BrainModular

Very strange but wikipedia doesn't want any sensomusic article.
Usine is, as they said, 'not a notable soft'...

Please help me to protest against wikipedia!

1) send protestation message at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: ... usic_Usine

2) try to complete and improve the article at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensomusic_Usine

thanks!!!!!!

grrr
there a place for little things in this world
not all must be done only for big and " Notable " things !!!

senso , i've add a few word to the deletion page...

found on the main page of wiki: You can help Wikimedia change the world
let me laugh...

wow. maybe the guys at Wikipedia have sidejobs at Cycling74 or something...

i left my mark on the page as well. hope they will hear us.

antwan

I'm afraid that, as much as I love Usine and find it, if not revolutionary, one of the best-conceived pieces of music creation software I ever tried, I must disagree about the proposal for deletion on Wikipedia.

First of all, the fact that it was Olivier who first posted the article may configure itself as "conflict of interests", especially if the original version of the article consisted in the advertising similar to that found on this site: although I've rarely seen such a reliable and easily veryfiable piece of advertising, it IS advertising, and its place is not in an encyclopedia.

Secondly, I've carefully read Wikipedia's guidelines on article deletion, and it seems to me that they're being respected: aside from the naive assumption that music magazines are a RELIABLE source (when in fact they suspiciously resemble the opposite), it is undisputable that Usine has not grown enough to warrant worldwide interest. I've not been able to find mention of any "notable" (see the guidelines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:NOTE) artist who uses Usine for his/her work.

This said, I do believe that Usine and Senso deserve all the support they can get, it's just that a Wikipedia entry is not a way to gain notoriety, but rather a "reward" for it.

Even if I didn't own Usine I'd say it was notably simply for the fact that it's the most modularly capable DAW and can deal with any kind of data, and midi, in many more ways than any other DAW.

runagate wrote:Even if I didn't own Usine I'd say it was notably simply for the fact that it's the most modularly capable DAW and can deal with any kind of data, and midi, in many more ways than any other DAW.

I totally second that, and it's certainly the best advantage Usine offers over other software; but alas, Wikipedia is not a review site, and its "notability" criteria rely much more on the availability of 3rd party sources about the subject than on the objective merits that would certainly make it notable IF ONLY people knew of its existence...

Wikipedia have screwed me around a little too... The problem is that you have no idea what agenda a particular editor might have -

I have add my two cents.