Audio Recording Wiki

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hello All,

I just wanted to drop a message in this group to let you all know about
the recently-started Audio Recording Wiki at
http://audiorecording.wikicities.com

For those of you who don't know, a Wiki site is a site that is editable
by anyone. Those who wish are free to write or edit articles. The idea
is to build a big enough community so that there will be a sort of
peer-review process. I requested the Audio Recording wiki from Wiki
Cities so that some day it would be a resource for those wishing to
research gear, studios, engineers and recording techniques. The wiki
needs a lot of help right now. I invite all of you to check it out and
help write more articles. I've seeded a few, and I intend to do more.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <275ag1l13q8kt8i2upuhu40tg8u9lts1h2@4ax.com> priest@gunga.din writes:

> Thanks for the info. If everyone ptches in, it could be a very
> valuable resource.

Or one that's largely incorrect or based on personal opinions of a
fairly narrow scope. (Q: "What's the best microphone?" A: "I have a
Bleeptone LDC that cost only $39.99 on eBay that's excellent for my
vocals." )



--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Well, that's exactly why I'm trying to solicit professionals (thus the
post to rec.audio.pro). The wiki model shows a history of changes. So
if you came across an article that was inaccurate, you could either
reinstate the article to its previous incarnation or edit it yourself.
It's also why I need the help of professionals and experts. Wikipedia,
for example, has 391,782 users worldwide.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Statistics

While you can't cite Wikipedia in a paper, it's a reasonably accurate,
easily searchable repository of knowledge.

If you're worried about accuracy, I encourage you to participate. We'll
probably never hit six digits with the number of users like Wikipedia,
but the more people we have contributing and editing, the better.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 19 Aug 2005 21:03:44 -0700, litkantilpis@yahoo.com wrote:

>> Or one that's largely incorrect or based on personal opinions of a
>> fairly narrow scope. (Q: "What's the best microphone?" A: "I have a
>> Bleeptone LDC that cost only $39.99 on eBay that's excellent for my
>> vocals." )
>
>You mean like rec.audio.pro?

If it allows Googoo children access, it will live or die on its
ability to attract a moderating group of tolerant and generous
core of folks like the gang at r.a.p.

Building such a core group today might prove difficult, and
conversely, a group of *all* Googoo children is deadly.

All politics is local, etc. (All honest politics is retail,
as i put it).

Good fortune,

Chris Hornbeck

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

A wiki can work well, *IF* it's got some dedicated editors who are
willing to read everything, flag questionable items for additional
discussion, remove items which are wrong or redundant, etc. Or if
editing access is limited to folks who are basically trustworth and
willing to work together.

An unmoderated wiki can be an exercise in GIGO.