User talk:Jazzmanian

Welcome!

Hello, Jazzmanian, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Just plain Bill 03:18, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bugle Calls

~~I've answered your Bugle call question on my talk page to keep the discussion in one place.~~ Actually, on second glance, it makes more sense to keep it here, since I see you've asked at least one other editor the following question. __Just plain Bill

Hi Bill - I noticed that you've done some edits to the Bugle Call article. I have the resources to create the music files for all the calls, but am looking to confirm that the calls themselves are in the public domain. I am pretty sure most are since they are traditional military calls, and very old. Can you tell me of a reference that would show me that the calls are PD ?

I don't have a paper copy in my hand just now, but the Upton reference in Bugle call is about 140 years old, putting the US calls pretty solidly in the public domain. Last time I saw a copy was in the 1970's when I lifted out a harmony part for "Retreat" to play at a Scout camp. If you found a gov't publication with the calls in it, that would relieve the copyright burden as well, I imagine. Just plain Bill 03:26, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would a military publication in MP3 format place the notes of the calls in PD ? http://www.af.mil/library/band/ceremonial.asp or http://bands.army.mil/music/bugle/

This website states that the calls are PD... http://www.wclathan.com/Army_Band_.htm#Ceremonial%20Band%20Music

First, I am not a lawyer. So it will not surprise you that my eyes promptly glazed over when I tried to find a clear answer in Wikipedia:Public domain. When you say you "have the resources to create the music files for all the calls," you mean original performances? In that case, you may release them to PD yourself, I believe. If it is a matter of massaging someone else's .mp3 into 'pedia-friendly format, and your source is a PD sound file, that should not present problems either. __Just plain Bill 17:25, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By "create music files" I meant score them and create graphic images of the music scores for them. I may also be able to record MP3 of my own performance someday, but that was not what I originally meant.

Ah, is more clear now. Sorry to let my hot button show: Music is sound, scores are inky paper, or sometimes graphite. Or an electronically readable record, nowadays, but there the difference gets blurred, since a lot of devices can use those records to produce sound. Go nuts, sez I, images'll be a handy thing to have in the articles on the various calls. I'll be happy to pound the dents out of the bell of the old bugle and check them out for you, but that I plan to do with the doors and windows closed and the neighbors away from home. __Just plain Bill 02:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Basically if the melody is in PD, I would think I could release any score of the melody created by me into PD. Since the score is my work, but the melody is not. I think I've seen people copyrighting scores of PD compositions before claiming that the score was protected.

Indeed. As long as it's not a grossly obvious cut-and-paste of something slick and recent, you're good to go. Worry less and score more, sez I-- these tunes have been so frequently published by so many different houses that it's not even an issue. We've already given it more words than it merits. (heh, hheh.. Beavis;; he said "merits") ;-) __Just plain Bill 21:54, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - also for the record I did find this e-book. First published in 1919.

The Manual for Buglers, US Navy, was prepared by the US Navy Training Publications Center with cooperation, assistance, and technical review by the US Navy School of Music, Naval Receiving Station, Washington, DC. http://www.history.navy.mil/library/online/bugle.htm

I just went and looked at Bugle call to see what you did there. At first quick glance, whistling them to myself, they look good and accurate. You got plans to put up Retreat, To the Color, Tattoo, Call to Quarters, Taps, and maybe even Church Call in similar form? Thanks! __Just plain Bill 02:53, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yup - I've got most of them scored, just have to make final edits and convert to graphics.

Edit summaries

Again, thanks for your work scoring the bugle calls! As you put them in, if you add a word or two to the edit summary box it will make things a bit easier to keep track of. Just plain Bill 05:49, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Something as simple as " + score " will stand out in the page histories and such. Just plain Bill

You may have seen this by now...

This is a discussion I had with the fellow who put up the png images. There is the reason for the fuzzy images that replaced your excellent jpegs. __Just plain Bill 01:21, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Action height

Along with action height on a violin goes the surface of the fingerboard. It needs to be smoothly scooped, without bumps or dips. At the nut, about a third of the string diameter is how much daylight showing underneath, with a bit more for that skinny old E. Just barely able to slip a business card under is another way to go there. For the bridge, it'll be useful to get or make a template for the standard top curve, different for different size fiddles. If the feet already fit, you can cut down the existing bridge, and thin the top where it gets too thick from the cutting down... space out the strings, file or sand some shallow notches, stand it back up and away you go. If the post falls down in the process, you can enjoy learning the immensely frustrating task of standing that up too. After a lot of practice, it becomes a piece of cake.

This thread on the Fiddle Forum has a lot of info, and some ongoing links to other threads on that forum. Good folks there will be more than happy to answer any questions you have, and I'll be looking in to help keep them honest. ;-) Don't worry, be happy, __Just plain Bill 03:07, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

p.s. Looks like there's no stopping you now... carry on, and thanks again! JpB

File:Reveille(2).jpg needs authorship information

Dear uploader:

The media file you uploaded as File:Reveille(2).jpg appears to be missing information as to its authorship (and or source), or if you did provide such information, it is confusing for others trying to make use of the image.

It would be appreciated if you would consider updating the file description page, to make the authorship of the media clearer.

Although some images may not need author information in obvious cases, (such where an applicable source is provided), authorship information aids users of the image, and helps ensure that appropriate credit is given (a requirement of some licenses).

If you created this media yourself, please consider explicitly including your user name, for which: {{subst:usernameexpand|Jazzmanian}} will produce an appropriate expansion,
or use the {{own}} template.

If this is an old image, for which the authorship is unknown or impossible to determine, please indicate this on the file description page.

If you have any questions please see Help:File page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:24, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Reveille(2).jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Reveille(2).jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. auntieruth (talk) 18:34, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mess (bugle call score).jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mess (bugle call score).jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:53, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fire Bugle Call.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Fire Bugle Call.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ℯ xplicit 04:15, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Church Call.jpg

The file File:Church Call.jpg has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the file should explain why.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Also:

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:03, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]