User talk:DualShowman
Your submission at Articles for creation
[edit]
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/HDtracks.com.
- To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the . Please remember to link to the submission!
- You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
- Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:18, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation
[edit]- If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/HDtracks.com.
- To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the . Please remember to link to the submission!
- You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
- Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! avs5221(talk|contrib) 21:28, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation
[edit]- To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the . Please remember to link to the submission!
- You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
- Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Lawsonmediaworks (talk) 23:37, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm confused. I've written this from a neutral, verifiable, third-party perspective. I've included notability links to Wall Street Journal, the New York TImes, CNN Technology News, Stereophile, etc. I was very careful to make sure that the story was NOT written as an ad for this website, and followed closely the examples from iTunes, eMusic and other digital music stores that have approved articles on Wikipedia. HDtracks.com deserves to have an entry because they were the first ones in the industry to offer high-resolution music from all the major labels, the first to offer these files without any digital rights management, years before iTunes did with Apple, and have effectively pioneered this industry. Can I please get some specific examples of what it is you think makes this read like an advertisement vs the neutral, factual, third-party article that I wrote it to be? I'm not an HDtracks employee, I'm not writing and ad for them. Their parent company, Chesky Records, has a Wikipedia entry, which is referenced, too. I would appreicate some actual examples of what it is I need to change to get this approved rather than having to guess at it, as I have done my best to write it so it did NOT appear as an ad and was filled with factual, notable references to the company's important work for audiophile customers like myself.
Your submission at Articles for creation
[edit]- If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/HDtracks.com.
- To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the . Please remember to link to the submission!
- You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
- Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 00:58, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation
[edit]- To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the . Please remember to link to the submission!
- You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
- Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Lawsonmediaworks (talk) 01:09, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Would you please tell me how my HDtracks entry is reading like an advertisement, while eMusic, iTunes and other similar Wikipedia pages that are approved, which this was originally modeled after, do not read as advertisements? I tried diligently to use them as templates for content, and I've provided lots of notability references from respects newspapers, books, trade publications, websites, etc. I'd really like to get this write, but the unfortunate lack of detail in the process of turning down the article is not helping. I am reading the requirements, and am following the guidelines. What specifically reads like an ad?
- Language like "HDtracks solved problems often complained about by consumers of downloadable music"; and all the worshipful stuff about the glories of the Chesky Brothers; those are the things that first strike me. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:19, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Blocked anyway
[edit]
- Why can't I edit Wikipedia?
Your account's edits and/or username indicate that it is being used on behalf of a company, group, website or organization for purposes of promotion and/or publicity. The edits may have violated one or more of our rules on spamming, which include: adding inappropriate external links, posting advertisements, and using Wikipedia for promotion. Wikipedia has many articles on companies, groups, and organizations, but such groups are generally discouraged from using Wikipedia to write about themselves. In addition, usernames like yours are disallowed under our username policy.
- Am I allowed to make these edits if I change my username?
Probably not. See Wikipedia's FAQ for Organizations for a helpful list of frequently asked questions by people in your position. Also, review the conflict of interest guidance to see the kinds of limitations you would have to obey if you did want to continue editing about your company, group, organization, or clients. If this does not fit in with your goals, then you will not be allowed to edit again.
- What can I do now?
If you have no interest in writing about some other topic than your organization, group, company, or product, you will probably not be allowed to edit Wikipedia again. Consider using one of the many websites that allow this instead.
If you do intend to make useful contributions about some other topic, you must convince a Wikipedia administrator that you mean it. To that end, please do the following:
- Add the text
{{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}}on your user talk page. - Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:Listusers to search for available usernames. Your new username will need to meet our username policy.
- Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In this reason, you must:
- Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the edits for which you were blocked.
- Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.
{{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. 
DualShowman (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Requested username:
Request reason:
I am NOT trying to write an advertisement. This entry is NOT being used on behalf of a company, group, website or organization for purposes of promotion and/or publicity. Perhaps somebody saw the user name and assumed I was some kind of publicist or something? Well, I'm not. I publish book and videos for recording engineers.
I am trying to make an encyclopedia entry about a company I know and admire that were the first to sell high resolution downloadable music without DRM restrictions and I referenced lots of third-party sources like CNN, New York Times, Wall Street Journal. Though I don't work for HDtracks.com I am a fan and user and acquaintance of the owners but that's it. Having advised them on an issue they had a few years ago I am incorrectly attributed in some online articles as "Mike Lawson of HDtracks" but that's inaccurate. I've never been an employee of HDtracks.com. I am a customer/user, and longtime acquaintance of the owners, which is what gave me the connections and insight to try to pen a factual, encyclopedic entry that I thought should be here in light of entries for iTunes Store, eMusic, etc but none about HDtracks.com and its introduction of high-resolution audio downloads to the marketplace.
The stuff OrangeMike complained about I added after the first entry I made because of non-specific criticisms, so I tried to re-write again, and before I could even change Mike's editorial concerns, I found I was blocked and labeled a spammer. Spammer? That really hurts, guys. I'm not a spammer. Not even close. This blocking of my account is unwarranted.
I am simply a first-time Wikipedia user, just learning the ropes. I don't think taking the nuclear option of blocking my account forever and calling me a spammer is fair, when all I've tried to do is put in an entry on par with iTunes, eMusic and others. If my language was too flowery, then let me change it, but branding me a spammer and blocking me for life?
I modeled the first entry after the iTunes Store page. Compare it with the categories and general info covered for HDtracks.com and you'll see I was doing that. I sincerely thought I was on target.
Though i've published some of the biggest-selling books in my industry, I've NEVER come to Wikipedia to toot my own horn or use this site for publicity for authors or books, etc. If I wouldn't do that for my own products, why would I try to use Wikipedia for advertising and spamming promotion of somebody else's company? My name is even referenced in articles for Bob Welch, Merl Saunders, Vince Welnick, Melvin Seals and other famous musicians, but I've never tried to create my own Wikipedia page.
I'm not a spammer or abuser of Wikipedia. If I were, would I not have tried to submit self-aggrandizing entries about my music career, or my publishing career or other accomplishments? Having "spamusernameblock" stings something terrible.
Please give me the benefit of the doubt here, folks. Unblock me, help me sort out a solid entry and educate me, but don't cut me off without a good reason. I want to do the right thing, and expected some practical guidance, not being blocked completely so I can't edit. The block should be removed so I can continue to refine this entry until it is acceptable. If my name needs to be changed then change it, I've submitted that request here, too.
Thank you for your replies. I'm afraid I'm having difficulty sorting out how to use the Talk pages. I'm new to this. There aren't clear "submit" or "post" navigation tools or I'd use them. Please forgive my primitive use here while I try to learn to navigate the site.
FYI, I wasn't referencing iTunes, the software, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITunes_Store the store, which is what I used to model the original entry for HDtracks. You can see by my categories of original entry here that I used the same ones on the iTunes Store page. If I need to re-write things, I'll re-write them, but please understand where I took my guidance from, which was an approved, similar listing. I'm just perplexed that i've had account creations blocked and been marked as a spammer when trying to refine an article.
Re:Modeled After - Thank you for lifting the block, I will submit a request to change my user name. To clarify, I think you misunderstood what I meant by "modeled after." I used the iTunes Store entry as a guide to the types of information I should include. I did not lift a single word from their entry for the HDtracks entry, I simply used their apparently acceptable entry (though I humbly submit an editor might want to check into why iTunes Store has been allowed to reference their own press releases as references). I am a publisher by trade, and have even published two books on copyright law, so I can assure you that I am not only well-versed in copyright law in the USA, but also have not violated any of Wikipedia's own guidance on copyrights. I don't know which version of the entry you think to be horrifically promotional, but rest assured I m trying diligently to strip it down and make it acceptable. Getting direct, specific examples from editors is very helpful. Some things that I've put in the HDtracks entry that have been deemed unacceptable have somehow passed muster in a lot of other entries I've read that use similar language, so I hope you'll understand just how confusing it is to the new person trying to write an entry. Wikipedia published very detailed standards, but the application of those standards is extremely unevenly enforced, which makes it difficult to determine sometimes what is and is not acceptable. Bottom line, I am going to make a stab at creating an entry that hopefully everyone will be happy with, and I will submit the name change just as soon as I master the process to do so. |}Accept reason:
Note for admins: I'm taking the unusual step of unblocking without consulting the blocking admin, purely because I know Mike and reckon he'd probably agree with an unblock. I will, however, be notifying him of my decision, and will not object or consider it a violation of WP:WHEEL if he reblocks or asks me or another admin to do so.
Yunshui 雲水 10:30, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
- I have to say, I've just read the AfC version of the article, and it really does look very promotional to me - it's puffing up everything that's good about HDtracks, and almost every sentence is essentially trying to tell us how much better HDtracks is than all the others. If you really can't see how promotional that writing comes across (even if it is not meant to be advertising), then I really don't think you have the necessary judgment to be writing this article. (And yes, I have read the iTunes article too) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 01:21, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
- Oh, and your username is a problem too. You cannot have a username that sounds like it's representing a company or organization - Wikipedia usernames are specifically for individuals only. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 01:22, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
- Also, I'm not an admin at the moment (I'm on a break from admin duties), and I will not be the one formally reviewing your unblock request. So if you have any points to make or questions to ask, you should do so here rather than emailing me, so the reviewing admin can see them. But you did ask me how to change your username - the details of how to use {{unblock-spamun}} are contained in the block notice, above. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 01:29, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
- Hi, You only need one unblock request at a time, so I've merged the two requests into one, above - hope that's OK with you. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 04:05, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
- One more comment from me, for the reviewing admin - were I in a position to review, I would be minded to recommend an unblock (after a discussion with the blocking admin first). Lawsonmediaworks/DualShowman comes across as genuine to me - I think this is someone who really just hasn't understood the way articles are written here, and I honestly don't think there's been an attempt at commercial promotion. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 04:38, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
Congratulations on the re-name
[edit]Hope to see you working here in the future. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:40, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. Please be patient with me as I learn the ropes. There is a lot I can contribute as time goes on. Learning the coding, the process, the acceptable use, etc presents a great learning curve. Not to be critical of Wikipedia, but its a little difficult to write an entry and use what looks like an acceptable description of something judging from other approved page content, only to find out its not later. A good example is Apple's iTunes Store entry. Its got a lot of links to iTunes press releases directly on Apple's site. Even as a newbie here I know better than to link to the press releases of the subject's website.
So far the experience has been a lot like dealing with Apple's iBookstore as a publisher. They never tell you specifically what's wrong with an eBook upload, they give you this wide range of things to look at instead, which is kind of maddening. I am most happy that its been established that I didn't setup this account to spam or violate Wikipedia's rules. I am hoping now that Kevin Rutherford will help me with the next entry edit as he said he'd try to do in an email, so we can get this first entry finally published and I'll have a better handle on what's acceptable by the sysops. Sysop, man that's a term I haven't used since I was a Sysop on Compu$erve back 20 years ago! DualShowman | Talk
Your submission at Articles for creation
[edit]- If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/HDtracks.com.
- To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the . Please remember to link to the submission!
- You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
- Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 02:56, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Just a heads up
[edit]Hey Mike, your e-mail has been hacked and is sending out spam. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 07:14, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation
[edit]
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
- If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
- If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:10, 9 February 2013 (UTC)Essra Mohawk
[edit]Adding details of someone's death need to be cited from a good source. You can understand how upsetting it might be for people to be incorrectly listed as dead, either by mistake or maliciously. Do you have a source? Escape Orbit (Talk) 19:05, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
We know that posts like this strongly suggest that she has, in fact, died. However, there have been plenty of false claims that people have died in the past, and Wikipedia requires any similar claims to be first published in reliable sources - not Facebook posts. All will become clear in a day or so, I'm sure. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:10, 11 December 2023 (UTC)