Talk:JGB (band)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-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.
Photo request It is requested that a picture or pictures of this person be included in this article to improve its quality.

[edit] Discussion moved from User talk:Mudwater and continued here

Just came across this article. There is no real assertion of notability in the article- please edit so that you provide references as to why this meets Wikipedia's musician policy. Feel free to contact me if I can be of any help, on my talk page. J Milburn 17:05, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I believe that JGB qualifies as a notable band under item 6 of the criteria for musicians and ensembles, "contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable." That is, JGB is notable because one member is Melvin Seals, formerly of the Jerry Garcia Band, as the article states. Let me know if you think this is sufficient. -- Mudwater 17:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
This is something that satisfies me, but it doesn't stand up in AfD. I know this from experience, band articles that I have argued for, containing ex-members of notable bands, have been deleted. Basically, it would be best if you could get the primary notability criteria- multiple independent, verifiable, third-party, reliable, non-trivial sources. Basically, this means two articles about the band, published somewhere other than a blog site or a Wiki, that have been published by someone or something independent from the band. These can also act as sources for the article- I'll help you look, if you like? J Milburn 17:43, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
I have looked into this a little further- perhaps it would be best if you merged the information in this article into Jerry Garcia Band, until more sources became available, and there was enough to say to keep it as a seperate article? Am I right in thinking that this is basically a side-project? Generally, side projects are only notable for the reason you used to justify this one, and so the common practice is to merge them into the article on the original band. Of course, once they become notable independently of the source band, then they deserve their own article. J Milburn 17:50, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
JGB's not a side project. I guess you could say it's a spin-off, because the band started after the dissolution of the Jerry Garcia Band, and was formed by several former members of that band. Also, as the article briefly alludes to, JGB is dedicated to the continuation of the Jerry Garcia Band's music. Because the Jerry Garcia Band was seriously notable, my opinion would be that JGB qualifies as notable under item 6.
On the other hand, "two articles about the band, published somewhere other than a blog site or a Wiki, that have been published by someone or something independent from the band" sounds reasonable to me. I don't really know this, but I'm guessing that there have been multiple articles published about JGB, perhaps in Relix Magazine or another magazine devoted to jam bands, or in a California newspaper such as the San Francisco Chronicle. In fact, I can see that there are two articles on Relix's web site, but it won't let me look at them because I'm not logged in. (Go to Google, and click on "advanced search". In "find results with all the words" type in " jgb melvin seals", and in "only return results from the site or domain" type in "relix.com".)
Let me know what you think so far. And, if you think that other Wikipedians with an interest in this subject should be consulted, what's the best way to do that? Also, I should have asked you this before, but what's your preference for continuing this conversation? If I just keep replying here, will you see it? Would you rather that we switch to your user talk page? Or do you want me to put a brief note on your talk page to let you know that I've replied here (which I'll do now)? -- Mudwater 18:34, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
I think it is in our best interests to move this discussion to the talk page of the article in question, then anyone else can join it, should they have an opinion on the matter. I will respond to your points there. J Milburn 18:41, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Copied text to talk page.

The phrasing I used was just my attempt at summarising the first notabilty criteria. If this band has been the subject of an article in those two sources, then it is notable. Cite those as your sources, and make sure all information in the article corresponds to the information in the cited articles. J Milburn 18:48, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the first notability criterion is that a band "has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable." So, let me see what I can dig up. Also, if anyone reading this can find appropriate citations, please post them here or in the article itself. (Old copies of Relix magazine, anyone?) -- Mudwater 19:04, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps you would be able to find someone who could help you find sources at Wikipedia:WikiProject Jam bands? Why not post a message about this article there? J Milburn 20:04, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
That's an excellent suggestion. I've done so. -- Mudwater 20:37, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I looked around some more and I did find a couple of sources to site. I've expanded the article and added the references. -- Mudwater 03:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Brilliant. Good work. J Milburn 11:43, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for suggesting it, the references definitely make this a better article. -- Mudwater 13:16, 28 January 2007 (UTC)