Talk:Janis Joplin/Archive 1

message: I loved Janis and saw her several times, but god, what a screech that voice was.  Emotional, powerful, sure, but not a singer, couldn't carry Dinah Washington's jockstrap.  Ortolan88
:<g>.  Add it, then.  I did a similar thing for the article on Jim Morrison, noting that (like Bob Dylan) he's not considered a technically accomplished singer.  Could use some rewording, maybe.  I don't care for her voice either--or Morrison's, really, for that matter.  --KQ
KQ, whenever the grand Wikipedia party is thrown, meet me near the bandstand.  We'll have some good laughs.  I had a talk page comment on Morrison, too, but I dislike his music so much I wouldn't dare edit the article.  I don't know if you ever saw "The Making of 'We Are the World'" (talk about music trivia), but there's a hilarious scene where Stevie Wonder teaches Dylan how to sing his lines Dylan style.  Ortolan88
:No, I missed that one.  Sounds priceless, though.  :-)  --KQ
-------
I snipped this part:
:While a moving performer and song stylist, she cannot really be considered a skillful singer.
Or are non-NPOV statements now allowed on artists' pages? - Montréalais
::I considered changing it to "not often considered a technically skillful singer" or something.  What would you suggest?  --KQ
Compare her "Ball and Chain" to Big Mama Thornton's.  Big Mama was no opera star, but she could hit the notes way better than Janis, and I'm sure Janis would agree.  Making a judgement and violating NPOV are two different things.  I changed it a little bit, but as I said in my comment, if you can call her a promiscuous speed freak, I don't know why you can't say she was not a technically skillful singer.  Roger Daltrey and Robert Plant sing a lot alike, but Daltrey is a far more skilled singer and it has nothing to do with non-NPOV or who you like, it is a judgement based on evidence.  (I know this causes difficulties when people have poor judgement, but so be it.) Ortolan88
:Actually, "promiscuous" bothered me a bit, though that's what most of the books say (and why not, it was the 60s and 70s).  Better of course would be to quantify, but, uh, ick.  --KQ
* 200-1000; that is 200 women, 1000 men  (about) according to "Scars of sweet paradise : the life and times of Janis Joplin / Alice Echols" Seniorsag 13:39, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You should spend some time in a modern recording studio then. Hardly anyone famous today in the popular music world can sing worth a damn. Janis' singing moved people though, that's what music is about...emotions.--210.50.81.234 07:48, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: June 2007

message: "Because of her talent for singing the blues that she rose to fame in the 1960s as the lead singer of Big Brother and the Holding Company and eventually a solo career before her death from a drug overdose" I can't for the life of me figure out this sentence. S.Camus 12:52, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Syntax 

message: Please answer this question based on how you understand it:
Male singers who have voices that sound like female singers are generally designated as either falsettos or castratos, depending on the technique being used. But, how about female singers who have voices that sound like male singers?? Do they have any special name?? 66.245.30.189 01:44, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't know so I asked some of my more musically minded online friends.  They concur the term is Contralto.  Here on wiki it redirects to alto but some external links in case you want confirmation are   JohnCub 16:59, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I would suspect that you are answering a different question. The above comments pertain strictly to the range of a voice and, naturally, most female voices have a higher range than most male voices. But the question here is what makes a woman's voice sound like a man's, not, how low a note can she reach? At issue here are more questions of timbre and even more so, singing style. These are more complex qualities, but I think the original questioner is hinting at more like these things. 66.108.4.183 04:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  How do we designate Janis Joplin?? 

message: In my effort to merge the now-deleted list from the article Gay icon to the Gay icons category, I have added this page to the category. I engaged in this effort as a "human script", adding everyone from the list to the category, bypassing the fact-checking stage. That is what I am relying on you to do. Please check the article Gay icon and make a judgment as to whether this person or group fits the category. By distributing this task from the regular editors of one article to the regular editors of several articles, I believe that the task of fact-checking this information can be expedited. Thank you very much. Philwelch 20:59, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gay Icon Project 

message: The following is a typical result of PC's fanatical enforcement of their illogical idiology. Some black people can be, and are, prejudice. I'm tired of hearing how skin color shouldn't matter and then hearing some 'black women' viciously stating it makes ALL the difference. Who cares what color singers are if people like to hear them sing? Only the prejudice care. The following writer seems to care a lot.
"Although there were of course some exceptions, prior to Janis, there was arguably a tendency for solo female pop performers to be pigeonholed into to a few broadly-defined roles -- the gentle, guitar-strumming 'folkie' (e.g. Judy Collins, Joni Mitchell), the virginal 'pop goddess' (Doris Day, Rosemary Clooney) or the well-groomed chanteuse (Dusty Springfield, Diana Ross)."
*I presume the writer of this was more refering to a kind of gender roles of the entertainment industry. Perhaps to show the influence of Feminism. Although, I can see why you took it out; It's rather POV.--216.26.203.204 09:09, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So by your logic someone like Nina Simone (classically trained)got rich by studying and employing white techniques? Whether Joplin could sing is a subjective point. She also used country techniques which woulda been from some of them white girls. And not all the white girlies was as prissy as you think. (83.13.39.98 (talk) 19:32, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Now, ain't this some bulls***

message: I've reverted the text.  Her style wasn't "idiosyncratic."  It's taken straight from black vocal techniques (except, IMO she didn't have the talent to carry it off).  Joplin was no different from thousands of blues/r&b singers.  About "yowlish" -- that's not an inherently negative word.  It is onomatopoetic and describes perfectly her delivery, and it's a common enough adjective when it comes to vocalized musical expression (see funk).  And, yes, Joplin screamed.  Just google "Joplin screaming," and you'll see this characterization of her vocal delivery expressed in positive and negative terms. Again, it's a common adjective used to describe the vocal delivery of lots of r&b and bluesmen and women.  The delivery is what it is. deeceevoice 09:36, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed about the screaming. When I got into her back in high school, the scream was one of the main things my mother (who grew up in the sixties) remembered about her. Rmj12345 21:46, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Joplin's singing style

message: Like a lot of other people listed as "bisexual", this article contains no mention whatsoever of Joplin supposedly being bisexual.
I'm adding her back to the category. There are a number of references that exist on this subject:
*
*
*
*"Going Down with Janis" a bio by Peggy Caserta
*As well as a number of other biographies
My two cents from the best (POV) biography, does not dig to deep but mentions all sides.
*Scars of sweet paradise : the life and times of Janis Joplin / Alice Echols
Seniorsag 13:37, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Joplin's Sexuality

message: I've noticed this is one of the only musician pages with no discography. Could some knowledgable people put together something? --70.231.169.127 02:02, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --Dumarest 17:08, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: No Discography?

message: The section starts out with: 'After a return to Port Arthur to recuperate', but there's nothing in the prior sections saying *what* she returned to PA to recuperate *from*.--Anchoress 16:21, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weird non-sequitor in 'BB&tHC' section 

message: Um...where's her discography?  This is a major hole in this article.--Esprit15d 20:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discography 

message: Shouldn't a section that describes someone as "pioneering" and "...pivotal in redefining what was possible for white female singers in mainstream American popular music" cite at least one source? Also, how can someone be "long overlooked" and yet continue to influence modern pop artists? Most modern pop artists at least sing on key, so the similarity is not self-evident. Also, comparisons and (unsubstantiated) reports of an affair with Jim Morrison, another "singer" whose talents are far from self-evident, does not constitute a legacy. And as stated above, to say that she is less popular than Hendrix because she put out fewer albums is speculative at best, probably closer to absurd. AllMusic.com states "amazingly, Hendrix would only record three fully conceived studio albums in his lifetime." Joplin on the other hand recorded two solo albums plus all her work with BB&HC which gives her a greater total output. The fact that she had fewer posthumous releases did not cause her to be less popular, it was because she was already less popular. Not to mention the fact that the phrase "she made a relatively small number of recordings during her career, and because she was not as prolific" is redundant. The fact is that Joplin couldn't sing or write songs and her influence was in attitude and style only-if that. This whole section seems scrapable to me. --Atripodi 06:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Amen to that!  deeceevoice 14:26, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Non-NPOV/Other Problems in Legacy Section

message: Is there a picture that isn't copyrighted that we can put of the top of the page? Onlyabititalian 16:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see that the head picture is listed as release given by copyright holder, but see no proof of that. And the other image is of an album cover, but does not make the legalities for such use, it is use of the album cover to illustrate the subject, Joplin, not the album itself. I have been caught by that more than once. --Dumarest 20:22, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture

message: I put the original discography up a good while ago. It disappeared. I never noticed. Some months later another discography appeared. It in my opinion is incomplete. So I have edited, added missing items. Format is not consistent, I know that, and will fix [unless some kind editor will fix]. But, the new stuff has 'Live at Winterland '68 (1998, Columbia Legacy)' while I am aware of 'Live at Woodstock: August 19, 1969 - 1999'. Are they the same, or no? Anyone know? --Dumarest 20:02, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discography revisited

message: The Article states:
"Around this time her drug use began to increase, and she acquired a reputation as a "speed freak" and occasional heroin user. She also used other intoxicants. She was a heavy drinker throughout her career, and her trademark beverage was Southern Comfort."
Yet the article never states when her drug use began.  Anyone have a reference to a timeframe of when Joplin began using drugs?  Regards,  Nautafoeda 06:24, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Drug Use Timeline? 

message: Fine, I hate to do this, but I have been caught by 'illegal' images too often. The image at the top is said to be from the source http://www.officialjanis.com.
I have looked throughout that site, and cannot find it. And a Google image search finds more than one copy of this image, from various sources. Just copying from the web is not acceptable to Wiki as far as I know. I copy from the image page: "2. The image is readily available on the source website, and the further use of this image on Wikipedia is not believed to disadvantage the copyright holder.". Maybe so, but that does not make it a valid Wiki image. --Dumarest 22:35, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Back to the top image

message: Refer to http://www.officialjanis.com - several of the dates there do not agree with the dates in the discography in the article [which discs I in fact put up, from another site, I forget where]. Could somebody who is more knowledgeable than I look at this and rectify where needed the dates? By the way, item 10 in the 'official' list gives 1968 as the date, but all the other dates are sequential - is this a misprint for 1998?? --Dumarest 15:50, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Discography dates

message: I know, I know, I should not do this. BUT, I am learning [the hard way] about image legal stuff. That image is said to be, by permission, from the official JJ site, but I cannot find it on that site, and so the attribution may be invalid, and the image invalid for Wiki. --Dumarest 19:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Topobox image

message: I remember it mentiond in "Scars of sweet paradise : the life and times of Janis Joplin / Alice Echols" but I do not have that avaible, when I have i will add source. Seniorsag 13:47, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  high school Class reunion 

message: "She was one of the most influential rocks singers of the 1960's and is widely considered to be the greatest female rock singer of all time."
That was what I removed. The issue has been argued again and again here. While I love her singing and her influence was considerable, that statement is beyond acceptable. --Dumarest 19:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Undo POV

message: "Cultivating a rebellious manner that could be viewed as "liberated,""  sounds a bit judgemental and codescending to me.  as if it says "could be viewed as liberated (if you were an idiot)".  Is it even true that her rebellious manner was "cultivated"?  I'm prepared to believe she was a phony hack, but you would have to cite some sources.
I don't know much about her life but this POV should either be cited or removed in my opinion - what do other people think? Cyclopsface 05:14, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: POV but not sure how to fix it

message: I entered that item, complete with citation - how did said citation get removed??? I have restored it. --Dumarest 15:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Citation needed" tatoos

message: Someone should comment on the remarks made by Janis about BB+HC in the "Festival Express" movie.
There is a video of Janis & BB+HC performing at KQED San Francisco (PBS) , the boys seemed condescending towards her.
I've seen the video of Janis at the High School Reunion , but I can't now remember if the context was PBS documentary or a DVD. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.181.22.152 (talk) 13:58, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Videos Pictures

message: Why no mention  of the 1970s movie "Janis"? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.0.117.171 (talk) 21:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Movie  

message: Every time i hear Janis sing it gives me chills. and i have listened to her for many years. No other artist can accomplish that on me. i dont know how any one could ever compare her to a heavy metal singer, except that she goes all out for every note. That should really be removed from the article.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.21.61.41 (talk) 16:46, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Janis A Heavy Metal Singer?? 

message: The surname was changed from Joplin to Jolphin, I reverted that change. The link to genealogy had Joplin for her father, grandfather, et cetera. Interesting though, I found a reference to her as Jophlin, on a music poster: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Cobain-Jophlin-Morrison-Hendrix-Poster/dp/B000R5P1L6
I suppose it could be true, but seems unlikely. --Dumarest 12:14, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A longer look via Google for Janis Jophlin gives hundreds [well maybe not hundreds but many] references to that name in many MySpace sites, and also many foreign language sites, usually the Janis Jophlin name in a string of names of rock stars. --Dumarest 13:08, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Joplin : Jolphin

message: An editing of the article of this date included data about an anti-war concert late in her life, with this text --- "This author witnessed the performance..." and he described it.
Is this not 'personal information' and not allowed in Wiki? --Dumarest 11:41, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Personal information

message: The preamble of the article (incorrectly) states that Janis grew up near Austin.  She grew up in Port Arthur, as indicated (correctly) by her secondary school locale.   -- 28 September 2007  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.110.112.62 (talk) 21:04, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Birth and Youth Locale

message: Me and Bobby McGee and Janis Joplin have contradictory information. Janis Joplin says that the last song she recored was Mercedes Benz while Me and Bobby McGee says that it was Me and Bobby McGee. - Jarn 04:52, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction between this and [[Me and Bobby McGee]] 

message: I've moved some of the trivia facts from the article here in case someone else can integrate them into the article per WP:TRIVIA. The rest were left in as pop culture references. Pinkadelica 05:44, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia Section 

message: Sorry, this is not working out. You can't piece together quotes to create the impression of a coherent belief system. That's simply original research and not very encyclopedic. Now, if Joplin actually stated her explicit belief in "freedom with responsibility" formulated as such, then it's a different matter. But you can't retrospectively foist a belief system onto Joplin, that's simply a POV interpretation. As the article looks now, one is given the impression that Joplin systematically advocated and extolled the virtues of "freedom with responsibility" as a kind of slogan. She simply did not. 130.238.66.35 16:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the title as it is now: Contemporary concerns. Wildhartlivie 21:44, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Belief in freedom with responsibility 

message: I have made a number of style edits to the article, but it also needs some serious pruning, particularly in the sections on Solo Career, Contemporary Concerns, and Relapse and Death. The good stuff in these sections is overshadowed by trivia, e.g., in Solo Career:
"For 25 years after Woodstock, the only portion of her performance there that was available commercially -- in either sound or picture -- was a spontaneous dance she did with her band's African-American tenor saxophone player, Cornelius "Snooky" Flowers, during an instrumental break. It is part of the 1975 theatrically released documentary Janis."
"The segment begins with Joplin asking the audience, "How you doin'?" and then advising people who are stoned to "drink lots of water." "
"He was married with small children and did not allow drugs in the house."
"Footage of her performing the song "Tell Mama" in Calgary became an MTV video in the 1980s."
"Color graphics in the print media were in their infancy at the time, and it was not until the last week of Joplin's life that Circus circulated for the first time a color photo of the motley feathers in her hair. (She did not live to see color photographs in Rolling Stone magazine.)"
 
I would like to remove the trivia. Does anyone have a problem with this?
--Eldred 17:15, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been of the opinion that the article needs more work, but as you can see from above, there's been controversy with changes. I suspect that what you've taken out will get reverted, but I think the changes are helpful. However, if you're referring to the In popular culture section, I think it needs to be rewritten, but not removed. There's precedent for leaving such sections in articles and rewriting them instead of just removing them altogether. Wildhartlivie 22:46, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Another example is the information about her parents giving interviews. I have to ask "so what?" It doesn't add anything of significance to knowing Janis Joplin, it actually doesn't even say anything except they did it. It's trivial and the article needs to lose trivialities, not add more. Wildhartlivie 02:26, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article needs pruning 

message: WP has a guideline for an article that is rated B-Class, as this one is, in all projects concerned with it. On the other hand, it's rated of High Importance on Importance scales. B-Class articles are:
missing elements or references, needs editing for language usage and/or clarity, balance of content, or contains other policy problems such as copyright, Neutral Point Of View (NPOV) or No Original Research (NOR). With NPOV a well written B-class may correspond to the "Wikipedia 0.5" or "usable" standard. Articles that are close to GA status but don't meet the Good article criteria should be B- or Start-class articles.
B-Class articles: Considerable editing is still needed...correcting significant policy errors.
This is what we are working on. The article doesn't need expansion, it needs to be brought into compliance with Wikipedia policy and improved to garner an upgraded status. Efforts at bringing this article into compliance are not vandalism, editing is not messing it up. Wildhartlivie 02:39, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Articles rated B-Class

message: The Solo career section has the following statement: "MTV viewers saw Joplin (in her "Tell Mama" video) wearing feathers in her hair and a loose-fitting costume." MTV did not exist during Janis' lifetime, and the statement is written in a context that makes it sound as if it was part of her life (not in a retropective sense, which would be the only way MTV viewers could see her). My inclination is to delete the reference to MTV, but I'll wait a week or so to see if someone can edit it to make it clearer. Ward3001 (talk) 02:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: MTV??

message: I've found some videos on Utube showing Janis on what appears to be a "Tom Jones" television show in 1969.
I've heard she also appeared on other talk shows.
Should this be further researched & entered? StarGehzer (talk) 20:01, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Certainly, if you find verification for appearances, please research it. However, if you would, please post it here so other interested editors can review it as well, also we need to make sure what is posted doesn't constitute a copyright violations (which a lot of YouTube does). I didn't realize she'd been on a Tom Jones show, though she was on a Dick Cavett show or two. Wildhartlivie (talk) 20:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Television Appearances

message: While in college, a frat house voted her "ugliest man" on campus.  This can be sourced, and I think should be added to the article, because it adds to the poignancy of her Ugly Duckling-like rise to fame. -24.149.203.34 (talk) 16:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Ugliest Man

message: This has "citation needed".  Will a link to the video of the actual performance and Mama Cass mouthing the words count?  It can be found on youtube searching for "ball and chain janis joplin".  It's her 1967 performance at the Monterey Pop Festival.  Not sure if that's the kind of thing that can be cited, though. 82.69.214.14 (talk) 16:38, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, no, YouTube isn't an acceptable source, as the clip shown on there is from copyrighted material, used in violation of it. I've seen this clip on a VHS or DVD somewhere, though I can't recall where. The tape or DVD would be an acceptable source, using the Wikipedia format for that. Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:54, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking at the clip again, you never see Janis and Mama Cass in the same shot so that could actually be from any part of the the festival, or even from another location altogether.  So it may not be a reliable source anyway.  82.69.214.14 (talk) 16:57, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mama Cass says "Wow" Citation 

message: The reference list seems to be scrambled. Could it be sorted, please? (83.13.39.98 (talk) 19:32, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: citations and reference list

message: There have been some heated and hearty battles over this article over the past year and the changes reverted tonight were done in consideration of that. I have returned some of the wording that was changed in edits tonight, including the change of the formerly contentious section title, which was ultimately titled "Contemporary concerns." The editor changed it to "Philosophy," which, similar to issues with earlier section names, implies much more regarding Joplin's viewpoints in life than what the section covers. This is also basically the reason I removed the phrase "believed in informed choice on drug use" because, essentially, it assumes facts not in evidence. We don't have material that supports what Joplin believed regarding informed choice. Our sources only say that she objected to dosing, but not specifically why she did. The only other change was to return the Wikilink to the gatecrasher disambiguation page, because although the specific use of the word is  redlinked on the DAB page now a forthcoming article is possible. It doesn't need to be defined in this article since the DAB page gives the definition. Wildhartlivie (talk) 05:19, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent changes

message: My eye kept catching on what I considered weak and disjointed narrative flow through this particular section, and that's what I was trying to improve with my edits here.  I understand and accept the reasons for your reversions on the gate-crashers link and informed choice, and as a newbie editor, I appreciate the clarifications here and have learned from them.  With regard to the informed choice addition, I understand now that writers/editors can't "invent" material just so it improves narrative flow, without specific evidence to support the addition.  As an aside, I'd add that I personally don't agree with the Wiki stance that it's useful to link to articles that haven't been written yet, but I'm sure that battle's been fought at length elsewhere and it's one of those things that newbies should best just roll with at first.  
The change I'm still not happy with is the reversion to the previous title of this section.  I understand why you're not satisfied, Wildhartlivie, with "Philosophy", and struggled with it myself for the same reason you identified, but "Contemporary Concerns" is the kind of thing our strictest, tightest-bunned high school English teacher would have taken a red pen to in a split second glance.  IMO, it adds nothing to the article  as a linked subhead (because I doubt that a reader would click on that at the top of the article to see what Janis was "concerned" about), and I think particularly with the modifier "contemporary", it reads as meaningless, confusing jargon.  I looked through the archives here and only found two brief references to this subject heading, with no illumination that I saw as to what the issues were; I did not go through all the old edits where perhaps some of this controversy was stirred. I see in the discussion Archives that you "like the title as it is now".  But if others have expressed a problem with it, I'd encourage you to revisit the issue.
Is there another term which better summarizes what this section is about?... we could try brainstorming it... and if there isn't one, is perhaps the article better off without any heading there at all?  For me, this one weakens it. Runnoft (talk) 15:29, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Gosh, I do appreciate your response. You have no idea what uproar something like this relatively minor change would have caused in the past. Without being too specific, versions of this article from six or eight months ago were rife with conjecture and speculation and it was very difficult to accomplish anything. My comment of liking the section title as it is now was mostly in comparison to some earlier titles for the section, including Very Different From Hippies And Grateful Dead Fans, Belief In Freedom With Responsibility Despite Others Saying "Without", and Belief In Freedom With Responsibility. This was also where arguments about facts not in evidence began.  Points of view was my initial preference. I'm quite open to discussion about it, in fact, I welcome debate and discussion (as opposed to contention :) ). Another option would be to remove the section entirely, something I'd probably support. The article is quite lengthy and in some cases, overly detailed. Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:46, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

text: I am all for removing the section, I too feel like it sticks out like a sore thumb. My vote is to prune it out as well. Wildhartlivie (talk) 02:24, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Lose it. The section is odd to begin with and I don't understand why any of it is relative to Joplin's notability. I really don't understand why it's titled "Contemporary Conerns" either, but that's neither here nor there. Pinkadelica (talk) 06:24, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Contemporary Concerns" 

message: Citation Don McClean has never confirmed that he intended it to reference to Janis Joplin in American Pie, therefore saying he does is arguable at best. I'm deleting it. Gripdamage (talk) 20:20, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There is more than one way to word this, since McLean also did not deny it. It has been returned and reworded to reflect that McLean has not confirmed or denied it. Also please note that new discussion belongs at the bottom of the page. Wildhartlivie (talk) 06:00, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  American Pie

message: Hi folks. Newbie here typing from a public computer. If you do a traceroute, you'll find it's at the place where Janis died. It's the hotel that used to be Landmark Motor Hotel. Now it's Highland Gardens.  The lobby got spruced up earlier this year, but the dark hallway leading to Janis' room looks the same. As a tribute to her, I'm adding a sentence to the Legacy section.  It leads people to the article about Janis (film).  If you don't like it, that's okay.  It might violate Wikipedia policy about the length of an article.  If it does, skip it. I noticed Janis' article has no reference or link to that documentary.  The VH1 Classic channel showed it twice on the night of Monday, June 23, almost a week ago. Bye now. Downonme (talk) 03:45, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Gee, but it's curious why a brand new user would feel inclined to explain where a traceroute might lead unless it was a point that user had run into before on Wikipedia. In any event, this entire addition is unreferenced, uses editorialization ("before the advent of basic cable TV"), and summarizes the use of clips of performances with no foundation for from where this information came. This isn't appropriate for a legacy section anyway. Thanks anyway, Dooyar. Wildhartlivie (talk) 05:48, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leading you to ''Janis'' documentary 

message: Back in the day, a few of us tried to talk about her singing voice.  Most of it archived here: .  Ortolan88 (talk) 20:52, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Totally subjective.  I cringe at Joplin daring to compare herself to someone like Aretha Franklin, who has considerable range, technical training -- and she can carry a tune.  So, what you're saying is if you can't sing, just scream a little louder, and that compensates for the lack of talent?  Uh, I don't think so.  Joplin comparing herself to Aretha?  What arrogance!  deeceevoice (talk) 01:02, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You can't really draw conclusions about arrogance unless you know the context in which a statement is made, and a paraphrased comment by an anonymous editor doesn't quite give you that. Meanwhile, for both above editors, this page is for discussing improvements to the article, not on the subject herself. Wildhartlivie (talk) 03:47, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, really.  In that case, with regard to relevance, in what light is your comment on my comment relevant? ;) And, hell, yeah.  It was arrogance/preposterous presumption on Joplin's part.  deeceevoice (talk) 05:29, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Aretha can sing opera.  End of comparison.  Ortolan88 (talk) 21:13, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: lol at Ortolan. ;)  And gospel (speaking of emotion and power), and R&B/soul, blues and jazz, and....  (How have you been, Ortolan?  We haven't crossed paths since the early days of Blackface before it was made a featured article and then screwed and de-featured.) Peace 2 you.  deeceevoice (talk) 12:53, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Archives of interest

message: The image :Image:Janis Joplin - Me and Bobby McGee.ogg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:24, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Janis Joplin - Me and Bobby McGee.ogg

message: Some sources, including NNDB  (which names two women), state that she was bisexual. Her bisexuality should be stated on her page; she should be added to bisexual/LGBT categories. Werdnawerdna (talk) 22:10, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not following you around, Werdnawerdna, but apparently I do have multiple articles on my watchlist which interest you. As I noted on the Paul Newman talk page, NNDB is not considered a reliable source by Wikipedia standards and can't be used to base changes to articles. I've never heard Janis Ian mentioned in relationship to Joplin, anywhere before, and her relationship with Peggy Caserta has been frequently questioned regarding sexual vs. drug related. In any case, it's not enough to label her bisexual, and NNDB saying she was is not reliable. Wildhartlivie (talk) 01:05, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the NNDb is a more reliable source that WikiPedia  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.235.132.76 (talk) 02:35, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Some clues, please read WP:RS, NNDb isn't considered a reliable source because it doesn't indicate where it gets its information. Some of it comes from Wikipedia. Another clue, Wikipedia doesn't get its information from NNDb. Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:11, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Bisexual

message: heads up for vandalism. 30 rock tonight is about comedy writers vandalising the janis joplin wikipedia page.
This article was just mentioned (and vandalised) on tonight's episode of 30 Rock. I know we can't preemptively semi it, but some more eyes on it tonight would be a good idea. And an admin ready to semi it just in case... Random89 02:36, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, what you reverted was me adding a not to the end of my own note, which I signed and time-stamped appropriately. Your edit was the one that was out of line, I'm not going to bother reverting you, but for the record, what I had said was that I collected all the 30 rock comments under one header. Random89 02:51, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

text: And more jokes to come... Pacific Coast Highway {talk • contribs} 02:41, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, it's already expired. WP doesn't usually protect in anticipation, so if the issue comes up again, it will be dealt with when the time comes. Wildhartlivie (talk) 01:58, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mention on 30 Rock 

message: Why does Coprophobia redirect to this page? lmao
71.223.76.224 (talk) 21:10, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It shouldn't.  Just vandalism that is now reverted.  Thanks for pointing it out! Maedin\talk 21:33, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: what?

message: The album title is Cheap Thrills, not "Cheaper Thrills" as mentioned in this article twice.
:No, that is incorrect. There was an album entitled Cheap Thrills that came out in 1968, which was released well prior to Joplin's death on October 4, 1970. If you had read more closely, you'd have seen a recording was made of a summer 1966 concert Big Brother & the Holding Company gave soon after Joplin joined that was later released in 1984, 14 years after she died, that was called Cheaper Thrills. I would have thought the dates of release would have yielded a clue. Wildhartlivie (talk) 21:08, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{tl|editsemiprotected}} 

message: I have recently put a source stating her voice type was mezzo-soprano:  Tribal44 (talk) 22:29, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Voice range