Talk:Jimmy Webb
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
More a puff-piece than an encyclopedia entry. I'm a big Webb fan, but I still find this kind of adulation offensive. Richardsrp (talk) 14:57, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Lacking In All Relevance
"Webb is probably the only songwriter to have had his songs recorded by both R.E.M. and Frank Sinatra." has got to be one of the most meaningless things I have ever read.
Probably POV. I thought it was pretty meaningful, though. I wish I'd written it. It's certainly true. --Clampton 08:48, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
For someone familiar with Frank Sinatra's history of antipathy towards rock, it's a lot more meaningful than to a young person whose only knowledge of this generation is classic recordings. Likewise if you aren't that familiar with REM, what's the big deal about them covering some old song? Don't lots of bands dig up obscure, weird cover versions? It's a good point, but I think there's got to be a more universal way of saying it. Bren Flibig (talk) 21:50, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] First album
The article lists 1970's "Words and Music" as Webb's first album as a performer. What about "Jim Webb Sings Jim Webb" (Epic 1967)? The songs are: I Keep It Hid; You're So Young; I'll Be Back; Life is Hard; I Need You; Our Time is Running Out; I Can Do It on My Own; Then; I'm In Need; Run, Run, Run. Rich 03:09, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- Great. Add it please. I added the album titles based on the discography in the boxed set, so I'm glad to have further information. --Sordel 17:47, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] "By The Time I Get to Phoenix"
Most recorded song of the 20th Century? I'll believe it when I see a citation. Hzoi 11:10, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 03:33, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Jimmy Webb Portrait.jpg
Image:Jimmy Webb Portrait.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 this Wikipedia article 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 23:42, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Great content, awful presentation
This article reads as if it had been copied and pasted from Jimmy Webb's website.
This is not the kind of text that belongs in an encyclopedia. It sounds like an advertisement and has some "weasel-word" action going on.
If I knew how to write, I'd fix it. --angrykeyboarder (a/k/a:Scott) (talk) 09:21, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I agree. The prose itself is neither wikipedia-style nor wikipedia-quality. Bren Flibig (talk) 21:52, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

