View Full Version : Midnight Rider's on Wikipedia
GOREVS3000
24 Dec 2006, 01:22 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midnight_Riders
Ok check that link out...
Now that you've finished laughing does anyone think this is a situation we should correct? If so how do we go about it?
GOREVS3000
24 Dec 2006, 01:23 AM
Yes I know I made a mistake writing Midnight Rider's instead of Midnight Riders. It was a slip of the hand.
JMMUSA8
24 Dec 2006, 01:39 AM
All in favor of changing it?
Seriously, its a crap band that lasted 4 years in the 80s.
wolfp10
24 Dec 2006, 12:37 PM
I say go for it. I'm not familiar with wikipedia editing, but it shouldn't be a problem.
The Magpie
26 Dec 2006, 10:19 PM
Just my 2 cents, but if this is probably something that would best be put together by someone, if not a group of people from the Riders' Board.
JMMUSA8
26 Dec 2006, 10:22 PM
Just my 2 cents, but if this is probably something that would best be put together by someone, if not a group of people from the Riders' Board.
Actually I believe this would be a good project for the Web Team.
thecastigador
26 Dec 2006, 11:16 PM
Actually I believe this would be a good project for the Web Team.
Agreed
thecastigador
27 Dec 2006, 12:38 AM
Here we go (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midnight_Riders_%28MLS_supporters_association%29)
feel free to edit it, as that was all just place holder text
even better, when you type in Midnight Riders you get this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midnight_Riders) instead of the crappy band.
patfan1
27 Dec 2006, 08:45 AM
Here we go (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midnight_Riders_%28MLS_supporters_association%29)
feel free to edit it, as that was all just place holder text
even better, when you type in Midnight Riders you get this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midnight_Riders) instead of the crappy band.
Don't use wiki all that much, but when I clicked on your link, I saw this:
An editor has expressed a concern that the subject of the article does not satisfy the notability guideline or one of the following guidelines for inclusion on Wikipedia: Biographies, Books, Companies, Fiction, Music, Neologisms, Numbers, Web content, or several proposals for new guidelines.
If you are familiar with the subject matter, please expand the article to establish its notability, citing reliable sources. If notability cannot be established, the article is more likely to be considered for deletion, as per Wikipedia:Guide to deletion. (See also Wikipedia:Notability)
JMMUSA8
27 Dec 2006, 09:19 AM
I gotta believe it's up there because it look more like a blog then a encyclopedia page.
Speaking of, maybe we should update the Riders history page on the Riders site, instead of it being a letter written by some guy.
The Magpie
27 Dec 2006, 09:59 AM
Seems like there's a new disclaimer at the top of the page, and see here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability
Looks like the page could be taken down; y'all really have to think these things through (and read the fine print) before you act.
The Magpie
Chowda
27 Dec 2006, 10:55 AM
Should board member names be listed on wiki? Seems superfluous and a little too personal. I hope they were contacted first.
patfan1
27 Dec 2006, 11:03 AM
Should board member names be listed on wiki? Seems superfluous and a little too personal. I hope they were contacted first.
That's a good point ... and no, we probably shouldn't be. I get the feeling the page will need a rework since we're already being threatened anyway.
JMMUSA8
27 Dec 2006, 11:17 AM
Seems like there's a new disclaimer at the top of the page, and see here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability
Looks like the page could be taken down; y'all really have to think these things through (and read the fine print) before you act.
The Magpie
"A topic is notable if it has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works with sources independent of the subject itself and each other."
By all means find me some of these sources so we can meet the guidelines.
edlova
27 Dec 2006, 11:29 AM
Should board member names be listed on wiki? Seems superfluous and a little too personal. I hope they were contacted first.
yeah I was wondering why that was done...this is not the Riders site guys
JMMUSA8
27 Dec 2006, 11:35 AM
yeah I was wondering why that was done...this is not the Riders site guys
Which is why I think it's up for review (or whatever it is).
Ultra Peanut
27 Dec 2006, 11:39 AM
Boy, if I ever needed to illustrate why Wikipedia gives librarians headaches, this is a good case study.
Chowda
27 Dec 2006, 11:57 AM
Boy, if I ever needed to illustrate why Wikipedia gives librarians headaches, this is a good case study.
You know what else gives librarians headaches? My fist!
Just Kidding.
Seriously, if you're looking for sources, you might want to see if there's been anything published on the Riders. I know of at least one article in POTM that was written about the various groups in The Fort. Has RevsNet ever written anything? Does the Rev's site have a blurb about us? I know Adam wrote a piece on the Colubus trip in a newspaper. Maybe there's something there. Come up with a concise summary and don't forget to mention philanthropy.
Also, look at what Bara Brava and Screaming Eagles did. Clear and concise and their only link is their respective website.
Section 8's is much more comprehensive. That would be quite a project to do something like that for the Riders.
JMMUSA8
27 Dec 2006, 11:59 AM
Section 8's is much more comprehensive. That would be quite a project to do something like that for the Riders.
There's no reason why ours shouldn't look like that.
FWIW, I did remove the board members.
Chowda
27 Dec 2006, 12:01 PM
There's no reason why ours shouldn't look like that.
FWIW, I did remove the board members.
As the old expression goes, there's nothing between you but asses and opportunity.
Wait, that can't be right...:)