Talk:Meister Mephisto

message: The added links are not above reproach in either reliability or independence. Please see Wikipedia:Notability (music) and provide reliable references that the band meets a good portion of those criteria, such as coverage in mainstream media, winning important awards, etc. A bunch of links to reviews that are essentially industry promotional material do not really cover it. Reliable references on album sales, concert ticket sales etc would help. - Taxman Talk 14:00, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That the band is notable does not mean the individual album is. If what I am asking for is impossible that is proof that this article needs to be merged into the band's. That's no loss of verifiable information and it removes what otherwise does yes does amount to a promotional article for the band. The facts you mention seem to support the band being notable, not the album. - Taxman Talk 20:32, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: But we've specifically chosen to limit the information we cover to what can meet WP:ATT. Almost nothing in this article can, except what's already in the band's article. The rest can be merged in without clutter. Yes, we have lots of articles that don't meet our policies, but that's just because there are a lot of people that don't understand them, and because the project is a work in progress. We can't fix everything at once. All albums need to be merged into the band article unless there is enough material about the album that meets WP:ATT to support all material in the article. This is an encyclopedia project, not a music promotion one. - Taxman Talk 01:03, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

text: WP:ATT applies because we've specifically chosen to only include material that has been published in reliable third party sources. Really nothing about this album has been that justifies an article on it. You've said there is no information available about the things an album article should talk about. So since there's not enough reliable third party material to justify an article, we simple write a few sentences in the article on Sturmgeist in the section on releases. There's no value to the encyclopedia to have a track listing (it's potential copyright violation anyway if there's no discussion of the tracks, and discussion of the tracks would require reliable third party references), and other than who was involved in the album and it's release date, there is literally no material in the article that justifies inclusion. Everything else only justifies including a mention of the fact that this group released this album. That should be covered in the group's article. Look I understand people want to have an article about their favorite band/album, but if we don't enforce a content policy then we end up with articles about Joe's garage band that's never played for anyone, and what his three friends think about it. We've intentionally set the bar at WP:ATT and it's higher than this for very good reasons. I don't really think I can re-explain the entire attribution policy at this point, but suffice it to say it's a non negotiable policy (in that we can't choose to ignore it) and that this article doesn't meet it. - Taxman Talk 04:49, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Oy vey. I didn't compare this band to Joe's garage band, I used that to point out we need standards. And the standards are higher than this from what you've told me. You keep (4-5 times so far) telling me reasons the band is notable, not that this album is. Here's why I keep bring up WP:ATT: every fact in the article needs to be attributable to a reliable, third party source. Metal magazines are marginal since they are essentially promotional material. To justify an article there has to be enough material covered in third party sources about the album that couldn't simply be described in the band's article. You'll have to look at other band articles to see the types of things they should cover, but the things I told you above are definitely part of it. Sales info, other info on the influence or importance of the album such as airplay, awards, downloads, description of it's musical style, and it's production, etc. But none of that descriptive stuff is important if you can't show that the album is important beyond just the band that created it. - Taxman Talk 05:09, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I haven't given constructive assistance because so far you haven't made any effort to establish the importance of the album beyond the band. - Taxman Talk 05:10, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Nothing about the above justifies anything more than mentioning that in the band's article. - Taxman Talk 15:16, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Importance 

message: :Image:Meistermephisto.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 ensure 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) 15:55, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Meistermephisto.jpg

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Meister Mephisto. 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/20070216203754/http://www.nocturnalhorde.com/interview65.html to http://www.nocturnalhorde.com/interview65.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070216203754/http://www.nocturnalhorde.com/interview65.html to http://www.nocturnalhorde.com/interview65.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070626003019/http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?Mode=Archive&Date=3%2F8%2F2005 to http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?Mode=Archive&Date=3%2F8%2F2005
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060112093900/http://www.spiralarchitect.com/ to http://www.spiralarchitect.com/
*Added archive https://archive.is/20070127043544/http://www.antenna.nu/sturmgeist/interview1.php to http://www.antenna.nu/sturmgeist/interview1.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070216203754/http://www.nocturnalhorde.com/interview65.html to http://www.nocturnalhorde.com/interview65.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928225225/http://www.season-of-mist.com/light/index.php?action=bands&groupe=Sturmgeist&datatype=releases to http://www.season-of-mist.com/light/index.php?action=bands&groupe=Sturmgeist&datatype=releases
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) 00:04, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018)