Talk:Balaguer Guitars
Latest comment: 5 years ago by Winged Blades of Godric in topic Sources
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
BRD edit
It's not BRRRRRR........ The 46-point checklist stuff is sheer ad-speak where the more the number, the more attractive it becomes to a prospective buyer. Anyways, it's sourced straight from Balaguer and you need to see WP:ORGIND. ∯WBGconverse 19:18, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
- Ritchie, you sure about meeting NCORP; given that it's one of our most rigorous standards? This is sheer junk, to start with. ∯WBGconverse 19:36, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
- Guitar Player is a well respected magazine that I have read for, well decades. Although I'm primarily a Fender Telecaster man, it's nice to read up on what other instruments are being played and being used by significant musicians. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:40, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
- If that's the standard of article in a well-respected magazine......... ∯WBGconverse 19:43, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
- I remember reading an issue in about 1991 which had guitar tab and sheet music for "Won't Get Fooled Again", which is where I learned to play it, except that was Guitar World; Pete Townshend had an article in Guitar Player earlier, in 1989. Still, in the late 1980s the internet was a niche academic thing, and you certainly wouldn't expect to find guitar geekery coverage on it. So we all had to make do with processed trees instead. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:49, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
- I don't appreciate the snark in the last line. It might be very true that it used to be a top-class magazine. But, the one I linked above is spam; no respectable outfit publishes such brazen advertorial stuff. ∯WBGconverse 19:56, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
- No it isn't. You just don't like the subject and get aggressive and upset when people write about topics you don't care about. Now run along, there's a good chap. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:59, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
- No; I don't like asking others about the number of FAs being written (how many have you written, by the way ?!) as an excuse to overturn valid G11s or violate WP:INTEGRITY or introduce ad-speak or not honor BRD once getting a pet topic to write upon. ∯WBGconverse 20:07, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
- Also, this and this seem quite impressive. ∯WBGconverse 20:23, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
- No it isn't. You just don't like the subject and get aggressive and upset when people write about topics you don't care about. Now run along, there's a good chap. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:59, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
- I don't appreciate the snark in the last line. It might be very true that it used to be a top-class magazine. But, the one I linked above is spam; no respectable outfit publishes such brazen advertorial stuff. ∯WBGconverse 19:56, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
- I remember reading an issue in about 1991 which had guitar tab and sheet music for "Won't Get Fooled Again", which is where I learned to play it, except that was Guitar World; Pete Townshend had an article in Guitar Player earlier, in 1989. Still, in the late 1980s the internet was a niche academic thing, and you certainly wouldn't expect to find guitar geekery coverage on it. So we all had to make do with processed trees instead. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:49, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
- If that's the standard of article in a well-respected magazine......... ∯WBGconverse 19:43, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
- Guitar Player is a well respected magazine that I have read for, well decades. Although I'm primarily a Fender Telecaster man, it's nice to read up on what other instruments are being played and being used by significant musicians. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:40, 29 April 2019 (UTC)