Talk:Roger Miller

Schlager

Do we agree that Roger Miller embodies the genre of Schlager? Shall it be added? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.25.228.225 (talk) 04:10, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Book

Did you know there is now a book out about Roger Miller ?9price 10:49, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Roger Miller also wrote songs for Broadway and Disney. He is the rooster in Disney's Robin Hood.

T.V. Commercials

Dare we mention Decker Hot Dogs commerical adaptation of the song Dang Me. Decker is the DOG for me.

The Hampster Dance

Dare we mention The Hampster Dance (which is based upon a clip of Whistle Stop)?
—überRegenbogen (talk) 06:25, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Dead links

This links in references is dead:

• http://www.countrymusichalloffame.org/site/inductees.aspx?cid=143

Xtzou (Talk) 19:56, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Roger Miller/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Xtzou (Talk) 22:32, 2 June 2010 (UTC) Hi, I am reviewing this article and will be adding comments below.

• http://www.countrymusichalloffame.org/site/inductees.aspx?cid=143 is a dead link (ref 6).
• I am concerned that so much of the article is reference to http://www.rogermiller.com/bio1.html which is a self-published source.
• Otherwise, I think the article gives a good overview of Roger Miller.
• I did some editing, including delinking a bunch of links per WP:Overlinking.

The nominator has not edited this artcile since 14 June, I suggest closing this review now. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 00:50, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I have found that the reviewer has a protected talk page and apparently wishes to disengage from Wikipedia. Pity they didn't bother to tell anyone. I shall take over the review. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 00:56, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: No dabs found

Linkrot: Found two dead links and tagged them, fixed a number of access dates.[1] –– Jezhotwells (talk) 01:10, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Career: The label was impressed with Miller and awarded him with a session in Houston, accompanied by Jones. Jones and Miller collaborated, writing "Tall, Tall Trees" and "Happy Child." Disillusioned, Miller decided to leave for Amarillo, Texas and become a fireman. Bit of a non sequitor here, he gets a session and then becomes disillusioned? This needs explanation.

   ''Miller worked as a fireman during the day and spent the nights performing gigs. The previous sentence has already told us he wasa fireman. Avoid repetition.

   But Miller soon grew tired of writing songs and began a lifestyle that earned him the moniker "wild child." He was dropped from his record label and began to pursue other interests. I think we need a little more detail here. What was this lifestyle? What were the other interests?

   In 1970 Miller played Johny Appleseed on the TV hit show "Daniel Boone". Miller stopped writing songs in 1978, feeling that his more "artistic" works were not being appreciated. What happened between 1970 and 1978?

   I made a number of copy edits for grammar and spelling.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Referencing generally is good.

   ref #2 Landon, Grelun; Stambler, Irwin; Stambler, Lyndon (2000), "Roger Miller", The Encyclopedia of Country Music (Macmillan) needs a page number

   ref #6 Cooper, Daniel. "The Roger Miller Story". Country Music Hall of Fame. Is this a book? Needs ISBN or ISSN, publication date, page numbers.#:: ref #14 Style, Lyle, Ain't Got No Cigarettes, University of Virginia. Is this a book? Needs ISBN or ISSN, publication date, page numbers.

   One dead link (ref #12), also one dead external link (Country Music Hall of Fame and Museum)

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Correct rationales and tags.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   On hold for seven days for above issues to be addressed. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 13:17, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

   OK, I think that this has been sufficiently improved to merit GA status. Congratulations. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 22:43, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

All fixed.--Lost Fugitive (talk) 19:44, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

2602:306:3027:C210:C8D5:35AE:FF33:553 (talk) 18:37, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Roger Miller. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110614222247/http://www.nashvillesongwritersfoundation.com/l-o/roger-miller.aspx to http://www.nashvillesongwritersfoundation.com/l-o/roger-miller.aspx

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After 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 {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 02:18, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Info Box; Mary Arnold

Info box said that Mary Arnold (third wife) died in 1990s. That conflicted with the statement that she currently manages his estate. Therefore, I deleted the date of death. Someone should research Arnold and see if there is a date of death. BuzzWeiser196 (talk) 14:40, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Her page in IMDb (linked from his) displays her birth date, but no death date. Login54321 (talk) 06:28, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Editing dispute

Can you better explain what on earth you are trying to do User:TenPoundHammer [2]? Because whatever mistakes they may have made, User:Lost Fugitive's version does seem better. They removed a bunch of repetitive details which better belong in the "awards" section than the personal life, and which were unsourced where added to the personal life section. They added some citations, which I AGF support the claims our articles made. They removed an IMO excessive trivia section. You stated at ANI that you removed a whole trivia section. Are you referring to the discography section? I wouldn't call it a trivia section since discography for a musician tends to be a key part of their career. Perhaps the section can be parred down, especially given the subarticle, I'm not sure if there is a need for a large number of apparently non notable albums. Still this would be better dealt with via discussion or removal of those entries you feel are unnecessary, rather than wholesale removal of the discography section. It seems to be there's decent reason to have a discography section, at least containing the notable albums and singles. Frankly there's far more reason to have a small discography section than a section on random shows which used Roger Miller's music, or people who mentioned his name, or recorded his music, or shows he appeared on one time, or whatever else in that section you keep adding back. So your stated reason is very perplexing to me. Nil Einne (talk) 19:16, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

It's hard to see it any other way. That IPC section was terrible. Doctorhawkes (talk) 21:15, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

I will chalk this up to not being fully alert early in the morning. I thought I was removing the section and got caught up in Lost Fugitive's disruptive editwarring. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 00:07, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Maybe you shouldn't edit when mentally impaired. I am not editwarring so perhaps that incorrect statement as well as your delisting of this article can also be chalked up to mental impairment.Lost Fugitive (talk) 03:11, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Good grief, "not fully alert" should not be described as "mentally impaired". Dial it back.

On the merits of the discography section: the albums section -- a simple bluelinked list of studio releases -- is typical and appropriate for an artist who has as separate discography article.

The rest should go IMO. The "#1 singles" subsection is misleading, since only one of those was a main Billboard list #1, and that one only in Britain. If "#1 singles" means "#1 on one of the subcharts in at least one major country", that needs to be specified. Since there's a separate discography article, I'd just leave these off. The "Recorded and released by other artists"... belongs in a section about his writing credits or something, the kind of detail that belongs in his discography article since there is one, and anyway none of these were Billboard main-chart #1 in any major country either. The bit about the fire should go somewhere, maybe not here. Herostratus (talk) 07:11, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

I agree and have implemented your suggestions. I added the bit about the fire to "Later career", which probably isn't the best place for it but it will work for now.Lost Fugitive (talk) 08:58, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Lawsuit overturned?

The article on his wife seems more current ("However, the verdict was overturned upon appeal, and Sony retained the rights to Roger Miller's catalogue."). Marty Mangold (talk) 20:38, 31 August 2023 (UTC)