Talk:Fairground organ

External Links

This article is not in compliance with the Wikipedia:External links policy. Firstly, it has too many external links (Wikipedia is not an internet directory), secondly many of these links might be considered commercial, and thirdly the links should be grouped in an External Links section. -- cmh^TC 17:02, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Deleted content

Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not a soapbox. I have deleted this contentious statement.

==Modernization==

A recent trend is adding an electronic MIDI control interface in addition to or instead of the traditional roll or book system. Unfortunately this produces very inferior results and owners of old mechanical organs are well-advised,

both for copyright and artistic reasons, to stay with book, barrel or roll technology.

SheepDoll 07:41, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

One-off examples with keyboards?

I'd be interested in learning more about these "one-off examples" (and also finding out what they must look like) as there are no sources to support that claim. I'm considering adding a maintenance tag of some sort, otherwise it could be interpreted as original research. Has anyone got a source to back that up?--2601:153:800:8308:2C9A:2F04:2631:9FEA (talk) 10:05, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

No, I'm just gonna go right ahead and WP:BOLDLY add a "Citation needed" tag, because I just did a search engine for such examples and none of the search results were relevant.--2601:153:800:8308:2C9A:2F04:2631:9FEA (talk) 10:21, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

I've added the "citation needed" tag, which I don't really like doing, I'd rather simply remove the whole unsourced/unsupported claim, but I'm trying to find ways to improve an article here, so maybe someone could (with better luck than me) find a source mentioning such examples.--2601:153:800:8308:2C9A:2F04:2631:9FEA (talk) 10:43, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

French?

@SpinnerLaserzthe2nd: Your revert of my bold edit to this article is, of course, within the limits of Wikipedia rules, and my next step after the B and the R of WP:BRD is therefore to start a discussion here. I do, however, find it a bit uncivil of you to make the revert without even giving an edit summary or any other explanation. I see that you have tried to add a citation for the claim, but the given link points to a non-existant page, so the claim is still unsourced.

Let us take a closer look at the edit you reverted:

• About the parenthesis with foreign names in the lede, I will point to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section and the section about "Foreign languages" at WP:LEADLANG: If the subject of the article is closely associated with a non-English language, a single foreign language equivalent name can be included in the lead sentence, usually in parentheses. There is no indication in the article that fairground organs are closely associated with French language (and far less German or Dutch). Even if the claim of French origin should be substanciated, the French name would not have a natural place in the lede. It is also explicitly specified that it should be only a single foreign equivalent name (as opposed to three). I can see that the History section might be extended to include content about early producers (where French producers would feature significantly), and it would then be natural to mention that the French name is actually derived from the name of one of these producers. It might also possibly be pertinent to mention other foreign names, but I rather doubt that. In the lede, none of those names are relevant.
• About the fairground organ being a French instrument, that is a very strong claim that would need a strong source. The book "Encyclopedia of Automatic Musical Instruments" by David Bowers (cite #1 in the French article and mentioned among references in the English article) describes the development of such organs as a process that was taking place in many different musical instrument companies in several countries. French companies were among the first, probably the very first to come up with a working instrument of this type, but that does not make a fairground organ a French instrument. That is as if we should say that a car is a "German motor vehicle" just because Benz patented the first working version. Again, I am sure there is room for more content about the French producers in the History section. In the lede, it is not pertinent to call it a French instrument.
• As for the Categories, I do not really care too much, but it is obviously not a WP:NPOV to have three categories linking to specifically French contexts and not one reflecting the thirty-odd other producers from other countries.

My suggestion is to remove the rather POV-pushing additions from the lede and concentrate on working with the History section. --T*U (talk) 08:59, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

I had revert this because I was going to add an edit that clarify the French origin about the instrument. Gavioli was the first person to patient the instrument. I did added more sources to back this up. I also added sources that the Limonare brothers were the first company to built the fairground organ. If you are upset, let me know in my talk page. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 15:07, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@SpinnerLaserzthe2nd: Thank you for your recent edits! With the information you have added, the "History" section now clearly shows the importance of French companies in the development of this kind of organ. As you also have explained the origin of the French name in that section, there is no longer any reason to present the French name in a parenthesis in the lede. (The Dutch and German names never had any place there anywhy.) I will therefore remove the parenthesis, and I will also do some slight copy edit to your additions. Regards! --T*U (talk) 19:01, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Steam engines?

This article does not discuss what originally powered fairground organs - some kind of steam engine? Some discussion of this would be interesting. 86.176.183.136 (talk) 17:07, 3 May 2023 (UTC)