Talk:Aeolian mode

message: Do we really need seven examples of the same simple thing? I propose all the articles on individual modes use at most three examples each. Hyacinth 00:21, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Examples

message: I assume that Porgy & Bess is in the natural minor, and that there are few 20th century or later popular songs which could accurately be called Aeolian. Hyacinth 16:38, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe an explanation of the actual difference would be nice to have in the article itself. Ari 08:26, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Porgy & Bess

message: This section's title is unclear and the information very basic: it basically re-explains through a specific example that "It may be considered a major scale but starting from the sixth scale degree." Hyacinth 16:38, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Modes

message: So many words about this article and important thing is missing. I would like to see here a picture with notes. Or what ever. I read this, and I still don't know what is aeolian mode. I remembered that it originates from ancient Greece and that it hasn't been used in middle ages, and I don't care about that at all. If there was option for grading article, I would give it a very low grade. Martin 18:09, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: So many words...

message: I realize that since this mode is virtually synonymous with the minor scale, but shouldn't we at least have some examples of Aeolian mode? Perhaps not songs that use the melodic or harmonic minor, but I'm sure there are plenty examples of songs purely in Aeolian. Unless I'm mistaken, I believe That's All is an example.—Iggy Koopa (talk) 03:18, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: you need a reliable source that supports inclusion in some list of examples to avoid original research.  —Chris Capoccia  T⁄C 11:07, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

text: Notability is not so much the issue as reliable sourced material. I see you offer two Youtube videos. I have not checked them, but I doubt very much if they include a verbal statement certifying the song is in Aeolian mode. Even if they do, the guideline I have linked specifically mentions Youtube as an example of an unreliable source.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 18:42, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

text: Just a single reliable source that confirms all this.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 22:04, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

text: I don't know where you got the idea that "academic analytic-level work" is required. I invite you once again to read the reliable source|relevant Wikipedia guideline. It's the way things are done here. If "contemporary K-pop" (whatever that is) is so new that it has not yet been reliably documented on the web, then we will just have to be patient and wait a few milliseconds. By the way, examples don't have to be hot off the press to be familiar, even to the very young.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 01:43, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Lack of Examples

message: I plan on deleting any unsourced entries from this in a few weeks. (Listening to a piece and trying to figure out the key is not a source, and is also WP:OR.) Torc2 (talk) 08:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Well-known music in this key

message: In the first section, the sentence which begins "[a]lthough scholars for the past three centuries[weasel words] have regarded..." is marked as weasel wordy.  I understand that "although scholars have regarded..." can be used as weasel words but, in this particular case, I think the usage as appropriate, as it serves to offset the second part of the paragraph, where that thinking is countered (with references.)
I was going to remove the WP:Weasel mark, but I don't feel I'm an experienced enough editor to make the call, so wanted to raise the issue to others with more background.  Oliepedia (talk) 19:55, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: As the editor who may have placed that tag, I should say that, personally, I have absolutely no problem with changing it to a , which indeed may be more appropriate in the present case. One way or another, a source is needed for this claim, which is not quite substantiated by the Powers article cited at the end of the paragraph, although he does say something similar that could be misrepresented in this way.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 20:35, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Improper Weasel notation?

message: I'm not a native english-speaker, so this is out of my range to fix. There are SEVEN modes, not eight like the article says in history section. What about twelve-mode-system, ninth mode discovery and all -- sounds crazy to me, and every other word in the article starts to stink. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Glarean can be it's own page, telling information about crazy music theorian from middle-age, but my opion is, that it should not be linked to this article, or let any disinformation flood to the history section with it.
I assume that there are lots of more mistakes like that, so maybe it would best to delete the whole shit. I was looking for some ethymological explanation for a word "aeolian", and finding this horrible example, why people can't really trust Wikipedia.
:I can assure you that there were eight church modes, not seven, and these were increased to twelve (not fourteen) by the arguments of Glareanus. The article is perfectly correct. I do not know what your native language might be, but I would suggest you begin by consulting the Wikipedia in that language, which may (or may not) make things clear to you. FWIW, the history of the church modes more or less ends with Glareanus, so to protest that this is "shit" and should be deleted is effectively suggesting the entire article be removed. 
:As for the etymology of the word, you are correct: this article does not explain it, as the articles on some of the other modes do. I shall see what I can do to correct this problem.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 22:07, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I have now added the etymology you were looking for. Thanks for calling attention to this missing detail.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 22:55, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too much bullshit in this article 

message: One of the most famous examples in (pop) music history is that it can be heard in some early Beatles songs, at least. Each and every Beatles fan knows the joke that when John saw or heard about their famous "Aeolian cadences" and quipped in an interviews, "I thought that's some colorful exotic birds flying out of our bodies on the stage!"
I'd like to see three examples from their song catalogue on it: Early period, mid-period (either before or after Rubber Soul, which is the famous landmark, earth-shattering, groundbreaking album that's started their so-called studio years), and late period. As well as both the quote from the music critic (London Times? Time magazine? Evening Standard? Easter Supplement? Daily Mail?) and John's famous own quote, of course, if it can be sourced. --2003:DA:CF12:CD16:5C5C:AB95:4CF2:BBFE (talk) 05:44, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Knowing so little about muscioloy, but knowing what a cadence is, I'm starting to wonder if the music critic may have actually meant Aeolic verse instead. --2003:DA:CF09:1476:F8A3:E5A5:9602:11AC (talk) 17:26, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Beatles