Talk:Even If It Kills Me
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
 | The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
Strange Glue Spam
[edit]- Okay, I doubt that the person who's doing it is gonna read this, but I plan to revert the page every time that someone adds the Strange Glue review to this page. Strange Glue is not a professional review site, so it has no place on the sidebar. Not only that, but whomever's editing the page has the audacity to post the link to the review at the top of the article page. This is the very definition of spam, and I plan on keeping it out of this page. Jopari 12:11, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
- Link to a list of acceptable professional review sites: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/WP:ALBUM#Review_sites. Note the absence of Strange Glue. :) Jopari 14:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Reply: Quoted from the WikiPedia info section "Professional reviews may include only reviews written by professional music journalists or DJs, or found within any online or print publication having a (paid or volunteer) editorial and writing staff (which excludes personal blogs). The standard for inclusion always is that the review meet Wikipedia's guideline for reliable sources and that the source be independent of the artist, record company, etc. A list of some sources of professional reviews is available at WP:ALBUM#Review sites."
I don't know why you're making a personal attack out of this Jopari, considering that Strange Glue has a staff over at least 5 people, some of whom are qualified journalists. They are obviously registered to receive promotional copies of albums from record companies, and are even quoted on Deep Elm's website in conjuction with their Emo Diaries 11 release. Or do you not consider Deep Elm a professional record company? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.157.65.221 (talk) 15:43, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- There are a few reasons why I have reversed the Strange Glue additions. The main reason was because the manner in which it was added (a link to the review on the top of the page) has all the earmarkings of a spam link--in this occasion, to generate page views for a little known review site. My suspicions were further confirmed when I saw that the Strange Glue review was added both times by the same IP address. A proper review website becomes popular through good reviews and word of mouth, not by spamming Wikipedia sites with their reviews. Since I am a registered Wikipedia editor, it is my duty to make sure that sites stay spam-free, and I intend to do so. This has nothing to do with personal attacks, nor any bias towards even the site itself (I read the review, it seemed like a pretty good one); rather, my offense stems from the manner in which the review is posted. And if someone who's not apparently connected to the site were to post the review (read: someone without an IP address starting in "86.13*"), I would probably leave it up. That said, though, spam on one of my watched pages will NOT be tolerated. Thanks for your time. Jopari 19:46, 23 September 2007 (UTC)