Wikipedia - How Many Others Here Utilize Them?

So set up a system where you add eachother to wiki?

It doesn’t matter if you add your own page or if your friend or your fan adds the page. As long as it qualifies with Wikipedia rules on this. You need to be notable, and article has to state what makes you notable. Also, all the info needs to be verifiable by linked resources. And the resources may not be self published ie. blog. You may use your project website as source, but only on basic data. Other than that, you need to refer to third party news articles in music magazines and stuff like that. If there is no news articles about you in online music zines then you can easily assume that you are not notable enough for inclusion in wikipedia.

hi looza, i think i just woke up so i dont think im really comprehending whats being said. i do however note that:

"This page has been deleted. The deletion log for the page is provided below for reference.

  • 00:43, 19 July 2008 Maxim (Talk | contribs) deleted “C64 Messiah” ‎ (Deleted because expired WP:PROD; Reason given: Not notable. using TW)"

i bumped into a lackluster entry on wikipedia and was surprised it was there, in may 2005. of course, i know who illbilly is, and yes, i’ve edited it on/off over the years to make it correct and precise.

stuff like this:…oldid=158882609

ive found that quoting discogs for discography stuff works and is considered valid 3rd party information. same with interviews that pop up on webzines or actual printed magazines. it appears that some of them (wikipedia editors) just demand any kind of reference to anything and dont really care, as long as it looks like there’s loads and loads of references. i wouldnt try fake references tho…

Yeah, well, you just need to prove that you are notable. Other than that, nobody cares. :)

On your article though. I would recommend you to upload a photo of yourself and mark it as self created CC or GFDL licenced. If you don’t mark it like that it will get deleted really quickly.

thanks,however, all those specifications make it not really that interesting to do it. wikimedia, wikipedia, this licence, that licence, whers its from, who took it, etc. ill put one in … maybe december.

Yeah, it actually goes worse every day. Nowadays it’s pretty hard to even keep CC licenced images in there. If there is some sort of typo in the explanation texts for example, the copyright freaks rather delete it than fix the typo.

I’m VERY glad Wiki got more strict.
It helps its (still questionable) credibility.

Scaring off people like us helps ;)

argh @ wikipedia