Talk:Musicians' Union (UK)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Organized Labour (Rated Stub-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organized Labour, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Organized Labour on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Duration and stages of the Jazz Ban?[edit]

This section really needs filled out, to establish the extent/dates when there was something which really qualifies as a ban, when there was a one-for-one exchange quota which effectively operated like a ban, when it was possible to circumvent a ban by reclassifying as a "classical" performance (such as Ornette Coleman in 1965), and when any restrictions were lifted. The question of whether/when there was a ban on BBC radio play also needs clarified: for example (staying with jazz), the BBC broadcast Ornette Coleman at Bracknell in 1978; and outside jazz, DJs like John Peel were broadcasting sessions and live performances by American bands during the 70s. AllyD (talk) 21:14, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

And why did jazz get banned? Where were the main influences of the Beatles and another bands (during the late 1940's and 1950's)?

Worst article on the Internet[edit]

This is a terrible article. Whoever contributed to this ought to be ashamed of themselves. All I have learned about the Musicians Union is that they forbid American Jazz musicians at some point. I know nothing else. This is quite possibly the worst article on any topic available in the world. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:51, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Possibly The Worst Article On Wikipedia[edit]

Appallingly bad, this appears to have been written by the MU and is nothing but a puff piece. Needs a rewrite from scratch. Looking at revision history, it appears to at one time have actually discussed the MU and its history, but now it's just advertising. An unencyclopaedic disaster, this is. (talk) 01:43, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Possibly internet's clearest example of trade unions' totalitarism and intolerance[edit]

How could a free, creative musician feel at ease in such a company ? How many voices of complaint must be filed in this talk section before the page gets a well deserved banner "NPOV questioned" at its front? (talk) 15:15, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed[edit]

One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Thincat (talk) 16:59, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Much of the text in the article is to be found at which has a copyright claim [1]. I shall remove problematic text as I have the opportunity. Thincat (talk) 16:59, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

I have removed problematic text and made some very minor cleanup. The article used to have some unreferenced critical comment [2] which was removed as part of a general whitewash. I have not restoring this text. Thincat (talk) 17:31, 21 November 2010 (UTC)