Talk:Dark Globe

message: If someone knows how to make the correct lyrics appear alongside the incorrect one sung by REM, that would probably be much better. Thanks
--Cranky1KCranky1000 15:31, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The image :Image:Sydbarrett-madcaplaughs.jpg 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. --02:59, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Sydbarrett-madcaplaughs.jpg

message: I removed some nonsense about how this song is all about his former bandmates in Pink Floyd, which I think is a bad joke (Who's "pussy willow", then? Some say it's Roger Waters, but I'm betting on Nick Mason!) The source on this was songfacts.com, and I urge you to look at the article and see for yourself that this is NOT a worthy source of FACTS, and should not be used as a source in editing Wikipedia articles. (I feel the same about allmusic.com, but won't get into that here.)
Here's something from the SongFacts article (or, I should say, the Song"Facts" article):
Generally, the version of the song on Opel, a compilation of Barrett out-takes, is considered far superior. That version is known as "Wouldn't You Miss Me?"
Oh, really?!? I'd be curious as to just WHO "considers" this, since SongFacts doesn't have to cite their sources, but as a long-time Wikipedian, I know the using-weasel-words-to-present-your-opinion-as-fact trick when I see it! Hell, in my early days, I used it! (No, I didn't.) "Generally"; "is considered". *scoff* You know what that means? That means "I, personally, the writer of this article, like the version on Opel better, because it stirs my emotions more. I asked my best pal and my girlfriend, who had to listen to both versions first, since she had never heard Syd Barrett before, and anyway, they both agreed with me." That's EXACTLY what that means!
I, personally, feel the version on Opel is garbage, an outtake best left in the bin, and never listened to by anyone, ever again. But I'm honest enough not to dress my opinion up in "fact-like" terms. Whichever version is "superior" (The Madcap Laughs version, but never mind) is a matter of opinon, and yet is stated as a "fact" by SongFacts, which calls into question their entire reputation as a "source" for an encyclopaedic article.
The SongFacts article consists of three basic factual statements ("Barrett was a founding member of Pink Floyd, but mental illness ...", etc.) one questionable, but acceptable statement ("This song shows Syd's awareness of his psychological state."), one statement of RAW OPINION GARNISHED WITH WEASEL WORDS (see above), and 21 comments! And the article proper never does say this song is directed at his former bandmates ANYWAY, so that's something the Wikipedian either gleaned from the comments (which I barely glanced at; they seem to be arguing over whether The Wall is "annoying" or not -- you know, crucial scholarly matters of Floydian analysis like that), or just plain fucking made up!
--Ben Culture (talk) 05:06, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Songfacts.com should not be used as a source.