Talk:Rock and Roll Hall of Fame
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Architectural history. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale. | |
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Ohio, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Ohio. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
[edit] Entry Criteria
Can someone explain what is needed to be eligible as a member of the hall of fame? I dont get how a band *can* be in in year 20XX. Is there a limit per year ? please expain 09:14, 31 August 2006 (UTC)Crystaliser
[edit] Controversy?
Quote: "The Cleveland location is controversial, but considered historically appropriate......"
Who makes this statement? Doesn't seem NPOV --Seltar 19:38, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
- At the time it was definitely "controversial" in the NPOV sense that it created a controversy. There was a bidding war, there were media polls, and the announcement was met with a huge, nationwide huh? They even ended up putting the question Why is it in Cleveland? in the website's FAQ! I hope the new wording makes it a little clearer, but I'm not picking up an old RS just to find a quote. --Dhartung | Talk 03:03, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
-
- Hi, I understand the controversial location remark now, and thanks for the clarification in the article. Seltar 19:23, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Sources on Rock and Roll Hall of Fame
Jake Packman, a Wikipedia user asked the following questions through the Wikipedia help list:
I am a 7th grader at Hall Middle School in Corte Madera, Ca.. I have chosen The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame as my topic for a major research paper which is due on November 30th.. However, I can not use the internet for reference material. Can you send me some information or recommend books I can purchase. My interests are on why was it started, how Cleveland became the home for the Museum, how the induction process works, who are the inductees, any controversies surrounding the museum and anything else you might think is important.
Thanks for any information you can provide me.
I responded:
Their website states that "All aspects of the induction process are handled by the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Foundation. It can be reached at 1290 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10104. The Foundation does not have e-mail available. " You might wish to write to them for suggested types of information.
In the early years namely the mid to late 1980's Rolling Stone Magazine" was heavily involved in the process. You might wish to look at copies of the magazine from that period to help you with your research.
The Rock Hall itself has an education office. You might wish to send an e-mail to Education@rockhall.org.
Does anyone else have any suggestions. Capitalistroadster 03:22, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Criticisms
That rock n roll hall of fame is a joke still. I'd better see Donna Summer, Yes, Kraftwerk, Black Sabbath, Madonna, Run DMC, The Clovers, Wynonia Harris, etc., inducted or else this is truly a flawed joke.
The entire grunge genre has been over looked. Generation X were shaped by such songs as "Black Hole Sun", "Smells Like Teen Spirit" and "Alive".
- The article is only for discussing improvements to this article, not for discussing the subject of the article. However, if you read this page, you'll note that no grunge bands are going to be eligible for a couple more years. I don't believe Madonna or Run DMC are eligible yet either. Tuf-Kat 18:47, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
In regards to grunge, I don't think most of them meet qualifications yet. I'm positive that Nirvana has about ten years before they are qualified. ~Scorpion
[edit] Abbreviations
The abbreviations RRHOF and RRHOFM are not listed anywhere in the article. There are also no existing redirects to this article for users that search for those abbreviations.
There is a redirect for RRHOF but not one for RRHOFM, RARHOF, RNRHOF, RARHOFM, RNRHOFM, RaRHoF, RnRHoF, RaRHoFM, and RnRHoFM.
If what the rock and rock hall of fame calls this latest group I guess I will start playing country. What changed the music back in the 70's was groups like the guess who, BTO and then Kiss. These groups had a major impact on the music world then and still are played today by many.
[edit] Rock 'n' Roll
Why are Bob Marley and Prince -for instance- in the "Rock 'n' Roll Hall of Fame". Their music can't really be called rock and roll. Or am I misunderstanding what "rock and roll" means? If I am right about this shouldn't there be something in the article pointing this out.(MrDeBeuker 04:53, 1 February 2006 (UTC))
- Wikipedia makes a distinction between rock and roll and rock music. The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame calls all rock music rock and roll, but also adds in even more tangential stuff like reggae. In this context, it basically just means "Anglo and African American popular music plus reggae". Tuf-Kat 05:04, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
R&B IS Rock, supplanted by Alan Freed. Rock n roll was original black slang for sex, and is esentially black music. Ask Robert Palmer, Dave Marsh, any of the Rock N Roll Hall of fame members and they will tell you the exact same thing. It's just been ingrained into the media that rock is white music and started by Elvis even though Elvis himself continually refuted that claim, always owing his debts to African Americans. Rock was born in the late 40s and early 50s. Rock is disco, prog, folk-rock, funk, punk, rap/hip hop, grunge, soul, etc., all firmly entrenched in R&B before Freed coined the music rock n roll so as to have better marketability and to detach the stigma of whites buying black records.
[edit] Do we need this paragraph?
"Not everybody is happy with the selection process, which some feel is effectively controlled by a few individuals, including founder Jann Wenner and writer Dave Marsh, and therefore reflects their tastes, rather than the views of the rock world as a whole. Hence, there are a disproportionate number of lesser known 1950s acts, as opposed to, for example, progressive rock and heavy metal acts. In addition, most of the inductees are American or are British that were successful in the US."
I think that this paragraph should not belong on this wiki. I have never heard any real criticism nor can see how it is really possible for it. How can the RARHOF be controlled be a few individuals and only reflect their tastes? The committee is made up of about 1000 rock historians and experts. If there is any true controversy on this issue it should have its own section rather being tacked on at the beginning.
[edit] Rock and Roll Hall of Fame / Jim Morrison
I was just at the Rock and The Roll Hall of Fame maybe about a week or so more ago as of this date here in the talk section. And I had took particular interest to the small exhibit that was focused mainly on Jim Morrisson of the Doors. I had paid careful and close attention to the chronology time line of the letters and photos through 1965 and into 1971 to and from Jim Morrisson before the time of when he and the Doors got there start. In and around what was maybe 1965 for when Jim did not seem to have such long hair as he is so well known today from so many photos circulated all over the world leading up to the time for when he died in Paris in what I think was possibly either 1970 or 1971. I was kind of amazed from that exhibit that before the time of when the Doors got there start and in the letters and the photos with his family. He had seemed to me quite bright and educated and infact lucid and clear not just in the ways of poetry and of language and cinema and of film but also in many other ways as well. And maybe 4 or 5 years later he is found dead inside of some bath tub somewhere in Paris. I guess that is what excess drinking and drugs will do that to a person. Before the Doors he seemed quite intelligent and balanced and rational and educated and quite a uniqye and a interesting person back in 1965 to know. www.geocities.com/berniethomas68 02:50, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Sex Pistols
Which one of the Sex Pistols was quoted as saying their induction at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame was but a mere piss stain www.geocities.com/berniethomas68 02:53, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Removal of editorializing from "criticism" section
I have removed the following from the "Criticism" section:
"Not everybody is happy with the selection process, which some feel is effectively controlled by a few individuals, including founder Jann Wenner and writer Dave Marsh, and therefore reflects their tastes, rather than the views of the rock world as a whole. Hence, there are a disproportionate number of lesser-known 1950s acts, as opposed to, for example, progressive rock and heavy metal acts. In addition, most of the inductees are American or are British artists that were successful in the U.S."
This section has no sources, uses weasel words, is far from neutral, and is generally opinion rather than fact. User:Scorpion0422 has reinserted this language twice now without comment; I ask that the content not be replaced until these issues can be resolved. JDoorjam Talk 16:43, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
- If you look at a whole bunch of articles about the Rock Hall of Fame, you will see these exact criticisms. And it is as neutral as it can be. It is important to note things like these, especially in a controversies section.
- Go here: http://www.futurerockhall.com/blog_files/category-15.html and scroll down to "Do petitions help get bands into the Rock Hall?" -- Scorpion0422 19:00, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
- But you don't list any sources for the criticism as it now stands. For instance, who says that their selection of largely American and British bands is a bad thing? It might be true, but who is citing it as criticism? Similarly, who says that their selection of few hard rock acts is a bad thing? In order to be listed as criticism, it has to be more than simply true that there are few hard rock acts or mostly American and British acts. Someone notable (preferably a few notable people) have to actually be saying that this is a problem. This article, on the other hand, is a decent source for criticism (it's the original article referenced in the link you provided). It can probably be used in supporting assertions that the board is controlled by corporate interests, and does not listen to fans. I've reverted the article again, as the criticism cited in the article is, so far, sourceless. JDoorjam Talk 23:35, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
- If sources are so important, why don't you add them in as opposed to just complaining about it? -- Scorpion0422 18:40, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
- Eh? If the criticism is so pronounced, why don't you find sources instead of just reinserting the content? JDoorjam Talk 00:51, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- Happy now? Although, it seems to me that as the one who was whining the most, you should have done it. -- Scorpion0422 01:59, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- Eh? If the criticism is so pronounced, why don't you find sources instead of just reinserting the content? JDoorjam Talk 00:51, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- If sources are so important, why don't you add them in as opposed to just complaining about it? -- Scorpion0422 18:40, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
- But you don't list any sources for the criticism as it now stands. For instance, who says that their selection of largely American and British bands is a bad thing? It might be true, but who is citing it as criticism? Similarly, who says that their selection of few hard rock acts is a bad thing? In order to be listed as criticism, it has to be more than simply true that there are few hard rock acts or mostly American and British acts. Someone notable (preferably a few notable people) have to actually be saying that this is a problem. This article, on the other hand, is a decent source for criticism (it's the original article referenced in the link you provided). It can probably be used in supporting assertions that the board is controlled by corporate interests, and does not listen to fans. I've reverted the article again, as the criticism cited in the article is, so far, sourceless. JDoorjam Talk 23:35, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] No Metal
There are also no metal bands. 67.188.172.165 04:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, and that could be noted here, but the way you worded was extremely POV. I'll add that, but we need to keep the article NPOV. -- Scorpion0422 04:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Someone help with this sentence
"Some feel the induction process is controlled by a few individuals, including founder Jann Wenner, former foundation director Suzan Evans, and writer Dave Marsh, reflecting their tastes rather than the views of the rock world as a whole."
Is Jann Wenner someone who feels that the nomination process is controlled by others, or is he one on the people doing the controlling? As written it is ambiguous.
- It means that the voting process is controlled by those three. I'll reword it. -- Scorpion0422 20:57, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
