys (talk) 00:56, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Tkbrett. Thank you for your work on The Kinks' 1965 US tour. User:Onel5969, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Okay, now that's a tour article. Well done.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Onel5969}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:14, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Onel5969: Thanks, that's very kind of you. Maybe you'd be interested in giving it a review when I nominate it for featured status! Tkbrett (✉) 16:48, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't do much work at GA or FA, but there are some very talented editors who do. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:48, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:57, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note Gerda Arendt. Hope all is well. Tkbrett (✉) 12:22, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

all would be saying to much, - see a Ukrainian on top of my talk, and read the talk of Mozart. - but yes, health and such: fine. how about you? -- (written in March but forgot o sign) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:06, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did You Ever Have to Make Up Your Mind

Saw your edit to this. I'm not sure where April 30 came from. I may have put it there when I created the article, I'm not sure where I got it from. Looking at some old Billboards, it looks like DYEHTMUYM was released first in Canada, by January at the latest (Billboard, January 15, 1966, p. 28 - "Recently, Quality released "(DYEHTMUYM)" by the Lovin' Spoonfuls, with Kama Sutra watching reaction here. And it's beginning to show chart action.") It charted in Canada as early as March. Does the date of release refer specifically to the American single?Brianyoumans (talk) 17:11, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Um, sorry, I failed to see your note at the top about article-specific matters...Brianyoumans (talk) 17:12, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No sweat, Brianyoumans. We can start up a discussion at its talk page to see if anything further can be sorted out.

I turned my friend on to the Spoonful not that long ago, but I haven't interacted with many other fans (a shame, really). You may be interested to know that I am working up a draft of their article in one of my sandboxes. I was quite unimpressed with the state of the band's article when compared to other '60s mainstays, like the Beatles, Bob Dylan, Jimi Hendrix and the Kinks (all FAs) or the Rolling Stones and the Byrds (both GAs). The Spoonful lack a proper band biography and a day-by-day guide – like all of those other bands have – so it feels a bit more like putting together a puzzle, but it should hopefully all come together soon enough. Tkbrett (✉) 18:17, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK Computer

I greatly appreciate you pointing me to the WP:MOS in the edit summary of your revert. I was not aware of that specific policy, as I initially saw the page and was confused by the release date change (if I recall, the release date presented on the page previously was 16 June 1997). Thank you for your assistance. JeffSpaceman (talk) 10:43, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Double A-sides released on the UK singles chart prior to The Beatles' "We Can Work It Out / Day Tripper"

Is it your belief that none of these songs were double A-side releases, and do you have evidence for this? 213.205.198.124 (talk) 17:36, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Accidentally rollbacked you

Fat fingered the phone screen, so sorry! Please ignore. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:18, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, Premeditated Chaos. I see you already staked your claim at my FAC – thank you! I think I was able to improve it quite a bit since the GAN and I hope you enjoy the read. I was looking through the FAC listings to see if there were any I'd be interested in and saw yours, which I will happily do. A quick skim reminded me of a certain clip which I wasn't sure if you had seen, hehe. Tkbrett (✉) 00:48, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't seen that before, too funny. I feel like I've developed this secondary fascination with The Kinks now, everything they do appears to be utterly chaotic and it's inevitably a great read. They really don't make band drama like they used to. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:59, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Premeditated Chaos: Ha, that's great! I quickly slapped together a bare-bones article on the band's other drama-filled tour from a month earlier. You may enjoy seeing that story fleshed out. I'll maybe expand it if I feel motivated.

I'm not sure why being a great artist often means being an egomaniac, but I guess it makes for more interesting stories. It is endlessly hilarious to me that the person who wrote a song as beautiful as "Waterloo Sunset" is also the same guy who punched a union official in the face for mildly insulting him. Tkbrett (✉) 19:53, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It really boggles the mind, doesn't it? I'm trying to imagine how wild it would be to go to a concert and see the bandmates get into a bar brawl onstage. (I guess you're getting a show either way?) If you do go for GA for that one, I'm happy to take the review. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:45, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Premeditated Chaos, you're too kind! Tkbrett (✉) 12:52, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, they're such easy reviews - I know the work is going to be good, and you're easy to work with as a reviewer, so it's really my pleasure. Plus the band drama is just delicious. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 12:58, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Premeditated Chaos: If you're still interested, I just nominated the Kinks' 1965 UK tour for GA status. I promise, ninety-nine per cent of the article is drama! Tkbrett (✉) 17:43, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How can I say no when it's the tour with the famed drumkit beating? If you're interested in trading at all, I've got more McQueen at GAN - The Birds and Taxi Driver. The Birds in particular could use a critical review, I never quite felt satisfied with it and I can't figure out why. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:14, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tour articles

Hey there friend. With your success writing the superb tour articles on the Kinks, I've been wondering if I should do the same for Bowie, as I haven't touched any of his. I've already started a draft of the Ziggy tour but haven't touched it in awhile. I was wondering if you might have any helpful tips when writing tour articles? I have literally no experience so I thought I'd ask someone who now has some :-) If not no worries. Thanks. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 18:42, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks zmbro, that's all so awesome of you to say.

If I'm writing about a subject I haven't touched before, I usually go search out good examples. There are very few FA-class concert articles, and I was not super impressed with the ones in existence. Instead, I closely read the article for the Beatles' 1966 tour of Germany, Japan and the Philippines. I think it is the best written and researched concert tour article on the site. It provides a great structure from which to work. Another thing is to group your writing by idea rather than as a simple chronological listing. The former makes for more engaging reading, whereas the latter approach of "and then ... and then ... and then ..." leaves the reader struggling to see the bigger picture.

Let me know when the Ziggy tour article is ready. I would love to review it. Tkbrett (✉) 22:16, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 205, May 2023

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results
Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content
Book review: Hawkeye7 on the Western Allied invasion of Germany
Op-ed: Hawkeye7's tips for writing articles on military logistics

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 08:06, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1860s disestablishments in Ontario

A tag has been placed on Category:1860s disestablishments in Ontario indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:08, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW

I see you've made several good additions to "For What It's Worth". I wouldn't want to overdo the local radio charts, but since it's a topical LA song, maybe mentioning an earlier debut on KHJ would be OK. It first showed up in the "Boss 30" on Dec. 28, 1966.[1] At one point, I was thinking of expanding it to a GA, but was put-off by some disruptive editing. Maybe it's time to try again. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:44, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ojorojo: Interesting. I think the LA-specific chartings warrant inclusion given how relevant the song was there at that time. My obsession has often come down to nailing down the exact date of a recording or release, but it seems like the day "FWIW" came out has been lost to time. At least this would go little further to figuring it out.

Expanding that page could be well worth it, as I think the actual origin of the song is not common knowledge outside of '60s aficionados – I have heard a couple people in my everyday life describe it as vaguely dealing with civil rights and even had one say it was about the 1970 Kent State shootings, mixing it up with "Ohio". (Even funnier, that was an American history teacher in high school).

Since you worked on "Bluebird", I am assuming you are the person to ask about literature; is there much on Buffalo Springfield outside of John Einarson and Richie Furay's group biography? I imagine David Roberts and David Gedge's biography of Stills would have some coverage of the band and "FWIW". Tkbrett (✉) 17:29, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's been awhile. If I remember, Einarson and Roberts & Gedge are good. I saved some search results, but some of the previews are no longer available:

Shakey: Neil Young's Biography[2]
Neil Young: Heart of Gold[3]
Neil Young: Long May You Run: The Illustrated History, Updated Edition[4]
Special Deluxe: A Memoir of Life & Cars[5]
Waging Heavy Peace: A Hippie Dream[6]
The Foundations of Rock: From "Blue Suede Shoes" to "Suite: Judy Blue Eyes"[7]
Canyon of Dreams: The Magic and the Music of Laurel Canyon[8]
Eight Miles High: Folk-rock's Flight from Haight-Ashbury to Woodstock[9]
Black Magic: White Hollywood and African American Culture[10]

Now there might be more. Domenic Priore's Riot on Sunset Strip: Rock'N'Roll's Last Stand in Hollywood may be the best telling of the pre-1967 LA rock scene. It doesn't have much about the song, but if you are interested in that period, it has a lot of detail on all the groups and the scene at the time (no preview, but I have it).

—Ojorojo (talk) 18:26, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ojorojo: Does Einarson and Furay's group bio have any info on recording sessions or is it all mostly prose? I never realized there were so many Neil Young books. Domenic Priore's book sounds like something I have always wanted to read but never knew existed; I just ordered a copy! Tkbrett (✉) 13:06, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I checked Einarson again and, from the preview, there are four+ pages with some very good background on the writing and recording and quotes from Stills, Dewey Martin, and others (Martin says after recording it on Monday "it was on KHJ by Friday", which would make it released, at least as a promo, by Dec. 10).[11] Unfortunately, the preview cuts off during the recording (p. 127). Roberts has somewhat different quotes from Stills, which are still useful, but doesn't go into the nuts and bolts.[12] Young has some interesting comments in his books, including that the guitar approach was inspired by Moby Grape, who also had three guitar players.[13] I see that there's a newer edition of Priore's book and am curious if there's much difference. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:45, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help!

Thanks for helping out with those cleanups in the Glyn Johns article! Garagepunk66 (talk) 16:41, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Garagepunk66: Thanks for your continued work in expanding it – it is an important page. Tkbrett (✉) 12:38, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you as well for your assistance here--and of course all of those great articles about the Kinks that you've contributed so much to. The Kinks are one of my favorite (or perhaps I should say "favourite") bands of all time! Garagepunk66 (talk) 22:47, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Garagepunk66: Thanks, I am glad you have enjoyed the articles. I guess you liking the band makes sense, given your username and edit history. I absolutely adore the Remains, a band which obviously drew a lot from that early Kinks sound. Funny that Barry Tashian ended up going into country music instead. Tkbrett (✉) 13:23, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for Wiki Commons photos of Glyn Johns

When I posted the photo of Glyn Johns, I thought it looked public domain, but I realized that if it is not, then it would have to go. Luckily you found some others that are now in commons. Thanks for helping with this! Perhaps eventually we could ask a publisher for permission to use a copyrighted image. Garagepunk66 (talk) 17:25, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion of The Kinks' 1965 US tour

Congratulations, Tkbrett! The article you nominated, The Kinks' 1965 US tour, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Built from the ground up. You should be very proud. Sorry I wasn't there for the FAC process, been pretty busy irl, but major congrats to you :-) – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 18:33, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much zmbro. No sweat, I get it – as always, they're really not paying us enough. Tkbrett (✉) 20:37, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1965 UK Tour

Another very interesting GA. I hadn't heard about Ray's throwing things during the Yardbirds' set. Russo (who I see you got some use out of) and McCarty in his bio don't mention it. I wonder if their "Heart Full of Soul" might have hit a nerve. They recorded it 10 days before the tour started and probably played it while on tour. Ray might have figured that it would be released before "See My Friends" and steal some of its thunder. Both songs are often mentioned as the first Indian/raga influenced rock songs. Lavezzoli notes the timing: "It is tempting to speculate if the two bands had discussed their recent work with each other",[14] but otherwise does not comment on who might have influenced whom. In your research, did you see anything about this? —Ojorojo (talk) 15:52, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ojorojo, it was a lot of fun to write too. The raga rock bit is really interesting to me, but I initially wasn't sure how it could be incorporated into the article. Lavezzoli's comment is helpful though and I think I definitely ought to include the potential connection.

I do not think the Yardbirds played "Heart Full of Soul" during the tour. Norrie Drummond reviewed the second April 30 show for NME. In his review, published on page ten of the May 7 issue, he included the set lists of the Kinks, the Yardbirds and Goldie and the Gingerbreads. This is where the sourced Kinks set list in the article comes from, since there are no extant live recordings of this tour. Drummond wrote this about the Yardbirds' set:

The Yardbirds, who closed the first half of the show, bounded on stage in mustard coloured suits and rocked into "Too Much Monkey Business", "I Done Somebody Wrong," I Ain't Got You," and "Five Long Years" followed. Next came their chart winner "For Your Love" before they closed their polished act with "I'm a Man".

It is curious to me that the Kinks recorded "See My Friends" on May 3, their first day off from the tour. I believe Ray had already written it, having been inspired from the stop in India months earlier, but perhaps hearing the Yardbirds talk about their new song lit a fire under his ass. I'll look deeper into it when I’m home and back with my books. Tkbrett (✉) 23:59, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ojorojo: I added what raga rock bits I thought relevant to the article. It's all very interesting; I knew that "Heart Full of Soul" and "See My Friends" were recorded closely together, but I had never realized that the original two attempts came on the same date: Tuesday, April 13, 1965 (some sources identify "See My Friends" as April 13–14 since it was an overnight session). Looking in a few other books, I see that the Beatles also recorded "Help!" that day and the Byrds recorded six songs for Mr. Tambourine Man the day after. The big 1965 NME Poll Winners' Concet happened days earlier on Sunday. Things moved pretty fast. Tkbrett (✉) 17:00, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice addition – it's an interesting coincidence. Not for this article, but I wonder if there's anything to Talmy's claim of playing a recording of a Jon Mark song with an Indian-type drone that inspired Ray to write SMF. Apparently, Mark backed Marianne Faithful on a previous tour with the Kinks (before they went to India?) and Talmy was involved in some recordings with him.[15] But I am suspicious about Talmy's "Ray came back the next day with 'See My Friends'", since it doesn't seem to fit the timeline. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:55, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ojorojo: I am not sure. Of all the Kinks sources, Johnny Rogan seems best at actually evaluating the likelihood of later recollections by comparing them against the vast amount of research and reading he has done. When Rogan interviewed Talmy in 1982 for the Kinks biography he was writing, Talmy mentioned the Jon Mark connection. In Rogan's 2015 bio, he unfortunately does not evaluate Talmy's claim, except to say that "Davies insists the melodic inspiration came from that earlier trip with the Kinks to Bombay ..." I have not checked all the other bios to see if any other author evaluates Talmy's claim, but I will if I end up trying to expand the "See My Friends" article.

I would love to bring that article up to GA status. JG66 – who has unfortunately gone inactive this year – did most of the work on it already and it is fantastic, but it still needs a bit more. I think it is the only raga rock song to not yet be at GA status; "Heart Full of Soul", "Eight Miles High", "Paint It Black", "Mother's Little Helper" and "Norwegian Wood" are all there already. Tkbrett (✉) 16:27, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ray may have gotten "melodic inspiration" during his visit, but it's possible that the drone on the guitars came from something closer to home. In the early 1960s, folkies like John Fahey, Sandy Bull, Davey Graham, and others had been experimenting with Indian-inspired tunings and drones. Jon Mark's "Sally Free and Easy" from around the same time actually uses a sitar.[16] A quick google search shows Talmy quoted in a couple of books,[17][18] but don't add to it. Maybe there is more is out there. —Ojorojo (talk) 18:38, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ojorojo: I missed your mention of Jon Mark being on a previous Kinks tour a few comments above. I flipped through Doug Hinman's book and I see that Marianne Faithfull and the Kinks were among the opening acts during Gerry & the Pacemaker's late 1964 UK tour, which ran November 7 – December 6. Hinman does not mention Mark at all, but in her autobiography, Faithfull writes that Mark was her guitar player (p. 34).

It does not sound like things went all that well. In Ian Dove's review of the tour's debut show for NME (p. 12), he describes Faithfull's performance as quite dull, with no announcements, no movement on stage and all the songs sounding the same. He also added that though she was accompanied by an acoustic guitar, "listeners in some parts of the hall must have thought she was virtually unaccompanied". In Disc Weekly (p. 11), Nigel Hunter writes that her performance was sometimes drowned out by jeers from the audience. None of the reviews mentioned Mark by name. Tkbrett (✉) 12:43, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe Ray's use of a finger-picking style led some to try to connect it with others who are known for that style. Another writer identifies Davey Graham as a possible influence: "In imitation of Graham's experiments, Davies creates a drone with overdriven electric guitars, starts the melody of 'See My Friends' on the third ..."[19] William Echard includes a detailed musical analysis in Psychedelic Popular Music: A History through Musical Topic Theory,[20] but doesn't mention influences. A lot of it is academic, but it has some useful info. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:08, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ojorojo: I was flipping through Russo again and learned that the American unions tossed the Yardbirds around quite a bit in September 1965, just like they did the Kinks. I added a little bit about it in a note to the US tour article. I found a funny editorial in an issue of the San Francisco popular music newspaper KYA Beat ([21][22][23]), in which the editors describe the US musicians' union as "the dictatorial organization which somehow has the power to decide who can appear on American television and seems to delight in turning away foreigners". Regarding the AFM's actions against the Yardbirds, the editors write: "The 19th century thinkers who make these decisions trapped them in a snarl of red tape and refused to allow the Englishmen to perform on Shindig, knowing full well they had travelled all the way from London to California for that purpose." Tkbrett (✉) 13:26, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Now it must be an embarrassing chapter in the union's history. The story is also in KRLA Beat[24] (the two appear to be the same paper). The Yardbirds seemed to have handled it fairly well. The party/gig Kim Fowley arranged in Hollywood introduced them to a lot of people, which helped their career. Priore briefly mentions it, but doesn't have anything to say about the Kinks. "The comparatively well-behaved Rolling Stones" was unexpected – who'd have thought that the Kinks were the real bad boys. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:30, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ojorojo: The union seemingly tried to stop any British bands from getting in. Michael Roberts, a sociologist at San Diego State, wrote a journal article in 2010 about the AFM's attempt to ban the Beatles in 1964, which formed the basis of his 2014 book Tell Tchaikovsky the News. It all probably deserves its own section at the British Invasion article; I think it is an unexplored area because there is not much overlap between people interested in rock music and those interested in labor issues.

I reworded that Rolling Stones bit so it is not as likely to surprise -- what Kitts means is that though the Rolling Stones presented as the bad boys, they were always polite with the business types backstage.

Priore's book finally came in at my local bookstore today, so I'll have to run over a grab it; I've been dying to read it. Tkbrett (✉) 18:06, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, question for you.

In regards to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Rollback of Vector 2022 you stated that [This is a] total step backwards in terms of readability. A majority in the last RfC were opposed to it and only 24 percent of those polled thought the new skin was easier to use. How do you feel now about the skin, months after the discussion?

Before you answer this question, please read my user page to see why I am asking you this question. You do not have to answer this question at all if you wish. If you do answer this question, could you please state if you are okay with your username being used, possibly publicly? Thank you-- DisposableUser12345 (talk) 01:31, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Four Award

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on The Kinks' 1965 US tour. — Bilorv (talk) 08:25, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews for the Who

Hello, @Tkbrett! I'm currently working on a rewrite of the article for the Who's song "My Generation". (This is the sandbox, if you're interested in skimming through it) I like to write my articles rather chronologically (starting with the background, before going onto the composition and release etc). And I've finally approached the "Reception" section. Finding contemporary reviews for the article has been rather hard. I've extracted the New Musical Express and Record Mirror reviews from https://worldradiohistory.com/ (the issues dated 30 October 1965 are not present for Disc and Music Echo and Melody Maker)

Reading through your articles for the Lovin' Spoonful ("Daydream" in particular), I notice that for some reviews for random British newspaper, you've had access through a website called Newspapers.com, which appears to be behind a paywall. Now, this might sound rather rude or improper, but if you still have access to Newspapers.com, could you extract a few reviews for "My Generation" from there? (Disc and Music Echo and Melody Maker would be preferred, if they're present)

Of course, you may reach out to me in response as a favour in return. (I could help you in translating sources from Swedish to English if required). Thanks in advance. VirreFriberg (talk) 20:28, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, VirreFriberg. Good pick. I'd like to see the quality of a few of the Who's pages improved as well; I would like to eventually work on ones like "I Can't Explain", "Anyway, Anyhow, Anywhere", "I'm a Boy" and "Pictures of Lily".

Newspapers.com is actually part of the Wikipedia Library. Here is info about getting on it for free: Wikipedia:Newspapers.com. Unfortunately, you will not find issues of magazines like Disc or Melody Maker there. The only alternative I have found to WorldRadioHistory.com is to look up the particular issue on eBay or Etsy, since sellers will sometimes include the article I want in the preview. I was able to find an article this way while working on the Kinks' 1965 US tour article; reference number 49 on the current version of the page ("Fourth of July Beach Boys' Fizzle!" in the July 12, 1965, issue of KEWB: 30) I found in this Etsy listing. Tkbrett (✉) 20:14, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

VirreFriberg: Would you be able to help me with some sources on the Lovin' Spoonful discography article? In particular, I would like to cite Eric Hallberg's 1993 book on the Kvällstoppen chart, rather than the PDF I have in its place. Also, do I remember correctly that you have access to Jake Nyman's book on the Finnish singles chart? At the moment, that information is cited from a blog post. Thanks, and feel free to let me know if you need any help with any other articles. Tkbrett (✉) 15:03, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Tkbrett! I can gladly help you source chart positions from the Swedish chart books (i.e Kvällstoppen and Tio i Topp). However, I do no longer have access to Jake Nyman's book about the Finnish charts, as that was borrowed from a friend and I have since returned it. I know for a certainty that the blog post you are referring to (http://suomenlistalevyt.blogspot.com/2015/08/los-lon.html) is sourced from Nyman's book. Therefore, it is more of an issue of not knowing the correct page number in Nyman's book than anything.

Here are the Swedish chart listings for the Lovin' Spoonful starting with Kvällstoppen! (Page 271 in Eric Hallberg's Kvällstoppen book) Formatted in Title, date of peak position and peak position:

"Daydream" - May 17, 1966 - 1
"Bald Headed Lena" - July 19th, 1966 - 1
"Did You Ever Have to Make Up Your Mind?" - August 2, 1966 - 3
"Summer in the City" - August 30, 1966 - 4
"Rain on the Roof" - December 27, 1966 - 11
"Nashville Cats" - February 14th, 1967 - 12

And here are the chart positions for Tio i Topp (page 225 in Ulf Henningsson & Eric Hallberg's Tio i Topp book) Formatted in Title, date of peak position and peak position:

"Daydream" - April 30, 1966 - 2
"Bald Headed Lena" - June 18, 1966 - 1
"Did You Ever Have to Make Up Your Mind?" - July 9, 1966 - 2
"Summer in the City" - August 13, 1966 - 3
"Rain on the Roof" - December 10, 1966 - 3
"Nashville Cats" - February 4, 1967 - 10

VirreFriberg (talk) 15:49, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much VirreFriberg, I have added the Kvällstoppen info to the page. I also appreciate you confirming that Nyman's book and the blog post provide the same information. I have not included Tio i Topp since only from a single vendor. Thanks again! Tkbrett (✉) 18:38, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No problem @Tkbrett! Feel free to reach out if you need Swedish chart listings for other artists! VirreFriberg (talk) 21:47, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New name!

Hello. I hope that you're doing great. You've known me as Garagepunk66, but I will be using a new name GloryRoad66. Best wishes! GloryRoad66 (talk) 08:23, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review of "Daydream"

Nice article. The review has been clean and easy, with almost no problems: Talk:Daydream (The Lovin' Spoonful song)/GA1. Just a few minor quibbles which should be quickly resolved. Do we need an image of The Supremes? The image of the advert has a licensing weakness that could be resolved by using a non-free license. And some vagueness over the "initial" influence of the Holland–Dozier–Holland songs. And shouldn't Holland–Dozier–Holland be mentioned as the authors of those influencing songs? SilkTork (talk) 10:28, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done!

This user helped promote Daydream (The Lovin' Spoonful song) to good article status.

Keep up the good work. SilkTork (talk) 16:35, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oops...

In this edit you reverted an edit of mine in which I had reverted a talk page edit of yours, and in the edit summary you asked "Why did you do that?" A good question. I can only assume that I clicked on the wrong link by mistake. My apologies. 😕 JBW (talk) 15:58, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No sweat JBW, thanks for following up. Cheers. Tkbrett (✉) 16:00, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and...

Hi Tkbrett! I see that you've been over here, on and off, so I'd be grateful if you just go over some of the most recent editsto check that everything's OK... I'm out of my depth there. Thanks, Technopat (talk) 15:19, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! My doubts have since been solved. Sorry to trouble you! Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 15:24, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation

Hello Tkbrett!

The New Pages Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help.
We think that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting.
Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines.
Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions.
If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here.

Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 07:51, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:The_Storm_Before_the_Calm#Euro_label

Share your thoughts regarding the album if you wish to. 2001:D08:2940:1935:DE6:7218:DFE9:9B78 (talk) 16:36, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations \| August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive: On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. (t · c) buidhe 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Certifications include shipments in basically all countries

I was speaking broadly. In most countries, certifications have been based on units also shipped to stores that haven't actually been sold and may never have been. Fine, this one example of one certification in the US may be sales, but that's not necessarily true for any other countries. Also, salesamount= doesn't mean a dollar amount. It's supposed to be a sales figure. Also, at least after this, the US started taking into account units shipped as qualifying for certifications, as per RIAA certification: "This system has permitted, at times, record labels to promote an album as Gold or Platinum simply based on large shipments. For instance, in 1978 the Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band soundtrack shipped Platinum but was a sales bust, with two million returns" (sourced to The New York Times). Ss112 12:13, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So I notice you've brought this up at Template talk:Certification Table Entry. I concur with Muhandes that mixing amounts and dollar values is confusing. Ss112 12:17, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ss112, I see what you mean now; not all certifications in a table may be based on sales like the pre-1975 RIAA, so it doesn't make sense to always caption the table with "Sales". Fair enough. I appreciate your attention to detail. Cheers. Tkbrett (✉) 12:32, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ss112: If you have time, I'd appreciate if you could share your thoughts directly in the thread at the Certification Table talk page, that way there can be more of a discussion over there. Tkbrett (✉) 12:36, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Kinks' 1965 US tour

Hi, does a TFA set for October 23 work for you? (Btw, I love the Nixon image for "transcripts", above). - Dank (push to talk) 14:45, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm supposed to be getting on with scheduling soon, so I'll add this one to the table at WT:Today's featured article/October 2023 now. This one was just promoted in June so I'm not anticipating any problems, but let me know if you'd like to have more time to work on it. - Dank (push to talk) 13:37, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dank: That sounds good to me. I unfortunately missed getting it ready in time for the tour's anniversary, and it is probably not worth waiting until next summer. The page is essentially complete. Unless someone publishes more research, I do not think there is anything else to write about the tour. Also, I'm glad someone likes the Nixon shot, hehe. Tkbrett (✉) 21:49, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, congrats on TFA! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:09, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your help and encouragement along the way, Premeditated Chaos. Tkbrett (✉) 00:58, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October songs
my story today

Thank you today for the article, introduced as "about the disastrous tour of America that left the English rock band the Kinks banned from performing in the country for the next four years"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:09, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Gerda Arendt. I always look forward to your message on TFA-day. Tkbrett (✉) 00:59, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's sweet! - A Romanian woman composer is today's topic. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:24, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Towards the end of the month, I thought of Brian Bouldton, and his ways to compromise, - with musings about peace there, - feel free to join. Hevenu shalom aleichem. Today is Reformation Day, and I believe that reformation is a work in progress. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:06, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Schenker

Thanks for attempting that cleanup. Sadly, that page has a group of watchdogs that vigorously enforce their own consensus on it. The talk page is scary. At least one of that crew has also attacked unrelated academics on Twitter, falsely accusing them of editing the page. It's a mess. PianoDan (talk) 18:01, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PianoDan: That's unfortunate, but not surprising. One thing my non-Wikipedia-editing friends have mentioned on occasion is gulf in quality between the encyclopedia's writing on contemporary versus historical subjects. You can see at Schenker's page how the contemporary controversy bit is a step down in good writing from the rest of the page.

People rarely have a bone to pick with the things I like to write about – the Berlin-to-Kitchener name change article may have been harder to write if Wiki was around in 1916, ha ha. I gave it another try removing some of the weak content over at Schenker, but I think I will bow out from any future attempts; my interactions with the most vociferous editors in years past made me realize it is best to stray away from anything too controversial here. Cheers. Tkbrett (✉) 18:35, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That seems very wise. :) PianoDan (talk) 15:12, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOT BROKEN

Big fan of that guideline, but please note the fifth bullet under "Good reasons to bypass redirects include:"

* Radio and TV station call letters, since call letters given up by one station can be used later by a different station.

Mlaffs (talk) 19:53, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing that out, Mlaffs, you are absolutely correct. My mistake. Cheers. Tkbrett (✉) 20:00, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All good – happy editing! Mlaffs (talk) 20:07, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

congrats man!

its cool that you got your article featured Puzzle Piece the Wikipedian (talk) 15:09, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Puzzle Piece the Wikipedian! Tkbrett (✉) 00:58, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]