Anything about Elvis
More than 30 Million visitors can't be wrong

Felton Jarvis Wikipedia Page

Wed Sep 21, 2011 4:14 pm

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felton_Jarvis

Hey have you guys seen this? It says he produced records for Adolf Hitler between 1939-1945.....Somebody's at it I think! :-)

Re: Felton Jarvis Wikipedia Page

Wed Sep 21, 2011 4:22 pm

Sick joke...

Re: Felton Jarvis Wikipedia Page

Wed Sep 21, 2011 4:44 pm

It's been updated.

Re: Felton Jarvis Wikipedia Page

Wed Sep 21, 2011 4:52 pm

Some of what's found on Wikipedia should be taken with a pinch of salt, other things are plainly wrong, inaccurate or posted with an agenda.

However, Joseph Goebbels actually established a Nazi big band for Hitler because armed forces and commercial radio was allowing German civilians - and soldiers - to hear, and enjoy, the music of Duke Ellington, Tommy Dorsey, Glen Miller and Frank Sinatra during the war. This was very much frowned upon by the Reich, such joyous music and freedom of expression being much against the grain of the Nazi party . . . The response was led by band-leader Karl ''Charlie'' Schwendler whose band Charlie and His Orchestra (a.k.a. The Templin Band and Bruno and His Swinging Tigers) reworked the standards into propaganda-fuelled swing that consisted of disgusting, hateful rants against Jews, Americans and the British via newly or re-written verses and stanzas.
Last edited by greystoke on Wed Sep 21, 2011 5:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Felton Jarvis Wikipedia Page

Wed Sep 21, 2011 5:46 pm

greystoke wrote:Some of what's found on Wikipedia should be taken with a pinch of salt, other things are plainly wrong, inaccurate or posted with an agenda.

However, Joseph Goebbels actually established a Nazi big band for Hitler because armed forces and commercial radio was allowing German civilians - and soldiers - to hear, and enjoy, the music of Duke Ellington, Tommy Dorsey, Glen Miller and Frank Sinatra during the war. This was very much frowned upon by the Reich, such joyous music and freedom of expression being much against the grain of the Nazi party . . . The response was led by band-leader Karl ''Charlie'' Schwendler whose band Charlie and His Orchestra (a.k.a. The Templin Band and Bruno and His Swinging Tigers) reworked the standards into propoganda-fuelled swing that consisted of disgusting, hateful rants against Jews, Americans and the British via newly or re-written verses and stanzas.


History is always interesting Greystroke but this was just a case of disrespectful vandalism.

Re: Felton Jarvis Wikipedia Page

Wed Sep 21, 2011 6:26 pm

Alexander wrote:
greystoke wrote:Some of what's found on Wikipedia should be taken with a pinch of salt, other things are plainly wrong, inaccurate or posted with an agenda.

However, Joseph Goebbels actually established a Nazi big band for Hitler because armed forces and commercial radio was allowing German civilians - and soldiers - to hear, and enjoy, the music of Duke Ellington, Tommy Dorsey, Glen Miller and Frank Sinatra during the war. This was very much frowned upon by the Reich, such joyous music and freedom of expression being much against the grain of the Nazi party . . . The response was led by band-leader Karl ''Charlie'' Schwendler whose band Charlie and His Orchestra (a.k.a. The Templin Band and Bruno and His Swinging Tigers) reworked the standards into propaganda-fuelled swing that consisted of disgusting, hateful rants against Jews, Americans and the British via newly or re-written verses and stanzas.


History is always interesting Greystroke but this was just a case of disrespectful vandalism.


The Nazi's weren't a breed known for respectful acts or a disliking of violence -- their tactics with regards to propaganda and the manipulating of a population afforded them power, and such is a mere example of how their head of propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, was able to turn something created for joy and entertainment into something vile, politically charged and tempered with hatred and ignorance. Music is such a powerful medium, so stirring of emotion and able to whisk into a fervour congregations at a church, political rallies, concerts and sporting events. It can conjour a sense of national pride, evoke fond memories, move to tears or bring a smile . . . But it can also be a tool for ignorance, used to convey messages of hatred and bigotry -- and in Charlie and His Orchestra, such was afforded its most vile medium.

From such, it's actually a credit to the popularity and effervescence of the popular music of the era that the Reich felt compelled to counter such with music of their own. Whilst many in the west, able to pick up on broadcasts of of Charlie and His Orchestra from Berlin, were able to mock the lyrics and find humour in the Nazis clutching at political straws.

Re: Felton Jarvis Wikipedia Page

Sun Jan 18, 2015 12:43 am

Don't you think contributors should have SOME vetting before they can vandalize an entry? There must be a way to prevent this sort of thing.

rjm

Sent via my most phabulous phablet, the Galaxy Note 4

Re: Felton Jarvis Wikipedia Page

Thu Jan 22, 2015 11:14 pm

rjm wrote:Don't you think contributors should have SOME vetting before they can vandalize an entry? There must be a way to prevent this sort of thing.

rjm

Sent via my most phabulous phablet, the Galaxy Note 4


Wikipedia is a not-for-profit operation dependent on the input of those who contribute. But their relatively small team works very hard to correct acts of vandalism, or when concerns are raised about the validity of a particular page. I consider it one of the most important and valuable sites on the internet, and I donate often.

Re: Felton Jarvis Wikipedia Page

Fri Jan 23, 2015 8:36 am

drjohncarpenter wrote:
rjm wrote:Don't you think contributors should have SOME vetting before they can vandalize an entry? There must be a way to prevent this sort of thing.

rjm

Sent via my most phabulous phablet, the Galaxy Note 4


Wikipedia is a not-for-profit operation dependent on the input of those who contribute. But their relatively small team works very hard to correct acts of vandalism, or when concerns are raised about the validity of a particular page. I consider it one of the most important and valuable sites on the internet, and I donate often.


Indeed. The fact is that Wikipedia WORKS, despite the criticisms (not as frequent these days as, say, 5 years ago) that the fact that "anyone can edit" it is a serious problem. That's actually its trump card: sure, you can find occasional examples of flagrant abuse. But for the most part they're rectified very quickly. And the fact that a large number of people can share their niche knowledge on XYZ far outweighs the negatives of letting trolls edit the site (and at this point, automated bots can detect 99% of trolling, so it's pretty much a moot point...the admins/editors take care of most of the remaining 1%).

There's a great book called something like "The Wikipedia Revolution" that anyone even remotely interested in Wikipedia should read; it's both a primer on the history of Wikipedia and a treatise on why Wikipedia works, despite all common sense and intuition telling us that it shouldn't.

Re: Felton Jarvis Wikipedia Page

Fri Jan 23, 2015 3:52 pm

Eggrert wrote:
drjohncarpenter wrote:
rjm wrote:Don't you think contributors should have SOME vetting before they can vandalize an entry? There must be a way to prevent this sort of thing.

rjm

Sent via my most phabulous phablet, the Galaxy Note 4


Wikipedia is a not-for-profit operation dependent on the input of those who contribute. But their relatively small team works very hard to correct acts of vandalism, or when concerns are raised about the validity of a particular page. I consider it one of the most important and valuable sites on the internet, and I donate often.


Indeed. The fact is that Wikipedia WORKS, despite the criticisms (not as frequent these days as, say, 5 years ago) that the fact that "anyone can edit" it is a serious problem. That's actually its trump card: sure, you can find occasional examples of flagrant abuse. But for the most part they're rectified very quickly. And the fact that a large number of people can share their niche knowledge on XYZ far outweighs the negatives of letting trolls edit the site (and at this point, automated bots can detect 99% of trolling, so it's pretty much a moot point...the admins/editors take care of most of the remaining 1%).

There's a great book called something like "The Wikipedia Revolution" that anyone even remotely interested in Wikipedia should read; it's both a primer on the history of Wikipedia and a treatise on why Wikipedia works, despite all common sense and intuition telling us that it shouldn't.


Thanks, I'll check it out.