Talk:Jon Anderson

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Falsetto[edit]

The article states " Even during live performances, such as those recorded and included in the Yessongs album, Anderson never wavers into falsetto..." and yet in the Falsetto article Jon is listed under "Examples of male singers who demonstrate frequent use of falsetto". Obviously one of these needs to be changed. I'm a huge Yes fan but I don't know what falsetto sounds like, so I'll leave it to someone who knows for sure. Raven4x4x 11:20, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah about that... I'll try to find the sound clip, but Jon was interviewed in regards to a concert he was putting on with a Middle school. They played a clip of his singing, and in regards to his high-pitched singing, she asked, "So, you're singing falsetto..." and he swiftly negated that comment, saying something like, "No, not falsetto. I'm classified as an alto-tenor." Yes, at some point in his career, Jon Anderson might have employed falsetto, but he definitely shouldn't be *known* as a falsetto singer. --65.186.211.172 22:00, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings, this is my first ever contribution to Wikipedia, so bear with me. . .
I am a Professor of Linguistics, a phonetics and voice specialist, and I have analyzed Jon Anderson's voice many times over the years, both by listening and by computer processing. All the evidence I can gather tells me that his singing is absolutely never in a falsetto, nor is it in the "blend voice" mode as described in the article. His voice is, it seems, basically "operatic" in character. He sings with a full chest voice on most notes, switching to a highly damped "head voice" (using larynx shifting a la Pavarotti) for his highest two or three notes (that would be high D, E-flat, and E, above the tenor range). In any event it is certainly one of the most unique and wonderful male voices of the twentieth century music scene (although far from perfectly trained), and I respectfully suggest changing the "vocal style" section of the article to reflect some of the facts I've been able to gather.
Safulop 01:19, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good, Safulop. You can change it yourself, you know! I've never thought of Jon as using falsetto, myself, so I'd probably agree with any changes you made to the article, particularly as you seem to be a very good writer. Go for it!
Gardener of Geda | Message Me.... 02:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I definitely don't want to be discouraging, but you should be aware of the policy about no original research. (John User:Jwy talk) 02:49, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your kind thoughts, I was just following the general Wikipedia policy that you are supposed to invite a discussion on the talk page before performing a major edit of a content page. I also see that you are right about original research; I cannot rely on my own investigations. I believe I can find published opinions that echo my own, so I will use those. It's funny that I can cite something for support that is basically itself just an unsupported opinion, while I can't present real science-based evidence in favor of the opinion because it would count as "original research." Oh, well, I understand the reasoning behind not presenting research in an encyclopedia.
Safulop 02:49, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was very reluctant to bring it up, but its useful information. You can remove the information there as being uncited and/or original research! Happy editing. . . (John User:Jwy talk) 04:28, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, the "yeoww's" in Owner are almost certainly Trevor Horn.
I was just thinking that! Plus, that's NOT FALSETTO, that's SCREAMING. Two good reasons for removing that sentence. --The guy with the axe - aaaaaaargh!!! (talk) 19:37, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey I was wondering why it still has references to "falsetto" and "the blend voice", even though this discussion (above) seemed to unanimously support taking it out a year ago. Jon does not sing in falsetto nor anything close to it. Plain & simple, he just has a high voice. His speaking voice is the same way, very high. Well, I'm not going to edit it out myself, since I'm new here, and I don't want to piss anyone off. But the existing statements in the article have absolutely no verifiable merit. Just an aside: I wonder what Jon's REAL falsetto would sound like... I bet only dogs could hear it.Chazella (talk) 00:19, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh bloody hell I went ahead and edited it myself. I found an interview where he clearly denies singing falsetto. Hope this puts an end to it once and for all! :) Chazella (talk) 00:43, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Further to my last on the screaming in "Owner...": I've just tried playing that part of the song at slower speed. It sounds as if the "yeoww's" on the track are sped up! --The guy with the axe - aaaaaaargh!!! (talk) 20:43, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Elf Culture, Mushrooms, 4th Dimension?[edit]

All very interesting & plausible, can we get some references though? --Son of Somebody 19:19, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Son of Somebody - Do you actually find those quaint suggestions "contentious material"? Hilarleo Hey,L.E.O. 07:52, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

More biographical details[edit]

I think the data regarding Jon's period with the different Yes eras is great but would greatly appreciate more info on: 1. Jon's solo albums and tours, and 2. Jon & Vangelis.

Might also be interesting to check - album credits? - just when he dropped the h from his name, given that there is an express reference to this. Thanks. 83.180.146.120 15:22, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone explain why in his early life section it claims he is of Irish ancestry? I followed the link and there is absolutely no mention of Irish ancestry. You can't just put this in because certain names might be associated with Ireland. Unless there's a credible source for this then it should be removed. If anyone objects please discuss. Thanks. D33te (talk) 01:25, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"June, 1997, Jon's "The Promise Ring" is released, a Celtic-flavored collection paying tribute to Jon's Irish heritage"
Source: jonanderson.com, used 10 times in the article. Also on some other repeated reviews of The Promise Ring, see Google search. As it's not contentious material and it's been in the article since Feb 2006, perhaps tagging it with {{fact}} and then removing it after a while if one wasn't provided would have been better. Ha! (talk) 22:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm from the same town as him and saw him recently, which is why I stumbled on this article. I've reverted it now, as I see the link does provide proof of his heritage. I'm never sure that any slight hint of Irish ancestry warrants mention in articles, but I'm willing to go along with it. I have some Irish ancestry, but I doubt it would need a nod if ever I had an article. Even so, I've rv'd. D33te (talk) 01:09, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Irish mention is on the sleeve notes of The Promise Ring, he says he's always considered himself Irish. I plan to do a page on The Promise Ring. D33te, you got the same cool Accrington accent as Jon? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Supersvist (talk • contribs) 11:11, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article Vigilance[edit]

Since January 10th, a total of 5 vandal-edits by IP 69.86.188.10 have been reverted by me, and one other editor.

Yesterday, I posted a message on his talk-page about his latest one, in which he attempted to use Wiki POV rules to justify a blatantly anti-Jon edit.

Today, I received a rather mysterious message on my talk-page here, featuring an attempt to use Wiki rules to stop me calling the troll a "vandal". Not, of course, that I'm saying that there is any possible connection between 69.86.188.10 and the poster on my talk page.

I get the impression that the vandalism may continue. Keep an eye on it.
Gardener of Geda | Message Me.... 17:40, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citations[edit]

Does anyone have citations for this article or provide inline citations? I added in Jon Anderson's bio from his website, but we need more than one source. Thanks, --Midorihana(talk)(contribs) 08:03, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In High Places[edit]

Most of Mike Oldfied's Crises album was recorded in 1983, so I'm guessing Jon recorded the track In High Places in 1983 rather than 1982, so I've changed that. I'm not sure about it though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.71.246.65 (talk) 13:29, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


recording of TALES - citation needed[edit]

In the interview with Eddie Offord on the NFTE site he mentions that he [Offord] was pushing to get the band in a country setting - that the wooden cows and trees/plants were there to appease him and I guess Anderson. Interesting thing is he mentions that by the end of the sessions the plants died and the cows were graffiti'd - fitting; he states, "...sums up that whole album..."

LINK - http://www.nfte.org/interviews/EO234.html or go the main NFTE.org site archives http://www.nfte.org/archives.aspx#special Wamnet (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:08, 11 October 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Alleged Irish ancestry[edit]

This has been in the article for several years now, but the supposed source (www.jonanderson.com) doesn't make any reference to it. The only reference to his family it does make is "October 25, 1944 John Roy Anderson is born in Accrington, Lancashire, England to Albert and Kathleen Anderson. (Of course, later in life he will drop the "h" in his first name.)". Not a word about his supposed Irish background.

This sounds like a hoax to me. I suggest that the mention of his Irish ancestry be removed unless someone can back it up. There are oodles of Google hits for it, but of course they are without exception echoes of this article.Shiresman (talk) 00:37, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't pay for Spiritual Guidance,this should be given as a gift because it is given to us freely. An old school friend.92.40.253.26 (talk) 19:11, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Collaboration[edit]

No mention of Jon's multiple collaborations with Cleveland's Contemporary Youth Orchestra? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.161.132.229 (talk) 20:36, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Added collaboration entry with Everyday Animals. (Tseiff (talk) 01:49, 20 February 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Corrected my entry on the collaboration with Everyday Animals; previously I didn't realize the entries were in chronological order so I put this collaboration from 2013 at the bottom of the list, it being the most recent entry.(Tseiff (talk) 01:52, 20 February 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Sources belong here-- not in External links[edit]

These sources do not ever belong in External links. I have moved the link farm there to this talk page where they do belong. Warning: I didn't check them over, so be careful in choosing any references here. Thank you. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 15:38, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Back to the falsetto question years later[edit]

Anderson doesn't use falsetto, even as recently as 2012. He discusses it here: [4] Cheers. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 04:04, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Béla Fleck and the Flecktones[edit]

Anderson cannot have appeared with Béla Fleck and the Flecktones in 1982/83 as they did not form until 1988 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.55.48.46 (talk) 08:47, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. He appears on this album: Outbound (Béla Fleck and the Flecktones album), released 2000. Bondegezou (talk) 17:39, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Discography format[edit]

The article's discography is split by act. These subsections used just to be titled with the name of each act. User:HurluGumene would like to change these to "As..." ("As Anderson Bruford Wakeman Howe", "As Anderson Ponty Band") etc. I looked at a number of other musician articles and "With..." seemed the commonest form, with the name of the act without any preposition also used, so I've changed the titles to "With...", but actually on the grounds of brevity, I'd be happiest with no preposition.

"As...", I suggest, is simply wrong. "As..." means an individual was working under a particular name (e.g., Anderson's early singles as Hans Christian), but you can't use "as" about a collaboration with other people. ABWH and the Anderson Ponty Band are different bands, not merely Jon Anderson using different names. Bondegezou (talk) 07:20, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For comparison, Steve Howe discography, Chris Squire, Alan White (Yes drummer), Tony_Kaye_(musician)#Discography, Peter Banks and Billy Sherwood use "With...". Geoff Downes#Discography uses no preposition for acts, but "with" for collaborations under the individuals' names (e.g. Wetton/Downes work is listed under "With John Wetton"). Bill_Bruford#Discography and Jon Davison use no prepositions, just the act name. None use "as". Bondegezou (talk) 09:11, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ARW paragraph[edit]

Hello, User:HurluGumene. You've included the following paragraph:

On 10 & 11 January 2016, Anderson also announced that, finally, the long-anticipated Anderson, Rabin and Wakeman (ARW) project has been writing some new songs together and is planning to perform live dates at the end of the year and to tour in 2017.[1] Rabin has also alluded to this project on social media[2][3] while Wakeman confirmed it via his January 2016 website update.

I would suggest that, as per my edit you reverted, this could be written in a more encyclopaedic way. "[L]ong-anticipated" smacks of violating WP:NPOV. The key information here is that the band are writing material and planning touring. Who precisely announced this news when is a level of detail appropriate for a news report about the band, but not really for an encyclopaedia. I propose that the second sentence is redundant. Throughout the rest of the article, the text says what happened, not who announced what when. For example, take this paragraph:

In October 2010, as Anderson/Wakeman, Jon Anderson and Rick Wakeman released a joint album entitled The Living Tree. Initially sold only as a souvenir during their "The Anderson Wakeman Project 360" UK tour in Autumn 2010, the album was later made available to the public in November 2010.

No details there of when the news came out or who said what, just the facts about when the album was available. Bondegezou (talk) 11:44, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So what? Sorry, I still disagree with you... I think you're quibbling...! WP:NPOV says: "All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view". I see no violation of neutral point of view in the word "long-anticipated" (or "long-awaited")! Do you prefer "long-awaited"? The key information here may be that the band are writing material and planning touring, the long-anticipated "status" of the band is yet a reality. HurluGumene (talk) 12:04, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Long-awaited or anticipated are much of a muchness to me: they both suggest a value judgement and do not appear to me to be neutral.
Do you have some reason for including the second sentence on who said what when?
Does anyone else want to chime in here? Bondegezou (talk) 17:01, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There is a lot of unconfirmed and unreferenced material here that needs some very close scrutiny - including one mention to a sexual assault that had no citation whatsoever. Karst (talk) 22:21, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Karst, could you be more specific to what you are referring? You seem to be talking about the article overall, rather than the ARW paragraph... yes? Bondegezou (talk) 22:26, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The ARW section is a case in point - the references there consist all of Facebook posts by the subjects themselves. That is WP:PRIMARY it needs a third-party source, otherwise it is just speculation. Karst (talk) 22:36, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ [1]
  2. ^ [2]
  3. ^ [3]

Guitarist?[edit]

Jon Anderson appears on Wikiproject Guitarist, but he's not notable as a guitarist, is he?
–Vmavanti (talk) 19:20, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

well, he's not anything, according to the info-box, & yet he recorded 'olias' all on his own, despite many of the keyboard sounds & the overall production sounding a lot like both vangelis & patrick moraz albums from the same era. I suspect contractual ties prevented their assistance being acknowledged for what it actually was- anyone with a decent pair of ears & a working knowledge of the two keyboardists can hear them. furthermore, nothing was ever seen again of anderson's miraculous overnight multi-instrumentalist skills, either solo or with yes. OR, I know, which is why I'm bringing it up here.

duncanrmi (talk) 01:06, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jon Anderson played all the instruments on Olias. This has been looked into several times. Vangelis has repeatedly denied any involvement in the album. Anderson has subsequently played various instruments on subsequent projects, notably Angels Embrace.
Anderson does play guitar, and often plays some guitar live, but he is not primarily known as a guitarist, no. Bondegezou (talk) 09:53, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jon[edit]

This article has, for many years, opened, "John Roy Anderson (born 25 October 1944), known professionally as Jon Anderson", but GeorgeJack has removed the bit about being known as Jon, citing the Manual of Style. I looked at MOS:NICK and it says, "If a person has a common English-language hypocorism (diminutive or abbreviation) used in lieu of a given name, it is not presented between quotation marks or parentheses within or after their name." So the prior text was not contravening MOS. Given Jon is more an alternate spelling than a hypocorism, I would suggest it is useful to restore that text. But what do other editors think? Bondegezou (talk) 10:39, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AndersonPonty Band or Anderson Ponty Band[edit]

Jon Anderson used to be in a collaboration with Jean-Luc Ponty called the Anderson Ponty Band... or is it the AndersonPonty Band? I prefer the latter, Shubopshadangalang prefers the former. There are clearly sources using both. Primary sources show the band did stylise the name without a space and some secondary sources follow that. Other secondary sources do not. We could start counting sources either way if that's useful. I got 14k for a space versus 9k for no space on Google hits. I got 31 for a space versus 6 for no space on Google News hits.

I would suggest that the common Wikipedia approach is not to use stylised names. So, we call Kesha "Kesha", not "Ke$ha". We call Prince "Prince", not that squiggle, or The Artist Formerly Known as Prince (or TAFKAP) or The Artist. We note such alternates, but don't use them. We call EE Cummings "Cummings", not "cummings" or "e e cummings". Yes often stylise themselves "YES" and some secondary sources use that, but we call them "Yes".

So, on grounds of what is used most commonly and Wikipedia approach to whacky punctuation, I suggest we stick with Anderson Ponty Band, with a space. Bondegezou (talk) 15:56, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't say it's a matter of preference, at least not my preference. The sources that use "AndersonPonty" include their official Facebook page, as well as Spotify, Billboard, OfficialCharts, Allmusic.com, etc., which indicate there was a specific, concerted effort on the part of the band/label/management/distributor to have it listed that way. Sure, it's possible that other sources refer to them differently (I'm not sure which other sources we're talking about, so I dare not guess as to the reason for the inconsistency), but to me that seems like those would be of lesser importance in this case. And MOS:TMRULES, as you referred to within edits is pretty clear on the issue of "CamelCase" (e.g. PlayStation), stating that it's a judgment call in some cases, but that "where it reflects general usage" should be preferred, which I think is what we're talking about here. —Shada Ng (talk | contribs) 22:18, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you are looking at the wrong sources. It doesn't matter if there was a specific, concerted effort on the part of the band/label/management/distributor to have it listed that way. There was a specific, concerted effort to use "Ke$ha". Wikipedia privileges WP:SECONDARY sources over WP:PRIMARY sources like Facebook, Spotify, Amazon etc. Wikipedia seeks to be an encyclopaedia and, in doing so, to write about subjects as an encyclopaedia would. As such, we look to how the best sources write about a topic, i.e. we want to look at how books and magazine articles write about the APB and follow their style, rather than relying on directory listings like the charts.
I gave Google hits before, and these favour "Anderson Ponty" over "AndersonPonty". We can look at specific articles:
  • Billboard, in an article rather than a chart listing, uses "Anderson Ponty Band", although an earlier article used "AndersonPonty"
  • NPR uses "Anderson Ponty Band"
  • Music Radar uses "Anderson Ponty Band"
  • The Montrealer uses "Anderson Ponty Band"
  • Long Island Weekly uses "Anderson Ponty Band"
  • Time and a Word: The Yes Story by Martin Popoff uses "Anderson Ponty Band"
  • L'age d'or du rock progressif anglais 1965 - 1979 Tome 1 by Didier Gonzalez uses "Anderson-Ponty Band", just to add to the mix
  • Prog magazine uses "Anderson Ponty Band", although an earlier article from Classic Rock (same publisher) used "AndersonPonty"
  • Aspen Public Radio uses "Anderson Ponty Band"
  • Rockshot Mag uses "Anderson Ponty Band"
  • Ramzine uses "Anderson Ponty Band"
  • Noise 11 uses "Anderson Ponty Band"
  • Biff Bam Pop uses "Anderson Ponty Band"
When people write about the APB, they overwhelmingly use "Anderson Ponty", particularly more recently. So, so should we. Bondegezou (talk) 10:39, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not even sure we're talking about the same thing. Obviously I know how Wikipedia works, Henri (and for the record I don't appreciate the condescending tone here), but this is a matter of being correct as compared to following common, incorrect usage. Just like you get to dictate the correct spelling or pronunciation of your name, no matter how common it's incorrectly used by others, a trademark owner gets to decide the correct usage of their trademark. Do a lot of people use it wrong? Good to know, and maybe that's worth noting secondarily. But it shouldn't overrule using the correct terminology as defined by those who… defined it. —Shada Ng (talk | contribs) 14:46, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry if my tone came across as condescending.
Ownership of a trademark does not mean you get to dictate how other people style your name. Wikipedia follows common usage, not the correct terminology as defined by those who… defined it. To quote WP:COMMONNAME (which is talking about a slightly different context of the article name, but the principle carries over), Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources). Bondegezou (talk) 09:48, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have put a note at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Musicians#How_do_we_style_a_name?_Anderson_Ponty_Band_or_AndersonPonty_Band to bring in some more opinions. Bondegezou (talk) 09:52, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the theory behind what you're saying for most things, but while the correct usage of language in general is more nebulously defined by common usage, a brand name or trademark isn't defined by the masses, but by its owner(s). No matter how many times someone calls them "Flock of Seagulls," the correct band name is A Flock of Seagulls, and the Wikipedia page for that band reflects that. No matter how many times they're referred to as "The Counting Crows," that's not what the band Counting Crows is correctly called, and the Wikipedia article appropriately treats those incorrect usages as irrelevant. There are plenty of other examples I'm sure, but it's also worth noting that this isn't simply about style, there's also a space here, which affects the actual spelling. A specific example of a camel case band name is BarlowGirl (not "Barlow Girl," despite mistaken mentions of them in the press with that variation), and I'm sure there are countless others. My point is that we can choose whether to be correct, or to yield to incorrect usage. I have no interest in the latter, as that would be, well… incorrect. My suggestion would be to call them "AndersonPonty Band" and, if necessary, include a mention that it's "sometimes styled 'Anderson Ponty Band.'" —Shada Ng (talk | contribs) 17:08, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also, re: this supposition stated above: "Ownership of a trademark does not mean you get to dictate how other people style your name": The trademark owners of YouTube (not You Tube), iPod (not I-pod), eBay (not e-bAy), PlayStation (not PLAY_station), and PowerPoint (not PowerPoint) would beg to differ, and I wouldn't put it past time-traveling attorneys to pop up out of nowhere if we start misspelling CompuServe, BellSouth, or PageMaker. Not to put too fine a point on it, but that's exactly what ownership of a trademark means you get to do… at least inasmuch as they get to define what spelling and styling is considered correct, and what is not. And, again, being correct is what we should concern ourselves with primarily here. —Shada Ng (talk | contribs) 23:02, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am not a lawyer, but as I understand it, you are entirely wrong in your understanding of what power ownership of a trademark bestows. Ownership of a trademark does not mean you get to tell other people how to write your name. You can write "You Tube", or "youtube" or "u tube" or whatever you want with zero fear of a YouTube lawyer contacting you. Here's an essay on what a trademark gets you.
Wikipedia writes "YouTube" because that is the most common usage. I have given you what the Wikipedia approach is: Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name [...] it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used. Bondegezou (talk) 07:37, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I quote MOS:TM: When deciding how to format a trademark, editors should examine styles already in use by independent reliable sources. From among those, choose the style that most closely resembles standard English – regardless of the preference of the trademark owner. Bondegezou (talk) 07:39, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Let's look at how Wikipedia treats some other artists and acts:

Artists

In all of the policies quoted above, I see that the recommendation is for us to "choose" and make a "judgement call" with numerous factors in mind, and in this case I stand by my argument above that we should favor what is correct, rather than what is incorrect, and the idea that we should "choose the style that most closely resembles standard English" hasn't been favored toward breaking apart compound camel case brand names in many prominent cases (YouTube, PlayStation, etc. as noted above). Both usages ["AndersonPonty" and "Anderson Ponty"] have reliable sources, which of course is necessary for inclusion, but it shouldn't be a matter of counting the number of those sources seeing which version "wins." Whether the incorrect usage slightly outnumbers the examples you've found of the correct usage, I don't see why that factors more highly in the judgment call the policy defines that we need to make here, any more than one should give false equivalence to an opposing argument about whether the earth is round. This [the general principle at play here, AndersonPonty Band aside] is a hill I'm prepared to die on, as they say, or to perhaps use a better metaphor, I'm not going to follow the lemmings off the cliff, just because there are more of them. That is to say, if consensus dictates this goes the other way, then so be it, but I stand by my arguments. I wish you well, and appreciate the seriousness and thoroughness with which you approach this topic as always.
One parting thought: The difference between "Anderson Ponty Band" and "AndersonPonty Band" affects alphabetization, so it's a matter of spelling, not simply of style, unlike most of the examples you cited above. —Shada Ng (talk | contribs) 15:58, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We should use the plain-English "Anderson Ponty Band", because usage is sources is mixed, and WP does not adopt an unusual stylization unless usage of it in RS is overwhelming.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  23:22, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2018 plans[edit]

Article said ”Anderson plans to release the album in three parts, with a tour currently following the first part, which he wants to document on film.<ref name="azcentral" /><ref name="ultimateclassicrock.com Jon Anderson Finishing Album">{{cite web |url=http://ultimateclassicrock.com/jon-anderson-solo-album-2018/ |title=Jon Anderson Finishing Album He Started 27 Years Ago (by Martin Kielty) |date= January 2018 |website=Ultimateclassicrock.com |access-date= 29 August 2018}}</ref>”. These plans have presumably been met, or not met, by now. I’ve moved the comment here so that hopefully someone who knows the topic can bring it up to date as it doesn’t make much sense in the article in its current form.--Northernhenge (talk) 22:39, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jon_Anderson&oldid=1214267235"