![]() | A fact from Saint Thomas Christian music appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 24 June 2012 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There has been considerable discussion relating to the contributions of Robin klein to the Saint Thomas Christians article. These can be found at, for example, DRN, various sections at the STC talk page (eg: this one), and numerous other venues.
As far as I can tell, this present article and its redirects are yet another spate of what is now becoming a somewhat tendentious pattern and there is also a fairly high probability that the sources, although plentiful, have been mis-used/misrepresented/misinterpreted (take your pick). A fine-tooth comb is required here. - Sitush ( talk) 10:42, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
As for chant accentuation and cantillation this is a quote from Ross page 83 "The Syrian Christian accentuation system was instituted by the Syrian Masoretes, a group similar to the grammarians in Tiberias who codified the system of non-diastematic (nonintervallic) signs for Hebrew cantillation of Biblical texts in the ninth century C.E. (Segal 1953:143; Avenary 1963:10). The Syrian Christian system is a dot notation above, below, or on either side of the words of the text, paralleling the Palestinian dot system of the Jews, which was later incorporated into the Tiberian ekphonetic notation. This development took place between the fifth and tenth centuries C.E. (Avenary 1963:8). The names for these signs give an indication of the expressiveness that characterizes Syrian Christian Bible reading and Chant style, names like wonder" Again I may have made POV interpretation of this, which is likely but again as I said not with intent or purpose. If so then please do rectify it. I added in this page whatever I could given my access to sources. I have tried to give balanced perspective by referring to Indian source of Choondal from Kerala. Please do add more material from other sources. Again I state that I agree there may be passages in the article that may be open to interpretation but it is not done on purpose. Please do help in improving this article by editing and adding information from more sources. I am afraid to say that I feel hounded and persecuted on the wikipedia. I hope we can have more trust in each other and not see our works with bad intent. An article written by only one person cannot be entirely NPOV especially when it deals with culture or religion or the like. Your help is needed to make this a better and a more neutral article. thanks Robin klein ( talk) 17:39, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
Now that Robin klein's topic ban has been settled, I'm going to set about gutting this article to remove as much of the POV-pushing, original research, and myriad style errors as I can. First I've moved it away from its awful title, and I'll get to the rest shortly.-- Cúchullain t/ c 13:48, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
I notice a lot of "may" and "might" mixed in with "is" and "was", but no discussion of the debatable points implied by "may" and "might". ISTM that when a Wikipedia article is about a topic on which there is legitimate debate, it's important that the article summarize the various sides of the debate in an even handed way. Alas, such is not the case here, buttressing earlier comments about distorted references, biased POV, etc.
PS: If anyone reading lives in a community of St. Thomas Christians, record a few samples of their music for inclusion in this article. Any Wikipedia article about music or speech should include an audible example. Or so it seems to me.
Floozybackloves ( talk) 23:36, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
I have had a discussion with User:Alan Liefting on their talk page. They had removed Category:Saint Thomas Christians and Category:Christian communities of India. I reinstated them because I couldn't understand the rationale, which was lost behind the HotCat automatic edit summary. I was then reverted and the rationale is basically that the article concerns music, not communities.
I can see that there may be some overcategorisation going on here: Category:Saint Thomas Christians is a subcat of Category:Christian communities of India, and therefore the latter is not required. I am struggling to see why the former is somehow in contravention of WP:CAT, and why the logic employed has left Category:Kerala society in there. Yes, AL has tried to explain it but I must be thick or summat - can anyone do a better job? - Sitush ( talk) 07:36, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
I tagged this with {{ one source}} because, of its eight references, seven are to the same source. As the tag says, it'd be good if citations to additional sources could be added. I don't really know what else to say. Thanks. – Arms & Hearts ( talk) 20:59, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
![]() | A fact from Saint Thomas Christian music appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 24 June 2012 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There has been considerable discussion relating to the contributions of Robin klein to the Saint Thomas Christians article. These can be found at, for example, DRN, various sections at the STC talk page (eg: this one), and numerous other venues.
As far as I can tell, this present article and its redirects are yet another spate of what is now becoming a somewhat tendentious pattern and there is also a fairly high probability that the sources, although plentiful, have been mis-used/misrepresented/misinterpreted (take your pick). A fine-tooth comb is required here. - Sitush ( talk) 10:42, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
As for chant accentuation and cantillation this is a quote from Ross page 83 "The Syrian Christian accentuation system was instituted by the Syrian Masoretes, a group similar to the grammarians in Tiberias who codified the system of non-diastematic (nonintervallic) signs for Hebrew cantillation of Biblical texts in the ninth century C.E. (Segal 1953:143; Avenary 1963:10). The Syrian Christian system is a dot notation above, below, or on either side of the words of the text, paralleling the Palestinian dot system of the Jews, which was later incorporated into the Tiberian ekphonetic notation. This development took place between the fifth and tenth centuries C.E. (Avenary 1963:8). The names for these signs give an indication of the expressiveness that characterizes Syrian Christian Bible reading and Chant style, names like wonder" Again I may have made POV interpretation of this, which is likely but again as I said not with intent or purpose. If so then please do rectify it. I added in this page whatever I could given my access to sources. I have tried to give balanced perspective by referring to Indian source of Choondal from Kerala. Please do add more material from other sources. Again I state that I agree there may be passages in the article that may be open to interpretation but it is not done on purpose. Please do help in improving this article by editing and adding information from more sources. I am afraid to say that I feel hounded and persecuted on the wikipedia. I hope we can have more trust in each other and not see our works with bad intent. An article written by only one person cannot be entirely NPOV especially when it deals with culture or religion or the like. Your help is needed to make this a better and a more neutral article. thanks Robin klein ( talk) 17:39, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
Now that Robin klein's topic ban has been settled, I'm going to set about gutting this article to remove as much of the POV-pushing, original research, and myriad style errors as I can. First I've moved it away from its awful title, and I'll get to the rest shortly.-- Cúchullain t/ c 13:48, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
I notice a lot of "may" and "might" mixed in with "is" and "was", but no discussion of the debatable points implied by "may" and "might". ISTM that when a Wikipedia article is about a topic on which there is legitimate debate, it's important that the article summarize the various sides of the debate in an even handed way. Alas, such is not the case here, buttressing earlier comments about distorted references, biased POV, etc.
PS: If anyone reading lives in a community of St. Thomas Christians, record a few samples of their music for inclusion in this article. Any Wikipedia article about music or speech should include an audible example. Or so it seems to me.
Floozybackloves ( talk) 23:36, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
I have had a discussion with User:Alan Liefting on their talk page. They had removed Category:Saint Thomas Christians and Category:Christian communities of India. I reinstated them because I couldn't understand the rationale, which was lost behind the HotCat automatic edit summary. I was then reverted and the rationale is basically that the article concerns music, not communities.
I can see that there may be some overcategorisation going on here: Category:Saint Thomas Christians is a subcat of Category:Christian communities of India, and therefore the latter is not required. I am struggling to see why the former is somehow in contravention of WP:CAT, and why the logic employed has left Category:Kerala society in there. Yes, AL has tried to explain it but I must be thick or summat - can anyone do a better job? - Sitush ( talk) 07:36, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
I tagged this with {{ one source}} because, of its eight references, seven are to the same source. As the tag says, it'd be good if citations to additional sources could be added. I don't really know what else to say. Thanks. – Arms & Hearts ( talk) 20:59, 25 June 2012 (UTC)