User talk:Alainbryden

Hello, Alainbryden, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Manual of Style
Also feel free to make test edits in the sandbox.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place "{{helpme}}" on your talk page and someone will drop by to help. You can also contact me if you wish by clicking "talk" to the right of my name. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:06, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alphabasic etc

Hi, thanks for message. I don't think it's quite as simple as that. Although the taggings for SD may have been motivated by bad faith, that doesn't mean they were wrong—I do read before hitting the delete button. I've accepted that the the artists and labels may be notable and restored, but I think that the albums are a different matter.

It's my understanding that albums even by a notable artist need to show that they have individual notability through sales, awards etc to merit more than a redirect. The articles I deleted provided no evidence of notability. I looked at Opus at the End of Everything, which is typical of those I deleted. The text was just Opus at the End of Everything is the eleventh studio album by The Flashbulb (Benn Jordan). It was released by Alphabasic on 10 February 2012. and a track listing with no indication of notability either of the album as a whole or of individual tracks
The "references" were nothing of the sort, just two links to commercial sales sites.

Basically what we have is a sales pitch for an album with no claim of notability and no genuine references. I'm unconvinced that there is a case for undeleting obvious spamming, and I'd welcome your further views. The articles can, of course, be recreated as redirects

Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:48, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Links to sales sites aren't evidence of anything regarding notability, and they are never acceptable. If the only source is the company itself or other sales sites, it's not notable, and none of the articles had any genuine refs. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the company, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company claims or interviewing its management.

Having said that, I am minded to follow your suggestion, restore without the spamlinks and AFD as non-notable. It's getting very busy in RL at the moment, and it may not happen for a few days. That shouldn't really matter, and it gives a chance for the half-hearted accusation of sock-puppetry below to be resolved, happy Christmas

Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:38, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, at least one article, Bit-Phalanx was written by User:Literatemovie, the company's MD. This is a concealed COI and paid advocacy, which is not permitted Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:13, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sock puppetry

Hello Alainbryden. It appears another Wikipedia editor has opened an investigation into sock puppetry by you, which means they suspect you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. The editor who opened the investigation against you looks like a sock puppet of Musicchief007 (talk · contribs), however, and they are under investigation as well. Personally, I am struggling a bit to make sense of this whole situation. On one hand, we have the confirmed group of sock puppets under Musicchief007, but on the other hand, we have editors like you and Subgeek who are coming out of a long period of dormancy just to participate in Benn Jordan-related discussions. I have confidence that you and Subgeek were contributing in good faith, however. Whenever you get the chance, feel free to respond at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Alainbryden. If you have not been abusing multiple accounts, don't worry, as that will almost always be the finding. Regards, Mz7 (talk) 03:44, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External discussion

You mentioned on the sockpuppet investigation page that discussion of the Benn Jordan deletion was happening on other sites/forums—can you please point me to those discussions? czar 22:28, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]