This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christian music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christian music 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.Christian musicWikipedia:WikiProject Christian musicTemplate:WikiProject Christian musicChristian music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs 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.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bob Dylan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bob Dylan on Wikipedia, including songs, albums, concepts, people, books, and movies related to him. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Bob DylanWikipedia:WikiProject Bob DylanTemplate:WikiProject Bob DylanBob Dylan articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music 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.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Roots music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to roots, folk and traditional folk music 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.Roots musicWikipedia:WikiProject Roots musicTemplate:WikiProject Roots musicRoots music articles
You should mention in the opening sentence that it is "from his studio album Harlem Street Singer (1960)" because the album's exact release month is not notable for the lead
I believe it is notable, as it is the first release of the song. Following WP:SONG#Article content, which says to "Write the basics first (this is often the information contained in the infobox)", the first instance of release would be essential. isento (talk) 15:53, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The song did not receive a standalone release though; this is notable in the manner that you can mention the album in the opening sentence and add the release year in brackets. --K. Peake21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I've cut out the month, but preserved the release context (label and career rebirth note), as its connection extends to the last sentence. isento (talk) 03:37, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"It was first recorded" → "The song was first recorded"
IMO, "song" would follow too closely to the earlier sentence. There is no ambiguity as to the subject of the sentence. The subject-clause structure is preserved from the first sentence to the next, so it should be clear to the reader. isento (talk) 15:53, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the sentence does not begin after any mention of the album. The album is mentioned later in the second sentence. isento (talk) 03:37, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, this is fine; I was writing the initial suggestion with the album title being moved to the opening sentence in mind. --K. Peake06:56, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"1960, for his album Harlem Street Singer," → "1960 for the album," since this was during the album sessions, plus remove the release month per earlier while keeping the during part, though
"The recording was engineered" → "The song was engineered" with the target
Well, recordings or instances of recording are engineered, rather than songs, compositions, etc. There is a nuance of word choice here that is critical. isento (talk) 15:53, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The "lively" part does not appear to be mentioned in the body, unless I wasn't reading through correctly?
The third paragraph of the first section establishes his style of guitar had a "unique bounce" to it, bounce being another word for an exuberant or lively quality. And the composition section establishes his style of guitar features on the song. "Dazzling" in a later section bolsters this phrasing as well. isento (talk) 15:53, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think the relevance is self-explanatory, as the section is largely an introduction to the performer, his life, career, events leading up to the song, etc. isento (talk) 16:04, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I do understand that it is from the same time period, but there is nothing in this section about the actual year 1963 so you could replace it with a different one or merely reword the text. --K. Peake21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"left during Davis' childhood" → "left during Gary Davis' childhood" per MOS:SAMESURNAME
That guideline says to use their full name on first mention and, for brevity, later mentions can be just the given name. So I'll make it "Gary's". isento (talk) 16:04, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"for Davis after he turned seven and had" → "for Gary Davis after he turned seven, by which time he had"
That would distance the fact of his mother's buying him the guitar from his demonstrating those qualities. "After" has the connotation of "because of", a connection that is supported by the source. Both are grammatically correct, but the current revision is more apt. isento (talk) 16:04, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure blues and ragtime is the same guitar or it isn't two separate ones... I can't view the book source?
"for his prospective LP album Harlem Street Singer," → "for Harlem Street Singer," but shouldn't you directly mentioned it being engineered at the studio?
The source says the album was forthcoming, so it should be introduced as such, as it doesn't exist yet. I have noted Goldstein and Van Gelder's direct roles. isento (talk) 16:54, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"as was his penchant for" → "following his penchant of"
Does in his words really need to be in brackets, or isn't that already implied by the fact the quote is in speech marks?
Yes. MOS:QUOTE says quote attribution should be at least recongizable by the footnote, but in this case it could be misconstrued as the words of Ian Zack. It is safer to note it is Davis. isento (talk) 16:54, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It just reads awkwardly saying "the next year" when the previous one is not known; could you specify either point? --K. Peake21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think that goes without saying for a popular music song, which the reader is made aware of in the lead and in the preceding sections, as opposed to a classical composition which generally won't have lyrics. Copyright registrations include lyrics as part of the composition. In short, I would keep it as it is for brevity. isento (talk) 17:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not necessarily, as music like ambient is still released to this very year and you need to add lyrics for specifying that the section discusses them too. --K. Peake21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't you identify G-flat major by its full name?
I have seen it more commonly referred to just as "key of G-flat". But that could be an informality. So for here, I will change it. isento (talk) 17:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"a guitar break wherein" → "a guitar break, wherein"
Are you sure the img is accurate by saying that he played a part in a re-issue?
Yes. I think it is a fair description, given he headed the label that reissued the song on Let Us Get Together (1974). isento (talk) 17:27, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
First para looks good!
If the publishing of the composition in the book was a re-issue as well, then reword accordingly
The source does not specify, but it gives the impression it was at least the first publication giving Davis copyright protection. So it is a publication, and quite possibly the first, since the LP does not appear to have a publishing credit. isento (talk) 17:27, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Remove wikilink on copyright protection
Reads confusingly having the labels in brackets; maybe add "through Fantasy and Kicking Mule, respectively" at the end of the sentence instead while still keeping the release years where they are
"while calling the lyric" → "while calling the line"
"turbulent event for" → "unstable event for" because the former wording is not encyclopaedic
I don't see how it is not encyclopedic. In fact, it is more accurate than "unstable", which is defined as being prone to change. The rally was turbulent, marked by conflict, disorder, etc, as supported in the source. isento (talk) 18:13, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The word just stuck out to me as having a tone not suited for this site, but it's the most specific in this context and that was more of an initial reaction so keep as is here. --K. Peake21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Remove the fanzine introduction to Little Sandy Review because this is not needed for a publication, plus either name the review or attribute the review to "a writer" like we did [[Talk:Live in Tokyo (Charles Tolliver album)/GA1|before]
There is no article for this title to offer readers context for what this publication is. Scholarly book sources like these support this phrasing. As for "a writer", this is unnecessary as it goes without saying it was a writer, rather than the entirety of a publication (its editors and staff, etc.) make the statement in unison, which is unheard of and unrealistic in published writing. isento (talk) 18:13, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It does read awkwardly saying "Little Sandy Review appraised" it, but you can keep the introduction even though "a writer" should still be added. --K. Peake21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Instead of "a writer", I've rearranged the wording to say the recording was "appraised in the ... 'Little Sandy Review as..." isento (talk) 04:32, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Img looks good!
LP introduction is not needed to Harlem Street Singer since it is already known
"The band debuted" → "The Grateful Dead debuted"
"version" (in Zack's words)." → "version", as described by Zack." because the brackets don't really seem required here
"which resembled the Davis original," → "which resembled the original," because it is already known as Davis', plus you mentioned him last sentence
"on hearing the record," → "on hearing the album," because it is awkward to use this term only once and this isn't an album article where you may be overusing the latter
"from a couple of teenage blues fans," → "from teenage blues fans" because otherwise it sounds like they were in a relationship, plus the comma is not needed here
"of $200 and visited Menuez and Fahey on April 24" → "of $200, visiting Menuez and Fahey on April 24, 1972"
That would make the independent clause very short and surrounded by much longer dependent clauses. I don't see an issue of grammar here. isento (talk) 18:13, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The usages of "and" are too close together, especially after you have used a comma before the word earlier in this sentence. --K. Peake21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think intense is really appropriate language here; either add in speech marks if it's a quote or reword to something more neutral
It is not an issue of neutrality. A performance can be objectively intense or forceful, and the source supports that in its wording. isento (talk) 18:13, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Is "recalled" or "recalls" the correct tense per my earlier comment?
For consistency's sake, subjects interviewed with ties to the events, as opposed to critical commentaries, I would leave it the way it is. isento (talk) 18:13, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"of the performance," → "of the performance that"
"Zack says, "maybe" → "Zack says that "maybe"
"chance to perform."" → "chance to perform"." per MOS:QUOTE
It does not appear to be a quote of the sentence in its entirety, or did the writer just not start maybe with capitalisation for some reason? --K. Peake21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure African-American music is relevant enough to be here?
Yes. Especially given the background section, the article has a large context in this topic and serves as an intersection for a number of references in the article on African-American music, including the historical conditions that gave rise to spirituals, the blues, ragtime. isento (talk) 18:18, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Isento Great to wake up to your second response here in the UK; I only left one comment above in a relevant area. ✓Pass now though, as you have no more issues left to fix! --K. Peake06:56, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
On hold until all of the issues are fixed; interesting change to review a song article by you for once! --K. Peake 13:42, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
