Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Musical Interpretation

Spotted this on cleanup and don't think it's salvageable. It reads like an essay or a magazine article; I think it'd be better to delete and start from scratch than to shoehorn it into something encyclopedic. Mindspillage 14:47, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: Original research. The topic is worthy, but anyone writing on the subject would be dissuaded from it by seeing this article, rather than encouraged.  Further, "musical interpretation" is a term not for "how to understand music," but "how to musically interpret a composer."  I.e. Elvis Costello has become a "musical interpreter" since he began crooning Burt Bacharach songs.  Liza Minelli is an interpreter.  On the other hand, music criticism is usually called musical criticism or "musical appreciation."  Geogre 16:49, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep: However the written matter is very much from a personal view point, but there are few decent ideas. The article in its current personal narrative form is not worthy for an encyclopaedia even by any liberal standards. It has to be thoroughly rewritten. The subject could be discussed in a more rigorous and objective manner. Like say the aesthetic interpretation of music (orchestral) or the appeal of instrumental music or the like. However just as George said it should not be confused with the technical interpretation of written music, and may be one could also write another article dealing exclusively with the rigours and techniques of the interpretation of a complex orchestral score. Water Fish 19:16, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep, or move this to a /temp page and replace with a stub and pointer to the temp page. There is, in fact, valuable information in the essay that may be of help to someone who wishes to write a proper article.  The text also becomes somewhat less autobiographical towards the end.  Smerdis of Tlön 19:31, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Delete. Definitely an essay, and written from the first person and, as such, that implies heavily that it's original research. An article on this subject IS desired, but not the existing one. I don't think this much original research can be easily cleaned up. Sorry, whoever wrote it. Hope it got a good grade. --Golbez 21:24, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Personal essay that's had almost two years to be fixed up. Delete. -- Cyrius|&#9998; 01:50, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Personal essay.  Postdlf 03:18, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fire Star 20:56, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep stubbed to basic defintion, will expand when I get the chance, it is an important topic, which is probably why it survived this long Stirling Newberry 01:58, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep now that Stirling has stubbed it. An extremely important topic for an article, and it has potential to be a very fine one; the original essay obviously did not belong, but now it's toast.  Antandrus 01:38, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is a Wikipedia, it is possible to start from scratch without listing things on vfd and deleting them first.--Dittaeva 11:46, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Delete. Much of this is no more than the sum of the terms ("music" and "interpretation"). Else, should be merged into music. - Centrx 23:19, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)