Talk:Big Al Carson

message: A user commented in an edit summary that Alton Carson has "significant work as jazz musician as well". I need to see proof of that via reliable sourced material. Or am I supposed to take someone's word for it? If you were being sent to prison because someone accused of something you didn't do, and had no proof, would you accept it? As editors, we are supposed to have good reasons for what we do. Vmavanti (talk) 18:07, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: That could easily be verified with a quick online search, a look at his discography, or a check of the media on Commons showing him performing with various jazz bands including the prominent New Orleans jazz bandleader  Doctor Michael White. -- Infrogmation (talk) 16:33, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  External link already in article has list of records he's on. . -- Infrogmation (talk) 16:43, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's not quite true, is it? I mean there's more to it than that. Vmavanti (talk) 18:40, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  What is "not quite true"?  Pardon if it was not your intention, but my impression is that your comments seem to have gone beyond the admirable goal of striving for better references into simple snark.  It doesn't seem extraordinary to me that a New Orleans musician has performed both blues and jazz professionally, and your comparison of performing jazz with doing something that would get one sent to prison seems unwarranted. If you want something referenced, ask for a citation for that particular thing. Thanks. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 20:36, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  "your comparison of performing jazz with doing something that would get one sent to prison seems unwarranted" What? Where did I say that? I suppose my joke about prison could be seen as snarky, a word I'm not fond of. My point was assertions have to be backed up with proof. Hypothetically, then, suppose you were in court and found guilty, then sent to prison, but the case rested not on evidence or proof but on someone's word, opinion, assertion. Someone said something about you, accused of something, then you went to jail. You wouldn't like it, right? The point is: evidence, proof. A citation to a source is proof. I know nothing about Al Carson. I have no idea whether he is primarily a jazz musician or a blues musician. It's not snarky to ask for proof that Carson is both a blues and jazz musician. Maybe you know the difference. Believe it or not, not everyone does. WP's information comes from independent reliable sources. Not from what pops into one's head. You said essentially "all you have to do is search for it", your assumption being that I'm lazy and that I haven't done that and that I haven't given my words much thought. Yes, there certainly are people who fail to think before they write and talk. I'm not one of those people. When I ask "Is he a jazz or blues musician"? I mean that literally. When I say "I need proof via reliable sources", I mean that literally. WP's documentation can help you with what constitutes a reliable source. Click on my name for more help. Vmavanti (talk) 20:50, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  By the way, it's not Doctor Michael White, it's Michael White. If you want that changed, you can pursue it. But in the meantime, scrupulous writers and editors try to follow the rules of Wikipedia, not insist on their own way. One rule is we rarely if ever use honorifics in the title of the article. Not Mr. or Dr. or Capt. You must have noticed this by now. Let's link to the title of the article as it appears in Wikipedia. If or when it gets changed, then you can change how you refer to him. Until then, let's show Wikipedia some respect by following its rules. It's a privilege, not a right. Vmavanti (talk) 20:57, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Meh. I'll only note for now that since he has a fairly common legal name "Michael White", the clarinetist  professionally goes by his doctorate title "Dr. Michael White".  I have no desire to make a big deal out of it, just noting that there are cases where people go by a "professional" or "show biz" name that distinguishes themselves from other similarly named people -- with no need for a Wikipedia neologism with parenthesis seen no where else. -- Infrogmation (talk) 07:48, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  He can call himself Daffy Duck for all I care. But on Wikipedia he isn't going to be called Dr. Vmavanti (talk) 19:42, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

text:  Pardon, I regret I've fallen into a distraction trap. If you have suggestions to improve the article, please make them. Anything else is irrelevant here. -- Infrogmation (talk) 07:54, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

text: Would you classify him as a jazz musician or a blues musician? Which does he play most often? Vmavanti (talk) 19:42, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I would (and do) classify him as a jazz and blues musician. Zero reason for an "or". There is no dichotomy.  Which label he has performed under most often has been different at different times in his career. -- Infrogmation (talk) 20:50, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you saying you don't know the difference between jazz and blues? Vmavanti (talk) 00:53, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: You are snarking again.  (Would you concede, for example, that Wynton Marsallis is both a jazz trumpeter and a classical trumpeter, or is that somehow an impossibility that could only be believed by people who can't tell the difference between those groups of music?)  We seem to have unfortunately got on the wrong foot with each other. If there is some issue with the article you think needs to be addressed, I suggest we bring in other editors to take a look. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 02:17, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I can not understand why so many people on Wikipedia refuse to answer simple questions. I don't know how to make the words any plainer than I have. Because I don't know you, I don't know if you know the difference between jazz and blues. Albert Murray wrote they are essentially the same thing, but I disagree with that and most people do. People look to references books to learn something. That means they are ignorant of something. People who write articles for reference books can't afford to assume too much on the part of the reader. They must make distinctions. Readers aren't all fans (fanatics, obsessives). They have all kinds of interests and all kinds of backgrounds. To your question, Wynton Marsalis is a jazz trumpeter because he has spent most of his career playing jazz. In 1983, he became the first person to win a Grammy Award in both jazz and classical categories. For good measure, he repeated it the next year. But after that he didn't play much classical. Some, not a lot. Let's not mistake the part for the whole, the backwater for the mainstream. Is Linda Ronstadt a jazz singer because she recorded two albums with Nelson Riddle? No. She has the pipes to sing whatever she wants (had, she has Parkinson's now). But most of her career was spent in pop and rock, not traditional pop. Ray Charles played jazz briefly in his career, but most of what he played was rhythm and blues, a combination of all kinds of things, like country, gospel, and soul. So is he a jazz musician? No, because he didn't spend his time playing jazz. I have no problem making these distinctions. If I didn't know what I was doing, I would never have started editing on Wikipedia. When in doubt, I have a wall of books to help me. Vmavanti (talk) 04:30, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Jazz or blues musician?