Talk:Buffalo Springfield

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (assessed as Mid-importance).

Clean-up and Verification

This article certainly needs to be cleaned up for style - it's essay-ish to the point that I wonder where it might be copied from - but as far as I can tell there is nothing here that isn't accurate, and I was a HUGE fan back in the day. For what it's worth. - PKM 18:53, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Canonical reference: For What It's Worth : The Story of Buffalo Springfield by John Einarson and Richie Furay. ISBN 0815412819. Also see http://www.thrasherswheat.org/tfa/bufspring.htm - PKM 19:00, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to remember "Uno Mundo" and "Bluebird" getting significant Top 40 radio play in California. 69.129.36.131 20:53, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've just taken step one in cleaning this one up. I hope that there are a lot of people watching this page and that they'll give it a good going over. I have added a lot of stuff, all of which I can document, and I've also eliminated a few things that I either could not verify or felt was supurfluous. Feel free to add stuff back in if there is a verifiable source for it. Spventi 08:53, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent job!Budrocket 20:27, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'm glad you like it. BTW, to whomever it might concern <g>, I removed the "verify" tag aat the top of the page since the content of the article is now quite factual and colloborated by documented sources. About the only thing that I can't provide a reference for is the statement that the live version of Bluebird was a "a staple of FM radio in the late 60s and early 70s." By FM radio, I mean WBCN in Boston, of course, but that's another story for a different page. <g> Spventi 23:05, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Added the last line of the first para to provide context as to why one should care about Buffalo Springfield. 71.194.38.54 (talk) 01:09, 10 January 2010 (UTC)Larry Siegel[reply]

Folk Rock / Folk-Rock

To whom it may concern:

Both versions link to exactly the same page, because "folk rock" redirects to "folk-rock."

Thanks to your having an editing war instead of discussing the issue here, the exact same version of the page has been saved four times with only that one link changed. But, hey, if that's how you FOLKs get your ROCKs off, who am I to complain? <g> Spventi 03:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Buffalo Springfield was a rock band; it's a stretch to call them folk-rock. Unlike the Byrds they didn't re-interpret existing folk songs in a rock style; unlike, say, the Seekers they didn't try to write new folksongs. Folk music influenced every aspect of sixties culture, so tagging a band "folk-rock" because it incorporated influences from folk into its eclectic and artsy rock sound is meaningless, at least to me. 71.194.38.54 (talk) 04:07, 7 January 2010 (UTC)Larry Siegel[reply]

Re "The Company"

Thanks for the information about The Company, but please don't wikifiy it until it can be properly linked to an article about the group itself. It would be nice to have an article in place so that we can remove the list of names, which doesn't really belong in this article because it has nothing to do with the Buffalo Springfield. Spventi 02:57, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth (no pun intended!), I agree that the names of the band members of this group are superfluous to the article, and simply add unnecessary clutter. Cgingold 14:08, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Bfretrospective.jpg

Image:Bfretrospective.jpg 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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 01:30, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]