Talk:Phish/Archive 4

message: what is ska? and i know there r a few songs with the blues in them: "jesus left chicago". in the beginning of "mound". i'm only 14 so i dont know about concerts, but is it fair to consider BLUES a defined genre of music played by Phish with only a couple songs?
also, does anyone have any info on Junta II's venue? "Union Federal", "Sanity", "Icculus"?
TommyBoy76 16:22, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ska is Ska. Phish are top-notch musicians proficient at many types of music, blues being one of them. Junta tracks = Nectars, Burlington, 7/25/88 per Junta (album). BabuBhatt 16:43, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

text: lol babu, i know who Phish are. i own every album but their "Live" series. I do my research. I have a couple brothers who have been to a little over 30 concerts. Trust me, I know who Phish is. What I'm saying is, I do not know enough to answer my question: What songs have the blues in them? I'm hoping you can answer because youve been on board lately, answering that guy's question up there ^^^^. Thanks for Ska and Junta info, too. 
71.120.184.137 01:32, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sarcasm accepted, and kudos for being such a conscientious speller. It's worth noting that 71.120.184.137 vandalized my userpage as well, so, in my mind nothing he has to say counts for anything.  BabuBhatt 08:37, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

text: WOW, you have brothers who have been to concerts?!?! WOW, i have to meet them!  Listen little boy, its great that your into phish, but they are so much more than you will ever be able to understand.  You can buy every album they have ever made, but until you go and experience one of there shows, you know NOTHING, NOTHING!!!!  And nobody can describe what a show is like.  Sure they can tell you the trivial details and the set-lists, but they cant re-live it for you.  I think its great your into phish, and i suggest you start listening to their live shows to encompass the entire joy of their musical genius.  If you want any live shows, hit up my talk pages, and i would be happy to send you some of my favorites.  Also, i know that this is not to be used as a blog or chat page, so i am sorry about the above content, i guess i am just so passionate about phish, and if that is a crime, well then you can lock me up.  As far as songs with blues in them, i think you need to sit down and start playing the guitar, that way you will start to understand what different music genres are and what they mean.  Blues is a technique, like pop or funk or jazz, that can be incorporated into a song or jam, or can be a song altogether (such as 'my soul).  Without sounding brash, I really think you are missing the point here.  Questions, comments, concerns?  "Dont forget to wear your gephy's"  --Geppy 08:27, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That was kinda rude.  Personally, I think we should be congratulating a 14-year-old on having the good sense to listen to a band as storied as Phish and not the CRAP his friends listen to.  It's not his fault he was just born too late.  Furthermore, the Phish I remember welcomed newcomers with open arms as another member of the community.  Your attitude is why everything after the hiatus was completely unneccessary.  MusicMaker5376 18:20, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At least SOMEONE gets where I stand. I didn't mean to post a question and seem high and mighty just because I listen to Phish and that makes me special because most 14 year olds don't listen to them and yada yada yada. I appreciate the words, MusicMaker. Thanks for the criticsm Babu and Geppy. TommyBoy76 03:33, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ska and Blues? 

message: Those watching this page will be interested to know that a number of the images on this page and other Phish-related pages have been tagged as no source and will be deleted in a few days.  This is because the only indication of source on these images is "press photo."  You are encouraged to upload suitable replacement images.  As many of these as possible should be images you've taken yourself (perhaps from concerts) which you can release under the GFDL.  If copyrighted images must be used, make sure to indicate the source (so that others can check the status of the images) and the copyright holder and status, and include a rationale for the fair use of that particular image.  For more information see Wikipedia:Image use policy.  Thank you.  Chick Bowen 06:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: This whole article (particularly the history section) reads like a fanboy article. Now, I like Phish as much as the next guy, but this is definitely excessive and not up to encyclopedia quality. 
And whoever tried to nominate this as a featured article...you've GOT to be kidding me. The Chief 07:34, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: FUCK YOU ASSHOLE!!!!!--Geppy 22:48, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Fuck you" seconded...er wait, Geppy. I don't know anything right? Oh, darn, I guess I can't agree with you on that "Fuck You" then, huh? TommyBoy76 03:35, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

text: If Phish wrote the article it would be more NPOV.  This sounds a lot more like a fan club than an encyclopedia.  John 03:39, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Suggestions for remedy would be helpful. BabuBhatt 03:46, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the information given out could be a little less biased. Some of the article leans towards a positive point of view, as if it were a persuasive advertisement. Some people may HATE Phish, and some may not agree with that same persuasive advertisement attitude towards Phish that is represented in the article. Stop selling and start telling. TommyBoy76 23:49, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly, "suggestions for remedy would be helpful."  For the last 7 months we have been trying to removed NPOV from this article, but dumb a's just post more and more cries about all the NPOV. IF YOU DONT HAVE A WAY TO FIX THE NPOV OR YOU ARE UNWILLING TO FIX IT YOURSELF, DO NOT POST ABOUT NPOV, WE ALREADY KNOW IT EXISTS!  thank you, and good night!--Geppy 00:33, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, that's not how it works.  Some of us (like me) don't know enough about Phish to make it neutral.  Others don't have the time.  Just because we're not willing to edit it doesn't mean its appropriate to be a fanboy article.  I'm putting the tag up.  Spending six months improving the article is admirable but that doesn't make it based on the virtue of the work not worthy of removing the tag.  As for suggestions, try separating sections into seperate articles that might be more appropriate.  For instance, inspiration from a Vermont Piano teacher is nice information, but not particularly for a general band.  Also, include some criticism of Phish from people who aren't fans (I don't have any though as I like the music).  Etc.  J. M. 07:06, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV! NPOV! NPOV! 

message: The article states:  The group also experimented with tension and release jamming, in which a jam would "bubble up" and condense itself into a tight, usually off-key musical corner, and then explode back to the main theme.
To call something "off-key" is misleading as people think is synonymous with "bad".  Everything Phish did (for the most part) can be justified musically within a key.  Sometimes they were polytonal, but never bad.  Some of their greatest moments sound, well, weird, but they can be justified as being in the "dominant leading-tone diminished chord -- V(vii°)" or some such theoretical nonsense that is a little beyond me.  Technically "off-key" as that chord would be an F-sharp diminished chord in the key of C (and, therefore, "off the key"), but completely justifiable theoretically.  That's why, when they "explode back to the main theme," it didn't sound jarring or out-of-place.  
I could explain more, but I would need charts and an easel.  MusicMaker5376 18:44, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crappy writing, misleading musically 

message: As any Phish fan knows, it's all about the music. But outsiders likely wonder 'what is it about this band that creates such die-hard fans?'. I've just finished a copy-edit on the entire article, and I feel like the "Their music" section could use a possible edit for clarity and cohesion, but I am not up for it now. Kudos to the many, many contributors to this article that could be featured at some point with a bit of rearraning for clarity, esp. in "Their music". BabuBhatt 09:45, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  March 21, 2006, copy-edit 

message: "In essence, Phish created their own form of improvisation, with a set of rules, goals, and listening exercises." What WERE those rules, goals, and listening excercises??TommyBoy76 16:15, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Read the article, its all explained.  For example, phish would lock themselves in a room for up to 24 hours and consume psychedelic mushrooms and play.  They would also do listening exercises, were one person would start playing and the others would have to match or change the pretense.  I am doing a terrible job of explaining, but if you actually took the time to read the article, it lays it all out.Oh, you cant read, well, then, stop smoking dope!--Geppy 22:47, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I guess I worded my question incorrectly. I knew about the Oh Kee Pa Ceremonies. And I suppose their goals were given. I probably just missed it in the article. Sorry. Dope? Not me... I made a promise not to. =0)TommyBoy76 16:15, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Structured Improv? 

message: We need to archive all the entries on this talk page that are more than 3 months old.  I would do it, but i have no idea how to.  So, if someone would step up that would be great.  Thanks--Geppy 22:50, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Archiving

message: I understand if you want to mess with the link or you feel it was linked to many times but as you revert you are removing information.  Pagelit 02:31, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, did not intend to remove info.BabuBhatt 02:35, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: One More Time and Limestone Link

message: The links listed under "external links" are excessive -- many are unnecessary. I removed several but they were put back, so I would like to open discussion here. I personally feel that "bringbackphish", "everything rock", "phantasy tour", and "phishposters" are all insufficiently important to justify being put into an encyclopedic entry. Everything rock has barely any related information on Phish and should be scrapped. Bring back Phish is a poorly made, rarely updated fan site: if we are going to put every fan site like this up, there are a hundred others more deserving than this one. In my opinion these amateurish fan sites should not be in an encyclopedia entry. The same goes for phishposters: my guess is the link for this one was placed by the site's owner. It is irrelevant and should be removed. Finally, "Phantasy tour" is just a discussion-based fan site. There are a dozen more just like it: I see no reason any of them should be up, and if we're choosing to put any one up then in all fairness they should all be up... and that would look terrible. In my opinion all of the links listed above are insufficiently important to merit being placed in an encyclopedia entry and should all be removed. Whoever replaced the links after I removed them, please justify and explain your action here. Bluenotem3 09:54, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In response to "Phantasy tour" is just a discussion-based fan site. While you might consider if just a discussion board, you also have to recognize the other (greater) information accessible on the site. They are as up to date on their setlists and article/news mention as any other Phish site, perhaps even moreso. I feel this is a great site that is easy to navigate for any person looking for information on Phish for the first time, as that is what the Wikipedia is striving for; giving the unintelligble person the most accessible information first. --Moeron 13:26, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Fair enough. I'll support keeping Phantasy Tour, but the others I mentioned are extraneous at best and advertising at worst. I'm going to remove those unless anyone has any reasonable objections. Bluenotem3 04:42, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with you on leaving the others out.--Moeron 05:00, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Pheesh? I don't think so. Bluenotem3 05:07, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excessive "External Links" 

message: The group also experimented with tension and release jamming, in which a jam would "bubble up" and condense itself into a tight, usually off-key musical corner, and then explode back to the main theme. Some fans found that this technique made the concert experience more energized and frantic than other bands of similar genre, such as The Allman Brothers Band or The Grateful Dead.
I find this paragraph highly questionable for a encyclopedic entry, especially since it is unsourced. While I certainly would love an explanation in the article of just how Phish "does what it does", we need to find something that has been written specifally about their style either in one of the books or the websites. --Moeron 13:40, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tension and Release Jamming?