Talk:Craig Chaquico/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled

I'm reasonably sure that "From the Redwoods to the Rockies" was with Russ Freeman the GUITARIST (of The Rippingtons) rather than Russ Freeman the pianist. Anybody confirm this?

You are correct. The album was released in 1998 via RCA. Jazzcat23 (talk) 17:31, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

How does Craig pronounce his surname?

How does Craig pronounce his surname? I just heard a DJ say /Chä-kē′sō/ (using AHD4 transcription), but the logical Spanish pronunciation would be /Chä-kē′kō/. If his ancestors' surname comes from a French source, it could have once had a cedilla, Chaquiço, which might reasonably be pronounced /Shä-kē′sō/. Oh well, I'm just idly curious more than interested in bothering to properly research it. Lumbercutter 16:14, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Mr. Chaquico is of Portuguese descent. This explains why his name should be properly spelled with a cedilla on the final "C" and why the pronunciation is different from Spanish. As far as I know, the pronunciation "Shä-kē′sō" is the closest approximation in American English. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.40.201.23 (talk) 06:19, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move per request. I would note that Google News archive and Google Books together return one hit for the current title and a few thousand for the move target.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:59, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

---

Craig Chaquiço → Craig Chaquico — No evidence of diacritic (ç) usage outside of Wikipedia. Note subject's official website. — AjaxSmack 07:50, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

• Support per nom.  — Amakuru (talk) 22:08, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Friendship with Neil Schon -- I understand that Craig and Neil would pass each other as children on their way to record with their respective bands--Journey and Jefferson Starship. This is certainly noteworthy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.127.181.211 (talk) 14:47, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Recent Edits/Changes to Craig Chaquico's Wikipedia Page

Hello Concerned Editors, I am Craig's artist manager, and he asked me to go in and correct factual errors on his Wikipedia page and to add current content, as what was up there hadn't been added to in the past several years. He also asked me to put up a current photo of him that he/we have sole rights to and have used on his Facebook page and Website without reservation. I am not being compensated to assist him in correcting the factual errors and adding the current photo. I am doing this so that the media and fans of Craig Chaquico will find accurate facts on his Wikipedia page. I made these changes and corrections but then Editors have reverted the page back to the old version which is incorrect. I have been asked to go onto this Talk page to request certain errors be corrected and to "be specific," however, there are so many that it would be extremely time consuming. I am requesting that anyone who is concerned about these corrections please go to View History, where the side-by-side can be viewed. You can see what was on the page before, and the changes that I/we made. They are simply factual and are not biased. They are easily verifiable, as well, by going to Craig Chaquico's Website. I hope this will be sufficient for you to allow him to have his page corrected and improved by me, his representative. If not, please respond and let me know what else I/we can do. We do not want incorrect information to continue to be put forth. Thank you.

PilotRock61 05:02, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

@PilotRock61: Chaquico's website is a self-published source. Please click on that link to read what we can use it for. And why are you removing the "On the career switch and success..." paragraph? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 05:34, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

New photos

Hi all, I've recently placed some new photos on the Craig Chaquico page and wanted to let you know all photographers have sent their permission to Wikimedia either by prescribed email or the Interactive Permission Tool. I trust that they have followed the instructions to the letter and provided an adequate permission level, as in "free!" I think the new photos will be an asset to Wikipedia and I thank the photographers very much for providing them with permission to be used by anyone. If anyone would like ticket numbers I can provide them on request.Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 22:51, 22 July 2017 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton

Corrections

These may sound like trivialities and pointless quibbles, but there are reasons behind editing. Some points to keep in mind. Wikipedia documentation covers most or all of this.

• Avoid time-sensitive material like "recent", "recently", "latest", "he has three awards", and "he lives in Los Angeles."

Those adjectives are attached to facts which can change, in which case they turn from true to false. If a person moves, then "he lives Los Angeles" becomes false (and why do we need to know where he lives?) If a new album is released, then that becomes the most recent, not the one Wikipedia called "recent". If he wins an award, he has four awards now instead of three. If you say he is married to Beth Smith, then he gets a divorce, then the entry has become false. If you say he has two kids, then he has another, then Wikipedia has been made false.

Although it does seem that every entry is in flux, there really are people attempting to write and edit entries that approach something like completion. Unlike newspapers or tv or facebook or twitter or other forms of temporary information, encyclopedias try to include more solid, permanent facts.

• "On April 22, 1974, San Francisco Chronicle music critic, Joel Selvin, wrote "Guitars are the best thing about live rock bands and Chaquico is easily the best thing about Starship." — why include this?
• "most popular songs" — according to whom? what's the measuring stick?
• "his distinctive, signature tone" — nearly everyone says this about their favorite musician. Therefore, it's meaningless. Distinctive in what way? Don't bother trying to expalin unless you can write about the subject of guitarists' tones specifically and briefly but in fine, technical detail.
• "Chaquico also became a household name"— He did? Every household? Not mine.

It's within the rules of Wikipedia to praise someone so long as that praise is documented with impartial, reliable sources. The bigger the praise, the greater the need for several reliable sources to back up that praise. But my view is that cheerleading weakens the entry because one's success ought to be evident from the factsand not from a critic, fan, agent, blogger, daughter, or cousin saying, "He's the greatest in the world!" I see this all over Wikipedia. People have a favorite celebrity, cause, city, sports team, or whatnot, then they can't be impartial about the subject and they become offended when their work is edited. The truth is, not everyone can be the greatest guitarist in the world, or the greatest actor, president, quarterback, scientist, writer, inventor, or deodorant salesman. Write the facts and let the facts speak for themselves. This isn't a race. No one's giving out trophies.

Linking "American" is unnecessary, as is telling us he is that he is part Portuguese. I don't have the rule in front of me, but it's overlinking, and a guitarist's partial ethnicity is not especially relevant.

You don't need to write every fact about every person. You don't need to write like the newspaper or Rolling Stone or TMZ.

• Notable instruments field is rarely used. Most often it's used for guitarists who have custom models named after them. Sometimes there's a point to it, such as the unusual guitars Linda Manzer made for Pat Metheny. Sometimes it's a nice honor near the end of a life. Sometimes it's just advertising. Wikipedia isn't in the advertising business. It's supposed to describe the facts, not promote.

• Please learn how to document your information. Since most people use information from the web, the easiest method, once you have found your impartial, reliable source, is to click on the Templates drop-down menu, select Cite Web, paste the URL in the empty box, click the magnifying glass, and ideally some information should get filled in automatically. If not, you can enter what's missing. Not every field is needed. For Cite Web, it's important to have the URL, the name of the web site, the name of the writer, the title of the article, the date of the article. Click on the access date's calendar button to enter today's date to signify that's when you accessed the web site and entered your information.
  –Vmavanti (talk) 03:06, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your response Vmavanti I respect your views on neutrality on Wiki. It's one of the things that make it a respected source of information. I would like to defend my position on some of your points. I'm a little puzzled by the citations point. I've been handling the citations as you have suggested and haven't had a problem, in fact one editor said he didn't have a problem with my formatting, but there was a problem with the site I cited. It was a "mirror" which I hadn't been aware of before. It was Revolvey or something like that. Maybe there was an earlier citation that wasn't quite perfect since I was starting fresh. I will be more careful.

Also, as a courtesy, it would be great if you would discuss your edits before making them. It's disheartening to work very hard to make improvements, and have them pulled down before given the chance to defend them.

About the "notable" vs. "custom' instruments, there are quite a few guitarists that list stock guitars that are not custom made. Here are a couple:

Eric Clapton Notable instruments

· See: Guitars section · Gibson Les Paul · Gibson SG ("The Fool") · Fender Stratocaster ("Blackie", "Brownie", custom signature model) · 1939 Martin 000-42 acoustic

Billy Gibbons Notable instruments

Gibson Les Paul "Pearly Gates" Gretsch Jupiter Thunderbird Gibson Explorer Fender Stratocaster Fender Telecaster Helliver "Trapezoid Hollow"

Strats and Tellys are listed quite frequently among electric guitarists notables. I don't see that there is a conflict if I use these on Chaquico's page as he is a contemporary of those guitarists, I list.

As for using the Joel Selvin comment: "On April 22, 1974, San Francisco Chronicle music critic, Joel Selvin, wrote "Guitars are the best thing about live rock bands and Chaquico is easily the best thing about Starship." — why include this?” It makes sense to include this because Joel Selvin was a music journalist for the San Francisco Chronicle, Rolling Stone, The LA Times, Billboard and others for almost 40 years and was an expert on the Bay Area music scene. He also wrote several books about the era including a #1 best seller about Sammy Hagar. His opinion about Chaquico’s playing matters and holds substantial credibility. Why include any journalist’s quotes on Wikipedia if you are going to discount this one by Joel Selvin? Here is another example of a similar quote for another musician on Wikipedia, “Passion and Warfare has been cited as one of the most pertinent instrumental albums released.[43][44] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Vai and from Eric Johnson’s Wikipedia page.

There are thousands of similar comments about popular musicians on Wikipedia, like the "household name" comment, for example, from Eddie Van Halen’s page, “…and is considered as one of the most influential guitarists in the history of rock music.” Note that there is no source affiliated with this claim on Eddie’s page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddie_Van_Halen. The point is other comparable musicians have similar claims on their pages. Are we going to delete all those? Chaquico's guitar playing is respected by many and is backed up by history and citations throughout his page.

Your comment about "don't bother to explain" is unnecessary, and frankly rude. I'm planning to add more technical information about his instruments, amps, pickups, strings, etc, as is on other musicians's pages, as my time allows. Guitarists are always interested in these details, as well as other more general claims like the one on Steve Morse's page, “Morse is considered one of the hardest working guitarists in the world.[10] He is widely known for his stylistically diverse compositional skills.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Morse and from Billy Gibbon’s Wikipedia page “After honing their trademark blues-rock style…” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Gibbons. Are you holding Chaquico to some other standard, I wonder? Here is a quote specifically about Chaquico's tone and style: “Contemporary smooth jazz artist Craig Chaquico gets his signature sound from a thin acoustic electric guitar that he helped design with the Carvin company, and his signature sound created by using this guitar is further personified by using effects such as chorus.” http://guitarwisdom.blogspot.com/2010/02/develop-signature-sound-part-2.html and “Over the years he has created a tone and melodic style as distinct as any to come out of San Francisco, a city known for Rock guitarists.” January 1982 Guitar Player Magazine Jas Obrecht (not sure how to cite that better). Also, the reference to Chaquico's ethnicity has been on the page for quite a while and is a clue to the pronunciation of Chaqucio. Anyway, is there a problem with having a heritage your proud of? His ethnicity is a fact that is unchangeable. Steve Vai comes to mind. His page states, “Steve Vai, a descendant of Italian immigrants, was born in Carle Place, New York on June 6, 1960.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Vai Again, is Chaquico being held to a different standard? Van Halen, too, have a look at his page. There are many more.

The point here is, I'm working hard to improve Chaquico's page here, so it is in line with that of his peers, as it was lacking in history and details for a very long time. I look forward to your comments!Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 01:39, 2 August 2017 (UTC) Cheryl Fullerton

___

It's not my intent to be insulting.

• "I respect your views on neutrality on Wiki."

Neutrality is not my view. It's one of the pillars of Wikipedia: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (not "Wiki", a wiki is something else)

• "in fact one editor said he didn't have a problem with my formatting, but there was a problem with the site I cited."

If you were using Revolvey, then that's a problem.

• "discuss your edits before making them"

If you click on View History at the top of every Wikipedia page, you can find a list of edits people have made to that page with edit summaries giving their reasons. I don't intentionally insult people, but I can see how my candor and bluntness can be off-putting.

When edits are made for the right reason, I don't have problem with it. When edits are not only changed but reverted for the wrong reasons, it's annoying.

• "there are quite a few guitarists that list stock guitars that are not custom made"
• "There are thousands of similar comments about popular musicians on Wikipedia"
• "as is on other musicians's pages"
• "one editor said"

I get this one a lot. "She did it, so why can't I?" If those pages are violating a rule, then they're wrong. Many entries on Wikipedia need a lot of work, or are not that great, and it's worth thinking about why that is. If you have a problem with another page, you should take it up with the person who entered that information. The Notable Instruments field is defined on this page in this way: "Particularly noteworthy models or custom musical instruments with which the artist is strongly associated".

• "His opinion about Chaquico's playing matters"

That's your opinion. Wikipedia is about facts. But it's not against the rules to use a quotation from someone, no matter how wrongheaded, so long as it is sourced properly.

• "I'm planning to add more technical information about his instruments, amps, pickups, strings, etc,"

Waste of time. Wikipedia is for a general audience. Always keep your audience in mind. What percent of the audience do you think is interested in that kind of thing? 0.001%? I try to stick to essentials. A lot of Wikipedia entries are too long and bogged down in excessive detail and trivialities.

• "don't bother to explain"

t means "don't waste your time" with ephemera that few people care about. To the guitarist and a few others those things matter. To others? Not so much. I say this as a former guitarist.

• "is there a problem with having a heritage your proud of"

I don't have the rule in front of me (maybe here [1]) but generally it's OK to put nationality in the lede but not ethnicity. If you want to explain how to pronounce Chaquico's name, which is a good idea, there are guidelines for that, too. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Pronunciation

• "so it is in line with that of his peers"

Don't worry about the other kids in the class. Follow the documentation and keep working at it. I'm sure you'll get better.
–Vmavanti (talk) 14:07, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Photos removed

Hello I recently provided new photos for this page and they were immediately taken down, even though the photographers had sent their proper license agreement to permissions via either the Interactive Tool, or by email. I believe there is a period of time for these to be processed by the volunteers, so that is why there is a grace period of 14 days to be up before being deleted. Am I incorrect in thinking this? We have ticket permissions receipts to show for each of the photos. Can someone help me with this?Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 20:28, 2 August 2017 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton

This is the ticket number I received for the photo that was removed. [Ticket#2017071510001355] Confirmation of receipt (Re: STARSHIP 1985) Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 20:43, 2 August 2017 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton