 Author
|
Topic: Frank Zappa - The Wiki (Read 21353 times)
|
mik
Radish
Posts: 6
Info... is not knowledge, knowledge is not wisdom.
|
I agree with the premise so far:
1. It should not be inside of Wikipeodeiaaoiea, so we are free to add EVERYTHING, lyrics and maybe even liner notes, concert photos, mp3s of boots if possible, mpg clips from interviews, anything that isn't outright commercial and available on Amazon, etc.
2. The structure, being based on wiki, is not only organic and fluid, but solidly so. Once a page has been created, it's there for good and other pages can choose to link to it or not. The content of the pages can, and should, change as needed and as energy appears, sporadically.
3. ALL content should be brought in. Original authors of written works should be asked, but simple reproducable things like set lists and tour lists could and should just be scraped enmasse and reformatted for the wikiness it will now reside.
This must be the place where anyone interested in FZ will get their questions answered. Period.
I tell you, there's some amazing shit out there. I forget the guy's name, but there's this one Conceptual Continuity page (linked off the globe icon next to someone's post on this site) that's unbelievable. I thought I knew all the references, or 99% of them, but it's truly amazing what's on that one page. it really should be formatted better for easier reading, and the text should be broken up into separate pages (perhaps a new tab off each recording / tour/show page?)
This is an exciting time for FZ fans.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 15, 2005, 12:01:43 PM by mik »
|
Logged
|
Information is not knowledge,
knowledge is not wisdom.
|
|
|
|
Chris
|
Okay, I've added quite a bit of material to the album backgrounds and the songs within the album entries. I have to admit that the "Conceptual Continuity" section seems redundant; any "clues" or cross-references are bound to be so intertwined with the articles on the songs themselves that it will be confusing regarding where to look for CC information if it's spread out all over the place. I've found myself simply putting all of the song-related notes in the song articles themselves, and avoiding the CC section. (I'm not supposed to be signing my entries with my name or anything, right? This is an anonymous kind of thing? What's the consensus on that?)
Emdebe, "buggering off" has nothing to do with it. This would be the worst time to get egotistical; it's a team project, and surely you agree that if we don't start out with CLEARLY DEFINED category headings, it will turn into a mess right away. We're going for ease of use. Do you have a problem with that?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Remember that words are our servants, not our masters.
|
|
|
|
Chris
|
(I'm asking for concise elaboration, not being confrontational or anything; you've thrown so many ideas out that it wouldn't do much good to get offended that they're not all being implemented meticulously right off the bat, y'know?)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Remember that words are our servants, not our masters.
|
|
|
|
emdebe
|
I'm certainly not telling you to bugger off.  Emdebe, "buggering off" has nothing to do with it. This would be the worst time to get egotistical; it's a team project, and surely you agree that if we don't start out with CLEARLY DEFINED category headings, it will turn into a mess right away. We're going for ease of use. Do you have a problem with that? (I'm asking for concise elaboration, not being confrontational or anything; you've thrown so many ideas out that it wouldn't do much good to get offended that they're not all being implemented meticulously right off the bat, y'know?) I don't feel offended, I'm not upset, and I'm not even disappointed... So save your breath for the important stuff... ;-) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
FZ fan for over 35 years now... so I must be getting old...
|
|
|
|
Bobo
|
Your question is basically: why create our own content when we can link to other sites. Well what if that other site disappears off the airwaves (for whatever reason), or becomes outdated? Also: the advantage of the wiki-format is that it allows for a democratic editing process whereby anyone can join in. This means no need for one SuperAdmin that has to coordinate/update/edit/add everything (look at Zappa Patio, Arf.ru - they do it this way; look at Nieve's old site, Corneliussen's old site: they USED to do it like that and have basically moved on to other things since then - see what I mean?). It's really about community-efforts versus LoneWebmaster-efforts... Hope that answers your questions See if I get this right: it is OK to copy info from other peoples website into the Wiki (the source will be named of course) in order to a) provide a better format (the wiki format) b) a more secure source of info (when other sites go down because of whatever reason) c) update info (some Zappa pages haven't been updated for ages, working the wiki way (hmm this sounds like the snack 'milky way'  ) will allow people to add and update info that's dormant on other sites) So for example, I could add an updated gig list, based on John Naurin's page? |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 28, 2005, 02:39:47 PM by Bobo »
|
Logged
|
Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe. -FZ-
|
|
|
|
SOFA
|
Here is how I'm approaching the Musicians List that I've been working on (I hope this will also go a ways in answering some of BoBo's and Balint's questions - and a few others, as I go):
There are several sites out there with mega "lists" in an array of different focuses; I chose 2 (UniMata's 'Musician's Timeline' was the actual base list, after abandoning 'Friendly Little Finger' because it was outdated){Reason for Being#1}, UniMata's A-Z directory, and Roman's A-Z 'Musishinin's' list. UniMata's has biographical data, Roman's has the most comprehensive "recording credits". Both of these sites are great, and "coallating" this info is the value of this wiki; it's what we're all about. {Reason for Being #2}
What goes In? There's a huge amount of data (read detritus) in the biographical info at UniMata's site. However, there is also the wealth of research performed by the Masters of affz: Ulrich, Naurin, Neive, Lantz, Bossok, etc, etc... Yes, I cut and paste from here - but not 'complete' sections.
Here's the deal: historical facts can not be copyrighted. They are, after all, facts... As this phaze of the wiki is meant to serve as the factual foundation for the 'discussions' to follow, it may be rightly considered a "research" work. Afa copyright is concerned, researchers are allowed a considerable amount of leeway. As long as direct quotes are attributed as such, and Publications are cited when used, researchers do not require permission from the source.
(Images, song lyrics, and other artistic copyrights, do not fall under this blanket; I'm talking strictly text.)
When it comes to longer passages, I paraphrase. Paraphrasing is not difficult, a simple change in word order, tense, punctuation will work...
Directly copying what is written, can - if abused - get the researcher in trouble. "Saying" - or writing - what is written is another matter...
So, I copy factual info that I find, paste, and then edit the end result, and - viola! - I have copied no one. (And you thought I got nothin with my college degree.) Oh... I also keep Naurin's "Shows Overview", and Roman's "Chronology" open as I work, for cross-reference sake...
So, in answer to BoBo's question, yes; all Jon is doing is posting known dates for concerts that occurred. These facts are simply not a matter of copyright, or ownership; they happened. You may want to try and add your own 'personality' to your research; maybe present it in a slightly different (possibly superior?) way than Jon has...
If you think about it, who wouldn't want the best of all of these great sites in one spot? And since this phaze deals strictly with the facts, the minutia is still there at those other sites, which keeps them viable {Reason for Being #3}. We're not "replacing" anyone, we're collating the best of the best. We're like the ultimate FZ compilation - not a corporate 'Best Of', but one that we created because we, as fans, know what we like.
(Whew, sorry that was so long-winded)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Bálint
|
General stuff, on the Wiki:
I dont have too much time at the moment, but looking forward to contribute some day, somehow. But:
At the moment it seems to be difficult: the threads here are named in a funny way (well, I think so...), but it's not easy to find out, what's behind a name.... So my suggestion is, that here we (=you, hehe, or anybody) when starting a new topic, should just simply give it a SIMPLE, easy-to-understand name. It's really hard for me to find what the hell might "Ruben and The Jets" "Drowning WhoKnowsWhat" and thing like that mean... What do you say?
*
and:
it would be nice to have a page (a thread?) like "stuff to do" or "stuff to continue" and to have a "sample-page" for these. Than it would be easy for us to join. At the moment these all seems to be too difficult and complicated for newcomers, but if we had some guidelines...
And: there are thing going fine, but there are things unfinished - maybe it would be nice to do one thing at a time: eg. the discography (at the moment I wasn't able to find a discography with the official releases). And: there would be READY part, that would be samples, and there would be (somewhere) a list with unfinished stuff. Than it would be easier to join.
Sorry, I didnt have too much time to look around, so maybe I'm totally mistaken - sorrry if its so, but maybe these can be useful thoughts.
B
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Barry
|
At the moment it seems to be difficult: the threads here are named in a funny way (well, I think so...), but it's not easy to find out, what's behind a name.... So my suggestion is, that here we (=you, hehe, or anybody) when starting a new topic, should just simply give it a SIMPLE, easy-to-understand name. It's really hard for me to find what the hell might "Ruben and The Jets" "Drowning WhoKnowsWhat" and thing like that mean... What do you say? Now you've got me confused  Are you referring to thread-titles here at the forum, or titles given to pages at the wiki? it would be nice to have a page (a thread?) like "stuff to do" or "stuff to continue" and to have a "sample-page" for these. Than it would be easy for us to join. At the moment these all seems to be too difficult and complicated for newcomers, but if we had some guidelines... There simply is too much left to be done, to make a concise list of it... I can tell you where the wiki is at right now, more or less: * SOFA's done the entire Bandmembers section. All the names are there with brief information - there's always room for more information in those articles. * The "Regular Albums" section is, I think, mostly complete - that is to say: most of those articles have players, tracklist listed. What could/should still be added there is background information, possible conceptual continuity clues, release-date, ... * Tracks: this is the section whose articles are the least developed - not suprizingly since it needs the addition of (different versions of) lyrics. * Emdebe is working on his lists of people/things that have appeared on artwork for OSFA, Freak Out!, and I may be missing a couple (he's working at a frantic pace, as you may have noticed). * There's a whole bunch of "related releases" that are being added / need to be added. *Tours: we're working our way down starting from '88; I've currently finished '73. When I say "finished", I mean: the basic set-up, and the most vital content is there -- but there is still very much room for additions to all of the existing tour pages. * Biography: we really need to start on that, there's only a skeleton there right now... Basically: many articles have been created, and carry barebones content, but that's where further adding/editing is required. And: there are thing going fine, but there are things unfinished - maybe it would be nice to do one thing at a time: eg. the discography (at the moment I wasn't able to find a discography with the official releases). Category:Discography should give you a headstart, no? there would be READY part, that would be samples, and there would be (somewhere) a list with unfinished stuff. Than it would be easier to join. Well theoretically, an article is *never* finished, meaning often times, even though there's already some good content in an article, it can always be improved/added on to. Another thing is: when you're browsing the wiki (try the Random Page thingie, it's one of my favorites), when you come across a link that's colored red - it means that article does not yet exist, but the author of the original article has deemed it worthy of a possible future article (be it by him or another editor). What I do when I have some time to offer the wiki is: I set myself a predefined goal. For instance: "okay, now I'm going to add as much information to "Zoot Allures" as I can". Looking at the wiki's Recent Changes page will tend to divert my focus (but that's just me, maybe ) Hope I've cleared up some things, feel free to further discuss... |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 04, 2005, 04:32:41 AM by Barry »
|
Logged
|
"Sanity is only a compromise but it won't last"- Vivian Stanshall
|
|
|
|
Bálint
|
Hi, Barry, thank you for your answer!
just a quick respond:
- yes, I was talking about the thread-titles here. I just (sometimes) can'T even think of what might be behind those names....
- discography: thank you - but I still dont know the way to get there... I fint track/album and so on... But no discography, chronologically.
- On the wiki: yes, I know the way it works, neverendingly, but there are almost-ready parts and not-even-started parts, and it would be nice to focus on one or two thing - because I might think of doing everithing on Zoot Allures, but I might find it ready. Then I might go to Studio Tan to get some information - and that one I might find not-even-started. But if the guys here focus on one or two things, showing the others what is still missing, then its easier to join, and even a fine way to communicate later: "we (almost) finished the discography!!!!!"
Well, I'm telling all this with not too much spare time... Sorry, but one day it would be nice to join some way...
B
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Barry
|
yes, I was talking about the thread-titles here. I just (sometimes) can'T even think of what might be behind those names.... Aah, I see. Well: to anyone posting wiki-related posts: please refrain from making your subject titles too cryptic! discography: thank you - but I still dont know the way to get there... I fint track/album and so on... But no discography, chronologically. The chronological approach, yes... We can and probably should make such a "view" of the discography. I seem to remember Emdebe had started such a page some time ago, but I may be mistaken... Regardless, that's where the empowering aspect of a wiki comes into play, Balint: if it's not on the wiki yet, and you feel it should be, nothing stops you from creating such a page yourself! On the wiki: yes, I know the way it works, neverendingly, but there are almost-ready parts and not-even-started parts, and it would be nice to focus on one or two thing - because I might think of doing everithing on Zoot Allures, but I might find it ready. Then I might go to Studio Tan to get some information - and that one I might find not-even-started. But if the guys here focus on one or two things, showing the others what is still missing, then its easier to join I see what you mean. Thing is: I cannot, right off the bat, tell you for any given page, at what stage of "completion" it is right now (and nor can anyone else working on the wiki, I reckon). No one is really supervising/coordinating any of this (spare meta-stuff like blocking spammers, naming conventions, proposed article sub sections, proposed categories and stuff like that which gets to be discussed here) - there is no hierarchy whereby the guy on top tells the rest of the pack what to do next. To some this might feel very awkward but it's essential to how a wiki works. Edits to articles need not be limited to a "this is the section we're working on right now, stick to it"-adagio, instead, stuff is added constantly, all over the place. To me it's part of the fun of the wiki-way! |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 04, 2005, 10:14:16 AM by Barry »
|
Logged
|
"Sanity is only a compromise but it won't last"- Vivian Stanshall
|
|
|
|
Dunk
|
it would be nice to have a page (a thread?) like "stuff to do" or "stuff to continue" and to have a "sample-page" for these. Than it would be easy for us to join. see my post about dead end pages in the Bend over and spread 'em: here come the stubs! thread. (OK it was a bad name ) for Stuff To Do. I fint track/album and so on... But no discography, chronologically. What do we mean by chronologically? In the order of release, or the order of recording (Joe's Corsage at the beginning or the end?) or order of composition? See FZ's comment about it all being one single piece. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
emdebe
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
FZ fan for over 35 years now... so I must be getting old...
|
|
|
|
emdebe
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
FZ fan for over 35 years now... so I must be getting old...
|
|
|
|
emdebe
|
...it would be nice to have a page (a thread?) like "stuff to do" or "stuff to continue"...
I was working on a similar topic myself, and I will use the last "incomprehensible" topic name for it...  See elsewhere in a few moments... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
FZ fan for over 35 years now... so I must be getting old...
|
|
|
|
emdebe
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
FZ fan for over 35 years now... so I must be getting old...
|
|
|
|
 |
Kill Ugly Radio Forums
