Talk:Netochka Nezvanova (author)

message: The list of Dostoevsky's works in his article links to this article.  Did he write something called "Netochka Nezvanova" or not? Triped 16:58, Jan 3, 2005 (UTC)
:Netochka Nezvanova was Dostoevsky's unfinished, 170 page, first novel.  Netochka, the narrator, was an impoverished child who cannot remember anything of her life before she was nine.  Sunray 22:47, 2005 Jan 3 (UTC)
::Well, I think that should be stated in a separate article. 157.92.4.151 00:15, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The above is right, this needs to be sorted. I'll create a new article called 'Netochka Nezvanova_Novel' or something to sort this out! --JDnCoke 17:53, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

message: :Image:Krop3rom a9ff.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 03:51, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Krop3rom a9ff.gif

message: While not advocating the vandalisation of this article, I notice that recent changes in the History segment are written in a slightly defamatory undertone. The article by Florian Cramer, that is given as source by an anonymous user (from IP 75.11.174.184 in San Diego, California), is actually much more moderate. As an example, Cramer speaks about nato as "an expensive video realtime processing" software, which is translated into "arbitrary high pricing" in this article. Not knowing the internal business organisation of Maschinenkunst, i couldnt tell how the pricing is more/less arbitrary than any other audiovisual software. This kind of writing shows hidden criticism which shouldnt appear in a wikipedia article.
Also, the present wikipedia article speaks about a "cumbersome process of buying", while i seem to remember that it used the very common Kagi system. So it was not different than any other software (except it required american buyers to have some sense of humour...).
Finally, terms such as "hyper aggressive" (introduced by another anonymous user from IP 75.11.160.37, San Diego, California) to describe NN's "business practices" sound like the writer has a too emotional approach on this subject. My conclusion: this article needs a more serious and neutral editorial board... ;) Irina666 (talk) 20:08, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: NOTE: The article has been written by Cycling74 employees, who have on innumerable occasions sabotaged, harassed and stolen NN's intellectual property, in particular NATO.0+55. The article is highly inaccurate, defamatory and, characteristic of Cycling74, contains material which violates NN's intellectual property rights.
Overall it betrays that unmistakable odour of deterministic occident 'thought'.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 0f0003 (talk • contribs) 06:09, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality issues

message: As somebody suggested, i changed the first sentence. This was the previous version: 
Netochka Nezvanova is the persona-pseudonym used by the author(s) of nato.0+55+3d, a set of QuickTime externals for Max/MSP.
How could any normal, non-specialist reader understand this sentence? "persona-pseudonym" sounds like a neologism, i think "pseudonym", in conjunction with "author(s)", is clear enough. Also the second paragraph was a bit heavy-handed, full of terms such as "terrorized", "aggressive", "anti social"... take it easy, folks, it was just an art project !! ;) I basically tried to de-dramatize this part a bit.
The history section still is quite a mess, for instance the chronology is absolutely not clear.. The whole artistic development could be described more clearly, starting with the music productions, then audio software, web-software (nebula), then finally nato. --Irina666 (talk) 21:20, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The "aggressive" behaviour of NN is well documented, as are bullying tactics. "Anti-social" is a judgement. I would suggest that you not tone down the descriptions too much, but rather look for sources. Describe the behaviour, leave out the judgments. Sunray (talk) 08:00, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Changes - Dec. 07

message: The legend of NN is indeed akin to modern folklore, but that 'her' encapsulation in one woman (Rebekah Wilson) is almost considered fact, seems to me remarkable. That the NN project relied on the 'genius' artist myth to sustain its chief protagonist and simultaneously create the mystique behind its novel marketing ploy, to me seems undeniable. But to conclude that the work was of sole origin denies obvious circumstantial evidence. For example the 'soundhack' mailing list archives (1997, ) provide examples of dialogue between 'Wilson/loopcontrol at integer.net', '=cw4t7abs/antiorp at tezcat.com' and 'Krop3rom|a9ff' collaborator Andrew McKenzie (who became the owner for the network domain 'god-emil.dk', the infamous calling card of NN through the bulk of 'her' mailing-list posts).
I have followed the work of (NN) for many years, as 'her' list emails were consistently present across similar interest groups [art/music/philosophy/technology]. While the aforementioned Rebekah Wilson was notably involved in the project and has to some extent taken responsibility as the sole incarnation of 'NN' , the origin of '=cw4t7abs' appears to stem from the work of Gheorghe Dan, a programmer/poet/linguist based in Romania who is the current owner of http://www.0f0003.com/ and http://www.ggttctttat.com and who occasionally posts to forums under the pseudonym '0f0003 | maschinenkunst'. Gheorghe Dan released a paper under his own name for the 'Subtle Technologies Symposium' of 1996, entitled "Living in Limnos, Betwixt and Between: A Trans-Reality Balkan Odyssey" (released here,) and published in full on Nettime-ro (). This article could be considered a eulogy to NN - a poetic soliloquy to an abandoned existence, while another paper in collaboration with Alisa Andrasek of biothing    for ISEA2006, "Phylotic BodyScapes | Entheogenic Gardens: poly-scalar heterotopic" (found here, ) shares similar themes of manifesting a body within a technological framework - "germinating their multifarious seeds into a heterotopic multiverse of intricately entangled, real and irreal gardens patterned as phantasmagorical bodyscape". The stanza and syntax of Gheorghe Dan's writing is certainly similar to that of NN, and Dan's biography at  should confirm the connection.
Furthermore the most significant published article by NN for the MIT press journal 'Computer Music Journal' titled 'The Internet, A Musical Instrument in Perpetual Flux' (see, ) which details the award winning 'Nebula.m81', positions NN at an address 'c/o Babeltech A/S', a company based in Copenhagen, Denmark which specializes in network throttling applications , a very convenient connection for the resulting artistic product.
I am not attempting to deny the influence or efforts involved in NN's product, but the obvious anonymity of the project makes it difficult to assess the outright authorship of what can only be described as a dubious career. This article appears to fall under the spell of the vague myths and perceptions that the project originally set out to create, this is particularly obvious in the discussion over the validity of NN's later actions and responsibility to her clients, which from what I can tell were many.
I think everyone enjoys a controversial figure in some way, even as an irritant, but we should be cautious not to get too caught up with the character that this figure wants us to perceive. For many people NN went beyond playful irritation, and crossed the line with character assassinations, revoked licenses and general abuse of public forums. These abuses are well documented and similar assaults were fired back.
The fact that NN's dominance of a small niche of internet history ended almost as quickly as it started makes the legend all the more exciting, and in 'her' case fiction and fact are as intertwined as any good story. I think in the interest of Wikipedia these opposing forces need to be better clarified.
121.45.242.136 (talk) 20:35, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Additional context and article criticism

message: Why isn't the lawsuit against Cycling 74 mentioned?  I think this was a key event and turning point of the NN project, one that turned many people against NN.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spot (talk • contribs) 03:59, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Wasn't aware of it, but info on the lawsuit would be welcome, Spot. can you point us to more information? Jm3 (talk) 23:29, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Cycling 74 Lawsuit

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Netochka Nezvanova (author). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070805144602/http://www.ensemble-integrales.com/htmlsenglisch/informationaboutprograms/repnr.html to http://www.ensemble-integrales.com/htmlsenglisch/informationaboutprograms/repnr.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081016095553/http://www.audiofoundation.org.nz/trans/homm.htm to http://www.audiofoundation.org.nz/trans/homm.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:29, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Netochka Nezvanova (author). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071103132616/http://www.cityofwomen.org:80/2006/en/program/ima to http://www.cityofwomen.org/2006/en/program/ima
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:10, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This page is disambiguated as being about an "author", but it seems like (digital artist) or (audio software developer) or the like would be more apt labels. It's not common to categorize software developers as "authors" without some kind of qualifier — authors generally write books / articles, etc. While someone might post many comments online, that person would still not commonly be called an author.
In the case of the performance art and music software created by antiorp / cw4t7abs / maschinenkunst, I propose we use something that more accurately describes why she's notable: for being provocative, creating innovative software, involvement in the digital music community, etc. Any objections? Suggestions?  Jm3 (talk) 20:01, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Choosing a better label than "author" (digital artist, software developer, etc.)