Talk:Back Home Again in Indiana
Latest comment: 8 years ago by 139.68.134.1 in topic Original Research in Chords section?
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Untitled edit
Nabors substitutes words, it is true. But the word "erroneous" is gratuitous. Songs can change over time, and Nabor's substitutions seem well thought out and sensitive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.25.115.119 (talk) 13:06, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Original Research in Chords section? edit
Much of the information recently added in the Chords section seems to be original research to me. The only citations in that section are to published scores themselves, and the actual analysis of those documents does not have any citation. Indyguy (talk) 05:00, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
- True. It's all uncited original research, and doesn't belong here. It's also out of place, a detailed theoretical analysis of the harmony of a pop tune belongs in a music theory text, or a book about early popular songs. It's just too much petty detail for an encyclopedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.68.134.1 (talk) 18:01, 19 August 2015 (UTC)