Talk:Performance rights organisation

message: This article fails to mention Global Music Rights, a performance rights organization in the USA.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kellybk (talk • contribs) 14:03, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  requested addition 

message: What the H? Firstly, excessive superlatives are used. 'wealth of advantages', 'enormous advantages'. The criticism section uses other POV adjectives like 'laughably' and 'depressingly'.
:'Large users, such as broadcasters, are well-represented by very capable lawyers in hearings before rate-setting tribunals and exert unceasing efforts to erode the rights and earnings of creators and music publishers. Similarly, they lobby intensively with legislatures in all countries to create "exemptions" to allow them to use music without paying. This battle will go on as long as people both value music and dislike paying.'
*'That some users, unwilling to pay for what they use, would condemn the actions of collectives as being heavy-handed or choose to malign collectives as "cartels" is understandable. Yelling is cheaper than paying.'
... Joffeloff 22:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV, POV, POV. 

message: There doesn't seem to have been serious discussion of this, difference between the two needs clarifying if there really is a difference other than terminology. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:50, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge tag

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
* Oppose. No reason nor consensus to always use American English. Coreyemotela (talk) 12:41, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: A dangerous precedent, though, inviting fait accompli violations of RETAIN. --BDD (talk) 18:33, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that depends on whether the content of the article was always primarily using "-ize" or was previously primarily using "-ise". I didn't review the history. I believe the WP:RETAIN guideline says that the variant used in the first non-stub version should be considered the default. —BarrelProof (talk) 00:28, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: :Any additional comments:
:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move.  Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.</div>
Postscript: Since the -ise spelling variation has prevailed in the RM discussion, I have changed the content of the article to match the spelling variation used in the title. —BarrelProof (talk) 16:07, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: Performing Rights Organization
96.35.35.92 (talk) 17:44, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Written in British English, so "organisation" is correct. See above. -- Necrothesp (talk) 20:00, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

text: Not done: page move requests should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Although I doubt that it would be successful, requesting a move is done thataway. -- Orduin Discuss 20:05, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 24 September 2015 

message: *Citation 1 is incorrect. Article does not contain quote.
*At least 4 other citations are needed in this section.
*The quote: "One exception to the rule allows businesses of a certain size...." pertains ONLY to US businesses. Not applicable in other territories (UK and Aus at least).Mickwalsh (talk) 06:11, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms section

message: Musicfunfact (talk) 22:33, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Sakura CarteletTalk 23:46, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 15 March 2018 

message: Pro Music Rights A Public Performance Rights society in the USA Musicfunfact (talk) 00:00, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. L293D (☎ • ✎) 01:10, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 17 May 2018 

message: The only evidence this company exists is their website which is very unclear about what they actually do.https://promusicrights.com/, or their own press releases which make unverified claims. https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2018/08/03/pro-music-rights-7-4-market-share/ A Wikipedia page they had submitted themselves a few months ago was deleted for these reasons. (See recent history for this article)https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Performance_rights_organisation&action=history
78.144.77.223 (talk) 10:52, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pro Music Rights should be removed from the list of North American PROs. 28 Feb 2019 

message: Reference to link on Tolling spelled Trolling. SJASoc (talk) 08:47, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Done NiciVampireHeart 08:53, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 9 May 2019 

message: added to USA Performance rights organisation list Pro Music Rightshttps://www.billboard.com/articles/business/8544945/sosa-entertainment-pro-music-rights-spotify Music Publisher s (talk) 01:33, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done, does not have an article here on Wikipedia. See also WP:COI. – Thjarkur (talk) 02:33, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 23 December 2019 

message: An editor has been repeatedly introducing alternative spellings, such as in this edit. Like Necrothesp, I believe this is unnecessary and unhelpful and contrary to the established Wikipedia guidance. I believe readers of English are generally capable of interpreting minor differences of spelling and that this article does not need any special treatment. —BarrelProof (talk) 18:31, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Originally this editor tried to change the primary spelling of the article to "organization". When I reverted this they alleged that I was "making unproductive changes that shuts out global facts as they want to exclude the proper spelling in US and other PRO organizations". They do not appear to understand the principles of WP:ENGVAR or WP:RETAIN. I agree that it is not productive to note minor spelling differences like this. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:29, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternative spellings 

message: I recommend keeping just the pointers to List of copyright collection societies and :Category:Copyright collection societies and possibly  a list of government-agencies or government-sanctioned monopolies if they exist.
In the alternative, remove all organizations that do not have articles or are not "valid" red-links.  That is, remove all organizations that do not qualify to have a Wikipedia article.  davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 16:18, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recommend stubbing out "organizatons" list 

message: Incomplete list of Canadian PRO's
Add ACTRA RACS Northsideresids (talk) 02:30, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: , see WP:WTAF. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 05:15, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 23 November 2021