Talk:Experimental Music Catalogue

Article concerns

I returned to this article to find that it had been decorated with several objections:

1) Possible conflict of interest. I have some connections with the publication and the composers involved - it is a very specialised subject - but this has been through writing about the subject over the last thirty-five years (I have a PhD in this subject and teach it in a major university). 2) No references. There is a separate reference from the journal Contact from 1973. This journal has nothing to do with the publication and, in fact, published reviews of the various Anthologies. There are other sources, but none in print. 3) Orphaned listing. This was created to link to the published output of the composers listed, as there was no link from the article on Hobbs to the publishing catalogue that he founded. Perhaps the articles on other composers in this group will link to this publication.

I notice that the complaints were made by people with no knowledge of this subject (they seem to be involved in various sciences). Could editors be aware, please, that they should know something about the subject before editing it? They should at least know the literature on the subject. British experimental music is a very specific arts movement. It would be useful, therefore, to be informed whenever the editors cannot understand the terminology, if these entries contain concepts that they cannot understand rather than to guess at problems of citation.

Experimusic (talk) 16:33, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

• This has nothing to do with people being uninformed about the subject and everything to do with complying with Wikipedia's key policy concerning referencing and original research. The article should have more sources apart from a single journal article and one other which is not independent of the subject. As for the orphan tag, I have now linked the article to three further articles. This is an important process on Wikipedia which integrates articles into the encyclopedia as a whole. You could have done that as well, rather than simply removing the orphan tag. Maintenance tags exist to alert experienced editors who can help improve an article. They shouldn't be removed without fixing the problem they highlight. Voceditenore (talk) 11:40, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Experimental Music Catalogue. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090129155028/http://www.experimentalmusic.co.uk/Experimental_Music_Catalogue/Jems.html to http://www.experimentalmusic.co.uk/Experimental_Music_Catalogue/Jems.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:38, 26 September 2017 (UTC)