Talk:Atlantic Records

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Atlantic Records article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Atlantic Records. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Atlantic Records at the Reference desk.

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Record Labels Start‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Record Labels, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of record labels 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.Record LabelsWikipedia:WikiProject Record LabelsTemplate:WikiProject Record Labelsrecord labels articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Classical music

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

Archives

Archive 1

Proposal to stop the majority of the vandalism

I have a simple, yet intriguing solution to this vandal problem, where people keep writing "You suck!" on the article. Why dont we just simply make a redirect page, where people can write in "You suck!" all they want on the article. Then, of course, if there are people that actually want to view the article, they can simply click at the link on the top to view the actual article.

I still believe that we should use protection, of course, but I do believe that this proposal will stop the majority of the vandalism from happening.--Roflthatnoobgotowned (talk) 20:18, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from the fact that the software doesn't contain any feature allowing people to do this (as far as I know), this is an encyclopedia and not a sandbox for vandals. Hut 8.5 20:46, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this would solve anything. People would still vandalize the main page anyway. No one wants to vandalize something if they're allowed to. People vandalize things because it makes others mad or frustrated. We would be better off banning users who do it, or possibly suggest the page be given full protection.User:Friginator 22 August 2008 —Preceding undated comment was added at 03:58, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Though most vandals do it to make people mad. I think this case is just an on going joke. The people that put "You Suck" on this article see the video and come in here to try it. They don't know or care about AR. I think protecting the page is not a good idea. It takes away from the base of Wikipedia. The ability to come in and add new information at will. Wikipedia has enough moderators they can watch this article for "You Suck" Heck Wikipedia has enough bots doing work, make one that watches this article for "You Suck". Knotslanding (talk) 11:42, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good idea. I wonder if bots have the power to suspend editing privileges? Steelbeard1 (talk) 16:33, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't the only problem. I've seen people replacing the White & Nerdy page with the same sentence, probably because the video for that song is what sparked this wave of vandalism on both pages. Bramblestar (ShadowClan Leader) (talk) 22:40, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I say we just protect these pages. WPjcm^{Words are cool} 19:15, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can we at least semi-protect it? WPjcm^{Words are cool} 17:17, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can this article be semi-protected again? Steelbeard1 (talk) 12:08, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've put the semiprotection back since it's clear the vandalism hasn't died down. Hut 8.5 12:11, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there still agreement that this should be an article focused on the Atlantic Record label, and that replacing content with troll memes should be treated as blatant vandalism? -- Infrogmation (talk) 17:16, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you're asking if there is a consensus to block IPs on sight without warning for making one edit, no there is not such a consensus and never can be. If somebody vandalizes this page, warn them, and if they continue, then they should be blocked. There's nothing special about this article that requires making exceptions to WP:BLOCK (such as blocking IPs for 10 days, four hours after they stopped editing or after just one edit). - auburnpilot talk 22:46, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think this talk page should be semi-protected as well. It's obviously getting vandalized as well. Steelbeard1 (talk) 02:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk pages are generally left open except in severe cases, and this one has only been vandalised by one IP in the last two weeks. Hut 8.5 07:38, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I like knotslanding's idea. Solar Flute (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 02:46, 22 December 2008 (UTC).[reply]

I reccomend semi protection (permanent) and then banning users for 1 hour, 3 hours, 7 hours, 24 hours, 72 hours, and then 240 hours (for repeat vandal IPs). If the final 10 day ban does not stop them then I reccomend a permanent IP ban. The other option would to to fully protect it and create a page such as Atlantic Records/New to allow people to add suggestions (which could be added by an admin) without threatening the artical. --JekShadow_talk 05:15, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How many years has this nonsense been going on? The trolls/vandals obviously won't give a damn if we keep throwing temporary, or even permanent bans, at them nonstop. I do think that permanent semi-protection is a good idea, as it has seemed to slow the vandalism down somewhat - yet 3 damned years after "White and Nerdy" came out, these morons are still messing things up for lulz. Banning accounts and/or IPs might not do much in the long run, since all they need do is create a new account or use a different computer/proxy server to get around such bans. And even if they can sneak around whatever degree of semi-protection we can have set up, our options are limited. I'd recommend full protection, but only as a last resort. This s*** has got to stop. --SigmaX54 (talk) 17:33, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]