This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jazz, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of jazz on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JazzWikipedia:WikiProject JazzTemplate:WikiProject JazzJazz articles
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
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 articles
I don't understand the adamant insistence on removing the author's name from the reference. If the problem is inconsistency with the other reference, I believe when I wrote it I only included the one because the other didn't have an author listed for the encyclopedia entry. But I can double-check that and add it if given (I am away from library access right now). The template for AMG does not include authorship, but that in and of itself is no reason not to include the author's name (who himself has a Wikipedia entry). I would rather remove the template and use a normal external link than needlessly shorten the reference for neatness' sake. As for confusion, I rather think the only one being confused is the person removing it. Chubbles (talk) 16:24, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This is a standard template. The author is not part of that template and is not included elsewhere. Therefore the unexplained inclusion of a link to Eugene Chadbourne is likely to confuse readers. There is no need to remove the template. Bwaybaby77 (talk) 17:22, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Readers never see the template; the only people looking at the code are editors. This displays as a standard reference (the template is not WYSIWYG), "author, title, publisher". The purpose of it is not to display a template; it is to indicate the source of the information, and the author of the source of the information is germane to that purpose. It sounds like your main concern is with (mis?)use of the template, and under these circumstances it actually does sound like removing the template is the best option, if you insist that you find it unnecessarily confusing. I do not believe you speak for any readers in this case. Chubbles (talk) 18:09, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think you misundertand me. Readers see an external link to more information about a musical artist at AllMusic. That's what the template produces and that's what they are used to. The fact that Eugene Chadbourne wrote the information at AllMusic is not especially relevant to Pha Terrell. Inserting the link before the template does not provide any context to the reader to understand why that link is there (and it doesn't need to be there at all in this case). Bwaybaby77 (talk) 21:52, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This particular link is here because the information it provides is the source of much of what is on the page. It's serving a different function than a pure external link would. I'll remove the template so that it's less likely an editor will take this to be an incorrectly templated external link. Chubbles (talk) 05:24, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
