Talk:Are You Experienced

Unexplained removal

Why was this review quote removed from the "Reception and legacy" section? Dan56 (talk) 17:21, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

1) Bob Christgau is an absolutely terrible source for music that is at all hard or heavy, and due to the fact that he has made numerous disparaging comments about the related genres I think his bias precludes him from being used at this article for critical commentary. 2) He was quite vocal in his dislike of Hendrix, so this review seems to be a pathetic way to save face; he's backtracking so the meaning is lost. 3) You cannot continue to go around to every single article and demand that they include a review from Christgau. You are POV pushing and if I didn't know better I'd swear that you either worked for Bob or you are Bob. 4) The "review" is exactly three sentences long, which is not at all serious critical commentary. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 17:31, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

• This is actually quite a common situation on Wikipedia where we have a choice of sources to include. It has to be down to editorial discussion. I see from the central discussion that Christgau is known for writing very short reviews. Dan56, is there a reason you are adding these reviews to many albums? --John (talk) 19:28, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes, the same reason AllMusic's reviews are added to almost every album article--these reasons were outlined at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Albums#Robert_Christgau_as_a_source_for_.22hard_or_heavy.22_music.3F. Dan56 (talk) 19:32, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

• The problem isn't so much that Dan adds a Christgau quote to every single article that he edits, its that its for the sake of adding it, not that it brings anything to the article. Also, using Christgau to explain hard rock or metal is like asking a skinhead what they think of ethnic Jewish music. Christgau is a self-avowed jazz fan who is on record disparaging this kind of music. Also, the business that you can gain consensus with your friends at an album project and then dictate content at an article page where that discussion has not taken place is absurd. John, you asked us to accept a voluntary IB, so how does Dan's continuation of his edit warring here work with that agreement? Now Dan will canvass three or four editors who never edit here to support his position, thus bullying yet another article into his will. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 19:33, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

• Also, Dan's approach is basically that no editors can ever remove anything that he added, but if they do then he will attempt to exhaust them while recruiting Wikibuddies to sway the discussion, hence my accusations of meatpuppetry. In the next few minutes several editors with a history of working with Dan will show up here supporting anything he wants, which is classic WP:MEAT. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 19:37, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

OK, let's leave the ad hominems for a moment and pretend we are all the best of pals discussing this over a small beer in a Paris cafe. Dan56, do you see why your additions are being seen as unhelpful? There is no Wikipedia guideline (that I know of; tell me if I am wrong) that says we need to add Christgau or AllMusic reviews to all music articles. --John (talk) 20:11, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

"Articles should provide an overview of the common interpretations of a creative work, preferably with citations to notable individuals holding that interpretation. Verifiable public and scholarly critiques provide useful context for works of art." (WP:SUBJECTIVE). As the discussion currently taking place at WP:ALBUMS' talk page continues to show, Christgau is clearly a notable individual holding the interpretation in the quote GabeMc removed. Btw, since Gabe recently responded at that project talk page, and since he has expressed the view that Christgau is an inappropriate source at other album articles/discussion, might it be more appropriate to discuss this at WP:ALBUMS? Otherwise, this anti-Christgau argument can be argued by him elsewhere--"an absolutely terrible source for music that is at all hard or heavy", which makes this an issue broader than just this article. Dan56 (talk) 20:44, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

The simple points are that not every article needs a quote from Christgau, who is not the best source for every single music article on Wikipedia. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:10, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

I'd really like to know what problem you have specifically with "In a retrospective review for Blender, the music critic Robert Christgau described Are You Experienced as "a roiling sea of guitar" that influenced the way in which "a generation of fans heard music". A consensus at WP:ALBUMS (unsolicited comments from project members who edit album articles of various genres) found him to be a more-than appropriate source here. Dan56 (talk) 21:21, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

I absolutely require you both to stop commenting at all here about each other. You are welcome to discuss your individual dispute at my page. We need to keep this area for discussing improvements to the Are You Experienced article. I've redacted part of each of your posts which broke talk guidelines. Please, both of you, stop this bickering here. --John (talk) 21:35, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

With the issue of whether or not Christgau is an appropriate source for music that is "hard or heavy" settled at WP:ALBUMS' talk page, what problem do either of you (if that's the case) have specifically with "In a retrospective review for Blender, the music critic Robert Christgau described Are You Experienced as 'a roiling sea of guitar' that influenced the way in which 'a generation of fans heard music'." Looking at secondary sources covering each critic, he appears to be a more notable critic than Noe Goldwasser and as much notable, if not more than, Charles Shaar Murray--the other two in that paragraph, neither of which have been "trim"med out. Is it Christgau's diction, grammar, what? in this quote? Dan56 (talk) 22:43, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Goldwasser founded one of the most widely read guitar magazines in the world, and he knows Hendrix's music inside and out as both a musicologist and a guitar player. He served as the series editor of the Hendrix Transcriptions that transcribed and analyzed every single note on Jimi's three studio albums, including bass and drums. Charles Shaar Murray is one of the most respected UK music journalists of the last 50 years and the author of arguably the best scholarly analysis of Hendrix's music ever published. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:48, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

You know, the discussion at WP:ALBUMS' talk page cited several secondary sources from me and one from Wasted Time R about Christgau, none of which I see have changed your dislike of him. Regardless, I don't see how any of what you said (verifiable or not) proves my previous remark untrue. And it definitely hasn't answered it--so I'll ask again: What problem do you specifically have with the "Reception" section continuing to include "In a retrospective review for Blender, the music critic Robert Christgau described Are You Experienced as 'a roiling sea of guitar' that influenced the way in which 'a generation of fans heard music'." Dan56 (talk) 22:59, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Protection

I have protected this page for 24 hours while the content dispute is ironed out here. --John (talk) 22:58, 22 March 2014 (UTC)