Talk:Gaida

Merger discussion
Should this one be merged to BAGPIPE? if not, Should there be an explanation for the difference? --afa86 (talk) 14:58, 10 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree with either
 * 1. Merger with Bagpipe; there seems no reason to list the instrument under any particular non-English name (gaida, bock, cimpoi, etc.) when a generic term for the instrument already exists in English and there is already much overlap; or
 * 2. The article should be limited/specialized to some kind of special Balkan instrument known as a gajde, gaida, etc. (e.g., Albania, Bulgaria, Macedonia, Serbia, Turkey) instead of including everything from Iran (ney-andan) to the UK (bagpipe), and from Finland (säkkipilli) to Egypt (zukra), and the intro should clearly state what differentiates it (e.g., "Unlike other bagpipes, the gaida is ..."). Doremo (talk) 05:06, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think that the gaida topic should be merged with the topic of bagpipes. Its sufficient enough to be referenced. The gaida is a bagpipe. Its playing style, history, construction, and cultural significance are all different than the Scottish/Irish bagpipes familiar to the West. It is referenced as an instrument throughout the Middle East and Eastern Europe as these share a common history and cultural root. russbach (talk) 11:36, 29 December 2011 (UTC)


 * This isn't just a matter of SE European bagpipes vs. Irish, this is a matter of whether we need to re-explain the entire concept of "bagpipe" when we already have the article bagpipe, which happens to cover everything from Portugal to India. I've done some chopping on the article to remove major redundancies; there's no need to re-explain how a pipe bag works, since it's basically the same for every bagpipe. The article "ukulele" doesn't need to explain how string vibration produces notes, since the article string instrument nicely sums up the basic concepts.


 * I think my edits have removed the "merge" issue. My question now would be whether the article should remain as one article covering everything that happens to be called gajda and shares certain similarities of construction (single chanter and single drone), or whether it should be subdivided. The article is a bit confusing still with the "in Macedonia they do X, and in Albania Y", and the foreign-language terms for the various parts are often a total mystery as to what language they represent. I think it's much better now, but still has no footnotes despite the number of claimed references. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:21, 19 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Would anyone else support making this page a disambiguation page, and splitting this article up into the different forms of "gaida"? Not that it has to be for every individual nation-state or individual spelling, but if the A and B gaidas are basically the same instrument in two countries they can share an article, but if the Y gaida has a very different chanter/bore/drone/reed setup and different playing tradition, it can have its own article gaida (X) or whatnot. Would that seem a reasonable way to address this issue? I just feel in the current version we're conflating Balkan-area bagpipes in general largely around the name. The article does not include Balkan pipes not called gaida (like the Istarski mih), so it seems to be lumping instruments on homonym vice structural/traditional similarities. Anyone else support divvying this article up, much like kaba gaida already is? MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:11, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
 * On the off chance any of you are still active, please see Talk:Bagpipes. @Afa86 @Doremo @MatthewVanitas @Russbach Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 09:05, 5 August 2022 (UTC)