Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/April 2007

Please cut and paste new entries to the bottom of this page, creating a new monthly archive (by closing date) when necessary.

• For promoted entries, add '''Promoted Example.ogg''' --~~~~ to the bottom of the entry, replacing Example.ogg with the file that was promoted.
• For entries not promoted, add '''Not promoted''' --~~~~ to the bottom of the entry.
• For entries demoted, add '''Demoted Example.ogg''' --~~~~ to the bottom of the entry.

Use variants as appropriate, e.g. with a large set of files, all of which pass, '''Promoted all''' is fine, but if one of them didn't pass for some reason, make sure that's clear.

One small step

This is the most iconic sound recording of the space age and one of the most important events in human history.

Created by NASA, used at Apollo 11 and Neill Armstrong

• Nominate and support. - Witty lama 04:58, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support, although for some reason the "play in browser" version cuts off early, even after clearing my cache. Mak (talk) 21:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
• Weak oppose Support. It ends with "one giant leap for man.." in my browser. Mind reuploading the complete version? Michaelas¹⁰ 18:36, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

But what is your reasoning? Support/Oppose don't count unless there's a justification. Witty lama 21:40, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

But it ends fine when you upload the full version. It's probably a problem with the cached version on a different server, not the one which was uploaded. I'll see if Gmaxwell can look at it. Mak (talk) 18:38, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I believe that his justification is the fact that it cuts off in the browser version. I've spoken to User:Gmaxwell about it, and he's looked at it and is pretty sure it's a bug in the player. As it says, the player is still in development stage#Beta, so problems with the browser player should not effect this nomination. Mak (talk) 21:46, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

• Support I think that sounds which help define history are certainly worthy of being featured. Aequo 03:03, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support The definitive example of a featured sound. Noclip 15:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Promoted Phrase de Neil Armstrong.oga MER-C 02:51, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

The Entertainer

Original nomination

I find the rendition to be very unencyclopedic. It is very far from the score of the piece, and many liberties were taken with the performance. None of this was discussed in the nomination, yet even the performer of the file admits the alterations and had concerns about its suitability as an audio document. If we are going to promote music recordings, there should be some standards involved in how they are performed. First, I would say that if a recording is for an article about a scored work, the performance should follow the score, and only add things that are commonly added as part of an established tradition for the genre. Second, the performing style should be documented and cited. This implies that there should be scholarship that justifies and explains how the score was interpreted. So using Beethoven's fifth symphony as an example, there might be a performance on original instruments using performance practices from the early 19th century, and/or one on modern instruments using current performance practices, but not a version arranged for jazz band! Someone unfamiliar with "The Entertainer" is not going to be aware of the liberties that were taken (tempos variations, added syncopation, added improvisation, altered harmonizations, etc...) This might be perfectly acceptable as a performance, but not as part of an encyclopedia article. It is analogous to digitally retouching a photograph to change the appearance of a portrait that accompanies a biography, adding wrinkles, changing the hair color and straightening crooked teeth. I'm nominating it for removal of featured status, but I hope there can also be discussion of the broader issue of setting some encyclopedic standards for music files at Wikipedia talk:Featured_sound_candidates#The Entertainer. --Samuel Wantman 09:59, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

• Here's a link to a midi recording that follows the score. The version at Mutopia also follows the score. Since that one is already linked from the article there really isn't a need to post a recording at Wikipedia. --Samuel Wantman 23:45, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Many music articles on Wikipedia have external links to original scores and MIDI files (example articles: The Four Seasons (Vivaldi); and Dieterich Buxtehude). However, it's still benefical for people to upload their own performances to complement the external links. --IE 18:13, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Performance is one thing, rendition is another. I don't think Wikipedia should be a repository for everyone's creative rendition of musical creations. That would be a Utube for music and not an encyclopedia. If you want to document the scholarship behind the ways you varied the performance from the score, I'll reconsider. By the way, It isn't that I don't like your performance, I do. --Samuel Wantman 18:55, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

You have raised some good points. You can de-list it.--IE 13:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

• I reinstate what I said in the discussion; that the file info needs to include exactly what was changed, and as long as it's not too drastic (the equivalent of removing spots from an old photograph), the sound can be promoted to featured status. If not, then the creator may need to be contacted for this information. --Tewy 03:50, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

• Stronly Support the sound's delisting: more significantly than minor melodic embellishments, ragtime doesn't have a swing feel (it's march derived) Leon 06:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

• This has been listed for about 3 weeks. Can someone please close the discussion? -- Samuel Wantman 05:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Delisted MER-C 02:56, 20 April 2007 (UTC)