Talk:Jimmie Rodgers

Requested move 23 June 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. The country artist seems to be the primary topic for the spelling "Jimmie Rodgers" given the evidence. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 01:36, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

---

Jimmie Rodgers (country singer) → Template:No redirect – I consider that this page should be moved to "Jimmie Rodgers" (as also noted by other people on its talk page). Currently, "Jimmie Rodgers" redirects to "James Rodgers", which is in of itself a disambiguation page. There are but two people with the exact spelling "Jimmie Rodgers": the original Jimmie Rodgers, whose biography is now contained under the title "Jimmie Rodgers (country singer)" and then "Jimmie Rodgers (pop singer)", who archived fame in the late 1950s. "Jimmie Rodgers (country singer)" currently has on top of the entry a "not to be confused with" notice that links to the pop singer. Now, since old Jimmie Rodgers is considered the "father of country music" and he is often cited as such by major publications and the Country Music Hall of Fame (1, 2, 3) it would be more relevant to link the entry directly to him, with the link on his article offering the link to the pop singer. I'm more than positive that most of the readers are searching for the country singer due to his major fame and influence (not putting down the pop singer, who had a briefer, but also remarkable career). I think to most readers it is frustrating to land on the page "James Rodgers" and to have to look for the singer among multiple names with radically different spellings. It is not even easy for the people who happen to be looking for the pop singer. GDuwenHoller! 20:55, 23 June 2022 (UTC)— Relisting. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 21:41, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

On a follow-up comment, the country singer gets more than double the views on a daily average than the pop singer (1, 2)--GDuwenHoller! 21:00, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Agree. Sinopecynic (talk) 21:07, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

Suport. Can't put it better than you have. Why does this always happen to me (Because) 07:03, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Non-free files

Template:Tqb Copied this from WP:ERRORS. Pings for Template:Yo Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 00:53, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for pulling, Template:U. Template:U, when you raise such a fundamental issue, it's not good enough to raise this issue at Errors only; it needs an article talk page discussion so that those who take an interest in the topic can do something about it. I would have thought that me asking you about the lack of discussion would have spurred you on to start that discussion. Schwede66 21:47, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Template:Ping Had closed the computer to fall asleep to get up for work and didn't see your comment. Therapyisgood (talk) 23:22, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Template:Yo I replaced the "n.a" with a line that should be descriptive enough for "Waiting for a Train" and "Blue Yodel No. 1" (someone already took care of the others). I did not consider it an issue at the time since I'm uploading the files under fair use, and there's more than enough to justify their use for educational purposes (stated under "Purpose of use in article" in all cases).

So, if the material is copyrighted (the actual reason why it's being uploaded under fair use) and its educational purpose on the article is stated, does that not make the replaceability field redundant? It is not the first time someone raises the issue, I had it happen in some other article a long time ago. There is probably a good reason why "n.a" is automatically placed on the template if you don't fill it up (I did not write it myself).--GDuwenHoller! 18:20, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Respectfully, there is not at all "more than enough to justify their use" here. WP:NFCC makes it clear that use of such files is to be kept to an absolute minimum, and I think a maximum of one extract of a song by Jimmie Rodgers would be more than enough for readers to understand the style of music he performed. Template:Xt. Incidentally, the Blue Yodel song was published in 1927 so if I understand the Public domain in the United States article correctly, that's actually already public domain. So my suggestion would be to re-upload File:Blue Yodel No. 1 intro.ogg and File:Blue Yodel No. 1 (yodel).ogg as public domain content, and then leave it at that. It would be extremely unusual and a breach of the NFCC guidelines to assert that any fair use audio is required for reader understanding of this topic.  — Amakuru (talk) 20:04, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

In that case, we could probably just remove "Waiting for a Train" for the time being. I see that according to Cornell "Blue Yodel No. 1" should currently be PD as you say. I guess "Waiting For a Train" falls into that 95-year period (which would next year make it ok to upload to it Commons). I remember hearing something about an extension to 100 years, but I don't seem to find anything about it...

Anyhow, I'll try to take care of those sound samples shortly.--GDuwenHoller! 20:36, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Template:Ping, Template:Ping I wasn't concerned so much with the number of fair use recordings (although if Ammakuru has issues with this that's totally fine), I don't think the 1927 sound recordings are PD. Please wait before uploading to the Commons. According to here, "For recordings first published between 1923-1946, the additional time period is 5 years after the general 95-year term." So for instance our article 2027_in_public_domain#United_States says "Sound recordings that were published in 1926 and [...] will [...] enter the public domain.". I would say any sound recording published in 1927 wouldn't be public domain for a while yet (2028) under the Music Modernization Act. Alternatively, you can just link to licensed versions of the songs on YouTube for instance to demonstrate his yodeling instead of fair using the clip. Therapyisgood (talk) 22:55, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

The "NAs" in the current fair use boxes aren't acceptable though, so replace those with actual rationals. Therapyisgood (talk) 22:58, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:NFCCE point 3 all NAs should be replaced with actual rationals. Therapyisgood (talk) 23:01, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Given that the one I thought is public domain actually unfortunately isn't, I think we're back to having just one fair use clip in the article per the "minimal usage" clause of NFCC. Whichever one clip you think is most indicative of his work and most necessary for readers in understanding it. Linking legitimate copies on YouTube as an external link at the bottom seems a good plan too, if you want readers to have the option to listen to it. Obviously the rationales need to be brought up to scratch too, per above. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 10:41, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Aha! I remember I read something about the extension making it 100 years. Well, it's only a few to go in order to reinstate most of these files by uploading a full version (that counting that the companies that own the catalogs don't attempt to extend it). I'll just leave the "Blue Yodel No. 1" and the excerpt of his yodeling in that case.--GDuwenHoller! 18:34, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Template:U With the removal of the excessive use of non-free files, is it now enough to reinstate the hook now?--GDuwenHoller! 17:57, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

My concerns about the number of fair use clips are just about assuaged now... I would have preferred one only, but if you really think two are absolutely necessary then so be it. It's close enough to the expiry point that I'm not sure there will be too many concerns right now anyway. However, and Template:U will correct me if I'm wrong, I think you need to eliminate all of the "n.a." rationales from File:Blue Yodel No. 1 intro.ogg and File:Blue Yodel No. 1 (yodel).ogg including those in commercial opportunity etc. Each of these NFCC points must be individually satisfied. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 20:14, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Template:U I see your point, forgot about those. Well, I replaced the last two "n.a.". I just plan to use two clips since I want to separately illustrate the yodel and the singing style. It's only a matter of time until I can restore all the files with their full version in the coming years anyhow.--GDuwenHoller! 18:02, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

The Jimmie Rodgers Entertainers image caption

I didn't want to edit the article without asking first, but isn't that Jimmie sitting on the far right of the image? Rihdiugam (talk) 02:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Template:Reply That was Claude Grant. Jimmie was balding (you kind of get to see it in some pictures, though you'll rarely see one of him without a hat like on this particular case). But the best way to recognize him from the others in my opinion is probably the shape of his protruding ears (and that band sure could hear!) Jimmie's were pointing out.--GDuwenHoller! 18:31, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks a million for the reply GDuwen! That's interesting about the ears. It was Dr. John's version of Waiting for a Train that brought me here btw. Just in case your stuck for something to listen to :-) Rihdiugam (talk) 22:25, 31 January 2024 (UTC)