User talk:Sandstein

Welcome to my talk page!

Please place new messages at the bottom of this page, or click here to start a new discussion, which will automatically be at the bottom. I will respond to comments here, unless you request otherwise. Please read the following helpful hints, as well as our talk page guidelines before posting:

• Please add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message. This will create an identifying signature and timestamp.

• Do you have a question about arbitration enforcement? Please read my FAQ at User:Sandstein/AE.

• If you're here to inform me of a mistake I made while on administrative duty, please indicate which article is concerned by enclosing the title of the article in two sets of square brackets: [[example article]].

• If you are looking for my talk page's previous contents, they are in the archives.

Start a new talk topic

Reinstating Music News (Music-News.com) page

Hi Sandstein

I hope all is well. The below seeks to represent the validity and growing reach and importance of Music-News.com through the years since 2003. I hope the information provided below can be added to your original Music News page http://web.archive.org/web/20161018011154/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_News and be reinstated to provide an informative article for the numerous Wikipedia mentions Music-News.com continues to accrue. There are over 70,000 link quotes attributed to Music-News.com, below is a small sample spread. If alternatives are required please let me know. I have tried to supply this in the correct format if I need to alter in any way please let me know. Thanks for your time and patience.

Lots of confusing content
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Music News (also Music-News.com) is an independent online music magazine based in North London, UK. A respected news and review resource since 2003, its reach has filtered through to all areas of the music and entertainment industry. The site features album, single, live and festival reviews from a dedicated team of over 250 contributors, the site is regularly quoted by the BBC [1][2]. Articles from Music News have been re-produced by newspapers[3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14], music publications [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37], and news/entertainment outlets[38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48] In a piece on Music News, New Media Age journalist Michael Nutley wrote that it "reads like a superior fanzine" and "does well" on the news front, albeit with an "idiosyncratic" writing style [49]. Conversely, Andrew Eaton-Lewis in the Scotland on Sunday wrote an article in which he criticised the site after it broke news of a Smiths reformation, which was later denied by band members. The article went viral[50] and reunion plans were not confirmed, a fact that could be explained by later health revelations[51]. Music News has a link on True To You, widely seen as Morrissey’s personal voice piece.[52] Music News also publishes high-profile exclusive filmed interviews with multiple chart musicians available on the MusicNewsWeb youtube channel [53] and frequently republished and quoted [54][55][56][57][58][59][60] Music News is also quoted on many band sites direct [61][62][63] Music News Underground [64] actively promotes and discovers new talent [65] and has become platform to premiere new songs and videos [66][67][68] Roy Stride, lead singer of Scouting For Girls commented "Music News gave us our first review and it was a good one. A well needed boost right at the start of our career." Marco Gandolfi is the longstanding editor of Music News and is a voting panel member of The BRITs, BBC Music Awards and a BBC News contributor [69]. Music News garners over two million visitors a month, and has kept the prized top Google ‘music news’ search for 12 years. Music News also operates internationally with Italian and Maltese [70] sites and forms part of an entertainment network alongside Film News [film-news.co.uk], Theatre News [theatre-news.com], and Game News [game-news.co.uk] Music News Presents… 2008-2011 In 2008 Music News launched ‘Music News Presents…’ providing a platform for unsigned and up-and-coming bands. These nights were originally held in Fulham but then moved to several different Camden venues. In October 2013 ‘Music News Presents…’ was brought back for a one-off special to celebrate the 10th Anniversary of the site with live sets including Billy Lunn of The Subways, Ghetts, IV Rox, Charlie Brown and Forget The Down. External links: Website: http://www.music-news.com/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/musicnewsweb Twitter: https://twitter.com/MusicNewsWeb Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/user/MusicNewsWeb

Why should any of this concern me?  Sandstein  19:56, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Was this not your original page? I have been working to reinstate the page that you took down. What should I be doing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marco Gandolfi (talk • contribs) 20:38, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

I deleted a page? What was its exact title?  Sandstein  20:53, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Well, I think it was under your remit, it was Music News (Music-News.com) here is the link http://web.archive.org/web/20161018011154/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_News — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marco Gandolfi (talk • contribs) 21:29, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

This was deleted per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Music News. What are the best two new sources that you think address that discussion's result that the topic fails WP:N?  Sandstein  21:37, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

With regards to notability I put together the original text at the start of this thread. With this in mind could you consider adding the new information and reinstating the page as a news source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marco Gandolfi (talk • contribs) 21:52, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Two important articles which quote from our exclusive breaking news interviews are http://www.nme.com/news/music/the-who-83-1272512 and http://ultimateclassicrock.com/kiss-gene-simmons-thinks-axl-rose-deserves-a-beatdown/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marco Gandolfi (talk • contribs) 01:16, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

By your use of "our" I assume you are affiliated with the subject. I will not help you promote your business on Wikipedia. See WP:COI. Request declined.  Sandstein  12:50, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Sandstein, this was a page which already existed and I have nothing to do with. I was asked to provide supporting content because of the deletion. This is not a promotional exercise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marco Gandolfi (talk • contribs) 16:42, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

I was asked to contribute to this debate, I did not in any way instigate it. This has been requested because of the number of links on Wikipedia attributed to Music-News.com. Can you please see the validity two previous links sent? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marco Gandolfi (talk • contribs) 12:17, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

This does not even make sense. I will not reply further.  Sandstein  13:22, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Assistance

I was hoping my complaint did not have less than understandable elements. I am requesting assistance guidance here for what you need. First, I do see two possible revert restriction violations. I may not need assistance here for that.

Second, I looked up WP:ACDS and have come up with Gaming the System. With the following I cite aspects of that page - per WP:GAME - "to enforce a specific non-neutral point of view" - Per WP:GAMETYPE - 4. "Spuriously and knowingly claiming...justification or support...for a viewpoint or stance which actually contradicts policy."

Page example: "Saying that content meets the policy on verifiability because it is cited to a source, when in fact the source is not reliable, or the content twists the source's point of view." I don't like using Gaming the system as that seems to be strong wording.<//s>

However...moving on...without actually expecting a decision here (of course), with Gaming the system I would be trying to show that material is assertively being inserted which is undue, and which contradicts wp:v, and which has no support in reliable secondary sources. Essentially, in terms of DS this is attempting to enforce a specific non-neutral point of view (a view which contradicts policy). Actually, two or three paragraphs (or sentences) in this article are involved so that would be a different non-neutral POV for each one.

And I am trying to avoid "content dispute" here. First, is this a reasonable DS violation issue, as long as it is not about resolving a content dispute, but is actually about doing an end around content policies? This is actually what I was trying to show with the set of reverts at the top of the page - in terms of reverts. I added a sprinkling of talk page comments to demonstrate the basis of policy violations. But, now I have no idea if this works for DS.

Next, if this rationale is acceptable, then I will probably add some of Thucydides411 talk page responses. I suppose my overall question is - does this work for AE and demonstration of DS violations? Should I do without Thucydides411 talk page responses? What are your general thoughts on how this might work? ---Steve Quinn (talk) 03:56, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

I should have said I am asking for guidance - not assistance. I also refer you to the DS page itself and the relevant section: Guidance for editors - and the following two bullets:

2. comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;

5 refrain from gaming the system.

So, it appears what I am getting at is non-compliance per #2 above - noncompliance with (some) applicable policies and guidelines. But gaming the system also seems to work.

In any case, right now I am amending my complaint to reversion restriction violations. Depending on your response here, I will see about adding something pertaining to this - or I won't add it. Thanks in advance for you guidance. Steve Quinn (talk) 04:26, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

• Well, it is obvious you are already doing a lot. What I have written above seems complicated. So, for now, I think it is best to just drop this. I can study this material on my own to see what I can do for a later time if necessary.

For now, I am going to let it go for this AE and sticking with my amendment. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 06:16, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

GMO logging

When browsing ARBGMO for some other reason I just happened to see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Genetically modified organisms#Enforcement actions where you logged some recent sanctions at the end of the case. My impression is that the committee now wants these in the WP:DSLOG instead: All sanctions issued pursuant to a discretionary sanctions remedy must be logged at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions/Log. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 04:07, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, but the sanction at issue was not a discretionary sanction.  Sandstein  08:55, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

OK, point taken. It was enforcement of a topic ban imposed directly by Arbcom. EdJohnston (talk) 17:05, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Can you tell me

How is it that the Everipedia article, in the one AfD discussion I can find, has you concluding no consensus, but then one cannot still find the article in the article main space? Was there a subsequent AfD? I would like access to the old article, because an article is now called for, by the business sourcing, at least (likely other news as well). If you give me access to the old, I would dust it off and give it a go—I can ensure any stub that goes in is well-sourced, and otherwise encyclopedic. My interest is solely in having information on this startup, appearing in article form. However much we might detest its concept and execution, it is a real entity, and is out there, and appearing in the news. It is to our detriment to not have it covered (and gives the appearance of bias). Cheers. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 15:10, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Never mind on this, Beeblebrox is going to userify the latest version prior to deletion, so I can take a look, and assess its value and prospects in light of further reporting. Cheers. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 15:16, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

The Red Tyger Church

Hello, I am a long-time Wikipedian but spend most of my time writing on my Facebook page about what I call "under appreciated rock bands", i.e., those with no Wikipedia article. I am not trying to revive the article on The Red Tyger Church, but I am interested in seeing if I can view the deleted page. I guess I have not tried to look at a fully deleted article before; can you help me take a look? Thank you in advance. Shocking Blue (talk) 09:02, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, you can't view The Red Tyger Church. Only admins can view deleted articles.  Sandstein  17:07, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, and notice

Thank you for clarifying what the "six months" referred to; I thought I could appeal at any time, and was thinking that maybe I would have a "better shot" in six months, but wasn't quite sure. Now I know the difference between appealing to you personally and appealing to AE. With that said, I have filed an appeal at AE, and this is your notice. Regards,TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 23:37, 22 February 2017 (UTC)