Talk:Kingdom song

message: Some of this article's content is duplicated at the article section Jehovah's Witnesses publications for adherents#Sing Praises to Jehovah. From THAT article, I propose to remove many of the music details which are already discussed HERE, thus leaving that other article section to discuss the publication as it relates to JW adherents, rather than musicologists. If you wish to comment, please do so at that article's TALK page. Thanks. --AuthorityTam (talk) 21:44, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Provide notable sources, otherwise, delete and redirect to Jehovah's Witnesses publications for adherents#Sing Praises to Jehovah.--Jeffro77 (talk) 10:25, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed the duplicated material from Jehovah's Witnesses publications for adherents#Sing Praises to Jehovah (see diff).Apparently, JWs will have a new "current" songbook beginning in 2010, so that new songbook will likely replace most of what it currently says at the article Jehovah's Witnesses publications for adherents. Sing Praises to Jehovah will then be relegated solely to this article, I'd guess.This article would benefit from attention, but it serves to gather information about all the songs (and songbooks) of Jehovah's Witnesses over the decades. --AuthorityTam (talk) 16:38, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sing Praises to Jehovah 

message: The intro is accurately describes "Kingdom songs" as 'hymns sung at meetings', and it is correct for 'meetings' here to link to the practices article which discusses ALL the JWs' meetings. However, later in this article here, the statement is made that 'a meeting has three songs', which is really only true for meetings at Kingdom Halls; it is NOT true for meetings for service held at homes, it is NOT true for Memorial commemorations, it is NOT true for assemblies, it is NOT true for conventions. Thus, insistently removing the link (here and here) to Kingdom Hall meetings seems to insist on removing information about the ACTUAL circumstances surrounding the type of meeting with three songs. By contrast, there seems no pressing NEED to remove the link. --AuthorityTam (talk) 21:06, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Readers should not need a secret decoder ring to work out that the second link goes to Kingdom Hall because it is for meetings for worship only at the hall. If songs are only sung at the Kingdom Hall (which is not completely true), then the article should say so, not give an easter egg to make readers guess. The purpose of links to other articles is not to provide "information about the ACTUAL circumstances surrounding the type" of something - that is the purpose of the actual article text. Additionally, it is not especially notable that they don't sing songs at meetings for field service and other minutia (JWs sing two songs at the Memorial; they sing three songs per session at conventions and assemblies). It is an ambiguous and unnecessary link.--Jeffro77 (talk) 22:02, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The matter has been rephrased to remove that which had previously confused the editor.--AuthorityTam (talk) 21:39, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no confusion. You're being pedantic, and you're simply insisting because there was resistance to your edit. There is simply no need to link to a minor section (which itself links back to the main section) when the main section about JW meetings is already linked.--Jeffro77 (talk) 22:03, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

text: The distinction you're claiming to make about meetings at Kingdom Halls compared to other meetings is not notable. Conventions are already mentioned separately in the article, and the sentence says what is 'typical'. Adapting the sentence for special focus on Kingdom Halls is not relevant in the scope of the article and reads poorly.--Jeffro77 (talk) 22:07, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No, JWs do not have three songs at all their meetings (most of which are "typical"). The sentence in question should Wikilink to the type of meetings, and it could also be somewhat more specific. Rather than repeatedly removing links to Kingdom Hall#Meetings for worship (see here and here) and here), I've added the detail and linked more specifically. The previous unlinked sentence has been edited thusly:* "Typically, Jehovah's Witnesses sing three songs at their formal meetings for worship." has been edited to:* "Typically, Jehovah's Witnesses sing three songs at their midweek- and weekend meetings for worship."--AuthorityTam (talk) 22:33, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The article already links to the 'meetings' section in the opening sentence, from which point the single paragraph about each of the meetings is readily visible. The additional links to the single-paragraph subsections are therefore superfluous.--Jeffro77 (talk) 00:10, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the lede's link is to the "Worship" section of another article. I have reinstated the links to the sections discussing the particular meetings.--AuthorityTam (talk) 02:11, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The link in the lead is sufficient coverage for linking to the 'discussion' (collectively comprising four sentences) about the meetings in question. Also, your links are to subsections of the already linked Worship section of the same target article.--Jeffro77 (talk) 02:31, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

text: Also, within the scope of this article and with respect to general notability, the specific meetings held by JWs are not especially notable. Additionally, the usage of their songs as originally stated is "typical" of their usage.--Jeffro77 (talk) 02:39, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The guideline at WP:LINK never mentions "notable" or "notability". I have reinstated the links to midweek- and weekend meetings for worship. Are these terms JW-specific (that is, "jargon")? At WP:UNDERLINK it explicitly states, "In general, links should be created to...articles explaining technical terms, jargon or slang expressions" [emphasis added].And, again, these links do not duplicate any other link in the article.--AuthorityTam (talk) 20:34, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Jehovah's Witnesses practices#Midweek meeting and Jehovah's Witnesses practices#Weekend meeting (each of which comprise two sentences) are both subsections of Jehovah's Witnesses practices#Worship, which is already linked. Your earlier claim that "the lede's link is to the "Worship" section of another article" is simply wrong.--Jeffro77 (talk) 07:52, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

text: I have lodged a 3rd opinion request.--Jeffro77 (talk) 07:57, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

text: There is no reason to link to the specific meetings at all. The format and content of specific JWs meetings are not covered in reliable third-party sources and are not especially notable, so there is no need to link to the individual kinds of meetings at all. JWs' primary meetings have three songs; the absence of songs from brief, often informal, 'field service meetings' prior to preaching is unnecessary minutia. Further information about how songs are used at JW conventions is also already mentioned in this article. Inclusion of the links would be more appropriate at a 'JW-Wiki', but is not encyclopaedically beneficial here.--Jeffro77 (talk) 22:30, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

text: Thanks. In view of the third opinion, I will leave it per AuthorityTam's edit (although the Worship section is the parent of the other two subsections, and not a different subsection). It should be noted that there are only four third-party refs in the target subsections, one of which is about JWs prohibitiing independent thinking and has no direct connection with the format of JW meetings. Most of the refs are JW publications, which are primary sources.--Jeffro77 (talk) 08:48, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Kingdom Hall meetings

message: I have included two sample audio of kingdom songs under fair usage policy. Wikipedia encourages sample music in articles if it is possible. see below articles.
:Waka Waka (This Time for Africa)
:Hymn
:Doxology
:Gloria in Excelsis Deo
:Sacred Harp
:Shape note
:Adeste Fideles
:Dies Irae
:Pange Lingua Gloriosi Corporis Mysterium
:Tantum Ergo
:Veni Creator Spiritus
:Veni Sancte Spiritus
:Victimae paschali laudes
I think the above examples are enough to convince my viewpoint..Flowerman75 (talk) 16:30, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok. The low quality clips don't add much to the article though.--Jeffro77 (talk) 22:17, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Per WP:SAMPLE, "Music samples can...illustrate the particular instruments or musical elements in a song in a way that a text description cannot."--AuthorityTam (talk) 22:33, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: sample audio

message: Although it does not currently address the name "Kingdom song", the article does mention that the term was in international use by the 1930s. The switch to the unique name seems a natural point to discuss (and vis a vis "hymn"), so I welcome others' efforts and hope to eventually research the matter myself.--AuthorityTam (talk) 22:33, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Kingdom song v hymn

message: * - "For example, we no longer speak of “the new order” but of “the new world.” And we now state that Jehovah’s name will be “sanctified,” not “vindicated.”"
* - "The Governing Body approved the publication of a new songbook entitled Sing to Jehovah."
* - "Because there are fewer songs to learn, it should be possible for us to memorize the lyrics of at least some of the new songs."
* - "This is in harmony with Paul’s counsel recorded at Ephesians 5:19.—Read."
* - "The lyrics of many of the songs have been composed in such a way that when you sing one line, you will almost be able to anticipate what comes next."
* - The Watchtower, Decemeber 15th, 2010, "Sing to Jehovah!" pages 23-24. --Anaccuratesource (talk) 03:05, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you suggesting an improvement to the article?? None of this seems especially notable. Have any third-party sources commented on these details??--Jeffro77 (talk) 08:52, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Sing to Jehovah" 

message: Can someone explain why the article is named "Kingdom songs" and not "Kingdom song"?  In general, page titles should be singular, so I'm unclear how/why this is different.  Nyttend (talk) 21:59, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: --Jeffro77 (talk) 07:21, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article name