Talk:Blowfly (musician): Difference between revisions
Synchronized listas with DEFAULTSORT from article, applied fixes to WPBiography template. Did I get it wrong? |
No edit summary |
||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
}} |
}} |
||
While some of the information is incorrect on this page, namely Blowfly's Date of Birth, which is 2/14/39 -- The great bulk of it is accurate. While some believe think the multiple remakes of "Rap Dirty" and "Blowfly's Rapp" believe that proves the song did not originate earlier, it is a fact that Blowfly had a self press of Rap Dirty in 1965 has been reported in numerous publications for decades. I have added three sources to this page to rectify the lack of sources here. [[User:Helltrout|Helltrout]] ([[User talk:Helltrout|talk]]) 00:15, 21 February 2009 (UTC) |
While some of the information is incorrect on this page, namely Blowfly's Date of Birth, which is 2/14/39 -- The great bulk of it is accurate. While some believe think the multiple remakes of "Rap Dirty" and "Blowfly's Rapp" believe that proves the song did not originate earlier, it is a fact that Blowfly had a self press of Rap Dirty in 1965 has been reported in numerous publications for decades. I have added three sources to this page to rectify the lack of sources here. [[User:Helltrout|Helltrout]] ([[User talk:Helltrout|talk]]) 00:15, 21 February 2009 (UTC) |
||
A claim made by Blowfly's publicist, no matter how many magazines it is repeated to, is not evidence that Blowfly made a rap record 15 years before its first actual known release, during a time when rap music didn't even exist. And surely the fact that no such record has ever surfaced is a good reason to be skeptical. There are many collectors of rare Miami funk 45s, but not a single person in the world appears to own this alleged 1965 pressing, which if it existed would be priceless and certainly the pride of any collection (not to mention radically change modern music history as we know it). There are no pictures, no sound clips, no catalog numbers, and no data from the copyright office to support the claim that "Rap Dirty" was released any time before its known pressing on T.K. Records in 1980. It seems much more likely that the rumor of a 1965 version of "Rapp Dirty" is just that: a rumor, albeit one that may have been perpetuated by Blowfly himself. While anything is possible, in the interest of intellectual honesty, we should at the very least maintain an agnostic stance on the recording until actual evidence for its existence surfaces. |
Revision as of 03:56, 15 August 2011
Biography: Musicians Stub‑class | ||||||||||
|
While some of the information is incorrect on this page, namely Blowfly's Date of Birth, which is 2/14/39 -- The great bulk of it is accurate. While some believe think the multiple remakes of "Rap Dirty" and "Blowfly's Rapp" believe that proves the song did not originate earlier, it is a fact that Blowfly had a self press of Rap Dirty in 1965 has been reported in numerous publications for decades. I have added three sources to this page to rectify the lack of sources here. Helltrout (talk) 00:15, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
A claim made by Blowfly's publicist, no matter how many magazines it is repeated to, is not evidence that Blowfly made a rap record 15 years before its first actual known release, during a time when rap music didn't even exist. And surely the fact that no such record has ever surfaced is a good reason to be skeptical. There are many collectors of rare Miami funk 45s, but not a single person in the world appears to own this alleged 1965 pressing, which if it existed would be priceless and certainly the pride of any collection (not to mention radically change modern music history as we know it). There are no pictures, no sound clips, no catalog numbers, and no data from the copyright office to support the claim that "Rap Dirty" was released any time before its known pressing on T.K. Records in 1980. It seems much more likely that the rumor of a 1965 version of "Rapp Dirty" is just that: a rumor, albeit one that may have been perpetuated by Blowfly himself. While anything is possible, in the interest of intellectual honesty, we should at the very least maintain an agnostic stance on the recording until actual evidence for its existence surfaces.