Talk:Bill Ham

	Biography portal 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.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians.

United States: Texas Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Texas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as Low-importance).

Notability

If you read the biographies of Bill Ham provided, you'll see that he played a major role in the creation and organization of ZZ Top. Furthermore, ZZ Top is (on the off change you weren't aware) very famous, so it makes more sense for people related to them to have articles than for a band whose own notability was marginal. You're really barking up the wrong tree when you worry about the notability of this guy; I can't even see why he'd be a borderline case. -- SCZenz 18:53, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This person may not meet the criteria of WP:BAND or WP:BIO. While he is associated with a notable band, it's not at all clear that that's good enough. In the corporate world, this job would be equivalent to being a former brand manager for a national brand, such as, say, an executive vice president at Gilette in charge of Right Guard. Wikipedia doesn't usually consider that notable.

WP:BAND is for performers. "Constructing the band's image" doesn't qualify. Going down the list in WP:BIO, he doesn't seem to meet any of the qualifications.

Ham deserves a mention in the ZZ Top article, but doesn't rate a standalone article. --John Nagle 19:02, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You misunderstand the role of notability guidelines; WP:BIO has examples of notable people, not an exhaustive list of every reason someone might be notable enough. He isn't just "with the band," he's played a key role in it and (according to our article) he has some notable side projects as well. This guy is verifiable and has a clear claim to fame; there's no purpose to reducing his biography and stuffing it into ZZ Top when it could be expanded. -- SCZenz 19:22, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You also might do a little google searching, and note that he's wrtten a bunch of ZZ Top's songs. You could AfD the article, just as an opportunity to gauge consensus, but I honestly think you'd embarass yourself. -- SCZenz 19:24, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are people with whom you have to refer to notability guidelines, and there are people who are just famous. Paris Hilton is famous for absolutely nothing apart from being a waste of public effort, but shes still famous and thus deserves an article. This guy is just famous, I have heard of him, and I am just some layman who knows three ZZ Top songs and has a moderate interest in pop music. Guidelines are only guidelines. Jdcooper 20:38, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POV?

It seems a bit over the top to make analogies to George Martin and the Beatles. If you are quoting a review say that and cite the source, otherwise this seems to have an overly favorable bias for an encyclopedia article. Also, it would be nice to have some sort of discography of works that he produced? What was the title of his own recording for Dot Records? -MrFizyx 21:01, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Given the level of credit given to Ham in the Bill Ham article, it might be appropriate to revise the ZZ Top article to begin "ZZ Top was a band created by manager Bill Ham, who hired musicians Billy Gibbons (vocals and guitar), Dusty Hill (bass guitar and vocals), and Frank Beard (drums), then built them into a world-famous group." But that would be pushing it. --John Nagle 21:23, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a link to his all music guide entry. Anyone wanting to do a serious job here might start there. Looks like he has produced records for Clint Black, Dwight Yoakam, and even a soundtrack for a teenage mutant ninja turtles movie (go figure). He appears to have songwriting credits as well. This would be a much better article if editors stick to the facts. I just lack the personal interest or the ZZ Top record collection that is needed here. -MrFizyx 15:32, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This entire entry reads like an advertisement or press release. Needs to be rewritten as an encyclopedia entry or deleted.71.115.89.70 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:01, 24 September 2010 (UTC).[reply]

CFD

Just to let everyone know, there is a CFD to delete Category:Albums produced by Bill Ham. Since the only articles found in the category are that of ZZ Top albums, the category is redundant. Yes, I'm aware that he has produced other artists. Still, it's a redundant category with too much focus on ZZ Top, when there are other categories for ZZ Top. I haven't had time to check and see if articles exist for any non-ZZ Top albums he's produced. If anyone has a desire to correct or clarify the problem, I'll be glad to drop the discussion.RadioKAOS (talk) 20:40, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Yellow Payges (band)

I have an album in my record collection: "The Yellow Payges, Volume 1" (UNI 73045). The band's guitarist is named Bill Ham.

I don't suppose this would be the SAME Bill Ham...? Shotguntony (talk) 04:13, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it would. And that should be mentioned in the article. I actually came here to find out if he ever recorded anything else. Guess I'll have to look elsewhere for that information. 71.190.87.124 (talk) 02:28, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

C-Class rating

I don't understand why it is rated as a C-Class article given the lack of references. Capitalistroadster (talk) 06:16, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's neither a Stub nor Start, per WP:BIOG/A for example. A C class "cites more than one reliable source and is better developed in style, structure, and quality than Start-Class", a Start class "has a usable amount of good content but is weak in many areas. Quality of the prose may be distinctly unencyclopedic, and MoS compliance non-existent. The article should satisfy fundamental content policies, such as BLP." While a Stub is a basic, "very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work to become a meaningful article". You may change this to a Start, but I disagree whole-heartedly that it is a Stub for only having four references. — Wylie pedia 07:22, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]