DHM Posted April 23, 2009 Share Posted April 23, 2009 Does anybody know of a list of Cathedral Assistants on the web? I could have sworn I found one a couple of weeks ago, but can't for the life of me remember where - or perhaps I just dreamt it? There is a list of Organists/DoMs on UK Cathedral Music Links, and a list of Organ Scholars on Wikipedia, but they're not what I'm after. Thanks in advance for any help. Douglas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard McVeigh Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 Not too sure about Assistant Organists, but how about these: List of organ scholars at British cathedrals and parish churches List of organ scholars at British universities and colleges Also, some cathedral articles on Wikipedia have lists of their organists, eg: Lichfield Cathedral Chichester Cathedral Lincoln Cathedral York Minster Westminster Abbey Winchester Cathedral infact, most of them seem to... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vox Humana Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 List of organ scholars at British universities and colleges What's been going on with this one then? Why has all the data for the current decade been deleted? I'm sure I'm not imagining that it used to be more up-to-date than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwhodges Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 Well, the banner at the top announces the merger with another article; but the removal of recent (and some old) names is shown in the history as: "(preparing for merger - removing non-notable names)" There are Wikipedia guidelines about whether the subject of an article is sufficiently "notable". These say they do not apply to the content of articles, except in the case of lists of people. I guess Wikipedia doesn't want to host merely comprehensive lists. I can't think of any other place such lists could conveniently be hosted, unless someone here wishes to offer. The deleted information can, of course, at present be recovered from Wikipedia by viewing its revision history - but that may not be possible when the article is actually deleted (so I've just grabbed a copy of the last version before the deletions began). Presumably the list of organ scholars at cathedrals and parish churches will be treated the same in due course (though it hasn't been flagged for it yet). Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vox Humana Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 I guess Wikipedia doesn't want to host merely comprehensive lists. ... Presumably the list of organ scholars and cathedrals and parish churches will be treated the same in due course (though it hasn't been flagged for it yet). Well, it would be illogical to do one without the other. It's a perfectly legitimate editorial principle to excise uninteresting information to focus on the important details. But who is to say what is uninteresting? I am as likely to find myself Googling obscure names as well-known ones and it is at times like this that the comprehensiveness of such lists can come up trumps. It does seem a shame that the complete knowledge will be suppressed. If Wikipedia is not going to host comprehensive lists, I do hope someone else will. Maybe http://www.cathedralmusiclinks.org.uk/ could do it, though I guess updating would become an issue. At any rate, if Wikipedia is going to be intellectually honest, those pages ought to be retitled "Some Organ Scholars...", or perhaps better, "Notable Organ Scholars..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard McVeigh Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 I can't believe that this list was edited. How utterly RIDICULOUS - I mean, why?? Can anyone tell me why on earth some people think that only the notable people should stay on the list? The whole list is a fascinating guide as to who was where, no matter how notable they may be. I'm sorry, that made me really cross as there is absolutely no reason what so ever for editing it. Surely the amount of contributions from various people just goes to show how non-pointless it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vox Humana Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 Indeed, indeed. Someone (possibly more than one person) put a lot of effort into the initial compilation of those lists and it seems such a waste if they are to be pruned so savagely. And what constitutes notability anyway? Look at any of those wooden boards you see near cathedral organ lofts listing the church's organists. They must all have been notable enough people in their day, but how many of the names in any given list are widely remembered today? Usually comparatively few. Yet it is surely right and proper that they are commemorated (even if all of these lists need updating in the light of Watkins Shaw's research). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwhodges Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 For those not accustomed to finding these things in Wikipedia, here is the discussion that was held by some Wikipedia editors on the handling of this article. Note the comment: "The position of 'organ scholar' is essentially a training role and not important enough for comprehensive lists." Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Lane Posted April 25, 2009 Share Posted April 25, 2009 I can't believe that this list was edited. How utterly RIDICULOUS - I mean, why?? Can anyone tell me why on earth some people think that only the notable people should stay on the list? The whole list is a fascinating guide as to who was where, no matter how notable they may be. I'm sorry, that made me really cross as there is absolutely no reason what so ever for editing it. Surely the amount of contributions from various people just goes to show how non-pointless it is. I totally agree. All names are notable to the people who held the post, and who is to say these people might become 'notable' later on. Just stupid. Wikipedia has seriously dropped in my estimation! Jonathan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Lane Posted April 25, 2009 Share Posted April 25, 2009 Note the comment: "The position of 'organ scholar' is essentially a training role and not important enough for comprehensive lists." Paul And as we all know, not true in many cases. In many Oxbridge and other colleges the Organ Scholar runs the chapel music. Jonathan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Lane Posted April 25, 2009 Share Posted April 25, 2009 'Many organ scholars have gone on to notable careers in music and in other fields. Two notable ex-organ scholars who went on to achieve fame in other fields are Edward Heath (who read Philosophy, Politics, and Economics at Balliol College, Oxford) and Dudley Moore (who read music at Magdalen College, Oxford).' I think this sums up the reasoning, for the editors, notable means people who are known nationally, to most people. I hope they now edit the Periodic Table of Elements to remove those which are not known by most people, after all, if people don't know them they cannot be notable!!! Jonathan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vox Humana Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Presumably the list of organ scholars at cathedrals and parish churches will be treated the same in due course (though it hasn't been flagged for it yet). I see it's now been flagged and is open for discussion if anyone feels inclined. Perhaps the editors should be pointed towards the comments here? I may make some comment in due course if the discussio stays open long enough, but am up to the eyes in other things just now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwhodges Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 I see no likelihood of changing their mind. The comment on the final removal of the colleges article reads: (redirecting to organ scholar per the AfD, as of no real encyclopaedic interest for a general, rather than a specifically Organ scholar-related encyclopaedia) The question is whether there is any other existing place this information could sensibly go. I have been wondering about sticking it in a spare wiki on my own server (I have preserved both articles), and linking to it from the remaining Wikipedia article. Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DHM Posted May 1, 2009 Author Share Posted May 1, 2009 I see no likelihood of changing their mind. The comment on the final removal of the colleges article reads: The question is whether there is any other existing place this information could sensibly go. I have been wondering about sticking it in a spare wiki on my own server (I have preserved both articles), and linking to it from the remaining Wikipedia article. Paul Perhaps Ron Sherlock (UK Cathedral Music Links) might be persuaded? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now