Talk:Frank Zappa/Archive 2

message: It's been suggested below, and it's painfully true, the "Overview" as written reads like a news release written by Zappa's most ardent, fatuous admirer. This entry is in need of a major overhaul, starting with surgery on this Overview. I am willing to undertake this myself, but since it would constitute serious editing -- the kind that will restructure the article -- I thought I'd start a discussion of the entry's current state. Iconoclastodon 07:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, the new overview section is too fan-ish. It was largely written by the user Dunks58 from Nov. 23rd onwards, before that the section was completely different. The new version does contain some good points though, I think perhaps we should go back to the older, more professionally written version while also including certain material from the new one. Either that or scrap it altogether and start again...203.167.235.136 01:52, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Some of the info in this section should really be used to expand the lead. ĤĶ51→Łalk 22:24, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I've deleted all of the useless fan-ish info from the 'Overview' section and incorporated the section into the lead. ĤĶ51→Łalk 23:12, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Good attempt. Some useful info is missing now though. I would, as others have, suggest to go back to the intro that was here a few months ago that was pretty neutral. Maybe we should make a list of what is the central things to mention about Zappa in an overview, and then write from that? --HJ 01:20, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Overview Section 

message: At the old talk page, it was suggested that the main picture for the article was "inappropriate." It was seen as emitting the signal of "Rock Star Turned Serious". I agree. Since copyright issues are serious here, I would suggest to use the cover of Apostrophe in lack of better alternatives. It is a nice picture of Frank, and provides a timeless and recognizable image. What do you think?--HJ 21:36, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please discuss, instead of just putting up several confrontational remarks. Cf., WP:NPA, WP:AGF or  WP:EQ. Well, "rock star" or not (a term indeed in quotation marks), I think the image is a poor choice for a Zappa article. He was rarely seen in a tux writing dots on paper (when he did, he would wear anything but a tux). The irony surely featured during the particular photo session is likely to be lost on non-Zappa fans. --HJ 06:27, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The current main pic with the piano and the score has to stay, IMO.  Frank was serious about his music, what's wrong with that?  He labored over scores his whole life... that has always been one of my favorite FZ photos.  KEEP IT!  --EmmSeeMusic 16:36, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main picture 

message: The article is already rather long. So I would suggest that the lengthy - but very good - discussion about Läther is moved to the page of the album. As of now, it breaks the flow of the article (and Zappa had many other projects that never materialized). I think it would suffice to mention the projected box set, refer to the album page, and then devote slightly more time to the four albums that actually came out of it. What do you think? --HJ 21:36, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: User:172.164.238.186 ([History] made a lengthy revision on this subject, stating that "this is what really happened". See http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_Zappa&diff=62108546&oldid=61937761 . It is a substantial shortening (which could have been discussed), but I think that the whole issue should be on the page of the album, and not in a subsection.--HJ 06:27, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Läther sub section 

message: This is mostly a collection of various fan-sites. When one looks at them now, there seems to have been no idea behind which are linked or not. Should there be some requirements for when a site should be linked? It is a tricky issue, but the links section is simply a mess as of now. What should we do, if anything?--HJ 21:36, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: Has anybody had thoughts about the basic structure of the article? The adopted "chronological approach" has it advantages (where to put something time specific is self evident), but also disadvantages (where to put something of general interest about Zappa is rather difficult).
:An example of the disadvantage is the treatment of Zappa's "classical" work, which could benefit from being presented in a single paragraph or two. As of now, reference to it is scattered all over the article (Early life and influences, 1980s, 1990s).
:Another example of the disadvantage is when describing Zappa's use of musical quotations. This is mentioned in 1960s, but the examples span all of his career.
Could anybody think of another structure, or is the chronological approach unavoidable when presenting Zappa?--HJ 21:36, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Basic structure of article: Chronology or not? 

message: An IP user added this section to the article on July 19:
:Frank zappa's guitar playing is undoubtedly influenced by him playing drums at an early age,   
:Which is shown through his strange and inventive rythmic passages.His legato phrasing can be be easily associated with a saxophone or violin and with pull offs, bending, trills and other Guitar techniques his guitar parts are filled with detail.His playing is influenced by many different genres such as Rock, Jazz and classical music and his experimentation with effects pedals such as wah wah and Overdrive is executed perfectly.With his high musical intelligence Frank zappa has been able to leave a vast legacy of over a thousand pieces of guitar work that is sure to last as outstanding music.
I think it could be interesting to expand to article with pieces going in more detail with various aspects of Zappa's work (his production techniques, his lyrics, his synclavier pieces, his horn arrangements, his orchestral compositions, and, of course, his guitar playing). This will, however, probably come at the cost of having to lose a lot of the plain information. I do think, in any case, that the description of his guitar playing style above does not add much to what is already in the article (e.g., that drums and percussion is important for all aspects of his music, hence also guitar playing, is already evident, as is the fact that his influences are from all over the place). Moreover, the last 2/3 of the edit is just POV praise (and the prose could be better). I therefore took the so-called bold step and deleted it. --HJ 20:24, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is way too WP:POV to be in a Wiki entry. If you can find some appropriate sourced material about Zappa's guitar style please feel free to include it. --HJ 07:52, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guitar playing style? 

message: Does anyone have strong feelings about this section being in the article? I think it is not needed.--HJ 16:11, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Deleted as of today. Anyone want it back?--HJ 23:07, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "See also: List of rock instrumentals" 

message: I inserted a blurb yesterday about FZ being inspired to become a guitarist when he heard Johnny "Guitar" Watson's song "Three Hours Past Midnight."  (I was logged out when I wrote it--thought I was logged in.)
I don't have a specific source for the quote, other than it is cited on a few websites--here's some:
www.rockabillyhall.com/JohnnyWatson1.html
wiki.killuglyradio.com/index.php/Johnny_%22Guitar%22_Watson 
www.johnnyguitarwatson.net/quotes.htm
Zappa did cite Watson's "Three Hours Past Midnight" as his favorite record in a 1979 interview:
http://www.killuglyradio.com/features/articles/frank_zappa_vs_the_world_part_three.php
Given it was his favorite record, and also that Zappa switched from drums to guitar at the time it was released in 1956, it's likely that the quote is authentic.
I'll dig around a few books and see if I can find more documentation.  
If any Zappa collectors have interview articles, etc., at their disposal, please feel free to shout out!  :)  Thanks,
John
--je 22:22, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's great! If you don't happen to find anything else, I believe a reference to the jgw.net is ok documentation. I think it is a fine thing to include.--HJ 22:36, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:   Thanks a lot.  I'm still new to the Wiki-world.  I may check the books anyway...  Can't be too careful.  :)  I might also add to FZ's entry that "Three Hours Past Midnight" was also his favorite record, if that's okay...  I'm a big JGW fellow.  Possibly the only.  :)  --je 23:05, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Johnny "Guitar" Watson influence 

message: In the trivia section the following resides. The final boldfaced sentence was added and reverted, but frankly (no pun intended), the whole thing is a bit speculative. Does anyone have any references?
: On December 6, 1976, Zappa introduced Black Sabbath at their Madison Square Garden concert. This announcement is featured on a Black Sabbath bootleg album. He once declared Sabbath's "Iron Man" (Paranoid, 1970) the greatest ever rock track, he would later change his choice of track to "Supernaut" from the group's Vol.4 Album (1972) A jam was once organised featuring Sabbath and Zappa, Sabbath however pulled out. Though technical difficulties were cited, it has been rumoured Sabbath lead guitarist Tony Iommi was not comfortable with sharing guitar duties with Zappa (rumored mostly by Zappa enthusiasts in an effort to sway attention away from Iommi). 
If not, I would suggest that everything from "He once..." and out is deleted.--HJ 21:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Here is a transcript from a BBC program where FZ presented his favorite records, and he does in fact play "Iron Man" (though he doesn't say it's "the greatest ever"). I do think everything from "Though technical difficulties..." should go. 145.222.138.134 21:09, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zappa and Black Sabbath 

message: Added today: "In the waning months of 1982, Frank released a small collaboration of unfinished cuts and jams titled "Beef Furniture Collection, Works 1-2". The album was one of the few universal critical failures of his career, as it was characterized by strangely poor production values, due to the fact that many tracks were still in an unfinished state. Nevertheless, some of the songs achieved popularity through the imaginative guitar solos and lyrics, particularly the title track." SOrry, you're making it up. --GangofOne 23:18, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: I call 'bullshit'

message: The 1960s section asserts that "motherfucker" is a term which refers to "skilled musicians". I do not have a reference at hand, but am sure that this term is actually used to refer to musicians who are NOT skilled, but only regard themselves as such. The quote taken from Zappa which follows this assertion also clearly indicates this by defining the term as a reference to "SUPPOSEDLY good musicians". Whoever looks this up and fixes this problem could probably also add this information to the "motherfucker" article. If the term isnt given this meaning by the Oxford English Dictionary, then I am sure that it could be found in some kind of adult jazz reference book.
No sir, you wouldn't say, "He plays like a motherfucker" if he was bad, that usually reflects good playing.  Bad would be, "He plays shit"
JMIZ 02:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quick minsinfo fix 

message: from what I've seen Zappa has been taken off of iTunes and other online music stores, perhaps the page should reflect this? (unsigned|66.56.145.43 (Talk)}
* (sorry for my bad "registration of entry" by the anon IP; I didn't bother to seek the correct template for too long) I really can't see the need or this. Zappa is available through numerous outlets (e.g., CDs, and even vinyl) so whether he is currently not at iTtunes could reflect some temporary "issues" between his company and iTunes. No big deal for now for an encyclopedia entry. If it turns into involving something of basic music industry priciples, it could be mentioned, but not for now.--HJ 05:06, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zappa taken off the internet musicsites? 

message: Quick fail for being in :Category:Articles with unsourced statements, having images without fair use rationale, and having too short of a lead. See WP:GA? and WP:LEAD. --SeizureDog 18:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Failed GA

message: The article only has 14 cites, the first appearing in the middle of the article. Wiki-newbie 11:33, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 2nd Failed GA

message: I've been trying to "undo" the vandalism, but it's not saving properly.  Can someone else undo the last edit?  --Snicker 23:39, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. IrishGuy talk 23:41, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalized 

message: Look Frank Zappa was the most alternative rock in the world.
+ HE did not want to be remembered
+He HATES the music industry
+I mean there are just SOOOOOOOOO many things you guys are leaving out of his article it's embarrsing. Zabrak 02:06, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I feel like I should point out at this point that not knowing anything about Frank Zappa is really the best qualification of all for writing a Wikipedia article about Frank Zappa.  If you don't know anything about him, you won't be tempted to insert your personal knowledge, and will simply report what reliable sources say, which will ensure that the article meets Wikipedia's verifiability standards.  In fact, that's probably why I haven't actually contributed much to the article.  It's because I know too much about FZ—yeah, that's the ticket! :)  Xtifr tälk 12:13, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  You losers don't know ANYTHING about Frank Zappa 

message: Somebody has written the follwing:
During the late 1970s Zappa made several celebrated appearances on the popular NBC series Saturday Night Live, both as guest host and as featured musical guest. His renowned SNL appearance in December 1976 included an impromptu musical collaboration with cast member John Belushi (playing his famous Samurai Futaba character) and a performance of "I'm The Slime" which featured a voice-over by SNL booth announcer Don Pardo, who also performed on stage with Zappa a few days later, reading the narration for "The Illinois Enema Bandit" (a performance which can be found on Zappa In New York and Läther).
I think it should be removed because: A) It is a minor thing in the big picture B) Most of the cast and producers of SNL hated Zappa, so it is not an example of some happy collaberation. --HJ 14:59, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have seen these episodes several times "dude" (where "several" is strictly greater than "two", which is not the way the word is used in the entry I want to debate), and I absolutely love them. This, however, is not the issue here. The paragraph is complete POV, and labelling the stint with Belushi a "collaberation" is pushing it too far. The Don Pardo thing is also really going into details for an encyclopedic article; also it loses focus as it moves away from SNL description quite fast. That's why I think the whole thing should be removed. --HJ 11:01, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zappa on SNL: To be mentioned? 

message: I'm trying to get Freak Out! promoted to featured article status. Feel free to help out. (Ibaranoff24 15:41, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wowie Zowie! (Ibaranoff24 22:29, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Freak Out! 

message: In the portion of the article that discusses the Mothers album "We're only in it for the money", a few short lines are devoted to the album's iconoclastic cover art. In these lines special attention is paid to the fact that an image of Jimi Hendrix appears on the album cover. No other individual is explicitley named even though other famous individuals appear on the cover, such as Lyndon Johnson. This leads me to beleive that the author of the article, or these few lines just seemed to like Jimi Hendrix. This I don't dispute, as I also enjoy Hendrix, however I don't believe he should get any special recognition for having his picture posted on the album. An album he made no creative contributions to. Therefore the list of people appearing on the album cover should be expanded or Hendrix's name should be removed.Bswartz 17:57, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I have removed it. --HJ 22:32, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding "We're Only in it for the Money" 

message: Recently some has put in Harmonica and Harpsicord as instruments in the user box. Here, and here. The question is whether the infobox (which I think is supposed to provide concise and short information) should list every instrument Zappa has ever touched? In my opinion, only the ones he regularly recorded and performed with should be mentioned. I don't think Harmonica and Harpsicord are among these, so I have reverted their inclusion. --HJ 07:13, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The instruments detailed in the infobox now are just fine. Anything else added in now would just be superfluity. Leave as is and rm any more that get added in. 156.34.142.110 13:06, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mention of instruments in infobox 

message: There seem to be numerous links from the Peter Wolf of Zappa's bands to the Peter Wolf of J. Geils fame...they are two entirely different people. Here is a true link to the correct Peter Wolf:   http://www.united-mutations.com/w/peter_wolf.htm 
Hawk59 19:39, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't find any mention of Peter Wolf in the article (?) --HJensen, talk 20:37, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong Peter Wolf 

message: There is no mention in this article of 'The Vault', a large storage vault underneath the Utility Muffin Research Kitchen, it holds almost every live performance that Zappa did. Now action is being taken to release almost all of it. it would be much appreciated if somebody added this to the article. Thankyou, A Zappa Fan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.212.223.251 (talk • contribs) 20:18, 12 April 2007
: It is mentioned that Zappa recorded almost all of his concerts and built up a vast archive. What is not mentioned is speculation about future releases. Let time show what will be released--HJensen, talk 21:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Mention Of 'The Vault' 

message: Should the MGWTKYM article be split into two articles, one for the song and one for the Dweezil Zappa album? Or is it better off left as it is? --Bongwarrior 00:08, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say that unless someone has subtantial interesting info to add to either of the articles, there are no need to create two one-line articles out of what is currently in the common article.--HJensen, talk 13:54, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[My Guitar Wants to Kill Your Mama]]" split 

message: We should move on and try eventually to get FA status for the Zappa article. I therefore think that the article needs a slight restructuring (and some more sourcing, I have added some sources recently, and will continue to add). In terms of restructuring: Now, the article is essentially "just" a chronological bio. I think it would be better to have a slightly briefer bio, followed by independent paragraphs on Zappa as composer, guitarist, film director, political spokesman, etc. Most of the, imo, central things are already mentioned in the article, but they are now "hidden" various places in the bio. So a lot is "only" a matter of editing. Finally, I think some more catchy headings of the bio are in place (now it is just decades). Thoughts, comments or objections? --HJensen, talk 08:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Regardless, I think the Zappa article is GA at the moment.-h i s   s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 00:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

text: GA review (see here for criteria)
#It is reasonably well written.
#:a (prose):  b (MoS): 
#It is factually accurate and verifiable.
#:a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
#It is broad in its coverage.
#:a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
#It follows the neutral point of view policy.
#:a (fair representation):  b (all significant views): 
#It is stable.
#:
#It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
#:a (tagged and captioned):  b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales): 
#Overall: 
#:a Pass/Fail: 
This article needs a lot more references to qualify for GA-whole sections are missing them. As for images-album covers will pass fair use regulations only if they are used to illustrate the album itself (read:on the album page). They have to be deleted on this page. The infobox looks very cluttered-find a consensus on the genres listed-preferably no more than four. For ideas on how to improve this article further, see The Beatles, Kate Bush, or U2-all GA articles. ErleGrey 21:05, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree to a certain extent. While he only did one full Doo-wop album, doo-wop songs are all over his albums from Freak Out! to songs from the 1988 tour. But I guess this is the 'problem' in a nutshell. Zappa's music transcended so many genres that it is hard to restrict oneself here. But to already try to reach some agreement, I guess that everybody can agree on "Rock", "Classical" and "Jazz"? If we should restrict to a fourth, I can see the argument for "Experimental" as that covers his contributions in all areas in the sense that he was rarely conventional. Let's collect more responses!--HJensen, talk 21:38, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Structure of article: Comments please 

message: :GA review (see here for criteria)
#It is reasonably well written.
#:a (prose):  b (MoS): 
#It is factually accurate and verifiable.
#:a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
#It is broad in its coverage.
#:a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
#It follows the neutral point of view policy.
#:a (fair representation):  b (all significant views): 
#It is stable.
#:
#It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
#:a (tagged and captioned):  b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales): 
#Overall: 
#:a Pass/Fail: 
This article needs a lot more references to qualify for GA-whole sections are missing them. As for images-album covers will pass fair use regulations only if they are used to illustrate the album itself (read:on the album page). They have to be deleted on this page. The infobox looks very cluttered-find a consensus on the genres listed-preferably no more than four. For ideas on how to improve this article further, see The Beatles, Kate Bush, or U2-all GA articles. ErleGrey 21:05, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA fail

message: Re: the genres in the infobox, as mentioned at the GA review above.  Zappa really only did one Doo-Wop album in his career (Cruising with Reuben & the Jets), but he performed experimental music of various sorts throughout his career.  I tend to think that Experimental music is much more defining than Doo-Wop.  As for blues, I can't really think of any that isn't incidental and at a level that would be expected of a typical rock musician of the era.  But rather than risk starting an edit war, I thought I'd try to start a discussion.  If we're going to limit it to four genres, I would think that rock, jazz, classical and experimental would be the most accurate and precise.  Comments?  Opinions?  Xtifr tälk 19:38, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree to a certain extent. While he only did one full Doo-wop album, doo-wop songs are all over his albums from Freak Out! to songs from the 1988 tour. But I guess this is the 'problem' in a nutshell. Zappa's music transcended so many genres that it is hard to restrict oneself here. But to already try to reach some agreement, I guess that everybody can agree on "Rock", "Classical" and "Jazz"? If we should restrict to a fourth, I can see the argument for "Experimental" as that covers his contributions in all areas in the sense that he was rarely conventional. Let's collect more responses!--HJensen, talk 21:38, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genres (and infobox) 

message: His book definetly deserves an article (The Real Frank Zappa Book). It's not mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia as far as I can see... 217.211.211.182 00:15, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The books article on Wiki Jawaka. 217.211.211.182 00:18, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Real Frank Zappa Book 

message: I remember hearing that one of his albums was labeled by the RIAA as having "Explicit Lyrics" - even though it was a completely instrumental album.  Does anyone remember which one?  And should it be mentioned in the article as part of his battles against the organization? Lurlock 19:12, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that Frank himself added his own infamous "Warning/Guarantee" to at least one of his instrumental albums.  I do not believe this was done because of the direct actions of the PMRC or RIAA or any other external organization; it was a voluntary (and presumably somewhat tongue-in-cheek) action by Frank himself.  Xtifr tälk 21:36, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Actually, I think it was Jazz from Hell, an entirely instrumental album, which - quite ironically - got a warning sticker. I will see if I can dig up a source.--HJensen, talk 16:07, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe.  The claim is certainly made at the article.  On the other hand, the claim is also unsupported by any citations or reliable sources, so I'll reserve judgment (I've owned my own copy too long to be sure--if there was a sticker, it's long since been lost).  In any case, if that's the only album, then I think a mention of it at the album article is probably sufficient.  If there are more, then maybe it would be worth mentioning here.  Xtifr tälk 02:47, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I remember it being mentioned in some made-for-TV movie that played on VH1.  Of course it was all reenactments, but it's supposed to all be based on actual events.  Don't remember the name of it, but that might help for those looking for the source for this info. Lurlock 03:35, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explicit instrumentals