User talk:PaulCHebert

Lol! Ok. Hahahaha That gave me a good laugh! Anyway, that stays. Lol

First of all, it is perfectly acceptable to say that something is, 'known as'. Also, I did not receive a notification about any post that you made in the talk page. If I did, I wouldn't have to explain it in the note I posted w/ the undo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kb217 (talk • contribs) 02:29, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Mohammad bin Salman

Hi PaulCHerbert – I saw you’ve recently made some edits to Mohammad bin Salman. I posted a couple of times on the talk page a while back about the paragraphs on human rights activists, which are now under the Human rights subheading in the Controversies section. The main point is that not one of the sources for the second and third of those three paragraphs contains any mention of him. The five men named in the second paragraph were sentenced in 2012, five years before he became Crown Prince, and the UN Special Rapporteur report (third paragraph) criticised the Saudi authorities as a whole but again made no mention of him as he was not yet Crown Prince.

The other point, which applies to all three paragraphs, is that apart from Democracy Now all the sources are from NGO websites. There’s nothing to suggest they’re questionable, but WP:BLPSPS is clear about not using self-published sources in a BLP. No firm rules etc. of course, but should a section of a BLP rely so heavily on these sources and namedrop as much as this section does, particularly when there’s already an article on Human rights in Saudi Arabia?

I’d be interested to know your thoughts. Thanks. Tarafa15 (talk) 10:56, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

I have no opinion on this matter. I only edited for language, consistency and clarity. PaulCHebert (talk) 17:23, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for the copywrite edits on my Gimlet Media updates. I'll work on my copy sounding less like promotional material going forward, thanks again!

Adameparker (talk) 18:14, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 22

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Highway to Hell (song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page You Never Can Tell (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:55, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Crossover jazz

What ideas do you have about the crossover jazz article? Do you think it should be deleted? Is it a significant enough topic that sources have covered it in depth? Is it less a genre than a selling point or marketing distinction to make it easier to categorize certain kinds of music?
Vmavanti (talk) 23:25, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

My first thought is that I'm not sure I see enough of a disctinction betwwen "crossover" and smooth jazz to warrant a separate article for the former. I'm sure you're correct -- it's a marketing thing more than how any artist would define their own work, and some of the stuff that's on the list -- and most of the article is a list -- doesn't go together. Steely Dan makes sophisticated music, so do Metheny and Benson and Chick Corea. But there isn't really a common, defined link between them. PaulCHebert (talk) 04:59, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

That's pretty much my thinking. A musician can crossover from any genre to any genre. It's the crossing over that's significant, particularly for sales, but having said that, I'm not there's much more to add. I don't see any characteristics in crossover jazz that warrant its existence as a separate genre or WP article. I'll notify EddieHugh to see what he thinks.
Vmavanti (talk) 17:42, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Deleting anything that is covered in sources is very hard (see the silliness of 'white jazz' for an example). If there isn't "enough of a distinction between 'crossover' and smooth jazz to warrant a separate article for the former", then proposing a merge or redirect (instead of deletion) would make sense. Having read the AllMusic attempt at delineation, though, I have little idea of what is supposed to distinguish "crossover" from "fusion" from "instrumental pop" from "smooth jazz" (which isn't mentioned), so what to merge with/redirect to would need some more thought. Jazz fusion appears to be the superordinate category in their system, so that could be the first one to consider. On the talk page, Gyrofrog wrote "'crossover' isn't a 'style' of jazz, but rather a description of its impact", so maybe it could just be merged with the big one, jazz, instead of a particular genre/category. EddieHugh (talk) 18:52, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

At the end of theday, I fucking hate debates about musical genre and subgenre. So boring. That said, I cannot imagine a definition of "jazz fusion" that can meaningfully include, say, the Mahavishnu Orchestra and Fourplay. PaulCHebert (talk) 19:31, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Don't bite the newbies

C'mon, "Go play outside with the other children." is over the top. I get being frustrated with vandals, but you need to tone it down. SQL^{Query me!} 04:00, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

I agree with SQL that your sentence, "Your silly vandalism didn't even last a minute. Undone in less time than it took you to do it. Go play outside with the other children." - is not an acceptable way to address a new user and for an edit that looks to be a test if anything. It will either chase away a legitimate user who didn't know what they were doing, or will taunt and goat the user into making more disruptive edits if you happen to be right and they're in fact here to cause disruption to the project. Either way you look at it, it's not the right way to talk to users. Please don't do that :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:07, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Okay. PaulCHebert (talk) 04:14, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Unsure what to do?

This redirect page is not at all formatted properly, but I don't want to mess around with procedures I don't fully understand.

PaulCHebert (talk) 02:17, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Looks correctly formatted to me. What seems to be the issue? Make sure to change the {{help me-helped}} back into a {{help me}} so that someone will be notified when you reply. Primefac (talk) 02:31, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Is the correct formatting not NAME (Clarifying information) and not NAME, Clarifying Information, as done here? If I'm right, two problems: 1. "Venture Capitalist" should be in parentheses, not after a comma, and 2. "Capitalist" should be lower-case "c". PaulCHebert (talk) 02:53, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

You are correct, fixed the issue. Snowycats (talk) 03:15, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks. PaulCHebert (talk) 03:25, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Justin Hayward as "notable" Gibson ES-335 user

PaulCHebert: I haven't reverted the article to my edit adding Justin Hayward as a "notable" user of the Gibson ES-335; I'm not inclined to argue about this. I want to better understand your reasons for undoing my edit. Toward that end, I have a few questions for you regarding your explanation for undoing my edit:

1. What does "leded" mean? I'm not familiar with that term.
2. What does "goes in a list" mean? Are you referring to a specific list?
3. Can you please point me toward a list of explicit Wikipedia criteria by which "notable" is defined?
4. If no such definition exists, can you please explain your thinking behind the criteria you used to make your "Not a notable enough guitarist" determination? I might agree with you, but without some mutually agreeable definition of "notable", your edit seems arbitrary to me.

For my part, I considered the following factors. As the guitarist of The Moody Blues, Justin Hayward:

• Has earned 18 gold or platinum records, and sold over 70 million albums worldwide
• Is an inductee of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame
• Has used his ES-335 on every album he ever recorded; it's almost a trademark for him, to the point wherein I associate the guitar with him at least as much as with B.B. King or Chuck Berry...and far more than with Eric Clapton. (I'm a guitarist.)

Thanks! Freevito (talk) 15:34, 20 July 2018 (UTC)