User talk:BurnOne

Notability of City Of Rust
A tag has been placed on City Of Rust requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Corvus cornix talk  02:22, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Please stop
Reposting an exact copy of a deleted article under a slightly different name (City of Rust vs City of rust) is considered disruptive. Exxolon (talk) 02:34, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Reasons for deletion
The reason the admins (not me) are deleting your articles is you are not showing why these bands/albums are notable enough for articles here - we get a lot of bands trying to use us as free advertising. See WP:BAND, WP:NOTABILITY and WP:RS (reliable sources) for guidance on whether an article is appropiate. If you can meet our criteria and write a balanced, sourced article on the band clearly demonstrating notability then it can stay. Exxolon (talk) 02:44, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Also you are copying text from other websites - that's a violation of copyright. See WP:COPYRIGHT. Exxolon (talk) 02:51, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

RE : ''If the musician isn't latched up to some corporate conglomerate they have no worth. Thats interesting, I thought that that is what wikipedia was all about, information for the people by the people. I guess I was wrong. Sorry I took up your precious space. Now you can continue telling people that their information is of no worth to the world. :)''

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a collection of all the knowledge on earth. If you want to get this band noticed there are far better sites. MySpace, FaceBook, YouTube and a whole host of others will all welcome your contributions. The band doesn't have to get "latched up to some corporate conglomerate" as you put it, they just need to demonstrate some notability and meet the guidelines. Exxolon (talk) 03:00, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

We can't take your word regarding the copyright - especially with "© 2008 Joseph Brooks, Joshua Brooks (796873061988)" on the page. You need to follow the procedures at WP:COPYRIGHT if you want to use this text here or otherwise we could be legally liable. Exxolon (talk) 03:03, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

RE : ''Joseph Brooks is me ... Is there anyway of making this page because we have had media coverage and do alot of shows. we released this album and it is selling. I just want people to get a little background that I thought wikipedia would be a great place for. In fact people asked me why I dont have info on wikipedia.''

The key thing here is reliable sources. Essentially we're looking for coverage of your band in newspapers, on TV programmes, on the radio and on reliable mainstream websites. I haven't seen your band article (I've only looked at the album City of Rust article) but I assume there were no links to any coverage of the band, that's why it was deleted. (I can't delete anything by the way - I can only recommend courses of action which the administrators here can follow or reject at their sole discretion). See what you can come up with, then rewrite and repost the article when you've got some backup info for us. WikiProject Music can help here too - they are far more knowledgeable than I am. Here are some criteria - if you can meet one of them and prove it you're already over half-way there :-

Criteria for musicians and ensembles

A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, DJ, musical theatre group, etc.) is notable if it meets any one of the following criteria:


 * 1) It has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable.[1]
 * This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, and television documentaries[2] except for the following:
 * Media reprints of press releases, other publications where the musician/ensemble talks about themselves, and advertising for the musician/ensemble.
 * Works comprising merely trivial coverage, such as newspaper articles that simply report performance dates or the publications of contact and booking details in directories.
 * An article in a school or university newspaper (or similar) would generally be considered trivial but should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.


 * 1) Has had a charted hit on any national music chart.
 * 2) Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one country.
 * 3) Has received non-trivial coverage in a reliable source of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country.[3]
 * 4) Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable).
 * 5) Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable; note that it is often most appropriate to use redirects in place of articles on side projects, early bands and such, and that commonsense exceptions always apply.
 * 6) Has become the most prominent representative of a notable style or of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.
 * 7) Has won or been nominated for a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury or Grammis award.
 * 8) Has won or placed in a major music competition.
 * 9) Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a compilation album, etc. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that article.)
 * 10) Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network.
 * 11) Has been the subject of a half hour or longer broadcast across a national radio or TV network.

Good luck. Exxolon (talk) 03:13, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 03:15, 23 May 2008 (UTC)