User talk:Danucalov

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Danucalov, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Jeremjay24 _msg 21:22, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Liquid Tension Experiment Live 2008 - Limited Edition Boxset

The article Liquid Tension Experiment Live 2008 - Limited Edition Boxset has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No third party sources or demonstration of notability. Did this ever chart?

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Durova³¹⁸ 16:07, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Liquid Tension Experiment Live 2008 - Limited Edition Boxset

I have nominated Liquid Tension Experiment Live 2008 - Limited Edition Boxset, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liquid Tension Experiment Live 2008 - Limited Edition Boxset. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Durova³¹⁸ 21:27, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Best Of Collection - Christmas Rocks!

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of The Best Of Collection - Christmas Rocks!, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.mtv.com/music/artist/brian_setzer_orchestra/albums.jhtml?albumId=2328554. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 20:05, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:Transatlantic TheAbsoluteUniverse Forevermore-1024x1024.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Transatlantic TheAbsoluteUniverse Forevermore-1024x1024.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 20:46, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Bso-xmas-rocks-cover.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Bso-xmas-rocks-cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 12:48, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Creating articles for non-notable albums

Hello Danucalov. Your contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but please see WP:NALBUMS. Albums need to be notable to have articles created for them on Wikipedia. Links to sites like Discogs or Apple Music that merely prove the album exists are not enough to establish notability. You need to prove with news sources that the album is notable enough to have an article. The Karmakanic articles you created have been redirected for this reason. The albums did not chart and did not receive any reviews that I can find, which does not make them notable. The artist article doesn't even have any citations, which doesn't bode well for their albums being notable. Again, please read WP:NALBUMS. Thanks. Ss112 03:23, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, although I understand the point, it doesn't make sense to me how I was completing the discography of a band that already has a Wikipedia page, one of their albums already has a page and the 2 hours that I spent gathering the information just completely vanished.

Karmakanic is a relatively small band from Sweden with members from The Flower Kings, their albums being released by Inside Out Music.

If it to be notable it has to appear on a chart, Wikipedia would only have Taylor Swift albums nowadays.

There's a ton of reviews here:

https://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=1093

https://progreport.com/karmakanic-dot-album-review/

https://www.angrymetalguy.com/karmakanic-dot-review/

Spotify is not a source, but many songs from them have more than 200.000 plays.

This is extremely frustrating. Bands that deserve more recognition, would never get to be known if they are only considered notable if they make it to the charts. And it is super hard to find information about them regularly, having an updated wikipedia page would definitely help with that. Danucalov (talk) 03:47, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I only redirected the Karmakanic albums, not the Flower Kings albums, which charted and I have added information on. I didn't say albums have to chart, it just helps establish notability for them. As somebody who follows music charts, there is far more than just Taylor Swift charting every week. The basics are articles need news sources and particularly reviews to establish notability. It's good that you've found some reviews, but to note, Prog Archives is not considered a reliable review source as there have been discussions on its use before and it is listed at WP:ALBUMAVOID. The other two reviews you listed above are for one of their albums, Dot, and as somebody who has edited plenty of articles in the rock and metal genres, Prog Report and Angry Metal Guy are two lower-quality sources that I have seen editors remove in favour of higher quality sources.

You only created the articles with an infobox, a track listing, and a list of personnel, which are the very basics. That information could be copied into an article in a matter of minutes (at least, it would take me a matter of minutes). I find it hard to believe it took you two hours to collect basic information about four albums.

To clarify, Wikipedia does not exist as a tool to help music fans find new music acts. Obviously people have found music they might not know otherwise through the website, but it's an encyclopedia first and foremost and we have requirements for notability.

As I also just said in my revert summary, some editors disagree strongly about converting numbered lists into track listing templates, so you might want to not do this. I am not one of these editors, but I do feel that MOS:RETAIN applies if no apparent benefits are being offered by the tabulation of the data. Ss112 04:10, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]