User talk:Skittle Stixx

July 2014

Hello, I'm Frosty. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Red Bee (band)  with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ~Frosty (Talk page) 11:08, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

July 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Red Bee (band) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• In February 2014 they joined TEAL (EP produced by [[Lucius Borich]] of [[Cog (band)|Cog]], [[FloatingMe]], Juice and ANUBIS (leading [[

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:32, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Red Bee

The problem with the article is that the references you're using don't pass our reliable sourcing rules. Acceptable sourcing on Wikipedia is real media coverage of the band in newspapers, magazines and the like — an article is not adequately referenced if all you're using for "sourcing" is the band's own promotional materials, because those aren't independent of the band and consequently don't properly demonstrate that they pass any of the criteria in our notability rules for musical artists. We're not like AusMetalGuide, where any band can post a profile just because they exist — bands don't get to be on here until they've been the subject of enough coverage in real published media to prove that they're notable enough to be in an encyclopedia. So if you want it to be saved, what you need to do is ditch the primary source referencing and start sourcing it to real media coverage.

It's not a comment on the band's music or anything — but an article has to meet certain minimum content standards to be allowed on here, and as written your article just isn't there yet. Bearcat (talk) 01:41, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Just for the record, YouTube videos don't cut it as referencing either — and the band's profile on Triple J might have cut it if Triple J had originated that content, but if all Triple J has about Red Bee is a space where the network lets bands repost their own self-penned marketing biographies, then that's still a primary source because the band still wrote it themselves. The only source you've added so far that isn't a complete non-starter is #4 ("loudmag") — and that's still not enough if it's the article's only real source. Bearcat (talk) 21:50, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

The mere fact that the content is on a third-party website is not, in and of itself, determinative. Cowan and Partners is the band's marketing team (it even has "our clients" built right into the URL), and thus is not an independent source giving coverage to the band, but an affiliated source actively involved in creating the band's promotional presence. One of the key distinctions between a primary source and a reliable one is its independence from people who have a vested interest in the band's career — the fact that it's posted on a "third party" site instead of the band's own website doesn't matter, if the content was written by somebody with a direct personal stake in the band. (Which is the same reason why the Triple J source doesn't wash — even though Triple J itself is a perfectly valid source for an article about a band in principle, the specific content in question is merely a reposting of the band's own self-penned marketing biography, rather than coverage being conferred on them by Triple J itself.)

The problem with Metal Obsession, on the other hand, is that it's a blog, which is also a class of sources that we deprecate. Bearcat (talk) 18:05, 3 August 2014 (UTC)