Talk:Audio Fidelity Records

Untitled

The question I always get about Audio Fidelity is: Where are the masters? I would love for someone to clear that up for me. Andrea (Frey) Bass, daughter of Sidney Frey. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anderonia (talk • contribs) 18:47, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

–––15:53, 7 April 2008 (UTC)92.104.130.228 (talk)lilililaldfléadkfIn 1958 Mr. Sydney Frey went to Argentina Buenos Aires and got registered the album Tango Argentino - Atilio Stampone orchestra singing Pablo Moreno can you add information?92.104.130.228 (talk) 15:53, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Background section of Audio Fidelity Records

My question is "Why is AFSD 5825 not included as one of the first Audio Fidelity stereo recodings, since it was recorded November, 1957 and released March,1958? 69.3.147.172 (talk) 22:23, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

TO:VMANTI: I do not appreciate most of your edits to this page. You removed references to valuable source documents. The former employees were key to the success of the company. Anderonia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anderonia (talk • contribs) 23:44, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps. But does that make them notable as defined by Wikipedia's Notability guidelines? Those employees may have been important to the company, but are they important in a larger sense, to every reader of that entry? Are they vital to an understanding of that entry? There are lots of companies with lots of employees. It's impossible to list them all.
–Vmavanti (talk) 16:41, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

VManti: you erased dozens of links, which I do not appreciate. They were links to the artists. Louis Armstrong and Al Hirt are not irrelevant to Audio Fidelity. Please go play somewhere else. This page has been used as a source numerous times in the past three months because a valuable film tape of Louis Armstrong recording for A/F was unearthed. Here is a link to the phrase "louis armstrong film discovered" =500,000+ entries on Google. Many people know nothing about the company, and it played an important role in the development of stereo . Its recordings were not rock n roll. People listened because the recording quality was SO good. I was the original creator of this page, and I appreciate the many contributors. But VManti: you are an ERASER who thinks he/she is an editor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anderonia (talk • contribs) 20:39, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

I assure you I'm not playing. I have professional experience as an editor. You said I deleted "dozens of links". A dozen equals 12, 2 dozen equals 24, 3 dozen equals 36. Have I deleted "dozens of links"? I don't know. Would you show me the list so I can respond? Which links that I deleted do you think ought to stay? Without seeing the names of the links, I have no way of judging. I have no intention of deleting valuable links or of do any harm. Have you read the relevant Wikipedia documentation? I ask you also to remember that this is an encyclopedia, not a book about record collecting.
–Vmavanti (talk) 05:38, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

External links section

User:Anderonia and User:Vmavanti, I've noticed that there have been some deletions and reversions in the External Links section, with no discussion other than your edit summaries. I'd like to start that discussion now.

First, Vmavanti, your statement that PDF files are not acceptable under the guidelines for External Links doesn't seem right to me. PDF files are used routinely in tens of thousands of articles, all without raising concerns under those guidelines. Indeed, the software template routinely adds the PDF icon to those links, hardly something that would be done for a prohibited type of file. But Anderonia, two PDF files that you've restored don't seem to have any place in this article. One is an article written by Frey; another is an article about Frey's home-audio setup. But this article is not about Frey -- it's about the Audio Fidelity company and it's not at all clear why those two articles are relevant to learning about the company. Anderonia, if you believe that Frey's role in the history of recording is notable, then you might want to write a separate article about him. That article would be a perfect place for those two links. But not here.

Also, the link to the 1959 newspaper article no longer works. If it can't be rescued via the Internet Archive or elsewhere, it will have to be removed.

I look forward to a discussion of these matters. NewYorkActuary (talk) 16:29, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

I'll try to find the part in the documentation that discouraged me from using .pdf files. That they are linked to often in other entries doesn't itself mean that it's a good idea. For example, when I browse the web, I don't like clicking on a link that automatically dowloads a file to my computer, even if it's something I'm interested in. I would rather be allowed to make that choice myself.

changed "discourage" back to "discouraged" to fix Anderonia's vandalism.
–Vmavanti (talk) 05:23, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for everyone's comments. I'm not trying to wreck anything. I couldn't respond to Anderonia because their red-linked user name suggested that they didn't have an account and was therefore unreachable on Talk Pages. Therefore I limited my comments to edit summaries. It's good to know that these are not simply drive-by edits from someone's phone.
Vmavanti (talk) 16:36, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt response. You're probably thinking of item #8 in WP:ELNO. But if you follow the link to WP:RICHMEDIA, you'll see that there is an example of a PDF file that is deemed "appropriate". Also, I underestimated the number of articles that use PDF files -- it's not in the tens of thousands, but more than half a million (as shown in this search here). NewYorkActuary (talk) 16:57, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

I was thinking of this: "Direct links to documents that require external applications or plugins".
–Vmavanti (talk) 05:42, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes, that would be item #8 in WP:ELNO. Are you still contending that PDF files can not be used here? NewYorkActuary (talk) 14:01, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

No. I wouldn't link to a pdf, but I'm not going to delete links that do. Aderonia mentioned that I deleted "dozens" of necessary links and I'm not sure which ones he means.
–Vmavanti (talk) 17:08, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

vmanti: there were 33 footnotes before you got involved. please go away. Sidney Frey was an overwhelming personality, and his stereo leadership catalyzed the vinyl biz and the home stereo biz. The article about his home stereo setup was written because his choice of eqipment was a model for many others. It wasn't about an irrelevant topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anderonia (talk • contribs) 05:08, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

NewYorkActuary:Do you know how to recover those 33 footnotes so we can analyze them?

Anderonia: I'm not going anywhere, friend, and insulting me isn't going to help anyone. I understand how frustrating it is to have someone change your work. But you have to understand that it isn't your work and yours alone. It's everyone's. Your name isn't on it and you're not getting paid. This is everyone's entry because it's everyone's encyclopedia. And anyone can edit at any time. That's Wikipedia. If you feel so strongly about the subject, you might want to find another outlet for your work, such as writing a newspaper article, magazine, web site, blog, or book where your work will be more in your hands as your own property. If you know anything about publishing, you know that writers often bemoan having their work changed by editors.
I'm willing to discuss the significance of any subject pertaining to this entry, any footnote, any comma. For the second time, you've mentioned in general terms but not specifically what material I deleted and why it should not have been deleted. You have to give me the benefit of the doubt that I edit rationally and not randomly. Without seeing any specifics of your criticisms, I don't know what else to say.

NewYorkActuary. This is the link from the Wikipedia history page before vmanti started editing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Audio_Fidelity_Records&diff=677385386&oldid=664579533

NewYorkActuary: I just checked the article about the Sidney Frey home audio setup. In its era (1962), this would be like having an article in 2010 like "What apps does Steve Jobs have on his IPhone?" It is an annoying pdf, and if you have any way of linking to just the article, not the whole magazine, that would be better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anderonia (talk • contribs) 23:51, 28 July 2016 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Audio_Fidelity_Records&diff=677385386&oldid=664579533 deleted talk-page addition restored by NewYorkActuary (talk) 03:50, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

I already cut and pasted the old version that existed before I started editing, and I made it the default page before the last message was posted. You can check the times. OK? OK? Does that make it all better now?
–Vmavanti (talk) 02:22, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Discussion - Round 1

My thanks to both User:Anderonia and User:Vmavanti for your willingness to engage in discussion. Thanks also to Vmavanti for facilitating the discussion by restoring the prior version.

I'll start the discussion with the External Links section. But before I do, I ask Anderonia to please sign your posts. The benefit of doing so is spelled out in WP:Signatures. It is generally considered poor practice to not sign them, and my own feeling is that it is also impolite. When you force the software to sign your posts for you, it does so by adding an extra entry into the log for the Talk page, as well as on the watchlists that we are using. This creates unnecessary clutter. Please start signing your posts.

Also, I removed the footnote that linked to Railroad Sounds on YouTube. Railroad Sounds is a copyrighted recording, as seen in the Library of Congress entry here. We can not link to it. I also removed one of the two links to the Reichle discography (keeping the one that went to the 'home' page of the discography). This is in keeping with the Manual of Style regarding external links.

As for the other external links, let's talk about it. I still do not see how the article written by Mr. Frey, and the one that describes his home stereo, are helpful to a reader who wants to learn about the record company. Anderonia, your responses to this point were unconvincing. I also note that your analogy with Steven Jobs actually works against your position. Our article on Apple, Inc. doesn't contain anything about Jobs' personal life. All of that detail is included in the article on Jobs himself. I see from the top of this Talk page that you are the daughter of Mr. Frey. I appreciate that you want to include detail about your father, but I'm puzzled as to why you don't simply start an article on him. That would be the perfect place for those links.

Finally, has there been any attempt to rescue the dead link to the 1959 article? If not, that link is useless and needs to be removed.

Thanks again for engaging in discussion. I look forward to your responses. NewYorkActuary (talk) 03:38, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

newyorkactuary: I have to login as anderonia, that's why I am puzzled why the entries are "unsigned," I appreciate the return to the previous version. I also had problems inserting pix of albums or even pix from my own home collection of pix, where the photographers are unknown. Please tell me the appropriate wording for a citation where I don't know the photographer or who owns the rights to the photograph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anderonia (talk • contribs) 15:45, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Merely logging in doesn't create the signature. Please read WP:Signatures. Also note that there is a button at the bottom of the edit window labeled "Sign your posts on talk pages". Please use it.

Uploading images can be a complex process. You can get started by reading Help:Introduction to uploading images.

Because you did not respond to my concerns about the external links, I presume that you have conceded the issue. The links in question have been removed.

Thank you for engaging in discussion. In a few days, I'll open up a second round of discussion for some of the other concerns raised by Vmavanti. NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:49, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

I fail to understand the benefit of removing all those links. You guys are so hung up on minute issues. I went to a lot of trouble to locate all those links. I don't understand your concerns at all. Please restore them again. Tell me why you want to remove them. The pages of AF artists and albums are woefully inadequate. I appreciate your adding the logo.

And still you refuse to sign your posts. I'm beginning to think that you are doing this deliberately.

I recognize that you went through a lot of effort in locating those links. But it was a great waste of your efforts, because every name on your list was already sourceable to the Reichle discography. But there's another issue, as well. It simply is not feasible to list every single artist who ever recorded for this company. In such cases, it is customary to include only those names that have been the subjects of their own articles. That's what the See-Also list does. In this regard, it's relevant to note that the See-Also list contains precisely the same number of blue-linked names as did your original list. Anderonia, if you believe that the red-linked artists such as Fernando Sirvent or Jo Basile or The Teenmates should have their own articles, feel free to write those articles. After you've done that, they will automatically appear on the See-Also list. Regarding the albums, I too was surprised at the small number of Audio Fidelity albums that have articles. But here, too, the solution is for you to write articles on more of their albums. NewYorkActuary (talk) 22:31, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Vmanti and nyactuary; what caused you to even pay attention to this article? I am done for now. You both worship petty details over substance. I don't feel like writing dozens of new articles. This was the ONE place on the web which unified known info about the compny. I don't know enough about the Teemates or Jo Basile to write about them. Likewise you two really don't know enough about A/F to write about it. Happily, I am busy with other things. Hope you are having fun erasing useful info on Wikipedia. I donated $$ in the past. You two have made me wonder whether I could get a refund. signed by anderonia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anderonia (talk • contribs) 05:22, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people.

Discussion - Round 2

User:Anderonia and User:Vmavanti Let's now discuss some of the material that does not directly address the company. I'm seeing two main items -- (1) the material that traces the early (pre-Audio Fidelity) history of stereo recording and (2) the personal details regarding Mr. Frey. I think both sets of material should be removed.

My quick reading of the article's history suggests that neither of you were the ones who added the history-of-stereo material, so perhaps there will be no controversy about removing it. I note that the lede paragraph already links to a well-written history via the blue-linked "stereophonic".

As for the personal details regarding Mr. Frey, these belong in an article on Mr. Frey himself, and not here. This will be all the more true when I start expanding the article to address the major changes and events that took place under the subsequent ownership of Gimbel and Pugliese. There will be no personal details given for either of these two subsequent owners.

Your thoughts and comments on these two proposals will be welcome.

On a different tack, this article would benefit from having a section listing any industry awards earned by the company or its products. I already checked the RIAA site and learned that Audio Fidelity never received a Gold Record award. But what about Grammy nominations? What about Billboard chart placements? Schifrin's bossa nova album charted on the Billboard jazz chart, but was this really the only Audio Fidelity album to do so? Any information along these lines would be helpful. NewYorkActuary (talk) 13:28, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

I noticed you changed the infobox. Other templates I prefer to have compressed. But not infoboxes. At least, infoboxes for record labels and musicians and those which are in a constant state of flux, possibly or likely to be changed. Obviously compressed, completed templates are hard to read while editing. That's okay in the case of citations because citations themselves are unlikely to be changed. They don't have to be read while in edit. I don't need to see the information in a citation template, so it doesn't need to be readable.

A vertical citation template in the middle of horizontal text is annoying while in edit. The infoboxes for musicians and record labels, on the other hand, are at the top, apart from the text, so it's not a problem. Having that information at the top while editing is helpful.

On a second matter: Discussing this entry doesn't interest me. There are people who have strong feelings here, and it's not worth it to me to spend time trying to reason people out of positions they haven't arrived at through reason. Some editors feel strongly about certain subjects and they don't like being challenged, esp. if those editors are older and set in their ways. I accept that. I'm no teenager myself. I'm not much interested in debate of any kind. This is all volunteer.

It's tough to talk to people who make drive-by, anonymous edits, who don't have accounts, and who give no reasons for their edits.

I would like to make one final point for anyone who might be editing entries about record labels or musicians or both. First, take a look at the documentation essay called What Wikipeda Is Not. Then take a look at some of these entries for record labels and musicians, with long, complete discographies, and which list matrix numbers, quality of vinyl, and likelihood records being found on ebay or pawn shops. These are matters for record collectors. Wikipedia is not a catalog for record collectors. It's an encyclopedia. For everyone. Not everyone wants to know about matrix numbers. Few people even know what they are. Collectors need to read books that were written for collectors, not Wikipedia. Wikipedia is helpful for discographies. Sometimes. But so is AllMusic. And Amazon. And the musician's web site. And the many web sites and books out there dedicated to record collecting.

ETA: Saying "round 2" makes it sound like a boxing match. If I wanted to box, I would've taken boxing lessons.
Vmavanti (talk) 16:36, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

User:Vmavanti Thanks for the response.

Regarding the info box, the benefit of the compact form is that it allows the article's first paragraph to be visible as soon as the edit window is opened. As this article gets expanded, so too will that first paragraph and there is a great advantage in not having to scroll down the edit window to find it. I expect this expansion to take no more than a month, after which I have no objection to you coming back to "verticalize" it again. I ask only that you leave it in compact form for this one month.

I'm sorry to hear that you've lost interest in working on this article. Although I'm willing to proceed on my own, I regret not having the benefit of teamwork. Nonetheless, please allow me to wish you "Happy Editing" in other articles. NewYorkActuary (talk) 19:16, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Vandalism by user Anderonia

A quick note to let people know a user known as Anderonia (red linked) deleted paragraphs of mine from this discusson today. They were restored, presumably by the admin., a short time after being deleted. All this is on record, of course.
–Vmavanti (talk) 20:08, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Anderonia is at again. A few reverts just minutes ago. One change he made is on the Talk page. Where I wrote I had no intention of or "of doing any harm", he changed to read "do" harm. Clever.
–Vmavanti (talk) 04:59, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive behaviour. It appears you are purposefully harassing another editor. Wikipedia aims to provide a safe environment for its collaborators, and harassing other users potentially compromises that safe environment. If you continue behaving like this, you may be blocked from editing.

What is a conflict of interest?

Although teachers tell us to write about what we know, and to write about what interests us, it's a mistake to write or edit entries on Wikipedia about which one has too much interest. It's a mistake to put personal matters anywhere on the internet. Writing about a subject for Wikipedia which is too close to one's heart is likely to create conflict because the writer cannot be impartial or disinterested. Strong feelings while writing will likely lead to strong feelings during editing by others, which is always a dicey process. Private property doesn't exist on Wikipedia. One person's work is another person's work. What one person cares about, another does not. The audience for Wikipedia is big. Writers and editors have to keep that in mind.
–Vmavanti (talk) 20:23, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Personal attack by Anderonia

anderonia says "vmanti" is a malicious eraser of valuable info. vmanti has no expertise in editing or the record business. signed anderonia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anderonia (talk • contribs) 04:57, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive behaviour. It appears you are purposefully harassing another editor. Wikipedia aims to provide a safe environment for its collaborators, and harassing other users potentially compromises that safe environment. If you continue behaving like this, you may be blocked from editing.

anderonia says: vmanti has feelings that are hurt, but vmanti removed 30!!!! links from the audio fidelity page for no reason. i felt that was something to complain about. vanti did not correct any info, just deleted. vmanti reported me to wikidaddy. wikipedia now sends me threatening emails and posts. jeez. what next???? i just don't have the time now to go thru the whole article all over again to meticulously re-add the MISSING info. but be clear: vmanti removed valuable info. that is why i am complaining. this article got a lot of readers when a film of louis armstrong in the recording session of "satchomo plays king oliver" surfaced fifty years later. wikipedia readers have the right to know everything about a/f in one place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.247.59.70 (talk) 15:01, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

User:Anderonia, you are being unduly harsh with Vmavanti. I too played a role in removing the unnecessary and inappropriate links. If you wish to have them restored, and if you have arguments that weren't given in our earlier discussion, please let us hear them now. For my part, I continued to be puzzled as to why you do not put your energies into writing an article on your father. You can also put some of your energy into writing an article on the Armstrong album you mentioned. Both would be welcome additions to the encyclopedia.

On a different note, did you really intend to reveal your IP address with your last edit? If not, you might want to send an e-mail to the address at the top of the page at WP:Oversight. The folks there have the ability to suppress the IP address from the page's history. NewYorkActuary (talk) 16:59, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Months ago I restored the page to its former state, and was thanked for it by NewYorkActuary who saw the page, the page as it existed before I edited anything. The deleted information was restored. So there's no need to complain about "30 deleted links". That information still exists. Anderonia perhaps doesn't know that deleted information on Wikipedia can be recovered and is not really gone. So I don't know what the problem is. What exactly does he/she want? As a favor to anderonia, I have not touched the Audio Fidelity page ever since he/she complained about it. So now what's the problem? To sum up: anderonia's posts are wrong, insulting, and pointless.
Vmavanti (talk) 01:48, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Anderonia says: I fail to understand how VMANTI and NYACTUARY are the bosses of Wikipedia. And what they says goes. What makes either of you justified in removing content? This page was edited over 100 times before you guys started erasing things. I did not mind, and I welcomed the additions. Both of you just want it YOUR WAY, I do not feel I am harassing you. In fact, the opposite is true. I fail to see why you are at all interested in this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anderonia (talk • contribs) 02:53, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

You continue to harass me and bully me and complain, without engaging in any reasonable, adult conversation. You can't even get my username correct. Have you read ANY of the Wikipedia documentation? Are you aware that Wikipedia has rules? Are you aware that the article is not "yours"? If you want an explanation, aside from what I have already given, which you refused to read or accept, then why don't you read the documentation? You have addressed almost none of the points that have been suggested by us already. What's the problem?
–Vmavanti (talk) 05:03, 7 November 2016 (UTC)