Talk:Hannah Fury

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (assessed as Low-importance).

Women in Music Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

well if she is noted in the List of Dark Cabaret Artists shouldn't she also have an article? and no, it wasn't me that put her on that list...

Being included on a list wouldn't in itself establish notability for her, it would have to be as per WP:MUSIC. If she meets one or more of the guidelines for inclusion of an artist, would be just fine, but I can't find charted hits, certified albums, or any non-trivial mention in third-party source material. Seraphimblade 23:29, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have reviewed the notability guidelines at WP:MUSIC. I believe she meets the following "Appears at reasonable length in standard reference books on his or her genre of music", and "Is frequently covered in publications devoted to a notable sub-culture". The fact is, people familiar with the so-called "Lillith Fair" genre of music (a genre covered especially well at Ectoguide.org) do know and highly respect her work. The fact that she has 14 reviews on Amazon and is frequently blogged about is an indication of merit for inclusion. It is just that this genre is minimally covered by mainstream media to begin with, so that is why she is not listed in any of the traditional publications. Konky2000 22:01, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:TheThingThatFeels.jpg is valid under fair use rules in Wikipedia. If there is a missing tag, please add the tag and do not attempt to delete the image. Tubusy 11:45, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you go by a strict reading of the fair use guidelines, one can only use the album cover image in an article about that album. Check out the pages of Tori Amos, Happy Rhodes and Kate Bush. None of those articles are using album covers, but are instead using pictures taken by fans. Note that Sinéad O'Connor's page doesn't have any picture at all even though there are plenty of pictures with her image on it. Sadly, until Hannah Fury herself releases an image of herself into the creative commons, or she makes a public appearance at which a Wikipedia member can take a picture of her, I don't think we will have an illustration for this article that is going to remain on the page. Konky2000 21:30, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also please refer to this guideline Wikipedia:Non-free_content#Examples_of_unacceptable_use. It clearly states that one can only use album covers in a discussion of that particular album. I want a picture for this article as much as anyone, but I think it is clear that we can't use the album art, so need to remove it. Konky2000 16:30, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As two people have felt that way, then fair enough; but I don't think the reasoning is quite sound. For the sake of discussion, the Barry Bonds point implies that the object is distinct from the subject; it is a photo of a card that by happenstance is of Barry Bonds. This article, however, is talking about Hannah and her albums, with reference to The Thing That Feels. (An idea reflected by the point A counterexample would be an image of a Billy Ripkin card in a sub-section of an article about Billy Ripkin that discusses why baseball cards are important to his career.) It's perfectly reasonable to illustrate something directly referenced in the article which elucidates the subject. Sinéad's editors shouldn't be so wimpish. ;) I'll accept there might be a slight grey area here, but such interpretation is very heavy-handed, and certainly bares no relation to copyright law. :) Tubusy 02:41, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hannah Fury has provided an image under Creative Commons attribution 2.5!

Great news, thanks. Tubusy 11:32, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let's be real...

Is this page really relevant? 81.178.216.56 (talk) 00:36, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Hannah Fury. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:20, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]