Talk:List of deaths in rock and roll

message: Any thoughts on putting the artist's age at death when the DOB is available? --Geneb1955Talk/CVU 03:23, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I support this. It's relevant to the topic and interesting to know. If we know how, where, and when the person died, we might as well put how old they were. - k|e|n|g - t | c - 19:15, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  age at death 

message: I don´t see Steve Clark (Def Leppard), Jeff Porcaro (Toto), Marvin Gaye and Frank Sinatra. And I don´t think Selena was a Rock and Roll artist. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aslavenas (talk • contribs) 03:11, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to add these yourself. Wikipedia is a joint effort between many people. — Kendra Michele — 20:49, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

text: Feel free to add them in. You don't need permission to add things to articles on Wikipedia. Just add it in, using the format used in the article. :-) — Kendra Michele — 14:06, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some missing 

message: seems to be in contradiction with what is found in the article about him on this site, where its says he died of cerebral hemoragia.
someone should check this out  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.83.183.116 (talk) 19:47, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ric Grech (Blind Faith) - Liver and Kidney failure, March 17, 1990 in Leicester, England 

message: I was going to turn this information into a comprehensive table. Does anyone oppose? - k|e|n|g - t | c - 14:34, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Completed. — Kendra Michele — 21:52, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table 

message: I would entirely understand, and support, a list of rock and roll musicians (and related people - songwriters, producers, etc.) who have died young, for whatever reason.  But rock and roll as a genre is now about 60 years old, and it's not surprising, or particularly interesting or notable, that many of its early practitioners, and a growing proportion of later musicians, have died.  There are other sites - notably The Dead Rock Stars Club - that provide much more comprehensive lists than we do here.  Should there be an age cut-off point for this article, so that we only list musicians who have died under the age of, say, 40, or 50?  Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:09, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I see what you are saying, but at the same time, I don't believe that the intention of this list was to only list musicians who have unfortunately passed away at a young age. If, for instance, Roger Waters of Pink Floyd passed away (as he inevitably will), I would want to see him on this list, regardless of his age. I've sometimes wondered the nobility of this article entirely, seeing as it began as a list of rock and roll deaths but has evolved into a list of musicians in general, but questioning who should be included based on just age doesn't seem right. Just my opinion, though. :-) — AngelCaboodle — 00:54, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Should we have List of deaths in jazz?  Or List of deaths in classical music?  Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:29, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't see why not. Both are notable in my opinion. :-) — AngelCaboodle — 21:47, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: this list is sick. Does it mean it is "rock and roll" (like 'cool' somehow) to die of "rock and roll" behaviour (like drug abuse) or is it "rock and roll" to commit suicide because of financial problems?. Pete Ham is not a Rock and roll musician.(E-Kartoffel (talk) 16:33, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I think most people would class him as a rock musician, but I share the underlying concern.  If this article is to continue, there needs to be some guidance about who it should cover, and why.  What is "encyclopedic" about this list?   If it were restricted to cover rock musicians who died at a relatively young age (which I assume was the original intention), it would be more defensible than the current ragbag.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:25, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The list could be changed to a list of musicians, regardless of genre. However, then we get into issues of notability... although, really, we're facing that issue with the list as it is. I don't really see the purpose of a list of deaths in rock and roll; there is no (non-original) research that draws conclusions from the information given. Although I've contributed a lot to this article (I converted the former bulleted lists into tables a few years ago), I don't really have an opinion of whether the article should even exist at all. — AngelCaboodle — 05:00, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I do find the list interesting and I'd be disappointed to lose it completely, but I think it should be trimmed, and criteria established.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:28, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

text: I think the limit should be rock and roll musicians who have notable deaths - where there's a reliable source focusing on the circumstances of the death itself rather than merely the fact a famous person died. Things like "complications following colon surgery age 89", "peacefully in his sleep", "after a fall in the nursing home" are what you'd see on line three of an obituary, whereas "shot himself", "drug overdose" or "died on stage" attract headlines of their own. All people die, even rock musicians. Not everyone dies notably, unusually, unexpectedly. This criteron would stop the list from slowly becoming identical to :Category:Rock musicians 193.9.13.138 (talk) 21:26, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with 193. This list should be restricted to notable, unusual deaths of notable rock and rollers. I've gotten rid of most (but not all) of those who don't have articles of their own or whose deaths are just mentioned in passing or not at all in their group's article. Many of these don't even have details about cause of death or references, just a date. For the moment, I've stopped from deleting more, but what is so unusual about people in their 50s, 60s or older dying of cancer, heart attack, or other mundane diseases (e.g. 74-year-old Big Joe Turner)? My hesitation stems from where to draw the line. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:19, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we start a new thread, below, to establish and agree these criteria?  I agree that the problem is where to draw the line.  There is another editor down below who argues that names should be excluded because they do not fit his definition of "rock and roll".  I disagree with some of them, so that's one arguable point - there are many many definitions of "rock and roll".  You suggest that there is nothing "unusual" about people dying in their 50s or 60s.  That worries me (!), but in any case the introduction to the article says nothing about deaths listed here being "unusual", and I would certainly argue that unexpected deaths - like that of Gene Pitney, to give one example - should be included.  Anyway, we need to establish what the criteria are - hopefully through consensus here, or with the involvement of other editors - and ensure that the article title and lead actually reflect the content of the article.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:35, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

text: The article has been semi-protected since 10 March, so that only registered and autoconfirmed editors can edit it, and editing has continued since then on that basis - but may need some updating.  That happened because of a series of problematic edits by an unregistered IP.   You could contact the administrator concerned, User:Drmies, on their talk page, to ask them to undo the protection.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:41, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you seeking to reopen the debate over criteria for inclusion, or simply to explain why the article is semi-protected?   Your personal opinions don't seem to justify continued protection of the article.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:45, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the point of this list? 

message: Again, we have an editor removing mention of non-performers from the list, without any explanation apart from WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT.  Other editors are welcome to pile in, advise, warn, revert and if necessary block - I'm going out to enjoy the rarity of a warm sunny day.  :-)  Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:44, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I`m sorry for deleting the non-performers and I`m sorry for bugging you about "best known songs." I won`t do it again.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by The235003 (talk • contribs) 01:02, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the apology, and thanks for adding in all the other musicians to the list as you've done over the last few hours.  I'm happy to leave it at that, and hope that you learn from the experience.  It would be really helpful if you could add references to the information you've added - see WP:CITE.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:03, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-performers 

message: Rock N Roll is a specific genre. I understand the inclusion of artists that while during their career crossed over from other styles into rock n roll. But artists that were specific to a genre outside of rock n roll should not be on the list. If you feel the need to just make it a list of dead musicians the name of the article should be changed. Otherwise once you include such artists and you defend the inclusion of such artists from outside the genre, then you must include all from outside the genre. Which means we must then add Mozart, Beethoven, Pavarotti, Hal Hasting, Zinka Milanov, and Leen 't Hart  and so on and so on from all different styles. Swampfire (talk) 13:36, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: This has been the subject of past discussions.  In many ways I agree with you - the list is bloated with the names of people with limited connections with rock and roll - or rock music (and whether or not you think the two are synonymous is a separate discussion) - and, given the length of time that the music has existed, it includes many unexceptional deaths.  The article would in my view be more interesting and useful if it focused on extraordinary, rather than ordinary, deaths.  The question of whether Hank Williams and Patsy Cline should be included is a small part of that wider question.  Without the slightest scintilla of doubt, Hank Williams was highly influential on rock and roll music - just as influential if not more influential than, say, Muddy Waters or (to quote a recent example also included) Pete Seeger.  If you listen to, say, "Move It On Over", a strong case can be made for Williams performing something very close to rock and roll.  Similarly, Patsy Cline has been highly influential on many singers whose music is considered to be "rock".   Another approach is to note that both Cline and Williams are listed in sources like Talevski's Rock Obituaries - here and here - and in the generally respected Dead Rock Stars site (my emphasis both times) here and here.  If the argument is that the introduction to this article fails to reflect adequately the article contents, I agree.  If the argument is that it includes many ordinary deaths and some only tangentially related to rock and roll, I agree.  Correcting either or both of those would in my view be a substantial improvement - though the second option has been and probably would remain opposed by many other editors.  But removing two names because you personally consider them to be "outside the genre" is unacceptable.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:23, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Being influential to rock n roll doesn't make you rock n roll, any more than Michael Jordan as a basketball player being influential to football/soccer players suddenly qualifies Jordan to be included on football/soccer lists. This is a specific genre. As I stated if you feel the need to add them back (unjustly) then I guess I'll start adding every dead musician to the list no matter the genre they come from. Adding names to the list because you personally deem them influential is unacceptable. Especially since the genre is clearly defined as rock n roll. So as I state it is what you are doing by adding them, is what is unacceptable. You need to create a county list, (and when you do add Freddie Mercury and John Lennon to it) and see what happens.Swampfire (talk) 01:04, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

text: now that I have found this list I will be continually monitoring it to remove such non-rock n roll artists. BTW if someone were to included such country artists as Kenny Rogers, Charlie Daniels after they die. It would be totally acceptable because they have crossed over as artists into the genre, But neither Williams or Cline ever did so. So as you can see I have no problem including country acts that actually contributed to Rock n Roll in their lifetime as an artist, my problem is including those that never did so, simply because they were well known. Beethoven, Bach and Mozart influenced a lot of rock artists should they be included as well?Swampfire (talk) 01:07, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: But hey feel free to produce any citable references of Williams or Cline releasing/producing/writing anything to be specifically released as rock n roll during their lifetime. If you find it then I'll agree they belong, otherwise simply adding them because you want them here in unacceptable.Swampfire (talk) 01:59, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: You seem to be under the false impression that this is simply an argument between you and me.  It isn't.  It's an argument between you, acting unilaterally based on your own opinions, and all the other editors who have contributed to the list.  You also seem to be under the false impression that there are no questions about how the term "rock and roll" is defined.  Anyone who knows anything about rock and roll and rock music knows that that is utter nonsense - it is impossible to come up with definitions of the terms that everyone agrees.  "I will be continually monitoring it to remove such non-rock n roll artists".  That is, frankly, an unbelievably and unacceptably arrogant attitude for an experienced editor to take.    What reputable sources have you got that say that Kenny Rogers or Charlie Daniels count as rock and roll for the purposes of this article, but Patsy Cline doesn't?  None.  It's your opinion.  This article is not based on one editor's opinion on what should be included.  It is based on the collective inputs of many editors - not all of whom I agree with.  There is massive scope for the article to be improved - but through collective discussion and agreement, not through unilateral decision making.  Sadly, the issue here is simply that your behaviour is unacceptable.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:32, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

text: Which is why to be included you should simply fall to Wikipedia standards. Which means using a verifiable citable reference that during their lifetime, they were in rock n roll or intentionally crossed over into it. Not simply saying someone in rock n roll says they were an influence to them, or that someone after they died took their work and transformed it into a rock n roll recording. It should be based on the intent of the artist themself during their lifetime. Swampfire (talk) 18:52, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Second if you noticed, I haven't added Kenny Rogers or Charlie Daniels(but then again they aren't dead). I merely stated they belonged on the list long before the others. For simply reasons in the 1980's Kenny rogers intentionally released songs onto rock radio satations, And I shouldn't have to explain Charlie Daniels but I guess since you don't know the CDB was actually a Southern Rock band in the 70's and their records were released to rock radio not country. But at the end of the 70's as southern rock was dying they changed into recording country music. Heck even Garth Brooks intentionally cross over into rock radio when he released his Chris Gaines album. But as I stated I won't be adding them when they die. Also Beethoven influenced tons of rock musicians. He will never belong on the list simply because of that.Swampfire (talk) 19:02, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Also you say this is not simply a discussion between me and you. But I tried and I can't find any such discussion on this page, and I sure don't see an archived version. Also I am not acting unilaterally, I simply stated if you feel the need to try and add them feel free as long as you back it up with verifiable citable references of their foray into rock n roll during their lifetime.Swampfire (talk) 19:06, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: We also need to create some criteria for the fact of even if you are in the RnR industry. What it takes to make the list. Should they be notable in the industry? Or can someone include their cousin Freddy simply because he was in a local RnR band? For starters I think if the person doesn't have a Wikipedia page they shouldn't be on the list.Swampfire (talk) 19:22, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

text: I'd be happy to remove those who don't have any article at all.  And here's another criterion - we should only include musicians who are included in both Talevski's Rock Obituaries and the  Dead Rock Stars site.  Surprise surprise, both Williams and Cline are in both.  Trying to police this article by trying to decide who is "rock'n'roll enough" to be included is an endeavour doomed to disaster.  For example - would you include Miles Davis?   Or Marvin Gaye?  Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:36, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Wrong those are both personal lists, with no real criteria on who is includedSwampfire (talk) 19:46, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Also there is a big difference in who is rock n roll enough, and who isn't rock n roll at all. For instance Francis Scott Key is not suddenly rock n roll because Jimi Hendrix decided to record the star spangled banner.Swampfire (talk) 19:48, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

text: Set out your criteria.  Those sources, by the way, are both regarded as reliable, and are both directly relevant to the content of this article.  There is a strong argument that says that only those deaths which are listed in books of rock deaths (or reliable sites) should be listed in an article on rock deaths.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:50, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: By that standard then this list needs to be deleted as it serves no purposeSwampfire (talk) 19:55, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

text: Umm... no, it needs good criteria, as I have said many times.  What are your criteria?  Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:58, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Also the talevski book states it is not simply for the rock genre, and the dead rock star sites states the same thing. And since Wikpedia not simply about copying readily available lists. It needs defining criteria for inclusion. The first and foremost thing should be the intent of the person. Did they intend to be rock n roll or crossover into it? Second should be were they notable in the industry and on what level. Third is the list simply about people that were RnR that are now dead(even if it's just because they got old and died) Forth their actual contribution to the genre(not influence to people within the genre)Swampfire (talk) 20:04, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure more criteria can be thought of, but simply influencing someone should never be on it.Swampfire (talk) 20:06, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

text: Sorry, but your suggestions are - apart from the one about basic notability, with which I agree - worthless and unworkable, because they are based on personal opinion.  How do you judge "the intent of the person"?  You seem to think that the answers to some of these questions are obvious.  They are not.  Again - would you include Miles Davis, or Marvin Gaye, or Bob Marley?  Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:40, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry but you suggestion of including people because they influenced someone(but weren't actually in the genre) is worthless and unworkable. Also the intent is into based on my personal opinion. It is based on the artists work itself. You can tell their intent by what genre they released their material within, during their lifetime. And basing what you deem to be people on them influencing someone in a completely separate genre is a personal opinion. As I have stated feel free to provide verifiable citable references of them actually releasing material within the genre and then they will belong.Swampfire (talk) 22:15, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: If a list was created named ""List of deaths in Heavy Metal"" George Harrison and John Lennon would NOT belong on the list, even though Ozzy Osbourne cites the Beatles as his greatest influence into becoming a music artist.Swampfire (talk) 22:18, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Also if a list was create named ""List of deaths in country music"" John Bonham would not belong on the list simply because the influenced some country drummers.Swampfire (talk) 22:20, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

text: (e/c) Rather than reverting me and returning to a preposterous wording - how can you know people's intentions in that way? - please continue the discussion here.  Apart from agreeing that entries without articles should be removed, nothing that you have suggested makes any sense.  We should base the article on what sources say - rather on what you believe to be the case.  I have suggested two sources - both with the word Rock in the title - that could form a basis for this article.  And you still haven't answered my question.  I'll ask it more generally.  Where do you draw the line as to what is, or isn't, rock and roll - and, arising from that, what sources do you have to back up your definition?  Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:21, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

text: And, of course, "the term "rock and roll" now has at least two different meanings, both in common usage: referring to the first wave of music that originated in the US in the 1950s and would later develop into the more encompassing international style known as "rock music", and as a term simply synonymous with the rock music and culture in the broad sense."  Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:24, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: You have not suggested 2 sources on what musical genre an artist belonged too. What you suggested was 2 separate peoples list of dead people in the music world, and they just happen to use ROCK in the name of their book and website. The book itself says it includes more than just people in rock, and the website actually says it includes country artists on his list. I can create my own list on my own website too and name it deadrockstarroyalty.com and included every one ever in music. That doesn't make them rock n roll simply because I put ROCK in my title. Bottom line you have NO verifiable citable references to them being in the genre. And as I have repeatedly stated both lists you stated are not list of only people in rock n roll and their list state that. You keep trying to quote a list that in themselves use NO verifiable citable references to the people on their list being in rock n roll. It's simple feel free to find verifiable citable references to them being in the genre. What you are wanting to do is make this into a ""list of deaths in music"" which it is not. Whats next, are you going to go to the ""List of female rock singers"" and include Robert Plant because he was an influence? And if you think that sounds silly, that basically the same thing you are wanting to do here.Swampfire (talk) 22:41, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

text: You have given no indication of what "in the genre" means to you.  You seem to think it's obvious, and can't be disputed.  It is not.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:18, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Genre

message: :Agree with caveats:  There may be exceptions - for example, several members of a notable group (like The Bar-Kays) dying in the same incident.  And, I can think of deaths of individuals lacking articles that I would be reluctant to exclude (Mary Ann Ganser of the Shangri-Las, Arlester Christian of Dyke & The Blazers, Malcolm Owen of The Ruts, etc.).  Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:06, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with exceptions allowed. If the unarticled person's death is discussed in some length in their group's article (i.e. had a significant impact on the group), I feel they should be included. However, if they died long time after they left, then no. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:12, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

text: Agree (no caveats) I think if you feel an artist without a page should be included. Then a page for that artists should be created first, Then they should be added to the list.Swampfire (talk) 16:22, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Only notable individuals with their own pages should be included

message: :Comment:  There may be disagreement over what is "age-related" - does an unexpected death by a heart attack at age 66 count?  It might be best, and certainly clearer, if we specify an age limit - for example, only deaths of those under 70, or 60, or 50. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:06, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with the age-related criterion, but I don't think you can choose an arbitrary sharp age cutoff. Also, most fatal heart attacks are unexpected. One in your 20s, 30s, maybe even 40s is notable/shocking, not so much when you're 66. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:12, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

text: Disgree (with caveat) I think if we use the (non-age related thing) we need to then define what that means. I mean say if someone dies of cancer at 23, and someone dies of the same cancer at 86. Are neither age related, or are they both age related.Swampfire (talk) 16:37, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Only deaths which are unexpected (not age-related) should be included

message: :Comment:  As suggested here, but not pursued.  May be relatively easy to define.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:43, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: ...although "natural" deaths as a result of substance abuse (heart attacks, liver disease, etc.) fall into a grey area.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:10, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

text: Mostly agree, with the exception of highly unusual natural deaths at an early age, e.g. Stuart Sutcliffe. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:12, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

text: Disagree Unless the name of the page is changed to reflect the distinction. I think eliminating all the people that never actually performed as a rock n roll artist and such will be sufficient.Swampfire (talk) 16:32, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Only "unnatural" deaths should be included

message: :Comment:  Only performers?  What about producers, etc.?  And, there are myriad difficulties in defining what is "rock and roll".  Should Hank Williams - a formative influence on rock and roll - be included?  What about Bob Marley, or Marvin Gaye, or Patsy Cline, or Miles Davis?  Do any, or all, of those count as "rock and roll"?  I would support an inclusive approach, rather than attempting to pigeonhole creative artists into a tightly defined genre.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:06, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Disagree (sort of). As long as this list has this title, anybody closely associated should be included. However, I don't like adding people who are influences. That's going a bit too far, IMO. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:12, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

text: Disagree(with caveat) I don't think it should be just performers(because of the name of the page) But I do think it should be only people of notable careers in the development of the artists career. Such as producers, and songwriters and such. I don't think it should included people that are simply a ceo of a label, or roadies. As far as performers I think it should be defined as "clearly rock n roll" it's really very easy to find a verifiable citable reference to an artist releasing material for rock/pop listeners if you look.  Swampfire (talk) 16:29, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Only deaths of those who performed what is clearly "rock and roll" should be included

message: ::As I stated far earlier on this page, I am not certain that this list is 'needed' at all.  Certainly the current name for the article is unhelpful, as there are people listed who do not fall in the rock and roll genre.  In fact, to use the relatively narrow definition of the terminology, very few of those named here were true rock and roll performers.  Age limits, and causes of death limitations, probably create  more problems than it solves.  I suspect the original intention was to list those such as Buddy Holly, but it has thereafter grown like topsy.
::Frankly, I suspect consensus will be very difficult to achieve, and awkward to police as time passes.  Negative thoughts I know, but I am not very enthusiastic about this list.
::Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:04, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to propose it for deletion, of course... but a consensus there would be even more difficult to achieve.  So, if it stays, we need clear criteria that will allow it to become more useful as an encyclopedia article.  By the way, an early version of the article looked like this - so, quite wide-ranging even then.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:35, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with Derek, especially if this list is simply to copy and paste people from other lists.Swampfire (talk) 16:52, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: My thoughts

message: I think the name rock and roll has changed so much. For many, it's a genre associated with the 1950s and 1960s, for others, it goes further to the 1970s and 1980s in terms of hard rock music, and for some, it's a blanket name for all of these genres that have emerged since the first generation rock and roll emerged in the mid-1950s, which can explain why Marvin, Patsy and them are included. I'll add more but these are my initial thoughts after seeing this. BrothaTimothy (talk · contribs) 17:21, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  Patsy Cline and Hank Williams were removed here - I've tried reinstating them, but that has so far not been accepted - see the thread above this one.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:26, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I am fine with the criteria, except the limitation to the narrow definition of rock and roll. I think at least a definition that includes rock works better.--SabreBD (talk) 20:19, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

text: Sorry, I shouldn't edit when I'm this tired. I will try to take a detailed look tomorrow.--SabreBD (talk) 20:31, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems as though the excuse for including Patsy and Hank are because they were included on 2 people private lists, One in a book(that clearly states the book includes people not in rock) and the other a website(which on the website that person states they include country artists) Artists such as Patsy and Hank devoted their entire career to country music and never tried crossing over into rock n roll of the time. Such artists should not be included. As I stated before Ghmyrtle wants to include them based on them being an influence to some people in the Rock n Roll world. If you then open this list up to those standards then this list is useless. Muchless it seems as though he just wants the page to copy and paste the people from those lists making this page entirely unnecessary. As I haver continually stated to him. PLEASE use a verifiable citable reference to them actually releasing material for rock n roll, and then they should be included. but if he can't find such reference it is because they don't exist. Because those artists were exclusively country. This page is about Rock n Roll and not about simply famous people in all genres and should be treated with that respect.Swampfire (talk) 16:10, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: If you read above to a discussion I have already had with Ghmyrtle what he is basically wanting is no different than adding Beethoven to this list because he was an influence as well. I don not think the list should be narrowly defined. I do think it should partially be based on whether they actually played rock n roll, produced rock n roll records, wrote rock n roll songs (during their lifetime). To me it is actually disrespecting Hank and Patsy's career to try and include them on a list of a genre that they stayed away from musically. I feel as though Ghmyrtle should actually create a new list for those artists, or the name of this page should be changed.Swampfire (talk) 16:17, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Nonsense.  I do not want to include Beethoven - I want to apply criteria.  It's no use saying that they should be "rock n roll" people if you do not explain how you define the term.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:08, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: You want to include people simply because they were an influence, so by that standard you want to include BeethovenSwampfire (talk) 18:30, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: What I believe

message: If List of unusual deaths is anything to go by, we can look forward to at least 10 RfDs. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:21, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That's one of the sources I've proposed using as a basic source, but it's been suggested that some of its entries should not count as "rock" (with or without the "roll").  Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:38, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Kind of surprising, given the title of the book. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:46, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

text: I see we don't (yet) have List of deaths in jazz, but I'm already proposing (and predicting) Blood, Chet and Tears. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:00, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The only thing truly ROCK about that book is the title. It cleary states genres from outside Rock n Roll were used in making the list. Also that book is simply one persons list that he released as a book, and as far as a verifiable citable reference goes, that book is simply a reference to the death, Without the book itself citing references to how the person was Rock N Roll. The only real qualification to be in his book, was that you actually be dead.Swampfire (talk) 17:05, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Haha, well even that's not always certain with some rock stars. But I getting a distinct feeling of deja entendu from your comment there. In fact, I'm half expecting The Gloom Father to re-appear from the abyss any time now... demanding at least three authoritative sources for any entry Martinevans123 (talk) 17:19, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

text: The simplest solution may just be to change the name of the page.Swampfire (talk) 17:15, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:19, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: To what?  Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:42, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

text:  "List of tragic deaths in the music industry" That way all genres can be included, and yet we remove such things as old age(yet things like cancer could still be included)Swampfire (talk) 17:46, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Most deaths are "tragic" to someone.  And, as Martin suggests, we would need authoritative sources describing them as "tragic".   Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:48, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The same can be said for the use of the word "unnatural"Swampfire (talk) 17:57, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Not true - deaths are either due to "natural causes" or not.  But any criterion for deciding which deaths should be included will cause some deaths to be left out.  You either include all deaths, or only those below a certain age - or you only include "notable" deaths, as now, while recognising that leaves great flexibility over interpretation.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:06, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It shouldn't be simply about age. If Tony Bennett or BB King dropped dead suddenly right now. It would be a tragedy despite their age. Also I am not speaking of the tragedy that it is to someone that knows them. I am speaking of the sudden tragedy to the industry and fans. Also what if someone lets say 23 drops dead of a massive heartattack while on stage playing a show, by the term "unnatural" they shouldn't be included.Swampfire (talk) 18:25, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Tragic? Well, kinda. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:57, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

text: Whatever it could become, could include ALL genres, while at the same time remove those that died simply because of old-age, of those retired from the industry.Swampfire (talk) 17:59, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Basically should be about those still actively in the industry, and the death was unexpectedly short (like cancer or illness of less than a year)Swampfire (talk) 18:01, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: .. could we have Bizarre deaths in zydeco, perhaps? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:03, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Oh, the fun...

message: Then why are people like Wes Montgomery, Miles Davis, and Chet Baker on this list?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.206.183.3 (talk) 09:14, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Rock and Roll" ?? 

message: One reference to another Wiki article, most deaths completely unsourced. How does this article survive? Left like this nothing is verified and entries could just be completely wrong? Entries either need verifying or deleting.--Egghead06 (talk) 06:56, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite right. The tables need an extra column adding for "Source(s)". Martinevans123 (talk) 19:58, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: How does this article survive given it is completely unsourced

message: From Obituary and Gorgoroth.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrs. Jan Cola (talk • contribs) 01:47, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: . Now added, thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:35, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Frank Watkins (musician)|Frank Watkins]] 

message: So, I'm curious what artists, and genres don't belong on this list. Does the article on the person have to say 'rock and roll' in order for them to be relevant? Or how does it work? 2602:304:CDC0:D470:C07B:65AE:97D4:9298 (talk) 19:09, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: You are persisting in making changes to the list without explanation.  Your editing is disruptive.  Use edit summaries, and explain here what you are trying to achieve.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:58, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

text: How about commenting in the ongoing discussion two threads above? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:12, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

text: The problem is not only that there is no consensus over who should be included in a "deaths in rock and roll" list, there is no consensus over what to do about it, and - apparently - an unwillingness among some of those who seem to hold strong views on the matter to communicate on this page.  Some editors seem to think that it's "obvious" who should be covered, or not covered, when that is clearly not the case.  As I've said before, there is a need for editors to communicate with each other on this page, with a view to achieving a consensus on the criteria that should be used to decide inclusion.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:57, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: From what I can see I'm the only one who has expressed a clear opinion, and suggested criteria to go by when adding content, so until others make their views clear, and/or suggest alternate criteria for inclusion, I see no need to add anything... Thomas.W  talk 16:44, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Yesterday I asked "So could we use those genres that are used in the info box and/or opening section for each artist?" I can re-write that as my clear opinion if required. You seemed to agree with that. Ghmyrtle suggested also including (any others) who have been inductees to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:02, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

text: .  So, you suggest that "if their genre isn't listed as "rock and roll"" they shouldn't be included.  Is that right?  As well as contravening WP:CIRCULAR, that would exclude many, if not most, on the current list.  We should, at the very least, seek to base any criteria on reliable sources independent of Wikipedia - or, go back to the previous approach of taking a liberal view towards inclusion.   As a matter of interest, what would your view be if the article was moved to "List of deaths in rock music".  Would your opinion be identical, or different?   Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:06, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: {Currently the article uses no sources independently to establish any links to "rock and roll". I had been assuming that any genre used from an article would itself be supported by reliable sources at that article. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:11, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Sourcing is clearly a major issue with this article.  But, what precisely should sourcing cover?  For instance. should we be looking for specific mentions of the term "rock and roll" in articles about them, or would the word "rock" be sufficient?  Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:29, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

text:  I have expressed my opinion, and proposed criteria for inclusion. If there's a consensus for different criteria, or a move in order to widen the scope of the list, I will of course abide by that decision, but I see no reason to change my stated opinion. Thomas.W  talk 17:18, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: .  I am trying to clarify what your opinion is.  So, you suggest excluding those who do not list "rock and roll" in their infobox - like, for example, Frank Watkins, whose article refers to heavy metal, death metal, and black metal, but not "rock and roll".  Is that right?   Sorry - the answer may be obvious to you, but it is not obvious to everyone else.   Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:24, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that is what I'm suggesting, as I already told you on my talk page. Let people slug it out on the artists' own talk pages, and decide their genres there, where editors interested in the artists can see the discussion, and take part in it, and not here. Thomas.W  talk 17:34, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Thomas, just to be clear, you're saying Frank Watkins should not be here as there is no "rock and roll" genre at his article? Martinevans123 (talk) 17:51, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: If rock and roll isn't listed as a genre, then yes. But that's no comment on whether his genre was r&r or not, that has to be decided on Frank Watkins, not here. Thomas.W  talk 18:30, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I fully agree with where a decision on his genre should be made. I added Watkins as I believed that the article, as it stands, allows for artists of all types of rock genres, not just rock and roll. Do you think this is what the article should be ( - and this should involve a name change)? Or do you think we should restrict it to rock and roll performers. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:40, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I would support a move to List of deaths in rock music if someone proposed such a move, but with the current name/scope of the article Watkins doesn't belong here. Thomas.W  talk 18:47, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's see what Ghmyrtle suggests. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:01, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

text: I'd be happy to see an explanation at the start of the article - that might even avoid a rename that way. And I agree RnRHoF inductees should be allowed. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:29, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: If Hall of Fame inductees are included, it seems to me only right that notable musicians who performed within the same genres as those Hall of Fame musicians should be included.  So, not only Johnny Cash but also Patsy Cline.  Not only Marvin Gaye but also Frank Reed.... etc.  That would take us back to the default position that prevailed here before the recent removals of names.  What would need to be done, in that case, is a clear explanation in the lead, that those musicians included are those who are notable within the wider cultural definition of "rock and roll" (that is, not the 1950s genre of r&r), which is defined in broad terms as coterminous with the definition used by the Hall of Fame.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:41, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: A step too far for me, I'm afraid. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:44, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: There seems little value, to me, in having a list of dead R&R Hall of Fame inductees, plus people whose infoboxes contain the words "rock and roll".  Apples and pears.   Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:48, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Sour grapes, more like. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:58, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

text: Marvin, but not Tammi?  Not Johnny Burnette?   Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:18, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Rockabilly fine by me. But not Tammy no, sorry. Or did some rock rub off from Marvin? Martinevans123 (talk) 09:24, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hmmm.....   Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:37, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: We'll have none of your hand-picked obscure vintage sources here, Gmh, just to prove a point! Martinevans123 (talk) 10:15, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: But, Nimrat, it shows that contemporary independent sources saw her as a rock and roll performer - and that fact is important.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:21, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, if that's the only source that has ever said Tammy was a rock and roll artist, I'm not sure it is "an important fact". Martinevans123 (talk) 14:40, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It simply goes back to the question of whose definition of "rock and roll" (or "rock", for that matter) we use - and, like everything else here, it should be based on what independent outside sources say, not what editors believe to be the case.  Mhg = Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:59, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Will you adding "rock and roll" as a genre in the infobox for Tammy, based on that source? Nitram = Martinevans123 (talk) 17:19, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: No, because that's not a genre she performed in.  As I said, there is a difference between rock and roll as a genre - the music played by Chuck Berry, Elvis Presley, etc. - and rock and roll as an overarching label for the popular music of the late 20th and early 21st century - which is the music recognised by the Hall of Fame and the published lists I've mentioned.  It is the latter meaning of rock and roll that this list has always covered.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:08, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The source you provided (Jet Magazine, 8 Feb 1968, Vol. 33, No. 18) describes her as "rock 'n' roll singer Tammi Terrell"? The article Rock and roll describes it as "a genre of popular music"? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:31, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I would suggest they are using different definitions of the phrase "rock and roll".  But, if someone wants to add "rock and roll" to her infobox, with that article as a source, I wouldn't stand in their way.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:37, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems it would not affect anything here. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:40, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

text:  (@Ghmyrtle) ??? You'll need a clear consensus for that, because it's way outside the intended scope of this list, judging by the title of it (it's List of deaths in rock and roll, not List of dead musicians of all kinds). Thomas.W  talk 21:49, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not proposing anything different to the position held in this article until a month or two ago - and I'm not proposing anything different to the criteria adopted by the Hall of Fame.  I don't see any evidence that you have accepted the fact that "rock and roll" has more than one definition.  You seem to be insisting on using one (tight) definition - other definitions are widely used.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:53, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

text:  For anyone interested in this discussion - "Each year, with the announcement of the next class of nominees for induction into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, a debate swirls as to what music is considered "rock and roll." The announcement of the 2014 Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Nominees – the Paul Butterfield Blues Band, Chic, Deep Purple, Peter Gabriel, Hall and Oates, Kiss, LL Cool J, the Meters, Nirvana, N.W.A., the Replacements, Linda Ronstadt, Cat Stevens, Link Wray, Yes and the Zombies – brought with it passionate discussions as to not only who should be inducted, but also how the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum and people all over the world interpret and define rock and roll......Over the past five decades-plus, rock and roll has evolved in many directions. Numerous styles of music – from soul to hip-hop, from heavy metal to punk, from progressive rock to electronic – have fallen under the rock and roll umbrella.  The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame recognizes these different types of music and looks forward to seeing how rock and roll will continue to reinvent itself in the future...."    Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:21, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The passionate discussions belong there. We can just use the outcome as a clear criterion here. It might be inaccurate criterion, but at least it's a clear one. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:26, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure what you're saying.  Only Hall of Fame inductees??   This list with a deaths column??   Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:28, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I'm saying anybody with a "rock" genre label, plus any in that list who's dead. Goodness me, we'll be booting out Ian Fraser Kilmister next! Martinevans123 (talk) 22:33, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Presumably, "rock" would encompass any of its offshoot genres - as at List of rock genres, for example?   Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:42, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it would have to. Especially Taqwacore, of course. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:47, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I can see some merit in that - especially if it serves to reduce the genre edit-warring here - but am still not convinced it would be workable.  WP:CIRCULAR - I don't think we should be using WP lists as criteria for inclusion in a different WP article.  I would still prefer to use reliable outside sources.  As I said previously, both this book and this list could provide an external basis for inclusion (though inevitably there would be discussions over the reliability of each of them).  Both take a generous view of who should be included (as does the Hall of Fame, despite its egregious exclusion of Chic).  By the way, I have no problem with renaming this article, or with setting out inclusion criteria clearly at the start of the article.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:30, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: So, to sum up so far: 1. We can rename the article ("List of deaths in rock music"?) 2. We can define terms and criteria for inclusion at the top of the article. 3. We can't use artists' Wiki articles, or any Wiki lists, as sources, since "Wikipedia is not a WP:RS". 4. We can't use RnR HoF induction as a source as that's incomplete and/or controversial. 5. We can use the thedeadrockstarsclub.com list as a source. 6. We can use the Nick Talevski book as a source. Everyone agreed? Any other sources? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:40, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with all that, except 4.  We can use the Hall of Fame as a source, even if it's incomplete - in fact, it's the most reliable source that exists which uses the performance of "rock and roll" - in one sense, not every sense - as a criterion for inclusion.  It's far more reliable than any editor asserting "but X did not perform rock and roll".   Whether or not the article should be moved to another name will need to go through the requested move process, as it's potentially contentious.    Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:33, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, so we have those three sources. Do we need more? What's the best way to get consesnsus here. Other editors have been rather quiet of late. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:39, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

text: Looks ok. I see you have put "such sources as", Are we (allowed) to prescribe sources? There has been interminable grief over at List of unusual deaths about what constitutes a suitable source. Is any WP:RS to be allowed here? Should sources supporting inclusion in the "rock" genre always added to each entry in the table? Do we need to link to some definition of recognised "genres of rock"? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:08, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think we should be too prescriptive.  Reliable sources should be provided that justify inclusion, particularly where inclusion is contentious.  Of course, this doesn't address the question (not discussed this time round, but in the past) of whether all "rock" deaths should be included, or just unusual / unnatural / unexpected deaths.  Perhaps that's for another time - or would it help to try to cover it in any changes now?   Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:13, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe we need to open an WP:RfC just on what has been proposed so far. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably a good idea.  I'd still like to hear other editors' comments before doing that - as you say, some editors have been quiet despite, from their edits, appearing to have strong views on the matter.  I'd be happy to let things rest for a day or two, to see if others come forward.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:54, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite agree. Satan Vermin 321 (talk) 21:02, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non rock and roll artists 

message: So, twenty minutes after the article protection was lifted, the unexplained IP edits started again.  They are not vandalism as such - that would be easy to deal with - but some are inaccurate, and many if not most are unnecessary.  None of them have edit summaries or any explanation.  Some seem to geolocate to Lyndon Township, Michigan.   Given that we are still (I think) waiting for a decision on how best to proceed with this article (though if two of us count as a "consensus" I'm happy to proceed on the basis I suggested in the thread above) - do we need to protect this article for a longer period against edits by unregistered editors?    Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:22, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: What this article needs more than anything is cites.  As long as it remains an unsourced list it is pretty much free game for anyone adding anything they like. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 14:40, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protection 

message: Please change the cause of death of Josefin Nilsson from "Tuberculosis" to "Unkown". It is not known what she died of.
See this recent article as a reference (Google translated from Swedish to Englist): 
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=sv&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.expressen.se%2Fnoje%2Fmarie-nilsson-lind-bryter-nu-tystnaden%2F&edit-text=
Fivbu (talk) 21:38, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Done —Skyllfully (talk | contribs) 19:25, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 17 March 2016 - Wrong cause of death 

message: He recently died.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrs. Jan Cola (talk • contribs) 01:44, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Deaths in rock and roll.....??  Seems marginal, at best.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:35, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add Frank Sinatra, Jr. 

message: Add Nick Drake ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Drake
Nealmabrey (talk) 02:39, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. EvergreenFir (talk) Please  04:23, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  - somewhat belatedly - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 21:47, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 4 April 2016 

message: Randy Lamar Howard - passed away on June 9 th, 2015 - cause was Bounty Hunter shot him to death. Randy Howard was an Outlaw Country Musician. You can look it up on yahoo news...please include him.
172.79.138.193 (talk) 06:24, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 10 April 2016 

message: Randy California died January 2,1997. Molokai,Hawaii.  Drowned rescuing son from a rip current. Multiple sources including Wikipedia
Chipkruncher (talk) 01:54, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you please provide those sources? Thanks, GABHello! 01:55, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Perfectly eligible for inclusion - .  I think he was excluded in some editor's half-baked blitz on the article some time ago, for unknown reasons.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:44, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

text: - belatedly.   Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:36, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 16 April 2016 

message: Please note the death of Dennis Davis, drummer with David Bowie between 1975 and 1980. The man already has his own wikipedia entry. He died April 6th, 2016
2003:5B:472C:4E00:A1A5:31BD:C286:F66E (talk) 07:11, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Onel5969 TT me 00:26, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death of Dennis Davis 

message: I understand blues and rock are interrelated. I understand some classic country can be considered old Rock & Roll.
I DO NOT understand how Rap and Hip Hop, in any way, can be considered Rock or Rock & Roll.
...Referencing the addition of Eazy E, Tupac Shakur, & The Notorious B.I.G.
I do like some old school hip hop, but I can't hear ANY rock or rock & roll in their music...except what they sampled/copied/ripped/stole.
2601:481:8503:AA40:6802:A5E3:2015:1C64 (talk) 01:15, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: "Rock and roll" is an extremely fluid term, and some definitions include rap and hip-hop.   The general approach taken in this article is to be inclusive, rather than exclusive.   Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:47, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hip Hop & Rap in Rock & Roll? 

message: Can I respectfully ask that the editors (apparently based in Seattle and in Virginia) who have recently made a large number of constructive edits to this article please consider the arguments set out in WP:REGISTER.  It would make the process of communication over article content much easier if they were to register, and perhaps avert the possibility of them being excluded from editing if the article were to be protected from IP editing for any reason.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:45, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anonymous editing 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 15 external links on List of deaths in rock and roll. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/music_blog/2011/07/amy-winehouse-found-dead-in-her-london-home.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14272032
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://web.archive.org/web/20130607053904/http%3A//www.bubblews.com%3A80/news/209865-fabio-frittelli-was-found-dead
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130226234528/http://bigstory.ap.org/article/damon-harris-former-temptations-member-dies to http://bigstory.ap.org/article/damon-harris-former-temptations-member-dies
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.spin.com/articles/phil-buerstatte-white-zombie-drummer-has-died/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140409002746/http://www.acousticguitar.com/News/Bluegrass-Guitarist-George-Shuffler-1925-2014 to http://www.acousticguitar.com/News/Bluegrass-guitarist-George-Shuffler-1925-2014
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140905191725/http://orleanscountyrecord.com/main.asp?SectionID=4&SubSectionID=36&ArticleID=60633 to http://orleanscountyrecord.com/main.asp?SectionID=4&SubSectionID=36&ArticleID=60633
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150916203741/http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/damned-bassist-bryn-merrick-dies-10041318 to http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/damned-bassist-bryn-merrick-dies-10041318
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150925001147/http://www.scrippsmedia.com/newschannel5/news/Ben-Cauley-Bar-Kays-Founder-Dies-At-67-328627521.html to http://www.scrippsmedia.com/newschannel5/news/Ben-Cauley-Bar-Kays-Founder-Dies-At-67-328627521.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160207103037/http://www.wral.com/wife-says-singer-and-band-leader-dan-hicks-dies-at-age-74/15330491/ to http://www.wral.com/wife-says-singer-and-band-leader-dan-hicks-dies-at-age-74/15330491/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160307023858/http://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/gayle-mccormick-lead-singer-of-the-band-smith-dies-at-67/ar-BBqm0CG?ocid=spartandhp to http://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/gayle-mccormick-lead-singer-of-the-band-smith-dies-at-67/ar-BBqm0CG?ocid=spartandhp
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://web.archive.org/web/20161212041646/http%3A//philnews.ph/2016/11/21/singer-comedian-blakdyak-found-dead-inside-house/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.wcvb.com/article/guitarist-known-as-j-geils-found-dead-in-massachusetts-home/9263211
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/entertainment/j-geils-founder-john-warren-geils-jr-1.4066828
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/11/arts/music/j-geils-whose-bands-catchy-pop-hits-colored-the-1980s-dies-at-71.html
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) 22:32, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on List of deaths in rock and roll. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.bubblews.com/news/209865-fabio-frittelli-was-found-dead
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141016145648/http://www.periodicodigital.mx/2014/10/14/fallece-tecladista-de-jack-white-en-hotel-camino-real-de-puebla/ to http://www.periodicodigital.mx/2014/10/14/fallece-tecladista-de-jack-white-en-hotel-camino-real-de-puebla/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141202215643/http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/dec/02/stones-saxophonist-bobby-keys-obituary/ to http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/dec/02/stones-saxophonist-bobby-keys-obituary
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) 05:19, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on List of deaths in rock and roll. 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://archive.is/20130121220307/http://wjla-pacino.destodev.com/news/?ID=76052 to http://wjla-pacino.destodev.com/news/?ID=76052
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130612025352/http://laist.com/2013/06/06/jefferson_airplane_drummer_joey_covington_dead.php to http://laist.com/2013/06/06/jefferson_airplane_drummer_joey_covington_dead.php
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130624204926/http://www.wsbtv.com/news/ap/entertainment/czech-musician-filip-topol-dies-at-48/nYP2r to http://www.wsbtv.com/news/ap/entertainment/czech-musician-filip-topol-dies-at-48/nYP2r
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160608082701/http://www.northjersey.com/news/rapper-big-bank-hank-of-englewood-based-sugar-hill-gang-dies-at-age-57-1.1131142 to http://www.northjersey.com/news/rapper-big-bank-hank-of-englewood-based-sugar-hill-gang-dies-at-age-57-1.1131142
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160119192138/http://www.obitsforlife.com/obituary/1232413/Loizzo-Gary.php to http://www.obitsforlife.com/obituary/1232413/Loizzo-Gary.php
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) 09:04, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Add Daisy Berkowitz (Scott Putesky) of Marilyn Manson (died October 22, 2017), add Lil Peep (died November 15, 2017), add Malcolm Young of AC/DC (died November 18, 2017) 47.155.211.116 (talk) 07:47, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Partly done: I added Putesky and Young; I did not add Lil Peep because I doubt he'd be considered a rock and roll musician. —KuyaBriBriTalk 17:33, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

text: On second thought, I see there are a few rappers on the list, so I added Lil Peep, too.  Done. —KuyaBriBriTalk 17:34, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I just re-added the link to Scott Putesky (but it took me about 5 minutes). Martinevans123 (talk) 19:25, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 19 November 2017 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of deaths in rock and roll. 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  tag to http://www.metrotimes.com/detroit/bank-shot/Content?oidLittl75
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151208102557/http://www.cornishman.co.uk/Musicians-pay-tribute-Cornish-folk-scene-legend/story-24675230-detail/story.html to http://www.cornishman.co.uk/Musicians-pay-tribute-Cornish-folk-scene-legend/story-24675230-detail/story.html
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) 09:28, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 15 external links on List of deaths in rock and roll. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.rollingstone.com/artists/nico/biography
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131219111027/http://archives.nodepression.com/2003/05/a-soul-forgotten/7/ to http://archives.nodepression.com/2003/05/a-soul-forgotten/7/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=51012
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.crimsonjazztrio.com/Ian_Wallace.15.0.html?&no_cache=1&tx_eeblog%5Bpointer%5D=0&tx_eeblog%5BshowUid%5D=378
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.latimes.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150702065213/http://www.cleveland.com/music/index_story.ssf?%2Fmusic%2Fmore%2Flocal%2Ftimeline%2F1980%2F1980postpunk.html to http://www.cleveland.com/music/index_story.ssf?%2Fmusic%2Fmore%2Flocal%2Ftimeline%2F1980%2F1980postpunk.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090301120502/http://www.accessatlanta.com/entertainment/content/entertainment/stories/2009/02/25/randy_bewley_pylon.html?cxntlid=thbz_hm to http://www.accessatlanta.com/entertainment/content/entertainment/stories/2009/02/25/randy_bewley_pylon.html?cxntlid=thbz_hm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=%2Fc%2Fa%2F2009%2F11%2F01%2FDD031ADOLJ.DTL
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091112041544/http://www.exclaim.ca/articles/generalarticlesynopsfullart.aspx?csid1=115&csid2=844&fid1=42364 to http://www.exclaim.ca/articles/generalarticlesynopsfullart.aspx?csid1=115&csid2=844&fid1=42364
*Added  tag to http://undercover.com.au/News-Story.aspx?id=9871
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111001112741/http://www.s2smagazine.com/stories/2011/09/sylvia-robinson-mother-hip-hop-dead to http://www.s2smagazine.com/stories/2011/09/sylvia-robinson-mother-hip-hop-dead
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120217211934/http://legacy.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=169787 to http://legacy.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=169787
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130924031354/http://popcultureblog.dallasnews.com/2013/09/it-was-a-shock-rockabilly-hall-of-famer-mac-curtis-dies-from-injuries-sustained-in-accident.html/ to http://popcultureblog.dallasnews.com/2013/09/it-was-a-shock-rockabilly-hall-of-famer-mac-curtis-dies-from-injuries-sustained-in-accident.html/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160508073745/http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2016/may/07/candye-kane-obituary/ to http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2016/may/07/candye-kane-obituary/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160620220523/https://oikotimes.com/2016/06/19/norway-1980-sverre-kjelsberg-dies-at-69/ to https://oikotimes.com/2016/06/19/norway-1980-sverre-kjelsberg-dies-at-69//
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160717100635/http://antiguaobserver.com/one-of-the-nations-most-successful-musicians-dies/ to http://antiguaobserver.com/one-of-the-nations-most-successful-musicians-dies/
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) 19:32, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on List of deaths in rock and roll. 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  tag to http://www.centerstagechicago.com/music/whoswho/LittleMackSimmons.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060905063945/http://www.eonline.com/News/Items/0,1,11323,00.html to http://www.eonline.com/News/Items/0,1,11323,00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050908063556/http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=10635 to http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=10635
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110928182318/http://www.wpbf.com/r/4083557/detail.html to http://www.wpbf.com/r/4083557/detail.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140707072705/http://www.dallasblack.com/entertainment/autopsyresultstonythompson to http://www.dallasblack.com/entertainment/autopsyresultstonythompson
*Added archive https://archive.is/20120524131835/http://legacy.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=109888 to http://legacy.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=109888
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) 09:21, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This article is well over 800,000 bytes, that's almost twice as big as the next longest article. It desperately needs a split as the article is actually having problems loading. I propose a split based on decade like the first proposal, then we can decide on the inclusion criteria after the split, it would be far easier to edit the split articles than try to edit this monster. If nobody objects after a couple hours, I will begin the split. Rob3512 chat? what I did  06:36, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  The current size of the article is absurd and unhelpful to readers (or editors).  Can I suggest that for the time being we need an article for each decade, rather than simply splitting off the 2010s.  As I've said in previous discussion, I'm all in favour of setting criteria for inclusion here, but they would not be easy to agree, I think.   Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:04, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with above. Its current size makes it almost unworkable. Split by decade.--Egghead06 (talk) 08:20, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I'm a little late on this proposal, but I fully agree, just to add to the above consensus. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:10, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

text: We shouldn't have let the disruptive edits of a drive-by IP editor control the direction of this article. Always review the article history before making significant changes like this, which would have avoided creating a WP:Content fork at . And , what's up with waiting just six hours to determine that there was a consensus? wbm1058 (talk) 13:16, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  2nd Split proposal