Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MusicReview


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. Jayjg (talk) 03:22, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

MusicReview

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Apparently, a non-notable website. I could not find reliable third-party sources. The current biography of the website was copied and pasted from its "about us" page by Sergio Pereira (old revision), who in 2009, "joined the [MusicReview] management team and has made a significant contribution in features, reviews and written articles." It should be noted that this article has been even semi-protected (difference) due to "excessive sock puppetry".  C  anniba loki  18:48, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:49, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: Having looked at the site, I agree with all of the nom's rationales. --IllaZilla (talk) 16:35, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - no coverage in reliable sources. -- Whpq (talk) 17:05, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, GoogleNews turns up a bunch of articles that are reviews about music, but nothing about MusicReview the website. Of the all of the third-party references provided, only one of them still mentions MusicReview, but it is only a mention. I might also want to suggest blacklisting the website from Wikipedia. There have been several editors, presumably the MusicReview staff, that I have seen whose sole purpose is to add a MusicReview review to every album page they can find. Most recently it was, but I know there have been others such as . Fezmar9 (talk) 17:23, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: would be another. --IllaZilla (talk) 16:46, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: I have crossed out my suggestion of blacklisting the url. It seems like it was all coming from one user who has since agreed to remove all references to MusicReview until the outcome of this nomination. Fezmar9 (talk) 19:32, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - lack of coverage in reliable third-party sources. --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 13:58, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: I have just noticed this now, I apologise if I have violated any terms out of inexperience, or stepped on anyone's toes. Please can I direct your attention to this:  Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Albums. Please let me know if we can do anything to rectify this problem. Skatchrsa (talk) 21:51, 20 June 2010 (GMT2)
 * 'Comment: Hi everyone, thanks again for everyone's input. After extensive discussions with IllaZilla over here Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums, and having read the links kind provided, I have attempted to edit the MusicReview page along the guidelines mentioned.  I kindly ask that you all please revisit this page, and provide your input.
 * With regards to the spam issue, I now understand Wikipedia's criteria, and apologise for inadvertant indiscretions. I have removed any and all links to MusicReview from infoboxes and album pages, and have done the same for the additions from other journalists.  If you find any further links to MusicReview, please remove them, or notify me to remove them.  No further entries will be made to album pages, unless the site is approved as a significant source, and is added to the list of accepted music review websites over here ALBUM/REVSIT. I will apply for this in later months, should the deletion issue be resolved.
 * In the event that this page is still not acceptable, and in the event of it being deleted, may I kindly request that you userfy it as User:Skatchrsa/MusicReview so that the relevant alterations can be made over time to improve it to meet Wikipedia's criteria.
 * Many thanks once again for your help, and particular thanks to IllaZilla --Skatchrsa (talk) 18:56, 21 June 2010 (GMT2)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.