Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Jazz
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the WikiProject Jazz page. |
|
 | This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
 Archives (Index) |
|
This page is archived by ClueBot III.
|
 | This WikiProject was featured on the WikiProject report at the Signpost on 9 January 2012. |
Might be of interest. S0091 (talk) 17:38, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
I was trying to fix the Logos section of this article, but can't figure out what it's supposed to be. Can someone here take a look? Thanks. 76.14.122.5 (talk) 02:04, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- I think the entire section should be removed. Having looked at a few good article and featured article class radio station pages, none of them seem to include past logos at all, or (also in the section) past slogans. The "Programming" subsection definitely needs to go per WP:NOTTVGUIDE. If you think the logos should stay, try to intersperse them in the "History" section. Mach61 08:01, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reply. I removed those two sections and the "Slogans" section as well. 76.14.122.5 (talk) 21:21, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Survival Records
edit
There is a discussion taking place on Talk:Survival_Records. Opinions / guidance would be greatly appreciated.
@Koavf: @Chubbles: @SelfieCity: @Mach61: @Eugenia ioessa:
Thank you.
Helen Puffer Thwait (talk) 22:20, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Suitability of Tom Hull Reviews
editMany articles about jazz albums have grade values from Tom Hull under “retrospective professional reviews.” Do his reviews or his standing as a reviewer meet Wikipedia standards for inclusion? While he has been a professional reviewer, as described in the article concerning him, many of his grades appear to be self-published as part of exhaustive inventories of artists’ catalogs. I’d suggest that many of these rankings don’t meet the standards of professional reviews. (In the majority of cases, there is no writing supporting the grade on his website.) For a similar case, I’d point to the many reviews by self-published writer Piero Scaruffi, whose evaluations appear to have been scrubbed from Wikipedia. Discipline27-II (talk) 19:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Discipline27-II I would say Tom Hull's reviews are suitable per WP:EXPERTSPS, considering his extensive publication history at The Village Voice. Many publications give ratings without prose, as discussed here; I personally include those ratings in {{album ratings}} templates, but regardless of if you think that's appropriate, it doesn't impugn the reliability of Hull's prose reviews. Cheers, Mach61 22:20, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Mach61Thanks for the response. Your link to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:EXPERTSPS supports the conclusion. I just wanted to check, but if the community practice is being followed, I won’t naysay (even if I think the grades themselves are questionable.) Discipline27-II (talk) 22:43, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Disagree--his WP article was written by a Christgau superfan (I'm merely a fan), and I remember a brief talk page discussion. His reviews and grades that were originally published in RS are fine; his database of grades divorced from text are problematic--unlike AllMusic, Larkin, Strong, the Rolling Stone guides, MusicHound, etc., they aren't tied to biographical or prose entries, unless he's changed his site. They're just, you know, hanging out. I think it's entirely appropriate to remove the grades that are just housed in database-type listings. If someone objects, take it to the talk page. Caro7200 (talk) 22:48, 5 September 2024 (UTC)