Jump to content

Talk:Eddie Kramer: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Undid revision 625326719 by 88.68.172.133 (talk)
Undid revision 625326858 by Robert.Harker (talk)
Line 34: Line 34:
== Encyclopedic tone and neutral point of view ==
== Encyclopedic tone and neutral point of view ==
I've just reverted the recent batch of edits as the tone and format was more like a promotional blurb than an encyclopaedia article - Wikipedia articles must adhere to a [[Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view|neutral point of view]]. Feel free to add additional content to the existing article, but please take care to maintain the tone of the current article. Cheers - [[User:Gobeirne|Gobeirne]] ([[User talk:Gobeirne|talk]]) 23:41, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
I've just reverted the recent batch of edits as the tone and format was more like a promotional blurb than an encyclopaedia article - Wikipedia articles must adhere to a [[Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view|neutral point of view]]. Feel free to add additional content to the existing article, but please take care to maintain the tone of the current article. Cheers - [[User:Gobeirne|Gobeirne]] ([[User talk:Gobeirne|talk]]) 23:41, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

I must wholeheartedly agree, as the current 'collaborations' section reads like the author was giving eddie a blowjob while writing. [[Special:Contributions/88.68.172.133|88.68.172.133]] ([[User talk:88.68.172.133|talk]]) 03:44, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:45, 13 September 2014


Cleanup

If someone has the time, this needs some work ... it lacks a chronological order and is a bit too .... gushy. I have removed some of the worst excesses. It needs references for the Kramer quotes. It has an excess of red Wiki links. It also needs a more precise production credits section, rather like Nick Launay, which I can do in the next few days. Grimhim 02:10, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added production credits. His engineering credits, which are rather more numerous, can be added beneath. I may get a chance tomorrow. Grimhim 11:22, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear. Most of the material in this article is a direct lift from Eddie Kramer's website, a breach of WP:CP and a clear explanation of the effusiveness of praise for Kramer's work. I'll have a crack at cutting this back. Grimhim 03:03, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:WoodstockTheAlbum-Cover.jpg

Image:WoodstockTheAlbum-Cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Year of birth?

What's his correct year of birth? The lead (1942) doesn't match the category (1941). GoingBatty (talk) 00:52, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Encyclopedic tone and neutral point of view

I've just reverted the recent batch of edits as the tone and format was more like a promotional blurb than an encyclopaedia article - Wikipedia articles must adhere to a neutral point of view. Feel free to add additional content to the existing article, but please take care to maintain the tone of the current article. Cheers - Gobeirne (talk) 23:41, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I must wholeheartedly agree, as the current 'collaborations' section reads like the author was giving eddie a blowjob while writing. 88.68.172.133 (talk) 03:44, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]