Talk:Modern Drummer

Magazines Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of magazines 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.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
See WikiProject Magazines' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Percussion High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Percussion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of percussion 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.PercussionWikipedia:WikiProject PercussionTemplate:WikiProject PercussionPercussion articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Conflict of Interest (See WP:COI) and Point-of view (see WP:NPOV) issues[edit]

This article has been tagged for a conflict of interest from IP editor 96.57.120.26, whose edit summary states "This pages has been factually edited as well as edited to provide more information about Modern Drummer Magazine. All edits to this page were done from the MOdern Drummer office in Cedar Grove, NJ.".

In addition, this editor has clearly edited the article to provide a non-neutral point of view, without sourcing such statements. For example: "Modern Drummer is the world’s first, most popular, and most highly regarded drum magazine.", "Modern Drummer [...] has been recognized as a major hub of the drumming community", "Today Modern Drummer boasts one of the most loyal readerships not only among music magazines, but in the entire magazine publishing industry", etc.

Also, there are no independent, 3rd party references provided. External links are all directly related to subject. This article needs reliable sources which are unrelated to the subject to verify statements. --Logical Fuzz (talk) 15:56, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV[edit]

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:

There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:11, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Editor's Achievement Award?[edit]

I'm working on the Ringo Starr article, and found a great quote on a Ringo fansite, but would like to have more details on the source.

Editor of Modern Drummer magazine, presenting the Editor's Achievement Award to Ringo -- "What is beyond question is Ringo's impact on an entire generation of drummers who first became drummers as a direct result of seeing and hearing him play in the early days of The Beatles. Literally hundreds of thousands of players -- including some of the greatest drummers playing today -- cite Ringo as their first motivating influence."

Anyone know what issue this was in, and/or have a reliable online source? I tried searching on moderndrummer.com but was not successful. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 01:05, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

references and proposed deletion[edit]

Someone put a "proposed deletion" tag, on the basis on having insufficient references.

Insufficient references is not the sole determining criteria of notability. Many trade magazines share this attribute - they are seldom covered by other publications.

However, over 300 drumming related articles on WP link to this page[1]. Being covered in Modern Drummer is an argument for notability under WP:MUSIC (eg. see [2] and [3]. Hence declaring the magazine itself to be non-notable is thus absurd. Manning (talk) 14:41, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you had not first removed the tag and later wrote this, or, better said, if you had first written this note instead of doing the other, I would have withdrawn my proposal as I am that "someone" who prodded it. But calling "absurd" my move, other than rude, is wrong. Doing a prod "on the basis of having insufficient references" may be right or wrong, but "absurd", not at all. I wanted you to know that. Regards. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 14:55, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was also in the process of deprodding this but Manning Bartlett got there first. Based on some scrutiny of Google and HighBeam results, it appears to me that this publication is notable given the considerations spelled out at WP:NMEDIA#Newspapers, magazines and journals, criteria #3 ("considered by reliable sources to be authoritative in their subject area"), #4 ("frequently cited by other reliable sources") and #5 ("significant publications in ethnic and other non-trivial niche markets"--the niche here being drummers). --Arxiloxos (talk) 17:23, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Manning: What you wrote here was politely appropriate, not rude at all, and generously helpful for now and for the future. It is squarely incumbent upon everyone to not do patently absurdly irresponsible things like trying to carve out cornerstones of our encyclopedia without even a question of what it is first. — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 20:15, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No offence was intended, and we've all made bad decisions in our time. But to propose deleting a world leading, industry-standard magazine such as Modern Drummer... I'm sorry, "absurd" is the ONLY possible term for such an action. I do recommend you check things like "what links here" in future. Manning (talk) 22:43, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely correct. To say it "may be right or wrong" is false equivocation. It is not right. It's just wrong; the concept is against policy because it's abusively, aggressively, illogical. — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 23:02, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Manning. I understand I may have made a wrong "proposal" which was rejected. However, I cannot understand and I do reject as unacceptable (wording intended to keep calm) accusations like "patently absurdly irresponsible things like trying to carve out cornerstones of our encyclopedia". One week ago I PRODded three articles: Somani, Ertegun Brothers and Clarification (Journalism). All three were deleted today as no-one objected. I don't know if there is a way to see one's PRODs, but if it is possible you can see that I have a perfect past in this area. Hit me again if you like, but I am not a drum and may explode... Regards to all. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 08:25, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It could be worse... someone PRODed Gretsch Drums a while ago. We kept it. Andrewa (talk) 03:23, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]