Talk:Randy Raine-Reusch

message: Please do not remove the Randy Raine-Reusch interview link, as it is the best interview with this musician available on the Internet, thank you. Badagnani (talk) 18:25, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Blogs are not appropriate here. The article is better off without it. --Tom 19:14, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Please do not add the blog entry back. This project can do much better.--Tom 19:58, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Again, Please do not add the blog entry back. This project can do much better. --Tom 20:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Mike Heffley has been accused of plagerism and is NOT a recognized authority on anything. The link is to a selfpublished interview from a blog. --Tom 20:51, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I meant plagiarism, my spelling sucks. I read it in a blog about him. --Tom 21:02, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Since Mike Heffley is not notable and does not have an article, how can this violate BLP? Also, I think you just made my point about blogs and why they should not be used here except in extrodinary circumstances.  --Tom 21:08, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Interview

message: Badagnani, please stop adding a blog to this article. --Tom 20:48, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As stated earlier, blogs are "generally" frowned upon at Wikipedia because most blogs are diaries or ephemeral political commentary. This blog entry, on the other hand, although hosted on a blog website, is not, in fact, a blog posting; it is the text of a valuable interview--so valuable, in fact, that it appears to be the first and only extensive interview of this musician available on the Internet. Your repeated blanking of this interview link is not helpful to our readers, to whom we owe the best possible article about this subject, and appears to represent the editor making a WP:POINT, something that is highly deleterious to our encyclopedia in this case. As per the guideline, editors knowledgeable about a particular subject area may exercise their own best judgement regarding the use of such links. However, acting simply as an "enforcer" who wishes to make a WP:POINT, especially when one has stated that he has little or no familiarity with the subject, is not helpful to our readers. Please restore the link, thanks. Badagnani (talk) 23:38, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you mean its not a blog posting? It is posted by a person who has been accused of faking material on his own web site! If this is the only interview on the internet, this Wiki article should probably be deleted per notability. I am not an "enforcer", that is silly, and I am not really trying to make any point. This project can do much better than adding material from a questionable source at best. --Tom 00:03, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

text: More BS I see. The link IS to a blog posting, period. Why is that so hard to grasp?--Tom 14:43, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

text: BS is BS. No biggie. --Tom 18:51, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: blog addition

message: Is there a RS for this? TIA --Tom 19:30, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I will converse with you if you state you will avoid the continued use of profanity. Badagnani (talk) 19:37, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Will you dissist with accusing me of being an enforcer, making a point, ect ect? Seriously Badagnani, how can we resolve our differences? Both of us I am sure can use our time better than edit warring with each other. It seems like you have done and continue to do much good contributing to this project, just as I hope you see that I do alot of good editing as well. Maybe we should get another set of eyes to comment about the link you want to add. If consensus is that the link should be included, then I am done, and likewise, I would hope if consensus says not to include the link, it can be done. Anyways, no hard feels either way. Cheers, --Tom 20:44, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Work with Yes

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Randy Raine-Reusch. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140323181330/http://amusicosm.com/Footnotes_15.html to http://amusicosm.com/Footnotes_15.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:35, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified