| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Whenever you search in PBworks, Dokkio Sidebar (from the makers of PBworks) will run the same search in your Drive, Dropbox, OneDrive, Gmail, and Slack. Now you can find what you're looking for wherever it lives. Try Dokkio Sidebar for free.

View
 

Testing page

This version was saved 15 years, 8 months ago View current version     Page history
Saved by PBworks
on March 31, 2007 at 11:28:41 pm
 


 

This page is only to be used for testing various templates in order to chose which one is the best one for the official version of the wiki.

 

Discographies

I deleted all the old ones I hope that is OK? Since it seems we have narrowed it down to something more likely to be used.

 

Albums

Single artist LP discography

revised

TitlelabelYearmatrix/cat numberCountry of issueComment (incl producer & format cd/LP)

 

Single artist featured on comp LP discography

revised

LP TitleSong(s) featuredlabelYearmatrix/cat numberCountry of issueComment (incl producer & format)

 

Single label LP discography

ArtistTitleYearMatrix/Cat NoComment (incl producer, & format, and country of origin if applicable)

 

12" Discos

Single artist 12" discography

Side 1(including additional artist details ie. dj)Side 2 (including additional artist details if different from a side etc)LabelMatrix/Catalogue #ProducerYearCountry of issueComment (including rhythm)

 

Single label 12" discography

revised

Artist ASide 1Artist BSide 2YearMatrix/Catalogue #ProducerCountry of issueComment (including rhythm)

 

7" Singles

Single artist 7" discography

revised

Side 1Side 2(including artist details if different)labelYearmatrix/cat numberCountry of issueComment (incl producer)

 

Single label 7" discography

revised

ArtistSide 1Side 2(including artist details if different)YearMatrix/Cat NoComment (incl producer, rhythm)

 

Discussion

I'm a bit unsure about the different discog-tables for JA vs. UK 7". Even though I see a point with them I can imagine that they'll end up causing more confusion than help it. I'd rather have the same standard for all 7". Furthermore I'd personally prefer the year of release in front of the catalogue number since I think it's information that more important than the matrix/catalogue #. Otherwise I think these are great templates. /joakim

 

I've started a UK Prince Buster discograpy to test the differences. Personally I still prefer this as it's more logical to me but I can see the other side of it too and don't mind too much either way. I've a feeling when people start differnt discographys they won't necassarily follow the set format anyway and unless it's completely terrible there would be little point in changing it. Let me know what you think. Tim

 

That's true. Even though it's good to have a standard. I think that contributors want some sort of guide lines when it comes to these things. Regarding the matrixes they can still be the structural part of the list. Just that they don't come in the first columnt. Something like:

ArtistSide 1Side 2YearCat NoComment
Prince BusterBig FiveMusical College1967PB 1A side rhythm Rainy Night In Gerogia, B side rhythm?
Prince BusterFisheyMore Fishey1971PB 4B side is instrumental version. Holly Holly Rhythm
Prince Buster & The All StarsI Wish Your Picture Was YouIt Mash Up Version (Dennis Alcapone)1971PB 7
Prince Buster & The All StarsMy Heart Is GoneI stand Accused1972PB 16

 

Just posted the twinkle disco. Forgot entirely about our discussion here. Sheesh :D I'll do it again later today and that time it will be the correct version!

/joakim

 

I did a change on the buster listing the singles by ascending cat #. Perhaps that is the best compromise of the two system to put both artist and cat # as the most important parts. /joakim

 

OK I see what you mean - yes this is fine with me. Enjoy changing the Twinkle Brothers discography ;-) I'll have to change the Parish one i did and a couple of others but at the moment I think I'd prefer to add more content. I can always return to that... Tim

 

I do all the changes in excel so there's a question of just a few minutes work. A little bit too tired to do the Twinkle now though. And yeah, good choice on rather adding than changing. /yabby jocke

 

Citing Sources

This is how I've been citing sources (check Soul Syndicate Band and Volcano)

  • Author(s), Title in italic (year), city of release, publisher

 

Discussion

I'm not sure about the city of release though. When citing sources in essays at the university I've got to include it since it's the proper citing-format. But I don't think we need to be that formal on the wiki.

 

I done it like this so really it's just the order.

1. Solid Foundation An Oral History Of Reggae - David Katz (Bloomsbury 2003)

I don't think we should bother with the city. I'll change my ones to conform with yours. What about magazine references is this likely to be different? Tim

 

we can probably treat magazine references in a similar way to citing articles from journals:

 

article title, author, page numbers, magazine title, issue number and year. (am i missing anything?)

 

I know it seems like a lot of extra work, but if you have the information to hand you can add this stuff more easily then than you can later. Also, i wholeheartedly agree with tim and Joakims comments above; probably much better to keep adding stuff now (in an agreed format) than to go back and revise the format previous additions are in... Now I just need to get myself a few free hours to get some real stuff written... Daniel

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.