 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
Facebook link
editWikipedia:ELNO#Links normally to be avoided says to avoid Facebook links unless there is an exceptional justification. In this case, the band already has a website, so the addition is spam. Additionally, it can not be verified that the Facebook page IS in any capacity official to the band as Facebook pages and user names are not vetted and anyone can create a page with any band name. This is also why you can't use Facebook as a reliable source. Dennis Brown (talk) 16:53, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
- The first words of Wikipedia:ELNO#Links normally to be avoided state "Except for a link to an official page of the article's subject". This link is obviously an official Facebook page of the artist, so is acceptable. memphisto 17:12, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
- The facebook page isn't the official website for the band, http://www.lovefungus.com is. You also don't need the same link the article multiple times. These aren't controversial concepts, this is standard operating procedure, same reason you don't have link to twitter and myspace and every other social network site on each article, only the main site. The purpose of Wikipedia isn't to promote the band. 17:15, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
- As I said, it is the official Facebook page of the artist and can be included in the article's external links per Wikipedia:External links#Official links. As for repeating the official website in the external links section, this is standard practice for artists articles on Wikipedia. memphisto 17:22, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
- For an example of the current use of external links on musical artist pages see Crowded House. memphisto 18:03, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
- WP:ATA, in particular subsection WP:WAX applies to talk pages as well as AFD. There are more pages with improper formatting on Wikipedia than with proper. Dennis Brown (talk) 18:11, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
- Tom Waits, Rihanna, Kasabian, Lily Allen, David Guetta, Darren Hayes, Professor Green, how many more examples do you need? memphisto 20:00, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
- I don't need any more. Those pages are not in compliance with guidelines. Like I said, most here are not in compliance, which is a problem. I just deal with the pages as I run across them. As to the policy, see User_talk:DGG#Love_Fungus if you want, I was trying to not labor the issue, even though the policy is very clear, knowing that other administrators (like DGG) interpret it the same way as I. The most important part is that when you say "What about X article, it does it", that is a non argument that no admin on Wikipedia will ever listen to. Two wrongs don't make a right. Oh, you hear people use it in AFD all the time, but the admin's ignore it when deciding the close. My goal isn't to make all articles equally out of compliance, it is to make them equally compliant. But you are welcome to get opinions from other administrators, I would even encourage it if you truly feel that every music article should have a facebook link. That should make short work of the issue. Dennis Brown (talk) 20:13, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
- How are these articles out of compliance? The guidelines at Wikipedia:External links#Official links states that "Official links (if any) are provided to give the reader the opportunity to see what the subject says about itself. These links are exempt from the links normally to be avoided..." memphisto 20:33, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
- I think your missing the point hes making here. You can not be sure that that facebook page is official. There is a link to the official website already. This is sufficient. The facebook link is breach of rules and because other articles do it does therefore make it correct procedure and repeating the official site in the external links is unnecessary. Nome3000 (talk) 20:05, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
- As an example, here is the David Bowie article as it was when it was promoted to featured article status on 28 September 2010 [1]. Notice that the official website features both in the infobox and the external links; as well as external links to the official Myspace & YouTube pages. memphisto 11:09, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
- I think your missing the point hes making here. You can not be sure that that facebook page is official. There is a link to the official website already. This is sufficient. The facebook link is breach of rules and because other articles do it does therefore make it correct procedure and repeating the official site in the external links is unnecessary. Nome3000 (talk) 20:05, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
- How are these articles out of compliance? The guidelines at Wikipedia:External links#Official links states that "Official links (if any) are provided to give the reader the opportunity to see what the subject says about itself. These links are exempt from the links normally to be avoided..." memphisto 20:33, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
- I don't need any more. Those pages are not in compliance with guidelines. Like I said, most here are not in compliance, which is a problem. I just deal with the pages as I run across them. As to the policy, see User_talk:DGG#Love_Fungus if you want, I was trying to not labor the issue, even though the policy is very clear, knowing that other administrators (like DGG) interpret it the same way as I. The most important part is that when you say "What about X article, it does it", that is a non argument that no admin on Wikipedia will ever listen to. Two wrongs don't make a right. Oh, you hear people use it in AFD all the time, but the admin's ignore it when deciding the close. My goal isn't to make all articles equally out of compliance, it is to make them equally compliant. But you are welcome to get opinions from other administrators, I would even encourage it if you truly feel that every music article should have a facebook link. That should make short work of the issue. Dennis Brown (talk) 20:13, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
- Tom Waits, Rihanna, Kasabian, Lily Allen, David Guetta, Darren Hayes, Professor Green, how many more examples do you need? memphisto 20:00, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
- WP:ATA, in particular subsection WP:WAX applies to talk pages as well as AFD. There are more pages with improper formatting on Wikipedia than with proper. Dennis Brown (talk) 18:11, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
- The facebook page isn't the official website for the band, http://www.lovefungus.com is. You also don't need the same link the article multiple times. These aren't controversial concepts, this is standard operating procedure, same reason you don't have link to twitter and myspace and every other social network site on each article, only the main site. The purpose of Wikipedia isn't to promote the band. 17:15, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
just wondering how it can be vandalism to an article i started. Nome3000 (talk) 16:14, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry Nome3000, for some reason I missed you comments on the talk page. memphisto 18:33, 11 November 2011 (UTC)