By "clear" do you mean technically (computer image format) or content-wise? Wahoofive
I'm not seeing that. It looks totally black and white to me. Can you make a screen shot? Wahoofive 03:02, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Never mind, I see it on IE. It looks fine on Safari. I'll tweak the format before I insert any more graphics. I'm generating these from Sibelius. Wahoofive 16:57, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Beacuse it is an early music instrument. Please remember to sign your posts. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 11:27, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
The redirection plan is fine with me; I hadn't realised that was your plan, which is why I removed the (temporarily) duplicated information. Warofdreams 16:47, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hello. I don't know how to do this but you probably know how to make the first column (the one with the white and black keys) narrower so that the aspect ratio looks more like a keyboard. If you can or can't well then thanks for taking a look. hydnjo talk 18:10, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I think the idea is to write more detailed satellite articles around the basic "Music of Country" articles. If you look in Music of France you will see the "Main article: French classical music" under the subheads, so it is already set up this way. We could put the detailed writeup right in the "Music of Country" articles, but I think they'd get to be too long; my 1980 Grove, for example, has 30 pages on France, and IMHO music history by country is currently rather under-covered on Wikipedia. Antandrus 22:38, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hello, Wahoofive. Thank you for your note and for your update. The matter is much clearer now for me, and hopefully for others who are redirected from Grace note. I appreciate the clarification. — Knowledge Seeker দ 03:03, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
scherzo con brio! — Sebastian (T) 07:03, 2005 May 3 (UTC)
Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I removed the speedy tag from this article. It seems the information was, at one point, all contained on this one page. After it became cluttered, the information was divided among sub-pages and this article left as an index. We still need to keep this one, though, for purposes of satisfying the authorship requirements of the GFDL. Happy editing! SWAdair | Talk 05:37, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
'As for the bias towards major labels, that's part of the bias towards the PR industry that inevitably pervades Wikipedia: anything featured in Big Media gets a lot of WP coverage'. I agree that the amount of coverage given will be larger for big-label artists, but what I think is wrong is for Wikipedia deletion policy to basically ban anything that isn't on a major label (through subjective notability standards)- such as the requirement for a top 100 chart placement, when the charts rely on sales in chain stores (which won't stock smaller independent labels) and airplay (the major labels bribe radio stations to not play independent music) Cynical 12:55, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
Are you still interested in developing the page Wikipedia:Manual of Style (music)? I'd like to turn it into an official Supplementary Manual of Style, but it has a ways to go yet. I've put some time into Wikipedia:WikiProject Music terminology. —Wahoofive (talk) 22:17, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Hello, Wahoofive...
I noticed you are a choral conductor...I discovered this after seeing you voted to delete my page, pointing out my "certain flair for self-promotion". Well, I'm self-promoting to you! If you are interested in a new choral work, let me know and I'll send you a score (email:baldnass@hotmail.com).
Cheers.
Daniel
Hi Wahoofive. Please don't replace images with smaller versions. dbenbenn | talk 8 July 2005 15:43 (UTC)
I was aware that we didn't need to start a WikiProject on music theory. It was just a thought for if we got a lot of people involved in cleaning music theory up, especially considering how much needs to be done. --David R Wright 17:04, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
Just FYI the "supposed' artist Mya is in fact a real artist (full name Mya Marie Harrison) and, it appears from http://myamya.com quite a notable one. I agree about speedy deletion for the It's All About Me article though - that's just the title of a single track from her eponymous album "Mya". Tonywalton 09:52, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
Hi - I do apologise for having upset you. My relative inexperience as a Wikipedian - only 2400 edits so far compared to your 4700 - is the cause. Sorry, I'm still learning. Can you point me at the guidance about disambiguation which I can read to familiarise myself with how it should be done? Thanks - SP-KP 20:50, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
I don't really mind that you redirected nontransposing instrument to transposing instrument, but the least you could've done was merge the info from the former article into the latter. You did, sort of, with the list of instruments at C, but that ignores that nontransposing brass instruments are almost never pitched in C (only the C trumpet or C tuba are, or the rare-as-hen's-teeth C trombone, which may not even merit mention). AND by including nontransposing instruments in the list of "instruments sorted by transposition," it implies that nontransposing instruments transpose, and that's obviously not true.
Personally, I think the best possible way to handle this would've been to make that list you made, and in place of the C "transposition" section, simply include a link to a restored nontransposing instrument article. --Jemiller226 05:49, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
Why doesnt belong there??? Khullah 00:36, 14 May 2007 (UTC)