Talk:American Federation of Musicians

message: It's possible that the Hal Davis mentioned here is the same Hal Davis about whom there is an article. The same applies to one of the two musicians named Steve Young. -Mardus 02:06, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: List of presidents

message: I added mention of the 1948 recording ban mentioned in the swing music article . . Unlike the 42-3 ban, it doesn't have a page of its own; it should, but I don't know enough about it. BobFromBrockley 17:24, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 1948 ban

message: Changes and decline of membership and locals needs to be explored. And the effect of technology in eliminating musician jobs needs to be expanded. Also the need to explain how the once nationwide membership, is now limited to major entertainment and recording locales.
Eelb53 (talk) 01:05, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: More History of AF of M needed

message: Surely there are some issues that deserve being covered, such as the current and going issue with Pere Ubu's two British members.. http://www.ubuprojex.net/press/ubuvisa.pdf  Centerone (talk) 14:32, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  no controversy section?  No issues from people who oppose the union? no detail?  

message: Hello. I am thinking about expanding the article by adding the history of the AFM from books, online sources and magazines. I will find a couple of sources, but can you help me out? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:42, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion ideas? 

message: This article is very complimentary to the AFM and doesn't at all mention the seedy side of the union, especially Petrillo's goon squads that would assault non-union musicians who were performing in public venues. 38.69.12.5 (talk) 04:25, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect this article was written by the AFM. I have not gone back through the edit history to verify, but it has the hallmarks of paid corporate editing. I have started cutting it back, but you are right that it also needs additional material. Kendall-K1 (talk) 02:50, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep. I'm thinking about expanding the article to at least a B-Class or a GA. I think we can find sources via library books. I'll post some as I go along. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 08:03, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Puff piece 

message: Here are some sources we can use. More will be added to this list when they are found.
* 
* 
* 
* 
Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 08:06, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources to use 

message: As a point of distinction, the AFM represents instrumental musicians. It does not represent singers.
Choral and solo singers (opera, art song, actors in musical theatre, etc.) are represented by the American Guild of Musical Artists.
Variety singers (e.g. nightclubs) might be represented by the American Guild of Variety Artists, but some are members of AGMA.
Singers who are also actors might also be represented by SAG-AFTRA or Actors Equity Association, especially if they are predominantly actors.
2601:645:C300:C1C:6C9D:8074:59B9:5233 (talk) 20:20, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Only represents instrumentalists not vocalists 

message: There's a claim of "a more egalitarian organization, inclusive to all musicians", but there's no hint of why that would have been necessary. What was wrong with the National League of Musicians? Was the AFM fully racially integrated in 1896? In short, what's the meaning here? TooManyFingers (talk) 16:01, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "More egalitarian" than what?