Talk:Traditional black gospel

message: Both the links provided in the External links section do not appear to be notable enough to be included in this article. Can someone with a deeper knowledge of the subject check them out and see? WP:EL might help. aJCfreak yAk 09:35, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: There is currently a discussion regarding the origins of gospel music on the Gospel music article's talk page. We are looking for any individuals with knowledge regarding the development of Gospel music (all forms including urban contemporary, Southern Gospel, traditional, etc.) to join the discussion. The resulting conversation will result in a rewrite of the article. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 14:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Attention Gospel music experts

message: I removed the section on notable artists. This list contained some POV statements and some questionable entries. It is also a duplicate since a link to the List of gospel musicians is in the "See Also" section. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 18:21, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of Notable Artists section

message: I temporarily removed the origin and influence sections until a source for the information can be found. Please see the Gospel music article's discussion page regarding the controversy regarding the development of Gospel music. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 14:34, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Major revisions on 15 January

message: I removed the links from the article because they all seem to be in violation of the WP:LINKS: "For policy or technical reasons, editors are restricted from linking to the following, without exception:
1. Sites that violate the copyrights of others per contributors' rights and obligations should not be linked. Linking to websites that display copyrighted works is acceptable as long as the website has licensed the work. Knowingly directing others to a site that violates copyright may be considered contributory infringement. If you know that an external Web site is carrying a work in violation of the creator's copyright, do not link to that copy of the work. Linking to a page that illegally distributes someone else's work sheds a bad light on Wikipedia and its editors."''
None of the lyric sites were on the "Recommend sources" list (see here). See WP:LYRICS for additional information on this topic. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 14:51, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of external links

message: I know close to nothing about urban contemporary gospel or gospel at all and wouldnt be much help in adding a new intro, but as of now, the introduction is basically exactly the same as the intro for Gospel music. I'm pretty sure that needs to be changed. Glassbreaker5791 (talk) 22:56, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: Please note that the decision to redirect this article was made quite a while back as an effort by the Gospel Music Wikiproject to accurately reflect the subgenre. Because the term Black gospel is simply a legacy marketing label it was decided to move to the currently used term. Because this is not a "noncontroversial" move I will be requesting that the redirect be undone until the issue can be fully discussed and resolved by the Christian Music Wikiproject. Feel free to move the discussion there. -- Absolon S. Kent (chat),  15:44, Thursday December 17, 2009 (UTC)
:WP:Consensus can change is a key policy on Wikipedia.
:More importantly, your facts are wrong -- Black gospel is not the same style of music as Urban/Contemporary gospel -- and this page is actually about Black gospel, not Urban/contemporary gospel.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:21, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Page movement/redirect from [[Urban contemporary gospel]]