Talk:Peavey Electronics
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Musical Instruments, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Musical Instruments articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
[edit] Thoughts on Peavey
(Just to get a discussion page started)
Peavey has (or at least has had) a reputation for making very solidly built equipment that sounds... just OK. Hence, the occasionally-heard aphorism, "Don't buy a Peavey, the damned thing will last forever." Like most generalizations, this one's a bit unfair. I can personally attest that they have made some very good-sounding bass cabinets, and they certainly deliver a lot of "bang-for-the-buck". And you've got to love a company that was founded by someone who made his own first electric guitar and first amp as a kid when his dad wouldn't pony up for them. MrRK 00:48, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- Good anecdotes. Of course, if they made lousy equipment (and I'm not saying they do!), there should still be a Wiki article about them.
- It appears that a good portion of the article material comes from Peavey's PR department. At the moment, the only sources are Peavey's own Web site. The current article reads a like an advertisement, with uncited phrases such as "grown massively", "humble beginnings". The article on Peavey himself could use more material, too. This might be a good source: http://www.peavey.com/corp/history/index.cfm 67.180.48.127 (talk) 01:42, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Peaveylogo.png
Image:Peaveylogo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 19:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Peaveylogo.png
Image:Peaveylogo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 06:38, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
