Talk:Daniel Amos
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to musicians and musical groups on Wikipedia. | ||
[edit] Article title
Why in the world is this article titled "Daniel Amos Band", a bizarre name I don't think they ever went by. It should just be under Daniel Amos. Or do we need to go rename some other pages: Beatles Band, U2 Band, Radiohead Band, etc... --68.147.53.251 04:30, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
--Excellent question. No idea why that was done, but it doesn't make any sense to me. They've always been known as either DAniel Amos, DA or Da... no band in the name ever.
-
- OK, explain why you keep changing the name. Is there another Daniel Amos? So far, you're not adding another one.. so why do we need the "band" thing? This rename affects a lot of articles.. so if its not needed, it shouldn't be changed.
-
- Hi. I've fixed the original redirect from Daniel Amos Band to Daniel Amos (band) and updated every article which linked to the old name (except one talk page and one copyvio). Hope this helps! :)
- Adrian Lamo ยทยท 23:40, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- My name is Daniel Amos. -- Doo Doo 21:39, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Ok, that'll be valid in this discussion when theres an article written about you.
-
-
-
- OK, I have a question about the renaming. I'm told on other pages that an article doesn't need to be renamed with a disambiguation title if it is the "most famous" use of the name. (For example, Sticks and Stones goes to an article about one album, even though there are other albums on Wikipedia with the same name. I'm told this is ok because it is the most famous of those albums). In the case of Daniel Amos, there is no other article with that name. If you do a Google search, every article that comes up is about this band. (I just went through the first 10 pages of hits and only saw one other artice come up about a guy named Dan Amos, who is the CEO of AFLAC. I realize someone might jump at the chance to write an AFLAC CEO article.. but, it appears he goes by the name "Dan" and not "Daniel" even if that happens.) If you do a search on the Internet Movie Database *or* All Music Guide, again you only get this band. So, wouldn't this be the most famous use of the name? If so, why do we need the (band) in the title? I don't really care - I just don't fully understand the decision. User:audiori 09:13, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- This argument makes no sense per norms. Beatles redirects no The Beatles, it dosen't disambiguate to show other uses. Note the arrangement of The Beatles to The Beatles (album) and The White Album to The White Album (disambiguation). This move does not help wikipedia either for overall organization, or for scaling. Dan, the CowMan 16:03, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- OK, I have a question about the renaming. I'm told on other pages that an article doesn't need to be renamed with a disambiguation title if it is the "most famous" use of the name. (For example, Sticks and Stones goes to an article about one album, even though there are other albums on Wikipedia with the same name. I'm told this is ok because it is the most famous of those albums). In the case of Daniel Amos, there is no other article with that name. If you do a Google search, every article that comes up is about this band. (I just went through the first 10 pages of hits and only saw one other artice come up about a guy named Dan Amos, who is the CEO of AFLAC. I realize someone might jump at the chance to write an AFLAC CEO article.. but, it appears he goes by the name "Dan" and not "Daniel" even if that happens.) If you do a search on the Internet Movie Database *or* All Music Guide, again you only get this band. So, wouldn't this be the most famous use of the name? If so, why do we need the (band) in the title? I don't really care - I just don't fully understand the decision. User:audiori 09:13, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
- So, should it just go back to Daniel Amos as the regular article? Audiori 19:04, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- OK, I went ahead and moved it back. If someone comes along named Daniel Amos and starts beating this band in Google, IMDB and AllMusic Guide searches... I'll help move it back. In the last 30+ years, there hasn't been anyone using this name that is more famous than this band though, so I don't expect it to suddenly happen overnight. Audiori 22:30, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Antoher DA goes under Daniel Amos (disambiguation), per the principal of least astonishment. Dan, the CowMan 03:09, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Sections
I have added some tentative section headings to the article. I think they're pretty good but I'm far from certain they're as good as they can be. Feel free to suggest/make changes to "soup it up". In particular I think the Alarma boxset needs its own section but it's a bit weak right now..needs beefed up with another sentence or two. GBrady 06:02, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
