Template talk:Phil Ochs

This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Rock music This template is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music articles Roots music This template is within the scope of WikiProject Roots music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to roots, folk and traditional folk music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Roots musicWikipedia:WikiProject Roots musicTemplate:WikiProject Roots musicRoots music articles

The entries I removed in this edit should not be restored as they are far too tangential for inclusion. We do not include genres of songs, etc, in a musical artists navbox, as neither these nor the political movements are directly related to the subject. --woodensuperman 10:00, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please point out which ones are tangential. Ochs was involved in formative ways in all of them. And how is the Jim Glover article tangential and not directly related to the topic? Randy Kryn (talk) 10:18, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, maybe Glover could stay (although we don't categorise people by other people, so I think an element of that should be considered when adding people to navboxes), but the rest of them are clearly tangential. If he was one of the Chicago Seven, then that wouldn't be tangential, but he wasn't, so it is. The genres are a definite no. We don't include Punk rock in {{The Stooges}}, etc, etc. Counterculture of the 1960s, List of anti-war songs, etc, etc are all way to general for inclusion in a navbox of this type. --woodensuperman 10:23, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be right on some of these, although yes, Glover should be on the template, as much or most of his notability stems from his association with Ochs. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:28, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]