User talk:DoomDoer

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, DoomDoer. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Time to Die (Electric Wizard album), you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:


 * Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
 * Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).
 * Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. § FreeRangeFrog croak 23:49, 1 June 2015 (UTC)


 * You received an email response about this - please stop trying to re-insert the material in the article, or your account may be blocked. § FreeRangeFrog croak 23:55, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

June 2015
You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring, as you did at Time to Die (Electric Wizard album). Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice:. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. § FreeRangeFrog croak 23:57, 1 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Note that you have added a link to a storefront saying that some unspecified product is unavailable. If you feel that this supports the entire paragraph of claims you have made, then it is possible you should not be editing here. Please note that if you resume this poor behavior, it is very likely that you will be blocked again.  Kuru   (talk)  12:07, 2 June 2015 (UTC)


 * So: you added a bunch of text about copyright dispute, lawsuit and album withdrawal, with a single reference out users might use to confirm the validity of this paragraph. This reference says "This product 157452 is currently not available." That's all! What does it mean? Maybe, it's just a broken link to an album that never existed. Maybe, the whole site is broken. Or maybe the album's not there because alien yeti reptiloids from Sirius B asked the label to remove it? Because the source says nothing about it, may be the case! :P The text added is not supported by the reference, and that means that this text is not verifiable. Which means that this text shouldn't have been added in the first place. Also, you copied this text from Encyclopaedia Metallum - this is a copyright infringement. In addition to EM being, strictly speaking, a tertiary source that should be used with great caution as it appears to be user-contributed. Hope that helps. Max Semenik (talk) 18:34, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
 * By the way, I'm checking this band out right now! :P Max Semenik (talk) 18:36, 3 June 2015 (UTC)


 * The chances of this being included in the article with the sourcing you have thus far provided are essentially zero. You need a reliable secondary source that specifically supports the claims you've made: without that being copied from somewhere else (which supports the idea that you or someone associated with you added that to Encyclopaedia Metallum). Period, end of story. "just Google it" is not enough, the non-existence of something is not enough, social media is not enough, user-edited websites are not enough, etc. Surely if this was a big deal then someone in the music industry should have mentioned it, and if that's not the case then there's nothing more to do. § FreeRangeFrog  croak 16:23, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

You do know this is Wikipedia, not the Constitution? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DoomDoer (talk • contribs)


 * In Wikipedia you will abide by the project's policies and guidelines. If you don't like that, you are welcome to simply leave. Also, please sign your comments. § FreeRangeFrog croak 20:48, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Humor
Thank you again for your helpful input FreeRangeFrog. Have you ever considered a hobby?
 * That's hilarious. And yet here we are. So now you have a good source for the firing, but I'd have to question what the point is if it doesn't support any of the other claims. As it stands your addition is irrelevant trivia, which is why I did not revert the IPs removal (I don't doubt they also have a COI but so far their reverts have been appropriate). I will ask you again, and for the last time, to not edit the article directly, since you have a declared conflict of interest. Please follow the instructions here to create a request instead. Please don't bother with the trivia thing again, go find some sources that actually provide some information directly relevant to the subject of the article. Failing that, I suggest you just go find a hobby or something. § FreeRangeFrog croak 20:44, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry User:FreeRangeFrog, it's been a long day & despite reading the page you kindly provided, I cannot figure out where the create a request thing is. I would like this page edited properly, so if you could please expand on how to create a request, I will happily do so. The update made news today so there are finally several credible sources already published, & I imagine there will be more to come, so hopefully it's now within Wiki policy & guidelines? I've re-read the COI page you sent to begin with & do not feel that it is applicable in this instance. Is there a page that tells you how to stop someone who actually does have a conflict of interest in the subject from deleting the facts? Isn't there something about edit-warring? Max Semenik did you check the band out? What did you think? talk


 * Well, if it made the news you should be OK then. Tell you what, you paste your links here along with the proposed wording and we'll figure it out. § FreeRangeFrog croak 22:04, 11 June 2015 (UTC)


 * The discussion is at Talk:Time to Die (Electric Wizard album), feel free to comment. I think you have enough for inclusion now, but I object to your original wording and one of your sources. § FreeRangeFrog croak 22:22, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you FreeRangeFrog   croak! The links & proposed wording are:

Shortly after writing and recording the album, and prior to the album's release, Mark Greening was fired by the band (this link is an interview with the band confirming Greening was fired) & (another confirmation of Greening being fired) & (Greening confirming he was fired from the band after writing & recording the album)

The album was released by Spinefarm Records, despite Greening's claims that he had not been paid by the band for his work or given his permission for his performance on the album to be used. Upon hearing this, a fan set up a controversial Facebook page in protest of Greening being fired and unpaid, with the hope of prompting the band to resolve the matter with Greening It is understood that the band's excuse for not paying is that they spent the record advance from the label recording the album, however in a number of interviews, the band confirm that it was entirely paid for prior to signing with Spinefarm. &

As a result of the ongoing legal action by Greening against the band's infringement of his copyrights and failure to pay him for his work on the album, on 20 May 2015, Universal Music Group International and Spinefarm Records made the decision to withdraw the album and all associated products from sale until the dispute is finalised so as not to infringe Greening's copyright claim. & &

Please let me know your thoughts on the proposed wording! Any suggested edits are welcome. Thanks again! DoomDoer

Just did a search & it's really made the news!

http://www.musictimes.com/articles/40836/20150613/electric-wizard-acclaimed-time-to-die-pulled-due-lawsuit.htm http://www.metalinsider.net/legal-woes/time-to-buy-electric-wizard-album-removed-from-retail-streaming-outlets http://www.rockmusicupdates.altervista.org/7461-electric-wizards-time-to-die-removed-from-retail-and-streaming-outlets-in-wake-of-financial-dispute-between-the-band-and-former-drummer-mark-greening.html

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4273/1374/1600/lionelrichie User:FreeRangeFrog