Talk:The Australian Pink Floyd Show/Archive 1

Cut and Paste Text

Ummm... some of the text for this article is lifted direct (cut and paste style) from the website of the band (improper punctuation and all). Is that really correct from the standpoint of plagiarism and overall integrity of the wiki? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.146.167.74 (talk • contribs).

Criticism of the punctuation may be a legitimate exercise if we wish to preserve the dignity and beauty of the English language-but the history of the band as recalled on the website is accurate, even if it is a commercial tool for advertising the band as well .I know it to be true because of my personal connection with the band. However- TAPFS is a 'tribute' band and there are few if any proper scholarly treatments of the 'tribute band' phenomenon.Indeed I would even venture to suggest that 'tribute' bands are generally viewed ( and perhaps unfairly in some instances)as some sort of inconsequential ephemera despite the fact that a band such as TAPFS has indeed played in Arenas across the globe and is a very popular touring act in it's own right. So why TAPFS might be considered to be ephemeral whereas something like the Berlin Philharmonic (which also plays the music of other composers)is considered to be something more worthy of note is something I find rather strange. There are, nonetheless many written interviews in existence concerning TAPFS which can be viewed if one wishes to scour the internet. Of course-whether these interviews will satisify the requirements of the wiki project remains to be discussed since many of these interviews are published in promotional articles and so may be deemed to be 'unreliable' sources. However that does not mean that the statements made in the interviews are false and I can of course cite myslf as a reliable source regarding any statements concerning TAPFS but my connection with the project would make it difficult for me to pose as an 'objective' contributer. Any suggestions as to what I should do?Godfinger 01:35, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the 'importance' of the article here are some starter references that may help to improve this article :

There is a mention of TAPFS in the Rough Guide Music Series paperbacks called 'The Rough Guide to Pink Floyd' by Tony Manning. Published 31 August 2006

There is a mention of TAPFS in the book 'Pink Floyd' by Patrick Humphries.Published by Andre Deutsch Ltd 23 Sept 1997

The book 'Echoes - a complete history of Pink Floyd' is written by Glen Povey who managed the band in the early years of TAPFS in the UK (1993-1995)

There is an article in the Sun in the 'Something for the Weekend' section entitled 'Tribute to the Masters' Sunday May 20 2007.

There is an interesting article on the tribute scene that includes comments by Jason Sawford and Chas Cole in the 'Film and Music' section of The Guardian May Friday 18 2007 Godfinger 14:03, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

False claims!

"Recreated David Gilmour's guitar set up, including the rare box used to create the seagull sounds in Echoes (of which only four are said to exist, the other three being owned by Gilmour). Gilmour has stated however that no such stompbox exists."

This is rubbish. The 'seagull' effect is achieved with a backwards-wired wah pedal. Swap the input and output cables, open the pedal fully, and use your volume/tone controls to adjust the pitch of the high-pitched sounds that come out. Works best with Cry Baby pedals, and - I think - Vox Wah pedals, and requires single-coil pickups I think. Anyway, enough geek-talk, this claim is false and I'm removing it! SJH 23:44, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

The claim is not entirely false. The box that is used by Steve Mac to recreate the seagull effect was made by Pete Cornish,who has I believe designed components for Dave Gilmour himself. It may be true that a similar effect is obtained with other pedals but there is a specifically customised 'seagull effect' box in existence. Steve Mac owns two of them. I have seen them with my own eyes. The claim about only two or more in existence probably comes from Steve's conversation with Pete Cornish-who according to Steve Mac, impled that Dave Gilmour had a box and so did Steve Mac and that the are no other specifically designed 'seagull' effect boxes as such. This comment, which I was privy to from Steve Mac has probably filtered out to several people including the author of the article. It may have been mentioned in an interview. I will investigate this further.Godfinger 01:35, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Interesting points - thanks for your input here. I've done a bit more research and have found photographic evidence that Gilmour's seagull effect was achieved using a reverse wired wah pedal: http://www.gilmourish.com/?page_id=182. Scroll down *to the section on The Wall tour and you can see a switch on his Cry Baby pedal that reverses the polarity. But I don't doubt that boxes to achieve a similar effect are in existence. SJH

You're both wrong because the seagull sounds are a sound clip (See Echoes' article). You're referring to the wailing whale sounds. I posted that trivia originally, long long time ago. No idea where I read it, but it was one of those more in depth fan sites that was acceptable as a reference in 2003, but would be stomped upon now. -- ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 04:38, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Ian Cattells website

Please do not remove this website. It contains - almost entirely - Australian Pink Floyd Show content. There are no guidelines against such material, and very few of the other band members have sites, let alone sites with relevant content. -- ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 20:33, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Music/MUSTARD#External_links (#'s 4, 5 and 6)

Please see discussion at the wikipedia content noticeboard. All edits removing the photo at the top, or the website at the bottom will be quickly reverted as vandalism until this discussion has taken place. -- ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 21:58, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

The page has been locked until friday to assist with this. Users are welcome to make their opinions heard here, but are encouraged to do so at the content noticeboard entry. If there continues to be no consensus as now, I'm going to ask that the lock be extended an additional week. -- ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 22:56, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

And if there is no consensus after a further week? Godfinger (talk) 00:10, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

If it makes it to this Friday without any change, I will list it in more places to get more editors to take a look. It's pretty obvious that this decision needs to be made by someone with no connection with this article. Both you and I and the entire Aussy Floyd Show fan base are too strung into this article (Myself as the original creator and you as a major contributor) to be able to make an unbiased decision.

Should nothing come after a second week, then I'll contact an admin and see what the next step should be. Most likely the article will be semi-protected to keep SLA's from changing things, and the link left in as it was before the edit war began until there is enough of a discussion to warrant changing that. -- ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 00:26, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Of course the link was there before the 'edit war' began.It was this very link that caused the so called edit war shortly after It was placed there by someone as many people seem to be trying to enforce wikipedias policy about external links.From what I've read on the notice board it's clear there seems to be a consensus from people posting about the unnecessary link and stating reasons as to why it's unnecessary.It also makes sense that if you allow this link to stand then you have to allow every link placed on the page concerning a member/employee of the band sites personal webpage..They will all contain information/photos/videos of tapfs.However as with Cattell's site,they'll contain nothing more than what's on the body of the main fan site regarding the band. The rest of the content is as the web address states about Ian Cattell.It appears to me you're having the page locked for another week as people don't agree with you.Your latter reply almost states that If people continue to disagree with you then you'll make sure no one can change it anyway.Hardly a democracy on fair and equal editing of wikipedias pages.(Floydfever22 (talk) 20:07, 15 July 2009 (UTC))

Your conspiracy theories continue to humour me, but are just simply not true. If you look through the history of this article, you'll see that I created it 5 and a half years ago. The closest connection to the band was seeing them live in Toronto... I believe it was December 23rd 2003. Ian Cattell wasn't even in the band at that point.

I would hardly call what is happening at the noticeboard consensus, just a lot of text by a couple of authors. Regardless, Godfinger offered a well argumented response, which I fully agree with (Removing the link, and replacing with the tributehub one). I also believe the myspace page should be unlinked, as myspace sites are not professional or verifiable.

The argument of "If you include one you have to include all" is not well pressed, especially since band bios are available on the official site for every other member.

Finally, what I intend to do is have the article semi-protected, regardless of the outcome. This means that newly signed up members (Less than 4 days/10 edits I believe) or IP's cannot edit the page. This is a protective measure to prevent the back and forth reversions made mostly by accounts with edits to this article only (Single purpose accounts) and IP addresses. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 20:53, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Introduction

The re-edited introduction by 'Floydian' removed any mention of 'international arena tours'. I think that this should be mentioned in the introduction because it asserts the notability of the subject. What other 'tribute band' plays in the venues that TAPFS does? It is one of the reasons TAPFS has an article in Wikipedia in the first place.Godfinger (talk) 15:25, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

My bad, missed putting that back in there... Was too focused on constantly reverting this page. -- ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 18:02, 12 July 2009 (UTC)