Talk:Ultimate Guitar

Latest comment: 5 months ago by TheDoubtingDisease in topic Notable???
WikiProject Libraries (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Libraries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Libraries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Guitarists (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Guitarists, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Guitarists on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.

Previous VfD and AfDEdit

A previous article on this subject was nominated for deletion twice:

I have recreated this article because I feel it does have sufficient notability. Please note its Alexa ranking of 1,444 and its nearly 300,000 members and over one million posts to its forums. — TheKMantalk 23:43, 22 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's 809 now James Brown[citation needed] 07:41, 26 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Its 700 now Avyfain 07:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's 374 as of 12-13-07

331 as of March 2008

I have deleted the notice about external references after adding the Reuters section Stratman07 (talk) 18:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Does the article quoting somebody affiliated with the site really make the site itself noteable? Not a rhetorical question here. - Vianello (talk) 04:32, 22 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The fact that the site has nearly 1 million members and gets more traffic than MTV makes it noteable. The external reference thing is just to please Wikipedia's rules. Stratman07 (talk) 03:22, 11 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Sorry if I put this in a wrong section, I'm not too familiar with Wikipedia. Anyway, I was seeking for a help of UG/Wiki community to expand the article and include some references to it, so we can keep the article. Obviously, Ultimate Guitar is the only big website that was able to stay alive while all other big websites have been closed down 11:09, 17 September 2007 (UTC)zapppReply[reply]

As a guitarist, I must say UG is significant. It is well known among guitarists, at least ones that I know. Non-musicians may not know this but tablature has revolutionized how people learn guitar. And the internet has allowed for another revolution in how tab is shared. UG is the most reliable and famous tab site on the net. THE MOST RELIABLE AND WELL KNOWN IN THE WORLD. I'm sure this is enough of a distinction to warrant its place in Wikipedia. 18:15, 8 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have nothing to add onto what the person above said. Everything he says is true, although I'm not totally sure if it's the most well known in the world. My learning of how to play was made much, much easier because of that site, and I was really suprised that a vote came in favour of "delete" last time. If the discussion ever comes up again, my vote would be strongly keep because of its popularity and importance to guitarists worldwide. --Pouchkidium 21:10, 8 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I feel more support is due to keep this article afloat. Ultimate Guitar is truly a great font of knowledge and guidance for guitarists and music fans the world over. Due to recent actions by various authorities, it is also one of the few, and probably the largest and most reputable, guitar tablature resource website/community left on the internet. It has been a great help to me and countless others that I know personally. It deserves to stay. Amphetachronism 02:37, 22 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Individual, subjective opinion isn't exactly verifiable or a good measure of importance at all, unfortunately. If this article is going to stay, its relevance and importance really need corroboration from some kind of significant source. References in prominent magazines might be a good angle. Vianello (talk) 22:59, 23 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I think that under the notable members we should add Nolan Whyte, because his contributions with "In The Van On Comeback Road" as made him pretty well known, and just about every member on the site are in stitches while reading them... so he has some good contributions to the site. I'll leave it up to everyone else to decide before I go and edit the page. -- Lgndkllr777 22:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I also think that Andrew Zara should be added under famous users. The guy has done over 1700 tabs. Also Mikhailo should be added (about 1400 tabs). All of the other users don't have more than 500.
Though it is popular, it is of Whyte's own registered work of fiction. It really doesn't have much to do with guitar playing and is only a nice side thing, where as PickNGrin's videos and other mentioned names are relevant to the page and its purpose.
Concerning Legality, sent me this: "For those publishers who had opt-in to the Ultimate Guitar Agreement, royalties are being collected." Anyone know what that really means? So the publishers who opted in have legal tabs and the ones who didn't, theirs are illegal? I don't understand this. (talk) 18:41, 3 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Concerning Eugeny NaidenovEdit

As I've read over this article for awhile, and as an avid goer to the UG website, people have hailed Naidenov as "Zappp". Yet, somebody has edited his name as "Scum" which I highly doubt is his name.

Yep. Fixed. — TheKMantalk 14:01, 29 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

NOTE: Now it says he's hailed as "czar..." His username's still Zappp, unless I missed him being promoted from admin to czar....


I have temporarily semi-protected the article since many new/anonymous users are vandalizing it or adding un-encyclopedic information. Mushroom (Talk) 18:27, 19 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Probobly the MPA trying to give UG a bad rep. muahahaha... or not on second thought The Ravager 19:32, 27 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's usually just people from the UG Community. I should know, I'm from UG, they do it all the time. Keaton fu

Is the semi-protected state still required given this occurred nearly 2 years ago? LemonairePaides (talk) 04:29, 14 October 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I just removed this from the article:

"Please stop adding nonsense here. We don't want to hear about who the coolest member is or learn about the craziest thing he did one night while drunk. Vanity entries and additions intended to smear or mock other users of the site are vandalism, and those who add them will be referred to administrators.

Thank you."

Avyfain 07:18, 5 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mods and Admins have gotten ban happy lately. It's getting crazy, I think they're gonna end up ruining the community they've worked hard on building. Turned it from just tabs to a guitarist community and it's heading back towards just tabs. more and more users are complaining and heading over to sites such as harmony central. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boblahblahlawblog (talkcontribs) 08:29, 2 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The PitEdit

Why should we not be able to post about the pit? The pit is a major part of UG for most people that go there. That includes me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thepitmonkey (talkcontribs) 04:33, 10 November 2007 (UTC) This pit is a huge part of UG for me.Reply[reply]

It is the most-posted-in forum, but is just the general chat forum. The site's purpose is to offer instruction etc for guitarists, and most forums have a general chat area anyway. I'd also like to add that despite what newer members of UG may think, the memes often used in the Pit (the "Lol wut?" pear; Pedobear; Icy Hot; buttsecks; All Your Base etc) are products of the *chan boards, not UG, and therefore are unworthy of mention in this article. Stratman07 (talk) 18:10, 30 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tab numbersEdit

"Around 1500 tabs are added every few days." is thoroughly unhelpful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:40, 14 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree. "A few days" can really be any number of days. I'd edit it myself it if the article wasn't semi-protected. What I would like to say is: "Large numbers of tabs are submitted daily by the community" Or something along those lines. Rpgoof (talk) 19:22, 15 October 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]


should we say how many of the topics included in news now are credited to and how it has become a source of contention for some users,and should we include other sources that are regurley refrenced in the news eg:NME etc... ????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by E1avenger (talkcontribs) 03:18, 8 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's an internal and fairly minor complaint. I wouldn't say that it's notable enough for the Wikipedia article Stratman07 (talk) 19:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No. of registered usersEdit

On they mentioned in their news section that they have officially reached 1,000,000 (and still counting), and I was hoping someone would be able to edit this because I cannot due to the protection lock on it. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevenmoreau (talkcontribs) 02:45, 12 October 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pending changesEdit

This article is one of a small number (about 100) selected for the first week of the trial of the Wikipedia:Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.

The following request appears on that page:

However with only a few hours to go, comments have only been made on two of the pages.

Please update the Queue page as appropriate.

Note that I am not involved in this project any more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially.

Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 20:44, 15 June 2010 (UTC).Reply[reply]


I'm trying to figure out how UltimateGuitar is notable. It's just another guitar website, and a poor one at that. Are we going to start putting up wikipedia pages for every website out there?

TobusRex (talk) 07:43, 5 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is an older WIkipedia page so it may have been under the rules of notability at the time. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:38, 20 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If nothing else, I think it's significant for it's role during the MPA's crackdown on guitar tab websites in the 2000's. Every other major site was shut down, but they managed to survive by arguing that the MPA copyright complaints did not effect them due to being based in Russia. This is discussed in the NYT piece referenced in the article.[1] For a long time it was the only notable guitar tab site available. TheDoubtingDisease (talk) 07:28, 7 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletionEdit

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:22, 21 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]