User talk:Ndorward

Derek Bailey

I appreciate your improvements to the Derek Bailey article- the least tribute we can give to the great man is a decent wikipedia article! quercus robur 22:01, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kind words--yeah, I was just kind of pissed off that the bit on his music described it as sounding like undifferentiated "noise" to the newcomer. Nonsense! & the mention of Webern is important I feel. ND 02:40, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

High Windows

I've left a comment on High Windows and balance on Talk:Philip Larkin. I basically agree with you that we need balance, but I'm not sure about the language at the moment; I'd be much happier with the words "acrid self-parody" if we could put it in quotes and cite a reference. — Stumps 08:28, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure: the exact wording doesn't matter as long as it's clear that the quality of the later work is a live critical issue. ND 06:08, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Birks Works

You're quite right of course (though I've seen it as "Birks' Works"); I was having a brainstorm, I think. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:56, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moanin'

"Blakey" for "Golson" was a silly slip of mine, but you also made a number of changes that go dead against the album notes and sleeve. I'm not saying that they can't be wrong, but you need to provide a citation for your changes. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:38, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't go into detail re: every change I made, but they are all correct as far as I know. First of all, re the title: take a look at the cover of the album which is already on the page. It doesn't have the word "Moanin'" on it anywhere. If you have the current RVG edition of the album you can check the Blumenthal liner notes for other factual matters like the fact it's Blakey's first album for Blue Note after several years away from the label (on Columbia &c). I don't know why you're calling "Are You Real" a blues, even Feather doesn't say this. It's not a blues, I can assure you--it's a series of straightforward descending II-V changes with an extra tag for the 2nd A section. I play the tune regularly & have transcribed it off the album, & know it well. -- The Blumenthal notes have their own problems (he seems to mix up "Are You Real" & "Along Came Betty" at one point) but do give a little more perspective on the album than Feather's original notes. The track listings on the wiki page are also wrong for the version of the album pictured on the page, since the RVG edition (which is what's in the photo) puts the alt.take at the end & adds a track of studio chatter at the start. -- ND 16:51, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As I said before, the problem was citations, rather than disagreement. The only actual disagreement I have is removing "(Miniature)" from "Drum Thunder"; it's included in the title on at least two versions of the album (my old LP, and the 1987 CD release). Do you have a reason for removing it? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 17:16, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not on the facsimile of the sleeve in the version I have; perhaps it was, like the LP title, added later? I believe there are also variant versions of the cover. ND 17:22, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sources I've found for it include [1], [2], [3]productid=18198&cat=262&XCARTSESSID=3a3e7547dada23c3f682c09f3f450a99], and a host of others, but with no obvious pattern emrging as to when the word is included and when it isn't. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 17:52, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dizzy

Thanks for filling out this page a bit. Your edits were enlightening. -LambaJan 13:42, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AMM

Thanks for adding the source for Rowe not wanting 'Apogee' released. I agree it doesn't need a footnote; I was simply curious as to where it had come from. Since it appears to be from the horse's mouth, so to speak, isn't the word 'apparently' redundant? --Richardrj 19:54, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm.... maybe, though I put it in there mostly just as a softener (i.e. not to accuse Prevost too bluntly of being in the wrong, or permitting the possibility of misunderstanding). ND 21:45, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Larkin

Thanks for the kind message. And, fwiw, I think you're right about the length of the "AWJ" quote. I'm not sure how to handle it, tho' -- it doesn't lend itself to trimming (coherent, well sustained, legnthy diatribe that it is), and I tend not to be bold enough for en-masse deletions of others' contribs. Sgt Pinback 21:36, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Jazz

Hello! I've noticed from your edits that you seem to have an interest in jazz (as well as knowledge of jazz). I'm just about ready to launch a new WikiProject for jazz, and would love to have you aboard. If you think you might be interested, details and a place to sign up can be found on Wikipedia:WikiProject/List of proposed projects. If you have any questions let me know. Thanks! --cholmes75 ^{(chit chat)} 19:33, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have a self-conscious question

I hope you don't mind. Why do people like jazz? I mean, I love jazz, I do, but my friend sort of just disdains my aesthetic admiration of it, scoffing that I am superficial. What element am I missing? I love the sound, from cool to hot, new, fusion, old, big band, etc., it's the seemless melodies that grab me. I know a little of the history, I love seeing shows (I am seeing one tonight), but it seems nothing lets me love it the way my friend says he does. I know it has a sonorous soul, and he, my friend, admits he doesn't even know that much or is so fond, but says confidently that I have no right to say so much about something I only recently picked up. I thought I got it because I felt it, and now I question everything I've attatched myselft to. I thought it was just a matter of taste. Is there something I have to learn "about" this music to appreciate it? -Bordello 02:32, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice. Will keep it in mind. And thanks for the link; I'll sign up and ask around. -Bordello 08:51, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for spending time to dispel my fears, and for correcting my spelling of "Einstein". For that I award you the mid-sized purple asterisk of earnest helping. * Spend it wisely. -Bordello 23:50, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the star! -- Good listening! What are you listening to lately anyway? -- I should add that the other thing I found useful in getting into jazz was a good record-review book: the Penguin Cook/Morton remains the best all-purpose one, & the Ratliff Times book is a handy primer. ND 02:45, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll find those on Amazon. Right now Miles Davis, Charlie Parker, Duke Ellington, a little Coltrane, Freddy Cole, Ella Fitzgerald, and Jaco Pastorius. And whatever muzak that plays. -Bordello 09:41, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like some good listening! Here it's mostly an odd assortment of things that I'm reviewing or just happen to have around, mostly less familiar names--Jon Jang, Kenny Burrell, William Gagliardi, Brian McWhorter, Biagio Coppa, Clusone 3, Eddie Gale, Sonny Clark, Roger Kellaway, Randy Sandke. ND 18:24, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Man, I haven't heard of any of them. But I'll look into it. I decided to take on the classics (Kind of Blue, etc.) first. I still feel like I'm in the shock phase of fawning over jazz. It's incredible! -Bordello 04:24, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, many are pretty obscure names. But if you haven't heard Sonny Clark, then one of the great pleasures awaits you: get hold of Cool Struttin', Leaping and Loping, and Grant Green's Complete Quartets with Sonny Clark: some of the best jazz of the 1950s/1960s. (Stuart Broomer once referred to the Green/Clark quartet as "hard bop's answer to the MJQ".) -- & Kenny Burrell's Midnight Blue is a laidback classic of the period. -- A good guide to the 1950s/1960s scene is David Rosenthal's Hard Bop, now out of print but easy to find; it has a few flaws (the inexplicable omission of Hank Mobley and Grant Green, and the misdating of Lee Morgan's death in the opening chapter) but it's otherwise a great little primer on the period. It's where I first heard about Larry Young & Tina Brooks for instance. -- Another book I like is Larry Kart's Jazz in Search of Itself, which is another book that will have you heading to the record store with a shopping list. ND 15:09, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Iain Sinclair

Hi Ndorward, we meet again (see AMM above). The tedious argument over white male historical figures is rearing its head again at Talk:Iain Sinclair. I'm 100% with you on this. Do you have anything more to add? --Richardrj 09:22, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, (being a relatively novice Wikipedian) I'm not sure what to do next: this anonymous person seems happy to sit there constantly reinserting it in the page. I think it's appalling but I'm not going to sit at my keyboard constantly reverting it. What's the best thing to do at this point? It's not "vandalism" exactly (the guy doesn't deserve to be reported on that basis) but it's nonetheless incredibly irritating. I was hoping that more people would chime in with opinions--at the moment it's two people against (you & me) & one person for (the anonymous poster) the dead-white-male revisions, which is a majority that only hinges on one vote.... ND 16:14, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see that that guy is now accusing YOU of vandalising the page. I think this is close to the dictionary definition of "chutzpah". ND 16:33, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know, it's unbelievable. I've reverted the edits again this morning and added a new paragraph to the talk page; let's see if he engages in discussion rather than blithely reverting again. I'm fairly new to Wikipedia as well but, to answer your question, I think the next stage would be dispute resolution, which as the article shows can be a lengthy process. Let's hope it doesn't come to that. --Richardrj 10:34, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Randy Sandke

Thanks for expanding and improving it. I started these stubs because they were requested and researching them taught me a bit, which is good as I'm interested in learning more about jazz. That said it meant I was often starting articles on musicians who I'm not very or at all familiar with. I'm glad to see someone knowledgeable fixing my errors.--T. Anthony 05:32, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I should add that you can feel free to fix any stubs I started. My interest is more older jazz so I imagine I was particularly off on the younger musicians. I kind of just wanted to get some articles out there so those knowledgeable could do something with them.--T. Anthony 05:44, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your work on creating new pieces – I'll keep an eye out for new pieces & see if I have anything to contribute.... I don't know what reference works you're using but I do recommend the Rough Guide to Jazz as a basic resource. Plus the better AMG entries (the biographical entries are usually fine, the reviews are very unreliable). With Sandke I was lucky because I had a copy of Larry Kart's piece which he sent me (it was omitted from his Jazz in Search of Itself because his publisher wouldn't give him enough pagecount). --ND 20:03, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

12 Monkeys Antisocial Six/Sex?

Did you check the subtitles? - Zepheus <ツィフィアス> 18:45, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I saw it in a theatre. If you have a copy can you check? --ND 21:56, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, absolutely. I'll check tonight. - Zepheus <ツィフィアス> 23:25, 23 October 2006 (UTC) Okay. I checked it. It says "Antisocial Six" in the subtitles. I changed it back on the page. - Zepheus <ツィフィアス> 05:27, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK! -- Cripes, I still wonder if that was a typo.... what does it sound like on the audio? I wish I'd known of this a week or so ago, as I talked to Gilliam briefly after a screening of Brazil & could have asked... --ND 21:55, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wait a minute. You talked to Gilliam? Rock on. Back to the question, it sounds really unclear on the audio. The character has a super-deep voice, so it's hard to be sure. I think it is "six" though, as in "Code 6" or "Chapter 6" of a penal code. Besides, what would "anti-social sex" be? Sex itself is a social endeavour. - Zepheus <ツィフィアス> 22:33, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I tend to think in the evidently appallingly hierarchized, paranoid world of the future posited in the film, it might well be the case that (as in the recent past!) sexual deviances would be punished by law...! Anyway, it probably makes just as much sense either way. -- Yeah, Gilliam was in town for a few days to promote Tideland & did a Q&A & signing session after Brazil & a more formal public interview after Tideland. I just exchanged a few words with him at the signing, mostly about Geoff Muldaur, who'd played town just two days before the screening – Gilliam talked a bit about the Muldaurs' version of "Brazil", which was the inspiration for its use in the film. He mentioned that while he'd met Maria Muldaur he'd never met Geoff. --ND 05:45, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it works as "six" or "sex." I think we're going to have to go with the subtitles until something better comes along. - Zepheus <ツィフィアス> 06:24, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

just watched the HD-DVD version...gotta say it sounds like "Anti-Social Sex". In 12 Monkeys it seems Gilliam is more likely to mix terms to invent something new rather than make up something new like 'anti social six'...but that's just me. the people that create the subtitles usually just quickly do it...i wouldn't trust them over your own ears. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.167.158.149 (talk) 11:16, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, makes a LOT more sense to me, & I think that's what it is. Did you try the subtitles? (But I'm not sure Gilliam necessarily read them anyway.) Is the script published? --ND 14:50, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dizzy Gillespie

noticed you did some edits there a while back - check it out now, lot's of changes and a touch of controversy about the opening paragraph.--Smkolins 23:32, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Misha Mengelberg

Hi Nordward, it seems you know a lot about Evan Parker. If he is not a jazz saxophonist, What he is than? It is a fact that Evan Parker is part of the European free jazz scene like Misha Mengelberg. Do you know what it means "Beckmesser"? Have a nice day.----Aktiver Arbeiter 16:42, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's no strict dividing line between "free jazz" and "free improvisation" but I think Parker's music is better classified as the latter (and Derek Bailey even more so). Parker himself has made some pertinent remarks on this distinction from time to time but I'm not going to dig through all the interviews & liner notes I have to find them right now. -- Yes I know who Beckmesser is. Have a nice day yourself, punk. --ND 16:24, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Theo Jörgensmann

Hi Nordward, I have translated some sentences from his book. To understand this theory, it can be a help, to read books from Jean Gebser. Gruß---Aktiver Arbeiter 05:28, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't concerned about the theory itself, just about whether the translation into English of the sentences in question was idiomatic. --ND 20:13, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

René McLean

Hi, Ndorward,

Just a minor point – I was wondering what your source is for the description of René McLean as Jackie McLean's stepson. I'm not questioning it – I'm just interested in any material about Jackie McLean, and I seem to have missed your source. John FitzGerald 12:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John--the source is Ira Gitler via Larry Kart. See the discussion here. Plus simple logic: Rene was born in 1946 (see his page at allmusic.com), when his dad was 14--not impossible, but very unlikely, for a biological father. --ND 14:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, ND. John FitzGerald 13:16, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sheila Jordan, Patty Waters, free jazz

Those were good additions you made to the free jazz article. (The Jeanne Lee article is new.) Dogru144 16:49, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re-doing the changes you made in jazz article

If you click on the history and keep going back in the history, back to your changes, you'll be able to find your version. You click on the date and you'll get the archived version. If you cut and paste you'll be able to get the old material.

P.S., I previously gave a reaction to your free jazz revisions. Dogru144 16:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments. I know how to undo changes but just decided to leave well enough alone. Really, the whole article is a mess but without taking weeks of my life to sort it out I can't see what to do with it. (I'm inclined to think that Wikipedia's "gradualism" philosophy only works in the initial stages of an article's gestation. After a while it becomes too hard to make substantial fixes.) There's also the problem that trying to fix up the article would probably stir up a hornet's nest.... (One wonders who the fans of incredibly obscure 1920s bands are who make the article so top-heavy....) --ND 21:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion would be greatly appreciated

Hello there, I am a fellow member of Wikiproject jazz. I was wondering, if you had a moment to spare, if you would be willing to give your opinion on a matter at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 June 15 concerning a category I created. The category is [[Category:Jazz musicians of New Orleans]], and it has been proposed that the article be merged with Musicians of New Orleans and American jazz musicians. This is precisely why I created the category, because it seemed to me the birthplace of jazz music and continous modern symbol of jazz certainly deserves a category unto itself. Regardless of your opinion, I would greatly appreciate your input there so as to have a discussion over the matter. Thanks. (Mind meal 03:24, 15 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

New categories for jazz musicians

Hello fellow member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Jazz! I am delivering this message to all members of the project to inform them of a major addition to the evolution of this project. Please see Category:Jazz musicians by genre to familiarize yourselves with the new categories for jazz musicians. Most of the genre categories contain sub-genres in their drop-down menus, so be sure to open them up! I am sending this to everyone to speed up the population of these categories. The sub-genres have been carefully researched to ensure they belong under their corresponding "mother genre"! And please, when in doubt do not categorize something via an assumption. Well, that about covers it! Any help in this regard will be greatly appreciated.(Mind meal 05:34, 25 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

California Hard reply

Just wanted you to know I replied to your question on the Talk:California Hard page. :) (Mind meal 01:55, 10 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Phil Minton

No problem! It's only a start – there's obviously room for further expansion. A few of the articles I'd created had red-links to Phil Minton and when I noticed they had turned blue I went to have a look. I didn't see the original article, but then I obviously didn't look quick enough! --Bruce1ee 06:39, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jazz

"It's tidier w/o slashes".. it is - and 'Jazz' could do with a lot more of your good tidy-ups!217.42.99.130 13:22, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jazz cont.

Now we've got more & again 'Jazz" is better for your efforts, Ndorward. don't stop! 217.42.99.130 16:17, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I try to help with minor stylistic fixes & the correction of obvious errors, but the problems with the article seem to me more deep-seated & I just have no idea how it can really be fixed. --ND 17:16, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Larkin

Since you are a previous editor of the page on Philip Larkin may I draw your attention to a request for advice that I have placed on the talk page? Thanks! Almost-instinct (talk) 22:11, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't really have anything to add at present; when I last edited the piece I'd just come off helping edit a poetry anthology (Keith Tuma's Oxford anthology of British/Irish poetry) so was fairly au fait with criticism in the area but I'm not even in academe anymore. A quick glance at the article suggests it's actually a fairly decent entry as it stands IMO. If you make any changes to it, I have the page on my watchlist & will see them & if I have any comments or corrections to add will certainly pitch in. --ND (talk) 22:11, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I don't think that as it stands there's anything wrong with it - I certainly don't want to change/remove anything that's currently there - it just seems to me that it's lacking some key facts (which I'm good on). Also I thought that if the structure was clearer then people with knowledge of his works' reception history (which I'm not remotely good on) might be more tempted to make useful contributions. I'll attempt to do it in one fell swoop in a few days' time, rather than in dribs and drabs, so that the page isn't forever popping up on people's watchlists. Till then almost-instinct 22:22, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Rowe AMPLIFY 2008.gif

An image that you uploaded or altered, File:Rowe AMPLIFY 2008.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — neuro^{(talk)(review)} 16:39, 20 March 2009 (UTC) --— neuro^{(talk)(review)} 16:39, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Rowe Solo.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, File:Rowe Solo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — neuro^{(talk)(review)} 16:39, 20 March 2009 (UTC) --— neuro^{(talk)(review)} 16:39, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Ndorward! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 123 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Karen Mac Cormack - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 01:15, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation

Dear Ndorward,

I am inviting you to join the Miles Davis WikiProject. I found you, Ndorward, on several revision history statistics of articles related with "Miles Davis", and therefore I am of the opinion, that you should be one of those members of this WikiProject I recently created. I hope you will approve my invitation.

Regards,

-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 23:14, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:13, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]