User talk:Redvers/Archive31

Nahib is up again

I dont think that person understand English. But i think its obvious from the website link at the bottom it is about an entity. Would you rather place it on WP:PNT or let another admin deal with it? Monster Under Your Bed ^(talk) 09:53, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, salted. From the previous version with a scattering of English, the company was (a) being advertised and (b) wasn't notable. So I'm happy for it to go. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 09:55, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Tyne Tees Television

Hello! First of all, thanks for your support at FAC. The article eventually made it, after about two years work! I've been working on the Tyne Tees article, with the intention of bringing it to GA (I don';t think we have any ITV regions at GA?). I know it's one of your pet topics, so would you mind casting your eye over it to see if there's anything you think is missing, etc.? No hurry. The JPS^{talk to me} 10:07, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Great idea; it would be nice to have one of the ITV companies at GA/FA (you're right, none of them have ever managed it). I'll give it a look over this week. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 10:36, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

SpaceVidcast deletion

please do not delete this page again without a nomination. I have consulted users involved in the notability and website projects and have got the opinion that this video podcast is notable enough to have a wikipedia article.U5K0 (talk) 13:49, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Please provide evidence of these discussions; please also make sure your articles assert notability within the article itself with references to third-party reliable sources. The article, in the form it appeared before, would be deleted again. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 13:51, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

[1],[2]

I have just begun to work on this article, it will have references by the end of today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by U5K0 (talk • contribs)

You asked in half a dozen places, but received only two replies: one saying basically "no", and one telling you to include a certain reference and find another (you did neither). So you've come to my talk page and been a bit economical with the truth. Don't do that again.

Also, put the references in the article first, not last or it will be deleted again. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 13:55, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

I asked in more than one place because a few of these projects are inactive. Both replies were favourable: "...In this case chance favors you because of the newspaper story you cite." , "...I'd feel confident anchoring an article with that."U5K0 (talk) 14:00, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

And then you didn't bother to cite the newspaper in question. And you haven't anywhere in the article at all stated why this podcast is notable. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 14:01, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Again, that's because I only saved this draft of the article to see if the picture link works. And it doesn't... I still have no idea why not. I'm just asking for a couple of hours here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by U5K0 (talk • contribs)

This is not how Wikipedia works. If you wish to create test pages, you can do so in your userspace: User:U5K0/Sandbox. And please sign your messages on talk pages - it's common courtesy. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 14:10, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

OK. I'll move it to my user page untill it's finished. —Preceding unsigned comment added by U5K0 (talk • contribs)

Cool. It's easily moved back when finished, with the edit history intact. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 14:18, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

InsuranceWorks Deletion

Hi I'm new to Wikipedia and not to sure why this entry was deleted. The content gave simple facts on a web based company. I took time too see how other similar companies entries (Workpolis, Monster.com, Careerbuilder) appeared and followed those allowed entries as a template. Are company images not allowed? (Bl652 (talk) 14:43, 28 October 2008 (UTC))

Welcome to Wikipedia! You probably need to read the business FAQ to get more information on what we do and don't accept. Articles must not give the appearance of advertising a corporation; they must also give an assertion of notability. The article you created looked like an advert for the company and didn't say why it should be in an encyclopedia (whether or not we have articles on similar things is immaterial). Try creating the article in your userspace - User:Bl652/InsuranceWorks for example - and inviting others to check it before it moves to the encyclopedia. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 14:49, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Redvers, I'll look into suggestions you provided.(Bl652 (talk) 14:51, 28 October 2008 (UTC))

wikify links

Hi. What is an acceptable amount of links? Cheers - Stefan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stefan.carter (talk • contribs)

You might want to read Wikipedia:Only make links that are relevant to the context. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 15:16, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok thanks. My Article International Food Exhibition could be more relevant named as "IFE Worldwide" - would it be possible to have the title changed? --Stefan.carter (talk) 15:33, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Done! ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 15:35, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much --Stefan.carter (talk) 15:35, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Nothing but odd socks

Red,

I'm glad someone else noticed the sock-and-SPA-fest going on at the Jori Chisholm AFD. I have no idea why this article appears to attract them... maybe it's a curse of low-profile WP:BLPs? I'm keeping an eye out and tagging where I see them, anyway.

Cheers,

onebravemonkey 09:27, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, the article started off on the wrong foot when Jchisholm (talk · contribs) was the one to create it back in 2006. From there, the article has been developed by IP addresses (mostly Comcast dynamic IPs so probably just one person) and a series of SPAs: Rz0720adfu (talk · contribs), I87fhv7dh (talk · contribs), Tznf3254 (talk · contribs), Q9gj47fheu (talk · contribs), Jori'sbiggestfan (talk · contribs), , Awesomesheltie (talk · contribs) and Fingyon 83 (talk · contribs). The first four are clearly all the same person - Jchisholm (talk · contribs), possibly - whilst the latter three have all had agendas of one type or another. I'd be pretty sure that Gy57f37gjh59gj (talk · contribs) on the AfD is one of the first four. 76.105.205.85 (talk · contribs) is Comcast, and seems to me to likely be Gy57f37gjh59gj (talk · contribs) double-voting. We'll see how this AfD pans out: it'll either be a car crash or a damp squib, but either way I'll lay money that the article survives. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 13:13, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh man. When you lay it out like that, it's pretty obvious. My money's on survival too, which I think it has a right to... but my spider-sense is going crazy, so I'd also bet on a car crash before it's through. onebravemonkey

Or, y'know, not. :D onebravemonkey 04:17, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

TerrainView-Globe

Hi Redvers

The TerrainView-Globe website was deleted by the wiki administrator User:Gwen_Gale . Can you talk with her to undo the deletion? Thank you. Interactive3d 12:09, 2 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Interactive3d (talk • contribs)

Well, no, frankly. I warned you repeatedly [3] [4] that the article didn't meet Wikipedia's established standards for inclusion, despite the fact that other similar articles existed, but you insisted [5] it be moved back to the mainspace, which I reluctantly did; it was then deleted for the many reasons I had already given. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 21:42, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Welcoming

Hi Is there any other method in welcoming, like using a bot? I m not using any tools, just manually welcoming using the template:welcomeg. Why the users are not welcomed in en:wiki? --Ramesh (talk) 08:53, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

They are welcomed; but we usually wait until users have made an edit (9 out of 10 new accounts never edit) and then welcome manually. This helps those patrolling for vandalism as the red-linked user talk page gives a clue as to the age of the account and so forth; we also have {{welcometest}} and so forth for people accidentally vandalising - a pre-existing welcome message will bump them forward on the 4-warnings-and-you're-out path for vandals. Bots have been suggested, but consensus was always against them. Regardless of whether or not your're using automated tools, you're still flooding Recent Changes, imposing a server burden and wasting editing time that we could use elsewhere. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 08:59, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions. I understand that welcoming policy and stopping the unwanted user welcoming. How do we come to know about the user who has done an edit and thus welcome him? --Ramesh (talk) 09:09, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Go to Special:Log/newusers: the ones who have made an edit have a blue "contribs" link. However, you'll need to check that the contribution in question is not vandalism (please don't welcome vandals, we have templates and processes for that which you'll get in the way of). Also, please don't welcome people with obviously bad names: we'll be blocking them anyway and your welcome will disrupt that. (All of this is why welcoming en masse is something we don't do. Now you see why). ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 09:15, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

WP:ANI#Ban_me_now

Exactly the right response, I think. I see no reason to play his little games. --Rodhullandemu 13:29, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Blue's Clues

Redvers, I hope that I changed this article to satisfy you. Although...it did state that it's a US show in the infobox, which I guess wasn't enough. Anyway...:)

I added that it aired in the US in the lead and in the first sentence of the article's body. It also has this, in the Reception and influence section: Blue's Clues was one of the first children's television shows that allowed countries outside the U.S. to produce their own versions of the show. It was a run-away hit in the U.K., and has become part of pop culture in Korea. The "dubbed" American version is shown in over sixty countries.[24] It was also one of the first preschool shows to incorporate American Sign Language into its content. (Approximately seven signs were used consistently in each episode.)[25]

So not only does it now state that it's a US show, it also (well, for a while now) has info about its multi-national and multicultural influence. It that enough? If not, let me know and I'll fix it. I'll let you remove the tag you placed there yourself. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 20:31, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

I've revised the lede a little to bring a mention in of the UK version (I'd assume there are others, the foot of the article mentions Korean) and also mentioned up-front that the article is about the American version. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 13:41, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

I made some slight nitpicky changes to your changes. I "improved" your in the lead, since it was to a Nick website, and replaced it with the Tracy book, since it's a slightly better ref and self-published sources aren't as reliable. I did, though, put the link in the External Links section. Thanks for removing the tag. BTW, are you a Brit with some kind of agenda here? :) Just kidding!!! --Figureskatingfan (talk) 16:58, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Heh heh heh! Yeah, I'm a Brit. But no agenda (honest!) - I was following a vandal, rolling back (beaten to it on Blue's Clues) when I spotted that this article was about the US one and didn't say much about the UK one. Although how I know about the UK one I don't know... I don't think I've ever watched Nick, let alone Nick Jr... ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 17:35, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Glad you were able to take my joke. I've never seen the Brit version, either, but that's because I live in the US. I'm sure an article about the British version of BC would be good, but I've never seen any articles about it, so I don't know if it's notable enough. I don't even know if it's still being produced, or if it stopped like the American version. Also, I don't know if I'd be a good person to write one, since I think an editor should have at least some familiarity with the subject of an article. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 19:13, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

87.194.248.127 vandalising Granada Television and Tyne Tees Television

87.194.248.127 is vandalising Granada Television and Tyne Tees Television. Keep a close eye on the franchise articles. Paul Austin (talk) 04:31, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Cheers!

Thanks for that! -- Banjeboi 13:32, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Anytime! ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 13:34, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zeituni Onyango

I wonder if you'd take another look at this. Whilst the nominator may have withdrawn, the nominator does not OWN the debate. And where may others have offered deletion or merge arguements, if is wrong to close on the strength of the nominator's withdrawal. All that means is that others arguing for deletion or merge are forced to begin their own "nomination" and we then repeat the debate, which is a real waste of time. Indeed, that's what has already happened Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zeituni Onyango (2nd nomination). To save everyone who voted in the first debate having to do so again, I am intending to reverse your closure and redirect the new debate to the old one, and let it run. However, I thought I'd give you the chance to reverse yourself first.--Scott MacDonald (talk) 14:15, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

I like this - we start a new debate then consult the closing admin, catching me in a perfect double-bind. Please do not reverse my closure (the result was going to be "no consensus" anyway, but that's beside the point). ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 14:20, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I consulted you before I did anything else. Then I noticed you'd posted to the second debate, so I left a note there. No, I'm afraid the closing reason is not beside the point. I am going to reverse you, but do feel free to re-close it as a "no consensus" if you wish. Closing on a technicality, when some people are arguing for deletion is simply going to frustrate people and lead to a needless second debate on DRV and AfD. You do not close a debate on the ground of the nominators wishes, unless no one else is suggesting delete.--Scott MacDonald (talk) 14:25, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

There are only two, poorly argued, !votes for delete. So you can add this being discussed in the wrong venue to the list of reasons to close it. You're telling me you're seriously going to reopen the debate so that I can immediately reclose with a slightly different rationale? Have you got enough shrubbery? ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 14:28, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Meh, I hate shrubbery. Process and needless debate should be minimised. But closing a debate on the basis of the nominator withdrawing, just leads to pointless process with someone saying "OK, this time the nominator will not withdraw" (which is what happened). Please do close the debate summing up the consensus of the debate (which I do think is either keep or merge - but that's your call). Once the debate is closed on other than the technicality of the nominator withdrawing, then hopefully we can all go home.--Scott MacDonald (talk) 14:33, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Having looked over this, I guess I look like a process-wonking dick. However, I was trying to stop a repetitive pointless debate - screw process. I'm sorry if I've annoyed you, please be assured that wasn't my intent, and I fully concur with your close now.--Scott MacDonald (talk) 14:40, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

And I guess I looked a bit rouge... discussion had fragmented and what I said in one place could've been copied over to the others for clarity. Still, we're cool now :o) ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 14:45, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

(unindent) A question on this - you say that the relatively low number of "delete" !votes suggests that AfD is the wrong venue. Would you mind elaborating? I'm not challenging you, I'm just curious about how AfD works. Thanks, Wikidemon (talk) 18:08, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

AfD really is for discussing whether articles should be deleted (well, duh :) but the system allows for other opinions - keeping, obviously, redirecting and merging. The originally nomination wasn't really asking for a delete, it was asking for a merge or a redirect. And the (not-) voters were almost unanimous in agreeing that deletion wasn't required (the two delete opinions were ones that I would have placed low reliance on in closing a debate anyway). This is a clue that the debate is happening in the wrong forum. AfD is poorly structured for merge debates, partially because the stakes are too high: the article is under threat of deletion, which frightens the ones who want the content kept; yet survival at AfD can often set an article in stone, preserving it from major change, which frightens those who want major change to it now. The debate therefore becomes a car crash. At the same time, AfD can be very useful for giving a shock to a badly performing article or reigning in misguided editors, and I've misused it this way myself in the past. But it is a misuse and you get hell if you're caught at it. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 19:18, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. That's very helpful. Wikidemon (talk) 20:51, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Didn't know that

I didn't know that, but still this user is adding complete nonsense and making personal attacks angainst one user. I just though i'd help this person out before they get blocked, but there seems to be no helping them. Thanks, HairyPerry 15:35, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

MiniTwins

You appear to have delete my MiniTwins page. Much of the text was a direct copy from www.minitwins.co.uk to which I own the copyright. I was well aware of the rules for submitting such information to Wikipedia and the implications for that copyright. Please can you reinstate my page? Asanyfuleno (talk) 17:14, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

If you have copied text to which you own the copyright, please read the guide to donating your own copyrighted material to Wikipedia. Note that, in addition to copyright requirements, the article must still comply with notability guidelines, advertising prohibition and avoid conflicts of interest. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 17:16, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

sorry

sorry, and thanks for deleting the page i just created. it was wrongly named. i just realised that after clicking save. w_tanoto (talk) 19:54, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

No worries - it's very easily done. It's now in you userspace: User:W Tanoto/Contribution. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 19:55, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Boston Civic Symphony Orchestra

I am a member of the Boston Civic Symphony Orchestra.

I posted a page about the orchestra but you deleted it for "blatent advertising."

I just posted a few historical facts about the orchestra. Why is that considered advertisement? —Preceding unsigned comment added by LUCAWINE (talk • contribs)

I'll answer on your talk page. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 22:34, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I just joined Wiki, so I'm new to this, so thanks for your patience.

In looking at the "conflict of interest" rules, I don't see a problem with what I posted. I have no financial interest in the orchestra since my position with them is completely voluntary. It is a not-for-profit orchestra. I am not promoting the concerts, only stating a few historical facts about this orchestra which is the second oldest orchestra in the city.

Why can the Boston Symphony Orchestra have a wiki page, but not the Boston Civic Orchestra? They even promote their official website on their WIKI page which I did not do with the Boston Civic Orchestra WIKI page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LUCAWINE (talk • contribs)

Replied on user's talk page. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 22:56, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

OK, I won't post a factual page about the orchestra if this is a problem. I was volunteering to do it anyway, so your rejection of the page actually makes my life easier. The orchestra is already referenced many times on wikipedia such as on this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=BOSTON+CIVIC+SYMPHONY&go=Go , but maybe I had the wrong idea of how everything works here. Thanks anyway! —Preceding unsigned comment added by LUCAWINE (talk • contribs)

There's no need to get all snotty. The article as it stood was not acceptable for Wikipedia. I've given you links to show you how to write a better one and warned you to avoid the conflict of interest you have in being the one assigned by the orchestra to write the article. But all you want is your original advert putting back up. There I cannot help you. Sorry that Wikipedia was not for you; some people it suits, others it doesn't. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 23:20, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

anon

Thanks for the revert. "Anon, anon, good nurse!" --Uncle Ed (talk) 23:30, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Pumajaw

I have recreated the above as I was working on it when you speedy deleted it. There seems to be quite a lot of third party info on this duo and I feel that they are worthy of an article. Perhaps you could take a further look at them? It now needs some work by someone with much greater knowledge of the duo and folk music as a whole. Thanks.. Paste (talk) 13:48, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

When I speedy deleted it, it was a perfectly written advertisement for a group with no assertion of why they should be in an encyclopedia. Your redo improved much of that, but I've still removed a fair few words that were glowing in tone. It would be nice to have some of the statements directly sourced (when did Time Out say what it said? etc). But it is now, I believe, outside of the speedy deletion criteria. That's not to say that it meets WP:MUSIC, of course. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 13:59, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks lets see what happens to it.Paste (talk) 14:01, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

1 UDR & 2UDR

Hi it's very kind of you to change the page names but unfortunately you've done it in such a way now as they don't make any sense. For naming they'd be known either as:

1 UDR
2 UDR
OR
1st Battalion Ulster Defence Regiment
2nd Battalion Ulster Defence Regiment
OR
1st (Country Antrim) Battalion, Ulster Defence Regiment
2nd (Country Armagh) Battalion, Ulster Defence Regiment

If you could make a choice on the naming convention you'd like me to stick to I'd be grateful as there are 11 Battalions of this regiment to create pages for as part of a major project I'm kicking off today.Thunderer (talk) 15:47, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, which would you be interested in using? "1 UDR" is awful, telling the reader nothing (albeit useful as a redirect, I suppose). The one I picked is consistent with other articles on battalions that WP:MILHIST looks after, but if it doesn't suit, we can pick something different. I'll help move stuff if the system is complaining. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 17:08, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I think I'd plump for "#th Battalion Ulster Defence Regiment" (no's 1-11). the # UDR is useful as a search term and is a very common name for them but the full title with the county name in it is rarely used except on paper so I can elaborate on that in the article. If you can rename or redirect for the first two then I'll name the other 9 articles following your convention.Thunderer (talk) 17:12, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Do you want "nth Battalion, Ulster Defence Regiment" or without the comma? (I'm neutral on this!) ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 17:14, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

The proper way in that format would be without the comma. Thunderer (talk) 17:24, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Done! ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 19:13, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you - I'll make sure the rest match that naming convention.Thunderer (talk) 19:25, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Cool. Good luck! ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 19:26, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

(outdent) - I've made a goof. I created a page for the 7th/10th Battalion but finished up with 7th/10 Battalion Ulster Defence Regiment. Could you maybe sort it out so that it reads 7th/10th Battalion Ulster Defence Regiment? I'd be very grateful.Thunderer (talk) 12:10, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Done! A goof that I've done dozens of times. All sorted. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 12:13, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

You are a gent. There are rather a lot of battalions, it's a wonder I haven't made more goofs like that. Must try harder LOL. Thunderer (talk) 12:15, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Toxin (band)

Redvers,

I am really sorry i am brand new to wikipedia and i was not aware that recreating the article was against policy. I would strongly appreciate if you could reconsider the deletion of Toxin (band). Please also tell me what i did or did not include that made the article bad. All advice is helpful!

Thanks very much! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dudemusicrocks94 (talk • contribs)

The article was deleted because it does not meet our guidelines for bands appearing in Wikipedia. Your recreation of the article - over a dozen times, including overwriting other articles - didn't help either and led to the title of the article being blocked from being created again.

I suggest you read WP:BAND for further advice; and that you find significant third party coverage of the band. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 23:24, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay thank you very much i appreciate the advice. I was just wondering if there is any possible way you could unblock the article Toxin (band) so that i could rewrite the article following the guidelines and you can keep watch of the article to make sure it meets the requirements? And again im very new to this program and i was not exactly sure that recreating or overwriting the article would get me in any kind of trouble. I truly am sorry for that and i will NEVER do it again

Thanks again —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dudemusicrocks94 (talk • contribs)

Best bet: create it in your userspace: User:Dudemusicrocks94/Toxin (band). That allows you infinite time to get your article in order without it being deleted. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 07:01, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay thanks again, but i have one more question. What was wrong with the article? I feel i explained why the band is important and i gave a source "Newsday" the long island newspaper? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dudemusicrocks94 (talk • contribs)

That's local coverage, nothing particularly important. Local newspapers often cover local bands. It's worse because it's the kids pull-out section: they'll review anything. There's a checklist at WP:MUSIC with twelve points. You need to hit one of them at least, two or more for guarenteed survival (in so far as these things can be guarenteed). ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 17:42, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

ooooooooooooooo ok, if i can prove to have done one or more of those things on the checklist, is there a way the article can be unblocked? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dudemusicrocks94 (talk • contribs)

Yes, once you've proved some of the 12 points. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 06:57, 12 November 2008 (UTC)