Talk:Louis Armstrong

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Former featured articleLouis Armstrong is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Article milestones
July 19, 2004Featured article candidatePromoted
October 20, 2006Featured article reviewDemoted
Current status: Former featured article

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Louis Armstrong. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:05, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Article intervention[edit]


It's good to see someone has the time to rehabilitate this article. Pops deserves a GA. I have attempted (and to some degree succeeded) in finding citations for unsourced statements here. Perhaps I should have been bolder about deleting old unsourced text and unverifiable claims. At other times, I may have cut too deeply. The problem is that a paragraph may contain a, b, c, and d. One credible source supports b and d, and another one supports a, but neither supports d. It does not mean d is untrue. Should an editor just delete the whole paragraph and rewrite it according to what credible source is at hand? Should the editor splice the paragraph with a hodge-podge of citations?

I am not knowledgeable enough about Armstrong and (or editing Wikipedia) to bring this up to a GA on my own, but I can be a part of it.

I hope you might share your general impressions about the state of the article. cheers, Oldsanfelipe (talk) 20:36, 15 June 2018 (UTC) edited once byOldsanfelipe (talk) 20:39, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Everything on Wikipedia needs to be sourced. Every sentence. If writers stick to the facts, it's not as a big of a problem when sources overlap.
Vmavanti (talk) 21:52, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
At what point does the slicing, dicing, and restructuring become synthesis?
I agree with you: if you add text, make sure its supported by an existing citation or support it with a new citation. Another problem with references takes the following form: editor1 writes a followed by citation C resulting in aC. Editor2 writes b and editor3 writes c, resulting in a paragraph with the form abcC. Statements b and c appear to be supported by C, but they were really just unsourced statements placed in front of an unrelated citation. I removed some statements like this last year, though I don't recall which ones.Oldsanfelipe (talk) 23:05, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Unnecessary section on "Contemporary trumpet players influenced by Louis Armstrong"?[edit]

This recently-added section consists of a list of names, some with and some without articles, and is unsourced. Even if each name was sourced, though, Armstrong's influence seems so ubiquitous as to not merit specific note? As a section list it would always bear significant omissions. I would favour deleting this section but am posting here to seek consensus. (While I was writing this, ewulp has tagged the lack of citations.) AllyD (talk) 09:02, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

I also think the section is unnecessary for the reason you've stated. Ewulp (talk) 00:41, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Battleground or Battlefield?[edit]

In early life it appears that his neighborhood is referred to both ways in this article. Is one correct, were they used interchangeably, or are they two different neighborhoods that had similar names? This could use some clarification or editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:EA00:107:3C07:FC82:2062:1E25:77A8 (talk) 20:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Good catch. I have fixed the problem. Cheers, Oldsanfelipe (talk) 21:48, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

First name pronunciation?[edit]

I believe I've heard his first name pronounced like "Louie", though I may have heard it pronounced at other times like "Lewis". If there is a good authority on which pronunciation he used it might be useful to include the pronunciation in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:44, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Correct birthdate[edit]

Armstrong's birth date is referred to twice in the article as August 4th....once at the beginning with a birth year of 1901, and later in reference to his death just before his birthday. The date shown is nearly 11 months incorrect.

His grave site is viewable here:

at 23:51.

I doubt that his grave marker date of birth is incorrect. This article should be changed to show July 4, 1900 as his birthdate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antennaman1 (talkcontribs) 20:47, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing the two birth dates given for Armstrong. However, the article already does a good job of addressing the issue in the first paragraph of Louis Armstrong#Early Life. Please take a look at the inline citations. The more recent consensus among biographers is the 1901 birth date. Perhaps the article could be improved by adding more sources to demonstrate the consensus. Second, grave markers are often incorrect.
While it may seem very strange to us that a person might be ignorant of his own birth date, it is not when you consider that Armstrong was born before social security cards and drivers licenses, and in general, when most people did not carry personal identification. Add to that the frequent loss of vital records caused by fires and floods. Cheers, Oldsanfelipe (talk) 21:42, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 January 2019[edit]

Louis married Daisy Parker on 24 Mar 1919 according to Louisiana, Parish Marriages, 1837-1957 from Familysearch Laurwarr (talk) 16:52, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

 Done Changed marriage year to Parker to 1919, per Bergreen (chapter says that they met and married after November 1918). Remove Parker's age per Collier, who says that she was 21. More/better sources may be needed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:12, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 May 2019[edit]

Change birth date August 4, 1901 to July 4, 1900. According to his autobiography, Swing That Music, Louis Armstrong was born on July 4, 1900. (talk) 18:34, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: This is addressed in the first paragraph at Louis Armstrong § Early life. Without consensus here on the talk page to make the change, this edit request cannot be completed. (And I don't foresee a consensus forming here until more of a consensus exists amongst the published sources.) ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 19:35, 10 May 2019 (UTC)