CZ Talk:Music Workgroup

Based on the experience on WP and elsewhere, I think that one of the first things we should do is sub-divide the Music Workgroup's "to-do" list into at least popular and classical, or popular, classical, and world. There are few people who are experts in more than one of these fields. This would help us figure out better what the most needed articles are.

I also think that most of the articles we currently have on the list tend to have pretty good WP articles, so there is less incentive to write an article here. Where WP tends to have awful music articles are those that cover the history of a genre or style. Those tend to be the articles where every anonymous editor adds his or her two cents, where every obvious assertion needs to have a footnote (hypothetical Baroque Music ex.: "Bach was an important baroque composer, according to an article in Newsweek 2005"), and otherwise where Wikipedia's policies tend to lead to bad writing. So I'll suggest that those larger history sections be high on the to-do list. Michael Scott Cuthbert 09:19, 7 August 2007 (CDT)

Hey Myke! Welcome to CZ! :-) Yes, I totally agree with what you suggest. Let's split the Workgroup and focus on articles that cover genres or styles. Matthias Röder 10:00, 7 August 2007 (CDT)

This is entirely possible. Please be sure to put it in the list of suggested new workgroups, linkedfrom CZ:Workgroups. --Larry Sanger 10:33, 7 August 2007 (CDT)

But would they be new workgroups, or a different class of workgroup under the umbrella of the music workgroup? Clearly the biology workgroup will need to go this route too. Chris Day (talk) 10:39, 7 August 2007 (CDT)

I guess they would be sub workgroups. Matthias Röder 10:40, 7 August 2007 (CDT)

I don't think they need to be at this point -- there's not enough activity yet and there are few enough contributors and editors that I can still be of help on popular music articles, and vice-versa with popular music editors. But I've seen from WP and academia that the audiences for classical and popular music are so different that there's unlikely to be much overlap in policy (on terminology, use of notation, etc.) between the two. And trying to decide what's more important to work on, Beethoven or Bruce Springsteen is unlikely to build consensus or community.

Since there hasn't been much public discussion about music articles on CZ yet, it's probably good to open it up. The most important point I see lacking in most WP articles on composers and especially individual pieces is discussion of style and analysis. For most 20th c. composers, analysis will need to wait until Citizendium has a fair use policy in place for images (the images would likely be free creations, but the music depicted therein is still under copyright). And in some cases, WP has misapplied their "no original research" policy to remove unpublished analyses which aren't really research at all. (Saying that a certain passage is in G-minor or a certain chord is V7 is about as much research as looking at a sentence such as "Out damn spot!" and noting that "spot" is a noun and the sentence is an imperative). Michael Scott Cuthbert 22:03, 7 August 2007 (CDT)