Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/Etherea

Etherea
This is a high-quality example of new age/contemporary instrumental music by a professional musician, featuring many of the characteristics noted in the article (ambient sounds of birds and percussion; traditional instrumentation combined with modern audio effects; a generally relaxing composition that demonstrates world music influences). I've added it to New Age music and recorder.


 * Nominate and support. - ragesoss (talk) 05:08, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * oppose. This recording is by a performer/composer who does not appear to be notable enough to have an article in Wikipedia.  As such, its inclusion in New Age music and recorder do not relate to any discussion in the articles and makes this nomination look like a bit of self-promotion by the artist.  I would consider changing my opinion to "support" with some notable third party citations that back the claims that this particular composition/recording is illustrative of the characteristics noted in the articles, and well cited text put the recording into a larger context in the articles. --&#x2611; Sam uelWantman 07:27, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The performer is not notable (well, it actually might be possible to scrape together enough sources to avoid deletion, but it'd be tough). However, it's not likely that a better free example of new age music will be available from a notable musician.  I just included it in recorder because there were no sounds in that article, but I think it's relevance to new age music is self-evident.  There won't be any sources explicitly stating how it exemplifies typical characteristics of new age, since as far as I know there is nothing published about this song.--ragesoss (talk) 12:04, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The problem is that if nothing can be said about it that can be backed up with citations, its relevance to the topic is not self-evident. The inclusion of the sample implies that it is a good example of New Age music.  Since that assertion cannot be backed up with citations, it is original research to make the claim or the implication of the claim.  I believe this recording should just continue to be available in commons but be removed from the two articles where it now resides.   I'm willing to hear other opinions about this first. -- &#x2611; Sam uelWantman 19:43, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think a piece of original music present as an example of a certain genre is any more original research than a photograph of a flower or insect used as an example of a taxon is original research. We don't demand citations explicitly identifying the subject of a photograph as the claimed species, but instead rely on user knowledge and matching the image to distinguishing characteristics of what it is claimed to depict.  The same, it seems to me, should apply to sounds.  But I'm interested to hear what others have to say as well.  (Obviously the new age music article itself could use more citations, but the basic descriptions pass the smell test.)  --ragesoss (talk) 22:08, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Support—The composition, performance and recording all have merit. I don't see a problem with respect to OR. TONY   (talk)  09:32, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Sure. Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday (talk) 19:03, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Support I don't know much about featured sounds, but I don't see why this should not be a featured sound.--Filll (talk | wpc ) 22:59, 11 July 2008 (UTC)



--Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday (talk) 12:22, 12 July 2008 (UTC)