text:
User talk:Macropode

Barack Obama Spoken Article Assessment
Thanks for the assessment of my reading of the Barack Obama article! I'll fix the 96kbps issue very soon, and aim for higher accuracy when I re-read the article in the near future! Regards, Rahzel 07:13, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Spoken Article Assessment
Thanks for the assessment on my Julius Caesar recording. I changed the recording to mono and I think I succeeded in making it 48 kbps instead of 96. Thanks for catching that! -- Kevin F. Story 21:26, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Taijin Kyofusho
Try tie-jin kyaw-aww-phoo-shaw-aww. Hard J as in jug, Y as a consonant, and aw as in paw. Note the frequent mistake English-speakers make in pronouncing Kyoto as either kye-oh-tow or key-oh-tow; it should be kyaw-aww-taw. This is probably strictly wrong but it's better than nothing. Cheers. --Euniana/Talk/Blog 00:29, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks Euniana, it's certainly closer to the mark than my first attempt. I'll fix that article in the coming week. Never having had much exposure to cultures other than the one I was brought up in is certainly a disadvantage in producing some spoken articles; I don't want to mislead anyone with incorrect pronunciation. An investigation of (spoken) Wikipedia in other languages might be the way to go. --Macropode 13:00, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Eureka Stockade
I'm just listening to it now and it's great!! Really well done. Your voice is perfect for this project. :) pfctdayelise 11:10, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Coconut crab
Great voice work! --Eeee 07:45, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Oi! Steady on, you two. A person could get a fat ego with talk like that flying around! :) --Macropode 03:58, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Lend Me Your Ear
Hey... I've been wanting to create some spoken word articles for awhile but haven't until today. I created a *test* file on a small article and would like you to take a listen for some contructive feedback before I begin creating more. Anyway, if you have the time please take a look at Parks_of_Chicago. Jasenlee 03:15, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Social anxiety
Hi, I'm not sure if you've done a new recording of SA, but this is just to let you know, I will probably expand the article this week. Gflores Talk 21:23, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Spoken articles
Thanks for the compliment! By the way, I'm impressed with how long you've been with the project. I think a lot of the contributions come from people who record a few articles and then seem to lose interest. (I'm not sure how long I'll be able to contribute, since I don't know what I'll be doing this year.) It's good that you've stuck to it. And your recordings are of fairly good quality, too. T J McKenzie 00:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

My RFA
 Thanks  Thanks for your recent support on my RfA which passed 91/0/0. If you ever need anything, feel free to leave me a message! Gflores Talk 07:02, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Social anxiety
I was wondering if you could show your opinion on what the title of the article should be (social anxiety disorder, social phobia, social anxiety). Discussion is here. I propose that a new article be created named social anxiety disorder with social phobia redirecting to it and social anxiety will remain that talks about the more common anxiety. You may think differently though. Appreciate your input. :) Gflor e sTalk 18:24, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the "Criticisms" edit. That sounds a lot better now. WookMuff 08:08, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Spoken article reply
Hi, thanks for your note. I replied on my talk page so it's all in one place :) --Laura S 22:13, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey there. (I'm putting this here because it's literally a reply to your spoken article, specifically Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9. :P) Nice recording job - I like your voice. Reminds me of a documentary narrator. Then again, for some reason I've always been biased against Received Pronunciation and in favor of Aussie English. Moulder 06:53, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Well thanks for the compliment but that's not my article :) the only "spacey" one I did was Solar eclipse. -- Laura S  |  talk to me  12:53, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Looks like we'll have to wait for Raul654 to get back from vacation before we have anything to discuss, since he's the only one on the page who's pushing "con" right now. I don't like his throwing the icon in with "advertisements" for projects since it really isn't an advert...it's another version of the file. I also chafe at his throwing his weight around with statements like "I'm the director of this committee" and "I've been around longer than you have been." Smacks of bad faith, IMHO, but I don't want to get into a power struggle here. That's not fun for anyone. Let's hope we can resolve this satisfactorally. For the record, it might be worth looking through Wikipedia policy to see what we can find regarding Wikipedia and "reusers". I can't find anything. But maybe I'm looking in the wrong place. I don't want to be one of those people who does the "let's ask Jimbo" thing, but it seems like we need to look for precendent to build upon. So far, I've taken the policy that Wikipedia needs to be easy to access and to take advantage of the web as a medium (found in Wiki is not paper and wiki is not paper). Ckamaeleon ((T)) 13:54, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't realise. Feel free. :) Rebecca 07:09, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
Thanks for the compliment! I'm counting on being able contribute more to the project in the future.

--Alekjds 16:01, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Spoken archive
Certainly not - looks like the page is due for an archiving! - SCEhard T 02:23, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank You for Your Spoken Article Reviews!
Thank you for adding my articles under your review list. I cannot believe your well-tuned ears and patience! Those mistakes in reading you caught on Article One of the United States Constitution.ogg were spot on (one day in the future when I summon enough patience I will correct them, recording it the first time was a monumental task for me enough :P). I greatly appreciated your reviews. Unfortunately my mic is somewhat low in volume when recording audio recordings. I tried to up the db level but the quality of the recording becomes poorer and too much fuzz gets added to the audio. As far as adjusting the kbps, I attempted to export an .ogg with the proper settings and was successful to do so but somehow the recording become mechanical sounding along with distracting echoes and sacrificing some quality. I also listened to your own audio recordings and I must say they are of excellent quality. All in all, I quite enjoy the WP:SPOKEN project, and longstanding members of it such as yourself are doing an excellent job and inspire me to continue adding to it in the small way I can. Once again thank you :).¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 21:11, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Spoken Article Reviews
Hi Macropode; many thanks for your very prompt assessments of my first spoken article attempts. As you can see, though, I'm still having trouble with the encoding arrangements ... I use Audacity, and having checked the settings I had used on my first article (James Bulger after you posted your review, I saw the "Quality" slider was at "5 out of 10" - hence the 96kbps. So before doing the next three, I adjusted this to "3 out of 10", while making sure that I was still recording at 44.1 kHz mono ... unfortunately, this has only reduced the quality to 80kbps.  Oh dear...!  Can you suggest anything I might be doing wrong?  With thanks from a technologically naïve Wikipedian - Hassocks5489 09:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

 * You're not necessarily doing anything wrong, and many others seem to be having the same problem.

 * Although it may sound like a fairly drastic measure, the key to achieving the correct bitrate in Audacity (in the Linux version I'm familiar with), is to move the "Quality" slider all the way to the lowest setting. This compresses the audio more, and will produce the required 48 kbps file. I've personally done this with all the recordings listed on my user page. Although there are minor differences in the configuration dialogue boxes, the same most likely applies in the Windows version. It would be a great help if you would try this with the next audio file you upload so that I can verify that the Windows version behaves the same and include the information in documentation I'm working on to help people with these kinds of issues.

 * The recommendation of 48 kbps encoding in the recording guidelines arises from the need to keep spoken audio files on Wikipedia as small as possible. Apart from video, which to my knowledge there's very little of on Wikipedia, our large multi-megabyte spoken audio files are probably (per unit) the biggest space-users on the Wikimedia servers, which makes it important to keep the file sizes down. Smaller files are also easier to download, so in practice, more people will get to listen to your recordings if you compress them more.

 * The default setting of "5", or 96 kbps is a good general-purpose setting which will give reasonably good results with music, which requires considerably more "space" or "bandwidth" than voice does to sound good. If you've ever heard music over a telephone line you might have noticed that while the music generally sounds pretty "tinny" and 'orrible, someone speaking on the other end should, if they're using a modern telephone (and the line's okay!), sound fairly natural. That's because telephone lines are designed to only carry the specific narrow range of frequencies produced by the human voice, and not the much broader range required by music. This way the telephone company can, essentially, squeeze more 'phone conversations down the same cable than they'd be able to if they had to accommodate the broader frequency range required to transmit music well.

 * Essentially the same principle applies to audio recordings. While a recording of music encoded to Ogg Vorbis (or any other compressed format, for that matter) at 48 thousand bits per second (kbps) will sound very noticeably worse than one encoded at 96 kbps, a voice recording will only suffer a fairly insignificant loss of quality, because voice doesn't need all the "space" provided by encoding at the higher speeds. What this produces is a very much smaller audio file which contains far less unused "space" or "bandwidth, hence the 48 kbps requirement for Wikipedia audio files.

 * I hope this helps, and doesn't just serve to confuse the issue further. Cheers! -- Macropode 11:56, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Thanks Macropode; that is very clear and helpful. I will record my next file at Quality setting "1" accordingly.  I expect it will be ready by this coming Sunday.  Many thanks again!  Hassocks5489 12:25, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

 * I'm pretty sure the file I submitted today (Premier League) is at 48kbps; it's a lot smaller than my others, despite being longer. Let me know with a quick reply just to confirm.  Cheers, Hassocks5489 18:22, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

 * It's showing nominal 60 kbps, average 30 kbps. More importantly, the file's not too big given the size of the article, and it sounds good, so go for it! -- Macropode 23:25, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Great, thanks for confirming that. I'll try to re-record the bit where I screwed up the player transfers; the microphone suddenly went haywire, with lots of weird interference, so I was probably too distracted by that to remember to check the factual content!  Hassocks5489 08:49, 6 March 2007 (UTC) - (New corrected version uploaded with the same name tonight.) Hassocks5489 23:04, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Spoken article reviews
Thanks for your reviews of my three spoken articles! I thought the correct .ogg compression in Audacity was achieved by setting the quality to 3, but from reading above I see this isn't the case; I'll be sure to correct this in the next article I read out. Concerning the "breath-thumps", do you have any suggestions for another material to create a screen out of? Being a guy, I don't happen to have many tights lying around the place. =P Cheers, Panser Born   (talk)  18:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

 * For making inexpensive microphone "pop-screens" they have no equal. Basically, you're looking for a fabric that's:
 * Thin. The idea is to diffuse the little "blasts" of breath that occur when you make certain sounds, so that they don't impinge on the microphone and create that "thumpy" noise. At the same time, you want to let the high frequencies in sounds like "ess" and "tee" through, so your voice doesn't sound muffled.
 * Stretchy, so the fabric easily conforms to the shape of your wire loop and can be made to stretch fairly evenly over it. This is a job best done by two people; one stretches the fabric taut over the loop while the other sews around it.
 * My spouse recommends, if you don't have a friend or relative who's willing to donate a pair, that you pick some up from your local supermarket, where they are (in Australia) readily available and cheap. Have fun! -- Macropode 05:34, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Alright, thanks! I'm sure I'll be able to get hold of some tights from somewhere. Cheers, Panser Born   (talk)  09:30, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

 * I've now exported and uploaded a lower quality .ogg file (which should now be 48kbps - it certainly managed to shave 5mb off the previous file size) from the master recording for the Star Wars Episode I article, and I thought I'd let you know so you can update the assessment if you wish. I also took the opportunity to correct my pronunciation of "patois". Both the Star Wars Episode II and [[Image:En-Same-sex marriage in Spain.ogg|Same-sex marriage in Spain]] recordings have undergone the same treatment. Panser Born   (talk)  20:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Excellent! For the many people with slow internet, 5 mega bytes can make the difference between an enjoyable listen and a recording that's just too big to download.
 * All new Wikipedia spoken recording pages have been going on my watchlist so I can check for updates; I'll start doing that for the ones on Commons too. I'll update the reviews for the above-mentioned recordings shortly. Cheers! -- Macropode 11:15, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

 * The "pop-screen" solution (good term!) I use when recording is rather basic and crude, but it works very well: I set the microphone up on my desk, then attach a clean unfolded handkerchief to an adjacent surface (a small filing cabinet which sits on my desk), and hold the other end of the handkerchief to pull it tight. My microphone is one of those very thin "stick" types that is too small to fit a screen to.  The fabric is thin enough to let the high-frequency sounds through.  (Incidentally, as referred to by Macropode on the review of Sheffield, the difference between the effect of using this screen and not doing so can be heard at the end: I originally recorded the GFDL bit right at the start of my involvement in the project, without using a screen, and have simply pasted it on to the end of each recording.  The difference is quite noticeable!  I will re-record the GFDL bit as suggested.)  Hassocks5489 11:26, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Review of [[Image:Peter_Maffay-20070331.ogg]]
Dear Macropode, Thank you for reviewing this spoken word article produced by myself for WP:WSW - I have seen the review, and as a result, have made changes to the file and re-uploaded it to include the changes you recommended, including Stereo to Mono - Corrections to the spoken text and amendment to the OGG file quality, which is now 48kb/s as suggested. Please would you be kind enough to re-review the article and comment upon it as you see fit. Your suggestions are always welcome. Thor Malmjursson 12:38, 2 April 2007 (UTC) (talk)

Spoken Wikipedia review
Thanks for your interest in my work! Though I normally don't let personal attacks bother me in Wikipedia content discussions, yours was directed towards a good friend who happened to be in the next room over playing guitar while I recorded the spoken version of Coitus interruptus. I would appreciate it if our conversation remains within the guidelines of the No personal attacks policy. If you would like to suggest a way of removing this music from my piece in post processing or offer up any constructive criticism, I would be delighted to discuss more with you. I am a huge fan of the work you've done with the Spoken Wikipedia project thus far. -WAZAAAA 05:21, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

 * For someone who so obviously enjoys making joke recordings of serious Wikipedia articles, you certainly do lose your sense of humour quickly when someone jokes about your work! Cheers!-- Macropode 06:59, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

 * I do enjoy making audio-illustrated Spoken Wikipedia articles, but I wouldn't consider the recordings "jokes". I like to make them interesting for the listeners, thereby enhancing their comprehension of the content. While I love listening to all spoken Wikipedia articles, I find the monotone straight ones harder to understand. In the Coitus interruptus recording, the use of major and minor keys distinguished sections to enhance audio content comprehension. I believe, if done correctly, Spoken Wikipedia articles can be both fun to listen to and educational.

 * Regarding a lack of humo(u)r when it comes to verbally describing my work, I'd argue that maintaining a higher level of discourse when discussing Project:SpokenWikipedia articles and saving the humo(u)r for non-administrative matters keeps policy relevant, and articles informative and, sometimes, entertaining. Cheers, no jeers, WAZAAAA 20:06, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I thank you for reviewing my work, and respectfully disagree with your decision to remove references to my spoken Wikipedia recordings and. In the interest of finding a balance between compelling audio and "entirely unsuitable for a formal encyclopedia / violates Wikipedia policy," I would like to know the specific policy regarding what is appropriate.

If changing voices during a piece or including non-spoken (but still GFDL'd) elements are disallowed by current Project:SpokenWikipedia policy, would there be a possibility of publishing these as a part of a different project? Maybe I could begin drumming up support for an InterestingSpokenWikipedia project? Thanks for any direction or guidance you can lend. -WAZAAAA 20:33, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

User:HisSpaceResearch - responding to your spoken article assessment
Thanks for reviewing my spoken articles on Caravan (band) and The Jeremy Kyle Show.

As I can see you are heavily involved with the Spoken Wikipedia project, I'd like to bring up an issue: I've recorded several other spoken articles but cannot upload them (the page fails when I try to upload them) as they are too large in file size. I made them using Audacity, reduced the noise, and made them .ogg files. I've done long recordings about various bands including Soft Machine, Can (band), Family (band), and King Crimson, some of which I'm not entirely convinced are of top quality, although the one for Soft Machine is certainly good.

I'd also like to bring up the issue of User:WAZAAAA and his recordings. Teabagging and Coitus interruptus are obviously jokes, although his spoken style on Reggae has influenced my spoken style. I must admit that I do find his joke recordings amusing, although that probably has to do with the fact that my sense of humour is a little bit left of centre.

-h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 22:14, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

 * Your recordings aren't in Ogg Vorbis format, they're un-compressed Wav files with an .ogg extension, which is why they're over the file size upload limit. Unless you're using the Linux version of Audacity, I can't assist you with this. Try one of the recording assistance people.

 * [The Reggae recording (file reference removed WAZAAAA (talk) 06:14, 2 December 2017 (UTC))] was uploaded at a time well before the Spoken project had any procedures in place to ensure that spoken versions of articles came up to the same standard that the rest of Wikipedia has to live up to.

 * My guess, at least when it comes to the music ones, is that you like the subject you're narrating about. If you want others who feel the same way to be able to listen to some good spoken recordings about their favourite British bands, I'd respectfully suggest that you have a think about it before you wind up the "Humour" knob. A left-of-centre sense of humour's fine, but in the context of a spoken encyclopedia article, it'll just make you sound like a prat. -- Macropode 06:19, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Cat, spoken wiki evaluation
"Appropriate low-level background noises in this recording. :)" MEW!!!!!!! lol.... DollieLlama 09:42, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I can't see my new version.
I made a newer version of with updated info to update it to the current version of Windows "Vienna", but I can't see the new info, and Yahoo! Music Jukebox isn't working for me so I can't hear if the audio has been updated to match the article. Could you please check and see if the audio has changed and see if the info has changed too. Also tell me if you like the recording. Please respond to my Talk page. Thanks in advance.--Chetblong 20:09, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for reveiwing my recording and helping out. But I still have a problem: the recording in the article Windows Vienna has not been updated, could you please update it and tell me how to from now on? Reply to my talk page. Thanks in advance. --Chetblong 12:04, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

My recording.
Hey could you please review for me again? I fixed the pronunciation of "paradigm" and added the spoken license statement. Please reply to my talk page. Thanks in advance. :) Chetblong 22:15, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Rindfleisch...
Hi, since I found Rinderkennzeichnungs- und Rindfleischetikettierungsüberwachungsaufgabenübertragungsgesetz and its German spoken article, I thought that the english-speaking community should get something similar too ;) And here it is - my first spoken article: Image:En-Rinderkennzeichnungs-und-Rindfleischetikettierungsüberwachungsaufgabenübertragungsgesetz-article.ogg

Since I'm not into the spoken articles guidelines, I'd be happy if you could listen to/check the file. Thanks :) -- Gerolsteiner91 (glugg) 12:31, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

 * Thanks for your contribution! I'll post a review at Image_talk:En-Rinderkennzeichnungs-und-Rindfleischetikettierungsüberwachungsaufgabenübertragungsgesetz-article.ogg shortly (I would have done it already, but I've been away from En.Wikipedia for a few weeks). -- Macropode 10:15, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. Don't forget to add a link to your recording to the article, and to the Spoken articles list. -- Macropode 10:06, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!
Lol cool thanks for reviewing my Urbanization recording, it was one of my firsts and yeah kind of bad but lol thanks for medium-medium-high marks! It's been too long since I've done voice-work. Davumaya 21:05, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

 * Thanks for reviewing the Minneapolis recording! Sorry I'm slow to respond. You're a great guy. .:DavuMaya:. 08:21, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Double Thanks!

has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Hi, Macropode. I just wanted to stop by and say thanks for giving me such good reviews on my two spoken articles! I really didn't think I put that much effort into them :-) Thanks again! -- 00:55, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Libravox review
Thanks you for the feedback and review. I'll be sure to take the critique to heart on my future projects! 16:21, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Shaw & Crompton
Hi Macropode,

Thanks for your comments. The problems have arisen from the fact that I have bought a new computer and have had to set up Audacity on it again. For some reason, when I came to do a recording for the first time, the settings had changed significantly; it took me a long time changing various parameters to strike a balance between getting any audible output at all and having excessive background noise. On my old computer, the voice output was pretty much in proportion to the my normal speaking voice; however, when I tried speaking at the same level with the mike attached to my new one, virtually nothing could be heard! I played around, finding a "boost" enhancement in the Control Panel, but even then, I had to enhance the sound level twice and do a double dose of noise reduction. Do you think this could be related to the microphone not liking the computer, or to the software? (The mike is >10 years old now, and it was pretty cheap even then!! :)) Also, I thought I had recorded it in mono ... I'll have to check (perhaps it defaulted back to stereo, although I was sure there was only one track recorded; when I get home from work, I'll have a look at the file and make the necessary changes).  Oops - I see what I did - that won't happen again! ;) As I have since recorded Aston Villa as well, some/all of these problems may also apply to it.

I think the low audio level problem might be the hardest to resolve; I'll do some testing tonight. I suppose I can always use the "Amplify" function. Incidentally, I think the scraping/hissing noises I used to have were caused by a loose connection in the microphone socket on the old computer - the new one fits tightly, so these should no longer be an issue.

Anyway, I'll resubmit S&C when I've done as much as I can to it. I think I still have the uncompressed/unfiltered raw file to work with, which will help. Hassocks5489 11:56, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * New version of S&C uploaded just now (same filename), in Mono and with amplification. I had a look at the Aston Villa file, and thankfully that is in Mono as well.  Hassocks5489 22:34, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

 * Hmm. The new version still has two channels, the level is a little bit higher, and the encoded bit-rate is reduced (which is why the file is smaller). The Aston Villa recording has one channel, but is also low in level. More to this reply later ('scuse my tardiness; if I told you how long it takes me to write this stuff you'd probably fall off your chair laughing). :) -- Macropode 11:28, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

 * This is too weird ... I've just opened the file in Audacity, and yep, it's still in stereo ... but I remember making all the changes you recommended. Aaaaaargh!!  I must have done something daft and undone the changes, or something.  Anyway, I've split the file again, resaved it and made sure it is in mono, so I'll upload that now...  Hassocks5489 13:07, 9 September 2007 (UTC) — done.  21:34, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Excellent. One channel of very fine narration. (I'll update the review shortly). There's room for quite a lot more amplification yet, but I can hear noise reduction artifacts that would come up with it, although they'll come up anyway when the listener (whose name, by the way, is Glynis) turns up their speaker volume to hear your voice. Have a look at your recording in Audacity, and see all that empty space above and below the blue trace. That's all unused room that your voice could be taking up! If we could just improve your technical quality a wee bit so it does full justice to your narration...

To address some of your earlier comments:

Firstly, thank you for providing a detailed account of your experiences. The more I can learn about the difficulties people are having with recording, the better I can (try to) help with, at some stage, a jargon-free guide to recording Wikipedia articles with Audacity.

I don't think there's much, if anything, wrong with your microphone, age or lack of obscenely-expensive-studio-mic credibility notwithstanding. Many inexpensive mics work very well indeed for recording voice, although some do introduce a bit of undesirable noise. To say anything further at this point would just be speculating. Only if you want to go the extra mile with this, do the following:
 * Make a short test recording. Say a few words, then leave a few seconds of silence, then stop recording. Don't noise reduce, amplify or anything else, I'd like to hear the raw, unprocessed audio.
 * Make an Ogg Vorbis file out of it.
 * Upload it (as a "new version") to Image:Spoken test recording.ogg. (I would have made this a link, but the wiki-wizards around here have rigged it so that all links to audio "image" pages get turned into little blue "play" buttons. Cute!)

It's good practice to always make your recording as loud as possible so the listener doesn't have to fiddle with their volume control to hear it. The correct way to do this is not to speak into the microphone more loudly, but, after you've finished recording and removed (edited out) the mistakes and bits you don't want, to apply something like Audacity's "Amplify" tool to the entire recording. Professionals would do something like this as a routine part of "post-production". It's a necessary step in turning a good narration into a finished, listenable recording.

The crackly hissy noises, which sounded very typical of a dry joint / bad connection have disappeared, along with your old computer. :) -- Macropode 12:47, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It's definitely worth doing, so I'll record a short test file as you suggested and upload it tomorrow. For comparison, I've managed to retrieve (from the Recycle Bin) a raw snippet of audio recorded on the "old" computer (I wish it would disappear: I've now got two knackered base units and a CRT monitor in our spare room, with my Dad's old one to follow soon! ;)); it's the GNU declaration I pasted on to the end each time.  I think the difference in volume will be quite striking, suggesting it must be something to do with the settings on my new computer.  The name of the "old" snippet is Original Ending Bit.ogg.  Look out for these some time in the next 24 hours.  Hassocks5489 22:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

 * OK, here are the two files: [[Image:Original Ending Bit.ogg]] (above) is raw audio from my old computer, and [[Image:Spoken test recording.ogg]] (above) is from my new one. As you will see on Audacity, the latter comes out remarkably quiet, with the trace being little more than a flat line.  Hmmmmm...!  Hassocks5489 21:22, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

 * You thought that was embarrassing? Now it gets really wierd. :) Make and upload another test recording, repeating the above procedure, but this time with your microphone un-plugged (it won't hurt your computer). Once this is done, before you plug the mic back in, give the metal contacts of the jack (plug) a light clean with a clean, dry cloth. Then plug the jack in and out (and in, of course) of the mic socket two or three times (no more) and see if all that 'orrible noise is still there when you record. -- Macropode 09:09, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

 * Oh dear, I'm confused ...! Am I to record when the mike is unplugged, which would presumably show up any interference or noise not related to the mike; or am I doing a "before-and-after" recording, unplugging and cleaning the mike in between; or something else?  I'm guessing the former, but that just seems a bit strange ... please confirm, just so I'm sure!  (I'm probably trying to look too deeply into something obvious... :))  Hassocks5489 12:33, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

You pretty much got it with your first guess. There are two (probably related) problems with your "raw" recorded signal: it's low in level and it's noisy. The low level could be either software or hardware related, but the noise seems indicative of a hardware issue. Divide and conquer! We're basically trying to isolate the source of the noise. My guess at this stage is that when you make a recording with the mic un-plugged, you'll get (effectively) blissful silence, with any noise being at an extremely low-level. If this is the case, the next step is to try another microphone (there's a possible explanation as to why your current mic seemed to work reasonably well with your old computer). I want to hear that silence before I recommend that you spend money on new hardware (although mics that will do the job well are quite inexpensive, and should be easy to obtain from any computer shop worth their salt).

There's no need to upload before-and-after recordings. Anytime you've got noise and low signals in audio equipment, among the first suspects (and the easiest ones to verify) are the connectors. Clean them (not with anything abrasive) and you may solve your problem right there.

A note regarding microphones: If you decide to buy a new one, get a desk mic, you'll likely get better results from it. Headset mics are for sports commentators, on-line gamers and pop performers who want to look like they're not miming. There are various types of microphones. Get one that's specifically designed to work with a computer and you probably won't go far wrong. -- Macropode 08:10, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Awesome; I understand now. I'll upload one file showing what happens when it is unplugged, and one with some test audio after I've cleaned the contacts, just to see if that does indeed cure the problem.  If not, a new microphone will be easy enough to pick up.  Again, look out for these uploads within the next day or so.  Hassocks5489 11:46, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

 * A caveat: Remote troubleshooting is rather awkward, and is a process of educated guesswork. In other words, I may well be wrong! -- Macropode 09:26, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Aston Villa FC
Just a quick note before I go to bed ... (11.30pm here!)

I have uploaded a new version of the AVFC recording, with significant amplification and as much noise reduction as I could manage without causing the words to start "eroding". The result isn't ideal, but as you said, at least it's louder. :)

Recording with the mike unplugged was troublesome: the program didn't let me do it first time. I'll try again tomorrrow. However, I did some recording with it plugged in but switched off, and the output was very "noisy". I'll fiddle around with things at the back of the computer and see if I get anywhere. (I have cleaned the jack with a cloth, BTW, so that possibility has been taken care of.) Hassocks5489 22:37, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Having done some fiddling around (ahem!) tonight, and tested the output in various ways, it does seem to be coming out a bit louder than was the case for the Shaw & Crompton and Aston Villa "originals", which is encouraging. I also compared the latest tests with "Cricket", for which I have recorded all of the raw audio but undertaken no editing; the difference is noticeable.  Hopefully this should mean future recordings will not have to be amplified and "noise-reduced" as much, and will therefore sound more normal!!  Hassocks5489 19:58, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

 * Sounds encouraging. You should get into the habit of tinkering, it's one of the small joys in life! Speaking of which, haul out those knackered system boxes you mentioned earlier and pull all the bits out of them. I'd be surprised if you couldn't salvage enough good parts to build a complete working machine. -- Macropode 07:04, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Yet more thanks!
Hey, just wanted to thank you for the reviews of my spoken articles Julia Set and Prisoner's Dilemma - only read them today and has given me renewed vigour to get on to recording some more - bit easier now I'm back at Uni as well :) My only issue is I'd love to do some crazy article like Sobolev space but I think there's only about 100 people in the world that would actually read it!  Here's to the project! JebJoya 23:53, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

 * Cheers! While there are people such as yourself who enjoy making spoken Wikipedia articles, then this project will be here to facilitate that.

 * While the equations in Julia Set translated to spoken form quite nicely, I'm not so sure the same would be true of the more complex equations in Sobolev space. You're welcome to prove me wrong though, and if you do so the result might be a good little audio learning tool for students of mathematics. More importantly, do it if you enjoy it! -- Macropode 06:37, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

The article for Australia
Could you update the spoken article for Australia? The current one is too loud and not clear enough. Your recordings would be pretty much perfect for it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sagan The Great (talk • contribs) 01:43, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you
Hi there. I was just browsing around various talk pages which I've contributed to in the past, and came across Image_talk:En-Gilberto_Silva.ogg. It's an assessment of a spoken article which I recorded. Even though the assessment is over a year old, I basically just want to say thanks for doing it! For some reason, I hadn't seen it until now - maybe in the future you could inform the recorder of the audio file that you have done the assessment (assuming you still do assessments). Anyway, thanks again - maybe I'll re-record the Gilberto Silva article and make the improvements which you suggested in your assessment. Cheers. -GilbertoSilvaFan (talk) 11:14, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Charset malfunction
For some reason, you messed up the entire character set of Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant with this edit. I assume this wasn't intentional, but do you have any idea how this happened? Maybe you walked into another bug of the MediaWiki software. --bender235 (talk) 10:51, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

 * My apologies for the problem my edit of this article caused to the charset. It certainly wasn't intentional. My guess at the moment is that it's something to do with the web browser I used for this edit (and another one today, before I read your message). The browser is KDE's Konqueror, as implemented in Kubuntu 10.04. It seems to display a few characters incorrectly, but it hadn't occurred to me that this might cause problems with Wikipedia edits. I'll use Firefox for any future edits. Thanks for letting me know of the problem. Macropode

 * I'm not sure if it was Konqueror that produced the problem. Maybe you should report this at Help desk or MediaWiki support desk, because as I said this could be a bug in the new MediaWiki software. --bender235 (talk) 01:16, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

 * Konqueror seems to be implicated somehow, because I'm not seeing the same character display problem in Firefox. On the other hand, as far as I can tell at the moment, the problem only seems to occur with Wikipedia. I'll try to pin down the parameters of the problem a bit more and report it as you suggest. Macropode

 * Wrong, it's happening in Firefox too... To be more specific, what I'm seeing on Wikipedia pages is an occasional diamond-shaped character containing a question mark, usually (but not always) followed by ". I'm not very knowledgeable when it comes to html stuff, but that suggests to me that the browser is probably encountering a character it doesn't know how to display. It seems highly likely that this problem is related to my inadvertently messing up the character set in the above-mentioned article. --Macropode

 * All http traffic here gets routed through a caching / filtering proxy. I'll need to rule that out as the cause of the problem to make sure I'm not wasting the time of the MediaWiki techies. (Just thinking out loud here for the benefit of anyone who's interested in this problem). --Macropode (talk) 04:02, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

 * When I bypass the proxy, Wikipedia pages display cleanly, with no unusual characters. The odd characters showing in downloaded pages with the proxy in-line are the same ones that appeared in the Fukushima article when I edited it. The lesson for me here is that I should have previewed the edit before saving it, but since it was only to correct a minor spelling mistake / typo ("breeched" to "breached"), I didn't think it necessary. I also should have only edited the relevant article section, instead of the whole article. I haven't been active on Wikipedia for a number of years, and I guess my editing skills are a little bit rusty. Interestingly, the proxy is exactly the same configuration as several years ago when I was last active on Wikipedia (albeit using later software versions now) and runs very widely used software, and I had no trouble with it then. I'll continue to investigate. --Macropode (talk) 06:21, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

 * It's almost certainly not an issue with the MediaWiki software. It appears that the hyphen character and a few non-English characters are being corrupted as they go through the local proxy here. It happens, but infrequently, when I load pages from websites running other software, which is probably why I haven't paid it much attention before. Once I do a bit more checking I'll likely be raising the issue with the developers of the proxy software. --Macropode (talk) 10:37, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

 * It turns out the proxy was mis-configured, but that was only half the problem. Macropode (talk) 05:39, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Macropode


text:
Kishon

The name Kishon (קישון) may refer to:
 * Kishon River (נחל הקישון), a river in northern Israel
 * Kishon Port (נמל הקישון), a port in the Haifa Bay area of Haifa, Israel near Haifa Airport; located at the mouth of the Kishon River. Part of the Port of Haifa.
 * Ephraim Kishon, (1924–2005) an Israeli satirist
 * Sara Kishon (1931–2002), Israeli pianist, art collector, and the wife of Ephraim Kishon
 * Kishon Khan (born 1970), Bangladeshi-born British jazz pianist
 * 21010 Kishon (1988 PL2), a main-belt asteroid discovered on 1988

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

title: Kishon


text:
Medieval French literature

Medieval French literature is, for the purpose of this article, Medieval literature written in Oïl languages (particularly Old French and early Middle French) during the period from the eleventh century to the end of the fifteenth century.

The material and cultural conditions in France and associated territories around the year 1100 unleashed what the scholar Charles Homer Haskins termed the "Renaissance of the 12th century" and, for over the next hundred years, writers, "jongleurs", "clercs" and poets produced a profusion of remarkable creative works in all genres. Although the dynastic struggles of the Hundred Years' War and the Black Death pandemic of the fourteenth century in many ways curtailed this creative production, the fifteenth century laid the groundwork for the French Renaissance.

Language
Up to roughly 1340, the Romance languages spoken in the Middle Ages in the northern half of what is today France are collectively known as "ancien français" ("Old French") or "langues d'oïl" (languages where one says "oïl" to mean "yes"); following the Germanic invasions of France in the fifth century, these Northern dialects had developed distinctly different phonetic and syntactical structures from the languages spoken in southern France. The language in southern France is known as "langue d'oc" or the Occitan language family (a language where one says "oc" to mean "yes"), also known under the name of one of its dialects, the Provençal language. The Western peninsula of Brittany spoke Breton, a Celtic language. Catalan was spoken in the South, and Germanic languages and Franco-Provençal were spoken in the East.

The various dialects of Old French developed into what are recognised as regional languages today. Languages which developed from dialects of Old French include Bourguignon, Champenois, Franc-Comtois, Francien (theoretical), Gallo, Lorrain, Norman, Anglo-Norman (spoken in England after the Norman Conquest of 1066), Picard, Poitevin, Saintongeais and Walloon.

From 1340 to the beginning of the seventeenth century, a generalized French language became clearly distinguished from the other competing Oïl languages. This is referred to as Middle French ("moyen français").

The vast majority of literary production in Old French is in verse; the development of prose as a literary form was a late phenomenon (in the late Middle Ages, many of the romances and epics were converted into prose versions). The French language does not have a significant stress accent (like English) or long and short syllables (like Latin). This means that the French metric line is not determined by the number of beats, but by the number of syllables. The most common metric lengths are the ten-syllable line (decasyllable), the eight-syllable line (octosyllable) and the twelve-syllable line (the "alexandrine"). Verses could be combined in a variety of ways: blocks (of varying lengths) of assonanced (occasionally rhymed) lines are called "laisses"; another frequent form is the rhymed couplet. The choice of verse form was generally dictated by the genre. The Old French epics ("chansons de geste") are generally written in ten-syllable assonanced "laisses", while the chivalric romance ("roman") was usually written in octosyllabic rhymed couplets.

Early texts
The earliest extant French literary texts date from the ninth century, but very few texts before the eleventh century have survived. The first literary works written in Old French were saints' lives. The Canticle of Saint Eulalie, written in the second half of the ninth century, is generally accepted as the first such text. It is a short poem that recounts the martyrdom of a young girl.

The best known of the early Old French saints' lives is the Vie de saint Alexis, the life of Saint Alexis, a translation/rewriting of a Latin legend. Saint Alexis fled from his family's home in Rome on his wedding night and dwelled as a hermit in Syria until a mystical voice began telling people of his holiness. In order to avoid the earthly honor that came with such fame, he left Syria and was driven back to Rome, where he lived as a beggar at his family's house, unrecognized by all until his death. He was only identified later when the pope read his name in a letter held in the dead saint's hand. Although the saint left his family in order to devote his life more fully to God, the poem makes clear that his father, mother, and wife are saved by the Alexis' intercession and join him in Paradise. The earliest and best surviving text is in St. Albans Psalter, written probably at St Albans, England, in the second or third decade of the twelfth century. This provenance is indicative of the fact that many of the most important early texts were composed in Anglo-Norman dialect.

The Chanson de Geste
At the beginning of the 13th century, Jean Bodel, in his Chanson de Saisnes, divided medieval French narrative literature into three subject areas:
 * the Matter of France or Matter of Charlemagne
 * the Matter of Rome – romances in an ancient setting (see roman below)
 * the Matter of Britain – Arthurian romances, Breton lais (see roman below)

The first of these is the subject area of the chansons de geste ("songs of exploits" or "songs of (heroic) deeds"), epic poems typically composed in ten-syllable assonanced (occasionally rhymed) laisses. More than one hundred chansons de geste have survived in around three hundred manuscripts. The chief theme of the earliest French epics was the court of Charlemagne, Charles Martel and Charles the Bald and their wars against the Moors and Saracens, or disputes between kings and their rebellious vassals.

The oldest and most celebrated of the chansons de geste is The Song of Roland (earliest version composed c. 1098), seen by some as the national epic of France (comparable with Beowulf in England, the Song of the Nibelungs in Germany and the Lay of el Cid in Spain). It is perhaps no coincidence that the Song of Roland was first written down at a date very close to that of Pope Urban's call (1095) for the First Crusade; its plot may be seen as a glorification of the crusader ethos.

The earliest chansons de geste are (more or less) anonymous. They are popular literature (aimed at a warrior class, some say, though the evidence for this is inconclusive). They use an assortment of stock characters: the valiant hero, the brave traitor, the shifty or cowardly traitor, the Saracen, the giant, and so forth. But they also reveal much of the fears and conflicts that were part of the audience's experience. Kings are vain, foolish, old or wily. Insults that threaten honour or cause shame are seen to provoke bloody conflict, which may arise simply from competitiveness among knights or noble families. For discussion of the much debated origins of this epic genre, see Chanson de geste.

Approximately one hundred chansons survive, in manuscripts that date from the 12th to the 15th century. Not long after Jean Bodel (above), Bertrand de Bar-sur-Aube in his Girart de Vienne set out a grouping of the chansons de geste into three cycles, each named after a chief character or ancestral figure, and each with a central theme, such as loyalty to a feudal chief, or the defence of Christianity. This is a list of the cycles with a few of the chansons that belong to each:
 * The Geste du roi. In these the chief character was Charlemagne or his heirs, and a pervasive theme was his role as the divine champion of Christianity. This cycle contains the earliest and best known of the epics –
 * The Song of Roland (c. 1098 for the Oxford text, the earliest version: several others exist, including an Occitan version)
 * Fierabras (c. 1170)
 * Aspremont (c. 1190–1200)
 * Huon de Bordeaux (c. 1216–1268)
 * Chanson de Saisnes by Jean Bodel (1200)
 * The Geste de Garin de Monglane, whose central character was William of Orange. These dealt with knights who were typically younger sons without an inheritance who sought land and glory through combat with the Saracens.
 * Chanson de Guillaume (c. 1100)
 * Couronnement de Louis (1130)
 * Charroi de Nîmes (1140)
 * Prise d'Orange (1150?)
 * Aliscans (1165)
 * Aymeri de Narbonne and Girart de Vienne by Bertrand de Bar-sur-Aube (1190–1217)
 * The Geste de Doon de Mayence (or the "rebel vassal cycle"); this cycle was concerned with rebels against (often unjust) royal authority and its most famous characters were Renaud de Montauban and Girart de Roussillon.
 * Gormond et Isembart
 * Girart de Roussillon (1160–1170)
 * Renaud de Montauban or Les quatre fils Aymon (end of the 12th century)
 * Raoul de Cambrai (end of the 12th century)
 * Doön de Mayence (mid 13th century)
 * A fourth grouping, not listed by Bertrand, is the Crusade cycle, dealing with the First Crusade and its immediate aftermath, and including:
 * Chanson d'Antioche
 * Les Chétifs
 * Chanson de Jérusalem

New chansons tended to be produced and incorporated into the existing literature in two ways: This method of epic expansion, with its obsession with blood line, was to be an important compositional technique throughout the Middle Ages. It also underscores the symbolic weight placed within this culture on family honor, paternal fidelity and on the idea of proving one's filial worth.
 * A separate period or adventure in the life of an established hero was told (for example, his childhood).
 * The adventures of one of the ancestors or descendants of an established hero was told.

As the genre matured, it began to borrow elements from the French roman and the role of love became increasingly important. In some chansons de geste an element of self-parody appears, as in the Pèlerinage de Charlemagne.

The Roman
Jean Bodel's other two categories—the "Matter of Rome" and the "Matter of Britain"—concern the French romance or "roman". The term "roman" signifies, roughly, "vernacular" (i.e. not Latin), but it is used to designate narrative poetry ("romance") usually written in octosyllabic rhymed couplets and telling stories of chivalry and love.

The most famous "romans" are those of the "Matter of Britain" dealing with Arthurian romance, the stories of Tristan and Iseult, the heroic legend of the doomed utopia of Camelot and the Holy Grail. Much of this material derives from Breton (Celtic) legends. The most important of these writers was Chrétien de Troyes (twelfth century).

The "Matter of Rome" concerns romances that take place in the ancient world, such as romances dealing with Alexander the Great, Troy, the Aeneid and Oedipus. Yet Bodel's category leaves little place for another important group of romances: those adventurous romances which are often set in Byzantium.

Sometimes linked with the "roman" are the Breton lais, narrative ballads of Britain by Marie de France, many of which have Celtic themes and origins.

Around a hundred verse romances survive from the period 1150–1220. From around 1200 on, the tendency was increasingly to write the romances in prose (many of the earlier verse romances were adapted into prose versions), although new verse romances continued to be written to the end of the 14th century., and it was chiefly in their prose form that many romances were read from the 14th to the 16th century.

The success of the early Arthurian romances also led, from around 1200 on, to a restructuring and compiling of the material into vast prose cycles.

Important "Matter of Rome" romances of the 12th century
 * Roman de Thèbes
 * Roman d'Enéas (1160)
 * Roman de Troie (1154–1173) – Benoît de Sainte-Maure
 * Roman d'Alexandre (1177) – this romance uses a twelve-syllable verse and is the reason why this verse length is termed alexandrine

Important Byzantine and adventure romances of the 12th century
 * Flore and Blanchefleur
 * Florimont – Aimon de Varenne (1188)
 * Guillaume d'Angleterre – sometimes ascribed to Chrétien de Troyes
 * Robert le Diable

Important romances of Britain of the 12th and 13th centuries
 * Brut – Wace
 * Erec and Enide – Chrétien de Troyes
 * Cligès – Chrétien de Troyes (1162)
 * Lancelot" or "Lancelot, the Knight of the Cart – Chrétien de Troyes (1164)
 * Yvain, the Knight of the Lion – Chrétien de Troyes (1180)
 * Perceval or the Story of the Grail – Chrétien de Troyes (1185)
 * Romance of the Grail – Robert de Boron (1191–1201)
 * Tristan – Thomas of Britain (1155–1178)
 * Tristan – Béroul (c. 1190)
 * Roman de Fergus – William the Clerk (late 12th century/early 13th century)

Important romances of the 13th and 14th centuries:
 * Chastelaine de Vergy
 * The "Lancelot-Grail" or "Vulgate Cycle" and its sections – a prose reworking of the Lancelot and Grail stories (1205)
 * The "Post-Vulgate Cycle" – another prose reworking of the Lancelot and Grail stories
 * Perceforest
 * Gui de Warewic (1232–1242)
 * Roman de la Rose ("Romance of the Rose") – Guillaume de Lorris (around 1225–1237) and Jean de Meun (1266–1277)

The most important romance of the 13th century is the Romance of the Rose which breaks considerably from the conventions of the chivalric adventure story: in a dream a lover comes upon a garden and meets various allegorical figures. The second part of the work (written by Jean de Meun) expands on the initial material with scientific and mythological discussions. The novel would have an enormous impact on French literature up to the Renaissance.

Related to the previous romance is the medieval narrative poem called "dit" (literally "spoken", i.e. a poem not meant to be sung) which follows the poetic form of the "roman" (octosyllabic rhymed couplets). These first-person narrative works (which sometimes include inserted lyric poems) often use allegorical dreams (songes), allegorical characters, and the situation of the narrator-lover attempting to return toward or satisfy his lady. The 14th-century poet Guillaume de Machaut is the most famous writers of "dits"; another notable author of "dits" is Gautier le Leu. King René I of Naples's allegorical romance Cœur d'amour épris (celebrated for its illustrations) is also a work in the same tradition.

Lyric poetry
Medieval French lyric poetry was indebted to the poetic and cultural traditions in Southern France and Provence—including Toulouse, Poitiers, and the Aquitaine region—where "langue d'oc" was spoken (Occitan language); in their turn, the Provençal poets were greatly influenced by poetic traditions from the Hispano-Arab world. The Occitan or Provençal poets were called troubadours, from the word "trobar" (to find, to invent). Lyric poets in Old French are called "trouvères", using the Old French version of the word (for more information on the "trouvères", their poetic forms, extant works and their social status, see the article of that name).

The occitan troubadours were amazingly creative in the development of verse forms and poetic genres, but their greatest impact on medieval literature was perhaps in their elaboration of complex code of love and service called "fin amors" or, more generally, courtly love. The "fin amors" tradition appears at roughly the same time in Europe as the Cult of the Virgin Mary, and the two have obvious similarities. In the "fin amors" tradition, the poet pledges his service to his lady ("dame", usually a married woman), in much the same way a knight or vassal pledges service to his lord. In the poems of the troubadours, the lady is frequently cold, distant, or upset with the poet and demands that he prove his service to her; the poet, for his part, is generally tormented by his passion, and his poems are often desperate pleas to his lady so that she might grant him some favor. In some troubadour poetry, the "favor" sought for is decidedly sexual, but in others there is a rarefied notion of love as spiritual and moral force. For more information on the troubadour tradition, see Provençal literature.

Selected trouvère poets of the 12th and 13th centuries:
 * Conon de Béthune (c. 1150)
 * Le Châtelain de Couci (d.1203)
 * Blondel de Nesle (second half of the 12th century)
 * Richard the Lionheart (Richard Coeur de Lion) (1157–1199)
 * Gace Brulé (active 1180–1213)
 * Colin Muset (around 1230)
 * Theobald IV of Champagne (1201–1253)
 * Adam de la Halle (c. 1240)
 * Guiot de Provins (d. after 1208)

By the late 13th century, the poetic tradition in France had begun to develop in ways that differed significantly from the troubadour poets, both in content and in the use of certain fixed forms. The new poetic (as well as musical: some of the earliest medieval music has lyrics composed in Old French by the earliest composers known by name) tendencies are apparent in the Roman de Fauvel in 1310 and 1314, a satire on abuses in the medieval church filled with medieval motets, lais, rondeaux and other new secular forms of poetry and music (mostly anonymous, but with several pieces by Philippe de Vitry who would coin the expression Ars nova [new art, or new technique] to distinguish the new musical practice from the music of the immediately preceding age). The best-known poet and composer of ars nova secular music and chansons was Guillaume de Machaut. (For more on music, see medieval music; for more on music in the period after Machaut, see Renaissance music).

Selected French poets from the late 13th to the 15th centuries:
 * Rutebeuf (d.1285)
 * Guillaume de Machaut (1300–1377)
 * Eustache Deschamps (1346-c. 1406)
 * Alain Chartier (c. 1392)
 * Christine de Pizan (1364–1430)
 * Charles, duc d'Orléans (1394–1465)
 * François Villon (1431–1465?)

The last three poets on this list deserve further comment.

Charles, duc d'Orléans was a noble and head of one of the most powerful families in France during the Hundred Years' War. Captured in the Battle of Agincourt, he was a prisoner of the English from 1415 to 1441 and his ballades often speak of loss and isolation. His son became King Louis XII of France.

Christine de Pizan was one of the most prolific writers of her age. Her most famous work is the Book of the City of Ladies, which is considered a foundational feminist text, along with Le Livre de la mutation de fortune, where she depicts in an autobiographical allegorical poem an early account of gender transitioning to enable her to become a male writer to sustain her family after the death of her father. She is often acknowledged to be the first female professional writer. Over the course of her lifetime, she produced 41 pieces of prose or poetry. She ran her own manuscript workshop and employed women as well as men to be scribes and illuminators.

François Villon was a student and vagabond whose two poetic "testaments" or "wills" are celebrated for their portrayal of the urban and university environment of Paris and their scabrous wit, satire and verbal puns. The image of Villon as vagabond poet seems to have gained almost mythic status in the 16th century, and this figure would be championed by poetic rebels of the 19th century and 20th centuries (see Poète maudit).

Poetic forms used by medieval French poets include:
 * Ballade
 * Rondeau (or Rondel)
 * Ditié
 * Dits moraux
 * Lai
 * Virelai
 * Pastourelle
 * Complainte
 * Chanson
 * Chanson de toile ("weaving song")
 * Chanson de croisade
 * Chanson courtoise
 * Rotrouenge
 * Chant royal
 * Aube ("dawn poem")
 * Jeu parti

Theater
Discussions about the origins of non-religious theater (théâtre profane)—both drama and farce—in the Middle Ages remain controversial, but the idea of a continuous popular tradition stemming from Latin comedy and tragedy to the 9th century seems unlikely.

Most historians place the origin of medieval drama in the church's liturgical dialogues and "tropes". At first simply dramatizations of the ritual, particularly in those rituals connected with Christmas and Easter (see Mystery play), plays were eventually transferred from the monastery church to the chapter house or refectory hall and finally to the open air, and the vernacular was substituted for Latin. In the 12th century one finds the earliest extant passages in French appearing as refrains inserted into liturgical dramas in Latin, such as a Saint Nicholas (patron saint of the student clercs) play and a Saint Stephen play.

Dramatic plays in French from the 12th and 13th centuries:
 * Le Jeu d'Adam (1150–1160) – written in octosyllabic rhymed couplets with Latin stage directions (implying that it was written by Latin-speaking clerics for a lay public)
 * Le Jeu de Saint Nicolas – Jean Bodel – written in octosyllabic rhymed couplets
 * Le Miracle de Théophile – Rutebeuf (c.1265)

The origins of farce and comic theater remain equally controversial; some literary historians believe in a non-liturgical origin (among "jongleurs" or in pagan and folk festivals), others see the influence of liturgical drama (some of the dramas listed above include farcical sequences) and monastic readings of Plautus and Latin comic theater.

Non-dramatic plays from the 12th and 13th centuries:
 * Le Dit de l'herberie – Rutebeuf
 * Courtois d'Arras (c.1228)
 * Le Jeu de la feuillé (1275) – Adam de la Halle
 * Le Jeu de Robin et de Marion (a pastourelle) (1288) – Adam de la Halle
 * Le Jeu du Pèlerin (1288)
 * Le Garçon et l'aveugle (1266–1282)
 * Aucassin et Nicolette (a chantefable) – a mixture of prose and lyrical passages

Select list of plays from the 14th and 15th centuries:
 * La Farce de maître Trubert et d'Antrongnard – Eustache Deschamps
 * Le Dit des quatre offices de l'ostel du roy – Eustache Deschamps
 * Miracles de Notre Dame
 * Bien Avisé et mal avisé (morality) (1439)
 * La Farce de maître Pierre Pathelin (1464–1469) – this play had a great influence on Rabelais in the 16th century
 * Le Franc archer de Bagnolet (1468–1473)
 * Moralité (1486) – Henri Baude
 * L'Homme pécheur (morality) (1494)
 * La Farce du cuvier
 * La Farce nouvelle du pâté et de la tarte

In the 15th century, the public representation of plays was organized and controlled by a number of professional and semi-professional guilds:
 * Clercs de la Basoche (Paris) – Morality plays
 * Enfants sans Souci (Paris) – Farces and Sotties
 * Conards (Rouen)
 * Confrérie de la Passion (Paris) – Mystery plays

Genres of theater practiced in the Middle Ages in France:
 * Farce – a realistic, humorous, and even coarse satire of human failings
 * Sottie – generally a conversation among idiots ("sots"), full of puns and quidproquos
 * Pastourelle – a play with a pastoral setting
 * Chantefable – a mixed verse and prose form only found in "Aucassin et Nicolette"
 * Mystery play – a depiction of the Christian mysteries or Saint's lives
 * Morality play
 * Miracle play
 * Passion play
 * Sermon Joyeux – a burlesque sermon

Fable and satire
A large body of fables survive in Old French; these include (mostly anonymous) literature dealing with the recurring trickster character of Reynard the Fox. Marie de France was also active in this genre, producing the Ysopet (Little Aesop) series of fables in verse.

Related to the fable was the more bawdy "fabliau", which covered topics such as cuckolding and corrupt clergy. These "fabliaux" would be an important source for Chaucer and for the Renaissance short story ("conte" or "nouvelle").

Satire was also written during this period, including the Roman de Fauvel, which mocks the sins of humanity by making the Seven Deadly Sins appear in the personification of a horse.

The prose satire Les XV [Quinze] joies de mariage (The Fifteen Joys of Marriage, first published 1480–90, written perhaps in the early 15th century, and attributed variously to Antoine de la Sale, Gilles Bellemère the bishop of Avignon, and many others) is a riotous critique of wives, but it also provides important insight into the economic and social life of a married household in the 15th century.

History and chronicles
Prose compositions in the Middle Ages—other than the prose versions of romances and "chansons de geste"—include a number of histories and chronicles, of which the most famous are those of Robert de Clari and Geoffroy de Villehardouin (both on the Fourth crusade of 1204 and the capture of Constantinople), Jean de Joinville (on Saint Louis IX of France), Jean Froissart (on the wars of the 14th century) and Philippe de Commines and Enguerrand de Monstrelet (on the troubles of the 15th century).

A program for a vernacular history of France organized by the reigns of its kings was first conceived in the 13th century at the Abbey of Saint-Denis. The result was the Grandes Chroniques de France, the earliest version of which was Primat of Saint-Denis's Roman des rois, presented to King Philip III in about 1274.

William of Santo Stefano wrote a history of the Knights Hospitaller in Old French.

Other
Philippe de Mézières wrote "Songe du Vieil Pelerin" (1389), an elaborate allegorical voyage in which he described the customs of Europe and the near East.

title: Medieval French literature


text:
User talk:Happytime

Hi! welcome to Wikipedia!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:

 * Try the Tutorial. If you have less time, try How to edit a page.
 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, Articles for deletion page etc.) use 	 ~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp. To insert just your name, type (3 tildes).
 * You can experiment in the test area.
 * You can get help at the Help Desk

 * Some other pages that will help you know more about Wikipedia: Manual of Style and Five pillars, Neutral point of view, Civility, What Wikipedia is not, How to write a great article

I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. Drop us a note at New user log.

-- utcursch | talk to me

History function
You do realise that Wikipedia has a history function? When you remove someone's comments they are still stored on the server. As much as you try, you will not be able to get rid of them once they have been committed! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 22:31, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Listen Sukh, I have tried explaining this to you over and over again but you don't listen. If I were to talk to you over a message service, we could have a discussion.  I would give you a word and then give you the Urdu and Hindi equivalent.  I could spend some time on this, if you are willing to and if it would have a peaceful outcome.  If you don't want to or if my attempts to talk reason will be of no use, then just tell me before hand.

I also suggest making a page called Modern day Hindi/Urdu in which I believe we could agree upon.-Happytime

 * Before I begin let me clarify one thing. The onus is on YOU to disprove existing points in the article or prove your additional points.

 * Nobody is disputing that higher Hindi/Urdu are different. The fact is that the language spoken in Northern India is neither of these higher forms.  What I have issue with is that you are removing all trace of this fact and pretending as if higher Hindi/Urdu is the norm - it's not.

 * Modern day Hindi/Urdu is EXACTLY what these pages should be about. Maybe instead you should consider writing a section called "Sanskritised Hindi" and "Persianised Urdu"?  The fact that you say "I also suggest making a page called Modern day Hindi/Urdu in which I believe we could agree upon." means that you agree with me that what you are writing about is not the common language spoken in North India/Pakistan.

 * Why are you editing the Sikhism page by removing the bit about reincarnation? Why are you making such large, unsupported edits to Khalistan?  I haven't seen you discuss any of these issues properly.

 * I honestly believe you have no wish to discuss these issues in a scholarly manner. However, if you do, I am more than happy to converse with you.  But remember, the onus is on YOU to discuss these controversial changes fully in talk pages before editing the main page.  If what you are adding isn't in dispute, then it's a different thing altogether — but these issues ARE in dispute. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 23:00, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Not only is comment deletion on talk pages futile, but it just makes you look bad - like you must silence your critics because you don't have arguments. It certainly doesn't earn you any friends.

Surely you have reasons for believing what you do. What are they? If you engage us in good faith, and provide some references for your assertions, we would be willing to discuss it like rational people. I can't imagine you don't find the current situation a colossal waste of time, conducting multiple revert wars with more than one user over several different pages. There's a better way to handle these disputes. It doesn't have to be this way. --skoosh (háblame) 23:31, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Hindi/Urdu
'''I've added subsection headings and moved some comments to keep the subtopics reasonably organized. skoosh (háblame) 21:27, 29 August 2005 (UTC)'''

Let me start of by saying I am quite pleased at Skoosh's trying to begin an intelligble discussion, this way at least one can explain in a rational manner. I am going to supply my response to the question/statement directly after it, it is easier to keep track this way.--

Comparison and contrast
Let's try another tack. I think we can all agree that:
 * 1) Formal Hindi and formal Urdu are not mutually intelligible, due to vocabulary.
 * 2) Hindi and Urdu share a common grammar.
 * 3) Hindi and Urdu also share a common core vocabulary - the basic words that most often occur, like "father", "mother", "is", "walk", "ten", and so on.
 * 4) People who speak Hindi and people who speak Urdu can understand each other without any difficulty when engaged in everyday conversation. --skoosh (háblame)

 * I disagree on the third part. I'll supply direct examples: For Hindi these words are  father: Bapu/piTA/utpAddka, mother: mAta/jaDa/mA.n, walk: chaal/Tahlana.  In Urdu these words are  father: walid/padr, mother:maadr/walda, walk: gardish/pyaadaru/rahraft --

 * Bap, maņ, and čalnā are all Urdu words and are taught as such (see Teach Yourself Urdu, David Matthews and Mohamed Kasim Dalvi, 1999). Unfortunately, other than walid and walida, the rest of these words are a mystery to me, and I don't have access to a dedicated dictionary.  In any case, plenty of other words in the core vocabulary are identical, such as pronouns, the numbers, the word is, and so on.  --skoosh (háblame) 21:27, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

On the other hand, we differ on questions of:
 * 1) Language ancestry: What is/are the immediate ancestor(s) of Hindi and Urdu, respectively?
 * 2) Language definition: What constitutes "real" Hindi, or "real" Urdu?  Is the language that people speak in ordinary life, that they themselves regard to be either Hindi or Urdu, actually not "real" Hindi or Urdu?
 * 3) Language identity over time: When did "real" Hindi (the kind that Urdu-speakers can't understand) begin?  When did "real" Urdu (the kind that Hindi-speakers can't understand) begin?
 * 4) Standard vs. nonstandard dialects: Is a standard version the "proper" version of a language?  Or is it just another dialect that happens to have greater social prestige, for whatever reason?  --skoosh (háblame)

 * The ancestor, indeed the main tongue at present is Hindustani. See.

 * The real Hindi and real Urdu is a relatively modern concept. My understanding is that the formal division is a modern development -- although the script and vocabularies have been separate much longer.  A Muslim in India may claim they speak Urdu and a Hindu may claim they speak Hindi, even when they both speak the same language. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 13:32, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Everyday Hindi and Urdu
I noticed your latest comment on Talk:Hindi: ''Urdu and Hindi are complete different tongues when spoken at a scholarly level and if they were used at a spoken level. The problem is that in the present time these languages aren't used in everyday language.''

I am quite curious, since I'm not a native speaker of either, if there is any way for a Hindi-speaker to, let's say, order a cup of tea, or ask about the price of a shirt, in such a way (i.e. using "proper" Hindi) that an Urdu-speaker would not be able to understand her, or vice versa. Can you give us an example of such an utterance? --skoosh (háblame)

 * this is best responded to by how it is said in Hindi: Chaya ka kaTora maangna. In Urdu it is said: Jaam-qahwa farmeyish/khwastn. --

 * What Happytime fails to remind you is that a "Urdu speaker" in Pakistan is considerbly more likely to say the Hindi version. Although we should involve WiseSabre in this discussion because he knows a lot more about Urdu than I :D Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 13:32, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Loanwords and language histories
I also noticed another comment on the same talk page from an anonymous user, to wit: ''... because you hear people speak a certain language doesn't necessarily mean they are using the language in its original form. You may not understand this if you are someone overseas in India now, but if someone is speaking ebonics it doesn't represent proper English. Although I see one's point that if that is all they hear on the streets they may be fooled into believing it is English.''

This shows a misunderstanding of how linguists regard language variation, as well as an unfamiliarity with the history of the English language. African American Vernacular English (AAVE), as it is technically known, is in fact a variety of English, albeit what is known as a "nonstandard" one. This designation is purely descriptive, not prescriptive; it is simply a sociolinguistic term to indicate a dialect's relative social prestige. It is not a judgment call on the part of linguists as to what is or is not a "proper" or "correct" way of speaking. Taking such a position represents a POV that linguistics as a field has long abandoned. --skoosh (háblame)

 * There has been a misunderstanding, proper means that it isn't in the original form. It may have been said wrong.  You are right about this point, one shouldn't say a certain language is correct and the other is not.  Proper means that it is the language that is called English (not a variant).  Another example, there are words such as Klaplutz and other Hebrew words that have been used alongside English.  This doesn't make these words English.--

 * Actually, it's well-known among linguists that languages often adopt words from other tongues as their own, and English is far from an exception. If by klaplutz* you mean kaput, that word is originally German, not Hebrew, and may have entered the English lexicon through Yiddish (though not necessarily; there were plenty of German immigrants in the U.S. in the 18th and 19th centuries).  It is also regarded by English-speakers (in North America, at least) as an English word, not a foreign one; it does not serve as a marker of the speaker's ethnicity, nor is it associated with things of a foreign nature.  Several words from Hindustani have also made it into ordinary English speech, and have been used long enough to lose any hint of foreignness or even nonstandardness, e.g. pundit, juggernaut, and thug.  This is not even taking into account all the words that English borrowed from French (practically every word ending in -tude or -tion), and from Latin and Greek directly.  Suffice it to say that most English words are loanwords from other languages, and most of them are now considered fully English words regardless.  --skoosh (háblame) 21:27, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Further, the idea that Modern Standard English represents an "original" English is just not accurate. Middle English — the English of Chaucer, spoken in the 14th century CE — differs markedly from contemporary standard English, both in prescription and practice, including in the use of double negatives, so stigmatized in English-speaking areas today. Also, the gradual evolution of languages has ensured that there is no "original" English that bears any resemblance to the contemporary dialects spoken today, least of all standard English. There is an ancestral relationship, but in all other respects, Old English and Modern Standard English are as different from each other as they are from Modern German. A standard English-speaker would have severe difficulty understanding a speech read in Old English. --skoosh (háblame)

 * This example is different from the Hindi-Urdu issue. If someone well-writ in English were to read an book in older English, they would be able to understand it well.  They make students read the work of Shakespeare (Hamlet, Romeo&Juliet, etc.) and other old English books in American  highschools.  The vocabulary has remained intact.  The pronouns ; thee thou may be a problem for a few.

 * Erm this is not true. I know plenty of people that would be flummoxed by the writings of Shakespeare. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 13:32, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I hope my explanation proved my point. I have a good amount of knowledge about both these languages.  You can analyze yourself the difference by the transliterations provided.  I wouldn't be so enthusiastic if I didn't believe my claims to be true.  If someone were to go on the english page and type in for a greeting in English "wudddup Dawg", I'm sure it would infuriate the English scholars.  Please consider my explanation.  Thank you---HT

 * The late 16th/early 17th-century English of Shakespeare is Elizabethan English, or Early Modern English, not Middle English. Even Chaucer, an example of late Middle English, is fairly opaque to contemporary readers even in comparison with Shakespeare (who himself is not exactly transparent upon first exposure to a contemporary reader).  Even for an educated English-speaker, to learn how to read Middle English, and especially Old English, is to learn another language entirely (it would be comparable to learning Dutch or German).  Old English and Modern English do not share a common grammar; they are not mutually intelligible; they certainly cannot be confused with each other.  In short, they are not the same language.  I bring this up only to challenge the notion of a "pure", "original" contemporary standard language.  Such languages are not "pure" and not like their original ancestors.

 * "Waddup dawg" is English, just not standard English. Wikipedia articles are written in one of several standard English dialects, which is why that would get edited out if used in an article's text.  However, if someone attempted to edit English language so as to state or imply that African American Vernacular English was not "real" English, that would get reverted as POV and counter to the consensus of most linguists.  And that's not even getting into the fact that "waddup dawg" evinces a different grammar from standard English, and is thus a more extreme example of dialect divergence than Hindi is versus Urdu; is "kyā āpko kaise heņ?" Hindi or Urdu?  A Hindi-speaker would say it's Hindi; an Urdu-speaker would say it's Urdu.  There are no words considered slang in that sentence,  or nonstandard grammar, yet both speakers not only understand that sentence, but recognize it as their own language.  This is why linguists consider Hindi and Urdu to be dialects of the same language (Hindustani or Hindi-Urdu); they have, if anything, more in common than many English dialects do.  --skoosh (háblame) 21:27, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Hindi and Urdu in their sociopolitical context

 * I'd also like to note that not everyone in India speaks Hindi and not everyone in Pakistan speaks Urdu. Pakistan has many, many immigrant people who were originally from India and spoke  Hindi.  Many people in their city of Karachi can speak better Hindi than can native Indians.  Just thought I would add this, its not political, its about the language.--

 * As to the point about who speaks Hindi and Urdu: let's not beat around the bush here. Hindi is associated with Hindus and Hinduism.  Urdu is associated with Muslims and Islam.  Yes, not every Hindi-speaker is Hindu, nor is every Urdu-speaker Muslim.  However, those are the religious identities with which each dialect is respectively associated.  By extension, Urdu is associated with Pakistan (it is, after all, officially an Islamic Republic) and Hindu nationalists in India have advanced the notion of Hindutva with some success over the last 15 years.  So this discussion does not take place in a political vacuum.  Also, I've been to Pakistan, and pretty much all of those people who emigrated from India after Partition would tell you that they speak Urdu, not Hindi (see Talk:Pakistan).  That is a point of ethnoreligious pride.  We have to be able to see beyond these communalist POVs and recognize the linguistic reality, as so many linguists, and Wikipedians, already have.  --skoosh (háblame) 21:27, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Things to think about. I look forward to an intelligent, reasoned response. --skoosh (háblame) 00:38, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Simply put: The separation of Hindi and Urdu vocabularies and the standardisation of the tongues was a way of creating a national identity in India and Pakistan. And it was a way to separate religious groups. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 13:32, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Urdu's official language status
Hey pal i duuno wat ur problem.. Who r u trying to fool... You keep changing Official Language Status of Urdu. Then u go on to discredit Urdu/Hindi relationship. The basic vocabulary of Hindi and Urdu is SAME. Check articles from other credible sources like Encarta et al. All you'll manage to do is to discredit Wikipedia. AMbroodEY 10:17, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Ambroodey, I would like to inform you that THE official/national lanugaes of India are Hindi and English. You would not know what I am trying to explain if you haven't studied Urdu or Hindi.  If one's only source of knowledge about these languages (what they perceive) is Bollywood movies and seeing a Pakistani and Indian talk to each other in a language other than one's own, then that is no way to say they are the same.  There are many Pakistanis who speak Hindi and some Indian's who can speak Urdu.  What you often hear in the streets of Britain, is better called Hindustani or a mix.  This would encompass Hindi, Urdu, and English all in one.  You would see some words said in Urdu, some said in Hindi, and others replaced by English.  There can be a separate page for this language (modernslang).  -Happytime

 * Hindi and English are the official languages of the national government, but in addition, there are 22 other languages given national recognition as scheduled languages. See List of national languages of India for details.  I described Urdu in all my edits as "a scheduled national language of India."  I think this most neutrally and accurately describes its official status there.  --skoosh (háblame) 21:27, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Happytime