User talk:Ultrajosh

AfD Nomination: The Blind King

An article that you have been involved in editing, The Blind King, has been listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Blind King. Please look there to see why this is, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

--TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 21:43, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

discussion about The Blind King article

It seems like you may be having some issues posting a message to me on my talk page, but I think I get the jist of what you were asking. In regards to the claim of me being an expert on what does and does not belong, that is not true. I do have a particular narrow interpretation of the various nobility critiera, the applicable one here is WP:BAND (there are specific ones others including WP:BIO, WP:CORP and WP:WEB and a more general discussion at WP:NN.) I am sorry you felt you had to give up. Given the volume of new articles that appear every hour, many editors (myself included) regularly review the new articles created, called new page patroling. There are many bands/organizations/corporations that view wikipedia as a place to "get attention" or advertise. Because of this influx, some criteria has to be set to evalute against.

The first step to the creation of any article, and prevent its deletion, is to become familiar with the nobility critiera for the subject, again in this case it is WP:BAND. Be aware that the article only has to meet one of the criteria in the nobility guidelines. It is also important to understand the guidelines around what is deemed a reliable source at the WP:RS page.

I would suggest creating the article on a sub-page of your userpage. See the page Wikipedia:User page and specifically the subsection "How do I create a user subpage?". Once you have created the subpage, you can edit an article there without any risk (well very minimal risk depending on content) of it being deleted before completion. Once you have the article fully created and sourced you can move it to the main space using the move tab at the top of the page.

I wish you well and hope you feel free to contribute going forward. If there is anything else you want to discuss, please feel free to contact me on my talk page.--Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 16:31, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Adding section to user talk page

I got your email you sent to me. I have addressed the issues about the article in my note above. You question about adding to a talk page and having it not appear in the section above. If you are adding a new subject, you can hand this issue in one of two ways (both work on any talk page):

• First, once on the talk page, click on the tab that says "edit this page" and when it comes up you add a title starting with two equal signs (==) and then add the title and then another two equal signs (==). There are two issues with this method, if the talk page is very long, it is a lot of scrolling to get to the bottom of the page and also if you are editing and another user comes to edit after you have opened but before saving, you can lose your edit

• Second, click on the "+" tab (beside the edit this page tab), you will be prompted to add a subject/headline which will become the title of the section and also list in your edit summary. The edit window will be empty and when you save it will add the section to the bottom of the page.

If you wish to comment within a pre-exsisting section on a talk page (ie you want to add your comments below someone elses as a rebuttle) you can follow the first suggestion of clicking on the "edit this page" tab. Another way to comment on a section is to click on the small "edit" word to the right of the section title. That will open up the edit window with only that section's text.

I am going to reverse your blanking of the comments you made on my talk page and add a title.--Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 18:10, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Does The Blind King Belong in WikiPedia?

An experiment in notability wherein I ask myself 2 important questions:

1) "Would you expect to find The Blind King in a paper Encyclopedia?"

2) "How about a really THICK Encyclopedia?"

I carefully reviewed the WP:BAND guidelines and it seems that The Blind King doesn't yet qualify WP:BAND since:

a) though we got an Honor Award in the 2004 Great American Song Contest, we didn't win or place

b) we've never been interviewed on a national radio station, only on SmallWorld Podcast and local radio

c) our reviews so far have only been in local publications

d) only one member is in another band linkable on Wikipedia

e) being in rotation on web media e.g. podcasts / IndieFeed / iTunes etc isn't yet quite the same as being in rotation on a national radio station

g) We release our music on my own label, Careful Records, and distribute via CD-Baby, iTunes, GEMM, Last.fm, etc

h) only one song, Indie Pop Song, was released by a notable label, [[Deep Elm Records ]]

The interesting question to me is whether "notability" is actually desirable, and if so, how important is it relative to other aspects of playing and recording music? What are the trade-offs and are they acceptable? What are the advantages of remaining obscure, if any?

Eventually I'll submit articles on some of our related bands, some of which I believe will meet the qualifications then end up in Wikipedia. For now I'll leave it up to history to convince the Wikipediasts whether The Blind King is notable. They're certainly notable to me.

Ultrajosh 18:54, 15 October 2006 (UTC)