Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/May 2008

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.

Ludwig van Beethoven - Symphonie 5 c-moll

This is a performance of one of the most famous symphonies of all time. The sound qality is really good and is used to illustrate the articles Symphony No. 5 (Beethoven), Symphony, and Ludwig van Beethoven

• Nominate and support. - Zginder ^{(talk) (Contrib)} 13:58, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
• Support - Some of my favorite Beethoven. -- Grandpafootsoldier (talk) 20:22, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
• Object—The musical shortcomings can't just be blamed on the high proportion of amateurs in the orchestra. For example, it’s a pity that the conductor clips short most of the dramatic rests in the first movement, like a nervous round at a gymkhana. The recording lacks clarity—and even booms—in the mid-to-low range, which might be minimised with the Audacity program; it would have been so easy to adjust at the time of the recording. Can you remove the excessively long silences at the start of each movement (10 seconds for the first movement)? Tony (talk) 13:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
• Postscript: This nomination has been here long enough; I think it should be archived, not promoted. Tony (talk) 13:08, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Not promoted --Zginder 2008-05-16T01:34Z (UTC)

Truman announces the bombing of Hiroshima

Top encyclopedic importance, clear recording. Appears in Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, U.S. Government public domain.

• Nominate and support. - Durova^Charge! 22:25, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
• Question—It seems like there should be an greeting by Truman, and it seems to end before the end. IS there more that was edited out? Zginder ^{(talk) (Contrib)} 23:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
  • I'm not certain about the editing. Despite the value of this audio, it was sitting unused at Commons. Is it that different from Image:Frase de Neil Armstrong.ogg in these respects? Durova^Charge! 23:36, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
    • It starts with, "The world will note" seems like an odd place to start. Zginder ^{(talk) (Contrib)} 00:18, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support I don't see (hear) anything wrong with it. Juliancolton ^{The storm still blows...} 20:42, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support. Strong encyclopedic value aside, I like it a lot. MrPrada (talk) 08:27, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose—per criterion:

5. Sound description page. The page contains an extended description of the file, including:

(iii) the date and venue of the recording, where they are recoverable;

(iv) the name(s) of the recordist/producer, and for historical recordings, a brief description of the recording equipment, where known;

(v) any editing that has been applied to the excerpt by the uploader, such as noise reduction by the uploader (aside from obvious fade ups and fade downs at the start and end), and by others, where that information is recoverable;

I believe this information is missing I will contact the original uploader to try to learn more. Zginder ^{(talk) (Contrib)} 22:11, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I am sorry, but I just cannot remember where I found the file. That was 2 years ago, and I just did not pay too much attention at that moment. When Zginder asked the question, I first thought about the National Archives, but I could not find it. I made some research and discovered something I did not know: the file is edited. I have put the information about the original recording and about the way it was edited on the Commons page, but I did not do the edition. I also gave on the page a link to the full recording. Here is a link to another extract. Hope this helps. Bradipus (talk) 11:19, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your help, the recording now meets criterion 5, but do we what a longer version of the speech? Zginder ^{(talk) (Contrib)} 20:18, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Honestly, now that I know it has been edited and that I know how, I find the choice made for the extract a bit strange. The inclusion of "We won the race of discovery against the Germans.", for instance, does not seem to serve any logical purpose. Why that sentence? I found that extract for instance, when I found it, more relevant. At the end of the day, the most interesting extract would probably include: "The British, Chinese, and United States Governments have given the Japanese people adequate warning of what is in store for them. (...) our terms were rejected. (...) The world will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians. But that attack is only a warning of things to come. (...) I realize the tragic significance of the atomic bomb. (...) We have used it in order to shorten the agony of war, in order to save the lives of thousands and thousands of young Americans. We shall continue to use it until we completely destroy Japan's power to make war. Only a Japanese surrender will stop us."

But I am afraid I do not think having the tools to do this. Bradipus (talk) 21:30, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose. Info page: what is "herbelow"? Hyphen missing there, too. "text in small" is not right. Duration of file not specified as required. The info page and the sound-bite box should each explicitly say "edited extract". Although the sentences stitched together do make sense, I think the extracting of them in the first place is quite unnecessary, possibly distortive, and causes the file to lose historical interest.
• Recording:

Not promoted Work was done on the image page, but the recording was edited --Zginder 2008-05-19T23:31Z (UTC)

Featured sound candidates/Image:Little Maid of Arcadee.ogg

This song is not generally available on commercial recordings, and very, very few amateur recordings exist in the first place. Hence, this provides a useful example of the lost opera that would otherwise be very difficult to find. Used in Thespis (opera) under Image:Little Maid of Arcadee (2-2).ogg - there was some confusion about the upload between the three of us who made it, so the commons version and the en-wiki are... well, someone can sort this out later

• Nominate and support. - Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 07:09, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose for now—According to criterion 3, "The file is used in at least one article," An other file Image:Little Maid of Arcadee (2-2).ogg is used in th article Thespis (opera), but this file is not. Listen to both recordings and used the better one in the article and here. Zginder ^{(talk) (Contrib)} 12:37, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment They're the same recording, just different conversions to ogg. Let's go with Image:Little Maid of Arcadee (2-2).ogg, as the volume's probably a bit better. I'll admit that the circumstances of this recording weren't ideal - the piano is a midi, for instance - but I think it's a good effort to bring something out that Wikipedia wouldn't have any other way. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 13:36, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
    • Oppose—The featured sound criterion 5 requires certain things to be listed in the Sound description page. I added what I could, but I could not find the following:

(iii)The venue of the recording.

(vi) For a musical performance, the name and years of the arranger, if relevant, the year of composition (and the arrangement, where relevant).

(vii) For a musical performance, links to a musical score in digital format where available.

Zginder ^{(talk) (Contrib)} 21:22, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

• (iii) Privately recorded specifically for Wikipedia, no audience. Hence, irrelevant, and possibly an invasion of privacy. It was recorded by broadwaygal alone. Sorry, I have flu, I have to be blunt.
• (vi) Uncredited, very possibly Sullivan himself. The song's from 1871, and I believe the music came out in 1872.
• (vii) I found one at the Gilbert and Sullivan archive Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 21:37, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

• Support Zginder ^{(talk) (Contrib)} 22:50, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Sorry - I wasn't very clear with vi - this is very definately by Gilbert and Sullivan, but I don't know who did the piano arrangement, and that is not credited. I clarified on the page.

• Comment: I would support this nomination, except that the singer sucks (I'm the singer). -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:36, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose I somewhat agree with Ssilvers. I don't think it "sucks", but it isn't up to featured quality. To be featured, it should be a top notch performance. There are intonation problems with the singing, it is fairly un-dramatic, and the piano sounds weirdly electronic. -- ☑ SamuelWantman 09:13, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
  • The piano IS electronic, actually. MIDI, you know =) Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 09:44, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose—Yes, I agree: intonation problems in the singing (not bad, but not good enough for featured content, and it's not a historical recording, to which lower performance standards might apply). Piano is a bit stodgy. TONY (talk) 12:58, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Not promoted --ŠξÞÞøΛ ^talk 15:17, 25 May 2008 (UTC)