text:
Nightshirt

A nightshirt is a garment intended for wear while sleeping, often with a nightcap. It is longer than most regular shirts, reaching down below the knees, leaving some of the legs uncovered. It is often referred to as a nightgown for men, but nowadays, nightshirts are an optional sleepwear for women too.

In the US, it also sometimes means a shirt, slightly longer than a regular shirt, reaching down to the thighs, worn as loungewear and nightwear. Traditional nightshirts are used just for nightwear, removed and stored away for next use upon waking. This other, non-traditional type is worn with pajama bottoms.

Until the 16th century men slept naked or in a day-shirt. Nobles in the 16th century then wore embroidered shirts or "wrought night-shirts". By the 19th century the nightshirt resembled a day-shirt with a loose, turned-down collar and similar length to a nightgown. Historically, nightshirts were often made of ruined or very cheap fabric, but most are now made of normal cloth.

Like nightgowns, it is recommended to wear a robe or a dressing gown over them when expecting guests.

title: Nightshirt


text:
Bathrobe

A bathrobe, also known as a housecoat or a dressing gown, is a loose-fitting outer garment (a robe) worn by people, often after washing the body or around a pool. A bathrobe is considered to be very informal clothing, and is not worn with everyday clothes.

A bathrobe is a dressing gown made from towelling or other absorbent fabric and may be donned while the wearer's body is wet, serving both as a towel and a body covering when there is no immediate need to fully dress.

Fabrics
Bathrobes can be categorized by the weave of their fabric:

 * Flannel: Flannel is a soft woven fabric, made from loosely spun yarn, usually cotton or wool.
 * Terrycloth: Terrycloth is a pile fabric, usually woven of cotton, with uncut loops on both sides, used for bath towels and robes. The longer and denser the loops are, the more absorbent the bathrobes are.
 * Velour: Velour is a pile fabric where the loops woven into the fabric have been cut. Velour bathrobes are typically made with a terrycloth lining, as terrycloth absorbs water better than velour. Velour can make a bathrobe appear more luxurious, cosier, and makes the garment soft to the touch.
 * Waffle fabric: Waffle fabric has good water absorbency, with a lightweight weave and a distinctive "gridlike" appearance. These bathrobes are designed for their light weight over their absorbency.

Bathrobes and bathrobe fabrics can also be categorised for their fibre types, and are generally made of four different fibres:

 * Cotton: Cotton is a natural fibre consisting primarily of cellulose and is one of the most commonly used fibres in textile manufacturing. Due to the hydrophilic nature of cellulose, cotton absorbs water easily and is frequently used by the beach, pool, or following a shower. Cotton robes are especially suited to use in hot climates because cotton tends to absorb perspiration.
 * Silk: Silk dressing gowns are popular because of their look and feel, but can be relatively expensive. Silk robes are very thin and lightweight, and are not particularly suited to wet situations because they lack the surface area and polarity necessary to absorb water. However, silk dressing gowns are the traditional choice, since they are not worn after bathing.
 * Microfiber: Microfiber is an extremely fine synthetic fiber, typically made of cellulose or polyester, that can be woven into textiles to mimic natural-fiber cloth. Modern microfibers are developed to maximize breathability and water absorption and can be thinner than the width of human hair. Much like silk, robes made out of microfiber are light in weight and are very soft to the touch. Microfiber is flammable.
 * Wool: Wool bathrobes are common in colder climates.
 * Nylon: Nylon is a synthetic fibre occasionally used in inexpensive dressing gowns. It is valued for its ability to be cleaned easily.

Design and construction
Most bathrobes are designed as a wrapped-front garment with belt loops and a matching belt, intended to be tied around the waist to hold the garment closed.

However, bathrobe designs vary, typically in collar and closure design, with some garments featuring an open front or fastened closures in place of a belt. Varieties of collar design include:

 * Shawl collar: So-called because the collar closes around the neck like a shawl. The shawl collar is borrowed from its use on men's evening wear on the dinner jacket and smoking jacket, and is common on traditional dressing gowns.
 * Kimono collar: Similar to the collar found on the kimono, a traditional Japanese garment, the collar forms a thin strip of consistent width, wrapping around the front in a Y-shaped manner.
 * Hooded: A hood is sewn into the neckline, which can be worn over the head to keep it warm and help to dry wet hair.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Bathrobe


text:
Gabo

Gabo may refer to:

 * Gabo (character), character in role-playing game Dragon Warrior VII
 * Gabo, a fictional character from the animated film Wish
 * Gabo Island, Victoria, Australia
 * Gabo Pat, neighbourhood in Karachi, Pakistan
 * Gabo Reform, series of reforms in Korea

People

 * Nickname of Gabriel García Márquez (1927–2014), Colombian novelist, journalist, editor, publisher, political activist, and recipient of the 1982 Nobel Prize in Literature
 * Naum Gabo (1890-1977), prominent Russian sculptor in the Constructivism movement

Similar spelling

 * Cabo (disambiguation)

title: Gabo


text: Category:Manikongo of Kongo

title: Category:Manikongo of Kongo


text: User talk:67.170.236.235

title: User talk:67.170.236.235


text:
Fairport's Cropredy Convention

Fairport's Cropredy Convention (formerly Cropredy Festival) is an annual festival of folk and rock music, headed by British folk-rock band Fairport Convention and held on the edge of the village of Cropredy in Oxfordshire, England. The festival has taken place in August annually since 1976.

Fairport's Cropredy Convention attracts up to 20,000 people each year. The festival features a single stage at the lower end of the sloping arena field. There are also ancillary events, such as Morris dancing in the streets and live music at the village's two pubs.

History
The festival began as a private performance to about 750 people by the British folk rock band Fairport Convention in a village back garden in July 1976. The next year the performance was repeated and opened up to the public. In 1978 it was properly organised and moved to a larger site behind the Cropredy village school. It became a significant event in the band's history as they played their farewell performance there on 4 August 1979 to around 4,500 people, who were cheered by a promise to continue with annual reunions. From this point the festival became the main mechanism for preserving the identity of the band and for their many fans to show their appreciation.

At the first reunion in 1980 the festival was expanded from a one to a two-day event with increasing numbers of guest acts. In 1981, lacking a suitable site at Cropredy, it was shifted to the grounds of Broughton Castle, a performance released as Moat on the Ledge – Live at Broughton Castle (1982).

The festival returned to Cropredy the next year (and has remained there ever since although the actual site has expanded over the years). Despite the fact that Fairport Convention was not active as a band from 1980 to 1985, the festival continued to grow. After the band reformed in 1985, the festival became Fairport's major platform for showcasing new material as well as revisiting the old.

Between 1981 and 1999, the festival was a two-day event. From 2000, it was expanded to three days—Thursday, Friday and Saturday. The festival takes place on the second full weekend in August. Originally known as just "the Cropredy reunion", the event was branded Cropredy Festival until 2005 when it was retitled Fairport's Cropredy Convention. In 2007, all available tickets were sold in advance for the first time (this would not happen again until 2014).

In 2008, a live on-stage video screen was introduced. The year was also notable because, for the first time, not a single theft from the campsites was reported to festival control over the whole three days, underlining the unique and friendly atmosphere for which the festival is famous.

In 2010, highlights of the festival were televised on Sky Arts for the first time, with a documentary presented by radio DJ and television presenter Bob Harris. This continued through to 2012. In 2013 and 2014 the Whispering Bob Broadcasting Company uploaded highlights of the festival on their YouTube channel. From 2015 onwards, highlights from Fairport Convention's Saturday night set have been uploaded on their official YouTube channel. In 2020 the festival did not take place due to the COVID-19 pandemic and so a broadcast of Richard Thompson and Fairport Convention's full sets from the 2019 festival was streamed on the official YouTube channel.

To celebrate forty years of the festival, a documentary called Summer by The Cherwell was released in 2020.

Outline of the festival
The event is organised largely by Gareth Williams, the Festival Director, and also Simon Nicol and Dave Pegg, both members of Fairport. Fairport themselves open the festival on the Thursday evening with an acoustic set, and close the festival on the Saturday night.

The majority of attendees camp for the duration of the festival. There are eight separate camping fields adjacent to the arena, one of which is reserved for family parties. Fairport's Cropredy Convention is aimed at all ages with an emphasis on families and has developed a reputation as a particularly friendly and safe festival.

As well as a wide range of live music, the event features three dozen stalls selling clothing, books, CDs and food. It also boasts a very large bar which specialises in cask ale which is provided by Wadworth, a brewery based in Devizes, Wiltshire. The bar is used by festival-goers and performers alike (there is no back-stage bar), making Cropredy one of the few major festivals where the public can mingle with the musicians playing there.

In recent years, the running times for live music have been 4 p.m. until 11 p.m. on the Thursday and noon until midnight on the Friday and Saturday.

Also recently, there has been a wider spread of genres of music, expanding out from the original folk roots of the festival. Status Quo, the Buzzcocks, Dreadzone and Supergrass have played at Cropredy in recent years. Among many well-known acts appearing in recent years are Robert Plant, Alice Cooper, Lonnie Donegan, Procol Harum, Steeleye Span, Eliza Carthy, Yusuf Islam and Oysterband (see below for others).

The pre-Cropredy "warm-ups"
On the Monday and Tuesday before the festival each year, fans get a foretaste of what is to come at the festival when Fairport Convention stage "warm-up" concerts at a local club venue. Until 2007 these concerts were held at the Mill Arts Centre in Banbury. From 2007 until 2010 the concerts were held at Woodford Halse Social Club (Woodford Halse is a village in Northamptonshire approximately nine miles northeast of Cropredy) but returned to The Mill in 2011.

In 2017 the warm-ups moved from The Mill to Banbury Trades And Labour Club, following in the footsteps of P J Wright (fellow band-member with Dave Pegg in the Dylan Project) who had moved his annual TRADarrr pre-Cropredy Wednesday gig to the same venue in 2016.

Appearances
These performers are generally listed with the headline act last.

2023
On 12 December 2022 it was announced that the festival would be happening on 10, 11 and 12 August 2023 with headliners 10cc on the Friday and other sets by Toyah & Robert Fripp, Kiki Dee & Carmelo Luggeri, Gilbert O’Sullivan and the UK farewell performance from Strawbs.

2022

 * Thursday 11 August 2022
 * The Trevor Horn Band
 * Clannad
 * Edward II
 * Thumping Tommys
 * Fairport Convention Acoustic

 * Friday 12 August 2022
 * Steve Hackett - Genesis Revisited
 * Turin Brakes
 * Sharon Shannon
 * Slambovian Circus of Dreams
 * Martyn Joseph
 * Home Service
 * Emily Barker
 * Maddie Morris

 * Saturday 13 August 2022
 * Fairport Convention & Friends (inc Full House)
 * Richard Thompson
 * The Matthews Baartmans Experience
 * Rosalie Cunningham
 * The Bar-Steward Sons of Val Doonican
 * Holy Moly & The Crackers
 * Seth Lakeman

2021
In 2021 the festival did not take place due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

2020
In 2020 the festival did not take place due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

2019

 * Thursday 8 August 2019
 * Fairport Acoustic
 * Lil'Jim
 * Tors
 * Gogol Bordello
 * The Waterboys

 * Friday 9 August 2019
 * The 4 of Us
 * Wildwood Kin
 * Will Pound & Eddy Jay
 * Wilson & Wakeman
 * Caravan
 * Seth Lakeman
 * Richard Thompson & Friends
 * Frank Turner & the Sleeping Souls

 * Saturday 10 August 2019
 * Richard Digance
 * Daphne's Flight
 * Tide Lines
 * Zal Cleminson's /sin'dogs/
 * Martin Barre Band plays 50 years of Jethro Tull
 * Martin Simpson
 * Fairport Convention & Friends

2018

 * Thursday 9 August 2018
 * Fairport Acoustic
 * Smith & Brewer
 * Police Dog Hogan
 * Oysterband
 * Brian Wilson Presents Pet Sounds

 * Friday 10 August 2018
 * Mera Royle & friends (Scran) (BBC R2 YFA Winner)
 * Midnight Skyracer
 * The Travelling Band
 * Cregan & Co
 * Le Vent Du Nord
 * Fish
 * Kate Rusby
 * Levellers

 * Saturday 11 August 2018
 * Richard Digance
 * Eric Sedge
 * The Bar-Steward Sons of Val Doonican
 * Will Varley
 * Sam Kelly & The Lost Boys
 * Afro Celt Sound System
 * Al Stewart
 * Fairport Convention & Friends

2017

 * Thursday 10 August 2017
 * Fairport Acoustic Convention
 * Feast of Fiddles
 * Show of Hands
 * The Trevor Horn Band
 * The Divine Comedy

 * Friday 11 August 2017
 * Josie Duncan and Pablo Lafuente
 * The Gerry Colvin Band
 * Quill
 * Gigspanner Big Band
 * CC Smugglers
 * Pierce Brothers
 * Petula Clark
 * Richard Thompson

 * Saturday 12 August 2017
 * Morris On
 * Judy Dyble and the Band of Perfect Strangers
 * Plainsong
 * Cats in Space
 * Marillion
 * Dougie MacLean
 * Fairport Convention & Friends

1976 to 2016
Appearances prior to 2017 are documented at Fairport's Cropredy Convention appearances

title: Fairport's Cropredy Convention


text:
Daisy Miller

Daisy Miller is a novella by Henry James that first appeared in The Cornhill Magazine in June–July 1878, and in book form the following year. It portrays the courtship of the beautiful American girl Daisy Miller by Winterbourne, a sophisticated compatriot of hers. His pursuit of her is hampered by her own flirtatiousness, which is frowned upon by the other expatriates when they meet in Switzerland and Italy.

Plot summary
Annie "Daisy" Miller and Frederick Winterbourne first meet in Vevey, Switzerland, in a garden of the grand hotel, where Winterbourne is allegedly vacationing from his studies (an attachment to an older lady is rumoured). They are introduced by Randolph Miller, Daisy's nine-year-old brother. Randolph considers their hometown of Schenectady, New York, to be absolutely superior to all of Europe. However, Daisy is absolutely delighted with the continent, especially the high society she wishes to enter.

Winterbourne is at first confused by her attitude, and though greatly impressed by her beauty, he soon determines that she is nothing more than a young flirt. He continues his pursuit of Daisy in spite of the disapproval of his aunt, Mrs. Costello, who spurns any family with so close a relationship to their courier as the Millers have with their Eugenio. She also thinks Daisy is a shameless girl for agreeing to visit the Château de Chillon with Winterbourne after they have known each other for only half an hour. Two days later, the two travel to Château de Chillon, and although Winterbourne had paid the janitor for privacy, Daisy is not quite impressed. Winterbourne then informs Daisy that he must go to Geneva the next day. Daisy feels disappointment and chaffs him, eventually asking him to visit her in Rome later that year.

In Rome, Winterbourne and Daisy meet unexpectedly in the parlor of Mrs. Walker, an American expatriate, whose moral values have adapted to those of Italian society. Rumors about Daisy meeting with young Italian gentlemen make her socially exceptionable under these criteria. Winterbourne learns of Daisy's increasing intimacy with a young Italian of questionable society, Giovanelli, as well as the growing scandal caused by the pair's behaviour. Daisy is undeterred by the open disapproval of the other Americans in Rome, and her mother seems quite unaware of the underlying tensions. Winterbourne and Mrs. Walker attempt to persuade Daisy to separate from Giovanelli, but she refuses.

One night, Winterbourne takes a walk through the Colosseum and sees a young couple sitting at its centre. He realises that they are Giovanelli and Daisy. Infuriated with Giovanelli, Winterbourne asks him how he could dare to take Daisy to a place where she runs the risk of catching "Roman fever" (malaria). Daisy says she does not care and Winterbourne leaves them. Daisy falls ill and dies a few days later.

List of characters

 * Annie P. Miller (Daisy) - A beautiful young American girl. Despite her exact age not being informed, the common sense tells she is about 18 years old.
 * Frederick Winterbourne - 27- year-old American gentleman raised in Europe. Lives in Geneva.
 * Mrs Costello - Frederick's aunt, a reserved "widow with a fortune".
 * Randolph C. Miller - Daisy's 9-year-old electric brother, responsible for introducing her to Frederick.
 * Mrs Miller - Daisy and Randolph's mother.
 * Eugenio - Miller's courier.
 *  Mrs Walker - An American lady living in Rome since long. Friend of Daisy and Frederick.
 * Giovanelli - Daisy's intimate friend in Rome.
 *  Ezra B. Miller - The rich husband of Mrs Miller, father of Daisy and Randolph. Mentioned by the latter in the first chapter, he does not appear in the story.
 * The 3 sons of Mrs Costello - In chapter 2, the omniscient narrator lets us know that Mrs Costello has 3 sons, two living in America, one in Germany. None of them appear in the story and remain unnamed.
 * A friend in the street - In chapter 4, Frederick meets a friend at Via del Corso. This unnamed friend tells him that he had just seen Miss Daisy Miller with a companion at the Palazzo Doria, a famous museum nearby. In hearing this, Frederick heads immediately to see Mrs Miller, who apologies for receiving him in Daisy's absence.
 * Dr Davis - Mrs Miller's physician in America (only mentioned).
 * Mrs Sanders and Mrs Featherstone - Teachers, considered to support Randolph during the Millers' long term travel through Europe (only mentioned).

Key themes
This novella serves as both a psychological description of the mind of a young woman and as an analysis of the traditional views of a society where she is a clear outsider. Henry James uses Daisy's story to discuss what he thinks Europeans and Americans believe about each other and more generally the prejudices common in any culture. In a letter, James said that Daisy is the victim of a "social rumpus" that goes on either over her head or beneath her notice.

The names of the characters are also symbolic. Daisy is a flower in full bloom, without inhibitions and in the springtime of her life. Daisy contrasts sharply with Winterbourne. Flowers die in winter and this is precisely what happens to Daisy after catching "Roman fever". As an objective analogue to this psychological reality, Daisy catches the very real Roman fever, the malaria that was endemic to many Roman neighbourhoods in the 19th century.

The issue on which the novella turns is the "innocence" of Daisy, despite her seemingly scandalous behavior.

John Burnside, writing for The Independent, said,

Daisy Miller arrives in Frederick Winterbourne's staid world the way that an angel arrives at an Annunciation, as both promise and challenge. From their first meeting at Vevey, to the story's dramatic conclusion in Rome, Winterbourne's interest in Daisy is subject to constant censure from his carefully "exclusive" aunt, Mrs Costello, and her forensically respectable social circle: the girl is "not nice", they say; she is overly familiar with her family's courier, she has been observed in inappropriate situations with dubious young "gentlemen" and Winterbourne would clearly do well to distance himself, before the inevitable scandal unfolds.

At first sight, it seems that Winterbourne is genuinely torn between romantic attachment and his suffocating social milieu – and that might have made for an engaging, but not uncommon study of love versus convention; however, James' keen observation reveals something deeper than that, for even as he protests his aunt's attacks on Daisy's character (yes, she is uncultivated, he admits, but she is not the reprobate for which the entire world has decided to mistake her), he is less disappointed than relieved when a nocturnal encounter with the girl and her suitor, Giovanelli, appears to prove Mrs Costello right: "Winterbourne stopped, with a sort of horror; and, it must be added, with a sort of relief. It was as if a sudden illumination had been flashed upon the ambiguity of Daisy's behaviour and the riddle had become easy to read. She was a young lady whom a gentleman need no longer be at pains to respect." Though the novella's final act has yet to unfold, we cannot help but conclude that the real tragedy lies here, in Winterbourne's relief.

Critical evaluation
Daisy Miller was an immediate and widespread popular success for James, despite some criticism that the story was "an outrage on American girlhood". The story continues to be one of James' most popular works, along with The Turn of the Screw and The Portrait of a Lady. Critics have generally praised the freshness and vigor of the storytelling.

In 1909, James revised Daisy Miller extensively for the New York Edition. He altered the tone of the story, and many modern editions (Penguin; Broadview) prefer to print the original edition, their editors believing that the later edition is a diminution of the original, rather than an improvement.

Derivative works
James converted his story into a play that failed to be produced. He published the play in The Atlantic Monthly in 1883, and it showed many changes from the original story. In particular, a happy ending was inserted to please what James believed to be the preferences of theatre-goers.

In the 1890s, a short walking-skirt called the rainy daisy, supposedly named for Daisy Miller, was introduced.

A 1974 film adaptation was directed by Peter Bogdanovich, with Cybill Shepherd as Daisy, Barry Brown as Frederick Winterbourne, Cloris Leachman as Mrs. Ezra Miller, Duilio Del Prete as Mr. Giovanelli, and Eileen Brennan as Mrs. Walker. Frederic Raphael wrote the script; the film follows the structure of the original story without significant changes, and even uses portions of James' dialogue from the novella.

The novella was adapted in 2017 as a five-part radio drama on BBC Radio 4 for its 15 Minute Drama's "Love Henry James" series.

title: Daisy Miller


text:
Talk:North America Nebula

Images
Although that's one of my favorite images, It's not from NASA or in the public domain. APOD lists [mailto:jware@galaxyphoto.com Jason Ware] as the picture source. Jason has a website with pretty clear use rules. I am sending him an e-mail to ask for his permission to use his images on Wikipedia and will report back... --mh 03:09, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

Jason has responded fairly positively: "I have no problem leaving them on the site with proper credit and a link to my site." I have noticed a few APOD images of his on Wikipedia that are misidentified. I will try to track them down and edit the image links to include a copyright but permission granted template on them and a link to his site. --mh 17:36, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)

Second update: Sadly, I wasn't clear on the new direction of Wikipedia to purge all copyrighted, non free-use material. When I got back in touch with Jason about the possibility of GNU-FDL, he said it sounded too complicated and he'd rather have them removed, especially because they are not credited properly. We will need to only use external links back to APOD (like those here) for all his images. I personally think it's a shame Wikipedia can't use copyrighted, but permission granted material, but I just got here :) I'll make an effort to have his images removed over the next few days. --mh 17:44, Dec 17, 2004 (UTC)

Coordinates
The J2000 coordinates listed at the top-right of the page needs to be fixed. The right ascension is off by 1 second (17.1 doesn't round up to 18), and the declination is way wrong - should be 44d31'44", and not 44d30'60". Besides, when would you ever list a position as being 60 arcseconds??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.99.185.239 (talk) 20:30, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

apparent magnitude
The infobox has 4.0, while my book has 16! I know magnitudes vary by source, but 12 is too much. I wonder if there can be a reasonable justification for the 16 figure. 85.217.34.203 (talk) 02:32, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:41, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Changing Face of the North America Nebula.jpg

New image
In the infobox, I have placed a new free-use image with a very detailed high resolution source, which I believe is more representative. Moved the multi-paneled "changing face" page to the gallery section. If any issues with this change, please comment. Assambrew (talk) 01:14, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:North America Nebula


text:
Warning Forever

Warning Forever is a freeware fixed shooter for Microsoft Windows written by Japanese developer Hikoza T Ohkubo and released under the name of his software house, Hikware.

Gameplay
The game is broken into stages; each stage is a single boss battle, resulting in a constant stream of bosses. To progress to the next stage, the boss must be completely destroyed within the time limit. The game starts with a default time limit of 180 seconds, with 30 seconds rewarded for every boss defeated and 20 seconds lost for each time the player is destroyed. The player flies a relatively small green ship. There are no power-ups - the player's only weapon is a very rapid-fire revolving cannon which is fired by holding down the shoot button (Z key by default). By default, it fires straight ahead with a small spread. Alternatively, after the switch button (D key by default) is pressed, a green arc is displayed originating from the ship and widening as distance increases. This arc represents the spread of the weapon fire and does not change while the weapon is firing. It can, however, be modified based on the ship's motion while not firing. The arc will rotate slowly to face the direction opposite the ship's motion. Also, the arc will widen as the player moves toward the enemy and vice versa.

The main gameplay feature is the bosses change from stage to stage. Based on how a boss is destroyed, the next boss will adapt itself to defend against previously used strategies and force the player to change tactics. For example, if the front section of one boss is destroyed the next boss will have increased armor in that area. If the player's ship is hit by a certain kind of weapon, but still defeats the boss, the next boss is likely to have more weapons of that type.

The game does not include music, but provides instructions in the read me file on how to provide one's own music. It also includes sound effects.

Reception
Download.com awarded the game a 5-star editor's rating and described the game as a classic in the making, "Warning Forever will entice nearly every gamer who enjoys a space shootout". The staff of Computer Gaming World, writing for gaming blog 1up.com said "This game is among the most addictive platform shooters in the business". Eurogamer's Jim Rossignol named Warning Forever among a top 20 list of Summer of PC Freeware games in 2006. Other reviews are from IGN and Rock, Paper, Shotgun. This game is part of the permanent collection of the travelling exhibition Game On 2.0, shown for instance in the Ontario Science Centre 2013, as example in the category Indie games.

title: Warning Forever


text:
Talk:Xylorimba

Resonator pitch?
In marimbas the resonator is tuned to reinforce the fundamental pitch of the bar. In xylophones the resonators are more usually tuned to reinforce the first overtone, and octave above the fundamental.

Which is it for xylorimba? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.89.176.249 (talk) 21:43, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Xylorimba


text:
Talk:Washtub bass

Removal of category
The washtub bass is not a Double bass, any more than an acoustic bass guitar is a double bass. Furthermore, washtub basses are not always in the double bass register, sometimes they are in the cello register. Do not remove the category for a *fourth* time, thank you. Badagnani (talk) 20:23, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Commercial edits
I have made some edits to try to contain the commercialism that this page seems to invite. Makers of "improved" washtubs abound on the internet, and some are using Wikipedia to promote their product. While I applaud their enthusiasm for the instrument, Wikipedia's neutral-point-of-view, non-original-work and non-commercial policies make many recent edits inappropriate.

To those wishing to promote your version of the instrument, you can do better by putting in a few hours of needed research and adding useful info to this page. Doing so will help to promote the instrument in general, which is good for you because it is good for everyone. 68.144.70.5 (talk) 18:01, 7 March 2009 (UTC)DaveCW

Merge
I believe this article should be merged with tea chest bass. It is functionally the exact same instrument with a metal tub in place of a wooden chest. A simply subsection can cover the difference in construction, culture and use. There's not enough information to support two articles and there's no reason to split it up. TheHYPO (talk) 12:37, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree. I think they are one and the same instrument. I would like to one other person say they agree, but if I knew what I was doing, I would merge the articles. DaveCW (talk) 08:35, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

title: Talk:Washtub bass


text:
Talk:Violotta

merge with Tenor violin
There is also a tenor violin article. Should they be merged?BassHistory (talk) 13:01, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes it should in my opinion. Contact Basemetal   here  21:16, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Of course, and the article I Phone 4 and I Phone 5 should be merged with Smartphone. Different instruments-sizes, philosophies, timbres. Each one has it's own history. Please provide better arguments, Basemetal.

No, the articles shouldn't be merged. Since may nobody seems to be interested in merging the articles; so please close this talk. 217.7.56.111 (talk) 02:28, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Commenting well after the fact, despite the sarcastic assertions of the anon above, these aren't different instruments at all. The violotta is just another name for the tenor violin, and despite the claims behind taking out a spurious patent in the late 1800s, there was nothing new about reviving a largely forgotten instrument that had been around centuries prior.

The same, and I mean the exact same, can be said of the viola profonda, another, more recent revival that also took out a patent that is dubious at best. It's just reinventing the same thing that already existed. Both this article and the viola profonda article should be merged into the tenor violin article. Especially the latter. Wikipedia isn't here for people to promote their products, especially when those products are not actually new, despite the promotional claims. oknazevad (talk) 20:48, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Violotta


text:
Talk:Vielle

Infobox
Discussion of the infobox that just showed up is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musical Instruments. __Just plain Bill (talk) 23:43, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

title: Talk:Vielle


text:
Talk:Tromboon

Image request fulfilled; template removed. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 14:01, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

i play trombone...i dont know how do this pdq bach play this instrument... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.254.90.42 (talk • contribs)

 * I play the bassoon. It worked for me, although it's been more than thirt-five years since I've tried it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.147.160.78 (talk • contribs)

Hey, actually, my friend and I tried this a few days ago, and I never knew it actually had an official designation of some sort. --User:Clorox (talk) 03:32, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Could you make a little sound clip of your tromboon? Willi Gers07 (talk) 18:16, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Schikele's description
When Peter Schikele, promoter of P. D. Q. Bach, described this instrument, he said it's, "a hybrid ... that's the nicer word ..." 140.147.160.78 13:36, 12 July 2007 (UTC)Stephen Kosciesza

title: Talk:Tromboon


text:
Talk:Tenor horn

Wikibooks/wikipedia
I'm on a kick of brass, I'm sorry.

Wouldn't the little guide be better suited to wikibooks? Just a question, do me no harm? Bizznot

naming
In the US and Germany the name tenor horn is identical to baritone horn as well as the Tuba and euphonium. Really? Perhaps this sentence could be removed without harm. Jwoehr (talk) 06:19, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

 * I think you're right; that doesn't make any sense at all. Deleted. WeisheitSuchen (talk) 12:09, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not planning a major edit, but it makes perfect sense, it is just a little ambiguous: In a German Band (e.g. Blaskapelle) the tenor horn is in Bb, has the same nominal range as a baritone (or baryton) but is smaller bore and plays the higher part. (It is also traditionally oval, with rotary valves. See https://gebr-alexander.de/en/portfolio-item/bb-tenor-horn-%c2%b7-model-145/ ) In a "fin de siecle" period American band, the terminology is usually "Eb horn" for an instrument like this: ( https://archon.library.illinois.edu/?p=digitallibrary/digitalcontent&id=9076 ) and there is no tenor horn - the Bb instrument is a baritone or euphonium. (The terms are largely synonymous in THIS context and tend to fall between the British baritone and euphonium in size and sound.) And the British band context is as described in the article. I think the article could be improved by at least mentioning that the term is ambiguous.

alto vs tenor
"The reason this was done is that in British brass bands the E♭ cornet is referred to as the soprano, the B♭ cornet as the alto (unsaid but implied), the E♭ horn as the tenor, the small-bore B♭ horn, formerly the tenor horn, became the baritone, the baritone mysteriously disappeared from the Saxhorn lineup, and so on. The name tenor could apply only to one instrument, of course, and it had been reassigned to the E♭ horn. Sometimes the name is shortened to just E♭ horn to avoid any confusion."

This does not seem to be accurate. First of all, the whole "It Came From The Saxhorn" thing is possibly a mere digression in that it emerges again and again in web discussion but seems to be left largely to the side by the professors. More importantly, as [http://www.public.asu.edu/~jqerics/alto-tenor-FAQ.html Assoc. Prof. John Erickson] of Arizona State University points out:

The term alto horn seems to be used more to refer to the older models of the instrument that were used in bands in general, not modern, British-style brass band instruments. These older instruments were typically a little smaller bore (especially around the neck of the bell), were mated with smaller bore mouthpieces, and blended a bit better with trumpets and trombones. Modern E-flat tenor horns in contrast tend to be a little larger bore and are designed to use larger bore mouthpieces. Tonally they are intended specifically to blend with modern cornets and Euphoniums in a brass band setting. It should also be noted that a hundred years ago “Solo Altos” were also produced that were basically the same instrument but in a bell front design, not unlike modern marching mellophone, pitched in E-flat. Jaxdelaguerre (talk) 06:52, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

 * I'm not convinced Erickson is talking about the naming history. If he refuted the "it came from the saxhorn family" argument directly, I'd agree with that, but I don't think saying where it comes from is a digression if it's talking about the naming. How the creator of the instrument named it seems quite relevant, actually. But maybe we should have both explanations included in the article if there are conflicting opinions on the matter. WeisheitSuchen (talk) 12:26, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

 * Good points. I have edited the material, removing some prose flourishes and some irrelevancies such as the comparison of the bore size of UK vs US baritone horns and the euphonium. I think it reads clearer now and conveys just as much verifiable information as before. Do you agree? Jaxdelaguerre (talk) 05:46, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

 * Looks clearer to me; even just tightening up the text helps a lot. Nicely done! WeisheitSuchen (talk) 11:47, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Disagree - bore size is definitely relevant. Mind you, it doesn't need a great deal of detail, but simple comparisons are helpful.
 * Thanks for the feedback Jaxdelaguerre (talk) 05:57, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

solo horn?
"Solos for the alto horn are very occasional, and are usually taken by the solo horns."

What's a "solo horn"? I'm not arguing; I'm asking for clarification inline in the text or via a link. I think the author meant "an alto horn shaped like and played horizontally facing forward like a mellophone" Jaxdelaguerre (talk) 05:54, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Cleared this up, "solo horn" was mentioned early and defined late in the article, so I collated all the history and morphological stuff and put it before the reference to "solo horns" taking the solos. Jaxdelaguerre (talk) 05:21, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

History section
Currently reads "Other saxhorns include the baritone horn."

Style question: Having mentioned and linked to saxhorn in the introductory sentence of History, this statement seems either superfluous (i.e. they can go to saxhorn if they want to know about more saxhorns) or inadequate (i.e., what about the other saxhorns?). Should it be removed, or expanded, or left as-is? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaxdelaguerre (talk • contribs) 06:03, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Commented out offending passage with a brief explanation. If no one is bothered or takes some other action, in a month I'll delete it. Jaxdelaguerre (talk) 04:34, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it makes sense the way you did it. Maybe that sentence made more sense in a previous version of the section, but it's better without now. WeisheitSuchen (talk) 07:16, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Awesome, thanks. Jaxdelaguerre (talk) 15:00, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

RE: Wikihow
yeah... this article should be revised, the information is "too specific" concerning technique. It downright has nothing to do with technique, but rather with "how to start playing it" (more or less...). Maybe someone could write something about how the mouthpiece relates to other, more common mouthpieces, such as that of the tenor trombone (or how about the alto trombone?) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nicholasnice (talk • contribs) 03:04, 24 February 2007 (UTC).

Playing Technique 'Guide'
The paragraph of numbered points in the Playing Technique section is written like a 'beginner's guide to playing'. This should be changed, or as suggested before, moved to somewhere more appropriate. Mickthefish 16:14, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I am taking this section out, as it has hardly any reason to be here. This information isn't anything that pertains only to the alto horn, it pertains to all brass. A link could be placed at the bottom, but it shouldn't be on this page. PhorkPhace (talk) 02:11, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Genis Sage
Call me ignorant, but I don't see any correlation between the Tales of Symphonia character and the alto horn. The word "genis" doesn't even appear in the article. So, just out of curiosity, why on Earth does "Genis" redirect to the Alto horn page and not the Tales character? 216.36.7.39 22:41, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it's because Genis is the Italian name for Alto Horn. TrumpetMan202 21:06, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Peck horn
An editor has removed my contribution that "peck horn" is an alternate name for the alto horn. I first became aware of this instrument when a line in The Music Man mentioned "peck horns". Since I expected others might be interested in finding what a "peck horn" is, and since this is probably the most commonly known name for the instrument among the general public, I thought it was worth mentioning the name in this article.

I'm fine if someone wants to mark the name "peck horn" as "slang", but it seems worthy of mentioning it. Seitz (talk) 04:31, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

 * It's listed in the section under "Naming Issues." Here's the exact quote: "In the U.S., it is colloquially known as the "peck horn". This name is mentioned in The Music Man." Does that address your concern? WeisheitSuchen (talk) 16:51, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

 * Yes, it does. I saw the edit, and didn't notice that paragraph was still present.  Sorry for the false alarm. Seitz (talk) 04:53, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Recently added further citations to that colloquial usage. Jaxdelaguerre (talk) 04:36, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Players
Django Bates playing the tenor horn? I've looked at his page and although he's a great musician, it seems as though the tenor horn is a bit of a joke to him. Has he recorded or composed anything that we could access? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bruce Myers (talk • contribs) 11:33, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Someone added the following:
 * Tim Girling - solo horn player for the Australian National Band, based in Canberra.

However, I cannot verify the existence of an Australian National Band (excuse my ignorance), merely an Australian National Band competition, in which some bands in Canberra have participated. There is apparently a brass player named Tim Girling who plays for the Salvation Army Band of Canberra. Does anyone know of this player? Jaxdelaguerre (talk) 05:44, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

 * Hey mate, I have heard of that guy. He plays Solo Horn for Woden Valley Corps Band (a Salvation Army citadel in Canberra), but I'm not sure about the Australian National Band thing. -- Parradudes (talk) 00:36, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, Thumperward edited that whole section out as unsourced. He's probably right, in the absence of both widespread general knowledge and a quotable authority which evaluates players, lists of best players are conjectural, not encyclopedic. JacquesDelaguerre (talk) 06:25, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

 * I wholeheartedly agree. --202.55.154.196 (talk) 05:31, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

French Horn Shape
There are also alto horns built in French horn shape:

product description on a manufacturer's page

Shouldn't this be included as well? -- megA (talk) 10:51, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You're right, I've edited to note that instrument is valved, moved morphological information out of History to Description, and added reference to Cerveny's unusually shaped Alto Horns. Jaxdelaguerre (talk) 14:31, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Description
Two conclusions currently expressed in Description It seems to me that these two could be construed as controversial and/or tendentious and need external citation. JacquesDelaguerre (talk) 22:27, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) composers were discouraged from writing for the instrument due to intrinsic factors
 * 2) market dominated by two makers

Requested move 23 November 2016

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved Fuortu (talk) 20:48, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Alto horn → Tenor horn – By far the most common use of this instrument is in British brass bands; where it is called a Tenor Horn. TITLEVAR says: "If a topic has strong ties to a particular English-speaking nation, the title of its article should use that nation's variety of English". As the instrument's primarily use is in a type of band native to Britain, I'd argue that the title should be the one used in that nation. (Indeed, even in America, British-style brass bands use the name Tenor Horn.) TSP (talk) 16:40, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:26, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Support. It does seem silly to have an article that repeatedly states the instrument's most important use is in the UK, and yet uses a US variant name as its title. I didn't know that US brass bands used the UK terminology. That ought to be included somewhere in the article (with a reliable source, of course).—Jerome Kohl (talk) 18:50, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Tenor horn
Dear Colleagues,

In my long years of professional musical experience on the US, I realized that the terminology concerning the saxhorn family in this country has shifted in a surprising way: American musicians call the alto horn a tenor horn; the tenor horn - a baritone; and the baritone - an euphonium. In Europe, "euphonium" is simply the other name of "baritone". The tenor horn (in B-flat) is a big deal in European wind orchestras, just open a score and you will see "Tenors in Si-bemol (B-flat) Tenor I, II, III. However, it is suspiciously absent from American concert band scores, and eventually my astonishment turned into a realization: Americans simply call the tenor horn "a baritone". So, it is present in American scores after all, but under the name of his cousin. Furthermore, the baritone is also present, but under the name of "euphonium". But that is not all; on the Wikipedia and elsewhere, the tenor horn is confused with an alto horn in Es, which is a smaller instrument that corresponds in function to the French horn (in E-flat and F). You will not see a European score which contains "Tenor horn in Es"; rather, this is the alto horn labeled as "Alhorn in Es" in German, or "Flicorno alto" in Italian. The tenor horn and the baritone are alike, they are both In B-flat, have the same range, and may substitute for each other. The difference is in the width of the bore which affects the tone a little. Again, in the US the tenor horn is called "a baritone", and the baritone is called "an euphonium". This explains those videos and talks about the difference between the baritone (tenor horn) and the euphonium (baritone). If you do not agree with the above statements, please open a European score for a large or middle size wind orchestra, and you will see those tenor horns in B-flat. If you manage to ever find a score including "Tenors in E-flat", I would revise my opinion on the Wikipedia article. Besides, they claim that the German name for "Tenor horn" is "Althorn". It is not; the Germans label the Tenor horn either as "Tenorhorn" or as "Bass-Flugelhorn". The latter term implies that it plays an octave below than the usual flugelhorn in B-flat.

Please, watch this 3-minute video on Tenor and Baritone, made by British performer Phil Dale from the Prince Regent's Band, and let me know what you think:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78qCc9xk18Q&t=54s

Thank you for your attention.

Best regards,

Mutaeditor, 30 August, 2021 Mutaeditor (talk) 19:32, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

 * Thank you for coming here to discuss this. I disagree with your premise, as I think you are talking about the wrong instrument. As the article makes clear, the instrument here described is the one in E-flat, called "tenor horn" in the UK and, as I understand it, correctly called "alto horn" in the US. So it is a simple British English vs American English thing: the BrE tenor horn is in E-flat and is the same as the AmE alto horn. I feel that the article does deal fairly well with the name differences and the fact that this, like much brass instrument nomenclature, is a mess. Should an additional note with an RS be added to say that "tenor horn" might mean something different elsewhere? I am not sure, maybe. But to add something which says that the entire existing article is wrong, because it is about the BrE tenor horn in E-flat, doesn't seem at all acceptable to me. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 20:22, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

It is not simply a difference between British English and American English
Dear DBak,

Thanks for your input, but I am afraid that you are not entirely right. You say "So it is a simple British English vs. American English thing: the BrE tenor horn is in E-flat and is the same as the AmE alto horn." The first video that I am posting below shows a British musician from The Prince Regents Band who shows a tenor horn in B-flat and calls it a "Tenor horn", comparing it to the baritone in B-flat. The second video shows you an American musician who shows an alto horn and calls it "a Tenor horn in E-flat in the British tradition or Alto horn in American tradition". This would be OK, but the same person also shows a Tenor horn and calls it "a Baritone". I wonder what Americans call "a Tenor horn", then? With the risk of your extracting the following phrase from my paragraph and say "this does not help your case", I will reiterate that there is no such thing as "a Tenor horn in E-flat". Check the British video again and you will witness the British tradition. Perhaps you have not looked and any scores for wind orchestra that come from Europe, because if you have, you will immediately realize that the Wiki article is generally wrong. No one should ever confuse a simple alto horn in E-flat with a tenor horn in B-flat. A quotation from the wiki:

"The tenor horn is a valved brass instrument (in E♭) which has a predominantly conical bore like the baritone horn and flugelhorn." Well, that is wrong from a general point of view. Also, "The tenor horn (British English; alto horn in American English, Althorn in Germany; occasionally referred to as E♭ horn) No one in Europe does occasionally refer to a Tenor as "E-flat horn"! If Americans also think the instrument in E-flat is an alto horn, and if the British video below shows that a tenor horn is in B-flat and the British are not confused either, who refers to the tenor as an E-flat instrument?

The correction in the Wiki article should be general, not cosmetic, and it should say that the Tenor horn is a B-flat instrument; that in Europe it is called "a Tenor horn" or a "Bass-flugelhorn", while in the US it is known as "a Baritone". On the other hand, what they call "Baritone" in Europe is known in the US as "an Euphonium". No mentioning of any alto horn is needed in this article. I bet you will sooner or later realize that I am right...

In a wind orchestra score, there are typically three tenor horns (American: baritones) in B-flat: I, II, III, the first playing a low melody or counterpoint, and the other two - harmonic voices. In a bass figure part of the composition, they may join the first bass to boost the line, or sometimes, the three tenors and the baritone may carry a low line in unison. There is also at least one Baritone (American: Euphonoum) which functions in the same way as the 1st Tenor.

Please, see the two videos below and let me know what you think"

1. A British musician thoughtfully explains the difference between Tenor in B-flat and Baritone in B-flat. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78qCc9xk18Q&t=55s

2. An American musician shows an alto horn and calls it "a Tenor horn in E-flat" (from a supposed British point of view), then shows a tenor horn and calls it "a baritone". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MJAs3pT01s&t=21s

Mutaeditor, 2 September 2021Mutaeditor (talk) 21:39, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

 * Hello and thank you for this. The article is about the E-flat horn which is pictured in its infobox photo. That's the thing like a small saxhorn, pitched in E-flat so its written C comes out a sixth lower. That is the instrument that the article is about and it makes this clear, repeatedly. I believe that yes, it is indeed a pretty simple BrE/AmE issue, because this article, like our Baritone horn article, uses the current BrE terminology, just as we do in the UK in the brass band, jazz, or whatever. So that instrument, the smallish saxhorn that is next down in pitch under the Bb flugelhorn, is indeed a tenor horn in the UK and an alto horn in the US, unless the US speaker is deliberately using British-style terminology, perhaps in a brass band context.

 * What I think of your two videos (as requested):

 * 1. It's great, but he is an original-instruments player from an original-instruments band. He is not playing a current tenor horn: he is showing us the old instruments that he plays in the band. It sounds as if he would probably call their E-flat horn an alto, but he would also know that this is not current mainstream BrE usage. He is not showing us the instrument that this article is about, and what he says on terminology does not really relate to this article. I did really like this clip, thank you, and will show it and others from The Prince Regent's Band to the children I teach.

 * 2. Lovely. He is not an American, but a New Zealander, and uses NZ English which is close to BrE, and is talking about NZ brass band terminology which is the same as BrE brass band. So he is absolutely correctly showing us a tenor horn in E-flat and then a baritone in B-flat. His terminology is perfect and exactly in tune with our Tenor Horn article in its current form.

 * While we are sharing links you might want to look at:

 * Kate Westbrook a jazz tenor horn player on her E-flat tenor horn
 * Sheona White an eminent tenor horn player and teacher, with her E-flat tenor horn
 * Here is a shop selling tenor horns, in E-flat, also in BrE. We bought about 40 of those: they are quite good.
 * Here is a rather more famous maker where you can buy E-flat tenor horns and B-flat baritones.
 * The Grove Music Online Tenor Horn article says, A valved brass instrument of alto pitch, like a small euphonium in shape; in British brass band scores it is usually referred to as ‘E♭ horn’. and goes on later to say The instrument of the brass band that stands in B♭, a 4th below the tenor horn, is known in Britain and the USA as the ‘baritone’ and in Germany as Tenorhorn (see Baritone). and that (see) link goes to their Baritone article, as described.
 * Grove / Oxford also have an article "Tenor Horn (jazz)" which simply confirms this, and at their article Alto Horn they do it again with American term for a valved brass instrument pitched in E♭ below the cornet and employed in some wind bands; its form is upright, often with the bell turned forward. It is equivalent to the English Tenorhorn.

 * Have you got the Cliff Bevan book? It's really about tubas, and I can't lay my hands on it right now, but I have a bit of a feeling that he gets into the saxhorn terminology a bit, and is maybe referenced by others.

 * So yes, it really is pretty much a simple question of BrE and AmE terminology. This article is not about B-flat instruments at all: it is about the E-flat instrument which we in the UK and Commonwealth and brass bands call a tenor horn, and that Americans not deliberately using that language will probably call an alto horn. The article uses the BrE term but explains the AmE one clearly. This language variation is a royal pain sometimes, all over the place, and even worse in a messy area like brass terminology, but we mostly cope with it through the joys of WP:ENGVAR.

 * I hope this helps. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 19:36, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

 * PS I had to step in and attempt to impersonate a sarrusophone on a gig a few months ago. This was a new experience ... probably a first and last! :)

Change the title of article
Dear Colleagues,

It looks as if some musicians in Great Britain (not all), call the alto horn "a tenor horn" which is wrong in comparison with the rest of the world. I suggest that you open some European scores for wind orchestra and see in there the parts for Tenor, I, II, and III in B-flat (which in USA would mean Baritone I, II, III in B-flat). What Europeans call a baritone is known under "euphonium" in Europe. If you tell a German musician, or an Italian, Russian, French, Dutch, Eastern European in general - that the tenor horn is an instrument pitched in E-flat, they will be astounded, the least to say...

This is why I am very sorry for the provincial explanation in the Grove dictionary which obviously reflects what is thought of in some British bands as "Tenor horn", dismissing the fact that worldwide this instrument is considered an alto horn. That is not only a pity, it sends a wrong signal to the entire world. On the other hand, if they rephrase this by saying that "the alto horn, an instrument pitched in E-flat and corresponding in function to the French horn, is known in Great Britain bands as "tenor horn in E-flat", that would partially clear the confusion...

Therefore, I have a proposition for some of you: you are right that the Wiki article is about an instrument pitched in E-flat. Just do not call it "a tenor horn, "but changed the name of the same article to "Alto Horn". Then everything will fall in place and the vast majority of the world will know what you are talking about. This does not prevent you from stating that in some Great Britain bands they call the alto horn "a tenor horn in E-flat". :)

To summarize: In Europe - tenor horn = baritone in USA; in Europe - baritone = euphonium in USA; in Europe - alto horn = alto horn in USA. And for those of you who still insist that the alto horn should be called "a tenor horn" in Great Britain, I am pasting the British video again, where a British instrumentalist very clearly shows and calls "Tenor horn" an instrument in B-flat, comparing it to the slightly wider baritone. About this vide you say: "It's great, but he is an original-instruments player from an original-instruments band. He is not playing a current tenor horn: he is showing us the old instruments that he plays in the band. It sounds as if he would probably call their E-flat horn an alto, but he would also know that this is not current mainstream BrE usage." I do not sense the logic here; that he is an original instrumentalist from an original instruments-band does not make him wrong by saying that a tenor horn is an instrument in B-flat; this is what all the world thinks except from some parts of Great Britain and The Common Wealth, as you say. No, these are not "old-fashioned instruments" who have lost their application nowadays. Germans still produce oval shaped tenors and baritones like those, vs. the American baritones and euphoniums. Thanks for your attention.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78qCc9xk18Q&t=58s

Best regards,

Mutaeditor, 8 September, 2021Mutaeditor (talk) 18:13, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

 * For the record, I am opposed to this change, especially after carefully rereading this entire Talk page, but I am finished discussing this matter for now. Best wishes to all DBaK (talk) 12:12, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Presentation of the Alto Horn by a British instrumentalist
Dear Colleagues,

Please take a look at this video, where a British instrumentalist presents the alto horn (in E-flat), and compare to the video below it, where another British instrumentalist presents the tenor horn and the baritone (both in B-flat, of course). These two presentations summarize the view of almost the entire musical world about the alto, tenor and baritone horns, including the British Regent's orchestra instrumentalists (at least), and makes strange the claim of some other British musicians that an alto horn should be called "a tenor horn in E-flat". No, there is no such thing, and if Wikipedia wants to clear its reputation, it should reflect the worldwide opinion on the alto and tenor horns, and not the limited, peculiar interpretation shared by some people on the isle. Is Wikipedia supposed to be a reflection of provincial, uncommon, and highly questionable views of some of its members, or is it supposed to be a reflection of what the vast majority of musicians around the world (including some British musicians) think? If it is the later, then the title Tenor Horn should be changed to Alto Horn, and everything will fall in place. No, it is not about the difference between British English and American English interpretation; it is about the difference between the musical world and a limited circle of British musicians. Compare to saxophones (except the Baritone Sax):

Alto sax is in E-flat, and Alto horn is in E-flat.

Tenor sax is in B-flat, and Tenor horn is in B-flat. I think that, originally, these instruments (saxes, tenor and alto horns) may have been invented or improved by the same maker (hence the name Saxhorns for the latter).

The British Regent's Band on Alto horn: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4-pOZp78wA

The British Regent's Band on Tenor horn and baritone: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78qCc9xk18Q

Mutaeditor, 13 September, 2021.Mutaeditor (talk) 00:40, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

 * This is a rehash of the same item above. —C.Fred (talk) 01:57, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Versions of the alto horn
Hi, I was wondering if I should add some info on versions of the alto horn such as the double bell alto horn, Over the shoulder alto horn, and marching alto horn. The actinium is mentioned, but I wanted to see if this info would be notable enough to add to the page. Ryan56DCIfan (talk) 16:02, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Tenor horn


text:
Talk:Synclavier

Untitled
The famous gong sound at the beginning of Michael Jackson's "Beat It" comes originally from a PPG Wave Synthesizer and not a Synclavier !

Where is more Information about the 3200, 6400 and 9600 systems ? After NED developments like the PowerMac Interface ? Vitae about Cameron Jones etc ... ?

I will add more details.

I don't think the article reads like an advert. I'm deleting the link to synclavier.net (it doesn't exist anymore) and to the synclavier yahoo group, as it also doesn't exist anymore. I have "inherited" a full blown synclavier system and will get it running soon. From there, I hope to revitalise a synclavier user group, early next year. I'll do what I can to update this article then as well, unless someone beats me to it. Hwarwick 02:03, 20 AUG 2007 (UTC)

Notable Synclavier users
I don't recall ever hearing of Kate Bush using a Synclavier (she was always a heavy Fairlight aficionado). BenedictPoole (talk) 13:19, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I take it back; Dave Lawson programmed for her on The Dreaming and The Red Shoes (at least)! BenedictPoole (talk) 21:16, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I've never heard of Imogen Heap using one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.47.121.97 (talk) 03:05, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

What? No mention of Gary Numan? His albums from 1981-1983 were loaded with synclavier

Photograph
Does't anyone have a better photo of a Synclavier? They looked quite pretty, design-wise. The current one looks like a 1960 tone generator – no keyboard, no monitor... Are Synclavier company photos still under copyright? -- megA (talk) 17:39, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

The photography is actually a Synclavier I, which is a primarily academic system. The Synclavier II always had a keyboard, and the V/P Keyboard is an option for the Synclavier II, not the basis of the Synclavier II generation.

I have NED promotional literature for the Synclavier II in my files, but I don't know if the use of photos from that brochure is OK here. I know of a system near me that I could photograph, but I'd have to get around to it. MRJayMach (talk) 18:16, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

I have a lot of information on the Synclavier, including boxed manual sets from the New England Digital days, as well as a PSMT Synclavier with polyphonic sampling, a Post Pro (Direct to Disk) and tons of spares and service parts. Feel free to contact me here for information and--while I'm not a service tech--I'll try to help out.Timecodejockeys (talk) 15:35, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

When did it ship?
The intro says 1975, the body says 1977-1978. Which is it? Does the Alles Machine pre-date it or not? Maury Markowitz (talk) 13:35, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

The early Synclavier (then called the Dartmouth Digital Sythesizer) was developed during the mid-70's, at the same time as the Alles machine. See http://www.500sound.com/synclavierhistory.html. Brown University bought the first system to go outside of Dartmouth, in mid-late 1978. 76.21.0.160 (talk) 09:31, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

 * According to that source, NED's first product "ABLE computer" (dedicated processor for later Synclavier) developed in 1975, was sold for academic data-collection applications. Source:
 * According to Joel Chadabe's article on emusician.com, he bought first Synclavier in September 1977. Source: --122.18.152.114 (talk) 20:40, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I stand corrected regarding the first delivery of a Synclavier. My professor at Brown always told me that we bought the first one in mid-late 1978, but now I realize that Joel Chadabe had bought a keyboard-less one in September 1977. Ours was probably the first one with the keyboard and control panel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.207.85.133 (talk) 07:19, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Series, modular
I think it's actually worth mentioning that there wasn't _A_ Synclavier, but a series of Synclavier systems from commercially available Synclavier II, 3200, PSMT, 9600 and PostPro. Since these systems were heavily modular, usually one could upgrade/advance system owned by adding cardcages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.24.12.91 (talk • contribs)

Words to watch...
"There is absolutely no doubt that the Synclavier System was "the" pioneer system in revolutionizing"...

Please check out the Wikipedia Style Guide. Otherwise, good article :)

Atom Bomb Speedster (talk) 09:35, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

 * I removed the offending text - see WP:BEBOLD --hulmem (talk) 01:12, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

ABLE computer
With respect to the architecture of ABLE processor, there are two descriptions on Wikipedia:
 * 1) based on Data General Nova processor   (as written on Synclavier)
 * 2) based on Transport triggered architecture with a single instruction "MOVE from source to destination"   (as written on Transport triggered architecture and its source)

After an addition of above 2nd hypothesis, I've received following message from a person who might be involved in the Synclavier software development. Currently I have not enough sources to judge these suggestions, so I'll quote a message before altering the descriptions of article, for later references by others. --Clusternote (talk) 00:15, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Quoted from my talk page: Hello, I see you are following up on my edits to the information about the NED Synclavier processor. Thanks. I've done some research for you:

1) regarding the two-card design, the only online document I found that describes the card layout is at http://www.yakingcat.com/yaking/html/wsnCARD.html You can see how the processor is listed as being a "Register module" combined with a "Sequencer". Each was on a separate card.  This was true for all models of the processor (A, B, C, etc.).  In some cases a third card was added that was the multiply-divide unit.

2) regarding the relationship to the Data General Nova, I've thought about it further and looked up the instruction sets once again. I've realized that when we used to describe the ABLE as being similar to a DG Nova that was in our fund-raising documents (as a term known to investors), rather than representing the details of the technical design or its history.  So perhaps you should just take this out.

3) regarding the three paragraphs of material on transfer-triggered architecture that you added in recent update, that is probably more technical information than a reader wants to know when coming to a page about Synclavier the music system. I would suggest that you prune that back, since the paragraphs are at the online link you gave.

2601:9:400:1F4:5DE:36E5:B4B1:CC7C (talk) 05:11, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

 * Thanks for your suggestions, and sorry for my late response. For each suggestions, I think as follows:
 * as for multiple cards configuration of ABLE processor, it seems not inconsistent to above two descriptions and other sources. Thus we should add your source on article, and also we can add additional details (ex. ABLE processor consists of 2 or 3 cards, including: "Sequencer", "Register module", and "Multiply/divide unit")
 * the existence of "Scientific XPL compiler" derived from Data General XPL compiler, seems imply some relationships between ABLE and DG processor (Nova ?), and probably the NED's two manuals ("ABLE Series Hardware Reference Manual" and "Creating Programs for ABLE Series Computers") may provide the important hints for it. However still we need to verify the contents of these manuals. Thus, as a concession of the utmost, I propose the replacement of tag from current citation needed to verification needed.
 * I'm prospecting for the designs of various campus made computers and early digital musical instruments. The architecture of ABLE processor seems provide important hints for how the enormous signal processing required on Synclavier was realized on the relatively limited computing power on mini-computer cards in 1970s. Thus, I think it is better to keep a mention to Transport triggered architecture article and its source, as possible as not inconsistent to your description. Or otherwise, we should follow Neutral point of view.
 * (Off Topic: I am currently trying to organize the details of models and options of Synclavier for this article, based on available references. I'm glad if you kindly commented on my later updates)
 * best, --Clusternote (talk) 03:00, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Regarding the enormous signal processing on a Synclavier and realization with mini-computer cards, you have an incorrect understanding of the Synclavier architecture. The waveforms are produced by the Synclavier Synthesizer cards (named SS1 through SS5). Each set of these five produced 8 mono FM voices (later variants supported stereo). The processor is only sending start-stop-setPitch-setParameter commands to the SS card set(s), as well as handling scanning of the keyboard and control panel. Hence this can be done with 1970's technology. For documentation, look at http://www.synclav.com/NED-hardware-home.html and notice how the processor and laboratory automation cards are described as being in the 'computer' bin, and the SS cards are described as being in the 'synthesizer' bin. There is little documentation available on these cards, as their design was the unique asset of the Synclavier. However, their structure was similar to other digital synthesizers of the mid-late 1970's realized in Medium Scale Integration (MSI) hardware. For a good overview of this field, see Foundations of Computer Music (http://www.amazon.com/Foundations-Computer-Music-Press-Classics/dp/0262680513) specifically the articles on pages 192-205 and on pages 206-224. Also see Bell Labs Digital Synthesizer.

24.7.30.40 (talk) 07:41, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Synclavier. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100713021441/http://mixonline.com/post/features/avatar-0110/ to http://mixonline.com/post/features/avatar-0110/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110414131532/http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_dave_hard_drive/ to http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_dave_hard_drive/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:13, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

More sources needed on a description "FM synthesis, (re-)licensed from Yamaha" that relies on single source MIX2006
The description "FM synthesis, (re-)licensed from Yamaha" (added by IP user 86.173.191.67 in April 28, 2017,, simultaneously added on the other articles Frequency_modulation_synthesis and Digital_synthesizer) relies on single source: however, this magazine article itself lacks reliable source(s), and as a result, lacks verifiability. We need additional reliable sources on the FM (re-)license from the exclusive licensee, YAMAHA. Clusternote (talk) 20:44, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

 * I don't know what you mean when you say Mix lacks a reliable source. You can try to argue that this Mix article is not a reliable source. There is no byline so its possible this is just a republished press release. We don't consider a source unreliable just because it does not list its own sources though.
 * Better sourcing is always welcome but I don't see any errors in what is written here. It is well established that FM synthesis was invented and patented at Stanford and that Stanford OTL licensed it exclusively to Yamaha. NED had to get their license from Yamaha. ~Kvng (talk) 19:11, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Synclavier


text:
Talk:Slide whistle

Untitled
I will be removing this part of the article “like the clarinet, the only closed-end, cylindrical Western orchestral instrument.” As it is incorrect that the clarinet is cylindrical, closed on the end, in a way similar to a slide whistle.

In addition (as time allows) I hope to organize the article so that it is laid out as follows.

 * 1) Short definition
 * 2) History
 * 3) Physical description
 * 4) The slide whistle in music
 * 5) References

 * The clarinet is effectively cylindrical (thus its harmonics are different from the saxophone), but otherwise I agree that the similarities are distant.--Curtis Clark 04:25, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

If someone could record the sound of one it'd be great. Secretlondon 09:31, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Armstrong
I know that Louis Armstrong played slide whistle on at least one record with King Oliver, but I've never read or heard about him using this instrument with his own Hot Five. Can anyone confirm the statement in the article that Armstrong played slide whistle post-Oliver? /FredrikT (talk) 14:14, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

In Comedy
The slide whistle has been used in comedy for a while now but there's nothing in this article to mention that; it'd be great if someone could add a section for that here (unless it's mentioned elsewhere). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:12:6DA0:5100:70E4:2331:4DE2:6AFE (talk) 04:43, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Also BBC Radio 4's extremely long running comedy show I'm Sorry I Haven't A Clue (Games) frequently has one round entitled Swanee-Kazoo in which the instrument is played by one member of each time whilst the other plays a kazoo - largely alternating through the tune being performed but usually building to a combined climax - and typically with piano accompaniment from Colin Sell. For an example of this combination, consider this from a Christmas Special with an unusual variation on this theme where the Chairman arranges for a pair of musicians from his own Jazz band to provide the accompaniment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9mNBsEDr98 SlySven (talk) 21:45, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

The article says that a siren whistle is a type of slide whistle. It is not. 2001:569:FA13:F500:384D:87BC:D9D6:B4E5 (talk) 15:55, 5 January 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:569:FA13:F500:384D:87BC:D9D6:B4E5 (talk) 03:26, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Why does siren whistle redirect here?
Siren whistle, the instrument Dylan plays in highway 61 revisited, redirects here. I don't know that it has really any similarities with a slide whistle other than being a cheap children's instrument that is powered by air. Does it make more sense to add a section on this page for it, or to write an entirely separate page? 63.231.58.87 (talk) 18:09, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

"Air reed"
The opening summary says "Thus it has an air reed like some woodwinds...." What? Is "air reed" simply a term I'm unfamiliar with, for the action of a column of air in a fipple flute... or is it a total misnomer? It dates from the very first version of this page in 2002. This summary appears in Google searches, so it would be nice to get it right. AbdiViklas (talk) 16:05, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Slide whistle


text:
Talk:Corporative federalism

[Untitled]
Are there references to this type of governance in the Austro-Hungarian states? Wekins

 * I'd be interested in knowing any exact reference in their governmental law also. Right now, besides repetitions of this very article, google finds only brief mentionings of this concept in association to the Austro-Hungarian governance, such as here. Nagelfar 19:27, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
 * In the event that the above link ever goes down, here is the content of that page in regard to the question:

 * "The personality principle consists in giving to each citizen certain services in his/her language independently from the place in which he/she lives. The territoriality principle consists, instead, in using in a certain territory one or more languages for all the citizens living there whatever languages they use."

 * "The most interesting example of the personality principle, is the "corporative federalism" adopted by the Austro-Hungarian Empire: this policy consisted in dividing the country not only in administrative territorial units, but also in ethnic units on a voluntary basis, in which each citizen could register wherever he or she was living."

 * It gives a copywrite link "(c) OneEurope Magazine III/94" to a site which is already down. Nagelfar 22:35, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

huh?

 * ... a system of federalism not based on the common federalist idea of relative land area or nearest spheres of influence for governance, but on fiduciary jurisdiction to corporate personhood, where groups who are considered incorporated members of their own prerogative structure by willed agreement can delegate their individual effective legislature within the overall government.

Was this translated from German or something? (I don't think jurisdiction to personhood is good English.) Does it mean that citizens can join the group of their choice, and these groups are the basis of legislative representation? Or something else? Is groups synonymous with structure, and prerogative with willed agreement?

I would also suggest that "relative land area" be moved to a separate paragraph about contrasting systems. (It's certainly not the first or second thing that comes to my mind when I think of federalism.) —Tamfang (talk) 21:46, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

 * I'd say most functional federal governments are so by viritue of their division into sub-territory, that are in-fact simply segments of actual geographic land as border jurisdiction. Readily contrasting jurisdiction as some more abstract right attached, free-floatingly, to an identity or persona ("personhood", is more from the terminology 'corporate personhood' as a legal idea itself.) whether as an individual human or conglomerate entity (even if not for profit / noncapitalist). 184.76.53.217 (talk) 12:25, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

desperately seeking a verb

 * Theories adding philosophic backing to its own conceptualizations from such ideas as diplomatic recognition and the sovereign state's right to exist as it were extending beyond territorial nation-state in an international structure, to an intranational structure of the voluntary association of those with similar social world views being codified legal frameworks to themselves, within their own sphere of interaction, under a federal government of a particular nation state.

This sentence has no verb, and the referent of "its" (in the first line) is not obvious. —Tamfang (talk) 01:42, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

 * I do not concur that such a line obfuscates the issue: the subject at hand in the previous sentence that you left out is the subject of the article right so referenced "corporative federalism" its-very-self. 'It's = corporative federalism,' as in theories adding to corporative federalism's (as a world view) general & natural conceptualization (native to its political philosophy underpinning justifying its viability in contrast to any other political systematization as either an entity or adherence / cause to believe in) ... etc. Nagelfar (talk) 07:23, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

 * The sentence is not there to create unclarity, it's there to preserve unclarity. —Tamfang (talk) 21:48, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Corporative federalism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070324072800/http://www.karl.aegee.org/oem/articles/linguist.htm to http://www.karl.aegee.org/oem/articles/linguist.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:58, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Corporative federalism


text:
Talk:Sheng (instrument)

Which came first?!?
This article calls the Sheng the first free reed; The Khene also claims to be the first. Which is it? I'm reworking the Accordion and Free reed aerophone articles and I know the sheng is the link to the accordion, but I want the early history straight. --Theodore Kloba 20:51, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, it's hard to tell, since many history, especially this old and similar, is heavily dominated by nationalism; and it's very possible that they co-develop with each other. You can either favor one county, do some research on the technology involve (and then hope your implication works), or say they are co-developed. Also, it is common for some people not to recognize themselves being from one country: For example, Vietnam hcan trace many origins from China, but those former Chinese quickly declared themselves as non-Chinese (read History of Vietnam). So take your pick... you have 50% wrong anyway. 64.180.0.130 08:39, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Comments about article
Jason Lanier at http://www.edge.org/discourse/whosays.html writes about this entry: . . . I just looked up one instrument (chosen at random by spinning a bottle in my instrument room); the not-at-all-obscure Chinese mouth organ "Sheng." As of this evening, the entry is typical for the Wikipedia. There is plenty of circumstantially selected, impressively detailed information, including names of some Europeans who brought shengs to the West in the 1700s and so on. But the overall effect is misleading. The emphasis is random.

For instance, the models and tunings of shengs listed are relevant in some recent contexts (when there have been Chinese instrument factories innovating to serve a modern and somewhat Western-influenced movement of music education and performance) but even within that framework, the details are hardly complete. The hot news among my Sheng-playing friends in the last few years has been the amazing innovation in models like the Hong Liang Zhao 38 key gaoyin, which are changing ideas about what can be played on the instrument.

An online exposition of modern keyed shengs ought to at least mention that the sheng world is caught up right now in a period of rapid transformation. Much more importantly, the very long history of the sheng, which includes many forms, tunings, and earlier influences on the West (going back to classical times) is not even suggested. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.176.169.212 (talk • contribs)

 * Lanier's assessment is accurate. Although there are a handful of editors here who are interested in and knowledgeable about Chinese traditional music, this article hasn't yet found the right editors to get it in shape. Maybe he needs to contribute; "it takes a village," you know! ;) Badagnani 19:50, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Picture
This picture in the article appears to be the Japanese sho, rather than a sheng. 98.113.149.159 (talk) 16:35, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

 * The next picture in the article appears to be Guo Yi. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 23:29, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Nüwa
This is the form of mouth organ Nuwa was credited with inventing, right? Should come up somewhere in the article. — Llywelyn II   22:14, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Piano?
Replace with the scale on the actual instrument, traditionally tuned, if possible, instead of this random use of the equal-tempered European piano. — Llywelyn II   22:26, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

 * It's a good idea. I did something like that for the Setar. I'm willing to take it on,  if I find the info.  If you see any good sources,  please let me know.  Best wishes, Jacqke (talk) 22:36, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * This is a video introduction to the instrument by Wu Wei hosted by a London orchestra and its utter perfection at doing the Super Mario theme with bells and whistles. You probably can't reconstruct the whole scale from that but at least check them both out if you haven't already. Took this instrument from 'huh that's odd and slightly demonic looking' to 'jfc that's awesome' (especially for 1000) really damned quick. — Llywelyn II   03:46, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 * This is a video introduction to the instrument by Wu Wei hosted by a London orchestra and its utter perfection at doing the Super Mario theme with bells and whistles. You probably can't reconstruct the whole scale from that but at least check them both out if you haven't already. Took this instrument from 'huh that's odd and slightly demonic looking' to 'jfc that's awesome' (especially for 1000) really damned quick. — Llywelyn II   03:46, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sheng (instrument)


text:
User:Visviva

Every body that is in motion has the capacity to do work.

Standing offer regarding AFDs: although I do not work on articles while they are under consideration for deletion, I am happy to work on any article that I have voted to keep that is subsequently kept. I do not ordinarily track the outcome of AFDs that I have participated in, so the favor of a ping is requested.

On replies
After making an initial contribution to community discussions, this user generally tries to follow a zero-reply rule, for much the same reasons as the zero-revert rule. This user believes that if this user's contribution is worthwhile, someone else will build on it. And if that contribution isn't worth building on, the less time spent on it the better. (If a reply from this user is specifically desired for some unusual reason, a ping will help.) This user recommends this practice to others as well, since it helps to keep discussions from becoming personal. Personalized conflicts are harmful to the community and the project.

This user is not always successful in following this rule.

About
This user recently had a fungus growing in its brain. Ask me anything!

This user is a former wiki-optimist, now in recovery. This user has logged over 30,000 edits and has started over 1100 articles. But a lot of that was a long time ago.

This user believes that the worst insult any Wikipedian can give another is "your work is incapable of being improved upon".

This user is not a fan of userboxes.

This user does not enjoy spending time in policy or deletion space, but has found that there is no real alternative to doing so. You may not think you care about policies or deletion, but if the human impulse toward hierarchy and exclusion isn't held in check, policy and deletion will come for things you do care about eventually.

This user has received formal credentials attesting to at least passive fluency in languages that include German, Korean, French, Portuguese, Italian, Danish, Dutch, and Swedish. This user is a native speaker of English.

This user has sometimes been misgendered or misraced based on its username or areas of activity. If you are making such assumptions, they may well be incorrect. If you have evaluated the credibility of this user's arguments based on such assumptions, you should examine the particular sexist or racist reasons that led you to do so.

History
Before I came to Wikipedia I was a contributor to the Open Directory Project, where I logged over 25000 edits. ODP was a great place in many ways, but its hierarchical structure could never really make good on the promise of openness and collaboration. After rdkeating25 destroyed several weeks of my work with a single unaccountable and irreversible keystroke, I went looking for something else to do with my time.

When I had first seen Wikipedia pages submitted to the Open Directory, they were indistiguishable from the other EB1911 clones that cluttered the early-2000s web. But by 2004, it was clear that something remarkable was happening at Wikipedia, as the pages in my topic areas increasingly provided unique value, and in many cases gave a better overview of the topic than anything else on the web. It seemed like an incredible thing to be part of. How could anyone not want to be part of writing a free and open encyclopedia? So here I came. And here I have, to some extent, remained.

Many of the problems that plague Wikipedia today were already apparent in the mid-2000s. Looking back, one of my most lasting contributions to the project (which also was one of the most controversial things I've been involved in) was the creation of the deletion sorting wikiproject as part of a broader effort to reform the deletion process in 2005. In the beginning, I maintained all the deletion lists manually, using some unholy combination of Excel and NoteTab Light tricks. Of course that quickly proved unsustainable. I am profoundly grateful that people with greater technical skills and staying power have kept the project going for all these years.

Even then, it was apparent that while article space attracts people who like to collaboratively create and improve articles by seeking out positive-sum solutions, deletion space attracts people who enjoy deleting things and winning zero-sum debates. Unfortunately, the effort to tackle this problem by bringing more topic-editor voices into the conversation was not successful in changing the overall dynamics. Indeed, over time the presence of topic editors in deletion debates has simply led AFDers to resort to more innovative forms of gatekeeping, such as ignoring community consensus unless the !votes are phrased in specific terms that the AFD clique has deemed acceptable.

A huge number of people left Wikipedia around 2007. Alas, shortly after my successful RFA in that year, I became one of them. As Wikipedia had itself become an increasingly unpleasant environment driven not by positive-sum collaboration but by zero-sum dynamics, many of which flowed (as they still continue to flow) from the uniquely toxic zero-sum environment of AFD, I took my energies to Wiktionary. There I logged another >25000 edits and also passed RFA.

I could never leave Wikipedia entirely, however, and so I have still come back occasionally to work on particular topic areas and to shake my fist at clouds in policy and deletion space. But neither have I ever been able to return to the level of joyous immersion in the project that I achieved in 2005-2006.

As of 2022, it has been 15 years since I could last have claimed to play any significant role in Wikipedia's work as a whole. But I still try to do my part here and there, as I am able.

Recently I have been prompted to look back on all the things I have done or attempted to do in life thus far. It seems that my contributions to Wikipedia, in the aggregate, have been of greater and more lasting value to my fellow humans than anything else I have done. So I hope to continue building on that.

On redlinks

 * 1) Wikipedia is a connected system; topics are not covered through a single article, but through many related articles.
 * 2) Just as the presence of an article on one subject foretells the presence of articles on related subjects, the absence of an article foretells the absence of related articles.  (This phenomenon manifests with greatest force in systemic bias.)
 * 3) Therefore, when creating or expanding an article, if your draft does not contain redlinks, you aren't done. -- Visviva (talk) 14:56, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

title: User:Visviva