Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Percussion/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2

Getting the word out

OK, so right now I think what we need to do is spread the word. I'm gonna to quickly make up a template (on my user space) for recruiting interested parties. --Evan ¤ Seeds 04:00, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I already put a message on Brad Halls's talk page, just so you know. Kakofonous (talk) 04:02, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Are you just going to contact users you know, or take a look at the histories of percussion-related pages and contact the active editors on those articles? Kakofonous (talk) 04:06, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I saw the note on brad halls's talk page (which is on my watchlist), and I guess i'll look through some percussion pages, as the only two members i know who'd be interested are brad halls and flamurai, who's very inactive. I'm actually going to make a template now, or at least try to <_< --Evan ¤ Seeds 07:07, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Here we are. Tell me what you think. It's at User:EvanSeeds/WPPerc recruit.
WikiProject Percussion
User:EvanSeeds and User:Kakofonous are starting a percussion WikiProject. If you think you may be interested, please leave either of them a message or check out the temporary project page.
Looks great! Kakofonous (talk) 14:04, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Should I adapt that for current use and move it to template space, or leave it in user space? --Evan ¤ Seeds 02:45, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and adapted it, tell me what you think. --Evan ¤ Seeds 03:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
WikiProject Percussion
Due to your edit history, I think you'd make a great addition to WikiProject Percussion, the WikiProject about all things percussion, from snare drums and John Bonham to Triccaballaccas and Tito Puente.


Also looks good. Kakofonous (talk) 03:03, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

How about this userbox? Feel free to use it.

This user is a member of WikiProject Percussion

Badagnani (talk) 17:17, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


For the record, we currently have a user box at User:EvanSeeds/Userbox/WPPerc, but yours works as well, and fits the color scheme better. --Evan ¤ Seeds 21:47, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
This user is a participant in WikiProject Percussion.


To-do list before moving to actual project space

Now, we currently have five members, assuming we're counting Brad Halls (due to his comment here), so I think we have enough support to get ready to move it into project space. So what needs to be done before moving this to Wikipedia:WikiProject Percussion? Looking at WikiProject Tool, the only other one I'm really involved in, here's what I can think of:

  • Agree upon a collaboration of the month for March (inc. the rest of February)
  • Compile a list of current and former percussion FAs and GAs —Preceding unsigned comment added by EvanSeeds (talk • contribs) 02:15, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Make the assessment subpages (and read up on WP:WVWP and Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Using_the_bot)
  • Let's make a userbox to help spread the word (a la the template above, I'll probably do this myself now)

What else? --Evan ¤ Seeds 02:14, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

(Not in order). Assessment I think we can deal with later, as some WikiProjects don't even have it. There is already a generic userbox ({{Participant}}). I think I found all of the FAs and GAs related to percussion (listed at the portal. I'd say timpani would make a fine collaboration. Kakofonous (talk) 02:20, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I'll make the moves into the WP namespace now, if it's okay with you. Kakofonous (talk) 02:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. Let's do it! --Evan ¤ Seeds 02:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Bot to add tag

Can we ask someone to add the WPPERCUSSION tag to the talk pages of all articles in percussion categories? That shouldn't be very difficult at all. Badagnani (talk) 17:10, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

We've been progressing fairly steadily on that, but to use a bot doesn't seem very helpful, as it would leave the article without a rating. We currently have ≈261 articles tagged already, and EvanSeeds and I are rating more all the time. Kakofonous (talk) 17:18, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

You can just tag all the articles, then rate them as you get to it. That's what I'd suggest. At least it's good to have a count to know how many percussion-related articles there are. Those that don't fall into a percussion-related category, but are indeed percussion-related, can be added by hand as they're noticed. Badagnani (talk) 17:36, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I just want to clarify something: in the header of this comment you said "bot". Your last comment implied that it would be a human doing the work. Who will be doing this? Kakofonous (talk) 17:40, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd say have a bot tag all articles within the category Percussion and all subcats (Body percussion, Drum rudiments, Percussion ensembles, etc.). Any other articles that we run across that are percussion-related but not in any percussion cats (such as Harry Partch), we can add the WPPERCUSSION tag by hand. The rating can be done later, by hand. Badagnani (talk) 22:31, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Article for Deletion: Hybrid rudiments

For the record the Hybrid rudiment article has been up for deletion for a while, and the only people who are have commented are myself (the nominator) and User:Brad Halls, the creator. We both believe it should be deleted, but i think it will need more consensus before being deleted. --Evan ¤ Seeds 23:56, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that hybrid rudiments are an encyclopedic topic (Vic Firth has done features on them), it's that it isn't clear as to which of the hybrid rudiments in the article are valid and which are just stupid licks that some kid made up. And I have no idea which is which. Ideas? Kakofonous (talk) 00:00, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
I agree that it's an encyclopedic topic, but I think it should be relegated to a section of the (combined?) rudiment page. So, actually, instead of delete, perhaps a cut down, merge, and redirect --Evan ¤ Seeds 03:29, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
That's why I created the hybrid article in the first place, to keep every high school kid that thinks he has invented a new rudiment from hacking up the rudiment article. At least in that respect, it has been successful.Brad Halls (talk) 03:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
I think it'd be better to just keep an eye on the rudiment article than to just sluff off all the trash onto another article. --Evan ¤ Seeds 03:52, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Sticking notation

This is something I brought up on the Wikiproject Music talk page (here) but there was no discussion on it. Sticking often needs to be notated, but the current scheme (RRLL rLrlL R, etc) doesn't really cut it. It's confusing, especially to those without much of a percussion background, it's ambiguous (is rL a left-handed flam or two taps, alternating sticking, where the second is accented?) and, in my opinion, it seems unprofessional. What other possibilities are there? --Evan ¤ Seeds 05:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Proposed article for deletion: Snare drum technique

Unless we are going to add similar articles for marimba technique, tamborine technique, triangle technique, etc. I think we should delete this article. The "technique" for playing each instrument should be covered in the article for that instrument. Brad Halls (talk) 00:45, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. Kakofonous (talk) 00:54, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Proposed article for deletion: Moeller method

This article continues to be completely devoid of any useful or verifiable information (not unlike hybrid rudiments), and I doubt that ever will change. No two people seem to agree on what this actually is (or isn't), so I don't see how it can ever evolve into an article of reasonable quality. Brad Halls (talk) 00:45, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Not sure. Though I do agree with you that it is something that only a select few can describe satisfactorily, it is definitely a prevalent and notable technique. I would merge with snare drum, personally—I agree that it doesn't warrant a separate article. Kakofonous (talk) 00:54, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Proposed article for deletion: Open, closed, open

The content of this article seems ok, but is only about three sentences long and I don't see what else there really is to add to it. Also, since it seems to only be relevant in the context of rudiments, I think it would make more sense to merge it into "rudiment". Brad Halls (talk) 00:45, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Merge this into snare drum, I'd say, then delete. Kakofonous (talk) 00:54, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Proposed merge: "Drumline" and "Marching percussion"

It seems completely obvious (to me anyway) that these articles are covering exactly the same material, and should be merged (keeping the Marching Percussion article). I think it might also make sense to merge "front ensemble" with these, although I could understand why others might not agree. Brad Halls (talk) 00:45, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. Kakofonous (talk) 00:54, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I also agree ; 74.14.48.178 (talk) 21:51, 26 April 2010 (UTC)Anonymos User

Handbells & Handchime

I've been working on improving these two articles, and I have some questions and a request. Questions: when is an article no longer a stub (re: Handchime)? Can I just remove the stub template when I think it's a start? Or should I have you guys re-asses it? Request: can you guys look at what I've done so far and make suggestions for improvement? I have more print sources to mine and I'm in the process of planning my attack. Any help would be appreciated! |Godofbiscuits| 00:41, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

If you think an article qualifies for a higher rating (which handchime definitely did, and I changed it) you can generally just take away the stub template. Question: planning your attack? Sounds a bit sinister… :) --Kakofonous (talk) 00:47, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Wow! Thanks for the lightning-fast reply, Kakofonous! Input is still welcome from everyone else, though! |Godofbiscuits| 01:30, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Rudiment rewrite

For the past couple weeks Kakofonous and I have been working on a rewrite of the rudiment article, combining all smaller rudiment articles into one larger one. I believe it is ready to be moved into mainspace, so anyone who has any comments or objections can post them here. --Evan ¤ Seeds 04:29, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

If there are no objections by, let's say, Saturday, I'll assume we're cool, and I'll move it into mainspace. --Evan ¤ Seeds 00:20, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Vibraphone article

I'm the primary author of the Vibraphone article. I just noticed the percussion project through the rating put on the vibraphone discussion page. I'd like to try to improve the quality of the article, get it to at least A-Class, but I'm not sure how to proceed. Can anyone give me some pointers? Tpvibes (talk) 13:40, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

  • The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
  • The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
  • A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:13, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Percussion

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:11, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Describing drum sizes

Have a look at Wikipedia:Describing drum sizes. Andrewa (talk) 02:16, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Coordinators' working group

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 06:15, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Azerbaijani banknotes depicting instruments

Is the fact that certain musical instruments are depicted on Azerbaijani banknotes worthy of mention in the corresponding articles ? – Please, provide your imput at Talk:Daf#quiz of the year.

Thank you already. - Regards, Ev (talk) 18:39, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of gamelan ensembles in the United States (2nd nomination)

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of gamelan ensembles in the United States (2nd nomination). Badagnani (talk) 18:34, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

And please see WP:CANVASS. Mass posting of this AfD to talk pages where there is likely to be a bias toward keeping the article is inappropriate and forbidden. GraYoshi2x►talk 01:25, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:46, 22 January 2010 (UTC)


Request for comment on Biographies of living people

Hello Wikiproject! Currently there is a discussion which will decide whether wikipedia will delete 49,000 articles about a living person without references, here:

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Since biographies of living people covers so many topics, many wikiproject topics will be effected.

The two opposing positions which have the most support is:

  1. supports the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, User:Jehochman
  2. opposes the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, except in limited circumstances, User:Collect

Comments are welcome. Keep in mind that by default, editor's comments are hidden. Simply press edit next to the section to add your comment.

Please keep in mind that at this point, it seems that editors support deleting unreferenced BLP articles if they are not sourced, so your project may want to source these articles as soon as possible. See the next, message, which may help.

Tools to help your project with unreferenced Biographies of living people

List of cleanup articles for your project

If you don't already have this and are interested in creating a list of articles which need cleanup for your wikiproject see: Cleanup listings A list of examples is here

Moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "[[WP
Incubation|incubation pages"

If you are interested in moving unreferenced blp articles that your project covers, to a special "incubation page", contact me, User talk:Ikip

Watchlisting all unreferenced articles

If you are interested in watchlisting all of the unreferenced articles once you install Cleanup_listings, contact me, User talk:Ikip

Ikip 05:05, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

FAR

I have nominated Olivier Messiaen for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 05:36, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Egg Shaker

Further to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 May 4, would someone with knowledge of the topic advise whether Egg Shaker is a proper name, please? Bridgeplayer (talk) 14:28, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

I think it was originally a proper name, but the term is now used by several manufacturers of cheap plastic egg-shaped shakers. --Deskford (talk) 14:33, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Percussion articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Percussion articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:27, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Should this become a taskforce of Musical Instruments?

This project sees little activity. Should it become a taskforce of Wikipedia:WikiProject Musical Instruments? Regards.--Kleinzach 01:50, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Maybe... Last meaningful activity was 5 September 2010 as far as I can see.
But it would be good to revive it. There is an enormous amount of interest in percussion articles, particularly drum kit articles, but the quality of contributions leaves above average room for improvement IMO. Perhaps some of the drummer jokes are true (;->. Andrewa (talk) 06:02, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Going to have a go at getting it started again, see User talk:Philip.t.day#Percussion wikiproject. Andrewa (talk) 12:41, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

In reply

Should this become a taskforce of Musical Instruments? Probably not. If there's interest even from a few people, it will be a very useful WikiProject.

If there's not, we could try making it a task force, and see whether that generates more interest, but when this strategy was tried for WikiProject Guitarists it failed miserably. An inactive task force is no more use than an inactive WikiProject. My hunch is, drummers tending to be what we are, there will be more interest in a WikiProject than in a task force. I could be wrong, but let's try restarting the WikiProject. Andrewa (talk) 20:30, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Restarting

I think it's worth a try, and the first thing is just to get people interested enough to watch this talk page IMO. Other comments welcome.

I'm removing the Inactive tag, living in hope as I do [1].

A nomination at Wikipedia:WikiProject Percussion/Collaboration of the Month for a collaboration wouldn't go astray, or if we don't have one let's mark that page as inactive. Or should we have another go at FA status for the tympani article? Why was it delisted?

I'm going to try to get all drum kit related articles (all those that use the template) to GA standing, but that will take some time. Not sure whether to start with drum kit itself or one of the more detailed articles. The main issue is getting references, the material is getting there but detailed references sadly lacking still (as with many percussion articles). Andrewa (talk) 12:41, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

User:Philip.t.day has expressed interest, and I will contact User:Trap The Drum Wonder (aka Mike) and User:Opus88888. None of the other "members" seem to be currently active on Wikipedia, I think that's part of the problem. Further down the track we might try email for those who have it enabled. Andrewa (talk) 20:37, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Contacted those first two [2] [3]. Andrewa (talk) 19:41, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Some priorities

I'd like to get a few articles to WP:good article status, see Category:GA-Class Percussion articles. This is a new direction for me, I've been more of an article starter and improver than finisher up until now.

Some possible candidates:

Issues:

  • References and citations. Probably the main problem with both drum kit and drum stick currently. I think they are now mostly accurate and verifiable, but there's a lot of work still to demonstrate this to GA standard. And I don't want to take the cowards' route and delete encyclopedic material just because I can't easily find a reference.

Comments? Andrewa (talk) 19:34, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Infrastucture

There's obviously some work to do on infrastructure.

As a small WikiProject, we probably don't want much.

There seems a good core on rudimental percussion [5]. There's lots of good stuff in fact. Andrewa (talk) 20:21, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Archiving

I've added {{archive box|auto=long}} to the top of this page, which should presently and automatically archive the old threads, and then do so regularly. Andrewa (talk) 23:51, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Oops... no it won't. I didn't understand the system obviously. Just had another try. Andrewa (talk) 11:49, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Working now. Andrewa (talk) 12:31, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Welcome template

I wonder, would it be worth setting up a special welcome template for anons who make contributions such as this (which cluebot reverted as vandalism and I restored)?

Or other special welcome templates? Lots of people update percussion articles. Some of them we could probably recruit to the WikiProject. Andrewa (talk) 23:50, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Article alerts

Check out Wikipedia:WikiProject Percussion/Article alerts and consider adding it to your watchlist. Andrewa (talk) 07:46, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikiversity

and more. Andrewa (talk) 11:09, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Pitched percussion

See Talk:Percussion#Tuned or untuned. Andrewa (talk) 18:17, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Sources

Some useful links

More to follow. Andrewa (talk) 02:20, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

http://www.vintagedrumguide.com/ history of some drum brands Andrewa (talk) 16:59, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Hornbostel-Sachs

http://www.music.vt.edu/musicdictionary/texth/Hornbostel-Sachs.html Hornbostel-Sachs classification system at Virginia Tech.

http://www.music.vt.edu/musicdictionary/ The Virginia Tech Music Dictionary home page, which gives indexing that the above link omits, at the cost of a narrower text window and no useful URLs.

Some definitions not all that helpful either, eg drum kit refers to a drummer in a rock or jazz band (narrow view of classical musicians one feels) and links to pitch from the phrase pitched and unpitched and pitch links to tone with no other useful information and tone gives no useful information at all, so there's a chain to follow to try to define pitched (percussion) but it leads nowhere.

Also some definitions just plain wrong, eg http://www.music.vt.edu/musicdictionary/textc/cymbal.html currently reads A percussion instrument made of a circular brass plate... (my emphasis). Brass is copper alloyed with zinc, and a type of bronze in the more general sense, and a very few cymbals are brass, most of them toy or beginners' cymbals. Bronze can mean any copper alloy or more specifically copper alloyed with tin, and the vast majority of cymbals are made of copper/tin bronze, and not of brass. So in summary almost all cymbals are some sort of bronze in the broader sense, and all traditional orchestral and all traditional drum kit cymbals are of bronze in the narrower sense, and very few cymbals are of brass.

I left them a message on their feedback page about the brass/bronze issue some weeks ago and they have yet to even acknowledged receiving the message. And there are other mistakes too.

But such problems aside, this is an official VT site and should be an excellent source and well worth quoting when it's correct! Andrewa (talk) 15:57, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

http://www.wesleyan.edu/vim/svh.html Comprehensive online H-S index. Andrewa (talk) 16:59, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Church bells

{{Infobox church}} now has parameters for church bells (number of, weight, and hanging arrangement). Please help to populate them. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:06, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Lincoln Cathedral#History already has some information in the article on the number of bells. I assume tenor bell weight means the weight of the largest bell, in this case Great Tom (a title this bell shares with one at Christ Church, Oxford, and possibly others... is it a genericised term?)? I have added the parameters, and the number of bells, and emailed the Cathedral as their website gives not even this information, and it is unsourced in our article.
What is intended to be in the parameter bells hung? Are there technical terms we should use? Andrewa (talk) 18:25, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
No. The tenor weight is that of the largest bell which participates in English-style change ringing. Great Tom is a bourdon bell and is more than four times heavier. Further discussed at Talk:Infobox church. Reference for the bell weights: Dove Online. Oosoom Talk 10:17, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
OK... I've put some of this clarification into the main namespace. What's the difference between an hour bell and a bourdon bell? St Pauls London seems to have one of each in the South-West Tower, see http://london.lovesguide.com/paul_cathedral_sw.htm for details. Andrewa (talk) 16:53, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Further to comments on my talk page, I suggest you ask on the infobox's talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:44, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Done. Thanks! Andrewa (talk) 23:09, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
There seems now some doubt as to whether having this information in the infobox is a good idea at all [6]. Andrewa (talk) 07:46, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism to the Drum kit article

Drum kit continues to be a vandalism magnet for vandalism-only new accounts (and previously IPs):

Blocking these users is an option, and perhaps semi-protecting the page. I'm new at both of these, I may raise it at WP:ANI. Andrewa (talk) 19:54, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, WP:ANI doesn't seem to be the place for it, reading in part Before posting a grievance about a user here, please discuss the issue with them on their user talk page which I don't think is advisable. Nor is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard nor even Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. I said I was new at it. Tempted to just block both the unblocked accounts. Andrewa (talk) 20:05, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Failing to find anywhere to ask for advice, I've posted a final warning at User talk:Samlovestroysteeth [7]. At User talk:TheEzequielAlvarez there's already a less severe warning [8] by another user (in addition to the automatic cluebot message, I don't know whether that counts as a warning). Andrewa (talk) 20:28, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
And I've asked the admin who did the block to comment here [9]. Andrewa (talk) 20:38, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protection is probably the best way to deal with it. I've protected it for a week in the hope that these people will move on and find something better to do. If the problems return after the protection expires, it's easy enough to renew it—you can do it yourself, ask me, or ask at WP:RfPP. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:47, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
That may work, but as I understand it User:Samlovestroysteeth has now reached the thresholds required to be autoconfirmed, so it may not. Andrewa (talk) 05:37, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

The solution lasted not much longer than the protection [10]. Andrewa (talk) 03:16, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Warning posted. Andrewa (talk) 06:16, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Lists

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Percussion/Lists of percussion instruments for some ideas regarding lists of percussion instruments. Andrewa (talk) 00:02, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Drums, membranophones, and idiophones

Currently, Category:Drums is a sub-category of Category:Membranophones. This appears to be incorrect because not all drums are membranophones, such as the Kiringi and Log drums in general, which are idiophones.

Conversely, not all membranophones are drums, such as the kazoo, which is an aerophone.

Is it correct to have a sub-category of the other, seeing that either arrangement (membranophone being a sub-category of drums, or vice versa) is wrong some of the time? --MichiHenning (talk) 04:03, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Good question.
My answer is yes, as the alternatives seem impractical. But interested in other views.
Hornbostel-Sachs is useful but not perfect. See my page at http://alderspace.pbworks.com/w/page/54885310/Hornbostel%20Sachs for some discussion! Andrewa (talk) 11:24, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
I guess the alternative is to have Category:Drums as a subcategory of Category:Percussion instruments instead of Category:Membranophones. That's growing on me. It would be more logical.
It does have some repercussions, for example most if not all articles in Category:African drums and every article in Category:Hand drums would need to be also added to Category:Membranophones or one of its subcategories. Andrewa (talk) 00:13, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Toolkit and article skeleton

Have a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Percussion/Percussion instrument article toolkit and Wikipedia:WikiProject Percussion/Percussion instrument article skeleton, both created for my own use but I hope generally useful. Andrewa (talk) 10:35, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Footer template

See Template talk:Percussion#Future for a proposal to modify the footer template, which provides a navigation bar for percussion articles. Andrewa (talk) 10:35, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Portal update

Portal:Percussion/Selected article is badly in need of an update... suggested articles? Andrewa (talk) 19:44, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

In progress

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Percussion/In progress. Andrewa (talk) 01:42, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Category:Castanets

I have removed the one member of Category:Castanets, which was castanets, and intend to propose the deletion of the category. Comments welcome. Andrewa (talk) 03:35, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. I can't see the point of a category that will never have more than one article in it… --MichiHenning (talk) 04:25, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
I see at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion#Speedy criteria that I need to wait for four days, and then add {{db-c1}} to the category to nominate it under criterion C1. Unpopulated categories, and hopefully it will happen. Andrewa (talk) 23:45, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
I've posted a heads-up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musical Instruments#Category:Castanets and reaction there is positive so far. Andrewa (talk) 03:59, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Categorisation of main articles

Take cymbal for example. Does it need to be in any category other than Category:Cymbals? I think it's helpful if it is, in fact they probably should be in an identical list of categories. See WP:SUBCAT. Probably raise this on Wikipedia:Categorization/Noticeboard. Andrewa (talk) 03:56, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't see a problem with cymbal being in more than one category. However, just having had a look, it's also in Category:Idiophones, which is wrong. In general, only the most specific category should be used; parent categories are not supposed to appear: WP:Categorization#Categorizing_pages. --MichiHenning (talk) 04:53, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
It depends... WP:SUBCAT talks of diffusing and non-diffusing subcategories. None of these categories is actually marked with either Template:Category diffuse (indicating that articles should be moved to subcategories where possible) or Template:Distinguished subcategory (indicating that articles in the category can also be in a parent category) so far as I've seen so far. Some of them probably should be. But yes, categories that are not distinguished are assumed to be not distinguished.
I'm still trying to understand some of the complexities and practicalities of the policy etc..
It's not a simple category tree. I suspect we are going to have a lot of line calls and compromises, partly because the only widely accepted classification system doesn't work very well at all for percussion, and partly because probably no system can. Andrewa (talk) 23:58, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

I've been wrangling a lot about this.

Clash cymbals, for example, clearly belongs in Category:Cymbals, but on reflection I've added it to Category:Concussion idiophones as well. The reasoning is that concussion idiophones is a Hornbostel-Sachs category, while cymbals is not, containing as it does some but not all concussion idiophones and also some but not all percusson idiophones.

In general, it seems to me that each percussion instrument should be be directly in exactly one Hornbostel-Sachs category. By Hornbostel-Sachs category I mean a category that contains , either directly or indirectly, all and only the instruments in a particular (simple) Hornbostel-Sachs designation.

(By simple here I mean, not including a + sign to indicate a compound instrument. This is in any case both rare and controversial, although less so in percussion than for other instruments, and is one of the key weaknesses of the HS system.)

This is possible because of the heirarchical (cladistic) nature of the Hornbostel-Sachs (hereafter HS) system. For example, Category:Idiophones corresponds to HS 1, and Category:Concussion idiophones to HS 111.1, so both are HS categories and are included in Category:Hornbostel-Sachs. But Category:Cymbals contains both instruments designated HS 111.1 and others HS 111.2, while omitting many others designated HS 111 such as bells. So cymbal as such has no HS designation.

So, articles on particular cymbals should each be in either Category:Concussion idiophones (HS 111.1) or Category:Percussion idiophones (HS 111.2) but not both and in no other HS category. Or that's the way I'm seeing it. Andrewa (talk) 18:09, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

This is further complicated by the existence of Category:Bells. In HS, there is a designation 111.242 Bells: The vibration is weakest near the vertex. 111.242 is HS shorthand for Idiophones (1), struck (11), directly (111), not against each other (111.2), vessels (111.24), vibration strongest at the rim (111.242). That includes all suspended cymbals, but it's not my intention to make ride cymbal a member of Category:Bells. But in that case Category:Bells does not represent all of HS 111.242 despite the HS description of 111.242 as Bells.

This is another key weakness of HS, the (mis)appropriation of terms used elsewhere, in this case bell, and more spectacularly percussion, see my personal webspace for more on this. Andrewa (talk) 19:22, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Importance scale

I ave updated the documentation [11] to reflect the fact that we don't use the importance scale currently. Template:WikiProject Percussion doesn't even support it currently. Perhaps we should? Andrewa (talk) 21:22, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Marching bass drum

Hi, I'm an user from the Wikipedia in Spanish (sorry in advance for my bad English). I'm working on the article about the bass drum on there (if you want you can see how the article is currently going), and I'm trying to improve it enough to reach FA level. But since there is little interest about percussion on my main wiki and I'm going to ask about sources that exists mainly in English, I'm trying to find if some of you here can assist me, if you don't mind. Coming to the point, I'm now trying to expand the section about the marching bass drum, and I know (as the enwiki article extensively says) for example that drumlines use tuned bass drum on his performances, but I can't find reliable sources to properly extend and create a section, covering for example the particularities of the use, technique or sound. I have found sources like [12] or [13], but could you help me with some other reliable sources (not necesarily online) covering the subject? Thanks in advance for your time, I would appreciate any comment anyway. Lobo (howl?) 17:14, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Your English is far above my French I suspect (which I do claim to speak a little). I'll try, but not optimistic. Great project, and yes, we have the same problems here... lots of interest actually, as evidenced by the frequent vandalism to the drum kit article, but few willing workers. And the reference works I'd like are not available free on the web, and interlibrary loans are a hassle. Andrewa (talk) 19:28, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
Well, I can try to get access to a non free source through my university, and if it's a book I can also buy it (I own many reference books like the Encyclopedia of percussion, Percussion instruments and their history by James Blades, or Timpani & Percussion by Jeremy Montagu, among others, and I would like to improve my library). Lobo (howl?) 09:39, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Mass deletion proposed

These are currently nominated for batch deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stone marimba. Any opinions? --Deskford (talk) 03:33, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Cymbal manufacturers - OTRS request

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musical Instruments#Cymbal manufacturers - OTRS request. Andrewa (talk) 19:29, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Found object (music)

An article was recently created called Found object (music). Can this material be moved into other articles? "Found object" is a term with significance in the visual arts. Sources for that can be found here. This article—Found object (music)—purports to reference the use of the term in the context of music, but very little can be found in sources supporting this use. That percussive sounds can be produced by objects not originally used for that purpose is not something that seems to me to warrant its own article, and especially not under a term for a title that does not have significant support in sources for such a use. And we already have articles on Experimental musical instrument and for instance Sampling (music). Please see related discussion here. Bus stop (talk) 13:13, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

This topic reminds the philarmonikers searching: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTMOpE_t8BA --Opus88888 (talk) 20:29, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
As for percussion, there is a basic mention of "found objects" in auxiliary percussion. But to answer your implicit question, no, you can't just decide that the existence of your favorite context (or your total lack of understanding of anything else) means that other contexts are categorically unimportant, and cite anecdotal evidence. Generally speaking, there will always be overlap between some articles, and significant content can be migrated; and, almost every article could be more thoroughly sourced. But you can't just make a generic finalization about it. — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 04:29, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Article alerts section added to projects main page

See: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Percussion#Article_alerts. XOttawahitech (talk) 01:20, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

AfC submission - 30/06

Any opinions on this? Draft:Subhen Chatterjee. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:29, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Well at least I've heard of him, and I have at least one CD on which he features, which is more than can be said for most AfC submissions, so my inclination is to say yes, he is notable. More reliable sources will need to be found, but I'm sure that should be possible. I read an article somewhere recently in which he was highly praised... I'll come back if I can remember where or if I find it. --Deskford (talk) 19:37, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Featured Article nomination for Taiko

Hey folks. An article I've been working on, Taiko, is being reviewed under the Featured Article Criteria, and a reviewer there has requested someone to check over the prose. If you'd like to help conduct this review, please check out the article and leave comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Taiko/archive1. The relevant criteria are described here. Thanks a bunch, I, JethroBT drop me a line 16:10, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Taiko as a Featured Article Candidate

Hey folks, I've just posted Taiko as an FAC and would really appreciate if you could take some time to review it and leave feedback on the FAC page. Any constructive comments or questions would be appreciated. Happy New Year, I, JethroBT drop me a line 02:47, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Congrats on feature article status. It looks quite comprehensive. I added a few Taiko drums to List of percussion instruments today from a smaller Japanese drum page. I'll have to comb your article for a few more that I might have missed. Gudzwabofer (talk) 13:25, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
@Gudzwabofer: Hey thanks! I'd been gradually working on that article for the past year and a half, so it's nice to get it where I thought it could go. I appreciate your additions to the list of percussion instruments. :) I, JethroBT drop me a line 05:00, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Vic Firth

Vic Firth has just died. Please keep an eye on the article. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:07, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Singing bowl

Singing bowl has been nominated for deletion. Please comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Singing bowl. --Deskford (talk) 21:40, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject

The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.

Portals are being redesigned.

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template {{Transclude lead excerpt}}.

The discussion about this can be found here.

Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.

Background

On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.

There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.

So far, 84 editors have joined.

If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.

If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.

Thank you.    — The Transhumanist   07:51, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Finger drumming

Is there an article on this? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:40, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Bell infobox

Hi, there's a proposal to create an infobox for articles about notable individual bells that would benefit from input from anyone interested in bells. Please see the proposal and leave your comments at Draft talk:Bell infobox. — Kpalion(talk) 16:06, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

A new newsletter directory is out!

A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.

– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:Percussion for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Percussion is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Percussion until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America1000 23:43, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Hammerax up for deletion again

Serial WP:AFD. Question of WP:Notability and WP:Before. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:36, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Percussion/Archive_1&oldid=1140106134"