Wikipedia article about Yanni, that keyboardist/composer that so many people (Dopers included) love to hate.
I wrote most of the above-referenced article (from the words “Although many fans and critics…” through the sentence that ends with “…biggest commercial success to date.”
I had written another sentence, but it has been deleted by a later editor. The sentence read:
I’m wondering why this sentence has been deleted. Does it, in some way, violate the principals of Wikipedia? It’s absolutely true, and does not (IMHO) constitute any kind of value judgment for or against Yanni’s music.
I want to put it back in. Is this a bad idea?
Isn’t that sort of a ‘goes without saying’ comment? Example:
The sentence still works, right? A critic is somebody who dislikes something. It goes without saying that if a person, group or president has critics, those critics are going to speak out with fervent dislike, as you put it.
Why not just put “Yanni continues to record and tour, selling out arenas” and leave out the fervent dislike comment. It seems like a needless jab.
No, a critic is someone whose job is to critique artists. They don’t have to dislike the artist and should actually strive to be neutral going in. Many artists receive praise from critics. Yanni usually doesn’t but still has a strong popular following.
Maybe because many if not most music genres musician types are going to have a group of people who fervently dislike their music, so it’s sort of like saying “rap music continues to enjoy immense popularity, even though many people would rather hear trash can lids being banged together.” If you cited a more specific criticism it might be more acceptable, like “Led Zeppelin has been occassionally criticized for what some see as repackaging at best, and outright theft at worst, of the songs of traditional blues artists, but nevertheless they remain one of the influential rock bands of the seventies and perhaps the twentieth century.” Maybe not, though.
Well he was using “critics” in the pejorative sense. I could say “The president’s critics lambasted him over his faith-based tax initiatives” and it’s pretty clear I’m talking about a group of people who have nothing but dislike for the president.
If, on the other foot, I say “critics applauded the president’s bipartisan efforts”, it sounds a bit odd.
I read “critics” as the opposite of fans in the OP.
Click the History tab of the Yanni article. Note the entry by Silsor for 04:52, 25 Mar 2005, (currently the entry at the top of the page):
Silsor apparently found that line redundant.
Your can click on the “(last)” hyperlink on that entry to see the exact changes that Silsor made. (S/He also cleaned up some coding.)
You’d probably get a more direct response on this issue at Wikipedia itself. At the top of the article you’ll see a tab marked “discussion” which links to a page for discussing issues like this on specific articles.
Wiki administrator checking in, though I don’t really have anything to say that hasn’t already been mentioned. That sentence might be a good way to end a breezy magazine article about Yanni but it’s not really appropriate for an encyclopedia article. It doesn’t tell us anything that isn’t true for any other artist; the only info in the sentence is 1) people hate him and 2) he tours. If it’s worth mentioning then it should be discussed in substantial detail (i.e., which people hate him and why, what’s special about his tours) instead of being tossed off at the end.
Whatever you do, don’t let this experience discourage you from contributing.