"
it is inarguable you're trying to improve the exposure lesser-known bands, whose musical merits are FAR inferior to Elton John's. That is not how music works. I have never ever seen someone post cover art of covering artists' album. it is unheard of and rude. it is the only page for which i have ever seen this, and clearly it is your prerogative to promote Ben Folds and other horrible bands.
The bottom line is that Elton John is a LEGEND, and I think what you're doing is no different than someone posting cover art for a boyband cover of a Beatles song; you would be eviscerated if you did something like that for a Beatles single, and I don't see why such evisceration should be spared when you're insulting arguably one of the best musicians in the past 50 years. Do not argue about whether this is an encyclopedia, argue the merit for why the cover art of inferior artists whose musical merit is far far far below that of the ORIGINAL artist. You can't, because you know they are inferior. instead you're using a BS ""freedom of information"" argument to ruin the appeal of a great song. No one covers a song better than the original artist. For example: Oasis' cover of Street Fighting Man is unbelievable, but I would NEVER EVER go to the Rolling Stones' ""Street Fighting Man"" single page and post Oasis' cover art, even though their merit is much closer to the Stones than Ben Folds is to Elton John. If you want to argue, let's argue. Don't go running and telling on me because I""m removing edits that are not worthy. Deal with it, that's life kiddo. Stop blasting Ben Folds in your boombox and learn about *real* music. - signed by someone who gives an EFF about preserving the greatness of humanity."