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.
A Chantar
- Reason
- This is a beautiful rendition of Beatritz de Dia’s song A chantar m'er de so qu'eu no volria, done by Makemi, who studied vocal performance and has sung professionally. I personally think it would be a great feature on the main page.
- Articles this image appears in
- Trobairitz; Beatritz de Dia
- Creator
- User:Makemi
- Nominator
- §hanel
- Support — §hanel 00:06, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support highly encyclopedic content created by Wikipedian to illustrate an article. I think it's pretty high quality, I can upload a larger version if requested. I believe it fulfills all the non-visual-specific featured picture criteria. Mak (talk) 00:20, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support because it is a professional-quality recording of an excellent performance of this song. I would also like to point out the second version above. ★MESSED ROCKER★ 01:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support - beautifully performed, high quality recording, very encyclopaedic. -- YFB ¿ 02:10, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
-
Support Let's get this project underway! I support either version - excellent sound quality, encyclopedic and, best of all, has a free license.
H4cksaw
(talk)
02:37, 28 January 2007 (UTC) - Support, this is a high-quality recording. Even better, Makemi is considering switching to a more free license like Creative Commons attribution 2.5. :) —{ admin} Pathoschild 05:01:46, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support An excellent recording of a unique piece, that really brings its article to life. This should be a fine prototype for Featured sounds.-- Pharos 07:16, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support. Haunting track that provoked me into learning more about the music. Pstuart84 Talk 12:49, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
OpposeNeutral. As far as I'm concerned, a featured sound should have social or world-wide significance. For instance, if there were a famous speech or saying (e.g. Read my lips: no new taxes). This is a nice piece, but has no significance otherwise. This is the distinguishing characteristic between sounds and visuals ( WP:FP). └ Jared┘┌ talk┐ 18:02, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- I respectfully disagree - this is a performance of the only surviving example of a 700-year-old style of music. If that's not of social (not to mention historic) significance then I'd struggle to think what is. -- YFB ¿ 18:07, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- Please see my comment on the talk page. If you believe it is socially significant, then by all means support it, but I don't believe it is in my own opinion, so that's why I've voted oppose. I did not mean to demean the piece, but that's just what I think. └ Jared┘┌ talk┐ 18:11, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- Comment - I agree with YFB. If you believe that, so soon into the opening of FSC, only presidential speeches and other iconic pieces are worthy, we're not going to get anywhere. If we required that only iconic image could be FP, some bad images would get in there, and some excellent ones would be left out. -- Iriseyes 18:13, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- You're misconstruing my statement. I never said I just wanted presidential speeches at all! I just said that FSs should be of significance; there has to be some guidelines here. I could sing a song and it could get on here if I really tried. Does it have significance? I doubt it, because no one would want to hear it! I believe the piece sung by Makemi is beautiful and heartwarming, but it, in my opinion, does not deserve to be a FS. I am voting oppose so early in FSC because we can't just show other people that anything can just get in, among the other reasons above. └ Jared┘┌ talk┐ 18:17, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- But this isn't "just anything." Read the description of the song. "Only existing" sounds like a good condidate to me. -- Iriseyes 18:23, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- I have changed my vote to neutral; you have convinced me not to oppose. I still believe the criteria should be spelled out better, though. I apologize if I offended anyone's opinion. └ Jared┘┌ talk┐ 18:29, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support - As I did on FPC, I support this whole-heartedly. -- Iriseyes 18:13, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support. Nice work. Original sound production should be encouraged and promoted on Wikipedia. I'd love to see this linked on the mainpage. -- Dschwen( A) 21:06, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- I question why this (or any other sound) would be allowed on the main page, given that animations aren't even allowed! └ Jared┘┌ talk┐ 21:31, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- Animations are allowed on the Main page. We had two this month. They load up in a 'static' state and have to be clicked to show the animation running to avoid lagging people with slow connections... but media files won't load up and start playing automatically either. Not to mention... appearing on the main page is not a criteria for 'featured status'... as shown by the fact that neither 'featured lists' nor 'featured topics' have ever appeared there. -- CBD 22:04, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- And, gosh, the rules are not set in stone (if they even exist). Are there any other reasons to object other than it has never been done before? With that mentality WikiPedia could not develop and evolve.-- Dschwen( A) 19:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support. This is a professional-level performance, worthy of anything you'd find in the early music bin at your local CD shop. Antandrus (talk) 00:55, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support Wonderful quality, and it illustrates the subject in a way text cannot. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 01:01, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support. Let's get this project started! -- Tewy 01:30, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- I dug this when I first heard it, thougt it was nifty and a good illustration of something extremely rare and significant. Perfect candidate for a FS in my view. support ++ Lar: t/ c 03:57, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support. Good quality audio for a notable subject. Daniel.Bryant 09:03, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support per all above. -- Bob 16:29, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. It's awful hard to criticize the art and not the artist in this case, but I really just don't think it's very good :( Unless it's absolutely exceptional, I think we should stick to iconic pieces like the I Have a Dream speech, Pachelbel's Canon, etc -- froth T 02:01, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- That's my line of thinking as well. Some people, as we've already seen, think that we should be as open as possible as FS unfolds, but personally (and I'm sure froth you think so too), I think starting out constricted will narrow the scope initially until it catches on. It just makes sense to me. The piece is nice, but not nice enough for a support vote, and in no way is this meant to offend the singer. └ Jared┘┌ talk┐ 02:40, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- I don't really understand your reasoning - if we make the criteria "constricted" to start with, surely that's going to reduce the likelihood of FSC catching on? Froth, you say you "just don't think it's that good" - in what sense do you mean? If you think it's only an average-quality performance, or the recording quality isn't great, then say so; that'll give people pointers as to the improvements needed to make a better-quality version. If on the other hand, you're opposing because you don't much like the song itself, then I think that's a poor reason. I can't say this is something I'd play on my car stereo but we're not gauging personal tastes, we're trying to highlight good-quality, encyclopaedic contributions. I personally think that only featuring so-called 'iconic' pieces would be selling Wikipedia short - you're likely to come across Pachabel's Canon or "I Have a Dream" from any number of sources, but a good deal of the utility of Featured material comes in highlighting articles that wouldn't otherwise attract attention and introducing people to fresh topics. -- YFB ¿ 03:02, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Froth, you have yet to make an actual specific criticism of this recording. Also, this is the only extant piece by an entire group of composer/poets. It seems like a pretty important piece to have a recording of in an encylopedia article about that group. So, I'd call it pretty "iconic", if you will. I'm not sure what possible usefulness narrowing the scope to copyrighted works (the "I have a dream" speech) and a piece which we only have very poor recordings of/mp3s (Pachelbel's canon) will have. I think it will only serve to kill this process before it's given a chance to begin. Mak (talk) 23:05, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Comment I find it interesting that most of the voters are people who usually contribute on Feature Picture Candidates. I can imagine that not every picture person is also well versed in audio quality but hey, to get this off the ground, have at it. - Fcb981 03:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- I think that's a product of the fact that this nomination was originally made at FPC. As it happens, I do have a little audio knowledge myself, but I don't think that audio experts are required at this stage; I'm sure a lot of those at FPC wouldn't class themselves as having any great amount of photographic knowledge, either. It would be good to recruit some more voters to this page if possible though; anyone know where would be a good place to advertise that FSC is being put through its paces? -- YFB ¿ 03:45, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support - It sounds good. I wasn't able to play the edited version, so I just heard the unedited version, and there was one pop or whatever you call it when the singer gets too close to the microphone and a burst of air exiting the mouth registers. Other than that, it was excellent. Makemi, you have a great voice. -- Cyde Weys 09:21, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Extremely vocal support: that's stonkingly good, and a great way to start this ball rolling. HTH HAND — Phil | Talk 08:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Promoted Image:A Chantar2.ogg-- Pharos 00:04, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Was frag ich nach der Welt
A lovely recording of a selection from a Buxtehude cantata, using stylistically appropriate instrumentation and voices. Appropriately licensed, encyclopedic. Used in Dieterich Buxtehude. Created by User:Trisdee (more performer info on image page)
- Nominate and support. - Mak (talk) 03:31, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Mos Def! Support ++ Lar: t/ c 03:55, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support. Clean recording, and good instumentation with the harpsichord to fit with the baroque period. -- Tewy 04:47, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support per Tewy. H4cksaw (talk)
- Comment. Sounds wonderful, but the clip starts and ends rather abruptly. -- KFP ( talk | contribs) 00:04, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support. It is fantastic that a Wikipedian could donate an excellent recording like this from a talented group of four instrumentalists and three singers. It seems like this was excerpted from a longer recording; perhaps taking KFP's concerns into account, this should be edited so that the start and the end of the movement (probably not using the correct musical term here) is clearer.-- Pharos 21:21, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support: Very good indeed. -- Meno25 13:25, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Very nice; support – Qxz 18:29, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Promoted BuxWV 104 - Was frag ich nach der Welt.ogg--
Pharos
18:12, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Advertising Record
I thought I'd try something different for our third nom here. This is not a piece of music but a historical recording, and one at low fidelity. However, I feel that its use at Phonograph gives a unique impression of the phonograph's novelty at the time. In other words, that it is very valuable in a encyclopedic sense if it is lacking in technical quality.
- Nominate and support. I'll note that this is a "self-nom" in that I uploaded it.- Pharos 06:24, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support, very interesting and encyclopedic. Scratchiness doesn't bother me in this context. Mak (talk) 19:56, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support per above. -- KFP ( talk | contribs) 15:18, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support if that's not a FS then I don't know what is. Witty lama 04:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support An extremely interesting recording. CloudNine 12:48, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support. Per above. -- Tewy 21:03, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Promoted Advertising Record.ogg -- KFP ( talk | contribs) 11:08, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
The RfA Candidate's Song
This is a funny song that was created by User:Bucketsofg and rerecorded by User:M1ss1ontomars2k4 to include the chorus parts. It might be self-referencing, but it's a very enjoyable piece.
- Nominate and support. - bibliomaniac 1 5 00:52, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support. Hehe... -- M1ss1ontom a rs2k4 ( T | C | @) 04:46, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support Appropriate, and would make more Wikipedians aware of Featured Sounds. Zidel333 08:04, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'd assume this is a joke, but some of the statements make me wonder. Surely you folks realize this is against virtually the whole of Wikipedia:Featured sound criteria, as well as throwing the whole "encyclopedia" thing out with the bathwater.-- Pharos 08:22, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose, sorry, not encyclopedic, not used in any encyclopedia articles. I could go into more detail if desired, but I think that's enough. Mak (talk) 17:18, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose, strongly. A recording of the actual Major-General's Song, though, would be great – do we have one? If not, would the users who created this like to create one? – Qxz 19:15, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yay! Brilliant :D -- KFP ( talk | contribs) 19:16, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose - I do like it, but I'm afraid this is an encyclopedia, not a comedy website, and the song meets none of the criteria apart from the licensing one. It is, however, suitable for putting on your user/talk page, if you want to. Mrug 2 20:35, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. Per above. -- Tewy 20:58, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. The sound quality isn't great and it is a self-reference. Good effort in its creation though! Witty lama 01:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Not promoted --
KFP (
talk |
contribs)
19:30, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
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.
A Chantar
- Reason
- This is a beautiful rendition of Beatritz de Dia’s song A chantar m'er de so qu'eu no volria, done by Makemi, who studied vocal performance and has sung professionally. I personally think it would be a great feature on the main page.
- Articles this image appears in
- Trobairitz; Beatritz de Dia
- Creator
- User:Makemi
- Nominator
- §hanel
- Support — §hanel 00:06, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support highly encyclopedic content created by Wikipedian to illustrate an article. I think it's pretty high quality, I can upload a larger version if requested. I believe it fulfills all the non-visual-specific featured picture criteria. Mak (talk) 00:20, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support because it is a professional-quality recording of an excellent performance of this song. I would also like to point out the second version above. ★MESSED ROCKER★ 01:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support - beautifully performed, high quality recording, very encyclopaedic. -- YFB ¿ 02:10, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
-
Support Let's get this project underway! I support either version - excellent sound quality, encyclopedic and, best of all, has a free license.
H4cksaw
(talk)
02:37, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support, this is a high-quality recording. Even better, Makemi is considering switching to a more free license like Creative Commons attribution 2.5. :) —{ admin} Pathoschild 05:01:46, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support An excellent recording of a unique piece, that really brings its article to life. This should be a fine prototype for Featured sounds.-- Pharos 07:16, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support. Haunting track that provoked me into learning more about the music. Pstuart84 Talk 12:49, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
OpposeNeutral. As far as I'm concerned, a featured sound should have social or world-wide significance. For instance, if there were a famous speech or saying (e.g. Read my lips: no new taxes). This is a nice piece, but has no significance otherwise. This is the distinguishing characteristic between sounds and visuals ( WP:FP). └ Jared┘┌ talk┐ 18:02, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- I respectfully disagree - this is a performance of the only surviving example of a 700-year-old style of music. If that's not of social (not to mention historic) significance then I'd struggle to think what is. -- YFB ¿ 18:07, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- Please see my comment on the talk page. If you believe it is socially significant, then by all means support it, but I don't believe it is in my own opinion, so that's why I've voted oppose. I did not mean to demean the piece, but that's just what I think. └ Jared┘┌ talk┐ 18:11, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- Comment - I agree with YFB. If you believe that, so soon into the opening of FSC, only presidential speeches and other iconic pieces are worthy, we're not going to get anywhere. If we required that only iconic image could be FP, some bad images would get in there, and some excellent ones would be left out. -- Iriseyes 18:13, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- You're misconstruing my statement. I never said I just wanted presidential speeches at all! I just said that FSs should be of significance; there has to be some guidelines here. I could sing a song and it could get on here if I really tried. Does it have significance? I doubt it, because no one would want to hear it! I believe the piece sung by Makemi is beautiful and heartwarming, but it, in my opinion, does not deserve to be a FS. I am voting oppose so early in FSC because we can't just show other people that anything can just get in, among the other reasons above. └ Jared┘┌ talk┐ 18:17, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- But this isn't "just anything." Read the description of the song. "Only existing" sounds like a good condidate to me. -- Iriseyes 18:23, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- I have changed my vote to neutral; you have convinced me not to oppose. I still believe the criteria should be spelled out better, though. I apologize if I offended anyone's opinion. └ Jared┘┌ talk┐ 18:29, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support - As I did on FPC, I support this whole-heartedly. -- Iriseyes 18:13, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support. Nice work. Original sound production should be encouraged and promoted on Wikipedia. I'd love to see this linked on the mainpage. -- Dschwen( A) 21:06, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- I question why this (or any other sound) would be allowed on the main page, given that animations aren't even allowed! └ Jared┘┌ talk┐ 21:31, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- Animations are allowed on the Main page. We had two this month. They load up in a 'static' state and have to be clicked to show the animation running to avoid lagging people with slow connections... but media files won't load up and start playing automatically either. Not to mention... appearing on the main page is not a criteria for 'featured status'... as shown by the fact that neither 'featured lists' nor 'featured topics' have ever appeared there. -- CBD 22:04, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- And, gosh, the rules are not set in stone (if they even exist). Are there any other reasons to object other than it has never been done before? With that mentality WikiPedia could not develop and evolve.-- Dschwen( A) 19:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support. This is a professional-level performance, worthy of anything you'd find in the early music bin at your local CD shop. Antandrus (talk) 00:55, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support Wonderful quality, and it illustrates the subject in a way text cannot. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 01:01, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support. Let's get this project started! -- Tewy 01:30, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- I dug this when I first heard it, thougt it was nifty and a good illustration of something extremely rare and significant. Perfect candidate for a FS in my view. support ++ Lar: t/ c 03:57, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support. Good quality audio for a notable subject. Daniel.Bryant 09:03, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support per all above. -- Bob 16:29, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. It's awful hard to criticize the art and not the artist in this case, but I really just don't think it's very good :( Unless it's absolutely exceptional, I think we should stick to iconic pieces like the I Have a Dream speech, Pachelbel's Canon, etc -- froth T 02:01, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- That's my line of thinking as well. Some people, as we've already seen, think that we should be as open as possible as FS unfolds, but personally (and I'm sure froth you think so too), I think starting out constricted will narrow the scope initially until it catches on. It just makes sense to me. The piece is nice, but not nice enough for a support vote, and in no way is this meant to offend the singer. └ Jared┘┌ talk┐ 02:40, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- I don't really understand your reasoning - if we make the criteria "constricted" to start with, surely that's going to reduce the likelihood of FSC catching on? Froth, you say you "just don't think it's that good" - in what sense do you mean? If you think it's only an average-quality performance, or the recording quality isn't great, then say so; that'll give people pointers as to the improvements needed to make a better-quality version. If on the other hand, you're opposing because you don't much like the song itself, then I think that's a poor reason. I can't say this is something I'd play on my car stereo but we're not gauging personal tastes, we're trying to highlight good-quality, encyclopaedic contributions. I personally think that only featuring so-called 'iconic' pieces would be selling Wikipedia short - you're likely to come across Pachabel's Canon or "I Have a Dream" from any number of sources, but a good deal of the utility of Featured material comes in highlighting articles that wouldn't otherwise attract attention and introducing people to fresh topics. -- YFB ¿ 03:02, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Froth, you have yet to make an actual specific criticism of this recording. Also, this is the only extant piece by an entire group of composer/poets. It seems like a pretty important piece to have a recording of in an encylopedia article about that group. So, I'd call it pretty "iconic", if you will. I'm not sure what possible usefulness narrowing the scope to copyrighted works (the "I have a dream" speech) and a piece which we only have very poor recordings of/mp3s (Pachelbel's canon) will have. I think it will only serve to kill this process before it's given a chance to begin. Mak (talk) 23:05, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Comment I find it interesting that most of the voters are people who usually contribute on Feature Picture Candidates. I can imagine that not every picture person is also well versed in audio quality but hey, to get this off the ground, have at it. - Fcb981 03:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- I think that's a product of the fact that this nomination was originally made at FPC. As it happens, I do have a little audio knowledge myself, but I don't think that audio experts are required at this stage; I'm sure a lot of those at FPC wouldn't class themselves as having any great amount of photographic knowledge, either. It would be good to recruit some more voters to this page if possible though; anyone know where would be a good place to advertise that FSC is being put through its paces? -- YFB ¿ 03:45, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support - It sounds good. I wasn't able to play the edited version, so I just heard the unedited version, and there was one pop or whatever you call it when the singer gets too close to the microphone and a burst of air exiting the mouth registers. Other than that, it was excellent. Makemi, you have a great voice. -- Cyde Weys 09:21, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Extremely vocal support: that's stonkingly good, and a great way to start this ball rolling. HTH HAND — Phil | Talk 08:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Promoted Image:A Chantar2.ogg-- Pharos 00:04, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Was frag ich nach der Welt
A lovely recording of a selection from a Buxtehude cantata, using stylistically appropriate instrumentation and voices. Appropriately licensed, encyclopedic. Used in Dieterich Buxtehude. Created by User:Trisdee (more performer info on image page)
- Nominate and support. - Mak (talk) 03:31, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Mos Def! Support ++ Lar: t/ c 03:55, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support. Clean recording, and good instumentation with the harpsichord to fit with the baroque period. -- Tewy 04:47, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support per Tewy. H4cksaw (talk)
- Comment. Sounds wonderful, but the clip starts and ends rather abruptly. -- KFP ( talk | contribs) 00:04, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Support. It is fantastic that a Wikipedian could donate an excellent recording like this from a talented group of four instrumentalists and three singers. It seems like this was excerpted from a longer recording; perhaps taking KFP's concerns into account, this should be edited so that the start and the end of the movement (probably not using the correct musical term here) is clearer.-- Pharos 21:21, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support: Very good indeed. -- Meno25 13:25, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Very nice; support – Qxz 18:29, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Promoted BuxWV 104 - Was frag ich nach der Welt.ogg--
Pharos
18:12, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Advertising Record
I thought I'd try something different for our third nom here. This is not a piece of music but a historical recording, and one at low fidelity. However, I feel that its use at Phonograph gives a unique impression of the phonograph's novelty at the time. In other words, that it is very valuable in a encyclopedic sense if it is lacking in technical quality.
- Nominate and support. I'll note that this is a "self-nom" in that I uploaded it.- Pharos 06:24, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support, very interesting and encyclopedic. Scratchiness doesn't bother me in this context. Mak (talk) 19:56, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support per above. -- KFP ( talk | contribs) 15:18, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support if that's not a FS then I don't know what is. Witty lama 04:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support An extremely interesting recording. CloudNine 12:48, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support. Per above. -- Tewy 21:03, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Promoted Advertising Record.ogg -- KFP ( talk | contribs) 11:08, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
The RfA Candidate's Song
This is a funny song that was created by User:Bucketsofg and rerecorded by User:M1ss1ontomars2k4 to include the chorus parts. It might be self-referencing, but it's a very enjoyable piece.
- Nominate and support. - bibliomaniac 1 5 00:52, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support. Hehe... -- M1ss1ontom a rs2k4 ( T | C | @) 04:46, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support Appropriate, and would make more Wikipedians aware of Featured Sounds. Zidel333 08:04, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'd assume this is a joke, but some of the statements make me wonder. Surely you folks realize this is against virtually the whole of Wikipedia:Featured sound criteria, as well as throwing the whole "encyclopedia" thing out with the bathwater.-- Pharos 08:22, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose, sorry, not encyclopedic, not used in any encyclopedia articles. I could go into more detail if desired, but I think that's enough. Mak (talk) 17:18, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose, strongly. A recording of the actual Major-General's Song, though, would be great – do we have one? If not, would the users who created this like to create one? – Qxz 19:15, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yay! Brilliant :D -- KFP ( talk | contribs) 19:16, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose - I do like it, but I'm afraid this is an encyclopedia, not a comedy website, and the song meets none of the criteria apart from the licensing one. It is, however, suitable for putting on your user/talk page, if you want to. Mrug 2 20:35, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. Per above. -- Tewy 20:58, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. The sound quality isn't great and it is a self-reference. Good effort in its creation though! Witty lama 01:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Not promoted --
KFP (
talk |
contribs)
19:30, 24 February 2007 (UTC)