User talk:Musicbyshineywater

The band has verified journalism in the U.K. from 2013 & 2015 from UNCUT magazine which is internationally printed for music fans with a website. Musicbyshineywater (talk) 03:19, 14 February 2017 (UTC) Cool Wiki helpers will recognize that since 2013 LIBRARY OF SANDS music has been listed & for sale..... The other Wiki editors listed here are too lazy to help & prefer to be negative. Google UNCUT MUSIC MAGAZINE & Wiki helpers will find 3-4 pages of relevant music links.[reply]

Wiki helper can use this link to start editing.

http://www.uncut.co.uk/blog/wild-mercury-sound/the-sixth-uncut-playlist-of-2013-hear-mikal-cronin-retribution-gospel-choir-jennie-o-library-of-sands-3rd-eye-foundation-26075

Welcome

Hello Musicbyshineywater and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your contributions do not conform to our policies. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.

I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! KGirlTrucker81^{huh? what I've been doing} 21:33, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A summary of some important site policies and guidelines

It is recommended that you do not add anything relating to yourself to article space, and it is expressly forbidden to use Wikipedia to promote anything about yourself.
We do not publish original thought nor original research. We're not a blog, we're not here to promote anything.
"Truth" is not the only criteria for inclusion, verifiability is also required.
Always cite a source for any new information. When adding this information to articles, use <ref>reference tags like this</ref>, containing the name of the source, the author, page number, publisher or web address (if applicable).
A subject is considered notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.
Primary sources are usually avoided to prevent original research. Secondary or tertiary sources are preferred for this reason as well.
Reliable sources typically include: articles from magazines or newspapers (particularly scholarly journals), or books by recognized authors (basically, books by respected publishers). Online versions of these are usually accepted, provided they're held to the same standards. User generated sources (like Wikipedia) are to be avoided. Self-published sources should be avoided except for information by and about the subject that is not self-serving (for example, citing a company's website to establish something like year of establishment).
Biographies of persons assumed to be alive are held to especially high standards of verifiability -- all unsourced information may be removed, no matter how plausible.

Ian.thomson (talk) 00:21, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you keep saying "we" -- Wikipedia does not allow shared accounts. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:22, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Musicbyshineywater, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Musicbyshineywater! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Jtmorgan (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Help me!

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Please help me with...

It seems Wikipedia thinks a music band should hire a Wiki expert a band page? This band has links to verify Journalism:

Adding these 3-5 links to the band page, as that some bad Wiki Editor refused to verify actual journalism links, (no matter how bilingual he thinks he is) a Wikipedia editor will find the band listed more with this particular music zine.

Link for bands journalism verified: http://www.uncut.co.uk/blog/wild-mercury-sound/the-sixth-uncut-playlist-of-2013-hear-mikal-cronin-retribution-gospel-choir-jennie-o-library-of-sands-3rd-eye-foundation-26075

Music distributor CLEARSPOT NETHERLANDS also gives verified band international sales.

Also, the band is multiple people, & some dumb editor cited the band page As unnotable for that reason? As the provided link shows notable work as "Top 15 2015 playlist by UNCUT MAGAZINE it proves a editor for Wiki has already abused the "citing" instead of researching the band to find facts. Focusing on building this page should be Wikipedia & Not the band is agreed, yet facts are essential. All the gigs played are verifiable..... So that editor has already abused his "citing" activity.

Musicbyshineywater (talk) 04:03, 14 February 2017 (UTC) Musicbyshineywater (talk) 04:03, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, focusing with only the best major independent news and reviews helps (you can list any available here), as that's what will help. Wiki experts are not hired as that method is never used. SwisterTwister talk 05:20, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]