Talk:Jazz royalty

message: I'd like to disagree. The first sentence in the article says "Jazz royalty is a term that reflects the many great jazz musicians who have some sort of royal title in their names or nicknames."
Sir Roland Hanna certainly qualified. Not only is he a 'real' knight, he has been billed as Sir Roland Hanna ever since. He may not be in the same realm as the Count, or the Duke, but he's certainly on par with Paul Paul Quinichette and Sharkey Bonano.
Anyhow, I'd like to restore it. Any other comments? -- SeanO 05:39, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)
:I'm not familiar with Hanna's work, so I can't argue too strongly either way, it just struck me that whenever I've heard the term jazz royalty I've never heard Hanna's name connected to it (I actually hadn't even heard of Hanna at all until I saw him here). The other thing is that I wouldn't consider "sir" a royal title, but I could be wrong. If anyone else thinks he belongs then I guess we can include him. -Lommer | talk 22:48, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I hadn't heard of him either, but I created an article on him while working on the red names at List of jazz pianists. So as it apparently stayed in least it's not red anymore.--T. Anthony 06:24, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposals

message: I see someone put a prod on this page recently, and I think its valid.  I really dont think there is any source one can find of grouping these nicknamed musicians together under a term "jazz royalty". I suspect it is OR.  However, I can see there is interesting and useful and verifiable information which can be salvaged from this article (but 90% is probably off to the dump), but to what use should it be put?  An article on musicians nicknames I think is worthwhile, but I cant imagine what it would be named to keep it encylopedic.  Anyone with ideas, come forth now, as I think this article is about to see its unfortunately rightful demise. Russeasby (talk) 17:06, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I've heard the term before, but I could be mistaken. But even if the term is new, I don't think most of the content of the page is OR. I know at least some is true, and it's interesting, and since it's associated with so many, notable. I removed the prod and added a  tag. If the term is new, perhaps a move to something like Use of royal nicknames by jazz musicians would be appropriate? Surely some jazz reference books discuss this phenomenon, as it's so widespread. Rigadoun  (talk) 08:37, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I'm going to AFD the article. The basic premise is flawed; 'Jazz royalty' is not a term used today in the industry anymore than it's used in, say, boxing. A move would be a good idea, but even then, it's akin to having an article on use of violent nicknames by rappers or the like. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 21:26, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  prod 

message: Content irrelevent to jazz royalty has become an ever larger part of this article.  Jazz nicknames, in my opinion, is a reasonable topic to be covered somewhere on Wikipedia, but are not the stated topic of the article.  So what to do?  One possible option that occurs to me is moving this article to "Jazz nicknames", and making the discussion of "jazz royalty" just one small section of it. Alternatively, we could keep this article focused on jazz royalty, and spin off a seperate article, something like "list of jazz nicknames".  Other thoughts?  -- Infrogmation (talk) 01:54, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Greetings Infrogmation, I agree with the second part of yours above. The term "jazz royalty" is sufficiently widespread within the jazz world for it to be the "logical", even the "first-call", term to search for on Wikipedia. By definition, surely "notable" enough to warrant an article on Wikipedia. Any variation on the theme could be spun off as a "see-also" catch-all for other nicknames. Obviously this article is of no interest whatsoever to the majority of people visiting Wikipedia/editors, but neither is quantum mechanics and that's based on a mere theory - at least the people mentioned here exist/existed - and many were certainly more of a household name than any of the names fundamental to the establishment of QM. No offence meant to all you phyicists out there - some of whom might even be jazz lovers :) --Technopat (talk) 11:13, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have been bold and spun off a good chunk of the content into nicknames of jazz musicians. Both this and that article still need work. -- Infrogmation (talk) 12:07, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Article title verses content

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Jazz royalty. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110521234814/http://www.thenation.com/doc/19990419/santoro/single to http://www.thenation.com/doc/19990419/santoro/single
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081205103959/http://www.cnn.com:80/2007/SHOWBIZ/Music/12/24/obit.peterson.ap/index.html to http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/Music/12/24/obit.peterson.ap/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:32, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: If anyone cares to do some actual work on this article, see older versions with much more information and history eg  and take some time to google references. -- Infrogmation (talk) 18:15, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I like that old version, will look at it more carefully later.  I just undid a removal of yours on the theory that the removed stuff was stable and informative and it isn't worth fussing too much over what is and isn't royal.  67.164.113.165 (talk) 15:56, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I removed some listings that were irrelevant to the title of the article. It is not an article on "Jazz nicknames" nor "Jazz honorary titles". Such may be notable and very relevant to cover in other articles, but not in this one specifically called "Jazz royalty".  Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 00:29, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Improving article