User talk:EddieHugh

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Reviewer[edit]

Wikipedia Reviewer.svg

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Nefarious: Merchant of Souls[edit]

Hi Eddie,

Thank you again for your comments at the Nefarious: Merchant of Souls featured article candidacy. I have implemented the recommendations you have made and have responded to your comments there. I hope that I can satisfy your concerns.

Neelix (talk) 14:54, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Responded on the FAC page. EddieHugh (talk) 21:15, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your response. I have edited the article accordingly and responded at the FAC. Because you asked for input from other editors, I contacted some of the other people involved in this FAC, and one of them has responded to your comments. Please let me know if there is anything further I can do to address your concerns. Neelix (talk) 04:15, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. Responded on the FAC page again. EddieHugh (talk) 10:06, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014[edit]

Hi, if you haven't already, you should consider signing up for WikiCup 2014. Cheers, --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 02:05, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mal Waldron[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mal Waldron you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 03:32, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mal Waldron[edit]

The article Mal Waldron you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold Symbol wait.svg. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Mal Waldron for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:12, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you! ... and a challenge[edit]

GA barnstar.png The Good Article Barnstar
For your contributions to bring Mal Waldron to Good Article status. Your impressive music articles are always appreciated--keep up the good work! -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:17, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
As a side note, you seem to know your jazz, and you're doing a great job with these GAs--have you ever thought about trying to get the jazz article itself to GA, either by yourself or with collaborators? It looks like it'd easily net everyone involved a Million Award. My own knowledge of jazz goes no further than Ken Burns' TV documentary and setting up a Pandora station, but I'd be glad to pitch in with any proofreading or technical aspects. -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:27, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
I'll see. I've edited jazz a lot already, mostly cutting irrelevance and repetition, but there's a long way to go. I might look through some books that provide an overview and see what topics come up in them and how they are balanced in terms of length/detail. Thanks for the offer. EddieHugh (talk) 18:13, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Consulting some summary-level sources for weight sounds like a good approach. The challenge there will definitely be condensing and organizing more than adding. Luckily, the kind of editors who add five paragraphs on "Expatriate Hungarian post-bop piano jazz" usually don't stick around afterward to battle it out. I'm doing something similar at the moment with United Nations, which seems to have been a dumping ground for random text for a few years now without any thought to the article as a whole... the sad fate of too many of our big topics.
Anyway, happy editing, whatever you choose to take on next! -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:29, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mal Waldron[edit]

The article Mal Waldron you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Mal Waldron for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:26, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

"Home" FAN comments[edit]

I have corrected the issues that you saw in the "Home" article. Thank you for the catch! Are there any more issues that you have spotted?--Gen. Quon (Talk) 20:11, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

As I mentioned on the page, that's the only thing I really looked at. I sometimes glance through a nominated article; occasionally I get more involved, but that's generally only when I oppose or quickly see how I think it could be better. You've clearly addressed what I raised, so that's fine. EddieHugh (talk) 22:34, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Eddie Costa[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Eddie Costa you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:50, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Eddie Costa[edit]

The article Eddie Costa you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold Symbol wait.svg. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Eddie Costa for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 19:50, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

GA barnstar.png The Good Article Barnstar
I realize this is the second one of these I've given you a week's time, but that's simply a tribute to your prolific contributions. Thanks for bringing Eddie Costa to Good Article status, and keep up the good work! -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:33, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Eddie Costa[edit]

The article Eddie Costa you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Eddie Costa for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:42, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Renomination alert[edit]

Hi. An article you previously commented at its first FAC has been renominated, and it has been recommended that previous reviewers be alerted about its second FAC. Dan56 (talk) 03:41, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

I looked in too late and now see that it's on its third. The system is getting in the way a bit, perhaps. Let me know when the suggested edits situation stabilizes and I'll probably be happy to support, as I did earlier. EddieHugh (talk) 14:34, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tommy Flanagan[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Tommy Flanagan you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ritchie333 -- Ritchie333 (talk) 17:00, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Ramsar sites of Poland/GA1[edit]

Hi, I'd urge you to re-open the GA on Ramsar sites of Poland to at least give the nominator (me) a chance to work through and discuss your concerns. Ajh1492 (talk) 10:50, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

I've replied on that page. EddieHugh (talk) 11:52, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tommy Flanagan[edit]

The article Tommy Flanagan you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold Symbol wait.svg. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Tommy Flanagan for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ritchie333 -- Ritchie333 (talk) 12:00, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tommy Flanagan[edit]

The article Tommy Flanagan you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Tommy Flanagan for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ritchie333 -- Ritchie333 (talk) 22:12, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jaki Byard[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Jaki Byard you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman (talk) 04:20, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your work[edit]

Thank you for your word on the tables in the article for Brad Mehldau. They add to the article immensely. DISEman (talk) 08:02, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jaki Byard[edit]

The article Jaki Byard you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold Symbol wait.svg. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Jaki Byard for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman (talk) 04:10, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jaki Byard[edit]

The article Jaki Byard you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Jaki Byard for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman (talk) 17:22, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Jazz discogs[edit]

Cheers and thank you for your great jazz discography work!!! The sortable table should be the wikipedia standard for sideman work....Cosprings (talk) 17:35, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

John Coltrane[edit]

Just a note: your revert apparently restores a dead link. As to the second, the template states, "Link needs dab", but there does not appear to be a link there. Cheers. Mannanan51 (talk) 21:27, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

I reacted in part to your marking of your edits as 'minor' and not giving them an edit summary. I think that restoring a dead link is ok – it allows someone to find the source, if that's possible, whereas removing it altogether makes that unlikely. I sometimes forget that 'dn' has a particular meaning in Wikipedia, so have changed the tag to 'clarification needed'. Thanks. EddieHugh (talk) 22:30, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mulgrew Miller[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mulgrew Miller you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 10:50, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wynton Kelly[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Wynton Kelly you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wilhelmina Will -- Wilhelmina Will (talk) 18:42, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bobby Timmons[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Bobby Timmons you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 18:43, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mulgrew Miller[edit]

The article Mulgrew Miller you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Mulgrew Miller for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 18:45, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Translation Miller[edit]

Dear Eddie, you write beautiful articles, and I would like to translate them into german. But I face some difficulties controlling the many refs you give, as I have no account to the archives, and in german WP, it is not enough to judge the accuracy of an article. Cheers .. Room 608 13:18, 22 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roomsixhu (talkcontribs)

Do you mean that the German WP needs online sources, or that you personally want to see/check the sources? Some of my sources cannot be found online or without a subscription, but a lot can. Try searching Google books or news.google.com for the titles of magazine and newspaper articles that I use (I don't always link to the online version). Maybe the German site has a place where you can ask for someone to check/send you the original. Otherwise... I don't make things up... but I understand your wish to check. Thanks, EddieHugh (talk) 14:03, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
Your articles are precise. In the case of Timmons I would have liked to excerpt a little for my own from newspaper articles. In the case of Miller: You are the only one who mentiones the NHØP tour sponsored by Bang & Olufson. I do not need to check this e.g. But when I translate I have to decide, where I omit refs, change them or cheat anyway. In Timmons' case I checked everything I found, which was interessting articles. I more give refs to albums where everbody can make his own judgement about characteristics of style. To me it seems, that in german WP every source that is pusblished is objective, more true than the experience of a listener. -- Room 608 19:10, 23 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roomsixhu (talkcontribs)

Your GA nomination of Bobby Timmons[edit]

The article Bobby Timmons you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold Symbol wait.svg. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Bobby Timmons for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 08:50, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bobby Timmons[edit]

The article Bobby Timmons you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Bobby Timmons for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 12:01, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wynton Kelly[edit]

The article Wynton Kelly you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Wynton Kelly for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wilhelmina Will -- Wilhelmina Will (talk) 18:41, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Wynton Kelly[edit]

Hello, I wanted to let you know that I have brought Wynton Kelly, which you brought to GA status, to Did you Know. The nomination can be found at Template:Did you know nominations/Wynton Kelly. Sven Manguard Wha? 22:20, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Feedback on a new beta feature called Hovercards[edit]

Hi EddieHugh, We are collecting feedback for a new beta feature called 'Hovercards' - https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Beta_Features/Hovercards. Beta features can be turned on using the tab in the top right. It would be great if you could turn the feature on and give us your feedback. Thanks Vibhabamba (talk) 10:04, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Wynton Kelly[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Independence referendum endorsements[edit]

You're quite right to add Lord Robertson. I have been reluctant to add politicians so far (apart from independents or people who have gone against party line) because that would be quite a big job to go back through all the sources to find every notable politician who has spoken for either Yes or No. Plus it will quite quickly overwhelm the other individuals and organisations that have expressed a view. Although perhaps that is accurate. ;-) Jmorrison230582 (talk) 19:20, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

I think that he is largely an ex-politician. I see that you've added Cameron, Clegg, Salmond, etc. I think that these names are redundant, given that they are leaders of parties with a stated position. Independents or those with an interest for some other reason (from Wales, former leader of something important, for instance) can be of relevance, but I reckon that readers will assume that party members will be following the party line, so don't need a list of those who are. Interesting to see what happens when things heat up... EddieHugh (talk) 22:35, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Brad Mehldau[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Brad Mehldau you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Viriditas -- Viriditas (talk) 04:00, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm going to try and finish this tomorrow. Sorry for the delay. Viriditas (talk) 09:47, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Brad Mehldau[edit]

The article Brad Mehldau you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Brad Mehldau for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Viriditas -- Viriditas (talk) 11:21, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Don't forget, you have five days to submit a DYK. Viriditas (talk) 20:08, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
Well, it's the fifth day and you haven't submitted a DYK. So, I submitted one instead. If you don't like it, you can propose a new one or propose modifications of the existing "hook". You can review the nomination here. Viriditas (talk) 21:58, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
No problem. I tried to think of something, but nothing stood out for me. I think that, in changing the wording, you've gone away from the original meaning. I read the source as: Mehldau identifies a motif, etc. while improvising, then later turns it into a composition; the rest of the composing does not occur during the improvisation. EddieHugh (talk) 22:12, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm a bit confused by your latest change. In your edit summary you say "the composing is not done while improvising", which doesn't make any sense, since the article says: "Mehldau himself indicated that some of his compositions address a specific need, such as integrating a particular rhythm into his trio, while others emerge from something he has played while improvising. That's composing while improvising. Further, that's what the subsequent term "the latter" refers to here. If you were to say the "former", that would refer to the artificial, formal composition process of "integrating a particular rhythm into his trio". The source explains this non-improvisational process: "I write at the piano mostly. It really varies. Some tunes start out as a challenge: how to introduce something into my trio rhythmically or formally, for example, that we haven't done." So the "former" refers to the formal, non-improvisational composition process, while the "latter" refers to what Mehldau calls the "much more natural" process of composing while improvising: "a melody or motif occurs while I'm improvising, and it becomes the basis of a tune." That's composing while improvising. Mehldau refers to this natural process: "If it's the latter, I've noticed that the level of difficulty in the different stages of writing a song is analogous to a chess game". DYK has specific rules about how the hook must be cited in the body of the article, which is why I removed the close paraphrasing of "the latter" and rephrased it to match the hook in one sentence followed by the citation. Do you still disagree that "Mehldau likened the difficulty of the composition process during improvisation to a game of chess"? What, in your opinion, does "the latter" refer to in the following phrasing: "In the latter case, Mehldau likened the difficulty of the composition process to that of a game of chess". In your own words that you wrote in the article, "the latter" directly refers to compositions that "emerge from something he has played while improvising". Are you getting confused by the ambiguity of improvising compositionally and improvising live during a performance? Viriditas (talk) 22:59, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
In any case, the DYK nomination is no longer valid as a result of your change. The DYK rules state that "the hook fact must be cited in the article with an inline citation to a reliable source, since inline citations are used to support specific statements in an article. The hook fact must have an inline citation right after it". So if you don't want to use that hook, please come up with another one or propose changing the current wording. Would removing the term "jazz improvisation" satisfy your concerns? Viriditas (talk) 23:02, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
To avoid the DYK from failing a review, I've shortened it here. Do you still oppose it? Viriditas (talk) 23:25, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
My interpretation of what BM said is that he improvises, hears something that appeals, then returns later to refine it, develop it and turn it into a composition that has a beginning, middle and end. Only the initial idea comes from genuine improvisation: it's "others emerge from something he has played while improvising", not "others are composed while improvising". The original is: "a melody or motif occurs while I'm improvising, and it becomes the basis of a tune". I don't, to be honest, think that anyone could create a full tune (new melody and harmony, etc.) during the process of one improvisation, given that the improvisation is based in various ways on another tune or structure. It could be "improvising compositionally", as you suggest, but that's probably not what the typical reader will think of when seeing "improvise" in an article about a jazz musician, and there's nothing in the source to indicate what type of improvisation he's referring to. Maybe we'll have to wait for another interview that clarifies or updates the point... EddieHugh (talk) 08:46, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
So the competing interpretations are that he's 1) composing while improvising or 2) improvising while composing. I can see how it could be ambiguous. However, the way the article and source text explain it, some compositions emerge from improvisation. I think you will agree with that simple statement. After all, Mehldau writes that "a melody or motif occurs while I'm improvising, and it becomes the basis of a tune." And I think we both agree that when he makes the analogy and refers to the "latter", he is referring to ideas that emerge from improvisation. Where we differ is in the interpretation of the analogy. For me, I see him referring to the natural approach to composition where the music arises out of improvisation, rather than the formal approach focusing on constructing music, such as rhythm, etc. Viriditas (talk) 23:02, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
I didn't intend to sabotage or even oppose the DYK nomination – I wasn't aware of the rules involved... sorry about that. The version without "jazz improvisation" is accurate, I believe. EddieHugh (talk) 08:46, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Oh, there's no need to explain. I know you have only good intentions. Thanks for taking another look. Viriditas (talk) 23:02, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
BTW, I want to you know that I am perfectly happy with getting rid of the current DYK and using one you prefer. Can you find anything in the current article you wrote that might work? Just make sure it is short and interesting! Viriditas (talk) 00:08, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
The one you have is good for broad appeal. Thanks. EddieHugh (talk) 09:11, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Brad Mehldau[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:13, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Good work! :) Viriditas (talk)

Graham Avery[edit]

Here he is his biography on the European Parliament website [1]. He is hon. DG of the Commission and an adviser to the EPC think tank. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 05:37, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for finding that clarification. Still not quite clear if he is the Hon DG or an Hon DG. EddieHugh (talk) 08:58, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

"Tabloidese"[edit]

I was referring to the use of the word "boosted", rather than the source provided. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 21:10, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Spelling[edit]

Your edit of Jazz, where you took the word "widespread" and broke it up into "wide spread", seems to require an explanation. There are plenty of dictionaries that show it as a single word, and none that advocate breaking it into two words. Chris the speller yack 16:09, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Apologies. It wasn't intentional and I didn't notice that it had happened. I must somehow have selected 'rollback' while looking at your edit; that reverts without any additional step. I've undone my change. EddieHugh (talk) 18:08, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Cool. Chris the speller yack 19:57, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Lars Ulrich[edit]

In terms of long-lasting influence, even the usage of winding down by heavy metal musicians post-gig should be noted! kencf0618 (talk)

Maybe if it influenced their music, but not if it influences just their relaxing... good to know that it's spread widely, though. EddieHugh (talk) 19:07, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Elmo Hope[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Elmo Hope you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of TLSuda -- TLSuda (talk) 19:00, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Elmo Hope[edit]

The article Elmo Hope you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold Symbol wait.svg. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Elmo Hope for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of TLSuda -- TLSuda (talk) 16:00, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Elmo Hope[edit]

The article Elmo Hope you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Elmo Hope for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of TLSuda -- TLSuda (talk) 02:22, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Elmo Hope[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:57, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Art Farmer discography[edit]

Hi EddieHugh, You are indeed correct as to the existence of two seperate albums titled The Time and the Place and I'm currently in the process of creating articles for both. I reinstated the Mosaic album as The Time and the Place: The Lost Concert in order to differentiate. In my haste I mistakenly assumed them to be both the same album but I stand corrected. DISEman (talk) 04:16, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

GA review[edit]

Hey...I didn't follow up much but did you quick-fail A.R.Rahman's GAN? The nominator never seem to have edited the article after he nominated the article. Again, I believe he never edited earlier as well. I was just curious so thought of asking you. - Vivvt (Talk) 19:37, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

I did, for reasons given on the review page. I checked before reviewing and also saw that the nominator had not done much editing of it (I checked back to March, when some was done). EddieHugh (talk) 19:50, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Plagiarism[edit]

I have just shamelessly repeated your careful condensations at Scottish independence referendum, 2014 as if they were my own, trying new way of persuading the recalcitrant. But just say the word - no need to state a reason - and I'll happily self-revert. NebY (talk) 17:05, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

These people usually disappear after a short time, so I usually wait, but that article is being edited so much that the moment would soon pass. I thank you for your edit and support. EddieHugh (talk) 18:37, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Scottish Refrendum post of voter fraud[edit]

Eddie, disregard my old post. My apologies for paranoid friendly fire.

Hasaan Ibn Ali[edit]

Eddie, I have replied to your message on my talk page. HomageToDonByas (talk) 14:49, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Jazz pianists[edit]

Hi, very pleased to see a quality editor interested in jazz topics with some great goals of achievement on here. I'm a keen jazz guitarist and (learning) jazz pianist myself! I've been building the List of jazz standards and created entries on the years in jazz a while back but I haven't got around to expanding most of them yet. I think it would be good if you could add 10 or 20 jazz standards to your lists to aim to get up to GA, they're really diabolical generally on here, even some of the very popular ones! I'd be happy to work with you on a few of them. I'd be very interested in taking somebody like Bill Evans to FA, Oscar and Art also I really think should be brought up to FA status. I would also like to get Joe Pass up to GA, but I don't think there's much bio info generally on him. BTW, thanks for your excellent comments at the FAC, can you clarify if that's a support?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:57, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld: The goals are largely personal ones; I haven't decided if the GA and FA ones should be for the jazz project instead, but I haven't had to, as no-one else has produced one! The motivation is for the pianists for now and the goals are a long way off, so I'm not considering adding in other things at the moment (although I have created a few jazz standard articles). They'd need to go beyond jazzstandards.com to be worthwhile.
At a glance, the Evans article looks not bad, the Peterson one is a mess and Tatum's is excessively about technique/style and comments on it. The last is of greatest interest to me, especially as far less has been written about his life (still only one biography?). Pass shouldn't be particularly hard, although that's a comment made without checking.
I changed the FAC from Comments to No objections as, from memory, I've supported only once and that went wrong when the article got hit with a plagiarism charge and failed. I think that you have enough supports to get through, but I can have a go at checking all of the criteria (rather than the prose and bits of the refs) if you wish. EddieHugh (talk) 18:07, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
So you're worried that if you support they'll do a spotcheck and show up problems and you'll feel sheepish again? I understand, but someday is going to come when you have an article at FAC and you'll be grateful for the support, if everybody worried about that then not much would be promoted! It's up to you, I do have a lot of support, but I do feel a little disappointed after spending so much time addressing all of your points you're still not willing to support it hehe! It is much easier to oppose an article than to support though, I agree. Don't worry about it now, thanks for the time you put into reviewing it anyway! On the jazz front, yes, one editor a yer or two back began giving Bill Evans a sizable expansion, I don't think they finished it though and only got up to the mid 60s - coverage from 1965 to 1980 is rather poor. There's still a lot of gaps but might be one to look at and get to GA, I might look into it later this week.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:16, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Kind of, kind of! It's more that I find that people post Support or 'Support on prose' seemingly without having checked through all of the criteria; that instance stressed the point for me. It might be a few days, as there's far too much going on in the world of oxygen right now, but I'll try to look through it again. EddieHugh (talk) 21:55, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I can see that, the thing is you're super thorough so literally want everything to be checked before you're 100% convinced! I've asked Crisco to do a spotcheck anyway. Admittedly I was put off for several years from contributing to FAs as I found the climate at FAC too hostile, people seemed to oppose for the sake of it in the old days on here. This has improved in recent years with peer reviews and collaboration I think. I agree that FAs should be of the highest standard and thorough reviews are an essential part of it but a line has to be drawn, there's no such thing as perfection. My concern is that some editors are put off from FAC because they find it impossible to deal with. Some of the people who helped write the Bramshill article feel that way about FA. We want to encourage more and more people to go for FA rather than scare them off by making them feel as though it has to be perfect. Finding a balance is difficult though! And if you also consider how much difficulty we get on TFA day with complaints and that, makes it difficult to convince editors that it's worth the trouble! Currently listening to this two of my favourites Joe Pass and Oscar together! On the List of jazz standards I was thinking about revising to a table format with columns for composer, year of release, original key and a summary. What do you think? Perhaps the time for now would be better spent getting a standard like Satin Doll or Body and Soul up to GA? I mean look at how poor Satin Doll is, one of the most popular standards is still pretty much a stub!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 23:16, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
After a check of some things, now supported. I've listened to the first Pass-OP track, which is a ridiculously strong start. The list – that sounds like a lot of work and largely duplicating what's on the individual pages; there'd need to be a lot of notes on the composers (some were gambled away by the original composer, for instance, so the named, legal composer is just a starting point). Better to concentrate on converting the redlinks and targeting a GA or two (Body and Soul? 'Round Midnight (song)?). I haven't collaborated with a target (e.g. GA), so welcome suggestions on pointing the way forward. EddieHugh (talk) 17:39, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for that. Yes, I think it's better to just work on the standards and red links. I've already started a fair few. Round Midnight, Stella By Starlight, Autumn Leaves, any of the most popular ones would be good. Perhaps you could add getting the top 10 standards on the standards website up to GA status on your goals? Check out this performance of Round Midnight [2] .♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:00, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
I'll add it mentally – not even at 50% of any of the pianist goals yet! Petrucciani is another one to expand... EddieHugh (talk) 21:54, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

I got you an image for Wynton Kelly. Perhaps in the article you could add something about the Wynton Kelly Trio or am I missing something?♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:30, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for that – it's easy to find pictures, but not easy to find ones with the required permission / status and I'm far from expert in that area. The Kelly trio is the topic of the penultimate para of the 1959–71 section. I'll move the group photo down there. EddieHugh (talk) 12:27, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Good job on Pickens, I've requested some photos on flickr, hopefully somebody will kindly donate one image. Any others you wanted images for? BTW, do you have access to Newspapers.com, that's usually a tremendous source on American subjects. If not strongly recommend you apply WP:Newspapers.com, Sadads deals with all that.♦ Dr. Blofeld 23:04, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
I do; it's been patchily useful. Photos for GAs: Eddie Costa (I contemplated contacting his family, but didn't); Jaki Byard; the Tommy Flanagan and Mulgrew Miller ones aren't very good. Thanks, EddieHugh (talk) 00:00, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

We hope can you be of any assistance to Mr. Hugh here? Bramshill House passed FAC BTW so your support didn't backfire this time :-). Thanks again for your terrific review of it!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:52, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

OK-the recent check of Eddie Costa and Jaki Byard turned up nothing free. However, that doesn't mean that free-use photos might not be found in future. I'll have a look for Tommy Flanagan and Mulgrew Miller to see if we can get something going here. We hope (talk) 17:56, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Sorry to say that there's nothing free at present for Tommy Flanagan or Mulgrew Miller. :// 02:20, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for trying. EddieHugh (talk) 10:49, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

The Tower House[edit]

Bramshill House passed FAC, thankyou for your input. I've opened a peer review for William Burges's The Tower House. Comments will be most welcome. Cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:07, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Thankyou for your input into the peer review. The article is now at FAC. Cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:09, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Newspapers.com check-in[edit]

Hello EddieHugh,

You are receiving this message because you have a one-year subscription to Newspapers.com through the Wikipedia Library. This is a brief update, to remind you about that access:

  • Please make sure that you can still log in to your Newspapers.com account. If you are having trouble let me know.
  • Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, to include citations with links on Wikipedia. Links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed. Also, keep in mind that part of Newspapers.com is open access via the clipping function. Clippings allow you to identify particular articles, extract them from the original full sheet newspaper, and share them through unique URLs. Wikipedia users who click on a clipping link in your citation list will be able to access that particular article, and the full page of the paper if they come from the clipping, without needing to subscribe to Newspapers.com. For more information about how to use clippings, see http://www.newspapers.com/basics/#h-clips .
  • Do you write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, let me know and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate it if you filled out this short survey. Your input will help us to facilitate this particular partnership, and to discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thank you,

Wikipedia Library Newspapers.com account coordinator HazelAB (talk) 18:37, 13 April 2015 (UTC)