Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Percussion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] 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.



[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)