Talk:Bobby Whitlock

This article sucks. Could someone please clean it up so it doesn't read like an 8th grade research paper? SeligErasmus (talk) 16:16, 25 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Talk:Bobby Whitlock

Article Cleanup

This article sucks. Could someone please clean it up so it doesn't read like an 8th grade research paper? SeligErasmus (talk) 16:16, 25 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Fair use rationale for Image:RawVelvetcover.jpg

Image:RawVelvetcover.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 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 23:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

General Faults

This article is poorly written (gramatically) and skips some major points of Whitlock's story: Duane Allman's death and Whitlock's "Christian Music" phase for example. Editing and additions needed.

The article contains references to Bobby's years in Memphis, Mississippi and Austin but not years in Nashville. I remember him being quoted in The Austin Chronicle (ca. 2006?) as saying he left Nashville because the population there don't have enough soul to appreciate his talents. Wondering if this is why Nashville is left out of the story. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Groovamos (talkcontribs) 18:51, 8 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

Recent overhaul/expansion of the article

Above here, there's a couple of blunt comments about the state of this article, going back some years – all quite valid, I'm sure. I've recently expanded the article and dealt with all concerns regarding balance, I hope: eg, in response to the banner from Jan 2010, which stated that someone seemingly close to the subject (Bobby Whitlock) had made significant contributions in the past. I've given myself a C for my homework ( ;), but if others feel that rating's too flattering, then feel free to take it down a notch. I'll be adding a few <citation needed> tags – for instance, after that mention of Whitlock supplying handclaps on the Sam & Dave single (a detail I'd love to see kept if possible), same for the point late in the article about Whitlock hosting a TV show with Steve Cropper. The article could definitely benefit from some better sources in places: as I've admitted in some of the edit comments, a few of the refs I've come up with are of the barrel-scraping variety, for sure. If anyone out there's got some good books on Southern rock musicians, the 1960s/70s Memphis soul school, Derek and the Dominos members, etc, please jump right in! Best, JG66 (talk) 07:41, 3 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.