User talk:JazzButcher: Difference between revisions

Hello JazzButcher! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Artaxiad 06:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply] Getting started Wikipedia tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting help Frequently asked questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Building consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

==That link is considered a spam link, as it is strictly a commercial link promoting a commercial product. Those links are unacceptable per Wikipedia policy regarding external links. See Wikipedia:External links The relevant parts are below, I have bolded the criteria that your link fails. Please do not reinsert the link as it will be considered vandalism and dealt with appropriately. Thanks for your time.

Except for a link to a page that is the subject of the article or an official page of the article subject—and not prohibited by restrictions on linking—one should avoid:

1. Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article.
2. Any site that misleads the reader by use of factually inaccurate material or unverifiable research. See Reliable sources.
3. Links mainly intended to promote a website.
4. Links to sites that primarily exist to sell products or services. For example, instead of linking to a commercial bookstore site, use the "ISBN" linking format, giving readers an opportunity to search a wide variety of free and non-free book sources.
5. Links to sites with objectionable amounts of advertising.
6. Links to sites that require payment or registration to view the relevant content.
7. Sites that are inaccessible to a substantial number of users, such as sites that only work with a specific browser.
8. Direct links to documents that require external applications (such as Flash or Java) to view the relevant content, unless the article is about such rich media. If you do link to such material make a note of what application is required.
9. Links to search engine results pages.
10. Links to social networking sites (such as MySpace), discussion forums or USENET.
11. Links to blogs and personal webpages, except those written by a recognized authority.
12. Links to open wikis, except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors.
13. Sites that are only indirectly related to the article's subject: it should be a simple exercise to show how the link is directly and symmetrically related to the article's subject. This means that there is both a relation from the website to the subject of the article, and a relation from the subject of the article to the website. For example, the officially sanctioned online site of a rock band has a direct and symmetric relationship to that rock band, and thus should be linked from the rock band's Wikipedia article. An alternative site run by fans is not symmetrically related to the rock band, as the rock band has only indirect connections with that site. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by A mcmurray (talk • contribs) 07:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I am now considering the reposting of that information or its link vandalism. Despite explanations by me and Kranar you are persisting with this. If you ignore this warning as you did our explanations you will be reported as a vandal. Thanks for your time.

Please stop. If you continue to vandalise Wikipedia, as you did to DeKalb, Illinois, you will be blocked. A mcmurray 07:33, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on METAL sATAN RECORDS, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (below the existing db tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Andante1980 07:19, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I tagged it, because there are no external links, nor does it assert it's notability. Please add external links and other references. You have put the proper tag on it, so the admins will let it live, if it is deemed appropriate. Also please sign your messages. Andante1980 07:38, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, I did a quick google on Metal Satan records. Unfortunately, there are no hits that lead to something directly related to this band. Andante1980 07:54, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Listen, I'm sorry to be so upfront about this, but I don't think Wikipedia is the place to promote a band. There are many better options for that. Besides, wikipedia documents notable, not unheard of bands and persons. I do think you would have to agree with my vision of Metal Satan Records being too small even to be noticed by Google, it has no place in Wikipedia. Andante1980 08:29, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, let's do things this way: Wait for an admin to come along and take a good long look at things. Then it's either stay or delete. But in my view, there's so many other bands, record companies and the likes which put their page on wikipedia and get instantly deleted. All follow the same pattern, one website, no hits on google or any other search engine, and only the person creating the page asserts it's notability. Please also note: Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox, Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest and Wikipedia:Notability#Notability_is_not_subjective. Andante1980 08:51, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed on waiting for the admins. And how to find new pages: On your left side of the screen is an option for "Recent changes" from there you can go to the "New" section. Also quick link: Special:Newpages. If you wish you can help keep Wikipedia clean by checking and adding deletion requests. (It would be appreciated, too many ppl created bogus pages. Not everyone even will try to actually be neutral and also properly assert notability.) See: Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion. And really, I have nothing against you or the page you created, just that it matches a certain pattern which I have tagged quite a few times and which subsequently got deleted. Nothing personal. Please keep Wikipedia clean and green, so that other can also enjoy it! Andante1980 09:13, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, by the way, programs do exist to monitor such things also. Just that they require the .NET framework, and I can't be bothered to get them. ;) Andante1980 09:15, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haha. What is it that makes your little arcade more notable than my gas station? Nothing. It's an arcade, its not notable. You're the only one that thinks its notable. We are writing an encyclopedic. Wikipedia is NOT a random collection of knowledge, a phone book, an advertising service or your personal soapbox so you can tell the world that some arcade owner gives you popcorn.A mcmurray 12:09, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Debate away: But look at this first.

"General notability is not judged by Wikipedia editors directly. The inclusion of topics on Wikipedia is a reflection of whether those topics have been included in reliable published works. Other authors, scholars, or journalists have decided whether to give attention to a topic, and in their expertise have researched and checked the information about it. Thus, the primary notability criterion is a way to determine whether "the world" has judged a topic to be notable. This is unrelated to whether a Wikipedia editor personally finds the subject remarkable or worthy."

Now it is up to you to produce reliable, published sources from other authors, scholars or non-trivial publications that assert the arcade is as notable as you say it is. Good luck. Until you can produce that your information cannot go into the article. It's not that I hate your arcade or you. Every business in DeKalb cannot be listed as a point of interest, you have to see that. Your arcade has to meet criteria like everything else.

Oh, and before you scream at me on my talk page again familirize yourself enough with our policy that you don't come off like the uninformed psychotic that you did with that post.A mcmurray 12:18, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS- Not to be nitpicky but could you please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~).A mcmurray 12:22, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More: Perhaps my warning was a bit harsh. But it was NOT with malice, nor was the removal of your information. It seemed the last addition of that information, was in fact, malice on your part. Because:

1. Despite having its removal explained by two editors you reinserted it. 2. You are introducing it without citation, which makes it impossible to verify. And no, in case you were wondering the arcade's web site does not qualify as a reliable source. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources. 3. Unless you are younger than 14 (and even then, in a lot of cases) you realize that the material you are introducing is not notable and does not belong in an encyclopedia.

Think about what you are doing before you accuse me of malice. If your edits were good faith you (or whoever the anon was before you registered, they would have been addressed on the talk page long ago, which they were not (because I have been reverting that information for a bit now).A mcmurray 12:28, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No not "alright guy." I am no longer dealing with this. I have notified administrators and have decided to await their action. Thanks.A mcmurray 03:07, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's guidelines on spam and external links will help you understand the objections to the arcade information. One way to counter these arguments would be to find some published sources indicating that this arcade is some sort of local landmark. If such sources don't exist, then perhaps its just a matter of time before a local paper recognizes the uniqueness of a retro arcade and writes a Sunday feature about it. Be patient, follow the rules, and you'll get what you want. Rklawton 20:09, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not the yellow pages and Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. An arcade doesn't strike me as worth mentioning unless its registered historical or something. Those sections kind of attract that sort of thing just like local bands in notable persons sections.A mcmurray 22:32, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guess what. I don't care what you think. I can't see further than my own nose at this moment. So guess what? Fuck off that's what. I know what you're up to mr. I dont wanna pay for advertising so guess what fuck off. I am an established user and your a fuck, so fuck off. I hate you so fuck off and die you loser. Fuck off and die I am sick of parading around the carousel with you. Go fuck yourself you loser.User:A mcmurray (talk • contribs) 05:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Report me, lick me, whatever. I dont give a fuck. why dont ya come to dekalb and confront you fukin douche bag asshat mutahfuka. you dont know me. you dont shit about me. so why dont ya? huh? im fuckin sick of actin like some spammer is a legimite user you are a fuck. I intend to treat you like it. So why not you fuck ass? huh? you got the guts to change some shit on wikipedia but ill fuck your ass up. So what now? What now? huh? all these other users may be ready to play nice but i am not, guess what, you caught me up in somethin i care about. so fuk u, call the cops, call your brothers, i dont give a fuck, bring it you loser manwhore, I WILL FUCKING ROK YOUR SHIT, this aint heyworth bitch. fuck you

I suggest all of you calm down and stop yelling obscenities at eachother. In the end that's not going to help anyone. And JazzButcher, please remember, bans are easy to get and difficult to get rid of. So, everyone remain civilized and handle this as grown ups. (As for McMurray, i would have expected someone who's been around on wikipedia longer not to fall into such yelling fits.) Andante1980 10:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've counted three experienced editors (including the one who lost his cool) all trying to explain to you that your edits to DeKalb aren't appropriate. Notice that none of the reasons stated fall within the five pillars of Wikipedia. Indeed, they more closely resemble what is not permitted. Your desire to help your friend has no bearing on the Wikipedia or its purpose. Indeed, it clearly represents a conflict of interest. However, if you would like additional opinions, then you might wish to ask an administrator or log a request for comment. You will lose this one, but it's your nickle. Rklawton 13:25, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad I could help, and I'm sorry about the rough start. Actually, I got my start a couple of years ago with an anonymous account vandalizing articles in order to "prove" a point to my students. Instead, Wikipedia proved a point to me. Very cool. One of the problems Wikipedians face every day is that we're a vandal magnet. As a result, some of us develop some pretty short fuses. That's a shame, though, since that sort of thing also upsets new users who might possibly offer considerable assistance over the months and years if only we were nicer. That, in the end, would give us a lot more firepower in fighting off the bad guys. And you certainly aren't in the vandal category. We've got another policy here, one that we should apply more often. It's called assume good faith. I wish those of us with more experience would apply this more often in our communications.

Oh, here are some ideas for helping out your friend. Take a quick inventory of his games. Look up each game here on Wikipedia. Chances are they're all notable. Now see if these articles have nice illustrations. If not, grab a digital camera, take some high quality images, and upload them here to help illustrate the game article. In the image upload page, be sure to credit the photographer - and the owner(!!) of the game (name of business, city, state). Just don't make it look like an advertisement. If you need a hand with this process, don't hesitate to drop me a note. Cheers - Rklawton 04:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What you have to understand, as we have explained to you time and time again is that there is no way that the place you want to put in here is noteworthy enough for the Wikipedia. Yes, it is a small business that allows a person to play old video games, but what you have to understand is this isn't the Yellow Pages. This is an encyclopedia. Mom and Pop stores or small businesses aren't noteworthy at all to put in here unless they have a lot of history. As I have already said, if their building had something in history happen there it might qualify, or if the business is a huge economic boon for the community. How many millions or billions of dollars is this gaming store of yours pumping into the DeKalb community? I am thinking that it is more like thousands, which is not a big deal. One example would be DaimlerChrysler having a plant in Belvidere, or HamiltonSundstrand having a plant in Rockford, they have a lot of history for being there. What you have to know is what battles to fight, and what not too. Even if you were to make this as a suggestion to the greater community of Wikipedians it would still fail. My suggestion is to move on, try and expand the history of your hometown.--Kranar drogin 11:41, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry.A mcmurray (talk • contribs) 05:08, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]