Talk:Nick Drake

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured article Nick Drake is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 19, 2012.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
November 17, 2006 Peer review Reviewed
February 10, 2007 Featured article candidate Promoted
Current status: Featured article
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Biography / Musicians (Rated FA-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (marked as High-importance).
 
WikiProject Rock music (Rated FA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock 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.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

The Melancholy Haunting of Nicholas Parkes[edit]

A user has removed this so I thought I'd check it out. The Melancholy Haunting of Nicholas Parkes appears to be part of an anthology published by a writers group in Derby. I'm sure it's worth a read but the story and its author fail WP:GNG so shouldn't be included in this article. Paul MacDermott (talk) 17:13, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, quite agree. The sources are both blogs, one of which is essentially just a random list of books. The story itself is not about Drake, it's about a ghost based on him: "Nicholas Parkes is also exceptionally believable, a product of Barker's decision to base this phantom and the entire tale around the tragic downfall of British musician Nick Drake." Really not sure how much light it could ever shed on Drake's actual real life. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:28, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

The story featured as the lead story in a single-author hardback collection called "Tenebrous Tales" by Christopher Barker which was published in 2010 by the Ex Occidente Press. It was subsequently reviewed in a "Best Of Year Horror" hardback anthology edited by Ellen Datlow, receiving an 'Honorable Mention'. According to the Amazon kindle entry, where the story is available to purchase as an e book, it has been read & commented upon by Drake's manager, Joe Boyd, who acknowledges that is based upon Nick Drake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.24.154.210 (talk) 21:24, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Mr Boyd is perfectly entitled to his own opinions. Where did he make that acknowledgement? Has he also said what light, if any, it casts on the life of Nick Drake? What light does it cast? Is there any published review which assesses this favourably? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:35, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Nit-picking. You are moving the goal posts with each comment. The original concern was the story did not appear in a book, that it appeared in an obscure regional anthology, ect, which was wrong. Now that this has been corrected, let's move on, and leave it alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.24.154.210 (talk) 22:20, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

I have said nothing about any "obscure regional anthology". How can we "move on" if you have answered none of my questions?. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:24, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Hmmm, on closer examination the Christopher Barker in the anthology would appear not to be the same author as the Christopher Barker who wrote this story. My bad for believing Amazon's link to "Christopher Richard Barker" would list works by the same author, not authors with the same or similar names. But as I have said elsewhere, this novella has not received any attention from mainstream media. For it to be notable for inclusion here I'd expect to have seen it reviewed by someone like The Guardian, The Daily Telegraph or The Times Literary Supplement. Failing that I'd expect to see Mr Boyd quoted somewhere, making reference to the story. Paul MacDermott (talk) 23:17, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
ok, time for some original research. There is no entry for Tenebrous Tales on Amazon.co.uk, or Amazon.com, although the e-book The Melancholy Haunting of Nicholas Parkes can be found on both. Tenebrous Tales was published by Ex-Occidente Press, but had a limited print run of 160 copies, retailing for $55. A relatively new/unknown author would be unlikely to sell many copies at such a high price, but publishing costs can be expensive and the company would want to recoup its outlay. It seems surprising not to at least find an Amazon entry for it though, as generally any book for publication is assigned an ISBN number, gets mentioned by Nielsen Bookscan, and tends to find its way onto the websites of the major book retailers (Waterstones, W. H. Smith, Amazon, Barnes and Noble, etc). I'm guessing the Datlow anthology is this one from 2011 that appears to cover books published through 2010. But in any case, without a wider audience this story doesn't meet the generable notability guidelines, and its author fails WP:AUTHOR. I'm sorry, but that's just the way it is. Paul MacDermott (talk) 12:40, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry but that is not just the way it is. What you mean is that arbitrary nitpicking is rife on Wikipedia. Numerous small presses are quite rightly referenced on Wiki and many of the authors published by the Ex Occidente Press have their own Wiki entries. Furthermore, copies of this sold-out book occasionally sell on Ebay for three figure sums, such is the book's collectability. Also, the book has been seen by Joe Boyd, Drake's manager, who has acknowledged it to be about Drake, and it has also been reviewed by Ellen Datlow, who is a well-known figure in literary circles. On all counts it scores relevance to Drake's posthumous popularity. It is certainly of more relevance than a television car advert. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.24.154.210 (talk) 14:49, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

The onus is on you to provide WP:RS. Simple as. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:01, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
Yes indeed. Name some authors who've been published by Ex Occidente Press who have Wikipedia articles, provide some links to the ebay pages you mention, and provide some reliable sources, preferably from a mainstream newspaper or journal. Then perhaps we can weigh up the evidence for its inclusion. I have to say at the moment though a book with a print run of 160 copies by an author with no other published works just isn't notable. Paul MacDermott (talk) 15:14, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
At least Ellen Datlow is notable. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:43, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
That's one thing, I guess. If he confirms the story is mentioned in the 2011 Datlow anthology I'll see if my local library can get hold of a copy. Paul MacDermott (talk) 16:05, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
Thought I'd ask as I had to return some books today. Sadly no Datlow titles on their database, but they may be able to get them from another library. Failing that I suppose it might be possible to pick up a second hand copy from a charity shop or somewhere. Paul MacDermott (talk) 13:54, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

A link to Ellen Datlow's website, where she singles out four of Barker's stories for praise in her anthology, was provided in the initial revision. This praise first appeared in the original anthology, copies of which are available in any library, in addition to Amazon, ABE, Biblio etc. Datlow only comments on books she has actually read and physically held in her hands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.27.211.1 (talk) 12:49, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but no matter how you try to spin this argument the story is not notable enough for a mention here. Paul MacDermott (talk) 13:19, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes it does. The book's existence has been verified. It is listed on the publisher's website, it is listed on Amazon, Goodreads etc. Reviews of the book have been published in two notable sources [the British Fantasy Society's journal 'Prism', where Barker's book received the longest review in Prism's history, and in Ellen Datlow's anthology 'Best Horror Of The Year']. The size of the print run is largely irrelevant. Many works by writers, artists et al have been produced in small numbers. Of far more importance is the relevance of the work itself. Being cited for a 'Notable Mention' by the leading anthologist in her field suggests that the notability criteria has been satisfied. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.27.211.1 (talk) 14:02, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

  • The consensus here is that the notability criteria have not been satisfied. Wikipedia is not the place to promote your book. You are now edit warring and can be blocked. I suggest you leave it and move on. freshacconci talktalk 14:09, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict)It's a fact that given the skills and time anyone can write and publish a book. Doing so doesn't automatically confirm notability. Also, any book published is usually mentioned by Nielsen, and consequently finds its way onto the websites of all the major book retailers. Very few of them become well known, and for this story to be mentioned in this article it would have to be. Paul MacDermott (talk) 14:21, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Consummated?[edit]

Hi! Nice article, thanks. One thing that seems out of place for my taste is the remark about whether his relationships to women were "consummated" or not. I don't really see the relavance. 84.56.55.198 (talk) 13:05, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

But the source quoted uses that word. It says: "The biography includes interviews with Drake’s two closest female friends — Ryde and fellow musician Linda Thompson. While he was attracted to both, it appears he never consummated either relationship. Ryde became the nearest he ever had to a girlfriend, although she preferred the description “best (girl) friend”. Dann has discovered that Ryde, who met Drake in 1967, had told the singer about a week before his death that she wanted “more space in their relationship. I couldn’t cope with it. I asked him for some time. And I never saw him again”." Do you have any suggestion for an alternative? I agree that it's a little irrelevant and so maybe should be removed altogether. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:39, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Molly Drake's recordings[edit]

Should a separate article be created to cover Molly Drake's recordings? They are attracting a fair amount of media interest, for example here, here and here. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:22, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

I would certainly support a separate article. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:40, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
Me too. Paul MacDermott (talk) 23:28, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
Agree, anybody up for it? Ceoil (talk) 13:12, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Posthumous popularity[edit]

I'm also not sure that this section should contain snippets of songs that have been used in feature films. It's very unusual, after all, for a film to feature an entire song (unless it's a musical or music-based film). I'm far more concerned that we have references to the use of songs in adverts - for Volkswagen Cabrio and AT&T - which surely can have used only a few seconds of the music, and in probably what many would see as a very "inappropriate" way? But maybe there are media awards for this kind of thing. I am a bit baffled, however, as to why that entire section about Joe Boyd in 2009 and the 2010 tours has been removed? That seems to me to be perfectly "legitimate" and a real indication of popular re-awakening of interest in Drake's music. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:27, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

I have removed the adverts and restored the Boyd paragraph, as this seems to make the section more balanced. But fully open to any other suggestions. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:25, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Sounds fair enough to me. Ceoil (talk) 13:11, 15 March 2014 (UTC)