Talk:Body and Soul (Joe Jackson album)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fair use rationale for Image:JoeJacksonBodyAndSoul.jpg[edit]

Image:JoeJacksonBodyAndSoul.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:53, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Artwork[edit]

Isn't it worth mentioning the cover art is a tribute to Sonny Rollins, Vol. 2? Note: the cover art with that article is missing, but if you don't know what it looks like just follow the AllMusic link. The Seventh Taylor (talk) 22:39, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Following lack of feedback and new mentioning of an entirely different (but not really specific) album by "Gene Krupa, the noted jazz drummer who worked with Benny Goodman", I have gone ahead and made the change. Note that the Sonny Rollins album is now visible with the wikipedia article. For easy comparison however I've embedded both side by side here. The Seventh Taylor (talk) 01:18, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
240px 240px

Liner notes[edit]

I wish people would leave this alone. This album was a milestone in digital recording history, and the liner notes reflect this. SO LEAVE THEM THERE!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.11.17.185 (talk) 21:14, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What you say about them album is probably true, but the liner notes are copyrighted, and as is made clear at the bottom of every editing page "Content that violates any copyrights will be deleted". This will remain the case. The liner notes can be used as a source for content as long as only short quotations are used and full attribution is given. The rest can be paraphrased, but not too closely. Graham Colm (talk) 21:38, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at reference #4, it cites the liner notes as the source! I am sure Joe Jackson or A&M Records is going to come downon this site because their infomation was used and cited. It's not like you get a bunch of money for this. I can now see why many people don't use this site for infomation, since correct information is deleted. I guess this site is just an opinion piece, as cited facts don't seem to matter.......

Copyright problem removed[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.allmusic.com/artist/joe-jackson-mn0000784732/biography. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 17:41, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Joofjoof (talk) 23:29, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

5x expanded by Binksternet (talk). Self-nominated at 05:44, 16 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

  • Roll Tide Binksternet--I'm having a look at the article (thanks--it's one of my favorites). Drmies (talk) 21:30, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Long enough, new enough, hook is fine and verified, etc. Thanks for expanding this, and yes, "Go For It" is not a good song. Drmies (talk) 21:39, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Heh heh... I'm sure it has its place, but in this album it doesn't fit. Personally, I love his atmospheric/cinematic stuff the best. The natural reverb on the album is amazing. You should hear it on my super-duper-neutral powered monitor speakers from Slovenia. Binksternet (talk) 22:14, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually, my first impression of "Go For It" back in 1984 was that Joe was making a bald play for commercial endorsement. I wonder if any companies ever offered to pay him licensing on their adverts. Maybe if the song had been more successful, familiar to more people... Binksternet (talk) 22:26, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Body and Soul (Joe Jackson album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Wetrorave (talk · contribs) 14:53, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]


I'll be remembering you reviewing this

Infobox and lead[edit]

  • At File:JoeJacksonBodyAndSoul.jpg, you might want to present a better source than Discogs, which is user-generated; this one, which is from the External links section
  • Where is it stated in the body of the article that the album was recorded in January 1984
  • Length isn't mentioned in the body
  • Following MOS:LEAD, the lead shouldn't have references; rather, it should summarize the body of the article, and the body itself should have references
  • "Body and Soul is an album by Joe Jackson, released in March 1984.[3] The album was Jackson's seventh studio album, and his first fully digital project. In the UK it peaked at No. 14," > "Body and Soul is the seventh studio album by English singer-songwriter Joe Jackson, released on 14 March 1984 by A&M Records. Jackson's first fully digital project, it peaked at No. 14 in the UK,"
  • The Professional ratings template should be after the first paragraph of Release and reception, and "Allmusic" should be "AllMusic"

Production[edit]

  • Retitle to Background and production
  • "first discussing it over sushi" – why is it relevant to mention that they were eating sushi, and what exactly does this sentence mean? Were they discussing it while they were eating sushi (which would be "first discussing it while eating sushi"), or did the discussion have a higher priority than the sushi they were eating (which would be "first discussing it rather than discussing the sushi they were eating")?
  • "the soundtrack of Mike's Murder," > the soundtrack of Mike's Murder,

Release and reception[edit]

  • "The album was" > "Body and Soul was"
  • Where is Body and Soul mentioned at ref 13
  • "Shewey was less impressed with the" > "However, the writer was less positive regarding the"
  • "which sounded to him like an Elvis Costello track from the Get Happy!! project (1980)." > "which he compared to musician Elvis Costello's tracks from the album Get Happy!! (1980)."
  • "Shewey thought Jackson's [...] was "a bracing," > "Shewey praised Jackson's [...] for its "bracing,"
  • "published a glowing review, characterizing" > "characterized" for neutrality
  • "On the other hand," – this is possibly a cliché, so change it to "However,"

Musical style[edit]

Track listing[edit]

  • Looks good

Personnel[edit]

  • Needs a source

Charts[edit]

  • The refs should be alongside the numbers, not the chart names

References[edit]

  • Copyvio score looks ok
  • Cite AllMusic as publisher on ref 1
  • Replace Allmusic.com on ref 5 with AllMusic
  • On ref 12, change Grammy.com to Grammy and cite it as publisher
  • Cite Official Charts as publisher on ref 13

External links[edit]

  • Looks good

Overall[edit]

 On hold for now:

Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

The article does have its amount of problems but is still close to GA. Wetrorave (talk) 14:53, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I have performed a bunch of fixes. Sushi removed, refs shifted from lead paragraph to body, some text added to body to satisfy LEAD. I beefed up the touring paragraph and gave it its own section. I moved discussion of the artwork down into its own section and expanded it somewhat. I think "making good" is can be kept: it appears in the dictionary.[2]
How we lookin' now? Binksternet (talk) 21:18, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's lookin' good now Binksternet, and there's additional changes too. Seems like a nice ✓ Pass to me. Wetrorave (talk) 04:17, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

who wrote the liner notes?[edit]

I noticed that the author of the liner notes is not mentioned anywhere on the original album. If the name of the author is known, it would be informative to add it to the article. 2001:985:CA4:1:3C5B:B193:899A:4773 (talk) 12:00, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's there already. The liner notes are referenced to:
  • David Kershenbaum (February 1984). Body and Soul (CD liner notes). A&M Records. A&M CD5000.
Hope that helps. Binksternet (talk) 14:42, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Body_and_Soul_(Joe_Jackson_album)&oldid=1200225105"