Talk:Rate Your Music

message: Confirm that the article is eligible for proposed deletion by checking that it has:
    * not previously been proposed for deletion'''
Sources were given at the time of the original AfD. That these sources have not been incorporated into the article is not a valid reason to place a deletion proposal on RYM. 
-ClockworkLunch (talk) 18:12, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed for deletion

message: Rate Your Music is a commercial website composed of user-generated content with no editorial oversight. It is not usable for citations according to Wikipedia policy WP:NOTRSMUSIC. KokoPhantom (talk) 17:44, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rate Your Music is NOT usable for citations 

message: I don't think it's a wiki. Here's what it says in the lead: "It is a wiki in the sense that users can add, edit and remove content; however, the majority of new, edited content must be approved by a moderator."--h i s   s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 15:34, 1 September 2007 (UTC
:I mean, it obviously doesn't use MediaWiki, but something else altogether.-h i s   s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 15:32, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, RYM does allow, "easy creation and editing of any number of interlinked Web pages", which is part of the definition of a wiki, according to Wikipedia.  It isn't a standard wiki though.  Hmm... Adammanifold (talk) 20:10, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Site documentation operates as a wiki (http://rateyourmusic.com/wiki/). The main database probably shouldn't be thought as one. --Trɔpʏliʊm • blah 22:29, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  A wiki? 

message: :Image:Rym20.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 04:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Rym20.jpg

message: Should Anthony Fantano (aka The Needle Drop) really be mentioned in the reception section of the article? Because WP:NOTRSMUSIC lists him as an unreliable source due to him being a WP:SPS, and there were 4 discussions about him, one in 2014 which came to no conclusion, 2017 (which would later be followed up in the reliable sources noticeboard, to somewhat of a conclusion, but would later be brought up again in the noticeboard that same year, and more recently an RfC in 2021, which finally came to a conclusion to what we have today in WP:NOTRSMUSIC, which says the following: "Editors have achieved a consensus that additional considerations apply when considering whether the use of The Needle Drop as a source is appropriate. Strong consensus was reached that Anthony Fantano's reviews that are published via The Needle Drop constitute self-published sources. Rough consensus among editors was reached that Fantano is considered to be an established subject-matter expert as it pertains to music reviews and that that these reviews may be used in an article as attributed opinion. However, per Wikipedia policy regarding self-published sources, these reviews should never be used as third-party sources about living people. Furthermore, there is a rough consensus that Fantano's reviews do not always constitute due weight and that discretion should be applied on a case-by-case basis when determining if content from The Needle Drop is appropriate to include in a given article." So this begs, and probably revives the question I brought up: Should Anthony Fantano (aka The Needle Drop) really be mentioned in the reception section of the article? Chrome Boy (talk) 12:47, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anthony Fantano / The Needle Drop