User talk:Caro7200

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well done. Any change you could get an article done about the first album Promosexual also? It generally got better reviews than The Lime Green Album did and was considered succesful within the milieu that it circulated (as an underground album.)
Also I see to recall another Nancy Boy album circa 2004 with Donovan on the cover in a straight jacket. What was this, and any chances of an article on that one? Romomusicfan (talk) 14:40, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks very much--I'll have to look at more sources after break; a cursory glance indicates that there may not be enough for a full article, though... Caro7200 (talk) 19:38, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you also. All the refs are invaluable in saving the article from being AfD'ed due to lack of notability. Hopefully the same can be done for other Morse Band albums—they've always been sparse on refs. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:59, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Caro7200. I feel like the "jangle pop" genre attribution for Down in the Shacks Where the Satellite Dishes Grow might be a stretch, as WP:EXPLICITGENRE notes that the genre has to be clearly stated in direct language via a reliable source in order to be included. To that end, the "jangly guitar pop" and "guitar jangle" descriptors in reviews wouldn't be the same thing as a source overtly stating that the album is "jangle pop," I'd think. If it will help, I can pitch this to WT:ALBUMS and see what others think.—The Keymaster (talk) 21:06, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Keymaster. I don't feel strongly about this--if it were totally up to me, I'd remove genres completely from the infobox. I think the negatives outweigh the positives, and it's just unnecessary warring. Let the prose do the talking, so to speak. Back when I was starting multiple album articles a week, I often left blank that field. I do note that "alternative rock" never appears in the article; at best there's the Billboard Modern Rock chart mention. I defer to what you would like to do. Take care and thanks for editing. Caro7200 (talk) 21:26, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, I agree! With all the music pages I edit, I don't go anywhere near the genre listings, as they seem to be a minefield. The only time I do is to revert when someone adds or deletes a genre with no explanation, which I initially (and mistakenly) thought was the case with your edit. Honestly, the Judybats get so little attention that I think we could probably just leave the "jangle pop" attribution as is. At any rate, I'm glad to find someone besides myself who has an interest in the band. Cheers. The Keymaster (talk) 21:48, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Caro7200!

• 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) 08:45, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What's with you removing the word "then" in the sentence about Ronald Reagan? He was president from 1981 to 1989 and has been dead since 2004. How is including the word "then" in that sentence unnecessary? 174.243.145.142 (talk) 23:52, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. It's already been established that the album was released in 1986, well into Reagan's presidency. It's redundant to mention the "then." The vast majority of articles don't employ this device. Take care. Caro7200 (talk) 13:37, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The "then" part does align with at least a few facts: Regan was out of the White House by 1989, he died in 2004 and 1986 is "then" and 2023 is "now". Therefore "then" is necessary and then you remove it again. Please stop it. UserWithUnknownName (talk) 19:06, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Sorry, but this isn't the case. Please visit Wikipedia:Teahouse if you would like more information regarding this, or any other help. Take care. Caro7200 (talk) 20:27, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Caro7200! Looking at your talk page I was surprised to see you are a very active editor (all these bot messages don't make it look so)! I'm reading out because I'm currently working on articles relating to Billy Pilgrim and I'm in need of some specific sources relating to their albums: Billy Pilgrim (the self-titled one) and Bloom. I found it impossible to find sources relating to these works since they're a 90s band, and all of my searches yield only sources about Slaughterhouse Five and Harold Bloom. I have to be doing something wrong

You found a lot of sources for Bloom when you created this article last year. Where can I find more of these? What keywords do I have to use to find them? Stuff like that. I just need to find that starting point. I'm especially looking for the reviews from Rolling Stone as I know 100% they exist (they gave Bloom a 4/5), but I just don't know where to find this information! Panini! • 🥪 00:16, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for writing. Yeah, saw that, sounds good. Well, the short answer is that I work for an academic library, so I always start with paper sources, microfiche, interlibrary loan (granted, partly for nostalgia and the perversity of using old things). But I would try Newspapers.com via the Wikipedia Library, as well as ProQuest; I use them a lot away from work. Put quotes around your search terms, change date range, etc. (sorry if this is condescending). I also like Access World News (Newsbank). You qualify for the Wikipedia Library. You may also check on which digital resources your closest general library provides, if you have an account. Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources and the talk page are great. If I can find something for you, please let me know. Have a good weekend. Caro7200 (talk) 00:29, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Caro7200 I'll be sure to check all these out. I'm typically active in writing about video games on the new side, so physical source hunting isn't my strong suit. Thanks for the suggestions! Panini! • 🥪 02:22, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the insight! I was able to find a lot more. Out of curiosity @Caro7200, do you have access to this source? The login concept bewilders me. I doubt there's anything much of note about Andrew Hyra here but this is for my curiosity. Panini! • 🥪 00:38, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, just about sister Meg hanging with him in Aspen, not a full sentence... Caro7200 (talk) 13:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thank you for the work you've been doing. Sorry for undoing your good faith edit. The reason I standardize as "November the following year" is because usually the month is incorrect in these releases, and when I confirm that I try to correct it easily. In the case of American Garage, there are no citable sources that can confirm November as the release date; AllMusic is the most reliable one, and they have November 1 (which is definitely wrong), and "side bar" info can be edited by users.

Sometimes the months can be confirmed on the ecm website, but currently in lists the reissue date. I couldn't find any older versions on the wayback machine either. TlonicChronic (talk) 00:15, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, thank you for your work. I think I was mostly fixing the order of the reviews--many times Penguin comes after Rolling Stone in these short jazz articles... and trying to add at least one prose review. I've been working backward from 2000 to, now, 1979. Take care. Caro7200 (talk) 13:05, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome! Definitely agree with that. Have fun with your final stretch. TlonicChronic (talk) 15:01, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Thanks for your suggestion that we discuss the recent edits. On Wikipedia:Blogs as sources, it states: "Is the article you're sourcing via a blog of a non-biographical nature (i.e., about computer science? Cooking? History about deceased individuals?) from a website that is known in the relevant subject circles as a source or authority? If the specific author of the specific blog post an expert or authority? In either case, the blog post may be fine to use." Given the fact that the site's been around so long, has a good reputation, and has so many writers, a number of whom publish reviews elsewhere, I thought the review would be ok. What are your thoughts? Thanks for your time and work. Regards, Helen Puffer Thwait (talk) 16:53, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for the hard work. Yeah, "blog" and "zine" and "mixtape" have had changing definitions over the years. You may want to ask on the album project talk page. It looked to me that some of the writers were qualified but many were just kind of fans, and that the Paul Acquaro in charge hasn't really defined the site's editorial policy. I don't care that strongly, so somewhat defer to you. There aren't any qualifications to be a critic, or course--it's more about the oversight of the criticism (unless it's someone like Robert Christgau, who's on his own now but who worked as a journalist and editor for decades and is an acknowledged subject matter expert). Have a good holiday. Caro7200 (talk) 17:20, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I think I'll just leave it as is for now. I didn't mean for this to turn into "a thing," and I hope you didn't interpret it that way.

"It looked to me that some of the writers were qualified but many were just kind of fans" - to be honest, I sometimes feel that way about some of the AllMusic and All About Jazz reviewers, but oh well.

In any case, I hope you enjoy the holidays.

Helen Puffer Thwait (talk) 20:45, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not to belabor this, but it looks like the AAJ reviewers are a mixed bag as well:

[Directory]

I'm also trying to locate their editorial policy.

Thanks again. Helen Puffer Thwait (talk) 21:27, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it's never been one of my favorites. The Week, for one, uses AAJ reviews in its music summaries... I've only added them if I'm pressed for sources... Caro7200 (talk) 21:44, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you point me to the discussion about this and if it was definitively agreed upon? DepressedPer (talk) 20:20, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure: Wikipedia:FAQ/Categorization. Have a good holiday. Caro7200 (talk) 20:26, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you and yours are having a wonderful day! J04n(talk page) 18:06, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Same! Thanks for everything! Caro7200 (talk) 18:10, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		The WikiProject Albums Barnstar
		I am so impressed by your frequent, well written, and well sourced pages on albums. Your choice of notable albums that have been overlooked by other editors is noteworthy. Wikipedia is better because of you. J04n(talk page) 15:55, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thanks so much, I appreciate it! Yeah, at work and at home I'm surrounded by reference works, bound journals, etc., so may as well make use of 'em. Thanks for adding all those covers, talk pages, and templates. Have a great week! Caro7200 (talk) 17:17, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, if you're looking for a page to beef up, please consider Here They Come!, thanks J04n(talk page) 21:20, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again,

I noticed your "unreliable source" tag on the Cecil Taylor Unit page, and was wondering what your thoughts were. Phil Freeman is a widely-published writer (https://philipdfreeman.com/articles/), has written three books on music (https://philipdfreeman.com/books), and seems to be pretty well-known in the jazz / free jazz field. Some issues of Burning Ambulance are also available in magazine form. Just curious as to why you found it unreliable.

Thank you - I hope you're doing well.

Helen Puffer Thwait (talk) 19:47, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, how are you? Yeah, he seems qualified--I'll remove it. Like me, you probably enjoy working on album articles more than talk discussions, but you may ask about some of these jazz, etc., sources, if you think you'll be using them a lot. It may make things easier if they are officially added as RS. The Burning Ambulance site seems to bury its editorial info... See my comment here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums, at the Needle Drop thread. There are probably a few jazz sites that could serve as RS. Then there are things like The Vinyl District, where the overwhelming commercialism outweighs everything else. Have a good week. Caro7200 (talk) 20:03, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I hadn't thought of that, and will look into suggesting a few sites be listed as RSs.

I hope you don't mind my asking: how do you manage to find so many sources for reviews? You seem to have a talent for locating seemingly obscure (imho) yet legit publications ("The Lower-Southwest Shpedunk County Gazette" lol). Do you have any suggestions re. finding these sources? As you've probably seen, I tend to write about so-called free jazz/free improvisation or what used to be called "avant-garde" classical music, and it's often tough to find reviews. There are a number of really good/interesting albums that I haven't written about because I can't find coverage.

Again, thanks, and all the best,

Helen Puffer Thwait (talk) 21:18, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Well, I've worked for a couple of academic libraries the past several years, so I use a lot of microfilm, bound periodicals, interlibrary loan, etc. But you are mostly likely eligible for the Wikipedia Library: https://wikipedialibrary.wmflabs.org/?next_url=/users/my_library/. ProQuest and Newspapers.com are the best, and some of the music stuff. Newsbank is really helpful, but WP doesn't subscribe, the last I checked. Take care. Caro7200 (talk) 21:41, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, I'll check those out. Helen Puffer Thwait (talk) 22:58, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. Where does it say in MOS:ALBUM to omit non-notable executive producers? He's not listed as management or special thanks. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 13:54, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Mac. As I wrote, I only "cared" enough to revert once, so obviously change back if you want. According to the guidance, "only report artistic and technical personnel who had some direct involvement in the creation of the recording or artwork itself"--unless reliable sources indicate otherwise, an executive producer may only be the suit attached to the album, without any actual creative involvement. Or it could be someone like Ahmet Ertegun, who in his later years was often given the credit as an honorific. Streamline isn't a good example, so perhaps I should have left it alone, but articles where dozens or scores (or 100+) of non-notable names are listed--especially where they overwhelm a small amount of actual prose--render the article more of a mere discography entry. I know there's often casual discussion of overhauling the album guidance; I think, uh, streamlining the exact reproduction of liner note names and credits is a great first step. Have a good day and thanks for all the work. Caro7200 (talk) 14:53, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Thanks for making Wikipedia a better place. With the creation of properly written, well cited articles, I have decided to give you this award that you rightfully deserve! Alon Alush (talk) 15:50, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, that's very nice of you. Have a great week. Caro7200 (talk) 19:54, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]