Talk:Michigan Marching Band

message: Terryfoster 18:59, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

message: The back bend and visitors fight song are done to opposite directions.  The visitors sit on the south side, and thats where the fight song is done.  The back bend is done on the north side of the stadium. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.227.233.54 (talk) 01:28, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have made further clarification to this section of the article.  The back bend is done in the North end but the DM starts by facing south (or back towards the band).  The DM then bends over backwards so as to face the North end of the stadium.  Also, the DM doesn't always perform the back bend without a hat (see 2004 photo) Terryfoster 15:16, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Back Bend 

message: :Image:Mmb logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 20:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Mmb logo.gif

message: The following is unreferenced in this article, so I've taken it out:
* The MMB formed the first script Ohio in 1932.  This was later incorporated into the "Script Ohio" formation which the Ohio State University Marching Band currently performs. 
* During the 1938 Ohio State game, legendary MMB director William Revelli (1935-71) moved the "i" from a  "Buck-i" formation in between the "u" and the "c" to spell Buick, to thank a major sponsor of Michigan football and the MMB. He received a very angry phone call at 2:00 the next morning from athletic director Fielding Yost, warning him, "Young man, you will never do that again!" referring to the prohibition on advertising in Michigan Stadium.
* The MMB was the first Big Ten band to perform for an NFL Super Bowl game (Super Bowl VII, Los Angeles, 1973). The band also performed for Super Bowl XVI at the Pontiac Silverdome in 1982 and the 1984 World Series in Detroit at Tiger Stadium.
* Carl Grapentine is the voice of the Michigan Marching Band, and has been the announcer since 1970. An alumnus of the MMB, Grapentine drives four hours from Chicago for every Michigan home football game. In 2005, Carl substituted as stadium announcer for Howard King for the first few games while Howard recovered from surgery. In 2006, he replaced King as the voice of Michigan Stadium.
* On Jan. 2, 2007, the MMB played "Ruffles and Flourishes," "Hail to the Chief," Michigan's alma mater "The Yellow and Blue," and "The Victors" in memory of President Gerald R. Ford at the Gerald R. Ford International Airport in Grand Rapids, Michigan when President Ford's body was brought for burial at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Museum in Grand Rapids.
* During the second half at every home game, the band will split into small groups going to various sections of the stadium and play short versions of various U-M choruses, such as "The Victors," "Let's Go Blue," and even The Rocky & Bullwinkle theme.
If this information can be referenced, please feel free to reincorporate this back into the article. However, please don't add it as a bulleted list in it's own section, it would be best to incorporate it into the main article. - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 05:39, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I see this material also stated in Bert %26 Ernie Sing-Along. Sadly, that article is also lacking references.ShoneBrooks (talk) 02:01, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Youtube has a weird video that has the Bert and Ernie album with another track from the Wiggles laid over it. Anyway, right at the end, Ernie does mention the MMB and you can hear Stars and Stripes being played as noted. So the question is, can we find some source that supports the claim that the band heard really is the MMB as opposed to some other group?ShoneBrooks (talk) 02:13, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

text: I have a sneaking suspicion that what we hear at the end of the Bert & Ernie album is actually a short excerpt from the last track, "Stars And Stripes Forever" on the 1968 album, "Hail, Sousa!" recorded by the UM Symphony Band. Calling it the Marching Band probably just worked better for the visual imagery they wanted to go along with crazy bathtub "scene." Still, I'd be happy to be proven wrong here. :-) ShoneBrooks (talk) 02:48, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

text: I moved both of these Discography listings here (for now) as I can't find material to use as reference sources. Anyone with access to the Media themselves can add them in with simple Media Notes citations similar to what has been done for other albums. ShoneBrooks (talk) 14:36, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unreferenced material 

message: Would it be appropriate to include a discography (i.e. a list of published albums/recordings) in this article?  Articles for many other musicians/bands have such a section.  JonSchneider (talk) 15:57, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: A discography section has been added. But we could use some help in citing reference sources for each bulleted item. The current blanket citations are rather weak and subject to potential challenge/deletion. ShoneBrooks (talk) 20:35, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discography 

message: University of Michigan is not represented with a project at :Category:WikiProject Universities. Please comment at Talk:University_of_Michigan#Should_University_of_Michigan_have_a_project.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  02:05, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This topic more properly belongs on the University of Michigan's article. This article is specific to the Michigan Marching Band, which does not qualify as a university unto itself. Furthermore, the :Category:WikiProject Universities no longer exists. ShoneBrooks (talk) 20:52, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  University of Michigan Project 

message: The band was selected to perform in the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade, representing the state of Michigan. This will mark the first Parade appearance by the band.
The band will join the parade to the call of “Let’s Have a Parade,” the iconic phrase that has signaled the start of every Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade since 1924.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1:F413:3944:84C:1BC0:877E:AA26 (talk) 16:58, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Michigan Marching Band. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140305071858/http://tmd.pub.umich.edu/blog/wire/marching-band-names-new-assistant-director to http://tmd.pub.umich.edu/blog/wire/marching-band-names-new-assistant-director
*Added  tag to http://www.michigandaily.com/media/storage/paper851/news/2001/09/05/News/Woman.Up.Front-1408243.shtml?norewrite200609270908&sourcedomain=www.michigandaily.com
*Added  tag to http://media.www.michigandaily.com/content/major-issues
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) 01:34, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: This is a central location for links or lists of publications which mention the Michigan Band, for use in adding additional material to the article.
Google Books  - Life Magazine Oct 30, 1950. Michigan Band article with photography by Alfred Eisenstaedt. Includes the drum major photo which later was part the the "Family of Man" photo exhibition and book.
Google Books - Life Magazine Oct 30, 1950
JNmich (talk) 08:38, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  MICHIGAN BAND RESOURCES COLLECTION 

message: Sources differ on whether or not the MMB performed at Super Bowl I in 1967. The NFL, Crain's Detroit Business, various Wikipedia articles, and some YouTube video captions indicate that the MMB participated alongside The Pride of Arizona and the Grambling State University Marching Band in pregame, halftime, or both. But other sources, like the New York Times and the University of Michigan, make no mention of the MMB at Super Bowl I. This editor has yet to see any video or photo evidence to demonstrate the presence of the MMB. So for now, I've removed that reference; but if additional evidence can be found to support the NFL's claim that the MMB was there, it would be nice to add it back in at some future date. ShoneBrooks (talk) 13:12, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The more relevant material I review (included several Sports Illustrated articles on the topic, the less inclined I am to believe the MMB was at Superbowl I. ShoneBrooks (talk) 03:48, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Super Bowl I 

message: There are quite a few news articles which mention the Michigan Marching Band performing under a guest conductor or hosting an interesting person who walks on to the field with the band to be introduced to the crowd. Occasionally another performing group participates with the band. These would be interesting to add to the article. Ideas for this section can be posted here as well as links. JNmich (talk) 08:19, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this idea has merit. It might be wise to lay out some guiding principles as to breaking this out into different subsets (e.g. Collaborations vs. Guest Conductors vs. Featured Soloists, etc.). For each starting subset, I think it would be helpful to list 2-3 examples that come to mind so we can weigh the value they potentially bring to the article. For example, a half-time collaboration with Lady Gaga may hold different significance than having H. Robert Reynolds guest conduct the Star Spangled Banner. We also need to consider where to source such info, as there may not be many secondary, or even primary sources documenting it. The links you provided are an excellent start, if those are the sort of cases we want to highlight. ShoneBrooks (talk) 18:34, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, it will be easier if we don't try to reinvent the wheel. Are there examples of WP articles for other groups/artists that we could use as de facto template, maybe like the short list below?
# U2: U2#Other projects and collaborations
# Moby: Moby#Collaborations
# Boston Pops: Boston Pops Orchestra#Guest artists
Are any of these close to what you envisioned? I was thinking of a very simple, bulleted list; but that probably would not do justice to the level of description appropriate for certain collabs. ShoneBrooks (talk) 01:04, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  New section that could be added: Collaborations and Guest Appearances, Conductors and Performers 

message: I've been thinking a lot about this article lately. Significant effort went into improving it since last year, and I hope the results serve as evidence that it was a worthwhile exercise. However, at the time, one of the goals of the updates was to "flesh out" and "beef up" what had previously been something closer to an article stub. Quite a bit of content was added to meet that objective.
With an organization that has the rich history of the MMB, it is tempting to continue adding material well past the point of what the casual reader is looking for, or what counts as "encyclopedic" or "noteworthy." Or said differently, we may not have always done the best job of limiting ourselves to the real "highlights" worth capturing here while allowing other details to remain for further discovery by those with the desire to seek them out elsewhere. 
As we think about changes we might like to apply, I'm thinking that adding more stuff does not necessarily equate to making the article better, and could actually decrease its overall value via the "clutter effect." I know that while drafting the history section, my goal was to generate "several" sentences documenting 5-10 noteworthy items for each decade of the MMB's history. That was just an arbitrary number chosen for the sake of delivering paragraphs that were obviously not bullet-style sentences, but were also not "walls of text." I think collectively, we should probably review what's out there now and give some careful thought as to what really should be retained as the highest-quality content representing each decade, while decluttering the article by removing other material that, while maybe nice, perhaps detracts from the more valuable content by its inclusion. Similar considerations are probably appropriate when we discuss adding new sections or features. Again, more is not always better and can be worse.
I would also suggest that we take careful stock of where this article is today and where we want it to go. Within WP's Marching Band Project, it has been rated with a grade of B. That's respectable, and I don't know how often those grades get updated. But I hope most of us would agree that we'd like to improve on that. I think we should be aiming for the highest grade possible (FA-Featured Article) and even higher. The most practical way I see of doing that at the moment is to emulate those articles that have already earned that grade, namely Fightin' Texas Aggie Band and Kappa Kappa Psi, and then try to one-up them if possible. Again, not necessarily with more content but with better content.
Who's up for a challenge?  :-)  ShoneBrooks (talk) 15:04, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like those two FA examples received their ratings back in November of 2008. I wonder how they would rate now. That's roughly the same date when this article got its rating. I think we should seek out a fresh rating before pursuing this further. ShoneBrooks (talk) 15:49, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It also seems that grades grades above our current rating of B require nominations and formal review processes, etc. Before we seek such a nomination, maybe we should spend some time playing Devil's Advocate to call out statements of fact that are not well supported by 'good' citations, etc. If we can fix those on our own, that's preferable, but I suspect many will take some teamwork to either substantiate or 'park' in a new section here on the talk page that I plan to add momentarily... ShoneBrooks (talk) 17:09, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

text: No need for a new section here. We can use the existing entry for "Unreferenced material" above. ShoneBrooks (talk) 17:11, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quality Over Quantity 

message: In light of recent concern tags being applied to the article, it seems that editors should seek to pare down the content to a more "encyclopedic" amount and tone. I offer some suggestions below to help guide that effort.
* If a statement is not well cited with a corresponding source aligning well with WP guidelines for sources, then remove it and add it to the appropriate section on this Talk page (above). If it just seems too important to remove, then take the time and effort to include one or more reliable references to support it. Failing to do so only serves as a red flag for another reviewer that problems persist.
* With over 100 years of history to cover, it's very easy to end up with a "wall of text" that exceeds the "summary" idea of what an encyclopedia article should really be. To help balance those competing forces, consider limiting the content to a loosely formulaic approach, like 2-5 sentences per decade of history. Some decades may have more, some less. If that doesn't quite work out, consider 5-10 sentences for each 25 years of history, etc. One of those types of approaches should render a respectable HIGH-LEVEL historical account that is more than just a list of bullet points, but is not overwhelming to the casual reader, or "non-encyclopedic" in its depth of coverage.
* Keep it factual. Be self-aware and self-critical of terms and phrases that a casual, bias-neutral reader might reasonably view as braggadocious or "prideful." If that seems likely, then it's probably worth the added effort to find a way to state the fact in more generic/neutral terms. If you can't quite decide, ask a buddy, or add it to this Talk page and invite discussion about its merits.
* Feel free to add more ideas to these, but at a very high level, the article is now in a state where LESS IS MORE. ShoneBrooks (talk) 19:40, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions for Decluttering