Talk:Folk music

message: An individual put a large amount of section tags and three global tags on at once. This is a large article built by many editors with many references. I don't think that the global tags are useful or necessary.  Could anyone with specific concerns make them know and then I plan to wait 1-2 months and take off the global tags. North8000 (talk) 15:26, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I support this and think that we should remove immediately the tags about "personal essay" - which is nonsense - and OR. Absent extended and specific discussion on Talk, these tags are POV and unproductive at the very least. More citations are always welcome in any good article and some other issues still need to be addressed, but the aforementioned two tags should de deleted right away. Sensei48 (talk) 08:42, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Global tags?

message: Right now, this article mostly takes a global view, especially the first half or so.  That is, it avoids defining the topic by reference to English-language folk music.  Later sub-sections are a bit more dominated by English-language coverage. 
So this is just to say, let's all keep ultra-aware to maintain (and extend) this commendable neutrality and balance. Onanoff (talk) 13:07, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Folk music of all cultures 

message: Recapping and expanding on the above.  In short, "folk music" is an English term that can be seen as having two different but related meanings.    My approach was to in essentially  divide the article into two halves accordingly, but still keep them in the same article due to overlap. While I was gone from Wikipedia for a while, somebody took the "contemporary folk music" half of the article and moved it to a new separate article by that name. I wouldn't have done that, but I have no significant objection to it and it did help regarding article length. So, as a result, we have an unusual structure.   The lead of this article covers both.  Then the body covers the Traditional folk music half of the topic and the Contemporary folk music article covers the other half of the topic.  So under the current structure Contemporary folk music needs to be strongly mentioned/ linked to in this article. I think that the only other viable alternative is to combine the two back into this article. All other alternatives come out to not even having an article named Folk Music which IMO is not viable since the overwhelmingly common term is Folk music and in the eyes of 95% of all English-speaking readers it is a single topic/subject. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 21:27, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Structural overview

message: There is an RfC ongoing about a topic that contributors to this article may be interested in. It can be found here. JimKaatFan (talk) 15:05, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for comment 

message: As I go through this article,  I see that there are sections without due importance. The first is "First British Folk Revival." Why must it have a separate subsection, when the section above it talks about all revivals? Besides, the references are scarce, and if you were to talk about one in specific it would more than likely be 1940's onward due to it receiving way more coverage. Also, another thing I wish to mention is electronic instruments in folk music. It only makes the article longer (which it already is) without providing real value, in my opinion.-- • Apollo468•  20:37, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't have a strong opinion either way on those and seeing the excellent work that you've been doing, I'd go along with the actions implied in your post.   I do advocate strong "in practice" coverage and so would like strong coverage of folk music festivals that significantly include traditional folk music.North8000 (talk) 01:22, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

text: @North8000 Alright, thank you for your comment. I'm going to go ahead and delete the subsections mentioned tomorrow since it is rather late. I'll continue adding citations to this article - currently on Sri Lanka under Asia. When I'm done, I will try and attempt to help with that and expand the folk music festivals. Not a writer personally, but some of the sentences in this are rather choppy. Cheers,-- • Apollo468•  03:51, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion of section(s)?

message: I was following a citation for research I’m doing, and instead of getting search results for the cited article, I found the link below. I have compared several sections of this Wiki entry and this WordPress page, and so far, the only difference I see is the WordPress site doesn't include a picture this Wiki page does. I don’t know if someone copied this entry for their WordPress site or wrote this for their WordPress blog, then copied and pasted it here (though I suspect the former; it just makes more sense). 
I’m assuming this isn’t permitted, though I’ve never run into this before. I hope this was the right place to post this discovery. 
https://violinsection.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/folksong.pdf SiobhanElizabeth (talk) 13:06, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: This would need a source. It is at least as likely that Word Press lifted this article from Wikipedia, given that both sites are of almosr equal age.Sensei48 (talk) 13:51, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  This page appears almost in its entirety in a WordPress site 

message: five aspects of a folk song 41.80.118.202 (talk) 10:09, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Music 

message: I've been researching for a little while and I cannot seem to find the meaning behind this one line of the poem. 2A02:C7C:DD73:BA00:B8DB:8CA2:C4B:F371 (talk) 08:19, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does anyone know what 'fishes in the water fishes in the sea' means?