Talk:Mueller Tower

Keyboard v. electronic
User:Doncram: We need to fix that paragraph based on: Thanks.Zigzig20s (talk) 00:42, 27 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Hey i hope you don't mind my resurrecting your comment which was stated then deleted. But about this topic, the article now states "The music was initially played on a keyboard, but it was later replaced by tape recordings", with the above source given.  It is sourced, but I don't quite believe it;  I imagine the other source is accurate that that the system was set up from the getgo, to accomodate a keyboard if someone wanted to use it, and to have the recordings otherwise.  Both are all electronic.  I don't think Mueller would have expected, or funded, a keyboardist to be available 24 hours a day, either.  So I would prefer not to accept the implication that it was set up (stupidly?) to have a keyboard player, which obviously had to be replaced by something more sustainable.  I think it was okay for Mary Kay Roth to embroider it a little bit, just to make a nice and readable article;  she was not trying to provide an academic encyclopedic treatment.  But again, the current wording is sourced.  And the alternative wording is sourced too.  So you can choose what you believe is best for the article; either is fine by me. cheers, --Doncram (talk) 01:15, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
 * As late as 1985, Alice Corkill, an educational psychology major, played the keyboard before football matches. But there was also the option of using tapes. Perhaps she would know. You could e-mail her and ask. But her e-mails would not be an RS, would they?Zigzig20s (talk) 01:25, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I think we should keep it. Maybe there was only a keyboard in 1949. It is what Harper, the university's electrician, seemed to be suggesting.Zigzig20s (talk) 01:28, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay. I wasn't thinking about it having been completed in 1949, when technology that I certainly take for granted now might not have been available. --Doncram (talk) 04:37, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
 * But it would be fine to contact the person you suggest (i am not about to, though) and find out the facts. And then the article should be edited to avoid, at least, any false statements.  The person might be able to provide citable sources.  And the person could probably be cited as a source herself... we are explicitly allowed to cite an expert on a topic, though with guideline like applies for all primary sources (what I remember use with care, use is okay for noncontroversial facts but a primary source is probably not good enough for controversial assertions, probably don't use if there is disagreement among Wikipedia editors about the validity of the info). I do assume she is an expert on the facts she would be expected to cover.  wp:EXPERT and wp:PRIMARYSOURCES probably apply. --Doncram (talk) 04:46, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I only cite what others have already published in newspapers, journals or books. I won't e-mail her either.Zigzig20s (talk) 22:33, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Red link
User:Cwmhiraeth: Any idea why the DYK nomination has a red link above? Is there a way to fix this please?Zigzig20s (talk) 22:27, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I have no idea. The nomination appears in the normal way on the nomination page and seems perfectly satisfactory to me. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:04, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Actually, the red link goes to "Mueller Tower" whereas the nomination is at "Barr Terrace, Mueller Tower". I have improved the credits in the nomination but I think the red link is immaterial. In any event, don't try changing the template name, because that mucks things up. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:18, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you.Zigzig20s (talk) 12:29, 29 May 2019 (UTC)