Talk:Jefferson Starship/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Recent Edits

Cheryl Fullerton

AbleGus AbleGus I see you have reverted my edits and I would like you to explain your reasons for doing so. My most recent edits were accurate and factual and sourced from the most current articles available.

“…was credited to ‘Paul Kantner/Jefferson Starship,’ the first use of the ‘Starship’ billing, predating the formation of the group with that name by four years.”

https://www.allmusic.com/album/blows-against-the-empire-mw0000024441

This is the correct quote from AllMusic currently, and refers to this album in depth, and I strongly believe that content should be reduced in this article. Meanwhile, as is currently noted in this article in spite of it having predated the subject of this article by four years, it is important to provide the facts of the matter. Also, your second source, which is a Microsoft listing, is not only outdated but it also verifies the current AllMusic reference to this album. I am adding a current source, Billboard.com, to additionally verify the actual title of this album. https://www.billboard.com/music/jefferson-starship/chart-history/TLP/song/826448

Your insistence on retaining “Paul Kantner & Jefferson Starship, marking the first use of that name,” begs the question as to why you are editing in such a way. Isn't the goal to inform the reader by presenting the most current and factual information available? As it stands now, the reader is led to believe that this album has something to do with the band, Jefferson Starship. Wikipedia is meant to be an encyclopedia, correct? And, therefore, not to be used as a vehicle to promote a particular editor’s agenda. Please let me know your thoughts.

Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 22:16, 9 April 2020 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton

AbleGus

Hello Cheryl,

The edits made regarding the word "evolved" were covered in the the prior section of this talk page. Specifically with regard to reverting your edit "the first use of the "Starship" billing, predating the formation of the group with that name by four years", it was because that information was already covered elsewhere within this article.

In Paragraph 6, it states "They appropriated the name from Kantner's Blows Against the Empire, with manager Bill Thompson convincing the group that keeping the connection to Jefferson Airplane made sense from a business standpoint." This specifies from where the name Jefferson Starship was taken, from that album. That paragraph starts with the words "In early 1974", so we already have the time frame that name was applied to the band at that point in the narrative.

The second line in Paragraph 1 covers that Blows Against the Empire also featured a number of musicians from various groups (CSNY, the Grateful Dead, and Jefferson Airplane), and the album was thus credited to both Paul Kantner and Jefferson Starship. This indicates what and when the name Jefferson Starship was first used; as the artist co-credited on the album and in reference to those musicians involved. This is also reflected in Jeff Tamarkin's book "Got a Revolution" (Page 234), where it states "Few buyers gave it any significance at the time, but in order to distinguish it the project, to make fans aware that it wasn't an Airplane album - and yet to indicate that it wasn't entirely a solo record either - Kantner branded it with an appropriately forward-looking touch. The finished product was attributed to Paul Kantner-Jefferson Starship." It is unnecessary to say it predates its use for the band here since we cover that information in this article later on when it actually does get applied, there is really no point in stating it here beforehand.

The additional source you listed from Billboard lists the album title as "Blows Against the Empire", which is really not disputable. This is the same as it is listed in other sources, so there is no added value to including it. Retaining the “Paul Kantner & Jefferson Starship, marking the first use of that name,” is factual based on the sources. It useful here in this article to explain the how the name was first used, and then following the historical narrative to cover how it later came to be applied to the band following the departures of Jack Casady and Jorma Kaukonen from Jefferson Airplane.

Regards, AbleGus (talk) 04:54, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Cheryl Fullerton

AbleGus Thanks for your reply. I am objecting to the phrasing in the second line in Paragraph 1, “credited on the LP as "Paul Kantner & Jefferson Starship" The use of the “&” symbol is incorrect and misleads readers of Wikipedia as to the correct title of this album and also gives the impression that the album is a Jefferson Starship band album. The correct title of the album does not reference the use of “&” (otherwise known as “and”). Credible and current sourcing, which I have used and would again insist on including, references the title of the album as “Paul Kantner/Jefferson Starship” and in Jeff Tamarkin’s book’s discography (Page 383) it is also written as “Paul Kantner/Jefferson Starship.” To be consistent with credible sources, and to be more clear as to the title of this album and that it is not, in fact, a Jefferson Starship album, I would like that this detail be corrected in the article.Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 22:59, 15 April 2020 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton

Hello Cheryl, thanks for your response clarifying your objection. Regarding the second sentence of paragraph 1 in the origins section, the use of the "&" symbol in the sentence, I disagree that this is incorrect and misleading. "Blows Against the Empire" is the full and correct title of the album, which is accurately stated in sentence one of the paragraph (singer-guitarist Paul Kantner recorded Blows Against the Empire).

The second sentence in paragraph 1 explains the group of musicians appearing alongside Kantner on the album, and that they were co-credited along with Paul Kantner as Jefferson Starship. Reviewing the cover of the album itself as a primary source, the front of the album has the name "Blows Against the Empire" under the artwork. Below the album title is listed the artist name Paul Kantner. Underneath it, without any punctuation between the two names, is the second artist name attributed to the album, which is Jefferson Starship. Also included in the credits on the album inset is the word Jefferson Starship and underneath it the list of performers being credited under that name. The album is co-credited to both names, so the use of the word "and" is the appropriate word in the sentence to indicate the both the artist names attributed to this work. In much the same way, the album cover for "Sunfighter" has the names of the artists attributed to the album without any punctuation between them under the album title heading. Regardless of there not being any punctuation on the cover, it is understood that the album is being credited to both Grace Slick and Paul Kantner, so using the word "and" between them is the acceptable practice that is generally used in an explanation of who released this album. The same holds true for Blows Against the Empire being credited to both the names Jefferson Starship "and" Paul Kantner, so using the word "and" or the accepted symbol for it (&) is both accurate and the appropriate sentence structure.

There is no source, including the Billboard link you provided or Jeff Tamarkin's biography, that indicates the title of the article is anything other than "Blows Against the Empire" specifically, and only that name. Jefferson Starship as it appears here is not the album title, or subtitle or sub heading on the album title. It is specifically the artist name being co-credited with this album along with the name Paul Kantner. This is precisely what is meant by Jeff Tamarkin "The finished product was attributed to Paul Kantner-Jefferson Starship" in the quote from "Got a Revolution" (Page 234), that the album was being credited to both names. While a "-" or a "/" might appear in a source, they are still indicating that this album was credited to both those names, so using the word "and" between those two names is the best way to express this concept in an encyclopedia article. I am open to changing the "&" to "and" in the sentence, but everything else in the sentence is correct and I feel it should remain as it is currently written.

Regards, AbleGus (talk) 04:13, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Cheryl Fullerton

AbleGus

I object to retaining the current wording, the use of “&” or “and” and outdated sourcing in Paragraph 1. As written, it implies that this album was a Jefferson Starship band album. It also does not clearly state that “Paul Kantner/Jefferson Starship” is a subtitle on the album. My suggestion is to include the proper reference to the album by AllMusic (a source you frequently refer to as well), which states that Blows Against the Empire was Paul Kantner's “debut solo album [that] actually was credited to ‘Paul Kantner/Jefferson Starship,’ the first use of the "Starship" billing, predating the formation of the group with that name by four years.’ This makes both the crediting clear, the title of the album clear, and that this was a Kantner solo album and not a Jefferson Starship band album. In addition, I suggest replacing the outdated, archived sourcing that is currently indicated by (11) and (12) and replacing these with current and credible sourcing, AllMusic https://www.allmusic.com/album/blows-against-the-empire-mw0000024441 and Billboard https://www.billboard.com/music/jefferson-starship/chart-history/TLP/song/826448 and Jeff Tamarkin’s discography (p. 383). As this is an article for the band Jefferson Starship, I think it is very important to be clear in these distinctions, to come to a consensus and a compromise that is backed up by multiple sourcing. For the record, I also believe that devoting this much space in a Jefferson Starship Wikipedia article to a Kantner solo album that predated the formation of this band by four years is objectionable. I suggest reducing this reference within this article entirely.Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 19:18, 20 April 2020 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton

AbleGus

Hello again Cheryl, thanks for your additional response to this discussion. Regarding your objection specific to the use of the word "and" or "&" in sentence 2 of paragraph 1 in the Origins, the word "and" is the correct term to describe this scenario, where the album is credited to two artist names. Once again, Paul Kantner and Jefferson Starship are not the album subtitle or part of the name, and no source indicates it as such. Again using the album itself as a primary source, both the names "Paul Kantner" and then "Jefferson Starship" appear under the album name (Blows Against the Empire) with no punctuation between them. Again note that the credits on the album inset list the word Jefferson Starship and underneath it the list of performers being credited under that name for this album in the same way an album would note the members of a group in credits. In the Jeff Tamarkin book "Got a Revolution" (Page 234), it states "The finished product was attributed to Paul Kantner-Jefferson Starship." Attributed here means the work was credited to both names. The Allmusic entry cited in the article also states the album "actually was credited to Paul Kantner/Jefferson Starship," again indicating that both those names are being credited as the artist for this album. Nowhere does it indicate the album has any other name besides "Blows Against the Empire" or that Jefferson Starship is somehow the subtitle, and to suggest otherwise is an unsourced assertion that should not be added to the article. Just as with the "Yellow Submarine" album, the name the Beatles refers to the music artist being attributed to the work and not a subtitle to the album name, to suggest otherwise would be inaccurate.

Specifically in regards to using a slash (/) as the punctuation the wording "Paul Kantner/Jefferson Starship" in this article, I also do not feel that is the best way to phase it. Per the Wikipedia Manual of Style (MOS) regarding slashes [1], it suggests "Generally, avoid joining two words with a slash, also called a forward slash, stroke or solidus ( / ), because it suggests that the words are related without specifying how. Replace with clearer wording." In this case a clearer wording is the term "and" as it indicates both names were used for the artist credit. Further review of the Manual of Style involving hyphens (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Hyphens) and dashes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Dashes) does not provide any examples to indicate using a dash or hyphen would be warranted here, so the preferred wording in this instance should remain "and" between Paul Kantner's name and Jefferson Starship. Related to this, the Manual of Style states "In normal text and headings, use and instead of the ampersand (&)" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Ampersand). Based on that recommendation, the "&" in this sentence should be replaced with "and" in keeping with that.

Regarding your recommendation on stating it was a Paul Kantner solo album, the article as written already states in the the first sentence of Origins paragraph 1 that "In 1970, while Jefferson Airplane was on break from touring, singer-guitarist Paul Kantner recorded Blows Against the Empire." This already attributes the album to Kantner. The second sentence of that paragraph expands on that, indicating it is "a concept album featuring an ad hoc group of musicians," and then explains on who was involved and that the album was thus co-credited to both Kantner and Jefferson Starship. This is supported by the already referenced quote by Jeff Tamarkin book "Got a Revolution (Page 234), where it states "but in order to distinguish it the project, to make fans aware that it wasn't an Airplane album - and yet to indicate that it wasn't entirely a solo record either - Kantner branded it with an appropriately forward-looking touch." It specifically says the use of the name "Jefferson Starship" was to signal that this was not entirely a solo record based on that labeling. While Kantner is the primary figure here, this name also clearly pays tribute to Jefferson Airplane, and five of the six then current members are involved on this album (Four performing on it and Marty Balin co-writing two songs before beginning to withdraw from the other band members). Since sentence one of the paragraph already credits Kantner for the album, and based on the co-credit and supporting documentation from the Tamarkin book that this was somewhat more than a solo album, I feel we should refrain from inserting the word solo here to describe the album.

Regarding the other portion of the sentence about the "predating the formation of the group with that name by four years" I have previously responded to that in the last discussion on this page (Recent Edits). My reasoning remains the same here. This information is already covered in paragraph 6 of the Origins section, which it indicates where the name Jefferson Starship was derived from and that it occurred in early 1974. The article has this information in the correct chronological place in the narrative, so it is redundant and unnecessary to state in this sentence. It is also clear in paragraph one of the Origins section that "Blows Against the Empire" is from 1970, and that is where and for what that the name "Jefferson Starship" is being initially used. The article covers using that name again in 1974 in paragraph 6 of the origins. This distinguishes the uses of the name sufficiently within the narrative.

In regards to your recommendation to replace the "outdated" sourcing, the sources already in the article are accurate and valid. The Blows Against the Empire Allmusic reference you provided is already used here, so replacing it with the same thing serves no purpose. The other source to the sentence is accurate as well. There is nothing incorrect in that source or outdated in its description of the album. It was written well after the album was released, and no new information has since come to light on this nearly fifty year old album since the source was written to contradict it, so there is no reason to remove it based solely on your opinion that is outdated. The Billboard site (https://www.billboard.com/music/jefferson-starship/chart-history/TLP/song/826448) you provided only gives the name of the album as "Blows Against the Empire" and the co-credits to Kantner and Jefferson Starship. This only corroborates the the already listed sources about the name of the album and what artist names are being attributed. If it is only referenced for the "/" (slash) used between the two names, note that was covered earlier in reference to the Wikipedia Manual of Style as to why the "/" should not be used. The same premise holds for adding the discography on page 383 of the Tamarkin book. It simply validates the album was named "Blows Against the Empire" and that it was credited to both Kantner and Jefferson Starship, which are already sufficiently covered in the provided sources. If your purpose is to use it as justification to change the "and" to "/" in the sentence, the Manual of Style preference is to keep "and" here, so it will not serve that purpose either, so there is no reason to include it.

On your final point objecting to covering this album in the article, I disagree that any reduction of the "Blows Against the Empire" content would improve this article. Leaving it out would fail to indicate the first use of the "Jefferson Starship" name. It also has relevance in relation to Paul Kantner, as well as several other individuals (Sick, Freiberg, Peter Kaukonen, Jack Casady from the Next Generation lineup of 1992-2000, plus the songs co-written by Balin) who are associated with both usages of the name. Additionally, it is important to cover the background leading up to the emergence of Jefferson Starship to provide a fuller understanding to the reader. It is necessary to explain how things came to be so that in 1974, Jefferson Airplane evolved into Jefferson Starship. Excluding related details that happened prior to that point will not improve the overall narrative and will diminish the article by leaving out significant information.

I will go ahead and change the "&" to "and in the previously mentioned sentence to conform with the Manual of Style. I do not agree with your suggestions to reword the sentence for the reasons noted, and recommend the sentence remain as currently configured.

Regards, AbleGus (talk) 05:24, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Cheryl Fullerton

Hello AbleGus

I would like to replace the following paragraph:

WHAT IT SAYS NOW "Kantner was introduced to the teenage guitarist Craig Chaquico through his friend Jack Traylor during this time. Chaquico first appeared on Sunfighter and played with Kantner, Slick and their bands and then with Starship until 1990."

With this edit: "Paul Kantner was introduced to the music of teenage guitarist, Craig Chaquico, through his friend and fellow musician, Jack Traylor, during this time. Chaquico, a high school English student of Traylor’s and also lead guitarist in his band, Steelwind, was invited to provide lead guitar on the song, “Earth Mother” on Kantner and Slick’s 1971 album, Sunfighter and then in 1973 played guitar on three tracks of Baron Von Tollbooth and the Chrome Nun, and also on Slick's 1974 album, Manhole."

Editing the section on Craig Chaquico’s musical history with Paul Kantner and Grace Slick in order to provide background as to his subsequently becoming a founding member and lead guitarist/songwriter for Jefferson Starship. Adding credible sourcing for included details.

https://www.allmusic.com/artist/jefferson-starship-mn0000840050/biography Tamarkin pages 251, 262, and 265 http://www.thevinyldistrict.com/storefront/2016/10/graded-on-a-curve-paul-kantner-grace-slick-david-freiberg-baron-von-tollbooth-the-chrome-nun/ https://www.allmusic.com/album/manhole-mw0000015080

I would appreciate your input. RegardsCheryl Fullerton (talk) 23:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton

AbleGus

Hello Cheryl,

I agree that an expansion to this paragraph would improve the article. How about the following wording:

"Kantner was introduced to the teenage guitarist Craig Chaquico through his friend and fellow musician, Jack Traylor, during this time. Chaquico, a high school English student of Traylor’s and a member in his band Steelwind, played guitar on the song "Earth Mother" from Sunfighter.(Source: Got a Revolution, Jeff Tamarkin, Page 251) Chaquico would go on to perform with Kantner and Slick on their subsequent album collaborations, then with Jefferson Starship, and finally with Starship until 1990."

I think the article should include the information about Chaquico's background and leading to his initial Grunt Records appearance on Sunfighter. Rather than also providing a full breakdown of the number of songs he was involved with on "Baron von Tollbooth & the Chrome Nun" and include preemptive information about Manhole before it is introduced in the next paragraph of the article, the narrative is better served by then indicating that Chaquico continued to work with Kantner and Slick on those subsequent albums and then with Jefferson Starship and Starship.

Regards, AbleGus (talk) 04:25, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Cheryl Fullerton

Hello AbleGus, I agree with your changes in wording, it makes sense. Regards, Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 23:24, 11 May 2020 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton

AbleGus

Hello Cheryl, I am glad we have a consensus here. I will go ahead and edit the article with the proposed change. Regards, AbleGus (talk) 02:36, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Cheryl Fullerton

Hello AbleGus, Sorry for this delayed response. Thank you for agreeing to that change and for making it. It adds a lot to the article, I think. Would you be open to allowing other editors to weigh in on our argument over the use of "and" and the forward slash (/)? I think the use of "and" is confusing and we should use the most current sources. Let me know. Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 22:01, 11 June 2020 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton

Cheryl Fullerton

Hello Cheryl, I agree that recent change to the paragraph introducing Craig Chaquico does improve the article. Regarding the discussion about changing the sentence from "and" to a "forward slash" in paragraph one of the Origins section, I still feel as before that this change should not be made. Once again, it would go against the Wikipedia Manual of Style regarding the use of a forward slash, so it should not be utilized. The album "Blows Against the Empire" is credited to both "Jefferson Starship" and Paul Kantner, and the most clear way to represent this in a sentence is to use the word "and" between the two co-credits. The sources provided for the sentence are accurate and have not been superseded by new information. They meet the standards for being used as a source, and no change is warranted based merely on your assertion they are not current. Based on this, I feel the sentence and sourcing should remain as presently composed.

Regards, AbleGus (talk) 03:54, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Cloud atlas

Hi Cheryl Fullerton and AbleGus -- Cheryl asked me to take a look at this album-crediting situation. I work on many articles about album, and this is certainly a confusing scenario! Looking around at some articles and looking at images of the album cover, I have a suggestion. I agree with AbleGus that the forward slash is not good Wikipedia style; I haven't seen that anywhere else. I also agree with Cheryl that we don't want the reader to think that there temporarily existed a band called "Paul Kantner and Jefferson Starship" (especially because on the album cover, there's no "and" or "&" of any sort). I think the sentence would be clearer if instead of reading like credited on the LP as Paul Kantner and "Jefferson Starship", marking the first use of that name, it read like credited on the LP to both Paul Kantner and to "Jefferson Starship", marking the first use of that name. This would show that the names are separate but co-existing. I think it would also be appropriate to include a sentence explaining that the first official Jefferson Starship album occurred some years later. What do you think? -- Cloud atlas (talk) 22:47, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

AbleGus

Hello Cloud Atlas, thanks for reviewing this discussion. Your assessment makes sense. How about incorporating your prosposed change and tweaking the sentence so it reads This was a concept album featuring an ad hoc group of musicians (centered on Kantner, Grace Slick, Joey Covington, and Jack Casady of Jefferson Airplane; David Crosby & Graham Nash; and members of Grateful Dead) that were co-credited on the LP along with Paul Kantner as "Jefferson Starship", marking the first use of that name. As for your suggestion on the additional sentence, I think parapraph six of the origins section covers the subsequent use of the name at the right point in the narrative, and then paragraph one under the 1974-1978 section covers the first album after the transition from Jefferson Airplane to Jefferson Starship. What if we add the following sentence right after the one we are attempting to edit that reads A few years later, "Jefferson Starship" would gain new significance with its emergence as a band name? Let me know your thoughts on these changes.

Regards, AbleGus (talk) 05:29, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Cheryl Fullerton

Hi AbleGus and Cloud atlas I'm just getting to this. Thank you both for your input. I also agree with Cloud atlas's suggested change. I don't think, however, AbleGus, that your suggested tweak will add clarity. I believe that the use of "Paul Kanter as Jefferson Starship, making the first use of that name" is misleading in and it still implies that this album name is actually referring to this group of musicians, or even an individual, who appeared on a 1970 album was called Jefferson Starship. Adding "a few years later, Jefferson Starship would gain new significance with its emergence as a band name" does not make it clear that the band, Jefferson Starship, began four years after this term was used as an album title. I think that this needs to be made more specific, in an article that is supposedly about the band, Jefferson Starship, so that there is no confusion, at the start of this article, between the use of the term as an album title and the use of it as a band name in 1974. Your thoughts? 28 June 2020 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton

AbleGus

Hello Cheryl, Thanks for your additional input regarding this discussion. My proposal to tweak the sentence suggested by Cloud atlas was aimed at fitting the modification into the existing sentence. We would want the resulting sentence to fit properly together from a grammatical standpoint. If we insert the change based on the recommendation of Cloud atlas unmodified, the full sentence will read as follows: This was a concept album featuring an ad hoc group of musicians (centered on Kantner, Grace Slick, Joey Covington, and Jack Casady of Jefferson Airplane; David Crosby and Graham Nash; and members of Grateful Dead) credited on the LP as Paul Kantner and "Jefferson Starship", marking the first use of that name. I feel the sentence should be tweaked to fit together better, without significantly changing the meaning.

Once again, the album name is without dispute "Blows Against the Empire", and the previous sentence in the article, "In 1970, while Jefferson Airplane was on break from touring, singer-guitarist Paul Kantner recorded Blows Against the Empire." clearly establishes the album's title in the narrative. The proposed modification to the subsequent sentence will not cause confusion on the actual title of the album. The co-credit to "Jefferson Starship" does refer to the collection of musicians appearing on the album along with Kantner. In the liner notes of the actual album itself, the list of musicians appears under the heading "Jefferson Starship" to indicate who is involved on the recording. This defines who is being referenced by the name "Jefferson Starship" here. That information is also supported in the Jeff Tamarkin Jefferson Airplane biography "Got a Revolution: The Turbulent Flight of Jefferson Airplane" (Page 234), where it states "but in order to distinguish it the project, to make fans aware that it wasn't an Airplane album - and yet to indicate that it wasn't entirely a solo record either - Kantner branded it with an appropriately forward-looking touch. The finished product was attributed to Paul Kantner-Jefferson Starship." It specifically says the use of the name "Jefferson Starship" was to signal that this was not entirely a solo record based on that labeling. The part about it not completely being a solo album must then mean the name would refer to the other artists appearing along with Kantner on the album. This statement that the "Jefferson Starship" co-credit refers to the other artists is also supported in the Jefferson Starship Allmusic Biography ( http://www.allmusic.com/artist/jefferson-starship-mn0000840050/biography) where it says "To pay tribute to this loose-knit studio ensemble and refer to the album's science-fiction theme, Kantner co-billed the album to "Jefferson Starship." The wording I proposed ties the modification recommended by Cloud atlas into the existing sentence, and is in line with other sources, so I feel it should be used here. The full modified sentence would thus read as follows: This was a concept album featuring an ad hoc group of musicians (centered on Kantner, Grace Slick, Joey Covington, and Jack Casady of Jefferson Airplane; David Crosby and Graham Nash; and members of Grateful Dead) that were co-credited on the LP along with Paul Kantner as "Jefferson Starship", marking the first use of that name.

The slightly tweaked, proposed additional sentence, "A few years later, "Jefferson Starship" would emerge as a band name," sufficiently indicates the future use of the name. This topic is further addressed in paragraph six of the Origins section in the article, which is the right spot chronologically to discuss it within the narrative. The first words of that paragraph are "In early 1974," which explicitly indicates the time frame when this occurred. The second sentence in that paragraph indicates that the name "Jefferson Starship" was selected. The third sentence, "They appropriated the name from Kantner's Blows Against the Empire, with manager Bill Thompson convincing the group that keeping the connection to Jefferson Airplane made sense from a business standpoint," states where the name "Jefferson Starship" was from and why it was selected for the name change. This clearly spells out the information at the correct point within the article. Stating this information again in the first paragraph, before it actually happened within the narrative, is redundant. Stating "the band Jefferson Starship began four years after this term was used as an album title" is not the most accurate representation of what occurred. Once again, the name "Jefferson Starship" is not the album name. It is the name used as the artist co-credit in reference to the group of musicians appearing on the album. Using the term "formed" without proper context to "Jefferson Airplane" could leave the mistaken impression that this endeavor was completely separate from the former. In fact, this was not the case. After Jorma Kaukonen and Jack Casady left Jefferson Airplane, Kantner and all five of the remaining band members recruited new musicians and reorganized the group under the new name. A number of sources, including multiple direct quotes by Grace Slick from 1975 (https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=qyEfAAAAIBAJ&sjid=KZcEAAAAIBAJ&pg=7193,2688665&dq=paul+kantner&hl=en) and 2019 (https://relix.com/articles/detail/the-core-jefferson-airplane/) refer to the transition from Jefferson Airplane to Jefferson Starship as a name change. Slick is the legal co-owner of both Jefferson Airplane and Jefferson Starship, with a controlling interest in the latter, so we should not discount her assessment of what occurred. I feel the new proposed wording of the additional sentence should be used to acknowledge the further use of the name but not seek to cover the same ground already covered elsewhere in this article.

Regards, AbleGus (talk) 04:11, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

"Hello AbleGus,

Thanks for the further thoughts.

This is an article about Jefferson Starship, not the album, "Blows Against the Empire." If anything, a short mention about the use of the "Starship" connection on "Blows" should be limited to the fact it was the name of a song on "Blows Against the Empire" with "Jefferson" tacked on, as you mentioned above, to keep the association with Jefferson Airplane, and was not the name of the group. I think that fact is well-sourced. I don't agree that Jefferson Starship was a labeling of the performers and musicians on the album and is misleading the reader into thinking that it was the same group of musicians who would, four years later become Jefferson Starship. I would point out that Paul Kantner himself referred to the ever-changing group on "Blows Against the Empire" as the "Planet Earth Rock and Roll Orchestra." This is sourced in Tamarkin's book on page 231. Perhaps, it might be better to go into more detail in an article about "Blows Against the Empire." Reduce the amount of information about "Blows Against the Empire" and it's history and provide a link to that article.

After thinking on the "a few years later" Cloud atlas's suggestion, which is somewhat vague and misleading, I think we should be more specific and use the 1974 date as the year in which Jefferson Starship began. That fact is well-sourced, as well, and I've provided the links previously. Placing that fact earlier on in the article instead of burying it below, is only being fair to the reader.” — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheryl Fullerton (talk • contribs) 22:41, 4 September 2020 (UTC) Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 22:44, 4 September 2020 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton

Cloud atlas Hello Cloud atlas, If you have a moment to weigh in on this, I'd really appreciate your input. Regards, Cheryl Fullerton Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 22:51, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Cheryl,

Thank you for providing your additional feedback on this topic and the sentence wording. While the article is about Jefferson Starship, it is essential to a complete understanding of that subject to properly cover the details of what led to its emergence. Blows Against the Empire is one key detail in that process. It came about in part because of a growing fissure between the Paul Kantner and Grace Slick faction and the Hot Tuna faction of Jefferson Airplane; one that would ultimately lead to the departures of Casady and Kaukonen from the group, and the subsequent evolution into Jefferson Starship. Information on the recording and release of Blows Against the Empire is included in other biographies about Jefferson Starship, such as the AllMusic Biography (https://www.allmusic.com/artist/jefferson-starship-mn0000840050/biography), so this would make the Wikipedia article consistent with other documents on the subject. After all, it is the first time that the name "Jefferson Starship" was used, so it has a direct relevance to a subject with that same name. Deleting or reducing this information from this article will be a disservice to the reader. It will deny them a complete picture of all the elements involved in the evolutionary process that brought about Jefferson Starship from Jefferson Airplane.

Your suggestion that the only "mention about the use of the "Starship" connection on "Blows" should be limited to the fact it was the name of a song on "Blows Against the Empire" with "Jefferson" tacked on" does not encompass the full rationale why that name was used. Again, per the AllMusic Biography, it was used as a co-credit on the album to "To pay tribute to this loose-knit studio ensemble and refer to the album's science-fiction theme." This is also supported in Jeff Tamarkin's book "Got a Revolution" (Page 234), where it states, "to make fans aware that it wasn't an Airplane album - and yet to indicate that it wasn't entirely a solo record either - Kantner branded it with an appropriately forward-looking touch. The finished product was attributed to Paul Kantner-Jefferson Starship." This clearly signifies that the use of "Jefferson Starship" is not just because there is a song named "Starship" the album, but that it is in reference to the other individuals who comprise the musicians appearing on this not quite solo record. Thus, we should not edit the statement in the article to provide an incomplete view of why that name was used.

While you may not agree "that Jefferson Starship was a labeling of the performers and musicians on the album," that is not backed up by sources. Again, in addition to the two that are cited in the preceeding paragraph, there is the primary source of the actual album itself. The credits on the album inset list the word "Jefferson Starship" and underneath it provide a listing of performers being credited under that name for this album in the same way an album would note the members of a group in credits. This should be taken at face value and not be arbitrarily interpreted otherwise without a reason. The album is credited to both Paul Kantner and to Jefferson Starship, and the latter is a reference to the group of artists appearing with Kantner on the project; also in keeping with the science fiction theme of the record and with a nod to name Jefferson Airplane. It will not mislead the reader, since both the parties associated with the name and album in 1970 and those involved in the 1974 reorganization are clearly indiciated in the article. Yes, the grouping was informally referred to as the "Planet Earth Rock and Roll Orchestra" as per the Tamarkin book. That information is already present in the last sentence of the first paragraph of the Origins section of this Wikipedia article. That detail also does not change that fact that the name "Jefferson Starship" was used as the co-credit on the album Blows Against the Empire or the documented reasons of what it referencing.

Regarding the suggestion to use "a few years later" in the next sentence, I do not agree with your assertion that this is misleading. The sentence in question makes reference to the recording and release of Blows Against the Empire, which happened in 1970. The time frame that name was applied to the band is a few years after 1970. As the year 1974 is already listed in the artist Infobox to lead the article, and paragraph six of the Origins section starts with the words "In early 1974," that information is already clearly listed in the article. It is not "buried" as you suggest, but stated clearly at exactly the correct point in the narrative where it should be mentioned.

I propose there be no reduction or modification to the content involving Blows Against the Empire to this article.

I would suggest that the sentence change proposal by Cloud Atlas be altered to read This was a concept album featuring an ad hoc group of musicians (centered on Kantner, Grace Slick, Joey Covington, and Jack Casady of Jefferson Airplane; David Crosby & Graham Nash; and members of Grateful Dead) that were co-credited on the LP along with Paul Kantner as "Jefferson Starship", marking the first use of that name. Immediately following that sentence, should be added A few years later, the term "Jefferson Starship" would be selected as a band name.

Thank you for continued interest in having this discussion.

Regards, AbleGus (talk) 07:31, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Cheryl Fullerton and AbleGus -- I would be happy to help. Could one of you summarize the two main options we're talking about here? It's hard for me to follow the whole conversation because I don't have the level of knowledge that you both have about this group of musicians and these sources. -- Cloud atlas (talk) 06:14, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Cloud Atlas,

Thanks for offering to review this discussion. I am proposing to maintain the current amount of information about the album Blows Against the Empire in the first two paragraphs of the Origins section of the article. The reasons I am in favor of keeping this information are that it provides a valuable insight into the steps involved in the development of Jefferson Starship out of Jefferson Airplane, it is in keeping with how Blows Against the Empire is covered in other biographies of Jefferson Starship such as the AllMusic site, it matches other sources on what the name "Jefferson Starship" was referencing in relation to the album, and it also important to explain that this album was the origin of the name "Jefferson Starship" in an article about Jefferson Starship.

I am suggesting the first paragraph of the Origins section of the article be slightly tweaked for better wording to the following, with changes in bold:

"In 1970, while Jefferson Airplane was on break from touring, singer-guitarist Paul Kantner recorded Blows Against the Empire. This was a concept album featuring an ad hoc group of musicians (centered on Kantner, Grace Slick, Joey Covington, and Jack Casady of Jefferson Airplane; David Crosby and Graham Nash; and Grateful Dead members Jerry Garcia, Mickey Hart, and Bill Kreutzmann) that were co-credited on the LP along with Paul Kantner as "Jefferson Starship", marking the first use of that name.[11][12] This agglomeration was informally known as the Planet Earth Rock and Roll Orchestra, a moniker later used on a Kantner album in the early 1980s. Four years later, the term "Jefferson Starship" would be repurposed as a band name."

To my understanding, Cheryl Fullerton's suggestion is to remove or reduce the amount of information about Blows Against the Empire from this article since she feels it is outside the scope of the topic.

Please let us know your thoughts.

Regards, AbleGus (talk) 05:35, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Cloud atlas

Sorry for the long delay.

Hello Cloud Atlas,

Thank you for taking the time to help us improve the Jefferson Starship article and to move forward from an ongoing impasse and helping us with how to best edit this article. I will try to make my points clearly. Yes, there is much to be confused about!

The article needs several points clarified. Because the article is about the Jefferson Starship band (as opposed to other Wikipedia articles which already exist for Paul Kantner, Jefferson Airplane, and for Kantner’s album Blows Against the Empire). I think a lot of unnecessary information can be deleted. There is an undue amount of information about Jefferson Airplane (which disbanded in 1972), Paul Kantner, and other musicians who were never part of Jefferson Starship and were unrelated to the Jefferson Starship band that formed in 1974.

Jefferson Starship has its own history, its significant musical success, and legacy to fill an article. Currently, the Jefferson Starship article with its lengthy and detailed description of Jefferson Airplane and solo albums of Paul Kantner and Grace Slick distracts from the purpose of the article and from the history of the actual Jefferson Starship band. When interested readers of Wikipedia want to research the Jefferson Starship history of the band, its musicians, hit songs and albums spanning their 10-year history, they have to sift through all of the indirectly related material, if related at all, to find information about Jefferson Starship.

I propose the Jefferson Starship article begin with information starting in 1974 when Jefferson Starship was founded. And briefly reference the name Jefferson Starship having been taken from Kantner’s album Blows Against the Empire: Paul Kantner/Jefferson Starship. This is sourced in Jeff Tamarkin’s book on page 383. Other sources that confirm the use of the name, Jefferson Starship, can be found elsewhere on the internet, including on the Wikipedia page dedicated to the album, Blows Against the Empire. The reference to “Jefferson Starship” on Blows Against the Empire has nothing to do with the band, Jefferson Starship, nor do musicians that contributed to that particular album. More information can be found in Jeff Tamarkin’s “Book Got a Revolution” on pages 231-234. Kantner himself dubbed the array of musicians on Blows Against the Empire “The Planet Earth Rock and Roll Orchestra.” The ad hoc musicians that performed on Blows Against the Empire were not a band or an organized group in any way. They were independent, individual musicians who contributed to Kantner and Slick, as well as others, over the years. Kantner is quoted as making it clear that Paul Kantner/Jefferson Starship is the name referred to, as a part of Blows Against the Empire, the album, not the band. If readers want more information about those topics, or about any brief references to previous works by members of the band, links can easily be provided.

Also, it could be briefly stated that some of the founding members did perform with Jefferson Airplane as well as with other notable bands and musicians such as Quicksilver Messenger Service, Rod Stewart, the Turtles, Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young, Jack Traylor’s Steelwind, Louis Armstrong, and Nat King Cole, to be fair. Two of the founding members, Chaquico and Sears were never a part of Jefferson Airplane, so to refer to Jefferson Starship as an evolution or reorganization of Jefferson Airplane is inaccurate.

Any “Origin” section of the article needs to be about the post-Jefferson Airplane band period when Kantner and Slick were working on solo albums which were not doing well and they were encouraged by their manager to form a new band. This is where the history of the founding members and band name should be stated—borrowed from Blows Against the Empire and leading up to their first album, Dragon Fly; however, it should be brief and concise. A link can be provided at this point.

In addition, the introduction paragraph needs to clearly reference the band, Jefferson Starship, its members, and successes, and be edited as such. It should not be a reference to members of other bands or other bands histories which can be found in other Wikipedia articles about those members and bands.

I hope this helps.

Best regards, Cheryl Fullerton Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 20:10, 9 November 2020 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton

Hello Cheryl,

Thank you for providing additional feedback on your concerns with this article. I would like to respond to your points here. Yes, the article topic is Jefferson Starship, but to properly explain that topic we should be explaining how and why things happened, especially in the origins section of the article. That should include information on Paul Kantner and the development within Jefferson Airplane of the faction including him and Grace Slick that began to work on a series of album collaborations together and with others, while they were in Jefferson Airplane. This later culminated in the eventual departure of the other faction from Jefferson Airplane (J. Kaukonen and J. Casady), which led to the reorganization instigated by Kantner and the evolution to Jefferson Starship. This is not "undue information" or off-topic, it helps elaborate on how Jefferson Starship developed, and it should remain.

The history and accomplishments of Jefferson Starship are fully covered in this article as it stands now. Nothing is being omitted, from the transition from Jefferson Airplane in 1974 all the way to the present day and the musicians who currently comprise it. Filling in the information on how Jefferson Starship evolved does not "distract from the purpose of the article and from the history of the actual Jefferson Starship band" but rather enhances it by providing essential context on the relevance of events that led to that emergence. This material you wish to discard is also present to a similar extent in other biographies, such as the AllMusic entry for Jefferson Starship, so retaining it is in line with other sources on the subject matter. The history, members, and songs associated with the group are all contained within the narrative already, and the article is broken down by headings to denote different sections and time frames that make it easy to navigate the different eras of the group. Paring that origin information here will not benefit the reader as they would arbitrarily be deprived of that relevant information, forcing them to have to go elsewhere to get proper context on Jefferson Starship.

I do not think simply starting the article in 1974 without regard to the events prior that led to it serves the reader well. The origins section should be retained here. Just saying the name "Jefferson Starship" was taken from a Paul Kantner solo album does not adequately explain what the name represented on that album. Again, it is in keeping with how Blows Against the Empire is covered in other biographies of Jefferson Starship such as the AllMusic site, it matches other sources (https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=qyEfAAAAIBAJ&pg=7193,2688665&dq=paul+kantner&hl=en) on what the name "Jefferson Starship" was referencing in relation to that album, and it also important to explain that this album was the origin of the name "Jefferson Starship" in an article about Jefferson Starship. Whether or not they were "independent, individual musicians" or "organized" is not relevant. What is relevant is that those musicians were referred to as Jefferson Starship, and were co-credited as such on the album. I have seen no quote from Paul Kantner "making it clear that Paul Kantner/Jefferson Starship is the name referred to, as a part of Blows Against the Empire, the album, not the band." Please provide that source which indicates Jefferson Starship is part the name of the album. Yes, when it was originally used for the album in 1970, Kantner could not possibly know that it would be used again several years later as the group name, but that does not change the fact it was used as a co-credit on the musicians appearing on that album. Links to articles about related topics are present in the article, but placing a link without context or explanation as merely a list is not preferable to providing a coherent narrative explaining the relevance and connection.

There is already sufficient coverage of individual members of Jefferson Starship and the prior groups they played with present in the article as currently constituted. Specific to Jefferson Airplane, just saying that some members played in Jefferson Airplane does not adequately cover the connection and makes it appear that this is just a coincidence. That is not accurate. Again, direct statements by Grace Slick from 1975 (https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=qyEfAAAAIBAJ&sjid=KZcEAAAAIBAJ&pg=7193,2688665&dq=paul+kantner&hl=en) and 2019 (https://relix.com/articles/detail/the-core-jefferson-airplane/) refer to the transition from Jefferson Airplane to Jefferson Starship as a name change and that there was a direct continuity from the one to the other. Kantner also referred to Jefferson Starship as an evolution from Jefferson Airplane. We should retain that interpretation based on the sources. That Chaquico and Sears were not part of Jefferson Airplane does not mean the evolution did not occur.

An arbitrary decision to limit the Origins section to the "post-Jefferson Airplane period" is not helpful. There was never a break up announced, so when exactly would that be? Does "post-Jefferson Airplane period" simply mean after the concerts associated with the Long John Silver tour were finished in 1972? If so, we would leave out the album Sunfighter, which also serves as a chance to introduce Craig Chaquico into the narrative. The article also introduces Jefferson Starship member David Freiberg to the narrative in the paragraph about Sunfighter and Baron von Tollbooth and the Chrome Nun. The same with Pete Sears in the paragraph about Manhole, so it makes sense to keep the information about these albums and how the various band members came to work together. That their solo albums, which you said you do not want to fully include, "were not doing well" is the only reason why they reorganized leaves out key details. It was the departure of Casady and Kaukonen; their unwillingness to return to the fold after an extended period of limbo where they kept telling Kantner, Slick, and company that they would be back, and Kantner's wish to return to touring that led to the reorganization into Jefferson Starship. All of this information is already clearly stated in paragraph six of the Origins section, along with each member of the group, so there is no need to make a change here. Dragonfly is covered in paragraph one of the 1974-1978 section, we should retain that information at that point of the narrative where it fits chronologically rather than adding it to the Origins section, before it happened.

The introductory paragraph already clearly references the band as the topic. It also informs how it relates to Jefferson Airplane and notes some of those successes that you indicated, specifically in terms of record sales and chart positions. Providing a list of band members here when it is already wholly present within the article is repetitive and unwieldy considering the number of personnel changes involved in this organization over the years.

For these reasons, I am not in favor of these wholesale changes to the article, and would like to keep it as presently laid out.

Regards, AbleGus (talk) 06:11, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Cloud atlas

Any thoughts on this Cloud atlas? Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 23:54, 22 November 2020 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton

Hi AbleGus, Cloud atlas

We disagree on this point. Not only is all that information superfluous to Jefferson Starship, the band, but your comments referring to this band as an "evolution" or "reorganization" instigated by Kantner doesn't line up with the facts. It is a theory you are promoting and which I as an Wikipedia editor am seeking to clarify, if not correct, rather than promote a marketing spin. I've provided a multitude of reliable sources that shows Jefferson Airplane ended "died" (in the words of Paul Kantner) became "dormant", "were no more" (in the words of Jeff Tamarkin) in 1972. Two years went by after that during which the remaining Airplane members were working on other projects, including Paul Kantner and Grace Slick who produced solo albums. It wasn't until those solo albums didn't generate enough revenue for the record company that the manager suggested that they start a new band in 1974 (Tamarkin, Got a Revolution, p.267). An evolution is defined as "the gradual development of something". (Oxford Languages) That was not the case here. "With the breakup of the Jefferson Airplane, in the early 1970's, Mr. Kantner began exploring his pet themes on a solo album, "Blows Against the Empire" https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/29/arts/music/paul-kantner-of-jefferson-airplane-dies-at-74.html and "After the breakup of Jefferson Airplane, Jefferson Starship forms." https://projects.sfchronicle.com/2017/jefferson-lawsuit-timeline/ and "In 1973, with Jefferson Airplane broken up but Jefferson Starship yet to form, Kantner teamed up with former/future bandmates Grace Slick and David Freiberg to record an album with the eye-popping title of "Baron von Tollbooth & the Chrome Nun." https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-lists/paul-kantners-10-trippiest-lyrics-27851/paul-kantner-grace-slick-and-david-freiberg-your-mind-has-left-your-body-1973-45453/ And, in 1972, after recording "Long John Silver", and following up with a series of concerts, Jefferson Airplane called it quits." Jefferson Starship officially launched in 1974. The line-up included Paul Kantner, Grace Slick, David Freiberg, John Barbara, Papa John Creach, Pete Sears, and Craig Chaquico. The bands first album, "Dragonfly" landed at #11 on Billboard's Hot 100. https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-lists/paul-kantners-10-trippiest-lyrics-27851/paul-kantner-grace-slick-and-david-freiberg-your-mind-has-left-your-body-1973-45453/

The term "evolution" could apply to the change from Jefferson Starship to Starship simply because Kantner left the band. In this case, relevant to this Wikipedia article, Jefferson Starship was a new band. So much attention at the start of the article about the Jefferson Airplane details and members is a valid objection. Again, I say there can be a brief mention with links to other articles and more appropriate. Lengthy paragraphs about former members and confusing details are not needed before the reader even reaches the actual history of Jefferson Starship.

With regards to referencing the name, again, such a reference should be brief as the article is not about the band's name. (I do not see any lengthy descriptions of how other classic bands came up with their names on Wikipedia). The article is about the band itself and its incredible catalog of music that continues to be re-released and streamed to this day. It would seem your grip on the article would not even address the band's actual musicians and body of music until deep into the article, at which point a lot of readers will have lost interest, as you know. As it is, the introductory paragraph and current Origins section dominate the entire front of the Wikipedia article. I believe it is our work to ensure that articles are objective.

I propose, and I'm asking for other editors to weigh in with their own thoughts. I propose the introductory paragraph to be re-written to include only the band for whom the article exists, and the Origins section begin with 1974, when the band was formed, and segue to a paragraph that briefly references the histories of the original Jefferson Starship members and the selection of the band name with hyperlinks to each, and then continue with the actual history and musical details of the band up to present times.

As to your request to provide my source for details "Jefferson Starship is part of the name of the album" In Kantner's own words: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7x1H_JqP2c

Regards,Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 00:19, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello Cheryl, thank you for providing further feedback on this discussion. I will agree with you that we disagree about this point and a great many things pertaining to this subject.

The information on the 1970-1974 period of collaborative albums centered on Paul Kantner and Grace Slick is far from "superfluous" to the subject of Jefferson Starship. It is essential to the understanding of this process. A change in the the dynamic within Jefferson Airplane led to the development of two cliques that gradually began to work apart from each other until the fissuring of Hot Tuna, which itself led to the evolution of Jefferson Airplane into Jefferson Starship. Each of those albums by Kantner and Slick represent steps in that process. It is on these albums that they also began working with future Jefferson Starship members Peter Kaukonen, Craig Chaquico, and Pete Sears, so it makes sense to include the album information in the Jefferson Starship article to help introduce these individuals into the narrative. Otherwise, we would simply tell the reader who is involved but not how and why it is they got there. That leaves the article bereft of substantive details that would benefit their understanding of the topic.

With regards to your continuing dispute over the word "evolved" in relation to Jefferson Starship, this is not a "theory that I am promoting" or "marketing spin" as you baselessly allege. This assertion describing the relationship between Jefferson Airplane and Jefferson Starship is accurate, and is backed up by numerous direct statements from the principals directly involved in the process (with sources). There are two direct quotes I previously provided by Grace Slick (https://relix.com/articles/detail/the-core-jefferson-airplane/) (https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=qyEfAAAAIBAJ&pg=7193,2688665&dq=paul+kantner&hl=en) which refer to the the "name change" from Jefferson Airplane to Jefferson Starship. Slick was involved in this process, and is one of the co-owners of the trademark for both the names Jefferson Airplane and Jefferson Starship, with a controlling (51%) interest in the latter. Her assessment has value and should not be dismissed. There is also the previously provided quote by Paul Kantner where he acknowledges that Jefferson Starship is "a continuation of Jefferson Airplane" (https://web.archive.org/web/20180707062402/http://www.njherald.com/story/23602165/kantner-still-pilots-jefferson-starship). In addition, please note the following direct quote from Paul Kantner when asked about Jefferson Starship, to which the interviewer referred to as a spin-off of Jefferson Airplane. Kantner replied, "I wouldn’t so much call Jefferson Starship a spinoff as, perhaps, an evolution." (https://web.archive.org/web/20160307165710/http://www.yuzu-melodies.fr/Paul-Kantner-The-songs-of-Jefferson-Airplane-and-Jefferson-Starship-are-as-relevant-now-as-they-were-in-the-60s_a1299.html) This is confirmation of how Kantner, who was the one behind the reorganization (Jeff Tamarkin Jefferson Airplane Biography - page 267), viewed the relationship. As a co-owner of both Jefferson Airplane and initially Jefferson Starship (until the 1985 settlement), his perspective here should not be disregarded.

None of the sources you have provided should override the assessments of Slick or Kantner regarding the development of Jefferson Starship from Jefferson Airplane. Note in the Rolling Stone article you linked (https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-lists/paul-kantners-10-trippiest-lyrics-27851/paul-kantner-grace-slick-and-david-freiberg-your-mind-has-left-your-body-1973-45453/), it also says the following under the section labeled "Paul Kantner and Jefferson Starship, 'Mau Mau (Amerikon)' 1970": "Before Jefferson Airplane transformed into Jefferson Starship, Kantner released a solo album titled Blows Against the Empire — with help from some of his bandmates — that first put the Jefferson Starship name into circulation." The same article you cited also acknowledges the evolution between Jefferson Airplane and Jefferson Starship. It is clear from this article that the author is using the term "break-up" differently than you intend, since you assert that the band Jefferson Airplane broke up, so therefore Jefferson Starship cannot be related to or evolve from it. They are obviously not making the such a distinction, or they would not say both statements in the write up as they would be contradictory. The New York Times article you listed (https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/29/arts/music/paul-kantner-of-jefferson-airplane-dies-at-74.html) also states "Paul Kantner, a founding member of Jefferson Airplane, one of the definitive San Francisco psychedelic groups of the 1960s, and the guiding spirit of its successor, Jefferson Starship, died on Thursday in San Francisco." In this case they are calling Jefferson Starship a successor to Jefferson Airplane, which also acknowledges the relationship. Successor means one that follows or succeeds (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/successor), again denoting a relationship between Jefferson Airplane and Jefferson Starship. The San Francisco Chonicle article (https://projects.sfchronicle.com/2017/jefferson-lawsuit-timeline/) you provided is titled "A band named Sue" and has the opening line "Jefferson Airplane is one of the greatest bands in S.F. history, contibuting to the San Francisco sound, a cultural shift that resonated around the world - and also a never ending world tour of litigation." If they believed Jefferson Starship to be an unrelated subject or one that did not evolve from Jefferson Starship, why would they include information about it in this article, which is ostensibly only about Jefferson Airplane? Each of these additional sources you have cited do not make any such assertion that Jefferson Starship was unrelated to or did not develop out of Jefferson Airplane. They are using the term "break up" here to describe the departure of Jack Casady and Jorma Kaukonen from Jefferson Airplane. I will subsequently explain in the next paragraph why that is not the best way to describe the events, but by using that term, they are in no way implying that Jefferson Starship is not related to Jefferson Airplane, or that the evolution from Jefferson Airplane to Jefferson Starship did not happen. The direct statements from Grace Slick, Paul Kantner, as well as the additional sources I provided previously spell that process out, and one where is there a source that denies this is what happened. They just use a different term to describe the transition, but in doing so it still does not mean that the evolution did not happen, and we should not interpret it as such.

As to the use of the term "break up" to describe what happened to Jefferson Airplane and the dating of it to 1972, this would not be the best way to describe what occurred. Per the Jeff Tamarkin Jefferson Airplane biography (page 259), "Jefferson Airplane never broke up. There was no farewell tour, no press conference or tear filled announcement, no vicious mud slinging in the press." They never made an announcement that they broke up. After the supporting tour for the Long John Silver album concluded in September 1972, Casady and J. Kaukonen resumed working as Hot Tuna, but continued to tell the others that they would be coming back to record and tour with Jefferson Airplane in the future. David Freiberg said the following about that time period, "'We were waiting for Jorma and Jack', Freiberg said of the time Paul, Grace and he did solo projects. “They kept saying, ‘Sure we’ll do another Airplane album. Just wait a couple months.’ It dragged on for practically two years." (https://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/jefferson-airplane-the-miracle-rockers-19760101) This indicates that no one in the group Jefferson Airplane itself considered the band to be broken up during this time. Both cliques were working on their own projects, much the same as they had done concurrently with their tenure in Jefferson Airplane since 1969-1970 when Jefferson Airplane was clearly active. This link (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baW9SSixSu8) contains an interview with Grace Slick and Paul Kantner from June 1973 where they discuss future plans to records additional Jefferson Airplane albums and speak of the band in the present tense. This is not possible if the band had broken up over six months prior to the interview, as Slick and Kantner would no doubt aware of it if there had been a break up of the band. They clearly considered the group as an active and ongoing concern at the time this was recorded, and not defunct. That the group was not broken up as of 1972 is further reinforced by the following statement in the biography of Jefferson Airplane by Jeff Tamarkin (page 273): "With the Airplane in limbo, Hot Tuna found themselves playing somewhere virtually every month of the year during 1973." Limbo would indicate a state of uncertainty, whereas if the group had broke up, there would be no uncertainty in 1973 about the status of the band.

The fact is that there was a period after the end of the Long John Silver tour where the other Jefferson Airplane members waited on the Hot Tuna side of the team to return to recording and touring with them. Casady and J. Kaukonen kept telling them that they would return, so the others waited, while doing the collaboration albums Baron von Tollbooth and the Chrome Nun and Manhole. When Kantner wanted to return to touring, Casady and J. Kaukonen were unavailable, so he reorganized without them (https://www.allmusic.com/artist/jefferson-starship-mn0000840050/biography). "The group didn't stop and start again."(https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=qyEfAAAAIBAJ&pg=7193,2688665&dq=paul+kantner&hl=en) They had an agreement not to continue to use the name Jefferson Airplane, so they had to select a new one (https://relix.com/articles/detail/the-core-jefferson-airplane/). They selected the name Jefferson Starship, previously the co-credit used on Blows Against the Empire, after agreeing with band manager (and Jefferson Airplane name co-owner) Bill Thompson to keep the connection to Jefferson Airplane (Tamarkin, page 267). This is very much an evolution. A gradual process that played out over a nearly eighteen month period where the estrangement of the two factions led to the departure of two members. The remaining five members, led by Paul Kantner, eventually regroup, and add new members. The organization goes forward with the same management and staff, the same contract with the record label, and under a name selected to denote a connection to Jefferson Airplane. This is how the process occurred, and is confirmed as an "evolution" by the words of Paul Kantner himself.

The attention provided to Jefferson Airplane at the start of the Jefferson Starship article is necessary to establish how it came to be that Jefferson Starship developed. This is an encyclopedia article, and should inform the reader what circumstances led to that development. Just providing links and brief mentions without adequate explanation is not sufficient for an encyclopedia article designed to define a topic. "Lengthy paragraphs about former members" is relevant here since the article is covering the entire history of the topic, so whether the person is still a member of Jefferson Starship presently or has since left the band is irrelevant to how they should be covered in the article. The origins section should spell out the steps involved in the process of all of the elements and persons coming together here, there is nothing confusing about doing that.

The Jefferson Starship article should address the origin of the name and its backstory, which serve to inform the reader where it is derived from and what it represented as a co-credit on the album. This also serves to distinguish the uses of the name and reduce confusion rather than create it. Yes, it is more detail than many other band names, but in truth the story is more involved here. Most articles about musical groups will explain the name and its selection, such as in the Jefferson Airplane Wikipedia article that goes into a good amount of detail, including a quote, on how Jorma Kaukonen brought that name to the band. This Jefferson Starship article does thoroughly discuss the "actual members of the band," both in the origins section to set the stage and then in the subsequent subsections. I do not understand how you can determine that readers would lose interest in a complete and factual account of the subject when reading an encyclopedia article, it would seem to me that they would expect that from Wikipedia. Of course, they already can easily navigate between the various subsections of the article. As it stands, the lead paragraph and origins section are about the same size and cover the same material as the AllMusic entry for Jefferson Starship. We should keep it that way.

For the reasons I have provided above, I think we should retain the article in its current form. Deleting information prior to 1974 deprives the article of the ability to set the stage for the topic and it diminishes the interconnected nature of it to the other topics under the Jefferson Airplane family umbrella. I would also suggest we leave the lead paragraph in its present form.

Thank you for providing the link to that video. I still do not hear where Kantner is referring to the album name as "Jefferson Starship" though. He is referring to the musicians appearing with him on Blows Against the Empire as under the name Jefferson Starship. Again, Jefferson Starship is not the name of the album itself, it is a co-credit.

Regards, AbleGus (talk) 05:01, 30 November 2020 (UTC)