Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup tuning Wikipedia blues

Dear friends:

Back in February I have edited the following Wikipedia entries:

- Brass Instruments
* Lute
* Equal Temperament
- Meantone Temperament
- Music and Mathematics
* Musical Temperament
* Well Temperament

Incredibly, I found that all the pages above in their REFERENCES and
EXTERNAL LINKS include works by Professors Barbour and Jorgensen, many also
to Kellner and Lehman. However there is only one mention of Prof. Barbieri,
none about Prof. Lindley or myself.
This gives an idea of the quality of the information provided ...

I am registered into the Wikipedia, where specialists are supposed to freely
contribute, and I am supposed to specialise in early tuning systems (though
obviously Wikipedia writers seem to think otherwise). So I candidly edited
the pages with a few comments and adding "The Unequal Temperaments website"
to the External Links entries.

INCREDIBLY, ALL MY EDITS WERE IMMEDIATELY DELETED!! (using the Undo feature)

I was able to trace the source of the deletions-an engineer in the USA-and
emailed him: he answered back saying that adding a website to 7 entries was
"spamming"!! And that anyway I could not insert a link to my own website but
had to propose it in the Discussion pages (that few people ever read). This
self-appointed "Wikipedia warden" felt entitled to delete immediately any of
my additions.

I followed his advice and included a paragraph in the Discussion pages:
nobody ever cared to include them, let alone to write me something or merely
comment the request.

Today I edited the four entries marked above with asterisk * mentioning the
Unequal Temperament website.
Four entries can hardly be considered spamming... however, two minutes later
...

AGAIN ALL MY REFERENCES TO MY WEBSITE WERE IMMEDIATELY DELETED!

This time the "censor" of my entries happens to be anonymous!!
(He identifies himself in the Wikipedia entries and in his own Wikipedia
talk page as "MER-C").

Obviously the Wikipedia notifies interested people about any edit in some
entries, and they feel entitled to be "judge, jury and executioner": so much
for freedom of expression.

Thanks to them, everybody who goes to the Wikipedia for information on early
tunings has it mostly from followers of Barbour and Jorgensen: I wish them
good luck, for they will need it.

Kind regards,

Claudio Di Veroli PhD
Bray Baroque
6 Toner House
Sidmonton Place
Bray, Co. Wicklow
Rep. Ireland

tel 01 276 4713
mob 087 955 9506

http://harps.braybaroque.ie <http://harps.braybaroque.ie/> /

🔗Mark Rankin <markrankin95511@...>

Claudio,

The "executioner" makes me sick. Monz has had the same kind of treatment from Nazi Wikipedia "dominators". I think that changes must be made in how Wikipedia is "edited".
We shouldn't be forced to live under a Wikipedia Ge(heime) Sta(ats)po(lizei), secret state police [Gestapo]!

-- Mark Rankin

--- On Sat, 5/2/09, Claudio Di Veroli <dvc@braybaroque.ie> wrote:

From: Claudio Di Veroli <dvc@...>
Subject: [tuning] Wikipedia blues
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, May 2, 2009, 4:37 AM

Dear friends:

Perhaps the members of the list-especially the ones that were interested in my work on historical temperaments and have perused for years spreadsheets and other material from my website(s)-will be interested to know about my experience with the Wikipedia.

Back in February I have edited the following Wikipedia entries:

- Brass Instruments
* Lute
* Equal Temperament
- Meantone Temperament
- Music and Mathematics
* Musical Temperament
* Well Temperament

Incredibly, I found that all the pages above in their REFERENCES and EXTERNAL LINKS include works by Professors Barbour and Jorgensen, many also to Kellner and Lehman. However there is only one mention of Prof. Barbieri, none about Prof. Lindley or myself.

This gives an idea of the quality of the information provided ...

I am registered into the Wikipedia, where specialists are supposed to freely contribute, and I am supposed to specialise in early tuning systems (though obviously Wikipedia writers seem to think otherwise). So I candidly edited the pages with a few comments and adding "The Unequal Temperaments website" to the External Links entries.

INCREDIBLY, ALL MY EDITS WERE IMMEDIATELY DELETED!! (using the Undo feature)

I was able to trace the source of the deletions-an engineer in the USA-and emailed him: he answered back saying that adding a website to 7 entries was "spamming"!! And that anyway I could not insert a link to my own website but had to propose it in the Discussion pages (that few people ever read). This self-appointed "Wikipedia warden" felt entitled to delete immediately any of my additions.

I followed his advice and included a paragraph in the Discussion pages: nobody ever cared to include them, let alone to write me something or merely comment the request.

Today I edited the four entries marked above with asterisk * mentioning the Unequal Temperament website.
Four entries can hardly be considered spamming... however, two minutes later ...

AGAIN ALL MY REFERENCES TO MY WEBSITE WERE IMMEDIATELY DELETED!

This time the "censor" of my entries happens to be anonymous!!
(He identifies himself in the Wikipedia entries and in his own Wikipedia talk page as "MER-C").

Obviously the Wikipedia notifies interested people about any edit in some entries, and they feel entitled to be "judge, jury and executioner" : so much for freedom of expression.

Thanks to them, everybody who goes to the Wikipedia for information on early tunings has it mostly from followers of Barbour and Jorgensen: I wish them good luck, for they will need it.

Kind regards,

Claudio Di Veroli PhD
Bray Baroque
6 Toner House
Sidmonton Place
Bray, Co. Wicklow
Rep. Ireland

tel 01 276 4713
mob 087 955 9506

http://harps. braybaroque. ie/

🔗Charles Lucy <lucy@...>

I have also had trouble with Wiki vandals, who seem to have nothing better to do than to modify entries about LucyTuning.
I used to repair them, but have decided that it is hardly worth the trouble, for as soon as repaired they start again.
It's rather like having weeds in your garden, or mice in the mouse;-)

"Perfect in their imperfection".

On 2 May 2009, at 14:55, Mark Rankin wrote:

>
>
> Claudio,
>
> The "executioner" makes me sick. Monz has had the same kind of > treatment from Nazi Wikipedia "dominators". I think that changes > must be made in how Wikipedia is "edited".
> We shouldn't be forced to live under a Wikipedia Ge(heime) > Sta(ats)po(lizei), secret state police [Gestapo]!
>
> -- Mark Rankin
>
>
> --- On Sat, 5/2/09, Claudio Di Veroli <dvc@...> wrote:
>
> From: Claudio Di Veroli <dvc@...>
> Subject: [tuning] Wikipedia blues
> To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, May 2, 2009, 4:37 AM
>
> Dear friends:
> Perhaps the members of the list-especially the ones that were > interested in my work on historical temperaments and have perused > for years spreadsheets and other material from my website(s)-will be > interested to know about my experience with the Wikipedia.
>
> Back in February I have edited the following Wikipedia entries:
>
> - Brass Instruments
> * Lute
> * Equal Temperament
> - Meantone Temperament
> - Music and Mathematics
> * Musical Temperament
> * Well Temperament
>
> Incredibly, I found that all the pages above in their REFERENCES and > EXTERNAL LINKS include works by Professors Barbour and Jorgensen, > many also to Kellner and Lehman. However there is only one mention > of Prof. Barbieri, none about Prof. Lindley or myself.
> This gives an idea of the quality of the information provided ...
>
> I am registered into the Wikipedia, where specialists are supposed > to freely contribute, and I am supposed to specialise in early > tuning systems (though obviously Wikipedia writers seem to think > otherwise). So I candidly edited the pages with a few comments and > adding "The Unequal Temperaments website" to the External Links > entries.
>
> INCREDIBLY, ALL MY EDITS WERE IMMEDIATELY DELETED!! (using the Undo > feature)
>
> I was able to trace the source of the deletions-an engineer in the > USA-and emailed him: he answered back saying that adding a website > to 7 entries was "spamming"!! And that anyway I could not insert a > link to my own website but had to propose it in the Discussion pages > (that few people ever read). This self-appointed "Wikipedia warden" > felt entitled to delete immediately any of my additions.
>
> I followed his advice and included a paragraph in the Discussion > pages: nobody ever cared to include them, let alone to write me > something or merely comment the request.
>
> Today I edited the four entries marked above with asterisk * > mentioning the Unequal Temperament website.
> Four entries can hardly be considered spamming... however, two > minutes later ...
>
> AGAIN ALL MY REFERENCES TO MY WEBSITE WERE IMMEDIATELY DELETED!
>
> This time the "censor" of my entries happens to be anonymous!!
> (He identifies himself in the Wikipedia entries and in his own > Wikipedia talk page as "MER-C").
>
> Obviously the Wikipedia notifies interested people about any edit in > some entries, and they feel entitled to be "judge, jury and > executioner" : so much for freedom of expression.
>
> Thanks to them, everybody who goes to the Wikipedia for information > on early tunings has it mostly from followers of Barbour and > Jorgensen: I wish them good luck, for they will need it.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Claudio Di Veroli PhD
> Bray Baroque
> 6 Toner House
> Sidmonton Place
> Bray, Co. Wicklow
> Rep. Ireland
> tel 01 276 4713
> mob 087 955 9506
> http://harps. braybaroque. ie/
>
>
>
>
Charles Lucy
lucy@...

- Promoting global harmony through LucyTuning -

for information on LucyTuning go to:
http://www.lucytune.com

For LucyTuned Lullabies go to:
http://www.lullabies.co.uk

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

Hi Claudio,

I've seen your comments around Wikipedia. Many of us have
expressed frustration over the years at various aspects of
the ecosystem there. Without having seen the edits in question
myself, I can only offer general comments...

> Incredibly, I found that all the pages above in their REFERENCES
> and EXTERNAL LINKS include works by Professors Barbour and
> Jorgensen, many also to Kellner and Lehman. However there is
> only one mention of Prof. Barbieri, none about Prof. Lindley or
> myself. This gives an idea of the quality of the information
> provided ...

For better or worse, Jorgensen, Barbour and Lehman are all much
better-known than Barbieri, Lindley, or yourself. So your
observation is unfortunate, but understandable. It can be
corrected over time.

> So I candidly edited the pages with a few comments and adding
> "The Unequal Temperaments website" to the External Links entries.
>
> INCREDIBLY, ALL MY EDITS WERE IMMEDIATELY DELETED!! (using the
> Undo feature)
>
> I was able to trace the source of the deletions-an engineer in
> the USA-and emailed him: he answered back saying that adding a
> website to 7 entries was "spamming"!!

While I understand your frustration, this was probably the
correct course of action. External Links are somewhat
deprecated in general; References are preferred.
External Links is meant for useful websites that do NOT meet
Wikipedia's criteria for references, and even then, posting
a link to one's own website, or posting any single website to
several articles, is considered bad form.

As for References proper, books and published articles are
preferred over websites. You'll also have to learn the
markup conventions for adding references. Self-published
books are considered weaker sources, but I'm sure you can
successfully cite your book on Wikipedia if you take care
to observe the guidelines.

For the record, I personally agree with the guidelines
around external links, but I do NOT agree with the guidelines
preferring published books or articles over websites.

> And that anyway I could not insert a link to my own website but
> had to propose it in the Discussion pages (that few people ever
> read).

I share your frustration about the talk pages. They are
underused.

> This self-appointed "Wikipedia warden"

To its credit, the governance of Wikipedia is meritocratic and
democratic. But it also has evolved a whole language and
clique that requires massive amounts of time to penetrate.
This shuts out many qualified people from governance and turns
Wikipedia's editors into an elite. Very unfortunate. In
this it is somewhat like law -- completely fair, as long as
you're a lawyer. :)

> AGAIN ALL MY REFERENCES TO MY WEBSITE WERE IMMEDIATELY DELETED!

Please, it's all I can do to handle Michael and company on
the caps.

-Carl

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

🔗Claudio Di Veroli <dvc@...>

Thanks for your comments Carl, which I appreciate as always and mostly agree
upon.
Only one minor clarification:

> Professors Barbour and
> Jorgensen, many also to Kellner and Lehman. However there is
> only one mention of Prof. Barbieri, none about Prof. Lindley or
> myself. This gives an idea of the quality of the information
> provided ...
For better or worse, Jorgensen, Barbour and Lehman are all much
better-known than Barbieri, Lindley, or yourself. So your
observation is unfortunate, but understandable.

That is only so in the USA Carl, not at all in Europe where it is exactly
the other way around.
Fame is one thing though, deeds are another: Barbieri and Lindley have
published more papers and more basic research on historical temperaments
matter than all the other modern researchers put together.

Kind regards,

Claudio

🔗Reverend R Clark <clark@...>

Greetings Carl and ALL!

I've lurked here for years wanting to want to learn more about tuning. We all do what we want and I am no exception. Now if I could only remove that "wanting to" level and could see my way clear timewise then I Might one day have something tuning related to share. However, much as I have rejected authority in my short dilettantish life, I have alas become one in other areas of music than tuning, namely, percussion. Yes, I am sure that explains a lot right there, you are probably thinking, "Aha, a Drummer" (Please Note: My solution to the capitalization problem, when emphasis is needed I Simply capitalize the first letter of the word, easier on the eyes than SHOUTING! <grin>).

Despite my perceived authority after moderating on Djembe-L (at yahoogroups) for a decade and having something to offer via my website, I too have run afoul of the Wiki-junkyard-dogs. I attempted to make some edits pointing to valid, germane, articles I'd written ...only to be summarily accused of being a malicious Spammer and charged with what they cryptically call COI ("Conflict Of Interest") a ban-able offense. All my careful edits thrown out, like the proverbial baby with the bath water. Little care seemed to given to the Content provided, only to the manner in which the information was delivered, or the person who provided such. When I protested that COI wasn't an issue in that one of my web pages was submitted by another editor and had stood there for many months, the response was to remove that link, also. <sigh>

I folded my discount tent and moved on, except to give this testimony.

Thanks for Everything!
One Love, R
http://tinyurl.com/RevRClark
++++++
ï¿½If you have something, something that gives you joy, peace, ecstasy, share it. And remember that when you share there is no motive. I am not saying that by sharing it you will reach to heaven. I am not giving you any goal. I am saying to you, just by sharing it you will be tremendously fulfilled. In the very sharing is the fulfillment, there is no goal beyond it. It is not end-oriented, it is an end unto itself.ï¿½
- Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh
++++++

Carl Lumma wrote:
> Hi Claudio,
>
> I've seen your comments around Wikipedia. Many of us have
> expressed frustration over the years at various aspects of
> the ecosystem there. Without having seen the edits in question
> myself, I can only offer general comments...