User:Koro Neil

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Flag of New Zealand.svg This user comes from New Zealand.

Personal information[edit]

Kia ora koutou!

I am the same person as Copey 2, but this new identity is not intended as a sock puppet. My recent attempts to log in as Copey 2 got me the response, no such user. Hence the new username.

My name is Neil Copeland. I live in Dunedin, New Zealand. I first created a Wikipedia account under the name Copey, a name I used for signing contributions before I created the account, but there was a glitch with the password, and requests to email a new one drew a blank. I assume this is partly because I opted not to include my email address when I first created the account, but it is also because the request link doesn't include a routine for getting unknown email addresses. I tried a few deliberate near misses—combinations close to my intended password, but nothing worked. So I became Copey 2. I am using the name Copey for other Wiki projects.

My laptop died, and I was without a computer for a while. Recently I was using my wife's laptop. It was when I tried to log on as Copey 2 that I struck another glitch (see the paragraph before last), and I have now become Koro Neil, which is what I was called by young Māori in the kapa haka group run by Otago University's Department of Māori, Pacific and Indigenous Studies. My grandchildren call me Koro. I now have my own laptop, and the hook-up into Wikipedia has gone smoothly.


My interests are:

Languages—Particular interests are comparative linguistics, especially Indo-European languages. I am seeking to become more knowledgable in the area of Polynesian languages. I have a reading knowledge at varying competence levels of Classical and Koinē Greek, Hebrew, Māori, Latin, Russian, Old English, Old Norse, Old Church Slavonic, Gothic, French, German, Biblical Aramaic, and smatterings of things like Italian and Spanish.

Christian faith—I am an evangelical/charismatic Baptist with a deep appreciation of Catholic spirituality. I believe that the Bible is authoritative in our understanding of God and in determining the way Christians live their lives, but I find the doctrine of inerrancy unhelpful—and sometimes meaningless, as it often implies accepting as history writings that the writers themselves plainly did not intend as such. In 2 Timothy 3.16-17 (All scripture is inspired by God...) I find no reference to the Bible as a geological or palaeontological textbook. I am interested in the writings of the Church Fathers and the light they throw on scripture.

Māoritanga—I studied te Reo Māori at University for four years. I also did other Māori papers, cultural and linguistic, and was involved in an extra-curricular kapa haka (Māori performing arts) group, visiting marae and high schools in various parts of New Zealand, performing, and promoting the University of Otago among young Māori. I performed my first haka at the age of 51, which I think is pretty dam' good. I want to make contributions to the Wikipedia in this area.

Music—Folk music in particular. I am a member of the New Edinburgh Folk Club, and am active in the wider South Island folk scene, participating in all five annual festivals on the Canterbury/Otago circuit. I am a fairly competent guitarist, and play a number of other instruments, including piano accordion, English concertina, mandolin, 5-string banjo, blues harp, tin whistle etc, with varying degrees of skill. I enjoy Celtic music, contemporary folk, bluegrass, blues, the folkier sort of country music, trad English and virtually anything well-written and witty. I also enjoy quite a lot of jazz, with Dave Brubeck as a particular favourite.

Mathematics—very much an amateur here, but I did work out the factorial of ½ accurate to 15 decimal places before I learned it was half the square root of π. I also worked out for myself why e to the power of = –1. I have a particular interest in factorials, the Fibonacci and Lucas series and complex numbers.

General reflection on Wikipedia—The usefulness of Wikipedia articles varies inversely with the accessibility of a given topic and the number of non-specialists interested enough in it to contribute. The first writer of an article often sets the tone.

Home page



From the University of Otago, I have a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Greek, a Bachelor of Divinity in New Testament, Postgraduate Diplomas in Greek and Hebrew (representing a full year of study in each at fourth year level), two Diplomas for Graduates incorporating papers in Russian (to third year level) Latin (to third year level), Old English (two papers at third and fourth year level of a course that normally begins in the second year) and Icelandic (one fourth year paper). I have also done papers to fourth year level in Māori language as well as other Māori culture papers at first and second year level. I fall just short of the requirements for a degree in Māori studies.

Pages in progress[edit]

Following up (in adapted form) a suggestion by Redfarmer, I am going to attempt to write a page here on New Zealand folk music. I can't do much more than start it, as I do not have the necessary bent for history. But, once started, hopefully it will attract better editors.

Folk music in New Zealand[edit]

This article is about the styles of music performed in and promoted by folk clubs and folk music festivals in New Zealand. It is also about the clubs and festivals themselves, and the culture they represent.

The Wikipedia article on New Zealand music lists the four following types of music under the heading "Folk music":

  • Māori music
  • Pioneer folk music
  • Brass bands
  • Highland pipe band

It is not the intention of this article to debate or dispute this categorisation. From an ethnomusicological point of view, Māori music, highland pipe band and pioneer folk music would all qualify as folk music. The appearance of brass bands on the list would probably surprise devotees of both brass band and folk music. Most of the music treated here does not fit any of the above categories, and pioneer folk music is the only item on the list that comes into the scope of this article.

The topic is not restricted to New Zealand folk music—which can be defined broadly as folk music produced by New Zealanders, or more narrowly as folk music identifiable by its style or content as belonging to New Zealand—but includes all music performed in folk music contexts in New Zealand, especially by musicians resident in the country.

  1. Lack of media attention (given or sought) makes sources a problem—especially for Celtic music.
  2. Introduction: defining terms. Compare New Zealand music page, which lists the following as folk music:

(Distinguish) New Zealand folk music - any folk music originating in New Zealand? - any folk music identifiable as such by style or content? By contrast "Folk music in New Zealand" includes all folk music played in New Zealand as part of the "folk scene".

Prob best defined as music performed in the folk scene (define) - loose network of folk clubs, with their associated festivals, plus the less formal Celtic music scene which is connected with the club scene, but has its own existence

Separate sections on Celtic music.

Other strands-- some country (esp bluegrass); kletzmer, blues,

Festivals and clubs

Celtic vs ceilidh/bush band vs "Irish band"

List of musicians[edit]

#Other people with important connections to the scene[edit]

Talk:Folk music in New Zealand[edit]

At the time of creating this article, my knowledge is limited mainly to the folk scene in Canterbury and Otago, although I know some artists from further north who put in an appearance down here from time to time. Accordingly I need good input by northerners to help me produce a page that isn't severely distorted, with all the apparent weight at the bottom. Koro Neil (talk) 14:07, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Anglic languages debate[edit]

(Copied from AfD debate)

There are no relevant hits on google book or scholar, something which tends to affirm what I've stated, i.e. that its non-wikipedia use is marginal at the very best. The fondness Scots enthusiasts have for the term is pure OR by me (though its appeal should be obvious). This is clear from my experience seeing the places it is present on the internet, my knowledge that Scots-loving nationalistic writers (including historians) like to do other such terms, like calling early medieval Northumbrians "Anglian" or "Anglians" in order to pretend they aren't English, and most importantly the users who spread the term on wikipedia (maybe you can affirm this, being as you are an active admin in the Scots wikipedia). It was no coincidence that this nom saw the reappearance of the wiki campaigner I call the "German anon", who has campaigned relentlessly for Scots on wikipedia for years and who suddenly reappeared to try to give the term more credibility. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 02:23, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Derek Ross raises a telling point, I think. It may or may not be true that "its non-wikipedia use is marginal at the very best," but it could be difficult to prove that. What I think Deacon of Pndapetzim does establish is that its non-wikipedia use online is marginal. While this is indicative that the term is marginal, it is not conclusive. The standing of those who use the term also has to be considered, even if they are only a handful. If they are a handful of recognised experts on Scots English or English dialect generally, then the article should be kept. Alternatively, it could be added to the English language article (which includes "Anglic" in its classification box), with a redirect from here. Compare the articles on Tagmemics and eucatastrophe, neither of which would be viable apart from the high standing of those who coined the terms (Kenneth L. Pike and J. R. R. Tolkien respectively).
If Derek Ross has access to other material on the term Anglic, then it would be good to cite it in the article. It is not implausible that a term with reasonable currency in older literature (pre-Internet explosion) might fail to show significantly online. Some older academics of my acquaintance have staunchly resisted becoming part of the computer culture.
For the article itself. If the subject is a viable one, then the article is pretty much what it should be—a short exposition of the term itself, with comments on its use that go beyond the scope of a dictionary entry. It doesn't attempt to hijack material properly belonging to an article on English language and/or dialect. Nor does it represent "Anglic" as a standard or broadly accepted term for the concept. It represents it as a term used by those who, whatever their motivation, want to emphasize the distinct nature of particular forms of English. The use of the term in the classification box of the English language article should probably be considered tendentious. But this article has its own sociolinguistic validity. Koro Neil (talk) 04:22, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Its presence in classification boxes is good demonstration, I may point out, of the power of a wiki-meme with a hard-core of ideologically motivated proponents to destroy the relationship between wikipedia articles on the one hand and wiki policies with the body of recommended sources supposed to be used on the other hand. Google books and google scholar contain a reasonable proportion and cross-section of mainstream scholarship, recent and traditional. "Imbellic cautustration" has the same representation, and that's a term I just made up. That I have proven its representation online is marginal does not mean that offline representation is high. It is strong evidence that offline representation is marginal. It is the only credible evidence that can be presented in an AfD nom also as each contributor can verify it (as well as see a fair representation of how much it is used). I have also asserted that use of the term from my own experience is almost non-existent, and frankly I don't think clutching at straws to find an excuse to keep the article or name is in line with the spirit of wikipedia's policies. It is not widespread practice to categorise these languages below Anglo-Frisian, but if it is done "Anglic" is not the term. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 04:52, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Comments to add[edit]

- Was going to imply Deacon didn't read me properly, but reverse is also true -

- Not majorly in disagreement -

- Material largely kept. Anglic talks about term; English languages has table -

- "English languages" strange term (to me)--better attested than "Anglic"? -

- Existence of controversy (if wider than wikipedia debate) worth noting? Deacon to provide stuff on politics involved in use of term? (Add "controversial" or sim to Anglic, and discuss use of term in English languages) -

- Should I query renaming/redirecting of article when no consensus? [perhaps in form, "I'm wondering if I should query your renaming (or whatever)"...]


User info[edit]

en This user is a native speaker of English.
mi-2 Kua taea e tēnei tangata te takawaengate reo Māori.
ru-2 Этот участник неплохо знает русский язык.
got-2 Sa niutands mag rodjan midjai gutiskai.
cu-1 Сь польѕевател҄ь глаголѥтъ словѣньскы зълѣ.