Analog-X64 wrote:either this is a sick game for these wikidweebs, or they lack social skills and live underground or something and they get off doing this.
All of the above.
As a small side note, SchuminWeb has just marked all my comments on the deletion page with Single Purpose Account, yet another attempt to soil me and the case. What a sad case...
Presumably you've got a lot of history on your account that shows this isn't the case? Behaviour like this would tend to weaken his case rather than yours for the independent adjudicator.
What was the reaction to you being on iTunes and Amazon MP3? Presumably this would be prima facie evidence of group-ness?
They are now commenting on the fact this very discussion exists !!
Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming 'WOO HOO what a ride'
@Chris: Haven't put in that ref yet. The response would be: Any idiot can have his crap on Amazon or iTunes.
@FFRenzy: Oh yes, they've discovered this discussion forum. The user Andy is postulating that I'm actually the one running this forum canvassing all the members here to help my case on wikipedia. If you ever wondered, you're right: I'm the puppeteer of LMan, muahaha.
wikipedia wrote:
Being discussed off Wikipedia re:Press Play on Tape
I just thought you might be interested to know that we and the AfD are being discussed off Wikipedia at [1]. I am amused that my actions have branded me a troll. Aspects (talk) 18:18, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Lovely... I'm amused about how much they lack a clue on how this system works. And points discussed there noted in case they ever come up in the Press Play on Tape AFD, or the recently-nominated Dunjonquest AFD. SchuminWeb (Talk) 20:04, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
beyond wrote:@@FFRenzy: Oh yes, they've discovered this discussion forum. The user Andy is postulating that I'm actually the one running this forum canvassing all the members here to help my case on wikipedia. If you ever wondered, you're right: I'm the puppeteer of LMan, muahaha.
well, he DID rectify that.
Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming 'WOO HOO what a ride'
Don't let andy provoke you with his smug behaviour. He obviously thinks the Wikipedia is a bureaucracy, always quoting paragraph this and guideline that; while at the same time ignoring many of their principles (Help and welcome Newbies, Ignore all Rules, Wikipedia is not a buerocracy, Show good faith, The Five Pillars, and so on). As far as I see it, he does not really want to improve Wikipedia, it's rather like an ego thing. SchuminWeb and others are just standing by and letting it happen.
It is disappointing to see how long time wikipedia editors find it "amusing" how newbies have no clue. It's a power game they play, and I sincerely hope the administrator who has the final word will see that.
So please everyone remain calm, if you wish the article to stay online we need to keep on improving the article. Doing name-calling with andy will not help. Has anybody researched mentions in the print media?
Had a quick look through my magazine collection, and so far I've found PPOT in the Swedish magazine Super PLAY #125, page 55. I know there are some stuff about them in Retro Gamer mags as well, but haven't had time to look through them.
Then again it doesn't seem to matter. What ever citation is thrown at the article, they'll claim it has no relevance. They demand the cover of Time Magazine, otherwise it's not of note.
While I do think there needs to be verification and quality control on Wikipedia, the kind of behaviour displayed ruins it. We have a Swedish word for it, regelryttare (literally "rule rider"), when you're unable to make any distinction. And there should be different levels of verification needed. I mean, it's one thing to claim Hitler loved to dance polka in the nude under a full moon and not back it up with historic facts (which he did btw, I just know it), but it's quite the other to claim an underground band is notable with underground sources.
Sadly it's this kind of citation witch hunt that often render some Wikipedia articles utterly unreadable, because every other claim has a dozen citation numbers after them.
Last edited by Makke on 12/08/2010 - 14:26, edited 1 time in total.
I went through my archives and found two articles that were published in German game magazine "Man!ac" (known as "M! Games" these days). While these articles cover game music on a more general level, both of them include information about PPOT as well as band shots:
"Musik liegt in der Luft" (issue 117, 2003), written by Ulrich Steppberger (us), p. 28-29.
"Retro Rhythmen" (issue 145, 2005), written by Ulrich Steppberger (us), p. 88-89.
> he response would be: Any idiot can have his crap on Amazon or iTunes.
Any idiot can be in the New York Times, but it still proves they exist. It's not a guarantee of quality, it's a guarantee of existability: i.e. in iTunes and Amazon, having your work published commercially for sale in a recognisable legal context by a reputable organisation, and licenced by the appropriate authorities.
If they're in the newspaper or in iTunes, then they're of note, regardless of quality.
And yes, every smug comment on that discussion makes the editors' motives more and more transparent. They can't see how they're doing more to destroy their own credibility with their own way of self-expression than anyone else could possibly achieve.
Makke wrote:Had a quick look through my magazine collection, and so far I've found PPOT in the Swedish magazine Super PLAY #125, page 55. I know there are some stuff about them in Retro Gamer mags as well, but haven't had time to look through them.
Then again it doesn't seem to matter. What ever citation is thrown at the article, they'll claim it has no relevance. They demand the cover of Time Magazine, otherwise it's not of note.
Time magazine? Any amateur can be on the front of Time just by farting color, or inventing perpetual smugness or something...
Chris Abbott wrote:>
If they're in the newspaper or in iTunes, then they're of note, regardless of quality.
Chris
I really can't be bothered with reading all their intertwined scwap guideline pages. If I'd insert a note or ref about PPOT material being available on Amazon or iTunes it would be instant suicide; probably the fastest way to the wikipedia editor guillotine festival, I guess.
Having read all the discussions, it's pretty clear to me that we need to be sensible and mature about this.
Of course, we all know who PRESS PLAY ON TAPE are, and their well earned and well deserved reputation within the C64 remix scene, but outside of the scene is a completely different story, and it's something I do think we need to carefully consider. If the article is kept, then that might indeed help pave the way for the C64 remix scene as a whole to be taken more seriously than it is now.
Being constructive and providing suitable sources to ensure that the article is kept and with valid reasons is the way forward. To this end, I shall check through back issues of Retro Gamer to see what coverage of the band is mentioned and scan the pages in to assist with documentary proof which can be sent on if required.
But please, folks, let's not get down to a personal level..
