Talk:British blues

message: This article is wayyyyyyy too short and doesn't do the subject justice! If I had the time, etc etc... Totnesmartin 15:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too short 

message: I'm kind of curious about Rory Gallagher's entry in this article. He was not British, his blues style was not specifically British nor did he start his career in the British blues scene. Rory spent a great deal of time travelling, Ireland, the UK and Europe but his music doesn't really fit with the British Blues subgenre, so it seems inappropriate to be listed here.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.16.39.4 (talk) 20:22, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rory Gallagher? 

message: Am I missing something or should Free not be listed on this page?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.117.78.233 (talk) 09:56, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Free 

message: Would the last person (wiki libs ?) who hesitated three times but finally did erase my bibliography additions in both Blues-rock and British Blues articles be polite enough to give me proper reasons of this undo, as there is a Further reading section in many other rock articles, which fully entitles me to ask my similar section to be included in both my quoted articles. And please explain what u mean when writing 'using popups'.  Thanks. --Polofrfr (talk) 01:31, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Further reading sections for specific essays/writings which enhance the content of any article is a welcomed addition. Massive listing of non-notable publications which add nothing to the article are frowned upon and removed. The only purpose they serve is to advertise the non-notable books. Also, popups is a Wikipedia script which is used to quickly revert vandalism, trolling, spamming, soapboxing and personal attacks. It gives the editor a very quick way of reverting things that should not have been added to Wikipedia in the first place (like NN books advertisiments ' such) The Real Libs-speak politely 12:32, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Why did you beleive those books were WP:NN ? I beleive this was not vandalism, spamming neither soapboxing; but building a Further reading section.--almaghi (talk) 21:19, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

text: British blues
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
	This article does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed. (November 2006)
	This article may contain original research or unverified claims. Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (September 2007)
Would one more reason be necessary to put back the Further reading section : out of these seven books, I owe and have fully read the first six of them. They ARE of deep interest for a deeper study of the British Blues.
By the way, Clapton obviously never played solo under his name in Klook's Kleek during the 60s. --Polofrfr (talk) 03:25, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

text: I truly thank the contributors who have rightly deleted ‘personal’ and ‘out of subject’ info which I had written, inside Further reading section, for both blues-rock and British blues. As a youngster in both French and English WP, I still have to learn a lot and they were quite right doing so : thanks a lot again as, after a second thought, the remaining references suit me perfectly.--Polofrfr (talk) 06:24, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Further reading section allowed ?