User talk:MandrakeMan

A tag has been placed on Mile High Music requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 14:21, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:MHM Logo.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 15:17, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Mile High Music, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mile High Music. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 11:15, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just saw your comments on the deletion discussion of Mile High Music and wanted to help with your understanding by providing some background & context.

Firstly, based upon the use of "we" & "our" in your comments I'm assuming that you are the owner of or otherwise associated with this company. Please note that creating or editing an article on a company you have an interest in is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia due to conflict of interest. You can find more about this at the Business FAQ (am I allowed to edit articles about myself or my company?)

Secondly, it is considered bad form to use the argument "but xxx exists so why can't mine?" in the deletion discussions. In the case of the example that you provided, just because it is not being deleted doesn't mean that the Wikipedia community considers it "OK", it may just be that they hadn't noticed it yet (there are I believe over 2 million articles out there, and only so many editors to watch for them).

Finally, to be included in Wikipedia a company needs to be considered notable. What this means is that your company has had significant coverage in third party publications such as newspapers, tv shows, fanzines etc. If that is the case, the article needs to include references to that coverage so make it clear to the community that the company is indeed notable. See the Microsoft article for an example.

In order to keep the article on Wikipedia my suggestion would be to gather any news articles that have been written about the company (having records that chart on NME is not likely to be sufficient), post those to the the Talk Page of the article and ask in the AFD that another editor review and add these to the article as appropriate. I cannot guarantee that it will be kept, but this is the best way forward. If the article is deleted, please read why was my page deleted to understand what you can do next.

Hope that this information helps. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any other questions about the process. Cheers! Richc80 (talk) 16:55, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was checking the AfD and wanted to see what you'd done with your site. It's not loading at all for me now. Just wanted to let you know. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 03:47, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DC, thanks for checking back. The server has been off-line and I've just been on to the provider and got it sorted. You should find it quite a long way on from your previous visit. I'll compile the reviews & press page over the next day or so, all of which - along with the pages that are already up - should hopefully give enough 'credence' to warrant the pages survival. Thanks

Probably a little too full the reviews but at least you can see the references to various reviews etc from over recent years. Again, I'll add more - if necessary - as time permits. And Richc80, yes, i have helped promote the guys at times, sorry if that's bad form but having used Wiki over the last few years an awful lot, I have seen and you must appreciate that most info is added by those either at or close to source, at least where more obscure material & artists are concerned.--MandrakeMan (talk) 13:44, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately all of the reviews talk about the artists, not the company. These do not show that the company is notable. You need reviews or articles about the company itself in order to establish that it is notable. Also, by adding the reviews verbatim there may be a copyright concern (although I'm certainly no expert on the matter). Finally I would say that my experience has not been the same as yours, and that being the owner of something you are contributing an article about can be incompatiable with the aims of Wikipedia and therefore strongly discouraged. Richc80 (talk) 00:27, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Considering it's well known that ALL major national companies edit their own pages, I find that a bit strange. I did actually say that I 'helped on occasion' promote stuff related to the label, i.e. music nights & website. I'm not actually too sure who will ever 'review' a company, bar maybe 'another great release from...' which I'm sure there are comments and will dig them out. This is all very convoluted just to say "hey, yes, there's a great little indie label in London that people should be able to find info on"!--MandrakeMan (talk) 11:30, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:MHM Logo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Skier Dude (talk 04:38, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]