Talk:Steve Lacy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to musicians and musical groups on Wikipedia. | ||
 |
It is requested that a picture or pictures of this person be included in this article to improve its quality. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jazz, set up to organize and expand entries on jazz and related subgenres, as well as other related subjects. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information). |
[edit] Neutrality
This article veers from neutrality several times. For example, calling Lacy underrated in the US. Calling him an innovator to rank with Braxton and Evans....the "most important" collabortation with Waldron, etc. It reads like a fond obituary more than an encylcopedia article.Bsharvy 15:22, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Please read more carefully: it compares him to Anthony Braxton and (saxophonist) Evan Parker not Gil Evans; & the statement about Waldron is not excessive (it's hedged with "probably" & it is straightforwardly true: outside of his own sextet, Lacy recorded most often with Mal Waldron--take a look at a discography if you like). --ND 01:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
The point is that there is a consisent lack of neutrality in the article. The criticism of the Waldron comment is that it is subjective, not that it is "excesive." If you think the relevant fact is that "Lacy recorded most often with Mal Waldron", then that is what the article should say, not that the colaboration was the most important. The latter comment is pushing a point of view. Other examples are that the range of musicians he worked with is "truly extraordinary", that the Waldon duet albums are "classic," and so on.Bsharvy 04:48, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] First wife?
The "Conversations" book mentions on pages 13, 14, 25, 28, 29, 30, 33 and 37 a first wife and (step) children. Perhaps it risks making the article too "gossipy", but it seems to me to be something that would improve the article if it provided a name or any other information on this woman and the children. This sort of thing is typical in may biographical overviews. Delegan2 08:53, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Not "Steve Lacy"
This article is about one person, whose real name was not Steve Lacy. There are other successful persons whose real names are Steve Lacy, however this article disparages them by not including any notation about the REAL Steve Lacy's in the world. One such example is the site located at STEVELACY.COM yet there are many others who have made significant contributions to humanity, to business, to the arts, etc. This article has the feel of an obsession by one person who imposes such information upon the readers and censors editoral comment.
- I take it this is a put-on. --ND 00:48, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
This guy seems to be trying to steal Web traffic generated by the musician. The Web site he mentions makes constant reference to jazz, music, and various jazz musicians that have no relevance to anything on the site. They would, however, catch some traffic looking for the musician, containing the usual keywords. His line of business? Web marketing. Getting the Web address into the Wikipedia entry for the saxophonist (as he does above) looks to be similarly motivated. He has previously put his Web site in the external links section of this page. I suggest removing his entry to the talk page, as it is incoherent and self-promotional. Note that the comment is also unsigned. Bsharvy 08:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Seems BSHARVY has an axe to grind, maybe even sour grapes. I think the guy above has a good point. Wiki Editors often are parochial in their efforts, which are primarily subjective and self-promoting of their particluar cause. There are plenty of people named STEVE LACY, I checked, so promoting one such person over all others using the only such Wiki address available is censorship, and communistic! Face it, the guy above was sharp enough to actually have the domain name of his real name, a feat that even your late jazz musician apparently could not pull off. I say the guy with the domain name, is the real one!
- I happen to also agree that "Bsharvy" is stretching the truth about SteveLacy.com, in fact going there one finds the gentleman to be a Christian, a business consultant and a Genealogy enthusiast. Marketing is apparnetly a sideline or pass-time. So the comment above about him "stealing web traffic" is grossly inappropriate and probably slanderous; poeple have been successfully sued for much less, I know! To be sure though before I wrote this, I checked web traffic for some key terms, such as "Steve Lacy", "Steve Lacy Music", etc, and found minimal, almost no entries for those terms. So I think "Bsharvy" makes much ado about nothing. Clearly he has an axe to grind and is unnecesarrily hard-timing the guy about whose real name is Steve Lacy and who legitimately owns the domain SteveLacy.com. jbenoit
++ Since "Steven Norman Lackritz" AKA steve lacy (yeah, sure) is now dead and gone, I think this Wiki article should be abandoned and other living Steve Lacy named persons can adopt it for development. Clearly, the person who owns http://www.stevelacy.com has a legitmate case to make if he wishes. At least he isn't deceiving people by using a pseudonym such as Lacritz used. Steve Lacy dknoltz —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.55.163.228 (talk) 22:58, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
