Henrik's Audiozone.dk website is slowly dying :( Jackson/Charvel Wikia never launched

[Number Of The Priest]

I know Henrik hasn't updated or maintained his http://audiozone.dk/ website in quite some time, and while there were some dead links and unfinished pages at the time he abandoned the resource, at least most of the crucial information was left intact for posterity... at least, that's what I thought.

I recently noticed that the giant lists of Jackson and Charvel guitar models (with accompanying images) at the bottom of the following two pages have now disappeared.

Jackson Professional Series 1990-1995: http://audiozone.dk/index-filer/jack...ries_1990-1995
Charvel Japan 1986-1991: http://audiozone.dk/index-filer/char...apan_1986-1991

Those lists were very useful for model identification and I referred to those lists frequently. Now they're gone.

Thankfully, the Internet Archive Wayback Machine (https://archive.org/) captured most of what was lost, minus the images of each guitar model that appear when you hover over the model name. I suppose I can live without direct images, since it's only one more separate step to enter a model name into Google Images for identification.

Below are the archived links we can use, preserved in time:

Jackson Professional Series 1990-1995: https://web.archive.org/web/20180831...ofessional.php
Charvel Japan 1986-1991: https://web.archive.org/web/20180831...rt-guitars.php

Another page I frequently reference is his Tremolo Info Project page: http://audiozone.dk/index-filer/TremoloInfoProject.htm I fear the day when that page gets ravaged by time.

This got me thinking. The Ibanez community has a great comprehensive Wikia (http://ibanez.wikia.com/wiki/Ibanez_Wiki) that is frequently updated, highly accurate, and constantly referenced in the Ibanez community. It's basically like the Ibanez guitar bible. Why don't we have one for Jacksons and Charvels? The Jackson/Charvel Wikia (http://jacksoncharvel.wikia.com/wiki...n_Charvel_Wiki) seems to be a sister site to the Ibanez Wikia but virtually neglected and never seemed to launch. Was anyone planning on doing anything with it? Given it's a wiki (ie - collaborative), it doesn't have to be one person doing all the work. Obviously the scope of one-off custom J/C models is too broad and ambitious to capture in a wiki, but documenting the production models and limited runs would be handy and a very solid start.

I personally have limited knowledge compared to our panel of experts and historians here on JCF. Most of my knowledge comes from reading JCF (still the best resource, but it relies on interaction and the information is often scattered), the preserved catalogs on the Jackson and Charvel websites, and Henrik and AlienXnation's (http://charvelusa.com/models.html) websites. I have zero experience editing a wiki, I would like to offer help to preserve info for the coming generations, and I would be willing to pitch in and help learn to build a wiki. Maybe this is enough to get the ball rolling, and others with more expertise can fill in my gaps on an ongoing basis?

Maybe it's pointless? Even when I log into JCF, I am frequently the only registered member logged in at a given time. That suggests occasional visits by people, and the status quo is sufficient to tackle those once-in-a-blue-moon questions that get asked.

If we do build that wiki, maybe Mudlark and Johnnyryche would be pressed to finally divulge their list of import serial numbers, for the greater good.

Thoughts?

[neilli]

I guess it's symptomatic of the current time, where facebook groups are taking over from forums etc. I guess a JC wiki would be cool, but as long as the legacy catalogues are available, that kind of covers the same ground no?

[EntrailsOfU]

I noticed the same thing... Sad really. That is in my opinion the best site of the two I know of. His and AlienXNation's www.charvelusa.com But as you've said, more and more keep slowly disappearing. I was going to show my friend how I knew what his guitar was by his lists and they were mysteriously gone. It's a shame.

[kamanda]

I noticed the same while going to reference the charvel model comparison chart.

I would love to help rebuild this as his website has been a great tool for me over the years.

[xenophobe]

Someone just needs to save it all to local HTML, reformat it and publish it somewhere.

We used to have a Mother of All Information Pages. One moderator here kept all the data and was supposed to put it back up but failed miserably. Nobody cares.

[EntrailsOfU]

I like the wiki idea. Ibanez's wiki is pretty great. I bet we could make it happen with the few dedicated users here we have. I'd love to help however.

[Heavymetal2000]

I actually had a look at the jackson/charvel wiki after I read this yesterday.
I removed some dead links and changed the page or ing paragraph for now.
I'm willing to help anyway I can.

[Number Of The Priest]

Tossing out some thoughts here. Thanks to those who feel energized by the prospect of building something great and new. Trying to consider multiple perspectives before sinking time and effort into anything. In the past, I contemplated building an info page for the 1998 Shannon Soloist; while it never materialized, perhaps I could make one on the Wikia as a sort of "practice run" for me to learn how to create a page on a Wikia, as well as a "prototype" or "sample" that sets the tone and style for future pages we build together, if we decide to go that route.

I guess it's symptomatic of the current time, where facebook groups are taking over from forums etc. I guess a JC wiki would be cool, but as long as the legacy catalogues are available, that kind of covers the same ground no?

I hate to keep comparing our community to that of Ibanez, but they also have plenty of archived catalog scans (http://www.ibanezrules.com/catalogs/index.htm and http://www.ibanez.com/anniversary/index.html) and yet they still built a comprehensive Wikia that is revered and referenced frequently. I suspect the abundance of catalogs probably made it easier to assemble their Wikia.

Someone just needs to save it all to local HTML, reformat it and publish it somewhere.

I realize Henrik isn't really around any longer, but would this be considered theft? I do like this idea though, as this seems like the simplest stop-gap measure compared to the massive effort needed to construct a Wikia virtually from scratch. And if it suffices, it might even be more than just a temporary stop-gap, as long as we can find a stable host that won't mysteriously lose content like Henrik's site.

We used to have a Mother of All Information Pages. One moderator here kept all the data and was supposed to put it back up but failed miserably. Nobody cares.

Wow, I forgot about the MOAIP. Is there anything of this left intact that we could see or use? Where is it?

[Heavymetal2000]

The beauty of all the information we need, is that it's all available online. The time consuming part is gathering it and organizing it in one place.

Between the knowledge of the guys here and the readily available information online you can create a very thorough resource for anyone to use.
If it's done on the Wiki you can have multiple admins and have a hard copy backup incase anything were to happen.
The information is safer if it's in multiple hands as well as online.
Also the wiki let's everyone contribute.

I'm gathering up videos, interviews, pages, as well as all the guitars ive recently asked about, purchased, and gotten serial numbers from.

Question is, do we work off the existing wiki page with no admin rights, or build our own page from scratch so we have admin rights?

[Number Of The Priest]

The beauty of all the information we need, is that it's all available online. The time consuming part is gathering it and organizing it in one place.

Between the knowledge of the guys here and the readily available information online you can create a very thorough resource for anyone to use.
If it's done on the Wiki you can have multiple admins and have a hard copy backup incase anything were to happen.
The information is safer if it's in multiple hands as well as online.
Also the wiki let's everyone contribute.

I wholeheartedly agree with all of this.

Question is, do we work off the existing wiki page with no admin rights, or build our own page from scratch so we have admin rights?

Wait, so even if we edited the existing Wikia as I originally envisioned, we don't have admin rights? Who does? That means there's a difference between editors and administrators?

I don't suppose it would be much trouble to start a new one, given there is practically nothing on the existing one and we would have full ownership/admin rights. But they do have the logical web address, and are practically "squatting" on it.

[Heavymetal2000]

From what I gather so far we wouldn't, but possibly could.

When I started editing the wiki I got a message from one of the wiki admins, not the jackson page admin but an actual site admin for the wiki as a whole.

He mentioned if I needed help with anything to let him know.
Maybe theres a way to transfer it?
I'll ask him. It would be nice to have that actual web address.

[xenophobe]

I realize Henrik isn't really around any longer, but would this be considered theft? I do like this idea though, as this seems like the simplest stop-gap measure compared to the massive effort needed to construct a Wikia virtually from scratch. And if it suffices, it might even be more than just a temporary stop-gap, as long as we can find a stable host that won't mysteriously lose content like Henrik's site.

As long as you reformat it and credit him for the source, I don't see why there would be any problems.

I'd say PM Tekky for the MOAIP data, but he probably deleted it or lost it by now. I originally offered to do it, but he was too egotistical to let anyone else do it. And then he didn't do it.

[Heavymetal2000]

So I put in a request to adopt the Jackson Charvel wiki.
It says to allow up to 6 days for a response so I'm waiting.
Mean time, if there is anyone willing to volunteer with me to be a caretaker let me know. It would be nice to have a few at least who would be willing to.
Anyone can edit it, even if you're not "staff". So if you feel like contributing but don't want the burden of needing to care for the wiki as a whole there is no worries.

[kamanda]

Sounds great, keep us updated! And you guys are right, the Ibby one is pretty great as well.

The comparison chart alone on audiozone was something I referenced frequently.

EDIT: http://jacksoncharvel.wikia.com/wiki...n_Charvel_Wiki

[Number Of The Priest]

As long as you reformat it and credit him for the source, I don't see why there would be any problems.

I'd say PM Tekky for the MOAIP data, but he probably deleted it or lost it by now. I originally offered to do it, but he was too egotistical to let anyone else do it. And then he didn't do it.

Thanks. That makes total sense. Henrik's spirit and hard work can live on, if we do decide to resurrect and revitalize his website elsewhere.

I reached out to Tekky via Facebook Messenger this morning. Even if he doesn't come through, oh well, no worries.

So I put in a request to adopt the Jackson Charvel wiki.
It says to allow up to 6 days for a response so I'm waiting.
Mean time, if there is anyone willing to volunteer with me to be a caretaker let me know. It would be nice to have a few at least who would be willing to.
Anyone can edit it, even if you're not "staff". So if you feel like contributing but don't want the burden of needing to care for the wiki as a whole there is no worries.

I have to hand it to you and your intrepid spirit taking initiative like this. Is there a difference between caretaker and writer/editor? My written English is strong, but my computer savvy is not quite there (though I'm willing to learn). For example, I can write a bulk of the model descriptions in a very tight, controlled, consistent manner, and can find the images for the corresponding models in different colors and finishes. However, I have no idea when it comes to putting all that up in a web/Wikia format that looks neat and organized, unless it's totally WYSIWYG and plug-and-play.

The comparison chart alone on audiozone was something I referenced frequently.

Which comparison chart were you referencing?