Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Jazz/Archives/2017 1
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Notice to participants at this page about adminship
Many participants here create a lot of content, may have to evaluate whether or not a subject is notable, decide if content complies with BLP policy, and much more. Well, these are just some of the skills considered at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.
So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:
You could be very helpful in evaluating potential candidates, and even finding out if you would be a suitable RfA candidate.
Many thanks and best wishes,
Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:07, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Articles for Deletion
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oscar Peterson Plays Jazz Standards. AllyD (talk) 18:30, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/All_About_Jazz. AllyD (talk) 08:32, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
Table
The Jazz articles by quality and importance table (on the project page) hasn't updated for a while. Does anyone know how to give it a kick? EddieHugh (talk) 16:00, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
Dick Siegel
Would someone from this WikiProject would mind taking a look at Dick Siegel? The subject of the article posted a request at WP:BLPN#Dick Siegel asking for some help. I'm not sure whether this person meets WP:BIO or WP:MUSICBIO after looking at the article. The article was created way back in 2005, and currently is only being supported by a single citation to an All Music bio page. The tone is also a bit promotional sounding, but that can be cleaned up if Siegel is truly Wikipedia notable. Perhaps someone who knows a bit about Jazz may have heard about Siegel and can help improve the article. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:34, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
420 Collaboration
Are there any project members interested in expanding "Have You Ever Met That Funny Reefer Man" or any other cannabis-related jazz songs as part of the ongoing 420 Collaboration? ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:19, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
- Sounds fun; I'll try to add an article or two. I like "Viper Mad"... is some of the list at Reefer Songs a starting point? EddieHugh (talk) 15:17, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
- Great! Yes, and there are plenty of articles (like http://www.complex.com/music/2012/04/the-50-best-weed-songs/reefer-man) that list songs about cannabis. Would be great to get some new articles up, even if just appropriately sourced stubs. If you or other project members create or improve any articles, feel free to add them to Wikipedia:WikiProject Cannabis/420 Collaboration. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:20, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
- Viper Mad done! It's older than I thought: 1924, although I haven't heard a version from then with lyrics. EddieHugh (talk) 22:35, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
- Fantastic, thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 02:02, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
- Viper Mad done! It's older than I thought: 1924, although I haven't heard a version from then with lyrics. EddieHugh (talk) 22:35, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
- Great! Yes, and there are plenty of articles (like http://www.complex.com/music/2012/04/the-50-best-weed-songs/reefer-man) that list songs about cannabis. Would be great to get some new articles up, even if just appropriately sourced stubs. If you or other project members create or improve any articles, feel free to add them to Wikipedia:WikiProject Cannabis/420 Collaboration. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:20, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Ongoing "420 collaboration" to improve cannabis/marijuana articles -- jazz expertise needed!
 You are invited to participate in the upcoming which is being held from Saturday, April 15 to Sunday, April 30, and especially on April 20, 2017!The purpose of the collaboration, which is being organized by WikiProject Cannabis, is to create and improve cannabis-related content at Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects in a variety of fields, including: culture, health, hemp, history, medicine, politics, and religion. WikiProject Jazz participants may be particularly interested in the following: Category:Songs about cannabis. For more information about this campaign, and to learn how you can help improve Wikipedia, please visit the "420 collaboration" page. |
|---|
Greetings all, we're in the middle of a collab to improve cannabis/marijuana/ coverage on Wikipedia, and I've noticed that we're pretty weak on jazz crossover coverage, which I noticed after I ran across the cool new article Viper Mad and went down a rabbit-hole of reading the other articles about early jazz songs about cannabis.
If anyone in this project is interested in helping with the collab, the following could be fun areas to help in:
- Category:Songs about cannabis, either improving existing jazz articles or adding new ones
- Legal history of cannabis in the United States: my understanding is that cannabis gained popularity in the US in the 20th century through two routes: up from Mexico, and via New Orleans through contact with the British Caribbean (where it had been popularized by indentured laborers from India). My understanding is there's a ton of relationship between cannabis and jazz in that early era, but we have little coverage of it.
- Cannabis in Louisiana: could really use coverage of the arrival of cannabis in the port city, its relationship with early jazz, and role in popularization elsewhere in the US
- Cannabis in New York: just ran across the article on clarinetist and reefer-dealer Mezz Mezzrow who had a big role in both the cannabis scene and the jazz scene in Harlem; probably lots of stories to add here?
- Cannabis in the United Kingdom: similar to the US, though I have added a section on the famous 1950 raid on bebop joint Club Eleven which raised British awareness of the growing trend of cannabis use.
Just a few suggestions of crossover topics that this project may find interesting! Today is April 20th, the international cannabis holiday, so a great time to delve into this angle! Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 01:22, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Missing American jazz
Hello - I'm not sure how active this Wikiproject (or any Wikiproject) is anymore, but I thought this might be valuable to anyone here interested in article creation. There are thousands of articles on Anglophone musicians in other Wikipedias which aren't covered here on the English Wikipedia. I've just compiled a list of over 900 American jazz and blues musicians, as well as jazz clubs and labels (and other types of music), which are on the German and other Wikipedias but not the English one. It's located at User:Chubbles/Missing American music. Chubbles (talk) 08:01, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
- An interesting list, probably worth also linking from the main Project page under Resources so that it persists for potential use? At first scan, I didn't see any astonishing omission from the English site, and the level of references on some that I reviewed could give difficulty surviving a notability challenge here. (The German page on C. Scoby Stroman was educational on someone who I knew only as a name on the back of a Saturn LP, but who clearly had wide ranging skills.) AllyD (talk) 09:19, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
- Sure, I'd be happy to link it there. Not much astonishing, no, but I guess it just struck me as curious, and maybe a little humbling, that other language Wikipedias would have more comprehensive coverage of Anglophone musicians than ours does. There are three or four editors who are some of the most active on the German Wikipedia who have essentially spent turned it into an exhaustive, world-class resource for jazz. They write an article or two every day, and have been doing it for more than ten years. They're a little ahead of us on Canadian and British artists, though not by nearly as much, and they've also got much better coverage of South African jazz (and, of course, continental Europe, by a long shot). Their coverage of Japanese and Antipodean artists seems to be slightly behind ours, but this is just a general impression; I don't have statistics to back that up. Chubbles (talk) 20:20, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Completing Nick Stabulas discography
I hope this is right - I've never exactly been able to figure out how the Talk feature works. I'm expanding the Nick Stabulas discography, which is pretty incomplete at the moment. I've added his 1957 album, Gil Evans & Ten, on Prestige, but the link to the album doesn't work, and I'm sure I've entered it correctly - an ampersand and "Ten" spelled out.
Tad Richards (talk) 13:47, 8 May 2017 (UTC)Tad Richards
- You got the talk bit perfect. You had this for the link: [[Gil Evans & Ten (album)|Gil Evans & Ten]]. The bit to the left of "|" is the link to an article and the bit to the right of it is what gets displayed. For the link to work, the bit to the left must be correct, but you changed the bit to the right. You needed just [[Gil Evans & Ten]] (i.e. no "|" split) because the article title and what needs to be displayed are the same. I've fixed it for you. Thanks for the additions; I like his work with Eddie Costa. EddieHugh (talk) 20:47, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Popular pages report
We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Jazz/Archives/2017 1/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Jazz.
We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:
- The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
- The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
- The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).
We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject Jazz, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.
Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:15, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
I'm a photographer and contributor to Wikimedia Commons and various Wikipedia projects. My contributions include portraits taken at jazz festivals and concerts in Oslo, as well as at music festivals of other genres from around Norway. These portraits are being used in artist biographies. Some of my work and contributions can be seen here [1].
I'm planning on covering several festivals this summer, photographing artists at the stage. A list of the festivals that I consider are listed here. My question to this group is are there what artists, concerts or festivals you would like to see covered?
I'm mentioning, in particular, the Copenhagen Jazz Festival, Kongsberg Jazz and Oslo Jazz Festival, all in July or August. Are there concerts at these festivals you'd like to see photographs from? Toresetre (talk) 20:51, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
- Great suggestion: thanks! I assume you know what's required regarding rights for taking and using photographs. I think that User:Knuand created quite a few articles on Norwegian jazz musicians, so probably has a good idea of which ones need images. EddieHugh (talk) 21:10, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
- Do you want to see photographs from Kongsberg Jazzfestival in Norway? I've placed an application for a rapid grant from Wikimedia to cover travel cost to two festivals in July. You can endorse the application for a grant here. And if you want to give feedback for concerts or artists of particular interest, drop a line at the project site. Toresetre (talk) 19:11, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
WiR focus on music and dance in July
 Welcome to Women in Red's July 2017 worldwide online editathons. | ||
.jpg) 
|
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Ipigott (talk) 10:26, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Joe Texidor is credited as playing a sound tree on various albums - see the 1970 section of http://www.jazzdisco.org/roland-kirk/discography/ for example. But it's a redlink and I can't find anything about it. Obviously a percussion instrument of some kind. Someone might be able to produce an article or a sourced redirect? Over to you jazz experts. Me, I just WikiGnome around stub-sorting etc but get interested in occasional random articles like Texidor's. PamD 09:59, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
Articles for Deletion
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Knoel Scott. AllyD (talk) 07:00, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hatano Jazz Band. AllyD (talk) 14:39, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Request for an article: Gwigwi Mrwebi
Sorry for reiterating a request for an article, but I feel that "down there" it is hard to discern notability. I paste here the motivation. Thank you. Hope you will have the chance of listening to the beautiful Bra Gwigwi's "Mbaqanga Songs" aka "Kwela".
Gwigwi Mrwebi (d:Q1557878) was a relevant sax and clarinet player in South African jazz scene of the 50s, then narrator and clarinetist on landmark King Kong (1959 musical). Mrwebi recorded with Hugh Masekela, Coleridge Goode, Kippie Moeketsi, Chris McGregor, Dudu Pukwana, Laurie Allan etc. A main street in Newtown, Johannesburg is named after him. Sources: 1, 2, 3.
Articles for Deletion
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leo Pellegrino. AllyD (talk) 18:38, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/British_jazz_musicians_with_Queen's_Birthday_Honours. AllyD (talk) 12:26, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nicola Stilo. AllyD (talk) 15:56, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
This is somewhat a continuation of the thread about defining jazz and the many genres that are claiming that moniker. I'm not trying to favor one kind of jazz. I'm not saying that swing is better than avant-garde and therefore the latter shouldn't be included. I have edited articles in both genres, much more in the latter. I have in mind the relatively recent creations jazz rap, nu jazz, acid jazz, plus the addition confusion of smooth jazz that is more like soul, pop, and R&B, and vocal jazz more like pop, traditional pop, and cabaret. I'm not going over the problems here, which we've touched on and are fairly obvious. Interested readers might want to listen to the newer genres I mentioned and consider whether they sound like jazz and whether they fall under the purview of Wikiproject Jazz.
–Vmavanti (talk) 19:20, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
Vmavanti delisting articles as jazz
Vmavanti has been making a large number of edits removing the WikiProject Jazz tag from article Talk pages, declaring they are "not jazz". This seems to me to be a unilateral and subjective act. Does the Project community have any views over what should be tagged and how it should be decided? Bondegezou (talk) 07:20, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- What is jazz? Sounds like a case for the jazz police. The project page states that we don't aim to "Act in an exclusionary way toward any particular styles of jazz or any jazz musicians." So, removing articles on one type of jazz, based on personal preferences, shouldn't be done. Often with talk pages, though, the categories have been copied and pasted from another talk page, so can be wrong. Some people also read "elements of jazz", "influenced by jazz", "jazzy ..." and so on in the article and think that means the topic is in the jazz genre; it doesn't. I looked through the 17 recent cullings of jazz tags (I think you're referring to those) and wouldn't disagree with many of them; several don't even have the word "jazz" anywhere in the article. With close to 30,000 articles tagged as jazz and not many people actively involved in the project, unilateral inclusion/removal is a good option, although, as you suggest, discussing what should be in/out requires occasional highlighting. EddieHugh (talk) 10:10, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- (Edit clash) I have descoped several myself, usually triggered from seeing surprise entries on Wikipedia:WikiProject Jazz/Popular pages. There is inevitably an element of subjectivity involved though correspondingly there is often over-use of the term for pop and rock musicians. Functionally, the Jazz project tag is of use only if someone with a jazz interest is likely to have an interest/knowledge in maintaining and improving an article, and a lot of the time that simply isn't likely. My rule of thumb when considering a de-tag is to start from the article and whether (a) jazz is mentioned and (b) whether it is supported by references. AllyD (talk) 10:13, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- Hi. My ears were burning. I appreciate the poster's concern for the quality of articles. It's not surprising that people would be taken aback by my boldness. I've seen timidity prevent jazz articles from moving forward. I think this timidity derives in part from frequent disagreements and edit wars with anonymous people, many them not even registered with accounts. If we could speak face to face, things would be different. Nevertheless, often one concludes that one more fight isn't worth it, and it becomes necessary to choose one's battles. It's too bad, because Wikiproject Jazz contains a lot of junk. Although I've been working on it for a while, I've barely put a dent in it. Look at the Cleanup Listing. Keep in mind that this report card changes every week with new entries and new problems. One of my first goals, which I used to think was preliminary, is to shrink this list to articles that are actually related to jazz. I don't know who labels these articles for the Project, but some of them aren't even close to jazz.
- I agree that there is some degree of subjectivity when it comes to defining jazz, but let's not get carried away. Not everything is jazz, despite many people wanting to claim the title. In our time jazz has become a subject of academic study, college degrees, and elevated with the kind of reverence we usually see in classical music. The latest American Idol winner who is at best a mediocre pop singer wants to put jazz on their Wikipedia entry (résumé) so that they can say, "Me too! Look at how profound I am!" That goes double or triple for the new Idol's fans who see Wikipedia as the new Tiger Beat, or as a way to become the Idol's unofficial promoter, always ready to tell you what happened in Season 47, episode 13, and which judges were mean and unfair. Put simply, this is the kind of thing that gets mixed up with Wikiproject Jazz.
- When it comes to weeding out articles for Wikiproject Jazz, I have several assumptions. One is that I know what I'm doing. I have some knowledge of jazz (and editing) and when called out to explain, I have sources and resources that I can cite in addition to my own headbone. I don't edit arbitrarily, nor do I mind making mistakes, because that's one way to learn. So if someone has a question, or more likely a revert accompanied by a curt "You're wrong" or a prissy "Good heavens! What have you done?", I am capable of saying "OK", admitting I was wrong, and leaving the revert alone. It isn't life or death to me, and my ego can take it. At the risk of blowing my own horn, I have to say that my percentage has been remarkable. Compared to the number of edits I've done, I have had a relatively small number of disagreements over "not jazz", and only one that could be construed as an edit war. That was over Jakko Jakszyk, an obscure figure who I continue to believe is progressive rock, and progressive rock doesn't have much to do with jazz. I was unable to persuade my my mustache-twirling nemesis of my case. Shocking, right? So I walked away from it, as I have many times on Wikipedia. So what? Compared to what? Pistols at dawn?
–Vmavanti (talk) 15:54, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- When it comes to weeding out articles for Wikiproject Jazz, I have several assumptions. One is that I know what I'm doing. I have some knowledge of jazz (and editing) and when called out to explain, I have sources and resources that I can cite in addition to my own headbone. I don't edit arbitrarily, nor do I mind making mistakes, because that's one way to learn. So if someone has a question, or more likely a revert accompanied by a curt "You're wrong" or a prissy "Good heavens! What have you done?", I am capable of saying "OK", admitting I was wrong, and leaving the revert alone. It isn't life or death to me, and my ego can take it. At the risk of blowing my own horn, I have to say that my percentage has been remarkable. Compared to the number of edits I've done, I have had a relatively small number of disagreements over "not jazz", and only one that could be construed as an edit war. That was over Jakko Jakszyk, an obscure figure who I continue to believe is progressive rock, and progressive rock doesn't have much to do with jazz. I was unable to persuade my my mustache-twirling nemesis of my case. Shocking, right? So I walked away from it, as I have many times on Wikipedia. So what? Compared to what? Pistols at dawn?
- These are the ones I removed from Wikiproject Jazz last night:
- Indigo (Matt Bianco album)
- Kevin Drumm
- Lara & Reyes
- Laurie Allan
- Mickey Bones
- Margaret Bonds
- Nihilist Spasm Band
- Rambo Amadeus
- Petr Skoumal
- Pearls II
- The Story of the Blues
- The Spasm Band
- Soft Heap
- Tika and The Dissidents
- Thomas Ankersmit
- The Swimming Hour
- The Battle of Hastings (album)
- Something Wicked This Way Comes (The Herbaliser album)
- These are the ones I removed from Wikiproject Jazz last night:
- Two of 18 have been reverted. That's 11%. That gives me a batting average last night of 89% over 30 minutes. Imagine what the Cubs could do with a hitter like that. Maybe I can make it 100%. Let's watch and find out.
- Revert 1: Laurie Allan – "Laurie Allan (born 19 February 1943, London) is an English drummer, best known for stints in Delivery and Gong. He has also played with Robert Wyatt."
- Delivery, Gong, and Robert Wyatt are British progressive rock musicians. Wyatt is the founder of progressive rock group Soft Machine. I know that there are people who say progressive rock musicians borrow from jazz, but that's quite a distance from equating progressive rock with jazz. Progressive rock also borrows from classical, but we don't categorize progressive rock as classical. I think I was right to say this article is "not jazz".
- Revert 2: Soft Heap. "Canterbury scene supergroup founded in January 1978". Canterbury scene refers to British progressive rock musicians of the last 1960s. "Soft" refers to "Soft Machine".
- I sense a similarity here. I had the same problem when I said Jakko Jakszyk (who was playing with King Crimson) wasn't jazz. A Brit tried to tell me that progressive rock is jazz. I continue to believe that these are not jazz entries, that they are of no interest to Wikiproject Jazz when so many other entries demand attention, and that they should be reverted to "not jazz".
–Vmavanti (talk) 17:48, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- I sense a similarity here. I had the same problem when I said Jakko Jakszyk (who was playing with King Crimson) wasn't jazz. A Brit tried to tell me that progressive rock is jazz. I continue to believe that these are not jazz entries, that they are of no interest to Wikiproject Jazz when so many other entries demand attention, and that they should be reverted to "not jazz".
- (edit conflict) Vmavanti, there are vast swathes of jazz and progressive rock that overlapped, as per the cited text at Jazz_fusion#Jazz-rock. If you think that "progressive rock doesn't have much to do with jazz", yet RS citations say otherwise, perhaps you should re-consider your position.
- Thanks EddieHugh for your comments and pointing out the project's stated non-exclusionary stance. I was prompted to post here by Vmavanti's recent 17 cullings (and reverted 2 myself), but there were another 20 on 27 August, 11 on 24 August, 6 on 18 July, and numerous others scattered in between. Many of these are sensible. Some suggest an idiosyncratic definition. Bondegezou (talk) 17:55, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- Vmavanti, I argued that Jakszyk should be tagged because he's done jazz projects that are described as such by reliable sources. Bondegezou (talk) 17:58, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- I don't need to reconsider my position. I gave it quite a bit of thought the last time I encountered disagreement over this topic. Perhaps you should educate yourself about music. "Vast swathes" strikes me as hyperbolic and redundant. Prudence keeps me from calling it wrong. I'm not sure why this is such a big deal. There's so much against your opinion that it's difficult to know where to begin.
–Vmavanti (talk) 18:07, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- I don't need to reconsider my position. I gave it quite a bit of thought the last time I encountered disagreement over this topic. Perhaps you should educate yourself about music. "Vast swathes" strikes me as hyperbolic and redundant. Prudence keeps me from calling it wrong. I'm not sure why this is such a big deal. There's so much against your opinion that it's difficult to know where to begin.
- It looks like ground is being re-tread here. I suggest: anyone deletes the project tags from an article if they have good reason to (AllyD's 2-step check is straightforward); if someone reverts it, then everyone leaves it reverted.
- And if the project tags are removed from the talk page, remove the relevant 'jazz' categories from the main page, too.
- Alternative suggestion: succumb to a higher, fixed authority. e.g., if the person/album is in the Penguin Guide to Jazz, then it gets the jazz tags; if a Brit is in the Who's Who of British Jazz (another book), then that person gets the tags. I don't recommend this option, because almost no one will know about it or remember it, and a fixed source is or will quickly be out of date. EddieHugh (talk) 19:43, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- I don't know why I should change what I'm doing when I didn't make a mistake last night in the ones I deleted. Any reasonable person will conclude that progressive rock is not jazz. I could list many sources, but let's start with the three-volume print edition of the New Grove Dictionary of Jazz. Although I haven't read every word, I have spent a lot of time with it, and I can say confidently that there are no entries about progressive rock musicians and there is no entry about progressive rock. Not in three heavy volumes. Let's not change change the rules, or make new ones, because of one person.
–Vmavanti (talk) 23:09, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Keith Tippett and Bill Bruford played on King Crimson albums, but I presume everyone agrees they still come under WikiProject Jazz.
A band like Soft Machine is somewhere between progressive rock and jazz ("soft machine" and "jazz" gives over 2000 hits on Google News; Soft Machine are referenced multiple times in Who's Who of British Jazz). Wikipedia follows reliable sources: that's what I'm suggesting we do. Bondegezou (talk) 08:11, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- So, for a more recent example, Laurie Allan was one of the articles de-jazz-ed recently. He's a relatively minor figure, but Allan performed with Chris McGregor, Dudu Pukwana, Gunter Hampel, Barbara Thompson and Peter Lemer. Does anyone other than Vmavanti think he doesn't come under WikiProject Jazz? Bondegezou (talk) 08:38, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- How can progressive rock be the straw man when the musicians you insist are jazz musicians are really progressive rock musicians? Far from being a straw man, it's the crux of the argument. You could argue that Wikiproject Jazz should cover progressive rock, but that's a different subject. There are plenty of articles to do already that obviously belong to jazz without having to add more articles which don't even belong. I continue to be astonished that this is even being debated. How are old are you? Are you American? How do you explain that in the three heavy, hardcover volumes of the New Grove Dictionary of Jazz there isn't one mention of progressive rock? Or in two other books I have with me at the moment, the third edition of AllMusic Guide, and the History of Jazz by Ted Gioia? Isn't that proof enough? If not, what kind of proof would satisfy you? I would really like some answers to my questions so we can't put this to rest. By the way, 2000 hits on Google is minuscule, and it's not a reliable standard for judging because it includes all kinds of websites with all kinds of opinions. On the contrary, I've offered you three authoritative, substantial sources.
–Vmavanti (talk) 20:03, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- How can progressive rock be the straw man when the musicians you insist are jazz musicians are really progressive rock musicians? Far from being a straw man, it's the crux of the argument. You could argue that Wikiproject Jazz should cover progressive rock, but that's a different subject. There are plenty of articles to do already that obviously belong to jazz without having to add more articles which don't even belong. I continue to be astonished that this is even being debated. How are old are you? Are you American? How do you explain that in the three heavy, hardcover volumes of the New Grove Dictionary of Jazz there isn't one mention of progressive rock? Or in two other books I have with me at the moment, the third edition of AllMusic Guide, and the History of Jazz by Ted Gioia? Isn't that proof enough? If not, what kind of proof would satisfy you? I would really like some answers to my questions so we can't put this to rest. By the way, 2000 hits on Google is minuscule, and it's not a reliable standard for judging because it includes all kinds of websites with all kinds of opinions. On the contrary, I've offered you three authoritative, substantial sources.
- King Crimson were my own gateway to jazz (from the auxiliary musicians on “Lizard” and “Islands” to the Centipede album featuring them and many others), but I don’t regard KC as jazz. I also recall helping Soft Machine’s roadies at the end of a Mike Gibbs Orchestra concert which had used their gear. And for that matter a gig involving both Mark Charig and Annie Lennox. Affinities and entanglements there were, and no discussion here is going to unpick clear and distinct lines between jazz and progressive music, and perhaps also with other genres at other times. Once again, I would push the functional line regarding a talkpage Wikiproject Jazz label: it is not an award medal but a basic mechanism whereby people with interest and knowledge can watch and improve pages. So best to focus on that aspect? AllyD (talk)
- No-one is arguing that King Crimson are jazz, or confusing progressive rock with jazz. But there are clearly artists and acts who blur the lines or move between the genres, as with Laurie Allan and Soft Heap, which is where this discussion started. Vmavanti's repeated line of reasoning that a musician who has done progressive rock cannot therefore be of relevance to WikiProject Jazz is wrong. I hope others here can get that point across to him/her, because I can't. Vmavanti's broader comments, use of "funny" piped links and his/her obsession with my nationality just look like WP:NOTHERE to me. Bondegezou (talk) 12:54, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
My attempts at humor apparently were unappreciated. OK, I'll return to iron-seriousness. Wikiproject Jazz isn't called Wikiproject Sort-of Jazz. It isn't for people who "move between genres" as you define it. If you want sort-of jazz, or quasi-jazz, or music-influenced-and-maybe-overlapping jazz, then start a different Wikiproject. Wikiproject Jazz is for jazz, and there's plenty of work to do already with those jazz musicians who are indisputably jazz. Let's not make a virtue of ignorance or indecisiveness. Let's not make a virtue of the reluctance or inability or refusal to define a genre. Let's not give in to some fear of haecceity. To some degree, an objective definition of jazz exists, despite the fact that it is a fluid genre. Otherwise, then everything is jazz, or worse, anything that you say is jazz magically becomes jazz, or if not jazz then something that ought to be included with it, which strikes me as a kind of cultural imperialism, appropriation, or special pleading.
–Vmavanti (talk) 18:18, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
- I am not saying that WikiProject Jazz should cover "music-influenced-and-maybe-overlapping jazz". I am saying that WikiProject Jazz should cover musicians who have played jazz music, as recognised by reliable sources, regardless of whether or not they have at other times also worked in other genres. As per EddieHugh, this project does not aim to "Act in an exclusionary way toward any particular styles of jazz or any jazz musicians." Your approach, Vmavanti, of casting out anyone who has worked in progressive rock, irrespective of what else they have done, is exclusionary and contrary to reliable sources.
- I agree with AllyD's point about a functional approach. I think someone who drummed for Chris McGregor, Dudu Pukwana, Gunter Hampel and Barbara Thompson is going to get a better Wikipedia article if their article is brought to the attention of WikiProject Jazz. I think a band like Soft Heap, who are mentioned in The Penguin Jazz Guide and The Rough Guide to Jazz, are going to get a better Wikipedia article if they are tagged by this WikiProject. I do not want to see Vmavanti's same flawed reasoning applied again. Bondegezou (talk) 14:15, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
- Well, that's your opinion, and it's not very well defended or backed by sources. I'm not going anywhere. I will continue to apply my reasoning, whether you can understand it or not.
–Vmavanti (talk) 22:47, 17 September 2017 (UTC)- The immediately previous entry on this Talk page, by Pequod, is seeking help to create an article on someone who, s/he points out, played with Laurie Allan. That's how a WikiProject should work, somewhere people can seek and offer help on articles of common interest. And you, Vmavanti, still think Allan should be removed from the Project's purview? How would that help with something like Pequod's request?
- O members of WikiProject Jazz, clearly Vmavanti and I aren't going to agree. Would it be useful for others to rule on the matter? Bondegezou (talk) 12:57, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
- First, sorry for my poor English. Honestly, I appreciate the boldness of Vmavanti. WP should work like this, especially in maintenance matters. I mean, you do 10 thing, 3 of them are maybe wrong, then somebody fixes those 3 things while doing other 10, 2 of which are again wrong, and so on... I think that here we discuss something similar to "requested articles". If we allow that any kind of request is good per se, we end up with useless lists of requested articles. And the same with jazz-tags. Now, AFAIK Laurie Allan *should* be jazz-tagged, because of his background. He started as a jazz drummer and as a jazz drummer he was recruited to join Mrwebi and other South African jazz musicians for the kwela album Mbaqanga Songs. The Wyatt albums featuring Allan underline the jazz background of the latter, otherwise the funny incident described here cannot be understood. To me, a bio-article about a jazz musician featured on let's say prog albums should be tagged as jazz. Tagging biographies is not the same as tagging album or band articles. Furthermore, we need to be consistent when categorizing articles, but we can be blurrier when tagging talk pages. Ok, I think this is a mistake by Vmavanti, but when it comes to disagreements we can always turn to authoritative sources. In general terms, we need clean lists more than a wide mesh. In the end, it is not our fault: it's the Universe which is "messy", so we need to be collaborative. --Pequod (talk) 12:59, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- Well, that's your opinion, and it's not very well defended or backed by sources. I'm not going anywhere. I will continue to apply my reasoning, whether you can understand it or not.
- When it comes to authoritative sources, the disagreement is almost nonexistent. That has been one of my points from the beginning. I don't know why it hasn't been full addressed. There's something about the internet and Wikipedia that encourages hyperbole. Bondegezou accuses me of "casting out anyone who has worked in progressive rock". Hardly. First, I'm not "casting out" anyone. I'm not deleting articles. This isn't a club. I'm not saying this is great and that is terrible. I'm making an obvious point which perhaps is getting distorted into something I don't mean. The disagreement is NOT over musicians who have worked in progressive rock. The disagreement is over who is defined as a progressive rock musician and who is defined as a jazz musician. It's a matter of degree. A jazz musician who dabbles in progressive rock is still a jazz musician. A progressive rock musician who dabbles in jazz is still a progressive rock musician. HOW MUCH time has been spent in a particular genre is the key. If you've spent most of your time performing and recording progressive rock, then you are a progressive rock musician. This is the kind of definition I'm talking about. There's no need to dig into the characteristics of the genres. One need only acknowledge which genre has been dominant in a person's career.
–Vmavanti (talk) 18:23, 20 September 2017 (UTC)- I think we now agree that Laurie Allan is the sort of person who should be tagged by this WikiProject. Good!
- You appear to be saying, Vmavanti -- and forgive me if I have misunderstood -- that people are either one thing or the other. It seems to me that someone can be a jazz musician AND a progressive rock musician, or a jazz musician AND something else. If someone's article will benefit from a jazz tag, let it have a jazz tag. Our job is not to produce a nicely curated list of articles for the WikiProject: our job is to make articles better. If articles are attracting input from editors who can improve them, then that is a good thing. If someone's done a bunch of jazz albums, I think it irrelevant if they've done a larger number of non-jazz albums or not, because they're still someone that people interested in jazz may be interested in. Bondegezou (talk) 14:29, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- When it comes to authoritative sources, the disagreement is almost nonexistent. That has been one of my points from the beginning. I don't know why it hasn't been full addressed. There's something about the internet and Wikipedia that encourages hyperbole. Bondegezou accuses me of "casting out anyone who has worked in progressive rock". Hardly. First, I'm not "casting out" anyone. I'm not deleting articles. This isn't a club. I'm not saying this is great and that is terrible. I'm making an obvious point which perhaps is getting distorted into something I don't mean. The disagreement is NOT over musicians who have worked in progressive rock. The disagreement is over who is defined as a progressive rock musician and who is defined as a jazz musician. It's a matter of degree. A jazz musician who dabbles in progressive rock is still a jazz musician. A progressive rock musician who dabbles in jazz is still a progressive rock musician. HOW MUCH time has been spent in a particular genre is the key. If you've spent most of your time performing and recording progressive rock, then you are a progressive rock musician. This is the kind of definition I'm talking about. There's no need to dig into the characteristics of the genres. One need only acknowledge which genre has been dominant in a person's career.
How kind of you to volunteer other people's time. Maybe you should consider what kinds of articles the project already covers: musicians, albums, songs, record labels, festivals, instruments, genres, clubs, restaurants, radio stations, awards, magazines, web sites, companies. I've seen articles on jazz poetry, jazz hip hop, and jazz slang, on Japanese fusion duos, noise rock Norwegians, New Age acoustic guitarists, and American Idol contestants. All of them and more want to be called jazz. Enough already. Lines have to be drawn if any work at all is going to get done. Yes, that means either/or. Making decisions is a good thing.
–Vmavanti (talk) 22:48, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
I've re-read this thread, and I would like to apologize to anyone I may have offended. I make mistakes. I hope to learn from them. One point that occurred to me is that jazz might be defined in Britain differently than in America. This is a subject about which I know little. In fact, when I hear progressive rock, I think of Yes and early Genesis (both British). There's a web site called Prograchy that covers prog bands. Nevertheless, Soft Machine does seem to fall under the category of jazz of some kind, though not everyone associated with that band is a jazz musician. One interesting case is Andy Summers, who played with Soft Machine early in his career before being known as a rock guitarist with the Police. He doesn't get enough credit, because he can play any genre. He listened to a lot of jazz early in his life. He recorded an album of Monk songs and an album of Mingus songs, in addition to several other albums which easily come under jazz fusion. He often plays Brazilian jazz, a genre that stretches the definition of jazz. I doubt he thinks of himself as a jazz guitarist, but he has spent enough time in that genre to be classified as one. Coincidentally, he won a prog award in recent years and was abashed about it.
–Vmavanti (talk) 19:08, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- I would like to make another point. "This WikiProject does not aim to act in an exclusionary way toward any particular styles of jazz or any jazz musicians." That isn't what I've done. I haven't preferred one kind of jazz over another. The disagreement was about genres that don't fit the definition of jazz and musicians who are not known as jazz musicians. It would be different if I said Ornette Coleman isn't jazz or Al Di Meola isn't jazz or Spyro Gyra isn't jazz. But look at the names listed here. If they require such careful, hairsplitting analysis, then one has to ask whether they are jazz musicians. It ought to be obvious. With most jazz musicians it is obvious. What's remarkable is how inclusive I've been, i.e. the number of articles I refrained from labeling "not jazz". I've tried to avoid close calls. I am mindful that an encyclopedia of any kind is selective. To be selective means having principles of selection. That means, too, that some people will be excluded. It's not a moral judgment. It's a practical matter of getting things done. Some editors want to include everyone on the planet in Wikipedia. Not only is that impractical, it goes against the documentation, purposes, and goals of Wikipedia.
–Vmavanti (talk) 04:56, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Vmavanti delisting articles as jazz
Vmavanti has been making a large number of edits removing the WikiProject Jazz tag from article Talk pages, declaring they are "not jazz". This seems to me to be a unilateral and subjective act. Does the Project community have any views over what should be tagged and how it should be decided? Bondegezou (talk) 07:20, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- What is jazz? Sounds like a case for the jazz police. The project page states that we don't aim to "Act in an exclusionary way toward any particular styles of jazz or any jazz musicians." So, removing articles on one type of jazz, based on personal preferences, shouldn't be done. Often with talk pages, though, the categories have been copied and pasted from another talk page, so can be wrong. Some people also read "elements of jazz", "influenced by jazz", "jazzy ..." and so on in the article and think that means the topic is in the jazz genre; it doesn't. I looked through the 17 recent cullings of jazz tags (I think you're referring to those) and wouldn't disagree with many of them; several don't even have the word "jazz" anywhere in the article. With close to 30,000 articles tagged as jazz and not many people actively involved in the project, unilateral inclusion/removal is a good option, although, as you suggest, discussing what should be in/out requires occasional highlighting. EddieHugh (talk) 10:10, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- (Edit clash) I have descoped several myself, usually triggered from seeing surprise entries on Wikipedia:WikiProject Jazz/Popular pages. There is inevitably an element of subjectivity involved though correspondingly there is often over-use of the term for pop and rock musicians. Functionally, the Jazz project tag is of use only if someone with a jazz interest is likely to have an interest/knowledge in maintaining and improving an article, and a lot of the time that simply isn't likely. My rule of thumb when considering a de-tag is to start from the article and whether (a) jazz is mentioned and (b) whether it is supported by references. AllyD (talk) 10:13, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- Hi. My ears were burning. I appreciate the poster's concern for the quality of articles. It's not surprising that people would be taken aback by my boldness. I've seen timidity prevent jazz articles from moving forward. I think this timidity derives in part from frequent disagreements and edit wars with anonymous people, many them not even registered with accounts. If we could speak face to face, things would be different. Nevertheless, often one concludes that one more fight isn't worth it, and it becomes necessary to choose one's battles. It's too bad, because Wikiproject Jazz contains a lot of junk. Although I've been working on it for a while, I've barely put a dent in it. Look at the Cleanup Listing. Keep in mind that this report card changes every week with new entries and new problems. One of my first goals, which I used to think was preliminary, is to shrink this list to articles that are actually related to jazz. I don't know who labels these articles for the Project, but some of them aren't even close to jazz.
- I agree that there is some degree of subjectivity when it comes to defining jazz, but let's not get carried away. Not everything is jazz, despite many people wanting to claim the title. In our time jazz has become a subject of academic study, college degrees, and elevated with the kind of reverence we usually see in classical music. The latest American Idol winner who is at best a mediocre pop singer wants to put jazz on their Wikipedia entry (résumé) so that they can say, "Me too! Look at how profound I am!" That goes double or triple for the new Idol's fans who see Wikipedia as the new Tiger Beat, or as a way to become the Idol's unofficial promoter, always ready to tell you what happened in Season 47, episode 13, and which judges were mean and unfair. Put simply, this is the kind of thing that gets mixed up with Wikiproject Jazz.
- When it comes to weeding out articles for Wikiproject Jazz, I have several assumptions. One is that I know what I'm doing. I have some knowledge of jazz (and editing) and when called out to explain, I have sources and resources that I can cite in addition to my own headbone. I don't edit arbitrarily, nor do I mind making mistakes, because that's one way to learn. So if someone has a question, or more likely a revert accompanied by a curt "You're wrong" or a prissy "Good heavens! What have you done?", I am capable of saying "OK", admitting I was wrong, and leaving the revert alone. It isn't life or death to me, and my ego can take it. At the risk of blowing my own horn, I have to say that my percentage has been remarkable. Compared to the number of edits I've done, I have had a relatively small number of disagreements over "not jazz", and only one that could be construed as an edit war. That was over Jakko Jakszyk, an obscure figure who I continue to believe is progressive rock, and progressive rock doesn't have much to do with jazz. I was unable to persuade my my mustache-twirling nemesis of my case. Shocking, right? So I walked away from it, as I have many times on Wikipedia. So what? Compared to what? Pistols at dawn?
–Vmavanti (talk) 15:54, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- When it comes to weeding out articles for Wikiproject Jazz, I have several assumptions. One is that I know what I'm doing. I have some knowledge of jazz (and editing) and when called out to explain, I have sources and resources that I can cite in addition to my own headbone. I don't edit arbitrarily, nor do I mind making mistakes, because that's one way to learn. So if someone has a question, or more likely a revert accompanied by a curt "You're wrong" or a prissy "Good heavens! What have you done?", I am capable of saying "OK", admitting I was wrong, and leaving the revert alone. It isn't life or death to me, and my ego can take it. At the risk of blowing my own horn, I have to say that my percentage has been remarkable. Compared to the number of edits I've done, I have had a relatively small number of disagreements over "not jazz", and only one that could be construed as an edit war. That was over Jakko Jakszyk, an obscure figure who I continue to believe is progressive rock, and progressive rock doesn't have much to do with jazz. I was unable to persuade my my mustache-twirling nemesis of my case. Shocking, right? So I walked away from it, as I have many times on Wikipedia. So what? Compared to what? Pistols at dawn?
- These are the ones I removed from Wikiproject Jazz last night:
- Indigo (Matt Bianco album)
- Kevin Drumm
- Lara & Reyes
- Laurie Allan
- Mickey Bones
- Margaret Bonds
- Nihilist Spasm Band
- Rambo Amadeus
- Petr Skoumal
- Pearls II
- The Story of the Blues
- The Spasm Band
- Soft Heap
- Tika and The Dissidents
- Thomas Ankersmit
- The Swimming Hour
- The Battle of Hastings (album)
- Something Wicked This Way Comes (The Herbaliser album)
- These are the ones I removed from Wikiproject Jazz last night:
- Two of 18 have been reverted. That's 11%. That gives me a batting average last night of 89% over 30 minutes. Imagine what the Cubs could do with a hitter like that. Maybe I can make it 100%. Let's watch and find out.
- Revert 1: Laurie Allan – "Laurie Allan (born 19 February 1943, London) is an English drummer, best known for stints in Delivery and Gong. He has also played with Robert Wyatt."
- Delivery, Gong, and Robert Wyatt are British progressive rock musicians. Wyatt is the founder of progressive rock group Soft Machine. I know that there are people who say progressive rock musicians borrow from jazz, but that's quite a distance from equating progressive rock with jazz. Progressive rock also borrows from classical, but we don't categorize progressive rock as classical. I think I was right to say this article is "not jazz".
- Revert 2: Soft Heap. "Canterbury scene supergroup founded in January 1978". Canterbury scene refers to British progressive rock musicians of the last 1960s. "Soft" refers to "Soft Machine".
- I sense a similarity here. I had the same problem when I said Jakko Jakszyk (who was playing with King Crimson) wasn't jazz. A Brit tried to tell me that progressive rock is jazz. I continue to believe that these are not jazz entries, that they are of no interest to Wikiproject Jazz when so many other entries demand attention, and that they should be reverted to "not jazz".
–Vmavanti (talk) 17:48, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- I sense a similarity here. I had the same problem when I said Jakko Jakszyk (who was playing with King Crimson) wasn't jazz. A Brit tried to tell me that progressive rock is jazz. I continue to believe that these are not jazz entries, that they are of no interest to Wikiproject Jazz when so many other entries demand attention, and that they should be reverted to "not jazz".
- (edit conflict) Vmavanti, there are vast swathes of jazz and progressive rock that overlapped, as per the cited text at Jazz_fusion#Jazz-rock. If you think that "progressive rock doesn't have much to do with jazz", yet RS citations say otherwise, perhaps you should re-consider your position.
- Thanks EddieHugh for your comments and pointing out the project's stated non-exclusionary stance. I was prompted to post here by Vmavanti's recent 17 cullings (and reverted 2 myself), but there were another 20 on 27 August, 11 on 24 August, 6 on 18 July, and numerous others scattered in between. Many of these are sensible. Some suggest an idiosyncratic definition. Bondegezou (talk) 17:55, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- Vmavanti, I argued that Jakszyk should be tagged because he's done jazz projects that are described as such by reliable sources. Bondegezou (talk) 17:58, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- I don't need to reconsider my position. I gave it quite a bit of thought the last time I encountered disagreement over this topic. Perhaps you should educate yourself about music. "Vast swathes" strikes me as hyperbolic and redundant. Prudence keeps me from calling it wrong. I'm not sure why this is such a big deal. There's so much against your opinion that it's difficult to know where to begin.
–Vmavanti (talk) 18:07, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- I don't need to reconsider my position. I gave it quite a bit of thought the last time I encountered disagreement over this topic. Perhaps you should educate yourself about music. "Vast swathes" strikes me as hyperbolic and redundant. Prudence keeps me from calling it wrong. I'm not sure why this is such a big deal. There's so much against your opinion that it's difficult to know where to begin.
- It looks like ground is being re-tread here. I suggest: anyone deletes the project tags from an article if they have good reason to (AllyD's 2-step check is straightforward); if someone reverts it, then everyone leaves it reverted.
- And if the project tags are removed from the talk page, remove the relevant 'jazz' categories from the main page, too.
- Alternative suggestion: succumb to a higher, fixed authority. e.g., if the person/album is in the Penguin Guide to Jazz, then it gets the jazz tags; if a Brit is in the Who's Who of British Jazz (another book), then that person gets the tags. I don't recommend this option, because almost no one will know about it or remember it, and a fixed source is or will quickly be out of date. EddieHugh (talk) 19:43, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- I don't know why I should change what I'm doing when I didn't make a mistake last night in the ones I deleted. Any reasonable person will conclude that progressive rock is not jazz. I could list many sources, but let's start with the three-volume print edition of the New Grove Dictionary of Jazz. Although I haven't read every word, I have spent a lot of time with it, and I can say confidently that there are no entries about progressive rock musicians and there is no entry about progressive rock. Not in three heavy volumes. Let's not change change the rules, or make new ones, because of one person.
–Vmavanti (talk) 23:09, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Keith Tippett and Bill Bruford played on King Crimson albums, but I presume everyone agrees they still come under WikiProject Jazz.
A band like Soft Machine is somewhere between progressive rock and jazz ("soft machine" and "jazz" gives over 2000 hits on Google News; Soft Machine are referenced multiple times in Who's Who of British Jazz). Wikipedia follows reliable sources: that's what I'm suggesting we do. Bondegezou (talk) 08:11, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- So, for a more recent example, Laurie Allan was one of the articles de-jazz-ed recently. He's a relatively minor figure, but Allan performed with Chris McGregor, Dudu Pukwana, Gunter Hampel, Barbara Thompson and Peter Lemer. Does anyone other than Vmavanti think he doesn't come under WikiProject Jazz? Bondegezou (talk) 08:38, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- How can progressive rock be the straw man when the musicians you insist are jazz musicians are really progressive rock musicians? Far from being a straw man, it's the crux of the argument. You could argue that Wikiproject Jazz should cover progressive rock, but that's a different subject. There are plenty of articles to do already that obviously belong to jazz without having to add more articles which don't even belong. I continue to be astonished that this is even being debated. How are old are you? Are you American? How do you explain that in the three heavy, hardcover volumes of the New Grove Dictionary of Jazz there isn't one mention of progressive rock? Or in two other books I have with me at the moment, the third edition of AllMusic Guide, and the History of Jazz by Ted Gioia? Isn't that proof enough? If not, what kind of proof would satisfy you? I would really like some answers to my questions so we can't put this to rest. By the way, 2000 hits on Google is minuscule, and it's not a reliable standard for judging because it includes all kinds of websites with all kinds of opinions. On the contrary, I've offered you three authoritative, substantial sources.
–Vmavanti (talk) 20:03, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- How can progressive rock be the straw man when the musicians you insist are jazz musicians are really progressive rock musicians? Far from being a straw man, it's the crux of the argument. You could argue that Wikiproject Jazz should cover progressive rock, but that's a different subject. There are plenty of articles to do already that obviously belong to jazz without having to add more articles which don't even belong. I continue to be astonished that this is even being debated. How are old are you? Are you American? How do you explain that in the three heavy, hardcover volumes of the New Grove Dictionary of Jazz there isn't one mention of progressive rock? Or in two other books I have with me at the moment, the third edition of AllMusic Guide, and the History of Jazz by Ted Gioia? Isn't that proof enough? If not, what kind of proof would satisfy you? I would really like some answers to my questions so we can't put this to rest. By the way, 2000 hits on Google is minuscule, and it's not a reliable standard for judging because it includes all kinds of websites with all kinds of opinions. On the contrary, I've offered you three authoritative, substantial sources.
- King Crimson were my own gateway to jazz (from the auxiliary musicians on “Lizard” and “Islands” to the Centipede album featuring them and many others), but I don’t regard KC as jazz. I also recall helping Soft Machine’s roadies at the end of a Mike Gibbs Orchestra concert which had used their gear. And for that matter a gig involving both Mark Charig and Annie Lennox. Affinities and entanglements there were, and no discussion here is going to unpick clear and distinct lines between jazz and progressive music, and perhaps also with other genres at other times. Once again, I would push the functional line regarding a talkpage Wikiproject Jazz label: it is not an award medal but a basic mechanism whereby people with interest and knowledge can watch and improve pages. So best to focus on that aspect? AllyD (talk)
- No-one is arguing that King Crimson are jazz, or confusing progressive rock with jazz. But there are clearly artists and acts who blur the lines or move between the genres, as with Laurie Allan and Soft Heap, which is where this discussion started. Vmavanti's repeated line of reasoning that a musician who has done progressive rock cannot therefore be of relevance to WikiProject Jazz is wrong. I hope others here can get that point across to him/her, because I can't. Vmavanti's broader comments, use of "funny" piped links and his/her obsession with my nationality just look like WP:NOTHERE to me. Bondegezou (talk) 12:54, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
My attempts at humor apparently were unappreciated. OK, I'll return to iron-seriousness. Wikiproject Jazz isn't called Wikiproject Sort-of Jazz. It isn't for people who "move between genres" as you define it. If you want sort-of jazz, or quasi-jazz, or music-influenced-and-maybe-overlapping jazz, then start a different Wikiproject. Wikiproject Jazz is for jazz, and there's plenty of work to do already with those jazz musicians who are indisputably jazz. Let's not make a virtue of ignorance or indecisiveness. Let's not make a virtue of the reluctance or inability or refusal to define a genre. Let's not give in to some fear of haecceity. To some degree, an objective definition of jazz exists, despite the fact that it is a fluid genre. Otherwise, then everything is jazz, or worse, anything that you say is jazz magically becomes jazz, or if not jazz then something that ought to be included with it, which strikes me as a kind of cultural imperialism, appropriation, or special pleading.
–Vmavanti (talk) 18:18, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
- I am not saying that WikiProject Jazz should cover "music-influenced-and-maybe-overlapping jazz". I am saying that WikiProject Jazz should cover musicians who have played jazz music, as recognised by reliable sources, regardless of whether or not they have at other times also worked in other genres. As per EddieHugh, this project does not aim to "Act in an exclusionary way toward any particular styles of jazz or any jazz musicians." Your approach, Vmavanti, of casting out anyone who has worked in progressive rock, irrespective of what else they have done, is exclusionary and contrary to reliable sources.
- I agree with AllyD's point about a functional approach. I think someone who drummed for Chris McGregor, Dudu Pukwana, Gunter Hampel and Barbara Thompson is going to get a better Wikipedia article if their article is brought to the attention of WikiProject Jazz. I think a band like Soft Heap, who are mentioned in The Penguin Jazz Guide and The Rough Guide to Jazz, are going to get a better Wikipedia article if they are tagged by this WikiProject. I do not want to see Vmavanti's same flawed reasoning applied again. Bondegezou (talk) 14:15, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
- Well, that's your opinion, and it's not very well defended or backed by sources. I'm not going anywhere. I will continue to apply my reasoning, whether you can understand it or not.
–Vmavanti (talk) 22:47, 17 September 2017 (UTC)- The immediately previous entry on this Talk page, by Pequod, is seeking help to create an article on someone who, s/he points out, played with Laurie Allan. That's how a WikiProject should work, somewhere people can seek and offer help on articles of common interest. And you, Vmavanti, still think Allan should be removed from the Project's purview? How would that help with something like Pequod's request?
- O members of WikiProject Jazz, clearly Vmavanti and I aren't going to agree. Would it be useful for others to rule on the matter? Bondegezou (talk) 12:57, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
- First, sorry for my poor English. Honestly, I appreciate the boldness of Vmavanti. WP should work like this, especially in maintenance matters. I mean, you do 10 thing, 3 of them are maybe wrong, then somebody fixes those 3 things while doing other 10, 2 of which are again wrong, and so on... I think that here we discuss something similar to "requested articles". If we allow that any kind of request is good per se, we end up with useless lists of requested articles. And the same with jazz-tags. Now, AFAIK Laurie Allan *should* be jazz-tagged, because of his background. He started as a jazz drummer and as a jazz drummer he was recruited to join Mrwebi and other South African jazz musicians for the kwela album Mbaqanga Songs. The Wyatt albums featuring Allan underline the jazz background of the latter, otherwise the funny incident described here cannot be understood. To me, a bio-article about a jazz musician featured on let's say prog albums should be tagged as jazz. Tagging biographies is not the same as tagging album or band articles. Furthermore, we need to be consistent when categorizing articles, but we can be blurrier when tagging talk pages. Ok, I think this is a mistake by Vmavanti, but when it comes to disagreements we can always turn to authoritative sources. In general terms, we need clean lists more than a wide mesh. In the end, it is not our fault: it's the Universe which is "messy", so we need to be collaborative. --Pequod (talk) 12:59, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- Well, that's your opinion, and it's not very well defended or backed by sources. I'm not going anywhere. I will continue to apply my reasoning, whether you can understand it or not.
- When it comes to authoritative sources, the disagreement is almost nonexistent. That has been one of my points from the beginning. I don't know why it hasn't been full addressed. There's something about the internet and Wikipedia that encourages hyperbole. Bondegezou accuses me of "casting out anyone who has worked in progressive rock". Hardly. First, I'm not "casting out" anyone. I'm not deleting articles. This isn't a club. I'm not saying this is great and that is terrible. I'm making an obvious point which perhaps is getting distorted into something I don't mean. The disagreement is NOT over musicians who have worked in progressive rock. The disagreement is over who is defined as a progressive rock musician and who is defined as a jazz musician. It's a matter of degree. A jazz musician who dabbles in progressive rock is still a jazz musician. A progressive rock musician who dabbles in jazz is still a progressive rock musician. HOW MUCH time has been spent in a particular genre is the key. If you've spent most of your time performing and recording progressive rock, then you are a progressive rock musician. This is the kind of definition I'm talking about. There's no need to dig into the characteristics of the genres. One need only acknowledge which genre has been dominant in a person's career.
–Vmavanti (talk) 18:23, 20 September 2017 (UTC)- I think we now agree that Laurie Allan is the sort of person who should be tagged by this WikiProject. Good!
- You appear to be saying, Vmavanti -- and forgive me if I have misunderstood -- that people are either one thing or the other. It seems to me that someone can be a jazz musician AND a progressive rock musician, or a jazz musician AND something else. If someone's article will benefit from a jazz tag, let it have a jazz tag. Our job is not to produce a nicely curated list of articles for the WikiProject: our job is to make articles better. If articles are attracting input from editors who can improve them, then that is a good thing. If someone's done a bunch of jazz albums, I think it irrelevant if they've done a larger number of non-jazz albums or not, because they're still someone that people interested in jazz may be interested in. Bondegezou (talk) 14:29, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- When it comes to authoritative sources, the disagreement is almost nonexistent. That has been one of my points from the beginning. I don't know why it hasn't been full addressed. There's something about the internet and Wikipedia that encourages hyperbole. Bondegezou accuses me of "casting out anyone who has worked in progressive rock". Hardly. First, I'm not "casting out" anyone. I'm not deleting articles. This isn't a club. I'm not saying this is great and that is terrible. I'm making an obvious point which perhaps is getting distorted into something I don't mean. The disagreement is NOT over musicians who have worked in progressive rock. The disagreement is over who is defined as a progressive rock musician and who is defined as a jazz musician. It's a matter of degree. A jazz musician who dabbles in progressive rock is still a jazz musician. A progressive rock musician who dabbles in jazz is still a progressive rock musician. HOW MUCH time has been spent in a particular genre is the key. If you've spent most of your time performing and recording progressive rock, then you are a progressive rock musician. This is the kind of definition I'm talking about. There's no need to dig into the characteristics of the genres. One need only acknowledge which genre has been dominant in a person's career.
How kind of you to volunteer other people's time. Maybe you should consider what kinds of articles the project already covers: musicians, albums, songs, record labels, festivals, instruments, genres, clubs, restaurants, radio stations, awards, magazines, web sites, companies. I've seen articles on jazz poetry, jazz hip hop, and jazz slang, on Japanese fusion duos, noise rock Norwegians, New Age acoustic guitarists, and American Idol contestants. All of them and more want to be called jazz. Enough already. Lines have to be drawn if any work at all is going to get done. Yes, that means either/or. Making decisions is a good thing.
–Vmavanti (talk) 22:48, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
I've re-read this thread, and I would like to apologize to anyone I may have offended. I make mistakes. I hope to learn from them. One point that occurred to me is that jazz might be defined in Britain differently than in America. This is a subject about which I know little. In fact, when I hear progressive rock, I think of Yes and early Genesis (both British). There's a web site called Prograchy that covers prog bands. Nevertheless, Soft Machine does seem to fall under the category of jazz of some kind, though not everyone associated with that band is a jazz musician. One interesting case is Andy Summers, who played with Soft Machine early in his career before being known as a rock guitarist with the Police. He doesn't get enough credit, because he can play any genre. He listened to a lot of jazz early in his life. He recorded an album of Monk songs and an album of Mingus songs, in addition to several other albums which easily come under jazz fusion. He often plays Brazilian jazz, a genre that stretches the definition of jazz. I doubt he thinks of himself as a jazz guitarist, but he has spent enough time in that genre to be classified as one. Coincidentally, he won a prog award in recent years and was abashed about it.
–Vmavanti (talk) 19:08, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- I would like to make another point. "This WikiProject does not aim to act in an exclusionary way toward any particular styles of jazz or any jazz musicians." That isn't what I've done. I haven't preferred one kind of jazz over another. The disagreement was about genres that don't fit the definition of jazz and musicians who are not known as jazz musicians. It would be different if I said Ornette Coleman isn't jazz or Al Di Meola isn't jazz or Spyro Gyra isn't jazz. But look at the names listed here. If they require such careful, hairsplitting analysis, then one has to ask whether they are jazz musicians. It ought to be obvious. With most jazz musicians it is obvious. What's remarkable is how inclusive I've been, i.e. the number of articles I refrained from labeling "not jazz". I've tried to avoid close calls. I am mindful that an encyclopedia of any kind is selective. To be selective means having principles of selection. That means, too, that some people will be excluded. It's not a moral judgment. It's a practical matter of getting things done. Some editors want to include everyone on the planet in Wikipedia. Not only is that impractical, it goes against the documentation, purposes, and goals of Wikipedia.
–Vmavanti (talk) 04:56, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation links on pages tagged by this wikiproject
Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.
A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_Jazz
Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.— Rod talk 16:31, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
- It's a deadlink for me. EddieHugh (talk) 16:53, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
- Don't know why that is it is working for me here.— Rod talk 16:59, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
- Now working! Only 16? I'll have a look. EddieHugh (talk) 17:21, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
- Done! I couldn't understand the tool, so did them manually. Several already had the correct wikilink in place at another point in the same article; maybe this could be used to automate more of the process, or would that be too much of an assumption about which link was intended? EddieHugh (talk) 17:47, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks - there is a current discussion around issues of automating some of this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation#Proposal to tag all disambiguation links, perhaps you would like to contribute?— Rod talk 17:55, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
- Automatic tagging would help draw attention, as proposed there. On second thoughts, though, changing automatically as I suggested would be guessing/hoping. There are two musicians named Bill Evans in jazz, for instance; and some people probably played with both of them. EddieHugh (talk) 18:10, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks - there is a current discussion around issues of automating some of this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation#Proposal to tag all disambiguation links, perhaps you would like to contribute?— Rod talk 17:55, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
- Done! I couldn't understand the tool, so did them manually. Several already had the correct wikilink in place at another point in the same article; maybe this could be used to automate more of the process, or would that be too much of an assumption about which link was intended? EddieHugh (talk) 17:47, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
- Now working! Only 16? I'll have a look. EddieHugh (talk) 17:21, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
- Don't know why that is it is working for me here.— Rod talk 16:59, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Articles for Deletion
- Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Songs_for_Hip_Lovers. AllyD (talk) 21:05, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
- Following a discussion with EddieHugh on my Talk page, I have expanded the choice of article alerts for the project to capture any related articles which are up for deletion and any categories under discussion. This is embedded under Wikipedia:WikiProject_Jazz#Articles_and_assessments but it may be more reflexive to watchlist Wikipedia:WikiProject Jazz/Article alerts itself to get a quick view of new changes. AllyD (talk) 10:07, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
Edits reverted by NeilN
@Vmavanti: Can you please stop removing jazz designations from performers you personally don't think are jazz singers like Van Morrison and Joni Mitchell? We go by what sources say and there's plenty of references to jazz works in these articles. --NeilN talk to me 01:14, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
- I reject your assumption and accusation that I have been using my opinion to make these judgments about who is and who is not a jazz musician. My knowledge in these areas is extensive. It might be difficult for an Irishman to be impartial when it comes to judgments about Irish musical heroes, especially if he happens to be one's own musical hero. Naturally we want our heroes to have no limitations or flaws.
–Vmavanti (talk) 01:22, 27 December 2017 (UTC)- "I reject your assumption and accusation that I have been using my opinion to make these judgments about who is and who is not a jazz musician."
- "My knowledge in these areas is extensive."
- Anyone else see the blindly obvious contradiction? And why do you think I'm Irish? --NeilN talk to me 01:26, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
- If it's so obvious, you shouldn't have any trouble explaining your behavior. You apparently ignored everything that was posted about this subject on this Talk Page before (and after) you proceeded to undo my edits, insult me, ridicule me, and then refuse to explain yourself. This is the kind of boorish, narcissistic behavior that gives administrators a bad name. I expect IP users to be clueless.
–Vmavanti (talk) 03:09, 27 December 2017 (UTC)- @Vmavanti: Explanation: I asked you to read the articles and the sources instead of using your own opinion. You confirmed you were using your own "extensive knowledge" (see WP:NOR). And then made some ridiculous statements about being an Irishman. --NeilN talk to me 03:21, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
- And it still seems you don't read articles. [2] There's a whole section called, "1975–1980: Jazz explorations" --NeilN talk to me 03:24, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Vmavanti: Explanation: I asked you to read the articles and the sources instead of using your own opinion. You confirmed you were using your own "extensive knowledge" (see WP:NOR). And then made some ridiculous statements about being an Irishman. --NeilN talk to me 03:21, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
- If it's so obvious, you shouldn't have any trouble explaining your behavior. You apparently ignored everything that was posted about this subject on this Talk Page before (and after) you proceeded to undo my edits, insult me, ridicule me, and then refuse to explain yourself. This is the kind of boorish, narcissistic behavior that gives administrators a bad name. I expect IP users to be clueless.
- You seem to think I'm going about it thoughtlessly and arbitrarily. Nothing could be further from the truth. A quick glance at this page would've enlightened you. Many times the subject of what to include in Wikiproject Jazz has been discussed. The one at fault is you. You have some catching up to do. Get to work and educate yourself. I'm not going to have any more dumb conversations with dumb people. Your assumption that I know nothing about these musicians is false. Your assumption that I know nothing about what I'm doing is false. My hunch that you know little to nothing about jazz continues to grow. I spent the afternoon writing about this subject (of genres, how to define jazz, and what to include it Wikiproject Jazz) which I will post to Wikiproject Jazz tomorrow.
–Vmavanti (talk) 03:41, 27 December 2017 (UTC)- @Vmavanti: You're not getting the point. Wikipedia doesn't care how much you know about these musicians. It doesn't care how much I know about these musicians. It cares what reliable, published sources (i.e., not you, not me) say about these musicians. --NeilN talk to me 05:18, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
- You seem to think I'm going about it thoughtlessly and arbitrarily. Nothing could be further from the truth. A quick glance at this page would've enlightened you. Many times the subject of what to include in Wikiproject Jazz has been discussed. The one at fault is you. You have some catching up to do. Get to work and educate yourself. I'm not going to have any more dumb conversations with dumb people. Your assumption that I know nothing about these musicians is false. Your assumption that I know nothing about what I'm doing is false. My hunch that you know little to nothing about jazz continues to grow. I spent the afternoon writing about this subject (of genres, how to define jazz, and what to include it Wikiproject Jazz) which I will post to Wikiproject Jazz tomorrow.
The long march, one step at a time
If I have to analyze them one at a time, I will, starting with Sade. I love her, but she's not jazz, as she has said. Interested readers might want to take a look at Talk:Sade (band).
–Vmavanti (talk) 18:25, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Vmavanti: Analyzing them one at a time should be done on the respective articles' talk pages as you've done with Sade. Thank you for that. --NeilN talk to me 18:32, 28 December 2017 (UTC)