Talk:Chuck Berry

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Chuck Berry has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
June 6, 2010 Good article nominee Listed
In the news A news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on March 18, 2017.

RFC: Which image should be used?[edit]

There is a clear consensus for Option A. Cunard (talk) 04:57, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Resolved: Consensus for Option A

We have a number of excellent images of Berry from various periods of his life. Which should be used in the infobox? MB298 (talk) 00:25, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Survey[edit]

  • Personally, I support Option C. MB298 (talk) 00:25, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
    • Changing to Option A after reading following comments. MB298 (talk) 23:39, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
  • A. They're all very nice, but best to keep the rock'n'roll-era one in the box. Rothorpe (talk) 00:34, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
  • I have noticed a trend of using most recent available photos for living persons, while using a more archetypal and defining image for those who have passed on. I agree therefore that the image must come from the rock and roll era and support option A (corrected) Edaham (talk) 00:53, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Option C presents a mid-career, hangdog Berry. Thus splitting the difference between the emerging talent and the emeritus status guru with campy cred we knew in recent years. It's all about essence, daddy.RYPJack (talk) 01:10, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Option A Works for me. It has the feel to it that reminds me of the movie Back to the Future scene where Chuck's song was supposedly influenced by Marty. Chuck's style back then has that true "old school" Rock and Roll feel that Photo A reveals. Can't match that I believe with the other photos. JungleCat Shiny!/Oohhh! 05:09, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Option A is how I remember him best. Thincat (talk) 07:03, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
  • A. Agree with Rothorpe: the RnR image is best, and this captures the essence of him and his legacy. – The Bounder (talk) 08:18, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
  • A - the current one. SilkTork ✔Tea time 08:40, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
  • A is iconic. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:09, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Option A is 50s Berry and that's when most of his memorable songs were recorded. --Seduisant (talk) 23:46, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Option A for all of the reasons already listed. If I had a heyday, I would want to be remembered by that picture, not something from my sunset years. --SlimJimTalk 03:15, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
  • A - agree with above comments. HelloStarling (talk) 11:18, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
  • AKendall-K1 (talk) 13:51, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
  • A per Rothorpe and The Bounder. There is nothing wrong with option C, but the current one is best. AndrewOne (talk) 15:09, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
  • A - as others said, iconic of the hey day. Option C is a close second as it is mid-career and at the Midnight Special, while A is a publicity shot of no intrinsic note other than the date. Markbassett (talk) 04:09, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
  • A - Pile on. - Mlpearc (open channel) 04:21, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
  • A - close WP:SNOW. It's iconic and the one most often used. SW3 5DL (talk) 15:00, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
  • A — there's no question of A. Iconic, as has been said. It's Chuck Berry. That's Chuck Berry. —BLZ · talk 09:09, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
  • A — I guess, that's the iconic one, the mischievous one, the youthful one. I just hope we can also use B, somewhere in the article, as it actually really shows the guy's immense warmth and soul. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:54, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
  • A - When I think of Chuck Berry, I instantly think of his early days as a star. This is undoubtedly his heyday and most famous style/appearance.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 00:57, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Controversies[edit]

Hi, I think we are going to need a section in the article about Chuck Berry's three arrests, prison, problems with substance abuse, etc. This person was a great musician, but he certainly was not an angel! IQ125 (talk) 10:06, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

If you read the article, these are all covered in the chronology of his life. – The Bounder (talk) 10:46, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Most of them are not mentioned in the article. It is good to summarize them separately, so readers can find them more easily as follows: IQ125 (talk) 10:49, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Chuck Berry had controversies in his life including three separate arrests. The first arrest resulted in a three-year prison sentence for armed robbery in 1942.[1] The second arrest lead to a prison sentence under the Mann Act for transporting of a 14-year-old girl across state lines for "immoral purposes” in 1960.[2]. The third arrest lead to Berry's and conviction of substance abuse in 1990.[3] In addition, Berry was sentenced to four-months in prison for tax evasion in 1979.[4]

In 1990, Berry faced a class action lawsuit from woman alleging that he had videotaped them, while undressing and using the washroom on his property.[5]

A, yes they are (read the article); B. No, that gives them undue weight. The information is aleady there, and I suggest you read through the article to see it. Edit warring to force it in is not good (see WP:BRD, so perhaps see if a consensus develops here? - The Bounder (talk) 10:52, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Let a consensus build here and we should both adhere to it. Edit warring is not good. I appreciate Chuck Berry's music as I presume you do, but people should be aware that he had a criminal side to him, he was no saint! IQ125 (talk) 10:59, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
The article already makes it abundantly clear that he had brushes with the law. Perhaps you should have read it through first? – The Bounder (talk) 11:03, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

There are many aspects of Berry's life that are interesting. That he was imprisoned during the height of his success, and on release his songs were now more famous as being done by white artists such as the Beach Boys, the Beatles and the Rolling Stones, so he spent the rest of his life in their shadows, is, for me, a particularly fascinating one. Berry was famously very frustrated by that. When working on this article in 2010, I wanted to bring that out, but couldn't find enough reliable sources to give it the coverage to do it justice. I think I may look again in a few months, as there will be a series of commentaries on his life and career in the coming weeks, and some of them may focus on that.

As regards putting together a dedicated section on controversies, that wouldn't be appropriate under our guidelines. Berry is not notable for those events, he is notable for his music. Where those events impacted on his life or were widely reported we should, yes, discuss them in detail, but to put them all together in a "Controversies" section would not be allowed in this situation per WP:SYNTHESIS, and WP:UNDUE. All the events mentioned above are in the article. SilkTork ✔Tea time 17:01, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

I think the main "Chuck Berry" article is going to require a fork to the "Chuck Berry controversies" supporting article. There is quite a lot of detail needed to explain the multiple legal and prison issues Chuck had! IQ125 (talk) 10:14, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
That's not going to happen. See Wikipedia:Consensus. Kendall-K1 (talk) 18:31, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Chuck Berry[edit]

I can't see any mention of my favourite Memphis Tennessee — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.29.241.79 (talk) 10:31, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

It's listed in the discography section Beaglemix (talk) 17:13, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Good article?[edit]

This article was promoted to Good status back in 2010 and has been edited significantly following Berry's death. I wonder if a Good article reassessment would be appropriate? ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:04, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

  • Only if you believe the article has been degraded. It looks like all the recent additions have been well sourced. - The Bounder (talk) 15:13, 22 March 2017 (UTC)