User talk:Thepissernettes

Welcome

I removed the welcome notice, because it was messing up the way your talk page was displayed. You can view it at Welcome to Wikipedia!! Ø tVaughn05 ^talk_contribs

Vandalism Notice

Please stop deliberately introducing incorrect information into articles. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.
Also, I have moved the text that you placed in your talk page about yourself, into your main userpage. Ø tVaughn05 ^talk_contribs

THIS IS A BAND AND IT SHOULD BE ON WIKIPEDIA AS A BAND

I apologize, I was not posting refering to the band, I was refering to your edits on the aricle Urination. If you would like to make an article on this band on Wikipedia, feel free to create one, but be sure that it meets Wikipedia's policies, and guidelines. For example, here is a band article that I created. Slingshot 57 - Ø tVaughn05 ^talk_contribs
- Aha, you did create an article on your band. However, it was nominated for speedy deletion, because it is nonsense. Please change the article to conform to Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Also, please stop vandalizing the article Urination. Vandalizing can earn you a block from one of the administrators.If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Ø tVaughn05 ^talk_contribs

It's not nonsense; it's an actual band. I was under the impression that music was a form of artistic expression and regardless of what you may or may not deem to be balderdash does not dispute the fact that it is still artwork. What would have happened if someone told Salvador Dali that his paintings were absurd, or that William Shakespeare's plays were poppycock? There are several bands / musicians that exist right now (Tenacious D, Incredibad, "Weird Al" Yankovic, to name a few) that are definitely classifiable as nonsense, yet they are actual, legitimate bands / musicians. Their ludicrousness is what makes them popular. I'm certain that when they started they were told on more than one occasions that they were toying with imprudency, yet they were tenacious (pardon the pun) and continued making music. Look where they are now: Jack Black stars in movies, the members of Incredibad now write for Saturday Night Live, and "Weird Al" Yankovic is the proud owner of three Grammy awards.

I didn't realize that Wikipedia was run by fascists.

Also, while several of my contributions to the article Urination were nonsense, several of them were justifiable and completely correct. It is arguable that your deletions of all of my additions were nonsense.

The pissernettes article

I've deleted it per terms of WP:CSD A7. For futher comments on this, please see Talk:The pissernettes, which will be temporarily available but will eventually be deleted as an orphaned talk page. --Durin 14:58, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the talk page has already been deleted. My comment there was: "I'm going to speedy delete the article. There's no claim to notability. Playing a few bar mitzvahs is insufficient. The band has no CD releases. Though there are some planned for the future, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Anal Cunt and Gwar both have extensive histories and discographies. Any comparison of this group to them is without merit for the purposes of claims of notability. I also agree with comments made above; Wikipedia is not an advertising venue." --Durin 14:59, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The burning sarcasm used by the moderators on this website destroys more of Wikipedia's credibility. "Wikipedia is not a crystal ball" -- was this necessary? It's obvious Wikipedia is not a crystal ball as it is not a sphere created from glass that allows one to see into the future. The grammar used by the moderators is atrocious, and I use the sentence Durin used as an example: "Anal Cunt and Gwar both have extensive GWAR both have extensive histories and discographies."

In terms of claims of notibility, perhaps you are correct in stating that comparing The Pissernettes to Gwar or Anal Cunt is without merit. HOWEVER, I clearly stated in basic English that I was comparing The Pissernettes to Gwar and Anal Cunt as all being real bands, regardless of how vulgar or uncouth they may seem to be.

I am forced to comment upon your grammatical structure yet again with your last sentence. I also agree with comments made about; Wikipedia is not an advertising venue." This makes little to no sense. You also agree with the comments made about what? The inappropriate semi-colon use has thrown me off, and the accusation of The Pissernettes using Wikipedia as an advertising venue is not only false, but it's getting cumbersome continuing to defend. It has already been stated that The Pissernettes were using Wikipedia as a venue for more information, not to advertise themselves. No offense, but Wikipedia isn't necessarily the best place for one to advertise themselves due to the fact it lacks credibility. I mean, you have a thirteen-year-old as one of the moderators, for crying out loud. I don't care how high his IQ is, I'm pretty sure Encyclopedia Britannica, an authorized, established, well-renouned encyclopedia, cannot boast that they have thirteen-year-olds on staff (volunteer or otherwise). If they do, I will eat my words.

I understand your decision to have The Pissernettes account deleted, but I wanted it shown on the record that I think these rules are fascist and draw parallels to harsh World War Two Nazi-Germany policies. Thepissernettes 15:38, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All of us are human and are imperfect creatures. We do make mistakes in grammar from time to time. You make mistakes too; you titled the article on this group "The pissernettes". In the article, you referred to them as "The Pissernettes". Further, above you say "well-renouned". It is properly spelled "renowned". So you see, you make mistakes as well.
As for the comparisons to Anal Cunt and Gwar: Whether The Pissernettes are vulgar is no matter to me. I do not care, nor does Wikipedia policy as Wikipedia is not censored for the protection of minors.
As for The Pissernettes being a real band: I have no reason to dispute that The Pissernettes is a real band, nor do I care to do so. Being real is not sufficient for inclusion in an encyclopedia. The large tree on my front lawn is real, but that alone is not sufficient to merit an article in an encyclopedia. Please note that I am not comparing The Pissernettes to a tree, just noting that being real is not sufficient criteria for inclusion. You may wish to review Wikipedia:Verifiability for more information on this subject.
That you are using Wikipedia to advertise the band is not a false accusation. You stated it yourself, as on the talk page of the article you said "I do not think that Wikipedia should be infringing on how some bands choose to advertise themselves". These are your words, and are the basis for why people have said you are attempting to advertise yourself.
As for credibility of Wikipedia, you are certainly welcome to raise the question. Others have before, and others will in the future. I find it interesting that you reference Encyclopedia Britannica. You might be interested to know that Nature magazine conducted a comparison of Wikipedia and Encyclopedia Britannica in December of 2005, and Wikipedia did rather well. In a detailed analysis, the errors per word average for Britannica was one and a half times that of Wikipedia. You can read the review yourself if you like. More information is available here on Wikipedia. It would appear based on that review that editors at Wikipedia (including the 13 year olds that you deride) are doing at least as good of a job as the paid, professional staff of Encyclopedia Britannica.
As for deleting accounts: Wikipedia does not delete accounts. We can and do delete articles. There is nothing fascist about the policies and procedures for doing so. Wikipedia works by the development of community consensus, not via authoritarian structures which fascist states employ. The policy at Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion is official policy, and has evolved over time with community input, not by the rule of a single person or group of people. The article on The Pissernettes was deleted per the policy of Articles 7 on that page, where it says "Unremarkable people or groups. An article about a real person, group of people, band or club that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject. If the assertion is disputed or controversial, it should be taken to AFD instead". You may feel that it is disputed, but Wikipedia has previously gained consensus that bands such as yours have not achieved any threshold of notability. You may review this at Wikipedia:Notability (music).
If you have other questions or concerns, I'd be happy to discuss them with you. All the best, --Durin 16:33, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yet you do not argue the parallels between Wikipedia and the harsh World War Two Nazi-Germany policies. Interesting. Thepissernettes 06:35, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did. Please read above. If you still truly believe that Wikipedia is a fascist state, then I invite you to recreate the article The Pissernettes. I will then tag it for deletion as per direction at WP:AFD. Then, a number of random people can all contribute their opinions on whether to keep or delete the article. Such a discussion is the very antithesis of fascism. I am in ernest; recreate the article. --Durin 13:48, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]