This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dance, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Dance and Dance-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DanceWikipedia:WikiProject DanceTemplate:WikiProject DanceDance articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Classical musicWikipedia:WikiProject Classical musicTemplate:WikiProject Classical musicClassical music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
Please help make this List complete. Any tarantellas you find in music (especially non-classical), films and television, any other media, fiction literature, and popular culture, please add it to the list. Where applicable, please add a source citation describing where you found it. Let's all make this a great list for every Wikipedia viewer's ultimate reference! Chuckstreet (talk) 17:28, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Completeness is a fine goal where it is possible. Clearly, with a topic such as this that can grow with time, it is unattainable.
The idea is we should strive to make it as complete as possible. A defeatist attitude you may have, but not everyone is that pessimistic. Give people a chance to contribute. Chuckstreet (talk) 17:40, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I would remind all editors that lists must not contain trivia, especially if they are uncited. Uses of tarantella in classical music are plainly non-trivial; a brief mention of a tarantella's tune in a single episode of a "popular" television show is almost certainly trivia. Any editor may correctly delete trivia from any article without preamble, and we've had plenty of that already in the discussion over at Tarantella.
There is no such rule that lists can't contain "trivia". In fact, that's what lists are for: all items are trivia! You also can't say classical music is the only thing worthwhile and other kinds of music or other things are worthless and trivial. You have no right to make a jugement call like that here. All items and categories are welcome on this list, and everyone is welcome to contribute. If you have evidence that an item on the list is incorrect, then provide your source. Don't delete it on an unwarranted claim or certainly not on your personal biased opinion that you consider it beneath your attention and respect. Chuckstreet (talk) 17:48, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You are missing not one but several points here. No, lists are not about trivia; and no, I am not stating that only classical music is not trivial; on the contrary, anything that can be cited to a reliable secondary source that verifiably demonstrates significance and relevance is non-trivial. I am not making any "jugement call" here, and indeed everyone is welcome to add reliable cited content; but Wikipedia policy permits uncited material to be removed by anyone, any time.
I would remind all editors, also, that list entries are not exempt from WP:V and WP:RS, two pillars of Wikipedia's policy. The existence of a bluelink to another Wikipedia article may (or may not, Wikipedia is not a reliable source) demonstrate that a book, piece of music, film or whatever exists, but it does nothing to show that the item actually contains a tarantella. Therefore, all items must be cited, and policy states that any editor may remove any uncited item at any time. It would be a great help if editors could familiarise themselves with core policy before making extensive changes to articles or additions to talk page discussions. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:13, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Stop trying to shoo people away. This is not your personal page. Nor is it an elite group. If you know of an occurrence or use of tarantella music in media or literature, add it to the list. Everyone is welcome to contribute. Citations are not necessary if you can't find one; someone else may add a cite later. However, note that the item you are adding is ITSELF a citation in many cases. For instance, if you add a movie or a TV episode, just include a link to the film or episode on IMDb. If you find a fictional book that features a tarantella as part of the plot, then you can cite a link to the book on Amazon.
You are making many statements of differing kinds, many of them wrong, and some I have already explained to you why they are wrong. Adding a link to a movie or episode demonstrates that that item *exists*, but it does *not* demonstrate that a tarantella occurs within that item: for that we need a reliable *secondary* source: this is basic to Wikipedia's concept of WP:RS and all editors need to understand it. On the "shoo away", I'm doing nothing of the sort (and accusing an editor of such a thing would be taken by many editors as a personal attack, also). On "personal page", I certainly am not; I found a poorly-constructed list, one of many that I've edited, and I added citations for 12 items on the list, so I have already contributed constructively to it, and I hope many other editors will do the same. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:32, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Chuckstreet I don't understand your comments. I agree everyone may contribute. Citations are however mandatory: things that you can't find a reliable source for are unfortunately probably not notable. I have asked you directly to take back several personal attacks above. This matters; please strike those comments now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:04, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Chiswick Chap, you are not being personally attacked. You are being disruptive and you are being called on it. Please stop posting here, and stop your disruptive editing. You don't get to decide what's "significant" or "notable" or "relevant". This is an all-inclusive list. Chuckstreet (talk) 18:14, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
