User talk:Derek R Bullamore/Archive 3

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Derek R Bullamore. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

Hi Derek, I edit Keef Trouble's page and add occasional info on Jona Lewie's, Brett Marvin and the Thunderbolts and Terry Dactyl and the Dinosaurs. This little coterie have a close musical history. I see that you have questioned (probably quite rightly) release dates of Jona Lewie product. The reference for these dates are from Jona's MySpace page that he updates from time to time. However its difficult to see how I can add a link here, especially if such information is likely to change. However my information on Keef, Jona, and the Bretts does come from a 30 year friendship with some, and occasional contact with others, of the offending parties. I do understand that it would still be difficult to accept word of mouth from someone claiming such personal familiarity. As for the Brett Marvin and the Thunderbolts' page, (of which I am not the major editor,) that seems under major contention, the information seems to be based on the Brett's web site. It was collated by the wife and son of Brett drummer Lofty Randall. All I can say is that a better source could not be found, and if anything is inaccurate the other band members would soon make their opinion felt - they can be an uppity bunch at times :) best wishes, and Happy New Year. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Acabashi (talk • contribs) 18:38, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Whats wrong with some more hand jive? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.139.45.54 (talk) 21:15, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, tell me just who Grease are/is. Please also sign your comments (use this symbol ~ four times).

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 21:21, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Its from the Grease(musical). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grease_(musical) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_Jive Unfortunately I am completely clueless as to how to fix links, etc. 67.139.45.54 (talk) 21:27, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in replying - New Year and all that. Probably best to represent it as: Sha Na Na "Born to Hand Jive" (as featured in the soundtrack to the film, Grease). I hope this helps.

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 21:09, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

The song is from the musical and was covered by Sha Na Na in the movie. Arguablly Sha Na Na inspired the musical, but I don't think they wrote the song and thus would rather credit it to the musical itself. ~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.139.45.54 (talk) 06:43, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

hi there, Just wondered if you could clarify what you consider reliable sources for this article.All the songwriting citations and rerences come from the record label the songs were released on so i'm not sure what your asking for. Please explain and I can rectify it Regards--Purplepickledonions (talk) 22:25, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello, it is difficult to know where to start. Let me make one thing clear though - it is not what I am requiring. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style for some guidance on what the encyclopedia itself desires. Here is just one paragraph that is neither encyclopedic in nature, nor contains any in-line citations as to verifiability. Having also worked as postmen and bingo callers, at the turn of the millennium James and Tom re-formed Sugartown with new members, and with a new, poppier sound. They recorded a new EP titled "The Next Big Thing". The band gained management in America and were showcased and filtered through Universal. Again, with no joy, the band disbanded.

I am an inclusionist, but some articles need a strong editing stance that is more in line with Wikipedia generally, of a general encyclopedic style and nature, plus of some depth. It presently worries me that the article as it stands looks more like a fan club. I do appreciate lesser pop music artists suffer from a general lack of reliable citable sources. But, just as a starter, where did their birth dates come from ? Wikifying them, from a reliable source, would be a start. With best wishes,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 23:14, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello again, I know their birthdays are correct because I know the twins personally and am currently trying to find a source to verify this fact but at present am not having much luck. Im sorry if you feel this article reads like a fan club...I am not sure entirely how to re word it to make it sound more encyclopedic and therefore more acceptable to Wikipedia so maybe some help if you are willing to give it would be much appreciated. This is my only article for Wikipedia as I have already had people trying to delete this article it was put to a vote and the result was keep as it was felt the Twins were notable enough to be recognied on here.

Sorry, I have just realised that I have not replied to you. I do understand your frustration, as all of us have to start somewhere on Wikipedia, and generally learn as we go along. The Five Pillars is worth reading, along with Editing Help. Please remember this is an encyclopedia dealing with hard facts not opinion, and not a fan site where the reverse generally applies. Also, take a look at The KLF - the nearest thing to perfection, at least for a pop music related article. Do not lose heart - there are thousands of articles far, far worse than James and Tom Martin. If at first you don't succeed .... Best wishes

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 21:31, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I notice, after a short hiatus, that you are contributing again. Good - remember my advice from before though. Be Bold, my kind of pickled onion collaborator.

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 23:25, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I saw that you had made some edits to this article within the last year. Unfortunately, it was brought to my attention that the article had earlier been a copyright violation, so I reverted back to the pre-copyvio version. This has had the unfortunate effect of removing your subsequent edits, so I thought I would let you know that you might want to rewrite them, or expand the article. Best regards, — BillC ^talk 14:33, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. As far as I can tell, I have now reinserted my original edits. Regards,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 15:40, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi, just wondering if you've got any information on Halo James. Was trying to put together an article on this top-ten charting UK group but the internet is sorely lacking in high-quality sources. Chubbles (talk) 17:29, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I am not much use this time, I'm afraid. They were a late 1980s/early 1990s UK pop band, fronted by Christian James (born 21 December 1964). Charting discography as follows:

Singles

• "Wanted" - Epic HALO 1 - UK - #45 - 1989
• "Could Have Told You So" - Epic HALO 2 - UK #6 - 1989
• "Baby" - Epic HALO 3 - UK #43 - 1990
• "Magic Hour" - Epic HALO 4 - UK # 59 - 1990

Albums

• Witness - Epic 466761 - UK #18 - 1990

^[1]

References

A sort of light weight throwaway pop act, who got thrown away ! Sorry,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 18:37, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the help - at least it's a start. Chubbles (talk) 19:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I looked it over and cleaned up a lot of the formatting errors - lots of bad boldfacing and album title mistakes. Also removed informal tone and fixed a lot of wikilinks. I'll keep an eye on it for a while, please do the same. - eo (talk) 19:04, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Alice Russell (singer), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alice Russell (singer). Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 15:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Just out of interest, where did you get your info on Earl Nelson's death? - I couldn't track down an online reference. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:25, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

From a trusted on-line source and friend - The Dead Rock Stars file ie. [1]. Hope you are well. Regards,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 10:43, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Aha! Thanks. I'll add him to this page as well. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:22, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to invite you to join the newly-formed Rock music WikiProject. There's alot of Rock-related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help us get this project off the ground and a few Rock music pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks! --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 09:13, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the invitation - you will see that I have enrolled. I have limited time, and would prefer to help to clean-up stubs and smaller articles to a decent standard (as a rule), rather than tackling potential A+ articles. What do I do next ??

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:42, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I look around musical articles a lot, and I just caught that one. Every musical article should have a {{infobox musical artist}}. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 22:46, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Derek, I was amazed to find that Wikipedia had nothing on Dickie Pride (except in German). I've started a stub but I reckon you're just the man to help expand it. All the best. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 14:00, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello, you certainly know how to butter someone up ! Nice stub effort from you on Dickie though, and my efforts are now added for what they are worth. Take care,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 18:47, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much: it's far better already! Someone commented on the talk page about its German origins but now it reads very well. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 19:00, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Derek! If you would like to colaborate on any punk-related pages please let me know. I've just finished polishing up the 999 (band) articlee but it could do with a second opinion. All the best. Yozzer66 (talk) 20:48, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I have edited the 999 page with wikilinks, formatting and a few additions. A minor polish, if you will allow. If you are talking about the, for me at least, true punk rock bands of the mid to late 1970s, then I'll have a go. I really am no expert, but have fond memories of seeing The Stranglers live at the Bridlington Spa in 1977 (I think). Does little more than show my age perhaps, but at the more cynical age of 23 (back then) it completely revived my interest in the absurd glories of pop music. You will find my feeble Wikipedia edits amongst the history of Wiki articles for most of the punk bands of that time. I am getting old ! Cheers,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 22:16, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Valuable edits to 999. Thanks. I DID mean the 'true' punk bands of the 1970s! I don't listen to a great deal of that era now. (I'm too busy listening to new stuff). However, like you, I do have fond memories. I was thirteen in 1979 so, whilst I love the early punks (esp. the Adverts, the Jam and the Buzzcocks), 'second' and 'third' wave bands like the Ruts, the Members and the Skids, together with post-punk groups like Echo & the Bunnymen, Joy Division, and the Specials, that were MINE (as oppose to my best mate's big brother's)!!! After X-Ray Spex, my next two 'projects' are Penetration and the Ruts. Any help would be appreciated. Yozzer66 (talk) 23:36, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Good - no, very good. Drop me a line as you go along and I will try my best. My Hospital Radio broadcasting activities mean that I play at least one punk track ever week - sheer bliss. Of slighter more modern punk-ish stuff, I love Beastie Boys - "(You Gotta) Fight for Your Right (To Party!)"; whilst Green Day's - American Idiot is an absolute masterpiece; with a dash of Social Distortion thrown in. Mind you, my real favourites include The Bee Gees, Eric Clapton, Wishbone Ash, Big Joe Turner, Billy Idol and .... oh hell, the list goes on and on. Eclectic, or what (or completely nuts, or what). Anyhow, I'm with you. If you want a second opinion, or whatever, you know where I am. Take care old boy,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 00:15, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Derek, I'm having great difficulty in finding out whether a number of punk and new wave Various Artists comps (circa. 1977, 78 & 79) charted or not. (Single artist albums are no problem). Is this something you could help with? Thanks. Yozzer66 (talk) 19:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes and no is the answer! I have a copy of The Guinness Book of British Hit Albums - 7th Edition - ISBN 0-85112-619-7, which does list Various Artists compilation albums. However these are mainly listed via record label releases, or under an all-embracing 'Others' heading. The difficulty is that although the album title is listed, there is no artist and track listing. So, if you were to say, for a fictional instance, did Punk, Junk and all that Funk on Harvest Records chart - then I can look it up. Without this information, it might be much more tricky. It may be feasible via the Allmusic website - here [2] to tie up some of the missing information to make things easier - but it could labour intensive. Does this help ? Incidentally, as an aside, I played The Only Ones, "Another Girl, Another Planet" earlier this evening on my radio show - cracking track.

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 23:01, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Derek. Here's the ones giving me problems:

• Streets (1977: Beggar's Banquet BEGA 1);
• Fools Gold: Chiswick Chartbusters' (1977: Chiswick CH2);
• Long Shots, Dead Certs and Odds On Favourites: Chiswick Chartbusters (1978: Chiswick CH5);
• A Bunch of Stiffs (1977: Stiff SEEZ 2);
• Hits Greatest Stiffs (1977: Stiff FIST 1);
• Stiffs Live Stiff (1978: Stiff GET 1);
• Short Circuit: Live At The Electric Circus (1977: Virgin VCL 5003);
• The Sire Machine Turns You Up (1978: Sire SMP 1);
• New Wave (1977: Vertigo 6300 902);
• Jubilee Cert X Soundtrack (1978: EG/Polydor 2302079).

Yozzer66 (talk) 18:26, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

By way of reply:-

• Streets (1977: Beggar's Banquet BEGA 1); - did not chart
• Fools Gold: Chiswick Chartbusters' (1977: Chiswick CH2); - did not chart
• Long Shots, Dead Certs and Odds On Favourites: Chiswick Chartbusters (1978: Chiswick CH5); - did not chart
• A Bunch of Stiffs (1977: Stiff SEEZ 2); - did not chart
• Hits Greatest Stiffs (1977: Stiff FIST 1); - did not chart
• Stiffs Live Stiff (1978: Stiff GET 1); - #28 (7 weeks)
• Short Circuit: Live At The Electric Circus (1977: Virgin VCL 5003); - did not chart
• The Sire Machine Turns You Up (1978: Sire SMP 1); - did not chart
• New Wave (1977: Vertigo 6300 902); - did not chart
• Jubilee Cert X Soundtrack (1978: EG/Polydor 2302079) - did not chart

Not much of a return, I'm afraid. Best wishes,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 19:33, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Derek, I liked how you tidied up the singles table on the Rezillos page. Keep up the good work! Yozzer66 (talk) 21:13, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Derek, if you get the chance, could you have a look over the Radio Stars article? It was very poor before I got to grips with it. However, it could still do with the additional input of a sensible editor. Thanks in anticipation. Yozzer66 (talk) 23:22, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Had a look at the Radio Stars article - you have done a very good job. I tweaked it about a bit with more wikilinks, added another reference and some formatting corrections, but generally it will look much the same to you. I think you get to a point with these 'lesser lights' when there is nowhere else to go. Well done,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:46, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I note that you've categorised the actor Julian Bleach as an English musician. I am not convinced that he is a musician at all; I think his role in musical projects is limited to that of an announcer, narrator or compere. Can you confirm his notable musical talent? See Julian Bleach talk page. Andrew Oakley (talk) 09:49, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, Andrew, I have no knowledge of Bleach's activities per se. I merely undertook an across the board exercise to rationalise those {Category:British musicians} to a more specific category, in this case {Category:English musicians}. You talk page comments are well made, and if you can not find a viable source, I suggest you do proceed to delete the musician connection altogether. Best wishes,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 10:12, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Cheers. I think the original person who categorised him as a musician did so solely because he had been an actor in a musical, which 99% of the time would have been a correct assumption, but in this case I suspect not - I think his role in the Shockheaded Peter musical was similar to that of Charles Gray, the narrator, in the Rocky Horror Picture Show, and Charles Gray certainly doesn't get categorised as a musician. I just wanted to check that you didn't have any further insight - I see now that you're just splitting British into the respective sub-nations. Thanks again, Andrew Oakley (talk) 12:47, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Looks like you are about to beat me to writing this article - a #1 album with no article! - look forward to reading it. Arjayay (talk) 14:43, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it's coming shortly. Sorry to steal your thunder, but feel free to sub-edit once it's up ! Regards,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:47, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Well done for the "Riot in Cell Block #9" link - I could not seem to find it, although I was fairly sure it existed. Are you looking at Sneakin' Suspicion for your next project ? Over to you. Cheers,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 16:09, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I need a Wiki-break, 'cos the boss wants some work done (I'm self employed) Arjayay (talk) 16:17, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

OK comments noted - I sometimes get carried away on the desire to communicate but recognise the need for conformity - I promise to improve!!

Hi Derek, your opinion and expertise on this subject is kindly requested over at Talk:Sweet discography#Additional sources for UK Charts. Cheers. – IbLeo (talk) 04:58, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I see from the talk page that like me, you hate this page as well. I've put a suggestion on the talk page. I don't think anyone's ever going to agree on criteria, so I reckon one of us needs to just go ahead and do something. I think my suggestion would bring the page down to a handful of artists, where we could do a brief summing up of the No.1 itself and follow-ups that failed (with a bit of research). It would surely make the article readable anyway. Anyway, see what you think. --Tuzapicabit (talk) 00:19, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I have watched, and at times edited this page, and yes it presently reads like a shopping list, with no-one quite sure why that want to buy anything ! Part of the problem has been that one editor suggests doing it this way or that way (without often realising that it must be referenced and sourced). In other words using some formula that, more often than not, represents original research. At least your way forward is based upon a reliable, citable source (Guinness Book of British Hit Singles & Albums) which is widely seen as the industry 'bible'. Also it is based upon the history of the 'official' UK Singles Chart, which can be easily researched and referenced. So far, so good.

To play devil's advocate for a moment, I see back in May this year you were advocating yourself some sort of amalgam of inclusion criteria, that differs from what you are now proposing; and herein lies one of the problems of gaining consensus ! Also, you state that the song, rather than the artiste is the one-hit wonder. I am not sure I agree with you - certainly the Guinness Book always lists the artiste first - reference ^[1]

I do think that if you can cram your intended major edit with references galore, then other editors have less reasons to quibble. If these also include those within, and moreover, outside of the Guinness family of publications, then so much the better. I feel your 'example' on the talk page of the article would be a good starting point. Referencing adds considerable kudos and status that is frankly more difficult to argue against, rather than 'I think this is a good idea' approach, that many have adopted over the past six years. Whatever happens, you will face opposition, but certainly broadly would have my support. Personally, I would wait for others to comment before you proceed too far. As you have seen, despite the relatively small scale of the subject matter, it arouses strong interest and passion. Best wishes,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 21:37, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. Just seen your response, but you may have noticed that I've just gone ahead and done it. I know it mught be a bit over-bold, but what happened was, I started the article on my talk page with just the examples I gave, but suddenly found myself compelled to keep going. I really enjoyed doing it and looking up the information of each artist and song. Before I knew it, I'd done the whole thing and reflected on how much more readable it was (I know I shouldn't say that myself, but hey). I posted it anyway just to see what would happen and I can imagine it could still get reverted over the next few days as there were a lot of people contributing, but hopefully if it can last say 3 weeks it might stay there (maybe the the US equivilent article would follow suit with something similar). Yes, you were right about my agreement with an earlier proposal, but I came to reflect later that this indeed would be original research. As it is, these records reached No.1 -fact, they never had another hit - fact, and the Guinness Book of suggests this criteria (and let's not forget it was them who chose the original charts (from various different compilers back in the 50s and 60s), which are now universally accepted as THE charts). I could as you suggest cram it with references quite easily - a quick Google of each song would give plenty - it'd probably only take about an hour to cover the whole page, but I'll leave it for the moment to see what others think. On a final note, I actually did say that I considered the artist to be the One Hit Wonder (not the song). As it was, the listing had the song first then the artist which I felt was wrong, so we do agree there.

As I say, it could quite easily get reverted and I imagine people will come along and do that to teach me a lesson if nothing else, but then we're back to square one after six years of debate. Someone had to do something. Anyway, thanks for your comments. --Tuzapicabit (talk) 19:23, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough - I fully appreciate your stance, and we will both await developments with interest. Sorry I misread your position regarding artist/song, but you are right and we do agree. Best wishes,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 19:46, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

I have added the {Refimprove} tag today. As I said before, the question of Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Citing sources is crucial here. Two months on - 'Must do better' - is your current school report. Cheers,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 00:06, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the comment regarding the Foundations article. I was actually a bit nervous about the edits I made considering the comments on the talk page. I'll work on getting it up to speed and if that stirs up the hornet's nest, so be it. I noticed no one has worked on it in quite some time so hopefully the POV warriors have moved on to greener pastures. If you have any info regarding the group, please feel free to chime in. Pinkadelica ^{Say it...} 15:33, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

I have added in-line citations and references from my hoard of publications, and tidied up some typos and so on. At least it is a start. Over to you !

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 18:15, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

I've also heard the colours were supposed to be milk and alcohol, but can't find a reference to cite.
Not sure the note about McCullough is relevant to the Be Seeing You article, as he only stood in for one European tour, and had left before they started writing the album, but have added McCullough to the main Feelgoods article - which needs a lot of amplification on the post Wilko years.
Seeing the band again next Friday - any questions you'd like me to try and ask? - oh sorry, that's original research isn't it?
Arjayay (talk) 12:19, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Martin C. Strong's book The Great Rock Discography states (and I quote exactly): (7",7" milky,7" beer-colrd) for the single issue types. I reckon this is good enough to include as a citation. Do you ? You are probably correct about McCullough in the Be Seeing You article - particularly now you have included him in the main article on the band. Feel free to remove that sentence. Lucky you seeing the Feelgoods. I saw them in Warrington several years ago at my friend's 50th birthday party. He actually hired them as the star turn - cool or what !? You are right about original research, but finding cites, refs etc for some of the less well known bands is sometimes like finding hen's teeth. Actually I wish the Feelgoods own website was more definitive rather than largely fancruft. God - just a thought - you are not responsible for it, are you ? Oh shit ! Anyhow, give 'em my love on Friday.

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:39, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't have Strong's book. Tony Moon doesn't give a reason (I've just checked) just the colours, and that the sleeves featured a bottle of Kahlua. (Kahlua is a brown coffee liqueur, often served with milk - which throws some doubt on the "beer" colour.)
I'll remove McCullough and add the story of Be Seeing You's title
No - the band's website is run by Gabbi in Germany - not me
I agree about finding references for less well known bands, especially if you discount the band or fan sites - although these are acceptable if copied on Allmusic, despite the frequent mistakes.
As you collect DoB's do you have one for Deke Leonard of Man? - although he is not a "pop" star.
Arjayay (talk) 13:28, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Can't help you with Deke Leonard - Man sort of passed me by at the time (don't know why). My 'Pop Star' title is somewhat misleading - the file includes Big Joe Turner, Ari Up, David Whitfield, Al Kooper and Buffy Sainte-Marie etc., etc. I've got Pete Gage's though ! Wasn't he once married to Elkie Brooks ?

Kahlúa, eh - I wonder why ? A favourite of the band's maybe ? Plus, you would not normally drink milk and beer, would you ? Might be worth exploring, but I bet finding a reference may prove to be beyond us. Keep beavering away. Best wishes,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:54, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, that was "the other" Pete Gage, who also played guitar with Geno Washington, formed Vinegar Joe & wrote "Happy Birthday Rock & Roll" with Mick Green (see [3] GAGES' PAGES)
Arjayay (talk) 15:51, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that - every day a little wiser, eh. Have you seen Suntag's work on "Milk and Alcohol" ? Incredible and I live in hope he may spend more time on Feelgood related articles ! Incidentally, thanks for the Twenty Five Years of Dr. Feelgood album cover picture. Please note "Down at the Doctors" is now an article in its own right. Regards again,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 19:20, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Can't add a picture to "Down at the Doctors" single, as there was no picture sleeve (although this might be worthy of note?)
Have added note on Down at the Doctors album, to try and avoid confusion, and pointed out that versions of the song appear on numerous other albums.
I note you say Private Practice was issued in October 1978, and "Down at the Doctors" was "released as a single in the UK in September 1978, a month prior to the album's issue." However Tony Moon lists both the album and single as being issued in September - don't know where you got your date from, let alone who is right.
Arjayay (talk) 10:19, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

The dates came from Martin C Strong's book; although only the months, not exact dates are shown. According to the Guinness Book of Hit Whatnots, "Down at the Doctors" charted in the week ending 30 September, and Private Practice on 7 October 1978. The Guinness book is rarely incorrect, but otherwise I don't know who is right either. Is there another source ? No picture sleeve, eh - I wonder why not. Regards,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 10:36, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Does your book throw light on why the vinyl colours for "As Long As The Price is Right" were blue, brown, purple and the normal black ? Thanks,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 21:00, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, Tony Moon doesn't comment on the reason, although his discography gives different catalogue numbers, or rather letters, for each colour:- Black UP 36506, Blue XUP 36506, Brown YUP36506 and Violet ZUP36506 - whereas the "Milk and Alcohol" colours (including black) all had the same Cat. No.
Moon barely refers to the As it Happens album either, other than to say the band had been touring relentlessly, so hadn't had any time to write new material, so resorted to "playing the live card" to deal with record company pressure.
Well done for adding the full singles list, I just wonder if the chart positions should be integrated with the main list?
I find it odd that everyone remembers Wilko Johnson, but the only chart single he was on was "Sneakin' Suspicion" whilst the other 5 chart singles all featured Gypie Mayo, who most people have forgotten. Maybe it was Wilko's strutting that people remember?
Arjayay (talk) 10:08, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, Martin C Strong's book also makes reference to the differing catalogue numbers. I guess it's fair to say that As It Happens was weak at best, which is probably why both Moon and Strong gloss over it. I think you are right about merging the singles lists - it did cross my mind at the time - I will set about this (although tables are not my forte !) Wilko's on stage persona is almost certainly the reason. Perhaps Gypie's own article should be 'enhanced' to strengthen his worth / contribution (maybe I should make a start on this also). Regards,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 11:54, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Having looked again at the 'Singles discography' table, I feel the catalogue numbers need linking to specific record labels. Perhaps, merely as a footnote. Does your publication help with which original single release was issued on United Artists Records, Liberty Records, Chiswick Records, Demon Records, Stiff Records, EMI Records or even Grand Records ? Allmusic is merely confusing me (not for the first time - bless 'em), whilst Martin C Strong's book is the only other reliable source I have. Actually, even the same may be true for the albums. Apart from anything else, if we are certain of our facts, it may help to crosslink the main Dr. Feelgood article (and the corresponding single and album entries) to the relevant Wikipedia record label articles. Or, is this getting too 'nerdy' ? Thanks again,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:28, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Added labels to the singles - only 1 on Liberty - no singles issued on Grand
Have not linked the labels, as will link on the albums list when add labels & cat nos.
Singles list does not include 12" issues (all of which have an extra track on the b side) or the Stiffs cassette "megamix" single - is this too specialised?
Will add album Labels & No's next.
Arjayay (talk) 17:01, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Whilst recently adding info to the album discography, I have come across these albums - The Complete Stiff Recordings (2006), Wolfman Calling - The Blues of Lee Brilleaux (2003), Dr. Feelgood (1997 - L&R) and Going Back Home (2005). Presumably these are all compilations of one sort or another, but for completeness should these be included ? Do you also think that we should split the 'main albums' and 'compilations/retrospectives etc' into two separate lists ? I don't want to get too hung up on lists for this, that and the other, as the main text still needs much further work (as you know). Some of the larger band articles have their discography hived off into a completely separate article of their own. Before the tables grow like topsy, is this worth pursuing as well ? I do have a life, honest !!

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:46, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't recognise the L&R title, whilst Moon was revised in 2002, and the other albums are later. There are an awful lot of compilations - former record companies often issue these without the band's agreement. I kept contemporary albums, archive albums and compliation albums separate in the Man discography, as the contemporary albums show the development of the band, whilst retrospective compilations interrupt this. Such an album list will also match the "Chronology" at the bottom of the info-box.
Arjayay (talk) 18:08, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I do not know if you got the message that I did earlier -

On 4 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Milk and Alcohol, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

If not, really well done you, because I am painfully aware it was not just my work that got the article on Wikipedia's main/front page for today. I feel rather proud, if I am honest - so many thanks again, Arjayay, for your valuable input. Cheers,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 22:56, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes both Suntag☼and I got the DYK message - collaboration works (sometimes)

See we have both been "fannying about" with the Feelgoods album table. I had tried to reduce the column width of "Notes", by breaking the lines, rather than let them auto-wrap, as this caused the dates, album titles and Cat. Nos. to wrap as well. Wrapping the smaller columns often breaks the info. in awkward places, e.g. part way through a Cat No, or leaving "Dr." on one line and "Feelgood" on another. It can also make the table very long, as 3 Cat Nos can take up 5 lines, leaving lots of blank space.

The trouble is, the table looks totally different depending on what Browser you use (Internet Explorer, Firefox etc.) what "Skin" you have set in "My Preferences" and how wide the window is on your screen. Having checked a table that looks good on my normal settings, in other skins and page widths, some look almost as good, but most look considerably poorer, so I don't think we can win.
I haven't tried using non-breaking spaces in a table, so don't know if they work, but they are laborious to use.
Arjayay (talk) 10:06, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

The 1997 L&R Album - Dr Feelgood, [4] is by "The Original Piano Red" - not by the band from Canvey
Arjayay (talk) 16:51, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Blimey, silly me - I just saw the album cover and... Point taken too on the album / singles tables - I'll stop fannying about. I see you bought the 'blue' version of "As Long As The Price is Right" - could you not afford the others ?!. Seriously though, thanks again for the picture - I wish there was someone who could upload free use pics of the band members / whole group. I haven't got a clue, I'm afraid, but it would enhance the articles somewhat. I think I have gone as far as I intend to at the present, with individual articles on the albums and singles. There is a lessening return on these as one goes on. Rather like trying to find useable citations regarding the band's activities after their heyday. Keep in touch,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 16:58, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Have been BOLD, hope you agree.
Have added second Info-box to Roxette (Dr. Feelgood song), for Roxette (live), but do not know how long this was, and have assumed Vic Maile produced this version as well - could you please advise/complete this? Two info boxes have caused disputes (See All by Myself) but enable all the information to be given, and the chronology to be followed
Have also removed Riot In Cell Block Nine from the chronology at the bottom of the Info-boxes, but not from the singles list. You can, therefore, click through the chronology from Roxette, through Roxette again, for Roxette (Live), all the way to Put Him Out of Your Mind. Have also clarified in singles list that Riot.... was never issued separately. Arjayay (talk) 09:51, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you have done a good job. Re the "Roxette" live track, I assume it is the same version that appears on the Stupidity album, which was released as a single. In which case, Allmusic states the track length was 2:54, and the producer is listed as Dr. Feelgood (Maile has engineering credit only). That makes sense although my other references are not 100% clear. I will effect the changes anyhow (if someone else finds a better reference or alternative info, then fine by me). I am glad you altered the chronology in the info boxes - I was always uneasy with the way they did not click through before. What a dispute over "All By Myself" - bloody awful song anyhow ! Well done - I have been working on some of the names that link into the various Feelgood articles (most are fairly weak, but I've tweaked them about a bit). Keep beavering away,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 11:01, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

thanks for the message - i'm the one who should apologise for not noticing the extent of the vandalism. my only excuse is that i was undercaffeinated at the time. thanks for taking care of it, and swing on Sssoul (talk) 19:08, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

On 4 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Milk and Alcohol, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 20:02, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Hello!

You may be interested to know that WikiProject Punk music has recently undergone a major revitalization. Please visit the project page to see our new look and check out some of our helpful new features, such as the Assessment Department and the Collaboration of the week. There are also a number of tasks on our Things to do page that you may be interested in helping with.

We are currently holding a roll call to help gauge how many active project members we have. Please visit the project's talk page and add your signature to the roll sheet to express your continued interest in the project. Also, if you have not already done so, please take a minute to add your name to the Participants page along with a brief summary of your punk-related interests, so that other project members will be better able to collaborate with you. If you do not add your signature to the roll sheet by November 30, 2008 your name will be moved to our list of inactive members. We may also take the liberty of removing the project userbox from your userpage if it appears there, to prevent you from automatically appearing in Category:WikiProject Punk music members. Of course you are free to rejoin the project and re-add the userbox at any time if you would like to become active in the project again.

Thank you and we hope you will continue to support WikiProject Punk music!

You are receiving this message because you have previously identified yourself as a member of WikiProject Punk music, either because your name appears on the Participants page or because you have placed the project userbox on your user page. As a courtesy, if you have left the project, retired from Wikipedia, or simply no longer wish to be an active project member, please remove the userbox from your user page. This will remove you from Category:WikiProject Punk music members and help the project to keep its active membership list up-to-date.

--IllaZilla (talk) 00:09, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Derek,

Thanks for your note. I must stress that I am trying to get through all the articles but am only half-way through "D" at the moment. For some reason I'd filed the article in question under "J". Calamity! Also, people keep changing things, so I keep having to go back and double-check. :-D

I also find nothing soothes me better than a big bowl of sherbert dab (bit confused that you couldn't find that link, btw.)

Yours, always,

onebravemonkey 09:37, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Derek. I see you've been busy replacing "British" by "English", "Welsh" etc. based on where people were born. Are you following an agreed consensus for that anywhere? I expect you're aware that this is potentially a highly contentious issue - the whole question of "Britishness" takes up all of some editors' time, and if there is a "consensus" anywhere I don't think I've seen it! Many people self-identify as "British" rather than on the basis of where precisely they were born, particularly if they come from a particular heritage and their families have moved across a border at some time, or if they come from "mixed" parentage (English/Welsh, etc.) I only noticed when you changed Charlie Landsborough from "British" to "Welsh", even though he was adopted as a baby and grew up in England not Wales. If you're doing this off your own bat, as it were, I strongly suggest you pause to get agreement, as it would be a lot of work to undo! Regards, Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:13, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

This gives the current position - I haven't read it all (!!) but I sense there isn't a consensus! Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:37, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

....also this. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:42, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts - I knew it would be only a matter of time before someone pounced on me ! Frankly, if there is no concensus, then how can I find one ! Despite all the so-called guidelines, at some stage, an editor proclaims someone's 'nationality' in the articles, seemingly without this 'concensus'. I know two wrongs do not make a right, but you have to start somewhere. You are correct in stating that some editors seem to have nothing else to do but pursue the "Britishness" angle - frankly most of the arguments are without much standing, apart from the usual POV stuff. I am trying very hard to be selective over these alterations; there is, without any doubt, cases where 'British' has been used as a safe option. Equally, I suggest some were posted before the alternative categories of 'English', 'Welsh' etc., were even created. I may get it wrong on occasions, and other editors can revert etc., as they wish. I do not intend to get hung up over the issue, as some have clearly done in the past. However, the nonsense that the Welsh are Welsh, the Scots are Scots, etc., but the English have to be British is bollocks. Actually I am nearly done on this mission anyway. Surely someone born, for example, in York is English; unless there are mitigating circumstances. This is not a hobby horse of mine; I am merely trying to categorise people more accurately, to the best of my ability. Ah, my ability - that's the achilles heel !??! Best wishes, as ever,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 15:48, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

If the discussions that I've highlighted make it clear enough for you to act, then fine (on your own head be it!). But the message that I get is that any attempts to impose a consistent approach on this are doomed to fail, simply because different people view things differently, and some have very strong views on the issue. I, for example, was born in England and have lived there for most of my life, but now live in Wales. One of my parents was born in England, the other in Ireland (Northern). Most of my great-grandparents were born in Wales. I've always self-identified primarily as "British", but, in some contexts at some times, am content to be described as either "English" or "Welsh". My family background is not uncommon, but others with similar histories might be very anxious to ensure they are described as one thing or the other. So, I suggest you tread carefully! Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:58, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

PS: I like this: "Sean Connery, who is of Irish extraction, presumably has a British passport, and lives in the Bahamas, should probably be referred to as Scottish." Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:38, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm relatively unscathed, so far (phew). Many thanks for your earlier guidance etc. "Sean Connery, who is of Irish extraction, presumably has a British passport, and lives in the Bahamas, should probably be referred to as Scottish." Yes; tee hee. Frankly, I would annexe "and should probably referred to as a complete twat". Whatever. Very best wishes - Welsh/English/Irish/British, err whatever you are - old boy !

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 00:39, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Greetings Derek R Bullamore (sorry for butting in on your talk page) and Ghmyrtle. Just had to get a word or two in here. I'm sure that the other pages on this subject have already gone over this - and will continue doing so till the cows come home - but these things are rarely clear-cut. Both of you make very interesting and logical points but, as there is no consensus on this at Wikipedia, I suppose that at some stage someone will have to insist on the claim to a certain nationality being referenced, and any variation on the theme explained in the body of the text.

Birthplace doesn't necessarily coincide with nationality, culture, and so on. Conrad is considered a major force in English(-language?) literature, as are several other people not born in England/the UK and/or changed their nationality later. There are infinite v. on the theme. In my own case, I was born in a country I have only visited once or twice since, of parents with different nationalities, each of whom had parents/ancestors from other lands, was brought up in another and now reside permanently (?) in yet another. At the age of 18, I was "offered" the choice of choosing one nationality or the other. My children are nationals of the country I reside in. However, I consider myself as English - not British* - as the next person...

• though I do make a concious effort to choose my words carefully in public

(Sorry for taking up so much space on this)Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 15:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Please note that you have to use Category:Year of birth missing instead of Category:Date of birth missing in articles. The same for Date of death and Year of death. Read instructions carefully. Moroever, consider using Category:Year of birth missing (living people) for living individuals. Thanks. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:13, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. I am sure the categorisation of these has changed in recent times; which makes keeping on the right lines more difficult. Frankly, and I would guess this is not your fault, but the whole 'date of birth / death' guidelines are frankly confusing (if not totally unreadable). Anyhow, your advice is much appreciated.

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 00:51, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Greetings Derek R Bullamore - thanx for your message the other day - I read it but didn't have time to reply just then. Great work you're doing there (and in general!). I've just left a note at Talk:Shel Talmy as to the possibility of creating a dedicated "List of..." - but haven't been bold and done so yet 'cos of the major work you're doing. Cheers!--Technopat (talk) 15:29, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Derek. It just occurs to me, have you thought of applying for rollback rights - WP:ROLLBACK? I've found it quite useful in combatting vandalism - saves time in undoing and reverting. You just have to apply, someone will check your edit record and then grant you the rights - no hassle. Regards, Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:40, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for the tip - I sounds just the job. I have applied to an admin for the facility to be installed. I hope he/she does not look at my cack-handed / ham-fisted editing history too closely, or I will have no chance !?! LOL. Best wishes,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 19:49, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Yipee, I got it - thanks again.

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:44, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Derek. I did actually put a load of refs on it. Spent about 2 hours referencing everything and then somehow hit the wrong thing and lost it all!! I was so livid I didn't want to look at it ever again! However, I've gone back to it since and made a few changes and eventually I'll ref it again. All in all however, I try and let people's edits stay because it's not my article as such, but sometimes you can't help but jump in and take something out. Thanks for report though.--Tuzapicabit (talk) 12:04, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

How about coming back to the article and telling us why you put up the POV tag. Am currently working on it. Thanks.Steve Pastor (talk) 21:36, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, to quote one example, is this paragraph not unsourced POV? - "Black was an extrovert and often "clowned" and did comedy during the live shows. Black and Presley had a couple of comedy routines together that they would slip into the live show from time to time. Black's on stage personality was a sharp contrast to the introverted stage presence of Moore. This balance seemed to be the perfect fit for the Presley performances." Perhaps I should have left a note on the article's talk page, but I felt the POV was quite obvious and blatant. However, I am pleased you are working on the article - there are a number of statements in the present article which are unsourced. Perhaps you can help push it towards a more acceptable, Wikipedia style, encyclopedic status. Best wishes,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 00:16, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Derek. You edited the article about Smith and added a book as reference. Good work, I like well-referenced artikels. Normally I'm writing in the German wikipedia, where I'm working on articles about Rock'n'Roll. For my personal investigations I'm looking for information about the Smiths' bass player Jerry Glenn Carter and the lead guitarist James Richard Cliburn. I found a single on Ruby-Doo #1 from 1966 with the composition "Dance With Me" which is played by a group called the Trippers. Is there any further information about the two guys in your book? Thank you very much. Krächz (talk) 02:11, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello Krächz. Thanks for your kind comments. However, I do not think I can be of much help. The book I used^[1] says this about Smith: "Smith (pop quintet) 'Baby It's You' Dunhill (USA), Smith quintet comprises one girl and four men: Gayle McCormick (lead singer) born in St. Louis, Missouri, Larry Moss (organ and kazoo); Jerry Carter (bass); Robert Evans (drums); Rich Cliburn (lead guitar). 'Baby It's You', a song written in 1961 by Mack David, Burt Bacharach and Barney Williams, was originally a hit for The Shirelles in 1962. Smith's disc was released in July 1969 and by October sold a million with R.I.A.A. gold disc award. It reached No 3 for two weeks and stayed in the USA bestsellers for 15 weeks. Smith gravitated together as a result of the Los Angeles scene, and was managed by disc artist Del Shannon who selected the song from their repertoire for recording."

That's all. To be honest with you, prior to editing the article I had never heard of this outfit, who did not chart in the UK. Allmusic states [5] and that is as far as I went for research. Oh, and McCormick was born in 1949. You appear to have more information on Carter and Cliburn than I. Happy editing,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:11, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Derek. Thank you. That is in deed not as much as I hoped. The only interesting fact is, that they came "together as a result if the LA scene". I knew that both musicians worked together with famous John Marascalco, who was very active in the early and later 60s in L.A. Thank you again and have a good trip to 2009! Krächz (talk) 15:51, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

The Yorkshire WikiProject Newsletter

The WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter Issue 9 - January 2009 December issue Got any suggestions? — Add them here Project News Welcome to the ninth WikiProject Yorkshire monthly newsletter. WP:YORKS is a leading local British WikiProject in terms of the total number of articles supported (up from 4532 last month to 4822 on December 19th). WP:GM has the lead in FAs at 29 out of a total number of 1763 articles. In the area of GAs, at 25, WP:YORKS also falls behind WP:GM with 36. Priorities are not set in stone and if you would like to discuss changes, please join in at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Yorkshire Currently there are thirteen Yorkshire featured articles: Sheffield • History of Sheffield • Sheffield Wednesday F.C. • York City F.C. • M62 motorway • Henry Moore • George Calvert, 1st Baron Baltimore • Stocksbridge Park Steels F.C. • Valley Parade • Caedmon • William Wilberforce • History of Bradford City A.F.C. • Last of the Summer Wine There are also eight featured lists: List of York City F.C. Clubmen of the Year • List of York City F.C. managers • List of York City F.C. players • York City F.C. seasons • Bradford City A.F.C. seasons • List of York City F.C. statistics and records • Leeds United A.F.C. seasons • Scarborough F.C. seasons Thank you and well done to all those who contributed. Article Activity Geoff Horsfield was promoted to GA on December 3rd Member News There are now 54 members of WikiProject Yorkshire! A warm welcome to the new members that have joined us since the December newsletter: Euchiasmus (talk · contribs) Chemical Engineer (talk · contribs) No members left the project this month: Thanks Thanks for all those who have been adding co-ordinate information to articles as a result of last month's newsletter. The major impact has been on the railway station articles, including disused ones, but other location articles have also been tackled. This effort means that the articles can be accessed directly from external sources such as Google maps and gives them a much higher profile. There has again been a number of suggestions on the ToDo list at Yorkshire Portal and this has been kept up to date. The football and rugby editors have continued keeping abreast of most, if not all, of the top clubs. WikiProkject Yorkshire editors have been busy on vandal patrol at watchlist. Thanks. A big "thank you" to all the editors who help make this WikiProject what it is; no edit goes unnoticed. Priority Articles The top priority articles that have been identified to date are as follows - Bradford • East Riding of Yorkshire • Henry Moore • Kingston upon Hull • Leeds • North Yorkshire • Ripon • Sheffield • South Yorkshire • Wakefield • West Yorkshire • William Wilberforce • York • Yorkshire • Yorkshire and the Humber The number has been kept deliberately low to give us a fighting chance of improving them to at least GA status, also so we can concentrate our efforts on these first. Yorkshire articles by quality and importance Quality Importance Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total FA 2 1 15 60 78 FL 1 16 17 GA 2 7 36 175 220 B 9 66 136 357 568 C 5 144 294 1,498 1,941 Start 1 240 1,255 8,685 1 10,182 Stub 20 354 5,649 3 6,026 List 4 12 941 957 Category 3,875 3,875 Disambig 21 21 File 22 22 Portal 95 95 Project 226 226 Redirect 2 194 1,359 1,555 Template 620 620 NA 1 1 Other 11 11 Assessed 19 482 2,105 17,575 6,233 1 26,415 Unassessed 1 1 Total 19 482 2,105 17,575 6,233 2 26,416 WikiWork factors (?) ω = 96,956 Ω = 5.10 New Aims After discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Yorkshire in April 2008. Specific aims for the project are:- To complete tagging and assessment of all Yorkshire related articles (See below) To recruit more active editors (See Member News above) To bring our top level article Yorkshire up to Featured article status To bring all other top priority articles (currently 15 with 2 at FA) to at least Good article status To set up a weekly or monthly selected article improvement drive To produce a regular news letter for circulation to members Citations Citations are a necessity to give credence to the articles that we produce, so that the facts given can be verified. One of the templates that is used for this is {{Cite book}} to give details of books used for creating the articles. There has been some changes to the template that we should be aware of and make changes accordingly when editing articles. The id= field should no longer be used to give the ISBN number for a book instead use the isbn= parameter. The page= and pages= parameters now have the p. or pp. automatically inserted and so we should just put the page number in the fields. Use page= for a single page and pages= for multiple pages. If the insertion of p. or pp. is not required then use nopp=true to suppress this. Note that the number of pages in a book is not specified using these fields and at the moment a new parameter is being discussed to cover this. Happy New Year Hope everyone enjoyed the festive season and are not feeling too worse for ware. At the start of a new year we all look back at what has happened in the last year and look forward to the coming year. It is time to take stock of what has happened in the last year well we have managed to get some priority articles selected and to get this newsletter in place to keep members up to date on what is happening. Articles have been tagged and assessed, a watchlist of these has been set up for members to keep track of changes to those articles that the project is interested in. So over all great steps have been made in the last year and thanks to everyone for the efforts put in. Looking forward it is time to make some targets for the coming year. If anyone has any ideas for what we should be doing in the coming year then please share them on the project talk page. The project is now subscribed to a clean-up listing which lists articles tagged with various clean-up tags that need attention. The listing is refreshed by a bot on a regular basis. Monitor Use the watchlist to keep an eye on changes to the project's articles so that vandalism and spamming can be removed as quickly as possible. Infoboxes Many of our articles would benefit from the addition of an appropriate infobox. Assessment Assess and review Assessment of Yorkshire related articles has been revised recently due to new classes being added by the Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team The changes are: The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class. The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects. A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here. References Please remember that the list of stubs needing expansion is always in need of attention. Please take a look and see if you can help. One small edit, such as adding a reference section and reference, to an article each session would make a big difference. Moves Please be careful when performing articles moves and ensure that you also move all the talk sub-pages and update any image fair use rational. Otherwise the archives, to-do lists, assessment comments and GA reviews get lost and the image may be deleted as it has an incorrect FUR. Written by Keith D • Template by Jza84 | Single-Page View Would you like to write the next newsletter for WP:YORKS?? Please nominate yourself at WT:YORKS! New editors are always welcome!

→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page.
→ This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 11:50, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Just wanted to say what an excellent job you've been doing on references and so forth. I've removed the tag on the article (though I don't think it was me who put it on originally, but what the hell!) All it needs now is a photo or two..... Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:26, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks, kind sir. I think I might have added the tag - but what the hell indeed - I am glad you have removed it. You are right, a couple of snapshots of the trio would be useful - but uploading images, and ensuring they are 'free use' is way beyond me. Can I ask you a favour. You know the song "Stay With Me" by Lorraine Ellison, The Walker Brothers and a million others subsequently ? I feel like writing an article on it - but I am not sure if it was originally published under the title "Stay With Me" or "Stay With Me Baby", or even "Stay With Me, Baby". I think it is important I get that correct before proceeding. Do you know somewhere, ultra-reliable, where you can check this out ? Cheers,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 15:47, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

The most reliable sources I've got for these things, usually (but not absolutely infallibly), are Joel Whitburn's Top Pop Singles 1955-2002 and Top R&B Singles 1942-1995 - which give the title of Lorraine Ellison's version (which coincidentally came up on my trusty iPod yesterday - excellent it is too) as "Stay With Me" (on Warner 5850, entered Billboard pop chart on 8 Oct 1966, reached #64, and entered R&B chart on 15 Oct, reached #11). Happy to help :) Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:01, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

PS I've now changed the Lorraine Ellison article to refer to the correct title. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:11, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Yikes! The article says she was born 1931, died 1983. Allmusic says 1943-1985. Whitburn says 1935-1985. This needs a bit of research! Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:16, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it is amazing the further you dig, the more you unearth ! 'Dead Rock Stars' says 1931-1983 - also (Marybelle Luraine Ellison Gonzalez-Keys) - Gonzalez-Keys her husband presumably. I'll leave Ms Ellison to you for the time bring, if that is alright. I'll dig further on "Stay With Me". Thanks for your help,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 16:26, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

No doubt one of us will get back to it, but I'm confused. You'd have thought her death would be well attested, but Allmusic and Whitburn both specify 17 August 1985, while this page, which refers to assistance from family members inc her grand-daughter, says 31 January 1983. Most odd. For the time being I'll add a query on her talk page, I think. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:31, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Well done for your edits on "Stay with Me". Having set out with all good intentions, I was disappointed with my final effort. Definitely "C minus - could do better" status. My only consolation is that as a Wiki song article, it still looked in far better shape than many I have visited along the way. It is a cracking song, and a simply brilliant rendition - as you have obviously discovered / rediscovered. Bless her, she deserves better coverage for herself and that song. I will dig around further to see if I can unroot more. The birth / death dates though are a mystery. How the hell, only twenty years on, does someone close to the subject seemingly not know exactly when someone has died ?! As dear old Winston Churchill said - "keep buggering on".

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 00:47, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Concerning this edit I would like to inform you that for for article pages we use Category:Year of birth missing (living people) instead of Category:Date of birth missing (living people). Please read instructions in both categories and WP:BLP for more information. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 16:37, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello again! It's Mr One Hit Wonder again! What a nightmare I've had with that article after all, but I've added in citations aplenty (a few weeks ago actually), but I don't know if you're aware of this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One-hit wonders of Alternative Guises in the UK, but perhaps you'd like to add your comments or thoughts - or vote. The guy that went and created the article was driving me mad (see the main article talk page) and I tried to be as accommodating as possible - after all the One Hit Wonder main article isn't mine to keep! But it's frustrating when you see people adding in a load of crap that just confuses the whole thing. So he went off and did his own spin-off and that got him off my back (even though I did think the article was pants - but I tried to be nice to the guy). It just seems that he won't listen and judging by his talk page, it's not just me. Anyway, see what you think about the whole thing.--Tuzapicabit (talk) 22:38, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

I know you have been editing the above article for some time now - thanks. I have been clearing out my attic recently - yes, I must get out more - and came across the following publication: ^[1] It is jam-packed full of facts and figures in 160 pages from the club's birth to 1983. Although it is clearly now over 25 years out of date, the historical stuff up to 1983 should be basically sound - a real gold mine. Probably the most important thing is that it is a reliable, citable source, which as you know, the present Wiki article is largely missing (mainly because decent sources are so hard to find). For example, page 62 states - "Derek Turner was transferred to Oldham for £2,500 in the 1955/56 season, but despite this a loss of £208 was made on a year when Rovers finished 24th out of 30" And so it goes on... and on. Excited ?!?

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 15:14, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Can you explain to me the rationale behind the international caps listing within this article ? It might just be me, but I find it hard to follow - maybe others would do also. 'My book' might be able to fill in some of the uncertainties and gaps; if I could better understand the formatting rationale. Many thanks,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 00:37, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

This is the first time I've used 'Talk', so please excuse me if I make a mess of it.

I see that we're both Derek's, being from Wakefield and born in 1964, I was "sort of" named after Derek 'Rocky' Turner. As there wasn't an article for Derek 'Rocky' Turner, so I thought I'd break my duck and create my first article. Whilst researching Derek 'Rocky' Turner it became apparent that it seems that nothing happened in Rugby League if it happened before the start of 'Super League', and very few club's websites have statistics of famous past players, let alone biographies, so citable sources are always welcome, and bearing in mind many of these players were part-time and unlike some modern association/rugby footballers, they didn't earn enough money to retire directly after playing, and often retired as a result of injury, I decided I would to attempt to restore the recognition that these Notable Players rightly deserve.

I thought rather than creating a club's Notable Players on an ad-hoc basis, it'd be useful to identify Notable Players using a consistent criteria, i.e. whilst at that club: players who won the Championship or Challenge Cup (I may eventually expand that to include County Championship and County Cup); players holding club match/season records, i.e. appearance, tries, goals, points; players who had testimonial matches; players who gained international honours (I may eventually expand that to include County honours).

So I set about creating 'Players Earning International Caps Whilst At...' sections for the 42-clubs that have had England Internationals (also including their Great Britain statistics if relevant).

The basic form is...

Forename Surname | Player's Nation: Whilst At Club Year Opposition Nation, Opposition Nation; Year Opposition Nation, Opposition Nation

As rugby league players often play for more than one country, e.g. both Great Britain, and England or Wales, this can become...

Forename Surname | Player's Nation #1: Whilst At Club Year Opposition Nation, Opposition Nation; Year Opposition Nation, Opposition Nation | Player's Nation #2: Whilst At Club Year Opposition Nation, Opposition Nation; Year Opposition Nation, Opposition Nation

As rugby league players often play for their country whilst moving from club -to- club, this can become... Forename Surname | Player's Nation: Whilst At Club #1 Year Opposition Nation, Opposition Nation; Year Opposition Nation, Opposition Nation; Whilst At Club #2 Year Opposition Nation, Opposition Nation; Year Opposition Nation, Opposition Nation

As rugby league players often play for more than one country whilst moving from club -to- club, this can become... Forename Surname | Player's Nation #1: Whilst At Club #1 Year Opposition Nation, Opposition Nation; Year Opposition Nation, Opposition Nation; Whilst At Club #2 Year Opposition Nation, Opposition Nation; Year Opposition Nation, Opposition Nation | Player's Nation #2: Whilst At Club #1 Year Opposition Nation, Opposition Nation; Year Opposition Nation, Opposition Nation; Whilst At Club #2 Year Opposition Nation, Opposition Nation; Year Opposition Nation, Opposition Nation

If known, and as an Aide-mémoire, I've added the year the player's Testimonial Match took place and/or the player's position after his name, e.g. Roger Millward (Testimonial match 1977) (#6) | etc. Whilst not absolutely necessary for someone as notable as Roger Millward, I feel it's helpful for less notable players for whom an article has yet to be written.

DynamoDegsy (talk) 11:12, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your response - which was a worthy effort for a 'talk virgin'. "Sort of" named after Mr Turner, eh. Derek's not too bad; but how much more kudos could you have had, if you had been named 'Rocky' ?!? I agree totally about the pre-Super League era. To my mind's eye Sky and the Rugby Football League have much to answer for, in reducing the value of the game's true and long history. Anyhow, don't get me started.

I am still working on past Hull KR player profiles, with varying degrees of success. Also I now much better understand the 'International caps' section; but feel some explanation of how it is made up would be very useful in the article itself. It is rather complicated, so that might be a challenge in itself ! Keep beavering away, and I will try to add what I can from this end - although from me, it is likely to concentrate purely on Rovers. "When the red red robin, keeps bob bob etc." Regards,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 18:58, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Derek, as a user and occasional updater of wikipedia - it really distresses me to see an article taken to task so heavily under the guise of 'citations needed'. This is then usually taken as carte blanche by some other wikipedia user, usually visibly without any understanding of the topic, to delete it or chop it so heavily it becomes useless. The citations you ask for are all non-contentious pieces of information and why not ask for citations for everything? Why not ask for citations for: "...formed in 1980 by vocalist Dave Hill and guitarist Mal Spooner..." "...both hailing from Leek, Staffordshire..." "They drew their initial audience from the New Wave of British Heavy Metal movement..."

There's three in the first para alone that are not referenced elsewhere. As a user of wikipedia but an outsider, just giving you my view that there is sometimes a tendency among the wikipedia elite to get completely out of control and make the work less, rather than more, usable.

No offence meant and if any taken - please just delete this! 81.77.232.7 (talk) 23:32, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. The major, overriding problem with the article, is an almost complete lack of references. In my experience, this usually leads to edits involving the contributors own biased points of view creeping in. Which is what we have here. Whilst hailing from Staffordshire is not particularly contentious (although there is no evidence to support that statement) "moved the band in a more melodic direction whilst still retaining the more traditional heavy metal black magic lyrical style" is clearly someone's viewpoint. I am not certain how experienced you are with Wikipedia, but POV, unsourced and non-verified are big problems throughout. Some editors can not resist turning articles into fansites, with all sorts of dubious claims and counterclaims, and general fancruft. Many forget, or ignore, that this is an encyclopedia, and are sometimes horrified when their own precious edit (however unsourced, libellous, or unbalanced) is removed. Equally, Wikipedia is open to all to edit, and it really is a matter of time before unfounded statements are challenged, or indeed removed entirely.

I am not part of the 'wikipedia elite' (whatever that is); merely, probably like you, a sub-editor trying to improve music related articles. As such I make no apologies for adding the ^{[citation needed]} tags - frankly, many editors would have removed some of the article's wording altogether.

If you wish to improve the article on the band, then chasing down reliable sources, and citing them in the article, would do both the band, and the credibility of Wikipedia, a great favour. Oh, and no, I did not take any particular offence; but equally hope you can appreciate my comments - which are simply based on Wikipedia guidelines (Five pillars).

Best wishes,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:34, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I just noticed this edit. Again in good humor (humour for you Brits), do you turn off of a highway on to another highway? If so, same concept, although I'll admit that living off of a highway is not the same as living off of bread. Speaking of language differences, we Yanks have about 20 or 30 different terms for "soft drink" in different parts of the country. Many of the terms are so regional that using the term in another region is likely to produce very puzzled looks. So I have to say "pop" in Detroit, "soda" in New York, and in the rural area where I grew up, it's "dope" (no kidding). Ward3001 (talk) 22:20, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

It's such a weird and wonderful language is English, I'm not surprised we invented it !! The bloody Yanks are doing their best to try to wreck it, but what the hell. For your information off of is a term no English person of sane mind would ever utter - merely fall over laughing at it. Equally we have streets, roads, motorways etc., but rarely use highway; except in the archic 'the Queen's highway'. To us "soda" is carbonated water, "dope" is something we tell our kids to avoid (but they rarely do, of course), but "pop" is widely used throughout the UK for soft drinks. Also, why do you drop the 'u' in colour, humour etc. - and elect a b-movie actor as president ?! Talking of humour - with the exception of The Simpsons, Bilko, Taxi and M*A*S*H, why do you laugh at Friends, I Love Lucy and Seinfeld ? Keep smiling - we have two queens - Queen Elizabeth II and Sir Elton John ! Best wishes,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 00:08, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I went to the Wikipedia Manual of Style and am uncertain as to how to include this information, which would appear to be relevant to an overall portrait of the members of a particular band. I am assuming that the inclusion of such information is not strictly prohibited.

Your comments sought here; many thanks in advance.

Dreadarthur (talk) 13:38, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I am puzzled - the dates of death for Mike Smith and Denis Payton are included; both in the 'Band personnel details' section; with further information in the 'Post break-up' section. If this does not answer your query, please re-word your question. Thanks,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:12, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, this is weird, very hard to find much information about the latest single on the net, I've seen it spelled both ways now, even on one of his fansites [6]. --Sc0ttkclark (talk) 18:18, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Derek,

I am the bandleader of Love Lane, and my band formed with Polly and Tony to form Sweet Dreams. My additions are 100% accurate.

Regards, Rob Parkes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.16.46.5 (talk) 08:23, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Derek,

When Sweet Dreams disbanded, I joined The Ivy League as frontman. Although at that stage no original members remained, we performed the original cabaret act. The current band Brennan/buckley/brice) were a comedy band from the outset, and merely used the name to get better billing. This is not meant as a criticism, just fact.

I have been in the business for 40 years, and any information I give is 100%.

Regards,

Rob Parkes (Robert Young)

robertparkes1953@hotmail.co.uk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.16.46.5 (talk) 08:34, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Which is all fine and dandy, and I am not in a position to question your honesty or integrity. BUT, and these are the points I made to you earlier - firstly, by editing an article where you have an involvement, you are in danger of compromising the Wikipedia guidelines see - Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. In addition, one of the thresholds for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth, see - Wikipedia:Verifiability. Plus you appear to be giving your version of what you perceive to be the facts/truth. That may appear to be fair enough, but without a citable source for the information, then you are in danger of violating the neutral point of view policy, as outlined here - Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. The cornerstone of basing contributions on reliable sources, not personal experience, is fundamental, and is as outlined here - Wikipedia:Reliable sources.

Whilst it may seem odd, Wikipedia requires referenced input from a reliable source, bizarrely even if that information is not 'correct'; and it simply does not 'takes someone's word for it' (even if, as in your case, you were directly involved with the bands/artistes in question). That's the way it is. Whilst I do not know whether you have added this particular wording nevertheless, statements such as "They are extremely popular on the cabaret circuit" and "largely respected for "keeping alive" the authentic sound and music of the original band for younger audiences to appreciate" are, without any referenced source for such statements, blatant POV. That is the crux of it, and the point I am trying to make to you. Basically, a poor referenced/cited line is one million times more acceptable than someone's personal recollections - however honest they may be.

With best wishes,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 16:04, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I have NO interest in promoting the present version of the Ivy League. But you removed my additions recently because they were at odds with the bands "official" website !!! What a laugh !! If the truth is so important !!....I replaced Perry Ford, and performed the original show.....There is NO "official" website !!! The current band simply "nicked" the Ivy League name AND NOTHING MORE !! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.16.46.5 (talk) 02:28, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Derek R Bullamore. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10