User talk:CvyvvZkmSUDowVf/delete

Dear Timnu22: Re Hymns and Tunes - Marriages and deletion:

This effort (and it has been a great effort!) started because of the "hymn" article, which was confused and unclear. I added a definition which helped clarify the difference between "hymn" and "hymn tune." The "hymn tune" article was the result, posted by someone else. That article is evidently allowed to stand. But the crucial factor of WHO puts the texts to which tune remained ambiguous. Kind of like gravity magically put the "right" tune with the text.... This ignores to what really happens.

A second impelling was the Charles Wesley article. I didn't read the whole thing; I got to the list of first lines of his hymns, each of which has "(lyrics)" after the first line. I'm sorry, but that made me laugh... in a pained way. And although it shows the article's writer is clarifying exactly what the article is aimed at, it also shows that most people just do not know that a hymn is a poem, not a melody.... The hymn is supposed to be sung, but the melody is not identified, and the author of the poem generally does not define the melody to use (and I suspectthat author was not involved or interested in doing so). Maybe as Charles wrote those thousands of hymns he had some tunes in mind.... Can anyone be sure? I've written some, and when based on a psalm, even choosing meters that fit a particular psalm, but giving zero thought to a tune for the hymn (knowing tunes can be written to fill the need)....

There is a complaint that my writing style is like an essay. Yes, I'm sure it is. So far my dabbling in Wikipedia convinces me that I would not elect to use the style I've encountered. But as articles are subject to editing by all....

All that said, I think I shall check through my sources as to how widespread is the use of the "marriages" parallel. The term is apt and the use one I've understood for a very long time. If its use is widespread in the companion and other volumes, interested researchers should be familiar with the term. If its use is not widespread, one could use some other "Wiki-friendly" description....  Nowadays the redundancy, "hymn text", is being used for clarity, and it prallels "hymn tune" which is correct and use is widespread.

My familiarity with Wikipedia terminology, etc. is minimal. I can see that expertise is needed, and I don't have that expertise. My thought with this article was to introduce the third factor behind what is on a hymnal page, in an article which presented, in a friendly style of prose, insights which ordinary people don't think about, of "every week" inspirations they may care about very deeply.Hymnlover (talk) 13:51, 17 May 2010 (UTC)hymnlover 5-17-10