User talk:Tkbrett

Please confine your article-specific discussions to that article's talk page.

Talk page transcripts

It’s been a while

Hi. It’s me, Blueskiesdry/Speatle. I’m back after a long hiatus/procrastination from Wiki editing. I just wanted to check up and see how things were going. The Beatles GA project seems to have been archived, which is pretty sad, but there’s been relatively little activity with that for a while so it was probably coming regardless. blueskiesdry … (cloudy contribs…) 15:52, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blueskiesdry. Yes, it is not too surprising. When I first started editing, I would find a problem and shout out for a more knowledgeable editor to come and fix it. An experienced editor told me that that sort of thing is not likely to happen, and that if you want something done around here you have to do it yourself. After stumbling on this mess at Tom Thomson, I initially hoped an art historian would come in and rewrite the article. Once I understood that that was not going to happen, I took out every Tom Thomson book from my library and wrote it myself.

Another issue is that while it is a lot of work to get an album article up to standard, writing about the Beatles is a greater challenge; there is so much literature with which to contend, I do not think there are many capable editors able to sort through it all. I think there is probably only one editor who could do it — and I do not think it is me.

Anyways, I hope you had a nice holiday season. Happy New Year. Tkbrett (✉) 16:06, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It’s been nice, although kinda aimless. I really have no idea what to do anymore here, so I just spend the day copyediting and fixing anything that I fancy doing. I’m reviewing one of Zmbro’s GANs, so that should keep me occupi3d for about a week.

Happy New Year,

blueskiesdry … (cloudy contribs…) 16:08, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) The Beatles project has been a bit slow since GabeMc's departure about ten years ago. However, I think there's still potential to get some more song articles to GA, using Mark Lewishon and Ian MacDonald's books. Although there are a lot of Beatles books, not that many of them are great FA-quality sources that detail solely in incontestable facts and not hearsay and opinions. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:55, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think if we can’t be bothered to remake an article from the ground up (like we tried to do with PPM), then we could probably polish up some B-class articles pretty easily. Blueskiesdry (talk) 21:58, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's easy to get lost in the information here on WP. When you're working with artists who have dozens of books written on them (ala Beatles, Bowie, Springsteen), you find it can be a little overwhelming to try to comprehend everything at once. It's best to take it one source at a time: I'd read through one source, mark down anything I know I'll need for the article, then move on to the next. (That's how I did Darkness on the Edge of Town and now Born to Run). I'm sure you'll find the inspiration one of these days, but if not that's ok too. Like Ritchie said, most Beatles stuff can be expanded with maybe five HQ sources-tops (I even own both Lewisohn 1988 and MacDonald 2005). – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 00:39, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think I might try BFS, as it was already a GA once and I might be able to take the criticism from the GAR and add it to the article. Also the 60th anniversary is coming up, so if my interest/confidence holds I might be able to get my favorite Beatles album to TFA. Blueskiesdry (talk) 00:45, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm disappointed to see that Beatles (and particularly George Harrison) stalwart JG66 hasn't been around for a year. Hope he returns. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:30, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ritchie333: I agree in regards to JG; it is his writing on here that I have learned the most from.

I am impressed by the calibre of talk-page stalkers I am bringing in. Tkbrett (✉) 16:47, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I get bored and start looking at everyone’s contribs and it leads me here. Blueskiesdry (talk) 16:53, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Led Zeppelin

They are a English band. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:00, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The statement above is in reference to this change by Tkbrett. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:56, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

an English band, surely? Maybe we should get a consensus from Rambling Man or The Martinevans123. (Please note, this comment uses recycled humour.) The Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:12, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, do what ya want, but now the entry sentence sounds stupid to me. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:14, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lovin’ Spoonful

Just wanted to let you know that I’ll probably review your Lovin’ Spoonful GAN in a couple days, after I recover from the obligations of the Peter and the Wolf one.

Good band btw. Butchie’s Tune is a banger. Blueskiesdry (talk) 21:04, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Blueskiesdry. If you don't mind though, I think I might prefer for a more experienced editor to tackle it; it is one of the bigger articles I have worked on, so I think it would be best to hear from an editor who has also written on a subject as large as a band's entire history.

Re: "Butchie's Tune", I agree. It features Zally playing some incredibly inspired lead stuff. It is among my favourite guitar work ever. Tkbrett (✉) 16:16, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Daydream’s such a good album, even though it’s got a lot of filler on it like most around that time.

What about Zim or Ritchie? They seem pretty experienced to me. Blueskiesdry (talk) 16:52, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on the FL! Blueskiesdry (talk) 00:07, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blueskiesdry: Thanks. Daydream is great, but like you said, lots of filler. I never liked their blues wanderings, like "Let the Boy Rock 'n' Roll", "Big Noise from Speonk" or "Night Owl Blues", all of which I just find atrocious. The only album I think that really works as an album qua album is Hums – I enjoy everything on there save "Nashville Cats" and "4 Eyes". It's funny; there is a picture of Paul McCartney holding a copy of the album, I'm guessing from February 1967, since it came out in the U.K. on January 27. That places it right in the middle of the sessions for Pepper, though I don't really hear its influence anywhere there. Tkbrett (✉) 16:05, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to Alamy that was February 3rd. Blueskiesdry (talk) 22:38, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blueskiesdry: Nice find, but I think Alamy is wrong. On February 3, 1967, the Beatles were at EMI recording overdubs to "A Day In the Life". On January 27, the band and Brian Epstein signed their nine-year worldwide recording contract with EMI. I think January 27 makes more sense as a date for the picture; Paul is walking out of Brian's office, and he would have had a reason to be there that day. Also, it would explain why he had a copy of Hums in his hand – he was a big fan of the Spoonful, so he must have bought their new album the day it came out. Tkbrett (✉) 18:46, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion of The Lovin' Spoonful discography

Congratulations, Tkbrett! The list you nominated, The Lovin' Spoonful discography, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Giants2008 (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Born to Run

Hey there friend. I just published Born to Run after almost six months (ironically the time it took the actual Springsteen to record the song "Born to Run" haha). Anyways, I recall you saying you would love to do a GA review on it and I was wondering if that offer still stands? If not that's perfectly fine (I haven't decided when I want to submit it to the WP:GOCE yet so I guess your answer depends). Thanks. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 19:59, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

zmbro: Absolutely. I will pick it up as soon as you nominate it. Just give me a shout when you do. Tkbrett (✉) 12:21, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All set. Thanks again. :-) – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 13:41, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Monkees pages

Hi! I just entered the fray of a discussion regarding alternate track listings and used the Monkees as an example of how bad it can get here. Then I noticed you did some LONG overdue pruning of Headquarters, which is something I'd been considering doing myself, as nearly all of the Monkees album pages are similar messes. Do you think it's acceptable if I just follow your lead and finally pare all those pages down? Or is that something I need to gain consensus for beforehand? Thanks!—The Keymaster (talk) 08:32, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Keymaster: I would just do it. That follows WP:BRD: make the change, see it reverted and only then take it to the talk page. If you go straight to the talk page, no one will respond. If you make the bold change, you will at least see whether someone takes issue by reverting. Tkbrett (✉) 12:27, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024 GAN backlog drive

Good article nominations \| March 2024 Backlog Drive
March 2024 Backlog Drive: On 1 March, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here or ask questions here.
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

(t · c) buidhe 02:40, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Inadvertent ping

The software told me I pinged you from Talk:Led Zeppelin III, but I didn't, so just letting you know it wasn't intentional (in case you go looking through the discussion for the missing ping). Schazjmd (talk) 20:43, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No sweat. Cheers. Tkbrett (✉) 22:19, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

		The Music Barnstar
		Great work on creating The Lovin' Spoonful's drug bust. It's a well-sourced article on an interesting music history story, and you might want to consider nominating it for GA status. Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 19:38, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doc Strange: Thanks so much, I am glad you enjoyed reading it. I found that this story was similar to the Kinks' 1965 US tour in that it was told in pieces across many different sources, but no one had consolidated all the information into one coherent narrative. I hope both articles can serve as a correction. I do not think there is much left to add to it, so nominating it for GA status may be in the cards. Cheers. Tkbrett (✉) 12:21, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:14, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gerda Arendt: Always a delight to hear from you. Thank you! Tkbrett (✉) 12:24, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Genre: Highway 61 Revisited

Hi,

I was the one that put in garage rock In highway 61 Revisited, and if your wondering why there were so many edits there its because the link wouldn't work as it included the date for whatever unknown reason. As for this, you say its for a handful of songs, when it lanels half of the songs from the album, and it did say its an album that ranges from folk rock and blues to garage rock. I know its not solely one but considering little people says its a rock n roll album either, or a blues rock album, can we add it as one of the genres or is there a different way i could do that. Thanks. APL555 (talk) 21:18, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ohhh you're also struggling with Tkbrett? He's a folk rock purist, isn't he? Doesn't want to see any of his favourite albums with any sort of tag except the ones he likes. Lmao. Had the same problem with him on Led Zeppelin III. Still undergoing. Tell you what, man, if your changes are sourced, hit me up with the source and I'll help you against this guy. I hate him to death and I want to terrorise him. It doesn't matter if you have no feelings against him, I do and I'm here to help you. 41.246.129.14 (talk) 04:58, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mean i have nothing against him anyway and i did expect something like that to happen, but i'll give you the source regardless for you to add in the genre section as garage rock, down below.

https://www.allmusic.com/album/highway-61-revisited-mw0000189730 APL555 (talk) 04:46, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spin Alternative Record Guide

Hey Tk you own the Spin Alternative Record Guide right? Would you be able to add the score for that to Selected Ambient Works Volume II when you chance please? (in the retrospective reviews box) I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks! – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 20:00, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, absolutely. I'll be back with my books in a few days.

I think it used to be on the Internet Archive, but they must have changed policies because a lot of previously available books are now only available for users with disabilities. Tkbrett (✉) 23:25, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

zmbro: It looks like someone else got to it. Let me know if you need anything else though. Tkbrett (✉) 18:28, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Albums/Album_article_style_advice#"Release history" tables

Hi @Tkbrett. Take a look for which one you prefer at the "Release history" table: "Distributor", "Licensee", "Marketer" or "Promoter". 183.171.122.34 (talk) 18:03, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am probably not the best one to have sought out; I think Release history tables violate WP:INDISCRIMINATE and they ought to be done away with entirely. I do not know if that is a very popular position though. Tkbrett (✉) 18:27, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I splitted into two subsections, especially "Label" or "distributor", to avoid confusion. 2001:D08:2940:B0B5:17DF:36B7:E6FA:34C5 (talk) 05:15, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello I saw you reverted my edit on the Joe Butler page. I do agree with you that it isnt a better image, I was trying to add a more recent image to the article like I did with Jerry Yester since the image in his article was a bit low quality and also with Steve Boone to add a better image. I wanted to ask you first if it would be ok to add on of these images instead, I just dont want to break the rules or seem annoying on accident by adding a better image to get my edit reverted, I just want to edit on this wiki and help it, so I am just asking since I just want to not break the rules, I feel the image on their is a great image, but I do feel it is a bit old and I feel the page needs a bit more of an updated image. Thank you. Joey (talk) 12:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joey (talk) 12:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rubber Soul

Norman Smith’s claims about the “Rubber Soul” sessions have never been corroborated by the other Beatles, so that was why I removed the passages, not the sources themselves.

Sorry for the incomplete explanation earlier.

Thanks for advising me to take the issue to the talk page.

14.202.173.22 (talk) 11:10, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll respond there that way other editors can chime in. Tkbrett (✉) 11:19, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian Solar

Hi, I saw you deleted my edit. So that I can learn from mistakes, could you explain to me what the problem was? OdNahlawi (talk) 17:16, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files listed for discussion

Some of your images or media files have been listed for discussion. Please see Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2024 August 1 if you are interested in preserving their usage.

Thank you. JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 18:41, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Joan_Murray_(art_historian) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joan_Murray_(art_historian), to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joan Murray (art historian) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

Thanks for catching that error at Voss! It's nice to see you around, are you working on any weird music stuff lately? I really enjoyed doing the Kinks articles, so if you have anything fun in the pipeline, I'd be happy to take a look. Hope you're doing well, cheers! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 14:30, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Premeditated Chaos: Nice to hear from you as well – I'm happy to help any way I can with your great fashion articles. It's funny you ask because my pet project for the past couple months has been another weird music article, this time about an American band, the Lovin' Spoonful, who fell apart after they got busted for weed. It's similar to the Kinks' 1965 US tour in that I had never seen the full story laid out in detail. Later writers would talk about its importance, but then quickly move past it. I hope you enjoy reading it! This one has some funny quotes. Tkbrett (✉) 15:37, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that was a fun read. I really feel for them, it feels like such an absurdly small thing to have derail your entire music career. If you GAN it, let me know, and I'll happily do the review. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:59, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Premeditated Chaos: Thanks! I'm glad you enjoyed it. I'm not sure yet if I want to nominate it – with it referencing so many contemporaneous newspaper articles, I'm worried I'd have to argue a strong case that does not stray towards WP:OR. I think it would break my heart if I had to cut down on that article, even a little bit, as the topic isn't really covered in a coherent fashion anywhere else. Mostly, I'm just happy it exists.

Unrelated, but I nearly made it over to Kissa Tanto earlier this year. I first heard about it through the nice article you put together. My wife and I went with friends to Victoria, but we unfortunately didn't end up in Vancouver long enough to catch dinner there. Maybe next time though. Most people I know are vegetarian, so after glancing at the menu, I'm wondering how accessible it may be to people who don't eat fish... Tkbrett (✉) 13:56, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there's anything wrong with using newspaper stories, as long as you're just reporting facts and not performing any interpretation of them. That's the standard I'd go by at GAN anyway.

As for KT, I hope you do come back and visit it, it's one of my favorite restaurants and I've never had a thing there I didn't love. There are so many vegetarians in Vancouver they'd be crazy not to have options to accommodate that, even if it's not on the main menu. This suggests they have a call-ahead vegan tasting menu, but that's from 2020, so not sure if current. Hope you enjoyed Victoria! I've always thought it was really beautiful there. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:51, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 224, December 2024

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results
Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content
Book review: Nick-D on the Franco-Prussian War
Op-ed: Nick-D visits the Swiss Air Force Museum

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:42, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]