Talk:Brunswick Records

message: The infobox is for active record labels.  There is no question that Brunswick has a long history with varied musical genres.  But the current Brunswick Records is a soul music label.  Is the infobox intended for the current incarnation of Brunswick or the entire history of the label?  The catalogue of the current Brunswick is mainly soul music.  The pre-Jackie Wilson material is not part of the current Brunswick and the old stuff is owned by Universal Music Group and Sony BMG Music Entertainment.
: Well, I think as the article needs to cover both historic and current Bruswick activities, I suppose the infobox should as well. Perhaps a double listing saying something like "Historic:Various  Current:Soul" or something similar? -- Infrogmation 23:30, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genre 

message: The UK arm of Brunswick Records should really have its own section. I believe US and UK Brunswick had much the same catalogue and artist roster from the 1920s through to the 1940s, but they were quite separate labels from the 1950s until the late 60s/early 70s.
During that latter era, broadly speaking, US Brunswick (and Coral) releases were on the Coral label in the UK, whereas US Decca stuff came out on UK Brunswick.  That does make things a bit complicated when you consider the likes of Buddy Holly - the Buddy records released on Brunswick in the UK were not the ones that were issued on US Brunswick! 217.155.20.163 14:33, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: From an American perspective, the early records by "Buddy Holly" were on Decca at first, then Coral.  The early records by "The Crickets" with Buddy Holly were on Brunswick.  Decca decided to consolidate "Buddy Holly and the Crickets" to Coral. Steelbeard1 15:23, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  British Brunswick 

message: :Image:Reetpetite.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 13:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Added formal fair use rationale. Steelbeard1 (talk) 13:48, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Reetpetite.jpg

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Brunswick Records. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130307220936/http://www.brunswickrecords.com/store.htm to http://brunswickrecords.com/store.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130107221842/http://brunswickrecords.com/history5.htm to http://brunswickrecords.com/history5.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:52, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified