Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Roots music

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

To-do list for Wikipedia:WikiProject Roots music: edit · history · watch · refresh


*Edit this list via the talk page.

Folk, Traditional,
and Roots music
WikiProject
General information
Main project page talk
Departments
Assessment talk
Peer Review talk
Outreach talk
Task forces
Electric folk talk
Chicago folk talk

edit · changes

Contents

[edit] Woody Guthrie

The Woody Guthrie article is listed as bening under the umbrella of this project. —Gaff ταλκ 01:57, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

That's right. Did you want to say something about that?
-- TimNelson 03:20, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, just that the article has a lot of potential. I cleaned it up a bit and got it approved as a Good Article. With a little work, it can very likely reach Featured Article. —Gaff ταλκ 09:35, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Woody Guthrie is quite close to being a Featured Article, follow it's progress on the discussion page! --Dannygutters (talk · contribs) 20:10, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Gordon

I just found you and joined. I could use some help in downloading a Library of Congress image of Robert Winslow Gordon with his Edison disks to the article. I would appreciate a rating, as I wrote most of the article. Pustelnik (talk) 23:27, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rosalie Sorrels

I just tagged the article on singer/songwriter/storyteller Rosalie Sorrels. This was a stub when added to the Idaho Wikiproject and is now fleshed out. I still need to finish the section covering her career beginning in about 1970. I have the last of the material gathered to write that section. I also created a discography. Any critique or input is welcomed. (Don't even ask me why there are no longer any photos on the discography. I lost that argument with one wicked wikiadmin who loves using the royal we and wielding his mighty keyboard. (Rant off)) I have done some annotation on the discography. I hope you enjoy her story as much as I have in writing it. I did not know how you listed unrated articles, so I used a ? Hope that was correct.

Are you all familiar with OCLC WorldCat? It is a great source for publication information on albums, sheet music, etc. The public catalog is located here. --Robbie Giles 03:57, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

If the class/importance are left blank, it will do the right thing. I've made them like that now. Great to see someone working on these things; thanks. -- TimNelson 05:56, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
You've done a lot of work on her music, which is great, but it's well outside of the conventions of discography layout as shown by, for example, "Pentangle". Ogg 08:57, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] British folk revival

Is there an article that chronicles the British folk revival of the 1950s and 60s? I couldn't find one but have maybe just not guessed the right title. Bluewave 13:17, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I think you're right that there's nothing. The information is around (scattered through various articles). Electric folk, for example, includes some of these people, but I agree that doesn't cover it by any means. Pages that may be relevant here are:
Basically, I put together the Electric folk article because this information was scattered everywhere; if there'd been something on the British folk revival, I might not've felt there was any need for the article (but since it's there now, I think it's worth keeping).
-- TimNelson 01:46, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
The article"Folk Music of England" is almost what you want. Ogg 08:50, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Songs

Another thought....having signed up (with some trepidation!) to this project, I had a good look round the stuff that seems to be in scope. One thing that struck me is that there are loads of folk song articles (eg most of the Child Ballads have individual articles) but not much consistency between them. For instance, some include lyrics (or even several variants of lyrics), but others don't; some list recordings (but probably only some individual's favourite version); some talk about comparisons with other similar songs; some are tagged as stubs, but its not really obvious what needs adding to them, etc. Should we try and come up with a consistent "preferred" style for folk song articles and, if so, is there a really good example of a well-structured, informative one that would serve as a model? Bluewave 12:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, I agree that it'd be nice to have some kind of co-ordinated approach, but there's also no point duplicating stuff, so we should investigate the following resources:
Having said all that, I don't know of any articles that I would say are great on this sort of thing. Articles that might be worth considering are Lady Isabel and the Elf Knight and Thomas the Rhymer. The Roud Folk Song Index page might link to something relevant too. My suggestion would be that we pick one article (possibly Lady Isabel and the Elf Knight, as it's one of the more extensive ones already), and do some things to improve it.
Actually, my suggestion would be that we could do something like Wikipedia:WikiProject Roots music/Anglo-Celtic electric folk task force#Quick article improvements, but do something for songs, and put it on this page.
What think you?
-- TimNelson 02:09, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Just found one more relevant link: s:Child's Ballads -- TimNelson 03:31, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I was inspired by that last link; I've written up some guidelines. -- TimNelson 04:41, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Great stuff! Thanks! I think that some of the general work on songs (mainly based on commercial, composed songs) has quite a different emphasis from folk songs. To take your example of From a Distance (which is a great article) - it has gained its importance from the recordings, eg by Bette Midler. On the other hand, a folk song, such as The Three Ravens is of interest as a song, but not really notable (as far as I know) from definitive recorded versions. I guess the Infobox_standard is the best we have available, but its fields such as "Written by", "Music by", "Lyrics by", "Written" and "Original artist" don't apply to, say a Child Ballad. Is there an argument for a specific folk song infobox (which would perhaps include Roude Number, Collected by, Earliest known date...)? I think your guidelines look sensible and helpful. I guess we need to try them out on one or two songs and see how they work out. Bluewave 09:54, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Enthused by the above, I thought it would be great to pick on a Child ballad with a stub article and have a go at developing it using your guidelines. First of all, I picked Little Musgrave and Lady Barnard and started editing an offline version. However, I had spent some time on it before I realised that there is quite a good Wikipedia article on Matty Groves which is essentially the same song! (Grrr!) Putting my discouragement to one side, I then picked on Andrew Lammie, which was a good candidate for improvement. I did some research and started working on a new version, only to discover that there's quite a good article on The Bonnie Lass o' Fyvie (another variant of Andrew Lammie). This is going to be much more difficult that I thought! Bluewave 15:19, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
In response to your comment about a particular template for folk songs, that could be a good idea. But we have to keep in mind:
  • In spite of the participants so far, this WikiProject isn't just about Anglo-Celtic music. If we're lucky, we'll someday need a subproject about Anglo-Celtic music, to differentiate it from eg. Flamenco (and Chinese folk), so we have to think carefully about what we want to do. But an Anglo-Celtic Folk Song box might be worth considering.
  • This might be possible as an expansion of an existing box
  • It might be that we could include a section for "Standard References", which would mean we would have to enter the Roud/Child info separately on each page, but it would be more generally applicable
  • I agree the "Standard" box information is mostly irrelevant, but it could be useful for thinking about things -- for example, there are many songs which are classed as "folk" which have all that information (ie. they've made their way into "the tradition" in spite of being copyright).
I presume you're using Digital Tradition/Mudcat to track down alternative versions, as well as folkinfo.org.
I forgot to mention that, inspired by my guidelines, I did some work to make Lady Isabel and the Elf Knight conform to them. This mostly involved adding more headings and rearranging the existing text around them, but I thought it would be the quickest way to an article that we could point people at and say "Here's what 'good' looks like". I'd originally considered Thomas the Rhymer, but that page documents a legend with an associated folksong, not the song itself.
I hear you about alternative names. Let me know if you find any more -- my role in WIkipedia tends to be an organiser of existing articles, so I'll investigate merging any that you mention.
-- TimNelson 01:32, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm also looking at making a Template:Traditional Song boilerplate. If that turns blue, you can use it by putting {{subst:Template:Traditional Song boilerplate}} at the top of the article.
-- TimNelson 01:49, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
For the two songs you mentioned, I've merged the articles in with the new boilerplate, but there's still work to be done (for example, the "Textual Variants" sections need more work).
I was also thinking it might be nice to have a specific "Child Ballads" header, like the one at s:Child's Ballads/4 -- the header at the top of that page could be useful on Wikipedia too. But I don't have time for that now. If you don't do it first, though, I might get onto it sometime.
-- TimNelson 04:57, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm arguing at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums#Proposed new infobox to replace 4 others in favour of the idea of having series, as shown at User:TimNelson/Lady Isabel and the Elf Knight (please note that this is my example copy, and not the original, and also that it's done as proof-of-concept, not as a final layout recommendation). -- TimNelson 12:29, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
The Child ballads at Wiksource are only the words; Child of course also collected & printed music for many versions, though I know of no convenient online source for the scores. The traditional musical variations are harder to list in an infobox than the texts, though Bronson's collection is I think considered reliable. There's a variable amount of literary and historical information about the different ballads, so although real standardization would be limited, a specialized infobox would provide the core and make for easy comparison. DGG (talk) 08:01, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I agree with pretty much what you've said. The Traditional song boilerplate I made has a comment in it that, for the purposes of most of the article, the song is considered to be the words, but there's a section for music at the bottom. The music is more important to me, but it's easier to talk about the words, and they tend to be what people are usually referring to when they say "song".
-- TimNelson 12:29, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Lady Isabel and the Elf Knight was suggested as an exemplar of "what good looks like". I have made some suggestions on that article's talk page about how we could improve it. I'll try and add what I can. (I had intended to do some work on it over the weekend, but this weekend turned out to be what we are likely to get as a "Summer" this year in England, so I made the most of the weather instead!) Bluewave 08:24, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The "Traditional Song boilerplate" and its relevance to early songs

Interested bystander checking in here. I would have put this as a comment under the previous section, but it's long and did not format well, so I made a new header.

Seeing as this project seems to have taken the Child Ballads and other early songs under its wing, I took a look at the Template:Traditional Song boilerplate and although I agree that it is a very good idea to impose some more regular structure on the relevant articles, it didn't really cover what I felt were the key points for early songs. Part of the problem is that "traditional" covers a whole lot of ground, from 12th century manuscripts to songs written within living memory that have naturalized themselves among the folksinging population.

In my mind, an ideal article about a "traditional" piece would include a set of information that is different from that appropriate for a more recent piece. For instance, many important early ballads have never been recorded, or have been recorded only in much-modified later versions, so a discography for such works is really not that useful. Having an obligate section entitled "Broadsides" is also questionable, since many important songs (especially the older pieces) never appeared in this form.

Tunes present special difficulties, in that few original tunes survive, early music often conformed to rather different tonal and melodic rules, and the most common modern secondary sources generally give somewhat modified versions even when they claim to be a transcription of the original (see here for a case example).

I would suggest an organization more along these lines (by no means complete or ideal):

0. Lead paragraph: type of work (ballad, song, etc), country / region of origin, era of probable origin

  1. Sources and classification:
    1. Standard References (eg, Child / Roud numbers)
    2. Alternate names
    3. List of the most important extant sources, with dates where known; "important" sources would include earliest, most complete, basis of later famous adaptation, etc. Special mention of extant sources which include matching music and / or suggest a suitable tune (if any - these tend to be quite rare for older works)
  2. Description
    1. For ballads, plot summary, for non-ballad songs, song type (eg, vocal, instrumental, round, choral, alliterative vs. rhymed, verse structure, etc); with relevant discussion of related pieces and variants
    2. Prior sources from which the plot / characters / events were drawn, if any (and discussion of known historical connections for songs based on real events)
    3. Geographic and temporal distribution of the work, including versions in other languages; where consistent and significant differences exist between early and late versions, or between versions in different languages, these should be summarized
    4. Extant original tunes and performance details if known; any recordings that can be considered "period-correct" (for any pre-modern period, which should be specified) should be mentioned - very rare for older pieces, since English vocabulary and pronunciation have changed to the point that the original lyrics are unintelligible to modern listeners
  3. References and adaptation
    1. Contemporary and premodern
    2. Modern - a discography would most likely go under this heading if desired

Any comments or responses are appreciated. -- JRBrown (talk) 23:06, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Adaptions

It'd also be appreciated if everyone could look at the "Adaptions" discussion on Lady Isabel and the Elf Knight, and chip in if they have any ideas.

-- TimNelson 11:47, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I would propose that the "original" versions of both words and music are those that survive from the pre-modern era (folksongs that originate in the modern era are a completely different kettle of fish). Most traditional songs have multiple versions of the lyrics, which were sung to different tunes in different times and places, so there may be 'many' "originals" for a given song. Nevertheless, for any traditional piece it is important to differentiate between a version from a 1450 manuscript, a 1750 broadside, and a 1950 popular recording. The first two would count as originals, although probably very different ones; the third would be an adaptation. -- JRBrown (talk) 23:37, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Hello from new member

Wow, I'm happy to have found this new group since it seems to be a perfect fit for my interests/work. Check out my user page to see what I'm working on. Kmzundel 10:31, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Great to have you! Good to have more representing American folk too.
-- TimNelson 07:41, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Black Jack Davy/ Raggy Taggle Gypsies

After all this time, Roud number one is still written as two separate articles (Black Jack Davy, and The Raggle Taggle Gypsy). Please, please somebody merge these into a single article. Somebody even tried to make a third article, by putting square brackets around the Irish-language title. There is a strong case for enforcing the new ballad template on it, since it is one of the most popular ballads. Ogg 19:01, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kate Rusby

I see that Kate Rusby is classified as "low importance". Today I saw that the HMV charts have got her at number one on the "Specialist chart" (i.e. jazz, country, folk music, easy listening etc). Is there any chance that she could be moved up a notch or two? Ogg 09:16, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, maybe move her up to "mid". I should probably explain my general Assessment philosophy here, so that people know why things are the way they are. My basic belief is that the assessment system is to help people find articles to work on.
  1. Few at the top. My point here is that the majority of articles should be in the Mid and Low importance categories.
  2. Individuals/groups towards the bottom. I regard general articles (ie. "Folk music", or "Iranian folk music") to be of more importance than specific articles (eg. articles about specific people). Then again, there are some people that are more important than others (eg. Bob Dylan is more important (ie. influential -- like him or loathe him) than Kate Rusby)
If you go it Wikipedia:WikiProject Roots music/Assessment and click on the links to see what's already in each importance level, you'll get a feel for what I think. Naturally, if you want to realign the importance levels, that's fine, but it's something we should discuss here.
If there's something specific you think needs to be addressed, though, there are lists of things to do on the main project page -- feel free to alther those.
-- TimNelson 07:37, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
I wouldn't have minded about Kusby's status, except that "Filk music" is high, and "Broadside Electric" is high, and I have never encountered them in any context other than Wikipedia. Ogg 17:28, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
As far as Broadside Electric goes, I agree. The problem here is that I need to alter the Article Scope template so that it puts stuff for the Electric Folk taskforce into a separate category to other Roots music.
As far as Filk goes, it's a subgenre, so I think it deserves a high-ish rating. I'm under the impression that it's American, so maybe that's why you and I (I assume you're UK, and I'm in Australia) are less familiar with it.
-- TimNelson 07:35, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Still unhappy. "Filk music" is classed as "high importance", but "War song" is classed as "Low importance". The category "Filk song" has only four entries, but the category "Category:Patriotic songs" has over 50 entries. It is classed as so very very low that it does even get into the classification system. What gives? If almost every country has war songs and patriotic songs, they have got to be important. Only one country has filk songs, and only four of them are described, yet it is high. Ogg (talk) 21:12, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
You can change importance ratings you don't agree with, they are an internal metric. I would check before changing things to or from high if you're uncertian. I don't think Filk should be high as an American I've never heard of it, plus it seems to be a portmanteaux of things rather than a traditional genere, but hey whatever, if somebody's working on it keep it high otherwise I'd say mid. Like Tim mentioned the rating should reflect importantce relevant to the topic of Folk and Roots music. So abstract topics about the music should be rated higher than people except in the case of very notable people interms of their scope towards the genere rather than a ranking of popularity, like dylan, guthrie or seeger are rightly highs. I usually rate individual artists as mid or low and individual songs as low. I think Kate Rusby should be mid. War Songs should be mid or high depending on the scope. --Dannygutters (talk · contribs) 16:12, 26 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dannygutters (talk • contribs)
I have no quarrel with the ratings for individual artists (not any more). None of the four acknowledge Filk songs can be described as related to "Traditional Music". I have unilaterally decided that "List of Patriotic Songs" is a roots music article of start class and mid importance. It's very suspicious that none of the filk music supporters are prepared to contribute to this debate. They are a breed unto themselves. Ogg (talk) 20:03, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Who are the top 111?

You might all be interested to see this list of the top 111 folk artists of all time: http://www.wku.edu/~smithch/essays/FOLK111.htm Ogg 13:12, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Chicago Folk Task Force

Hi, I have a group of a few editors who would like to focus on Chicago Traditional and Current folk/roots artists (specifically those revolving around the Old Town School of Folk Music in Chicago) as well as enhancing existing articles with chicago relevant material and providing more background for Traditional Songs. We have access to the considerable archives at the Old Town School that we can gather data from (and hopefully get some of the photos released under the CC license). Can I create a task force page for this? I think it would be useful for us as well as allow us to use the peer review features of the roots project. Personally I was working on the woody guthrie page earlier this year so I know the good help you guys are. :) (also, the Task Force help page suggested I ask first) I could jointly register this task force with the chicago project as well if appropriate. Dannygutters 17:40, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I guess I'm going to go ahead with this since I didn't get any comments against. It seems to me to be within the scope of the project. Dannygutters 14:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, good call. I'm happy for people to do this if they can do it properly. Unfortunately I don't have the Wikipedia time that I used to. -- TimNelson 03:01, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fellside Records

The evil deletionists within the Wikipedia hierarchy are trying to delete "Fellside Records". Rally round the flag boys! Go to the page where this issue is debated and say strongly that you want this article to be kept. Ogg 08:48, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

One of the most snied comments on that page is from Dannygutters (see above) who wants to form his own Chicago project. Hey, it would be a good start if you TRIED to support an article on folk music instead of risking the deletion of one that tells the world about a good record label. Which side are you on? Ogg 10:48, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry if it seemed snide, but I was trying to point out what probably were the points of contention and my suggestions were things that would definatly increase the notability. I would have been happy to do them myself if I knew anything about this label. You'll also notice I voted keep. Also, does this discussion about me belong here or on my talk page? Dannygutters 14:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Also, I've updated my suggestion to Strong Keep based on the changes you made to the article since I last looked at it. Good job, it's looking good now. Dannygutters 14:29, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Glory be, he's seen the light. Now how about the rest of you? Ogg 17:29, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
In the end they decided not to delete it. Ogg 08:45, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Liege and Lief(revived)

Great album, rubbish article. It'a gig listing masquerading as an album. The article "Liege and Lief(revived)" should be deleted.Ogg 08:46, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Assessment?

Why hasn't the assessment run since the 14th? shouldn't it run every 3rd day? Dannygutters 18:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Looks like i was just being impatient. It's run now..:) Dannygutters 18:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Newsletter

Would anyone be interested in recieving a monthly newsletter regarding the state of the project? The oklahoma project does a nice one : Wikipedia:WikiProject Oklahoma/newsletter/aug07. I'd be willing to put it together if there was interest and submissions. Dannygutters 18:21, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Portal

Roots Music does deserve a portal, but as of now, it doesn't have one. I've updated the project template's portal link to point to the Music portal until we can build a roots portal. Dannygutters 15:51, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Woody Guthrie Discography

I could use some help on the Woody Guthrie discography. I am basically citing it from the Hard Travelin' book by recording sessions. If you can lend some time and type up a section from this list please do. If you don't have the book email me and I can send you a pdf of the relevant discography. Thanks. --Dan G. 18:30, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citations

I have just finished "Rod Clements", in case anyone feels like demolishing it. I notice that there are a whole load of comments saying "This article does not cite any references or sources. (September 2006)" plastered all over Steeleye Span, Rick Kemp, etc etc. I made a start by adding references to Anne Briggs, but it's a lot of difficult work to find reliable citations. Any help from you would be great. Ogg (talk) 21:11, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Patti Reid

If anyone knows anything about this English folk singer, could they perhaps add it to this newly created article? An attempt to speedy it was made in the first thirty seconds of its life so it could do with some help from those in the know. Nick mallory (talk) 13:36, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

You should add this article to the roots group by pasting the roots template into its discussion page. --Dan G. 14:50, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Sorry to be brutal, but I don't think she's significant. I can uncover nothing more than is already there. Now if it's traditional English singers you want to write about, how about Martin Wyndham-Read. There's an under-rated singer. Ogg (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 09:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
The Topic seems to be ok for notability if she has released albums and is a known festival artist. Though the article is a stub, which is probably why it was nominated for delete. I'd expand it and add some refrences if you're concerned about it's notablity. My rule of thumb is that the more obscure a topic is the stronger it's initial page needs to be at creation. --Dannygutters (talk · contribs) 15:20, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Albums

I realize that album articles are not a high priority for many of you. Making the big fixes in the important articles is probably the best goal for this project. And obviously an artist needs to have a bio before it makes sense to write about his/her albums. Still, I like to write album articles though, because one can make a worthwhile add to the encyclopedia without committing much time.

Feel free to check out and/or edit the list I've started here: User:MrFizyx/List of notable folk & roots music albums this is still a project in a formative stage. Regards, -MrFizyx 17:29, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I see that you have connected Rachael Unthank's album "The Bairns" to Falkirk Football club, nicknamed "The Bairns". Shooting's too good for the likes of you! Ogg (talk) 12:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Cheers Ogg: Yeah, there are a number of poorly linked titles. Not really worth getting too worried about yet. In this case there is no page for Unthank, never mind that her album title has already found another use on the 'pedia. I'm not sure that I get your last comment, but I have a feeling that just accentuates your point to those that do. -MrFizyx (talk) 00:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm still not clear what's going on. Conspicuously absent from your criteria of notableness, is commercial success. There is no mention of chart hits. Is this meant to be a "critial choice"? I have added commercial successes from the UK, going back to 1956, giving chart positions for albums. I am also not sure whether this is supposed to be a list of articles that needs to be improved. Several of the album articles that I have added are pretty comprehensive, and not in need of any improvement. If I have got it all wrong, it's easy enough to delete some or all that I have added. I have included "Mike Oldfield" who is a little bit "New Age". Maybe they should be deleted. I leave it up to you. Ogg (talk) 10:27, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Aaagh! Has it come to this? People are adding stuff to your list which have no detectable notability - no awards, no nominations, no chart placings. It's time to become more discriminating or else just give up the ghost. Ogg (talk) 17:49, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bagpipers

Much as I love bagpipes ... I consider these two articles to be ego-trips:

  • John Angus Smith
  • Jenny Hazzard

I would like to see them deleted. Does anyone agree with me? Perhaps in 5 years time they will produce a worthwhile body of recorded work, but so far they are not notable. Ogg (talk) 16:33, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I have only just spotted that they have been deleted. Thanks to the person who did it. Ogg (talk) 11:26, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Folk music of Ireland

I think there should be a "Folk music of Ireland" article in the same way that there is a "Folk music of England" article. I have mentioned this on the comments page of "Music of Ireland". Please add your thoughts there or here. Ogg (talk) 06:47, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Go for it. Wikipedia:BOLD --Dannygutters (talk · contribs) 21:56, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

It's done. No backlash so far, just a couple of corrections to my links. Later today I will probably create an article called "War Songs", and possibly a re-write of "Pub session". Ogg (talk) 12:21, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

"War song" now exists, and I have re-written "Pub session". Ogg (talk) 11:23, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

nice, add these to the project by adding the template on the discussion page.--Dannygutters (talk · contribs) 04:45, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup

I'm attempting to clean up the project pages, removeing dead links and pointing to new or relevant ones. Does anyone have a better image to use for the roots navigation bar? The bodhran is hard to make out when shrunk. Maybe a photo of a few instruments at a hootenanny or some roots musicians playing together. --Dannygutters (talk · contribs) 20:09, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I created a new userbox for the group since the participant one is kind of boring (tho it's still avaliable), you can add it to your page with the template Wikipedia:WikiProject_Roots_music/Outreach#Userboxs. --Dannygutters (talk · contribs) 21:20, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sporting song

I have added a few categories within "List of folk music traditions". This includes making a new category "Sporting song". I feel there should be another category: "Occupational song" (the joys and sorrows of being a weaver, a waggoner, a railway worker etc), but I haven't worked out what to say. Ogg (talk) 21:00, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Good articles, start sub ..

It's about time that the Shirley Collins article received some sort of assessment. Ogg (talk) 12:21, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Nothing has happened. OK, what about Robin Williamson? Both unique figures in the folk scene. Ogg (talk) 00:29, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Go ahead and assign an assessment, anything B or lower doesn't need peer review, check out Wikipedia:WikiProject_Roots_music/Assessment for a guide on picking a category.--Dannygutters (talk · contribs) 22:24, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, in the case of Shirley Collins, if the topic does not have the roots template box on the talk page it won't show up on our unassessed list. I usually add it when I fina a page within the scope.

[edit] Six degrees of separation

If anyone wants to known how to connect Steeleye Span to 1,239 bands, check out this website:

Ogg (talk) 21:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Web radio, podcasts

I'd like to see an article on folk music web radio/ podcasts. I'm not sure where it belongs - I guess it would be an offshoot of the "folk music" article. If anyone feels like doing this, here are a few sites I have found:-

  • Cool as Folk www.coolasfolk.co.uk
  • Uilleann Obsession www.uilleannobsession.com/links_radio.html
  • Folk Radio www.folkradio.co.uk/component/option,com_magazine/Itemid,1/
  • The Music Well www.themusicwellhome.co.uk/
  • Edinburgh University Folk Society podcasts www.fuzzyhaggis.org.uk/folksoc/freshfolk/downloads.php
  • Celtic Storm www.celticcenter.org/celticstorm.php

Ogg (talk) 10:15, 9 February 2008 (UTC) That would be an interesting article, I like the one at www.downhomeraidoshow.com --Dannygutters (talk · contribs) 22:14, 9 February 2008 (UTC) Another one: Whole Wheat Radio: http://wholewheatradio.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page Ogg (talk) 09:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Woody Guthrie Promoted!

Congrats to everyone here who helped out on getting Woody Guthrie up to Featured Article status. It was tough but it looks great! Go check out the article if you haven't had the pleasure. --Dannygutters (talk · contribs) 22:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tradition bearers

I have the feeling nobody reads this page anymore, but here goes ... I have started writing a draft of an article on "Voice of the People" - the most important collection of songs by "Traditional singers" from the UK and Ireland. There is no way of avoiding mentioning that special class of people - the tradition bearers. These are the people who learned folk songs in their original context (sea shanties while on board ship, railway songs sung by railway workers, etc), and then went on to be collected by ballad hunters. This implies an article on them, listing a few. But what should the article be called? The obvious candidates are: "Traditional singers"; "Tradition bearers"; "Source singers". In the USA there is some kind of award for "National Heritage singers", but I know almost nothing about it. Is there any agreed name for these people? By implication it includes the people whose versions of songs went into Child's collection. Any suggestions? Ogg (talk) 19:22, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Goodbye

Just like "Project: Music of the United Kingdom", this project is dead.

Project Roots Music June 2007 - Feb 2008

R.I.P.

How many folksingers does it take to change a lightbulb?

Two. One to change it, and one to sing about how good the old one was.