Talk:Brunswick Records

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Brunswick Records article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ).
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.

Article policies

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Jazz (Rated Start-class)

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.

Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.


	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.

WikiProject Record Labels

(Rated C-class, High-importance)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Record Labels, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of record labels 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.

C

This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Record Production

(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Record Production; a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's documentation of Record Production articles. Questions or comments related to record production and related articles are welcome at the project's talk page. Anyone interested may join the project: add your name to the list of project members!

Start

This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Genre[edit]

The infobox is for active record labels. There is no question that Brunswick has a long history with varied musical genres. But the current Brunswick Records is a soul music label. Is the infobox intended for the current incarnation of Brunswick or the entire history of the label? The catalogue of the current Brunswick is mainly soul music. The pre-Jackie Wilson material is not part of the current Brunswick and the old stuff is owned by Universal Music Group and Sony BMG Music Entertainment.

Well, I think as the article needs to cover both historic and current Bruswick activities, I suppose the infobox should as well. Perhaps a double listing saying something like "Historic:Various Current:Soul" or something similar? -- Infrogmation 23:30, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

British Brunswick[edit]

The UK arm of Brunswick Records should really have its own section. I believe US and UK Brunswick had much the same catalogue and artist roster from the 1920s through to the 1940s, but they were quite separate labels from the 1950s until the late 60s/early 70s.

During that latter era, broadly speaking, US Brunswick (and Coral) releases were on the Coral label in the UK, whereas US Decca stuff came out on UK Brunswick. That does make things a bit complicated when you consider the likes of Buddy Holly - the Buddy records released on Brunswick in the UK were not the ones that were issued on US Brunswick! 217.155.20.163 14:33, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

From an American perspective, the early records by "Buddy Holly" were on Decca at first, then Coral. The early records by "The Crickets" with Buddy Holly were on Brunswick. Decca decided to consolidate "Buddy Holly and the Crickets" to Coral. Steelbeard1 15:23, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

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

Image:Reetpetite.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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 13:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Added formal fair use rationale. Steelbeard1 (talk) 13:48, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Brunswick Records. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:52, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

anhducwiki7

Tuesday, March 24, 2020