Talk:Nambassa

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Waikino[edit]

Loved the Waikino concert.. very much in fact..moza 13:57, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

more work on this article[edit]

This article needs much more work to clarify the actual difference between Nambassa the community trust and Nambassa the music festivals. The music festival in 1979 will always overshadow the rest of Nambassa history, but it is important to demonstrate that it grew from a n alternative cultural groups desire to share their passion and knowledge of a better way of life for the people on mother earth. There is a lot more information coming from the trust that is authourised for use here, including images.moza 01:01, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And why did it end? LamontCranston 02:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the meantime......[edit]

The article also needs to be generally improved. Fullish bio details about some of the people mentioned, like Jim Cairns, is not required. The article is not about them, and it llinks to their own entry anyway. The info about Chief Oren Lyons and Eva Rickard should be used to create articles about them. Section headers followed by blank space looks awful. The headers can always be reinserted if/when relevant text is created for those sections. Etc. I am putting a "inuse" tag on the article and will do a preliminary cleanup. Moriori 22:31, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good points[edit]

When one makes an assertion towards the content of a particular submission this must be considerd as a matter of opinion and not a green light for censorship?. While I tend to agree with whats been shared here one must take into consideration that this Nambassa entry is far from conclusion and still needs a considerable amount of work to which the detail will be included over the coming months. Perhaps the user Moriori would like to start a link on Eva Rickard and Oren Lyons? (Mombas 23:50, 6 May 2006 (UTC)).[reply]

Your last comment indicates you might support those who dump text here and then expect someone else to clean up. You linked to Eva Rickard, you write her article, (and whoever added the Orens info might like to create an article about him too). Seems to me they both deserve their own bios, but the Nambassa article is definitely not the place for bios. Regarding your first sentence, making any article basically readable, encyclopedic and devoid of irrelevant and POV info is not influenced by opinion or censorship, but by the generally agreed convention on Wikipedia that articles should be, um, basically readable, encyclopedic and devoid of irrelevant and POV info. In the future, if you come across an article with a {{inuse}} tag on it, do not remove it. That could be considered disruption of Wikipedia, and you could be blocked from editing for a period. Hope this helps. Moriori 01:07, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Moriori..a nice piece of editing. And you are quite right of course- Wikipedia is not the appropriate format for detailed submissions on opinions, this from Nambassas perspective is probably best reserved for their website. On the question of dumping, your assumptions are completely irrelevant to the context to which this invitation concerning Rickard and Lyons were made, and so again I invite you to reconsider my suggestion? While I have only been a contributer to this wiki community for a handfull of days my, I get the distinct feeling that initiators of articles are as integral to this message board, as editors. cheers :-) (Mombas 02:06, 7 May 2006 (UTC)).[reply]
Newcomers to Wikipedia who initiate articles are indeed as integral to Wiki as editors. That's why seasoned editors go out of their way to welcome them. But they are also expected to make an effort regarding Wiki style, basic English usage and spelling. Regarding your suggestion, allow me to iterate - YOU linked Eva Rickard to a nonexistent article, YOU create the article. Moriori 02:31, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine by me. (Mombas 02:35, 7 May 2006 (UTC)).[reply]

Thanks for the checks and balances, its good that someone can expend the energy and time assiting us here. As the original creator I am happy to work on those linked articles as well, and create them if needed. I simply require the time period to allow a group of editors to interact positively, I dont think its fair to insist that all articles are built off line, I believe the metamorphosis of an article is allowable and quite an interesting part of any article. There are many examples of dumping and many stubs in NZ articles, but a genuine attempt to create a really important historic article could be met with support and generosity, and theenegative part of critical energy applied to those other articles that have been sitting for long periods without attention. If you look at the history of this article you will see its very active indeed. I currently have the images just arrived in my mailbox with authority for placing on wiki. This is the first time in nearly 30 years such images have been released in this way. You all must agree that the audience count for all the events and media is significant, in global terms, and that this article is worthy of lots of collaboration by lots of people. I believe that this article will bring much more referential material to light, and in turn be the best reference source for references to Nambassa community, and their activities and events. The most interesting aspect of this, to me, is for it to re-appear at this time, when the global society NEEDS such messages in order for planet earth to survive. Many of us just KNEW that, at the time, some 30 years ago, and have been distracted somewhat, and now the harsh reality is in our face, we are doing something about it. I dont think that we have time or energy to debate syntax, just get on and fix it as we can. That said, I do appreciate all and every comment, and all attempts at improvement, I do trust the intent, I have been here long enough to experience the whole range of stimulus<>response cycles, and I see that most are genuinely committed to the best, its just a bit hard sometimes to see that, as we all have disparate thinking and communication styles. moza 05:37, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You say you "dont think its fair to insist that all articles are built off line". Neither do I, and I haven't said so. However, the way this particular article was left with several headings but no accompanying text could easily have been avoided. It is true that we all have disparate thinking and communication styles, but it is Wikipedia's encyclopedic style that we have to employ, not our own preferences. Moriori 08:33, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your editing skills, good punctuation and grammer, are most welcome, and we trust you will continue to show interest. I freely admit that in this area I need all the help that I can possibly get. Your eagerness to contribute should not however, encroach upon the content of historic fact which this article is attempting to reflect. It is my view that you need to show some restraint in terms of the negativity and lack of empathy you appear to be demonstrating towards this submission, and towards those who have voluntererd their time to make it happen. Give this submission a chance to evolve itself into an informative Wiki inclusion, which it has the potential to become. Loosen up a little mate, Rome wasn't built in a day. (Mombas 11:34, 7 May 2006 (UTC)).[reply]

Hey, I have no negativity or empathy towards this subject, otherwise I would never have spent time knocking it into shape. Believe me. I thought I had made it pretty clear by now that it is sloppy editing/cruft that exercises me. Incidentally, this article belongs to Wikipedia, not exclusively to the people included in your "we". Moriori 20:51, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No it doesn't. Wikipedia doesn't own any articles. They're owned by the copyright holders. They're in theory "managed" by Wikipedia but in practice a small group of editors or a WikiProject manage each article. That's all fine, as long as no "ownership" of the "you can't edit this article it's mine!" type comes into play (WP:OWN). --kingboyk 13:35, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, but I didn't mention anything about "you can't edit this article it's mine!". I'm talking "ownership" of article content. Wiki articles are open content so they are not "owned" by the people who created them (which would mean no-one could reproduce Wiki articles without permission of the creators). Moriori 00:51, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nambassa Photography[edit]

Photos on Nambassa-Wikipedia have been shot by official Nambassa Trust photographers and have been made available by the Nambassa Trust and Peter Terry (Trustee). They are made up of the private collection of Peter Terry as well as from comissioned Nambassa photographers.

Which is great, but I'm getting a bit sick of seeing the festival linked to from every page on alternative culture (even world peace). It wasn't Woodstock. More to the point, when a photo is used in an unrelated article it should be directly relevant to the article and the caption should be concise and targetted at the subject matter. In cases such as a shot of an artist on stage, a reader of the article on that artist doesn't need to be told which event it was just the year. Whilst no doubt you're proud of your involvement with the festival, you shouldn't be using the photos as a way of promoting that event's article; the number of incoming links from not-really-relevant articles (and in some cases from low quality photos) gives off the smell of spam, even if it wasn't intended. I'm working through the incoming links now, making captions more concise and in a few cases removing photos/links. --kingboyk 13:40, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations --kingboyk on a great job in trashing the Nambassa photo links on Wikipedia. I trust that you have no problems whatsoever in other editors visiting articles that you have worked on and applying your very same POV theories on what you consider constitutes a correct photo caption. Facts are, photos captions should contain the basic information where possible: who, where and when. While I can understand the basis behind such belligerent motives and why you would consider Nambassa a spam effort, (your words not mine), I intend to revert some of the bad edits made by you in recent days. Wikipedia is about sharing factual information and as I peruse thousands of photos in hundreds of articles I find the precedent clearly confirms my position. Mombas 11:08, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On the question of your roar for citation in the Split Enz article, it’s abundantly clear that you didn’t bother reading the whole article and links, and know pretty much nothing about the history of Split Enz. Mombas 11:07, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clean-up[edit]

The article needs a lot of editing but the first para under "Arts, self-sufficiency and healing arts workshops" with its anti-Catholic point-of-view is perhaps the most pressing caase. Nurg 10:33, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As well, something needs to be done about those images. Wikipedia:Image use policy clearly states, under Rules of Thumb, " Don't put credits in images themselves." Seems that either the images with "nambassa.com" need to be removed or have the credit removed from them. Moriori 20:36, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. There's a lot of opinion masquerating as fact here. Do we really need the section about housetruckers at all? And a lot of this seems to be promotional blurb written by the organsiers. There's a distinct lack of information about Nambassa's later financial problems. --Hugh7 (talk) 02:09, 17 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]

It's a month now......[edit]

.......since I mentioned "Wikipedia:Image use policy clearly states, under Rules of Thumb, " Don't put credits in images themselves." OK, as no-one has bothered to reply, I will set to tomorrow to remove all images in this article which have the "nambassa.com" credit removed on them. Moriori 08:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer: [[1]] Mombas 11:12, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About the "Trivia"[edit]

It's more of a question since I don't want to remove something from the article, I might be wrong here. The first thing under "Trivia" mentions that the Nambassa festival was over ten times bigger than Woodstock, on the basis of numbers. The last point under "Trivia" states that the official count was 75 000, and estimating "as high as 150 000 people". However, at Woodstock 1969, on the wikipedia page it is stated : Although the show had been planned for a maximum of 200,000 attendees, over 500 000 eventually attended...

This is why I was wondering if the first point under Trivia in the Nambassa music festival page should be removed or, for example, if there should be another explanation on this fact. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by LeRooster (talk • contribs) 06:35, 7 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

You are quite right of course. Please note the correction.Mombas 07:25, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The dividing up of Nambassa[edit]

Images of Nambassa

I have added an Images of Nambassa photo gallery as a separate entry because the weight of the original article exceeding the 1.2mb guideline and weighed in at 1.3mb due to the number of photos it contained. This resulted from an editor raising the prospects of a slow download due to the body of weight of the photos in the original article. Indeed it's only a question of time when everyone will deservedly have fast internet or broadband. Cheers.. Mombas 06:22, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

cheers Mombas i havent looked yet but as I have had quite a lot of image placements trashed over the years I resorted to posting them all to a holding gallery page as I uploaded them to wikipedia and then I always had a reference to go back to. There is an small element in the realm of editors that seems to be opposed to any pics at all, or at least only a few at the bottom, where my view is that a pic is a 1000 words, and small thumbs are not an actual problem, but are certainly subject to the view that they are. When I study the histories of editors that have trashed my articles and image layouts i see that they spend most of their time here as subtractive 'mr fix-its' surgically removing anything that they feel is superfluous or can be rationalised as deserving of the knife according to any of the zillions of rules that can be found and quoted. I iaccept that they believe that they are acting correctly and appropriately, although most in my experience dont bother to discuss it on the talk page first. I am happy to see that some kiwis are talking first. One of my strategies is to simply go away for a while and when I come back those edit conflicts are often gone. Many users that cut my work have dissolved away. Isnt that a bit quirky. I'm quite interested in how people behave, and the mental sets and settings that conspire to evoke different behaviour, not in any pro or technical way, just a tourist of human nature... So anyway I have created a few websites outside of wikipedia that are insulated from the behaviour, to continue my passion for sharing images. The latest today is about 180 pics from a block party yesterday, where I ran my inaugural 'Dark Sky' campaign stand, and told everyone about the need to protect the dark sky from light pollution and at the same time got to here lots of friends play awesome music. I cant share the music but I can share the pics!! I also spent Easter at Inangahua (Phat Moon) and posted zillions of pics from that festival, and a whole gallery of exquisitely beautiful countryside fromt he trip around Te Wai Pounamu. I got some very cool shots of our native robin, toutouwai australis, and I intend to print frame and sell those. so have a squiz at my new galleries, 15 and 16 at aka Rakiura Music. i'll see you soon no doubt. We should buiols a myspace for Nambassa. Ive joined an email list of audio artists in enzed, and there are many passsionate people out there that love this stuff, and have participated over the years..moza 10:13, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Start on tidying references[edit]

I've made a start on tidying up the references section. I moved it to the end and changed it to a two-column format. This resulted in some overflow issues due to the long length of some of the URLs, so I fixed the worst offenders up by mostly just adding link titles. One I changed to a cite. Hope this helps a little - interesting article. BigBadaboom0 17:11, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair warning[edit]

Hello. I'm here to give fair warning. In about 7 days, it is possible that nearly every image on this article will be deleted. A number of the images are marked with {{Di-no permission}}. You can read that template for more information if you'd like. For the record, I won't be doing any actual deletions myself as I am not an admin. If you have any questions, ask.--Rockfang (talk) 02:39, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This issue is presently before Wikipedia administrators.Mombas (talk) 22:51, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The permission for use of this work has been verified and archived in the Wikimedia OTRS system.

It is available as ticket #2010022210013771 for users with an OTRS account. To confirm the permission, please contact someone with an OTRS account or leave a note at the OTRS noticeboard. Mombas (talk) 22:28, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nambassa Website up soon[edit]

Apologies for reconstruction — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.226.129.180 (talk) 10:16, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All done

Arts, self-sufficiency and healing arts workshops[edit]

Am I the only one to find the list in the section rather long? It could be vandalism...219.79.74.162 (talk) 03:41, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Nambassa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:15, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nambassa&oldid=1203873458"