Talk:Mind Garage

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] December 15, 2005

[edit] Changes/Comments

1. In the paragraph "The Mind Garage 1967-1970", whether we should include the link to http://www.mindgarage.com?

Comment by Honeybells - this link takes the reader off wikipedia before he can read the article. It should not be here. Besides it is in the External links Hey, thanks for all your help Hurricane I truly appreciate it. I'll try to answer your questions. Nothing on this page was irrelevant or opinion. it is all completely documented. I merely organized it here.

Agree to remove the link. Yes, it is redundent since the external links already link to the website. --Hurricane111 18:43, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

2. Whether the paragraph Among their fellow students were Allen Appel and Lawrence Kasdan. '''[[Allen Appel]]''', photographer turned novelist, is perhaps best known for his series about time traveler Alex Balfour. '''[[Lawrence Kasdan]]''', is the screenwriter of '''[[The Empire Strikes Back]]''', '''[[Raiders of the Lost Ark]]''', '''[[Body Heat]]''', and '''[[Return of the Jedi]]'''. should be kept?

Comment by Hurricane - why is this part important??

Comment by Honeybells - Because you are known by the company you keep. Can you imagine an article on Charlie Brown of Peanuts without a mention of Snoopy? that's why

IMHO, unless Allen Appel and Lawrence Kasdan worked with Mind Garage for any specific (notable) project, they should only be mentioned as trivia (or something like that). Otherwise, readers may be distracted. --Hurricane111 18:43, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Allen Apple did work with the Mind garageHoneybells

3. Whether the line It has since become a much sought after collector's item. violates NPOV?

Comment by Honeybells - Sorry, it is NOT POV, it is fact. I have been outbid by people in Japan, Italy, France and England for it. The bidding got so high I had to stop. I managed to buy a record from another private collector in New Zealand. Find out for yourself by trying to buy one.

However, for an encyclopedia article, we might need evidence (ie: numbers / testimony from published source - not that I am saying you are not reliable) to say it is a much sought after collector's item. --Hurricane111 18:43, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

4. Questions regarding whether the line Neither did the genre [[garage rock]] nor the classification [[garage band]] is relevent

Comment by Honeybells - How is it irrelevant to an article on a band named GARAGE. Did you ever wonder where the description garage band, or garage rock came from. It didn't exist before this group.

Sorry - I don't know that before you tell me :D Can it be reworded so that it is clear the term "garage rock/garage band" comes from Mind Garage?

>>>Isn't important enough, and it isn't documented. Its like smoking causes cancer. Everyone knew it for hundreds of years tho it might have been called consumption or something else, but it wasn't "proven" or ducumented till recently.Honeybells 23:05, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

5. Why is the paragraph regarding Electric Prunes important?

Comment by Honeybells: wBecause it shows a chronology, a progression in the beginning, of who, what, when, where, and why the Mind Garage is foremost the reason for the genre and not the Electric Prunes. However I'll change it. The former sentence is The Electric Prunes album Mass in F Minor sung in Latin and released in January, 1968 was a bold experiment. There was only one live performance in the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

Ok. --Hurricane111 18:43, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

6. What is "Where you get your soul overhauled"? Is it a name or something? If it is merely a description by the author, then maybe we should think of something more appropriate...

Comment by Honeybells: it is the headline of an article on mindgarage.com website, and also helps people to understand the name of the band, Mind Garage.

I don't think it should be used as a subsection title just because it is the headline of an article on mindgarage.com's site. As for helping people to understand the name of the band, then it should be mentioned in the article (ie: something like -- the name "Mind Garage" refers to the location where sould is being overhauled <ok, that sounds weird and need some work>) For subsection's title, it should be clear to user what the subsection is about.

I guess its one of those things where you had to be there,I thought it was clear :-)Honeybells 23:05, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

7. "We could all do with a shocking splendid spiritual surprise" [http://www.mindgarage.com/princeton.html] -- why is this statement important?? Who is Dean Gordon?

Comment by Honeybells: Dean Gordon was a dean of Princeton U.

OK, then we should mentioned it as part of the article. --Hurricane111 18:43, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

8. Whether the term "The Mind Garage" is appropriate? <honeybells> Actually the snippet was "Mind Garage's drew attention" Honeybells 16:06, 15 December 2005 (UTC)  :

Comment: Mind Garage's is a like a possessive noun. Substitute Bob instead. ex: Bob's drew attention is wrong. Bob drew is correct.

I didn't raise that point - so I have no comment. --Hurricane111 18:43, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

9. Do we have any proofs? (ie: published review of their concerts? If not, then it may be qualified as original research/non-neutral point of view materials and have to be removed---

Comment: Yes, there is proof. Follow the external links to the website and see published newspaper article after article describing concerts and Masses. Plus there are letters from concert goers and Mass goers who wrote about their experiences. The website posters as well as the articles verify billing as Celebration of Life, etc. I have made sure that everything is thoroughly documented. Going back to #2, why Allen Appel and Lawrence Kasdan were relevant, they were witnesses to the concerts and could be asked about these things. If it was not so, would I say it?

If that's the case, then we should work the reference into the concert section. Sorry, I didn't meant to suggest you are making it up - it is just that I have seen way too much POV materials in Wikipedia and is paranoid when trying to clean up the article. As for #2, we don't expect people to contact Allen Appel and/or Lawrence Kasdan when they have question, do we? If not, then what we can go by is published material...--Hurricane111 18:43, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

10. Regarding the section name "Beginnings of Christian Rock Music Documented" - Here, I assume that the following paragraphs contain actual reference to the group. If so, should we rename it to reference or something like that?

Comment: Yes there are the references to the group you seek, but NO it should not be renamed. That they are references is understood. If the same information was in paragraph form you would probably not question the title. The format here only makes it clear what the references are trying to explain. For example, if I said REFERENCES and listed 2x4s, hammer, nails, wood, you would have NO idea I was referencing Some Things Needed to Build a House, and although the external links would tell you where to get the material you would not know why.

I think the changes you put in now makes it more clear to the average read (like me). --Hurricane111 18:43, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Although labeled as over categorized- December 2005 Ilya K (rm overcategorizing- I didn't think the assesment is correct. Ex Hank Aaron . If an article legitimately has a place in a category how is it over categorized by listing those caegories?

• 1/18/06 Regarding NPOV, clean up notices, etc. There were so many notices, etc, even scrolling down I didn't even know an article was here. Why not read the documentation associated with each statement instead of plastering notes about correctness, NPOV, etc. THEN if you think the article is POV edit it, and stop leaving your plethera of notices to distract others.

[edit] Pictures

By the way, I have took the liberty in thumbtagging the picture and move the picture to the front of the article (instead of being a subsection). This conforms more to the "regular" wikipedia article's format. If user wants to see the picture in more detail, they can click on it and the picture will be enlarged. I hope that you would not mind... --Hurricane111 18:47, 15 December 2005 (UTC) That's OK But I think it makes more impact and is better at conveying the feel of the article as a large image ON the page than a small image that needs to be clicked, and once shown , loses its statement because it is surrounded by legal disclaimers and a MUCH to busy page design wise. Its like taking a scruffy criminal and dressing him nice to sit in the courtroom. Maybe he looks very nice, but if he has done some terrible crime it makes it harder for the jury to associate him with horrible acts. The large image within the text associates the fury of the band with what the reader is reading. It makes a better artistic statement. Sometimes that is more important than a dry technically correct formula. Any, OK. Honeybells 23:05, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Regarding "Mind Garage is a 5 men psychedelic rock and roll band from Morgantown, West Virginia." 5 man band is correct. Its the way people talk and write. Ex: the million man march in washington. A million man army. A 3 dog night. Honeybells 23:05, 15 December 2005 (UTC)