Talk:Solid body

message: My, my, my, but there's a lot of misinformation out there!
My favourite so far is http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/features/patc/electricguitar/ and I quote:
Aug. 12, 2002 -- Until about 70 years ago, musical instruments remained pretty much the same as they were for centuries. Then a new invention changed modern music and popular culture as well -- the electric guitar.
While I'm not doubting the electric guitar is every bit as significant as this says, that first statement is just plain false. For example, the saxophone didn't even exist before the 19th century. Neither did the piston valve for brass instruments such as the trumpet. And the only component of the drum kit that was in anything like its current form in 1920 was the drumsticks - and even these now have optional nylon tips, some drummers don't ever use wood tips nowadays.
I guess it depends on what you mean by pretty much. But I hope we can do a bit better than the (shallow IMO) insight shown by this writer (or perhaps their editor(s)). This is a job for... wikiman! Andrewa 18:58, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Andrewa, you certainly have got that right! One might only hope that all Wikipedia editors would recognize the difference between the enthusiastic fluff that decorates popular media magazine reporting and solid information based on reliable research. This is as true today as it was 6 years ago when you made your observation. BellwetherToday (talk) 15:24, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

message: Claims of prior art are the sort of thing that is bound to happen and the reasons for its abuse are legion. The Wikipedia article on the subject does a passable job in presenting a working description. A few requirements for claiming prior art:
: it is generally expected to provide a description sufficient to inform an average worker in the field that the invention is within the scope of what is claimed
: it must be available in some way to the public in a fixed form
: it must be publicly knowable, i.e. it cannot be kept for merely personal use
In regard to this article, I notice that relatively recently here and elsewhere on the web a claim has been floated about that one Valentino Airoldi of Galliate, Novara, Italy invented the first sold body electric guitar in 1937. That would be wonderful and enlightening news except for this: there appear to be no reliable sources of information for this claim. 
While the early history of the the development of the the electric guitar is one that lay in muddy waters, there has been considerable and solid scholarship devoted to research of the topic. Not so in the case of Mr Airoldi. Further, it is clear from the story told about him, even were it proven to be factual, that this claim does not meet the criteria for prior art. A similar claim has been made on behalf of Bill Wilson from the University of North Carolina, it too fails to be backed up by scholarship and remains as fondly embraced folklore. In either case, beyond a small group of enthusiasts, there is no recognized body of scholarship that examines the scant documentation. Even among the enthusiasts, there is much contention about the facts and the interpretation of them contained in the narratives now being repeated. All that we can be certain of here is that this material, at this time, constitutes original research.
A key element not to be overlooked is history. What specific influence did either of these individuals have on the subsequent development of the instrument? An encyclopedia article is not a mere collection of anecdotal remarks. As editors, we must respect the importance of notability. BellwetherToday (talk) 17:18, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: First Solid Body