Difference between revisions of "Talk:Trout Mask Replica: Reviews"
(New section: Still not convinced) |
(Review, adieu?) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
Not sure that these add anything much to a Zappa wiki or just how they fit in with the rest of the stuff here. They are available elsewhere for anyone who wants them. | Not sure that these add anything much to a Zappa wiki or just how they fit in with the rest of the stuff here. They are available elsewhere for anyone who wants them. | ||
[[User:Duncan|Duncan]] 07:17, 2 June 2008 (PDT) | [[User:Duncan|Duncan]] 07:17, 2 June 2008 (PDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == FZ Project Reviews: Trout Mask Replica == | ||
| + | |||
| + | I get your drift on the lack of 'purity' of the articles, ie drifting away from FZ, however: My thought process was as follows; | ||
| + | |||
| + | :1. I kept them in as they were in the original/very 1st TMR page- so thought already OK'd with you guys..? | ||
| + | :2. I found them interesting & had envisaged articles like this, (of the emergence/early days of FZ's works- & the 'collective' around him- on an unsuspecting public & music press) would help a wiki reader to gain insight into breadth of FZ entrepreneurial skills while providing a medium for links in context for lookup of 'extroverted thread stuff'. | ||
| + | :3. Just the 'keystone' people, cross-fertilisation etc, ie TMR, GTOs, Fischer, Fowley, Buckley- maybe a few others... The 'introverted thread' stuff, seeds sown by Zappa | ||
| + | :4. Perhaps, for 'findability' I should have called page [as above prefix], with any 'project' review as the suffix in title? So, they nest together quietly somewhere in the wiki & provide 'quick taster/overview' with internal links & save a reader flying off to all points in the web & back. We can't have opinions but we can effect them with pages like this. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Up to you. Bottom line is "I don't think it's doing any harm, TMR was a 1st project, it put CB in the spotlight where previous things had 'failed' & they were chums, find out more elsewhere in the links we've given..." --[[User:Tonefish|Tonefish]] 03:06, 4 June 2008 (PDT) | ||
Revision as of 02:06, 4 June 2008
Can't fathom why last review doesn't justify, have I embedded invisible gremlins or something, or just coded it wrong? can you help out?
There was a <div align=right> at the end of the previous piece instead of a / div Duncan 02:33, 2 June 2008 (PDT)
Still not convinced
Not sure that these add anything much to a Zappa wiki or just how they fit in with the rest of the stuff here. They are available elsewhere for anyone who wants them. Duncan 07:17, 2 June 2008 (PDT)
FZ Project Reviews: Trout Mask Replica
I get your drift on the lack of 'purity' of the articles, ie drifting away from FZ, however: My thought process was as follows;
- 1. I kept them in as they were in the original/very 1st TMR page- so thought already OK'd with you guys..?
- 2. I found them interesting & had envisaged articles like this, (of the emergence/early days of FZ's works- & the 'collective' around him- on an unsuspecting public & music press) would help a wiki reader to gain insight into breadth of FZ entrepreneurial skills while providing a medium for links in context for lookup of 'extroverted thread stuff'.
- 3. Just the 'keystone' people, cross-fertilisation etc, ie TMR, GTOs, Fischer, Fowley, Buckley- maybe a few others... The 'introverted thread' stuff, seeds sown by Zappa
- 4. Perhaps, for 'findability' I should have called page [as above prefix], with any 'project' review as the suffix in title? So, they nest together quietly somewhere in the wiki & provide 'quick taster/overview' with internal links & save a reader flying off to all points in the web & back. We can't have opinions but we can effect them with pages like this.
Up to you. Bottom line is "I don't think it's doing any harm, TMR was a 1st project, it put CB in the spotlight where previous things had 'failed' & they were chums, find out more elsewhere in the links we've given..." --Tonefish 03:06, 4 June 2008 (PDT)
