Talk:Louis Armstrong/Archive 1

message: According to various Web sites, researcher Tad Jones found Louis Armstrong's baptismal record at Sacred Heart of Jesus Church, 139 South Lopez Street Street in New Orleans. I have examined many such records, and they are generally accepted to be accurate. They are obviously accurate as to the date of baptism.
It is possible, of course, that the priest was given the wrong date of birth, or that he wrote it down wrong. But this is possible with any document. For my money, short of viewing a copy of this document myself, I'd go with the date reported by Jones. Regards, Peter J. Curry, e-mail: ka2ttu@aol.com
The 1910 census agrees more with the August, 1901 birthdate over the July 1900. He is listed as eight years old when the census was taken in April, 1910. -- Daviddaniel37 10:01, 16 Feb 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Armstrong's Date of Birth 

message: This IMO does not belong under his legacy:
:The Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport in Kenner, Louisiana and serving New Orleans, Louisiana, is named after Armstrong. Also, the secondary stadium court at the USTA National Tennis Center in Flushing Meadows Park in Queens, the site of the US Open, is named for him.
-- Viajero 09:42, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  mv from Legacy section 

message: This IMO does not belong under his legacy:
:The Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport in Kenner, Louisiana and serving New Orleans, Louisiana, is named after Armstrong. Also, the secondary stadium court at the USTA National Tennis Center in Flushing Meadows Park in Queens, the site of the US Open, is named for him.
The articles on those topics can mention, if necessary, that these places where named after him.
-- Viajero 09:43, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Then again, a "Tributes" paragraph could be formed. --Rover Segundo 23:47, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  mv from Legacy section 

message: I don't see any reason to link adjectives in the first place, and particularly not in this case.  The only thing in the charisma article beyond a dictionary definition is a discussion of Christian charismatics; it's misleading to link to this since Armstrong was not, to public knowledge, this type of charismatic.  Jgm 20:38, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. I was tempted to delete anon's dubious linking of the term altogether myself. Looks good. -- Infrogmation 20:46, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  "charismatic" 

message: Here's a couple of paragraphs from the Music section of the article:
:In his early years, Armstrong was best known for his virtuosity with the cornet and trumpet. The greatest trumpet playing of his early years can be heard on his Hot Five and Hot Seven records. The improvisations which he made on these records of New Orleans jazz standards and popular songs of the day, to the present time stack up brilliantly alongside those of any other later jazz performer. The older generation of New Orleans jazz musicians often referred to their improvisations as "variating the melody"; Armstrong's improvisations were daring and sophisticated for the time while often subtle and melodic. He often essentially re-composed pop-tunes he played, making them more interesting. Armstrong's playing is filled with joyous, inspired original melodies, creative leaps, and subtle relaxed or driving rhythms. The genius of these creative passages is matched by Armstrong's playing technique, honed by constant practice, which extended the range, tone and capabilities of the trumpet. In these records, Armstrong almost single-handedly created the role of the jazz soloist, taking what was essentially a collective folk music and turning it into an art form with tremendous possibilities for individual expression.
:Armstrong's work in the 1920s shows him playing at the outer limits of his abilities. The Hot 5 records, especially, often have minor flubs and missed notes, which do little to detract from listening enjoyment since the energy of the spontaneous performance comes through. By the mid 1930s Armstrong achieved a smooth assurance, knowing exactly what he could do and carrying out his ideas with perfectionism.
I have bolded the phrases/sentences I feel are opinion and not fact. Does anyone else agree? Johnleemk | Talk 16:45, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that these passages could use some NPOV improvement. I think, however, that there are some legitimate bits of fact in there as well, especially in the last example. We should give thought to rewriting those portions. -- Infrogmation 19:11, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: These statements are not POV, but general consensus among those who know the history of jazz, musicians and scholars alike.  The Hot Five and Seven recordings are seminal events in the annals of recorded jazz, and are literally to jazz what the Homeric epics are to Western literature.  Their importance cannot be overstated, and any superlatives regarding their genius are most likely understatement rather than anything else.PJtP (talk) 22:20, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible POV issues 

message: User:Infrogmation changed
"...the New Orleans Home for Colored Waifs, where he had been sent for general delinquency, though it is widely believed that he was sent there after firing a pistol into the air at a New Year's Eve celebration"
to:
"...where he had been sent multiple times for general delinquency, most notably for a long term after firing a pistol into the air at a New Year's Eve celebration"
with the comment:
"Waif's home: no need to say "widely believed" when it was public record"
But is it definitely known for a fact that firing a pistol was the reason for his stay in the Home, as the sentence implies? Can we have some references showing that this is accepted as fact, in an area that abounds in folklore and unverifiable rumours? After all, plenty of people think it's a fact that Buddy Bolden was a barber, or that Bessie Smith bled to death while being denied admission to a White hopital -- there may not be a shred of evidence but it's certainly "widely believed" (which in itself is interesting information). Flapdragon 15:31, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Armstrong himself told the story in his "My Life In New Orleans" autobiography and several interviews, and it was in the police report records, and mentioned in the police report sectoin of at least one of the local papers at the time. (Sorry I don't have a specific reference on the latter-- University and most public libraries and archives are still closed here in New Orleans at present-- but I recall seeing copies of the original clippings at various conferences, and at least one, including such details as the arresting officers etc, made its way into a PBS tv doccumentary on Armstrong's early life that Tad Jones had some input on about a decade ago. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 19:23, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: By gosh, I just happened to run into Tad Jones! The expert confirms the pistol incident is documented from period materials. No doubt we can learn all about it in great detail whenever he finishes his book. -- Infrogmation 22:51, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Waifs' home 

message: were removed by anon 69.249.246.42. I did not see reason here and rv.Mikereichold 02:11, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Samples

message: According to the Grand Lodge of British Columbia there is no evidence that he was in fact a Freemason. Dwain 18:53, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not a Freemason 

message: Isn't it Daniel Louis Armstrong rather than Louis Daniel Armstrong? Flapdragon 11:16, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I have a Louis Armstrong CD album, Singin' n' Playin', with the bio inside the insert saying he was born Daniel Louis Armstrong. In regards to this article, where is the evidence that Armstrong himself said Daniel wasn't his middle name? I'm going to add a citation tag to that... --Geopgeop (T) 06:06, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Daniel Louis Armstrong  

message: Nothing at all about his use of "Gage"? That's strange. Here is some info http://www.cleartest.com/testinfo/louis_armstrong.htm as I don't have time to write it just now... The Real Walrus 16:32, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Viper 

message: In the 1970s and through most of the 1980s, I always heard it pronounced "Looie." Then is started to change so that now I almost always hear it as "Lewis." Which did the man himself use and/or prefer to be introduced as? Did the change come from people who thought "Looie" wasn't respectful enough? Dvd Avins 22:39, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The short answer is that he used both.   I don't know which he "prefered", but there are documations of both, ranging from the phonetic "Lewie" written down by the census taker in 1920 to his clearly saying "Lew-Is" in the film of "Hello Dolly". -- Infrogmation 23:32, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

text: A few years back at the U.S. Open (maybe 2001?), during a match in the Louis Armstrong Stadium, Tony Bennett came to see the commentators on the USA network and told them that it would mean a lot to Louis Armstrong's family if they would stop pronouncing it "Looie Armstrong" and start saying "Louis Armstrong."  Since then, almost all of the commentators use this pronunciation. --Faith healer 19:37, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

text: The assertion in the introduction that Armstrong preferred the pronunciation "Lewis" is contradicted by the source it cites (an interview with Louie Bellson, who worked with Armstrong). I'm about to change it to "Looie", but if anyone has any more information, do keep talking about it. Echobeats 00:01, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Why is his name listed here at "louis" when in both his autobiography, most autographs, his draft card and drivers' license, his signature is very clearly "Lewis"? His birth certificate says "Lewis" too, so I'm confused as to why the Wiki entry says "Louis." 198.135.224.110 (talk) 17:59, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation of "Louis" 

message: Removing the link to Joe Glaser - the article doesn't deal with Armstrong's manager but some guitar maker. The "right" Joe sounds like he was a colourful character, deserving an article. Until then though... CCooke 18:57, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joe Glaser 

message: Removed the link to William Armstrong, it leads to a disambiguation page, none of which are the William Armstrong that is mentioned in the article.Zapatista comeau 00:36, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  William Armstrong 

message: I just heard a remark on the radio on American Routes that because of the Karnofskys' generosity, he wore a Star of David around his neck for the rest of his life. Does anyone know if there is something citable on this? Might be worth adding to the mention of the Karnofskys, shows a closer bond that might be gleaned from the current wording. - Jmabel | Talk 05:10, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's fixed now, thanks for pointing it out. Robotman1974 17:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Karnofskys 

message: I am extremely angry while typing this. I have just noticed that KNcyu38 (now AldeBaer) has sent me a message saying the following.  "Please do not add unhelpful and unconstructive information to Wikipedia, as you did to Louis Armstrong. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 01:53, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tour de France 

message: In or about 1964/1965 Louis Armstrong and his band did a couple of concerts in Dar es Salaam, Tanganyika. The country is now called Tanzania.
My parents were involved with the Round Table and assisted in the organisation of the tour. Louis apparently did at least two concerts, one expensive one for the wealthy and another for the people.
I have a concert programme somewhere in my archives that was signed by Louis and a few of his band members. 
At least one of the concerts was for charity.
I will try and dig it up.
Do you think it would be a useful addition to the article?
--Tiucsib 18:47, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Louis Armstrong's Concert Tour to Tanganyika

message: Is it just me, or does that picture look like a Photoshop job? (Hallander 01:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not at all. -- Infrogmation (talk)
I agree that it looks a bit weird, but I don't think it's a Photoshop job.  For one thing, if you look at the glare from the camera flash reflected on both Levin's and Armstrong's faces, it's in the exact same places on both (cheekbones and centre of forehead), suggesting that the two men were each illuminated by the same light source.  I agree that you could fake that on Photoshop if you were seriously good, but if the supposed artist were that good, why would he or she have left Armstrong's right arm looking so bizarrely foreshortened?  Anyone who can do the subtle stuff so well wouldn't have screwed up on the obvious thing.  It's just one of those photos that looks mysteriously wrong, IMO. Lexo (talk) 15:15, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

text: I deleted it , because it seems odd to have a photo which makes Levin as prominent as Armstrong, absent some evidence Levin was influential on Armstrong or somehow important to his career. Edison (talk) 04:38, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  If it was free licensed, please undelete it and move it to Commons! It may not belong in the article, but having another free licensed photo of Armstrong availible on Commons is good, and the photo may be useful on Wikipedia at such time as Wikipedia gets an articl eon writer Levin. -- Infrogmation (talk) 21:07, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ah, I see you did not delete the image at all, thank you.  It is already in Commons, and already in use on our existing Floyd Levin article. -- Infrogmation (talk) 21:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Floyd Levin pic 

message: Armstrong was a charismatic, innovative performer whose musical skills and bright personality transformed jazz from a rough regional dance music into a popular art form.
Cute, but wrong. Armstrongs' impact on early jazz was a breaktrough in soloing. His incredibly influential solos were the main stepping stone for the shift from collective ensemble polyphony to expressive improvised solos. But most certainly he did not transform jazz from 'rough regional dance music' into a 'popular art form', whatever that is supposed to mean.
Jazz was, by Armstrong's time already popular enough, mostly by means of incredibly well selling records of the Original Dixieland Jazz Band, which, admittedly, was rough and frenetic dance music with barnyard animal imitations, but being successfully sold Americawide, it was hardly regional, even notwithstanding the fact that jazz, by the 1920s, was spread more or less throughout the whole of America. 
Furthermore, as detested as generally Whiteman is, his ensemble's music was far from being rough, Whiteman mainly capitalizing on the then fresh dance craze in "high society", playing dance music (JAZZ INCLUDED) with a big band of extremely capable musicians who set the standard for all future jazz big bands to come. All in all, the jazz that Whiteman's ensemble did play was very far from rough, Whiteman's main ambition being (well, earning dollars didn't hurt either) elevating jazz into music to listen to, not music to dance to, his band's premiere performance of Rhapsody in Blue by and large fulfilling it from his point of view. In any case, his performances were not in the least rough. The numbers they played that were truly jazz, not some form of social dance or another, the "hot numbers", were executed on the same high level of musicianship as any other arrangement they performed. 
Neither did jazz cease to be dancing music after Armstrong's appearance - the swing era jazz is not exactly comprised of contemplative compositions, it's driving and constant rhytm being there for the dance. Also, the implied claim that jazz, prior to Armstrong, was not an art form is incredibly bigoted and far beyond neutral.
Therefore, I am changing the horrendously misleading line that resides at the top into this:
Armstrong was a charismatic, innovative performer whose inspired improvised soloing was the main influence for a fundamental change in jazz, shifting it's focus from collective melodic playing, often arranged in one way or another, to the solo player and improvised soloing.
Note that I used "collective melodic playing" instead of "ensemble polyphony" to simplify things. By "arranged in a way" I mean either note-for-note arrangements (like in Whiteman's band) or collective memorization of a piece with little or none subsequent improvization (like King Oliver's band, Jelly Roll Morton's band or the O. D. J. B.). Of course, outright claims that earlier jazz bands did not improvise would be preposterous, but improvisation was certainly not regarded as a defining element in early jazz, so it is fair to assume that Louis' constant improvising, from his days with Fate Marable onwards, had a great impact on the perception of what jazz performances should be like, and did indeed inititiate a change in what was later deemed to be of key importance in jazz.
He also acquired recognition and influence already as a cornetist, switching to trumpet somewhat later. --Rover Segundo 00:22, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Your change in the article seems reasonable to me. Thanks for your detailed explanation. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 00:44, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I like the change as well, good job.71.238.71.180 01:14, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transformed jazz 

message: Separating Satchmo's personal life from his carreer as a musician would help the article a great deal. Per instance, the paragraph "Early Carreer" begins with information about his personal life, first wife and his children, needlessly obscuring infromation on his early carreer, which was supposed to be the subject matter. Creating a paragraph titled "Personal life" would keep all information in tidy, meaningful clusters. I suggest that someone who knows more about the man's personal life than me does it, lest I screw it up. --Rover Segundo 23:37, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal life 

message: There is very little here on critical and scholarly reception of his work, and some of what little there is lacks citation. For what it's worth, Gary Giddins, "How Come Jazz Isn't Dead", p. 39–55 in Eric Weisbard, ed., This is Pop, Harvard University Press, 2004.  (cloth),  (paper) cites an interesting negative remark by Rudi Blesh, a minority view but one that should probably be represented, saying, effectively, that from the time he left King Oliver, Armstrong was doing something other than jazz; the relevant passage is on p. 42 of the cited work, and an endnote cites "Rudi Blesh, Shining Trumpets: A History of Jazz (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1958 [1946])". Here's the passage:
"Printed scores are not a part of jazz," historian Rudi Blesh declared. Armstrong, he said, had abandoned jazz; "West End Blues" "narrowly misses banality," with its "dark romanticism foreign to jazz." Ellington's "tea dansant music" had no jazz content whatsoever.
I know that Giddins has written a book on Armstrong (Satchmo), and I see that it's not cited at all here. I haven't read it, but I've read other things of Giddins', and I imagine it is well worth a read. If someone is serious about working on this article, they should probably track it down. - Jmabel | Talk 18:34, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism 

message: I have asked for a citation to the claim "Armstrong lived his entire life believing that he was born on July 04, 1900", which I think is dubious and should be removed. Certainly he gave that date in a number of public interviews, but the facts that he sometimes confessed he was unsure of the exact date to serious researchers and used "1901" in some of his government doccuments seem to contradict the statement. -- Infrogmation 15:38, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If anyone wishes to keep the current wording please provide a citation soon. Otherwise I shall plan to rewrite that sentence next week. -- Infrogmation 13:50, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  As an anon has removed the citation request more than once, I have gone ahead and reworded. If you disagree, please provide information and/or discussion here. -- Infrogmation 03:07, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Believed birthdate

message: a long term after (as police records show) firing his stepfather's pistol- I don't like the fact that the bracketed part is before the verb--Dominik92 18:37, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Armstrong 

message: I would like to have the following removed:
On December 31, 1999, US President Bill Clinton announced that Armstrong's trumpet was among several items of national memorabilia that were to be interred in a Millennial time capsule to be opened 100 years later.[38]
It's simply not true -- check http://clinton4.nara.gov/Initiatives/Millennium/capsule/burns.html
Armstrong's trumpets are on display at the Louis Armstrong House Museum. I think someone talked metaphorically about "the sound of Louis Armstrong's trumpet" being included in the capsule, and it got distorted to "his trumpet being in the capsule," which it isn't.
149.4.110.62 (talk) 21:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trumpet in Time Capsule 

message: in the Grammy Hall of Fame, st-louis blues is classified under the genre of jazz ( single) but st-louis blues is a  blues song. The Grammy hall of fame is the source of the error, but i think the genre should be corrected on this article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boibn (talk • contribs) 18:49, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  St-louis blues 

message: The "Samples" section has three items; two of them have no links at all and the third has a blind link.  May I suggest that the section be removed?  83.70.164.71 (talk) 21:44, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the heads-up. I'll delete the section. Binksternet (talk) 22:06, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: What samples?

message: The list below discography was removed because it was a poorly formated, incomplete and pointless since 2 lines above there were links to both discography and songs categories listing all the important items. -- m:drini  18:51, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  songs removals 

message: An anonymous editor keeps inserting something about a 1992 Diet Coke commercial that included archival footage of Armstrong.  IMO, this is too trivial for inclusion in this article.  The other entries in the legacy section are about museum exhibits and major things named for him, and I don't think a commercial is significant enough to be added to this.  I don't want to see this degrade into a long list of places in contemporary culture where his image and or music have been used.  I have seen this happen in many other articles.  --rogerd (talk) 23:51, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The issue is that Elton John was a big star after Armstrong's time (Elton's first hit was in 1971, Armstrong died that year). Furthermore Diet Coke was introduced into the market in the early 1980s. Armstrong’s inclusion in this specific campaign highlights the fact that he had relevance at that point in history despite the two previous factors. It is not simply a piece of trivia. There is a difference between using a piece of music (the commercial in question does not even feature any of the Armstrong's music per say). You can not simply write such an issue as Trivia. If the issue at hand was simply a song was used, I would agree with you (I neither want to see this degrade into a long list of places in contemporary culture where his image and or music have been used). However, the fact he was in this commercial more than two decades after his death at a time when John was a major force in contemporary music showcases Armstrong's lasting legacy and the fact he was well known enough among the public of that era. It was also one of the first times this technology was used to bring a past star “back from the dead” and for that historic fact alone is notable. 74.65.39.59 (talk) 00:07, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Wouldn't it be sufficient to say that "Armstrong's legacy [or "lasting impression" etc.] was such that his likeness (via archival footage) was incorporated into television advertisements two decades after his death"? -- Gyrofrog  (talk) 13:53, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

text: It has also occurred to me that this commercial mention is not referenced.  That is not my rationale for opposing its inclusion, but it is against policy.  --rogerd (talk) 15:56, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

text: Any parts of this article that aren't well-sourced need to be. Labeling the indicated parts with a fact tag is the recommended first path; deleting is a later step. Binksternet (talk) 01:14, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, my main beef with this is that it is trivial.  I will bet that very few fans of Armstrong remember this TV commercial.  I found this ad on youtube and I notice that James Cagney and Humprey Bogart also have their images inserted, but I don't think this ad should be considered part of any of their legacies, not even Elton John's. I have no doubt that the commercial happened as described, since I saw it on youtube, but my contention is that it isn't notable.  Elton John sold out made a lot of commercials in those days.  Before you use the youtube video as a ref, see WP:YOUTUBE.  --rogerd (talk) 05:57, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

text: To me, this looks like a fantastic cite for an article on video blending. As far as the legacy of Louis Armstrong goes, it fails to rate. The commercial is little remembered today and hasn't helped nor hindered Armstrong's legacy. Binksternet (talk) 00:05, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, Binksternet, you have stated the situation very concisely.  --rogerd (talk) 04:36, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  legacy or trivia? 

message: Would anyone be able to add a discography to the article? 92.11.242.83 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment was added at 10:11, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I found an extensive discography here. http://www.michaelminn.net/armstrong/index.php?albums --Deleet (talk) 13:41, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discography 

message: Hi Everyone, 
I was looking at the page for Louis Armstrong and it says that his name was Paul McDickDick?  It also said that his birthdate was January 1001.  It seems like someone is making fun of Louis Armstrong who was great man.  I don't know how, but is it possible for someone to change those figures.  Thanks, 
Alan H  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.160.74.77 (talk) 22:31, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As long as "Wikipedia is the encyclopedia anyone can edit" there will be stupid vandalism of that sort. Fortunately, in most articles anyone can remove the vandalism. Edison (talk) 23:01, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Louis Armstrong's name and date of birth 

message: People..you can all pretend to be inteligent about it, but the fact is is that unless youve lived there you dont know.. Iam from new orleans. I listen to my grandparents talk about the old days, and new orleans has always been a city where you werent more than 3blocks away from a black person or family. I felt the need to write thus because the article talks of new orleans being segregated. THis is an assumption, A wrong one at  that...The fact that we are so mixed  is what makes us so great.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by NewOrleansNative (talk • contribs) 04:10, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Orleans One Of The Most Mixed, Nonsegregated citites 

message: I am from new orleans. So is all of my family history. It in history has been proven one of the most miexed areas. Very few people are racist(mostly politicians) but my grandparents will conferm that new orleans has always had little to no racial tension.. We honestly dont give a care what shade you are. In this article it talks of segregation and southern whites. TO clear this up consider this:most people in N.O. have both european and african heritage, and our neighborhoods are some of the most mixed in the country.Also, if you do your homework you will know that new orleans isnt "southern"..its actually considered creole/carribean in general culture. Its nicknamed "the northern most carribean city" ..someone please fix this error for me..Thanks ( im a new user)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by NewOrleansNative (talk • contribs) 04:18, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Someone change this for me. 

message: Substituted at 19:59, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Suggested edit:
FROM: Louis Daniel Armstrong (August 4, 1901 – July 6, 1971), nicknamed "Satchmo",
TO:   Louis Daniel Armstrong (August 4, 1901 – July 6, 1971), by himself pronounced /ˈluːɪs/ as per the name Lewis, nicknamed "Satchmo",
According to Leif ‘Smokerings’ Anderson in the radio programme series called _Swing og sweet_ on NRK, Mr Armstrong pronounced his name /ˈluːɪs/ (as though it were spelled Lewis). Mr Anderson personally met Mr Armstrong, at which time he was made aware of this. CannedMan (talk) 11:24, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 24 August 2020 

message: Is this recipe link (at the end of the 3.1 Pronunciation of name section)really necessary? Also, it seems odd to directly link to videos instead of citing them...
⚠Efreak 06:38, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Red Beans recipe link? Suggestion 

message: In the paragraph listing the All Stars, it names Big Sid "Buddy" Catlett. Sid and Buddy were 2 different people. My source is / was Buddy Catlett, who I took saxophone lessons from (Buddy played bass in the All Stars). I asked him if he were related to Sid Catlett, and he said that he they were possibly distantly related. He definitely didn't say "That's me, I'm Sid Catlett."
Sid died in 1951, I believe Buddy's time in the All Stars was after that.
Lorendrebin (talk) 05:07, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sid / Buddy Catlett 

message: === Louis Amstrong remembered hearing Buddy Bolden when he was five years old. ===
Here's Armstrong on Bolden, from a 1956 Voice of America interview, courtesy of Ricky Riccardi, Director of Research Collections at the Louis Armstrong House Museum:
"I could go on for hours talking about them good old cats, you know, like Manny Perez, Joe Oliver, Freddie Keppard, Bunk Johnson, “Big Eye” Louis, Buddy Bolden —one of the early masters, you see? I remember hearing Buddy Bolden when I was five years old. In those days they used to play in the back of the funky butt halls, see? They’d play a half-hour in front of the hall, you know, outside. And then they’d go in and play — when they’d play that half where we kids could — on the side — you know, the sidewalk now. But it was banquet then, on the side of the banquet. And we’d dance and I was in my little, old dress, you know? And I’d be wailing and having a ball and when they went inside, we’d have to go to bed. Because they’d play from eight to four in the morning. And that’s my first time hearing Buddy Bolden."
Without a doubt, Bolden was hugely important to the early years of jazz, but we have plenty of recordings of other African-American artists from the late 1890s through the 1920s — more than enough to hear jazz, and related earlier black musics, changing and developing before we get to Armstrong.
Louis Armstrong House Museum/<ref>
<ref>1956 Voice of America interview
Guardianofthekelpforest (talk) 22:06, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add Buddy Bolden's Legacy Here 

message: Here's Armstrong on Bolden, from a 1956 Voice of America interview, courtesy of Ricky Riccardi, Director of Research Collections at the Louis Armstrong House Museum:
"I could go on for hours talking about them good old cats, you know, like Manny Perez, Joe Oliver, Freddie Keppard, Bunk Johnson, “Big Eye” Louis, Buddy Bolden —one of the early masters, you see? I remember hearing Buddy Bolden when I was five years old. In those days they used to play in the back of the funky butt halls, see? They’d play a half-hour in front of the hall, you know, outside. And then they’d go in and play — when they’d play that half where we kids could — on the side — you know, the sidewalk now. But it was banquet then, on the side of the banquet. And we’d dance and I was in my little, old dress, you know? And I’d be wailing and having a ball and when they went inside, we’d have to go to bed. Because they’d play from eight to four in the morning. And that’s my first time hearing Buddy Bolden."
Without a doubt, Bolden was hugely important to the early years of jazz, but we have plenty of recordings of other African-American artists from the late 1890s through the 1920s — more than enough to hear jazz, and related earlier black musics, changing and developing before we get to Armstrong.
Louis Armstrong House Museum/<ref>
<ref>1956 Voice of America interview
Guardianofthekelpforest (talk) 22:06, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Louis Amstrong remembered hearing [[Buddy Bolden]] when he was five years old. 

message: When was the last actual vandalism attempt?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 36.11.225.60 (talk) 11:52, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Why is this page locked?

message: 72.138.79.246 (talk) 14:36, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 23 February 2021