This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 8 |
Hi, I am Adam and I have taken this case. The details of the request for mediation are at 2006-06-13 Red Hot Chili Peppers.
Before continuing, I need to find out if all sides will cooperate with the mediation. These are ReadyMade, regrhcp, Maxcap, Xinit, and several anonymous editors. Any other parties who wish to participate must also indicate their cooperation below. ReadyMade has been blocked; when he becomes unblocked he can indicate his cooperation and join the discussion.
During this mediation please refrain from editing the article. Since so many of the participants are anonymous I would like some indication from them that they understand what this mediation is about. If there is continued editing or disruption of the mediation by anonymous accounts I will have to refer this case to a higher form of dispute resolution.
Please indicate below if you will cooperate with this mediation. Ideogram 04:41, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Will the user at 88.111.88.195 please refrain from editing this article. Ideogram 09:36, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
All participants please state your positions and give your supporting reasons below. Keep your statements concise and to-the-point and do not engage in personal attacks. Ideogram 10:16, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Please be sure to read WP:EL. Ideogram 10:42, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm onboard with the process, as I'm one of the people attempting to clean up the EL... -- Xinit 14:38, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Count me in. -- Jason1978 01:35, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Me as well. maxcap 18:32, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
I suppose I should have stated my position on the EL that we've seen added again and again here. I stand pretty strongly by the WP:EL as it's currently written, especially in regard to the fan sites. The problem comes in that all the players seem to want to push their own blog, forum or site to the exclusion of all others, so even if we were to try to pick a representative example of a fan site for the RHCP, we'd run into troubles.
As it stands, I've taken the relatively hard-line approach of removing anything that isn't capable of acting as a citeable reference or that isn't an official organ of the band. Anything that is capable of being used as a reference should be linked from withing the body of the article with the <ref> tag where it can be of use.
I've attempted to bring people to the discussion pages to explain why their fan site or forum or other link should be included, but I recieve personal attacks, circular logic, or cries that I'm trying to assert 'ownership' or that I'm being 'unfair' to the fan sites that I'm removing. -- Xinit 19:01, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm in agreement with Xinit's reasoning, and would like to add that I would be in support of a link to a directory of fansites (if such a directory exists) as it is probably the only fair solution. maxcap 19:18, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Frankly, I think there are four solid non-fan links already and that should be sufficient. An article doesn't need a huge amount of external links, simply external links which are relevant and appropriate. RHCP are a large enough band that it is clear they have numerous fans. Linking to fan sites isn't necessary to prove this. IrishGuy talk 19:31, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Maybe you're just being super paranoid and have too much time on your hands? Infact there was no attempt for me to have multiple identities. If you took the time to think about it, you'll see i have two ip's because my isp provides dynamic ip's. Also my username on wikipedia is readymade, so there you go. I have no relation to regrhcp.
If you're not prepared to listen, then so be it. This discussion is over as far as i'm concerned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.209.222.166 ( talk • contribs)
I feel that I should weigh in because I was the one that started the entire fan site debate in the first place.
The fact of the matter is this: I agree with Anthony. The inclusion of fan sites as external links are of course going to give more enhancement to the article; this article should be only providing general knowledge of the band with fan sites being able to provide extended knowledge of it. To say that the only sites that are officially are organs of the band being the only ones that are allowed because the official websites of the Red Hot Chili Peppers are not helpful at all and generally fan sites are more indepth and give a better wealth of information. Plus, fan sites also get their information from credible sources, whether it is press releases or interviews and profiles and whatnot given out by the official members of the band (i.e. Anthony Kiedis' biography Scar Tissue).
In retrospect, the only reason why we are having this mediation in the first place because I for one found it suspect that while all other fan site addresses got deleted, Stadium-Arcadium.com did not. Now I have been in contact with the owner of the site and apologized for my remarks, but I could not help it but to find it unfair in that sense. While it is true that some might be on here to promote their fan website, some, such as the American sites One Hot Globe and The Red Hot Stadium, the British Stadium-Arcadium.com, and the Italian redhotchilipeppers.it, are of good reference with their providing of news, deep band information, amongst other things.
Despite the fact that on the WP:EL, it states that one major fan site is appropriate, that is difficult when there are four major fan websites. I think everyone on all sides of this debate has to keep in mind that a) this is an article about one of the world's biggest bands, and b) as much as we want to be scholarly about this, we cannot, and we should not either. Plus the fans that being introduced to the Red Hot Chili Peppers or trying to find out more about the Red Hot Chili Peppers, should have fan sites that they can access to not only find more information but to interact with more fans. -- Paralleluniverse
I was looking at all the links posted above that have been added on here before and only 2 of them are actual RHCP fansites. Most of them are non-fan run bios and fan run blogs and message boards/forums. OHG and Stadium-Arcadium seem to be the only two actual sites that are RHCP fansites. I wouldn't really call a blog or forum a fansite because there are tons of those out there, especially on MySpace. One of the links was (the RHCP Turkey one)was just a forum, not in English which you had to subscribe to to even view. Like I have stated before, I do not run OHG though I am a newswriter and moderator for the site. I'm not here to cry and complain, pick any fights because these are only links to websites. I can understand not wanting alot of links and by judging from certain links posted I can see the reasons behind removing most of them but there are not many actual full RHCP websites out there anymore. Like I have stated, OHG has been in contact with the label in the past as well as other RHCP sources which allowed the site exclusive content only allowed to two other sources: RHCP.com and RHCP MySpace. I'm not against the SA site (I actually post there often) and i'm not here to act as if OHG is better. Like I said, they are just links but like someone already mentioned, people looking at the RHCP article on here might want to get more info that they can't get here so they might want to see some fansites. I know that the official site isn't the greatest source (they actually have the wrong lyrics for some songs there)and some fansites give people more knowledge, news, tourdates and info about the band that the official site lacks. --
Jason1978 04:34, 16 June 2006
The stated goals I've heard from the pro-fan site camp is that they want to help fans learn more about the band, and that's what the links to the fan communities do. Well, I would suggest that they use google to search, but maybe we should just link ' Search for more' -- Xinit 02:21, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
All right, allow me to ask you this: is Wikipedia supposed to be a place where people can get information. I know about the bias issue. I have dealt with the bias issue. Hell, I once rewrote the entire RHCP article and edited other band articles to reduce the bias issue. We all understand why there is such a bias aagainst Wikipedia -- the reason for that bias only centers around the fact that people can come in and edit it at anytime.
And I'm going reinterate what I said earlier, I support fan sites that are QUALITY fan sites, not the typical fanboy shrine junk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.88.21.7 ( talk • contribs)
Xinit, your solution for the fansite debate is flawed. If you look at the search results those google keywords bring up, you'll find that there are barely any rhcp focused sites in the list. Surely it would be easier to add 2 or 3 evaluated links directly onto the article. Anthony - Stadium-arcadium
Here is a twist, one of the Fansites you want to throw out, is basically a search of Google Blogs with relevancy, just like the suggestions given to solve the problem. Wiki's are supposed to be communnity, not based on what one or 2 people think. I was not a RHCP fan, but I went to this page, and tried every link there was, before they got tossed, and I gathered a lot of information to help me learn about the band and become a fan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.0.109.73 ( talk • contribs)
Well thank-you to the guy above. He just proves that alot of the links that were present are infact useful to people with an interest in the band. Ask people who've found the likes of OHG and SA through this wiki page, the majority are now loyal members on both sites forums and are pleased they found the links through here. Anthony.
All right, let's be serious here. I don't think a majority of people are going to want to thumb through pages and pages of information that will prove to be nothing more than repetitive information. I thumbed through that. It's pointless! Absolutely pointless! Most people that are looking for information on the Red Hot Chili Peppers are not looking for just stupid news! They want to know about their history. They want to know about their music. Here on Wikipedia you cannot get that indepth about a band with all of that. Wikipedia is to provide basic, unbiased information about the band. If people want to find out more about the band then they can go to websites that are dedicated to the band, not to a Google link where they have to search for more and more mess.
Listen, people are going to be biased when it comes to their favorite band. You cannot avoid that, you cannot police this page enough to avoid that, and if you're policing this page to reach a unrealistic goal, then I am sorry, that is the most idiotic and pointless effort I ever heard. I'm not calling you two, Xinit and Maxcap, idiots, but the unrealistic effort. The WP:EL doesn't even define what an appropriate fan site is, and to refer to an article about it is stupid. If it's a fan site that is going to provide indepth information about the Red Hot Chili Peppers, it's going to provide an opportunity for fans to interact and to get know more about the Chili Peppers, they're not going to do it here. I think the idea of a refernece and external links is to allow fans or other people who are interested in getting a deeper and greater knowledge of the Red Hot Chili Peppers. That's why I support the fan sites. And I'm talking about fan sites that are appropriate -- deep, indepth, informative, somewhere you actually learn something instead of redudnant, fanboy, shrine mess. Paralleluniverse 04:13, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Please do sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~) this will add a timestamp. Ideogram 23:12, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
well with the discography your actually missing a compilation album called "Plasma Shaft" i would add it, but im not certain on how Klyv 07:43, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
This is not good. But don't start an edit war over it. Anthony, are you responsible for this? Ideogram 08:49, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
There are about four or five people against the fansite links being posted. I can promise you the majority of article readers will disagree with that miniroity of people. The difference is, they're not going to debate it or argue it. So you'll never know how many exist. Anthony.
172.209.222.166 11:47, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
That's two. At three I'd advise you to pursue other solutions. I personally have a preference for semi-protection but that is very controversial. Ideogram 16:02, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
You'll find some fans who feel strongly about sa and ohg adding back the links. I can assure you they won't give up. Therefore I advise you to get this page semi-protected because it won't stop any other way. Anthony - stadium-arcadium 172.209.222.166 16:27, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
With all due respect Ideogram (And I do hold a bit for you) I don't care about the consequences of my actions. It's quite clear what xinit and maxcaps true intentions are. If i'm banned for speaking the truth, then so be it. 172.209.222.166 17:16, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
The kylie minogue page is an excellent example of how bad the red hot chili peppers page is. Take a look at the external links on the kylie page. There are THREE fansites on it. It's obvious there are too many people supressing this article. Anthony 172.209.222.166 17:23, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Nothing against either website, but why are those two have to be the center of the debate? What about, Red Hot Stadium, Red Hot Chili Peppers Italy, RHCP France three good resource sites if we're wanting to have resourceful information to be external links for this article. Paralleluniverse 19:31, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
<Personal attack removed> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.209.222.166 ( talk • contribs)
Since when did you become the master? Seriously, what gives you leverage over everyone else to assume yourself as dictator.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.209.222.166 ( talk • contribs)
Why does the mediation even get parts edited out as people please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.209.222.166 ( talk • contribs)
Because it isn't up to you to declare mediation to be over. IrishGuy talk 21:44, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Anyone is free to edit this page and remove comments that are not constructive. If you're going to go away, then go away. Ideogram 21:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
All right, I'm sick of this mediation. We aren't going anywhere; Xinit is declaring himself the persnoal saviour of this article and I've had it. Until the WP:EL has a better definition on what a fan site that is appropriate for being listed under extended links is, we won't allow any until that point and time until it is better defined. This mediation has proven fruitless; nobody on either side will get anywhere. I'm just going to allow Xinit to have his way for now until there's better language in the WP:EL because I have become sick and tired of debating with him. Paralleluniverse 22:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
I would concede to allowing redhotchilipeppers.it because their news archives go back to 2002, though the sources aren't exacly evident maxcap 00:29, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Upon closer inpection Red Hot Chili Peppers Chili Peppers Italy seems like it might be a useful link since it's news archives go back to 2002, what do the fansite supporters think? maxcap 14:47, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Just tossing in my two cents. I haven't extensively looked over the source of the dispute, but per WP:IAR, if the external link, fansite or not, add to or improve the article (and thus the encyclopedia), then it should probably be kept. It seems the argument may have died down already, but perhaps a quick outline of what the each link provides to the article may be in order if anyone is willing to do that. Also, the use of the term 'biggest' when referring to the website does not appear very professional. If the link is kept, perhaps instead of biggest, it should simply state that it is a fansite in the interest of not making it appear more notable than the other links to retain WP:NPOV. Cowman109 Talk 14:43, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Please add what each website brings to the article below. Cowman109 Talk 15:05, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
In that case, why not include both of the fansites as they both provide information concerning the subject of the article? (the english version of the italian one, that is. This IS after all the English Wikipedia) They can both be labeled as an unofficial fansite, as WP:EL does say that in extreme cases links to more than one fansite are acceptable. However, this is only if both add insight or information that is not present in the article in some way (which it certainly does appear to be). Do both of the websites offer knowledge or information about the RHCP that is not available on the article? Cowman109 Talk 16:43, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
So anyways, I just went through the pain of registering for One Hot Globe: RHCP Fansite's forums to check it out. It's a shame that you have to join to view topics, because their posts go back to 2004, and if we're discussing the how resourceful a forum is, age would make it more viable as a source don't you think? maxcap 18:35, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
I disagree completely. Why should age be a deciding factor? ReadyMade 18:39, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
WP:EL states that an external link must be accessible. If one must register to utilize the content, then it isn't accessible. IrishGuy talk 18:52, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
The way I see it stadium-arcadium already has loads more topics and coverage of subjects relating to the band. The majority of RHCP fans are going to be interested in more recent discussions than discussions which have taken place over a year ago. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ReadyMade ( talk • contribs)
And you wouldn't have any personal affiliation with that site, would you? IrishGuy talk 19:00, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
I think we'll all survive without the need for the edit. Thanks ReadyMade 20:44, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Theres no need to be arrogant when we're trying to hold a discussion here. The answer is No, I'm not affiliated. How can you (Irishguy) prove to all of us you are not affiliated with any fan sites? ReadyMade 21:00, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
I have claimed no such thing. Ideogram, can you prove to us that you are not affiliated with any RHCP fan sites? ReadyMade 21:30, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
That is the point. When it becomes and all-or-none proposition, you are forced to go with none. Otherwise everyone who creates any level of RHCP shrine on geocities or angelfire will be able to put a spamlink in this article. We couldn't say no because there are already other fansites. IrishGuy talk 01:38, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Like I have previously pointed out, OHG has been around since 2000(though the site has been changed around a few times and the board/site was lost for a while due to server problems). OHG again is the ONLY fansite that I know of that has been given exclusive content directly from the band's label (OHG was given free copies of the Dani California single to give away through site contests), AOL gave the site exclusive content only avaiable through the RHCP.com site including the full private AOL sessions show (you can look through the news archives for proof of this) and OHG has had the honor of being voted as a top site by MTV (which you can see at the top of the page). While the site has gone under some extensive work in the past few months there is work being done on it to get it back to how it once was. Just thought i'd throw in my opinion again. Like I said, I don't run the page though I do have access to updating the page, moderating the forum etc.. I have no problem with any other RHCP site. All of them are great though I will point out that sites like SA or rhcp.it have been slacking on the news on their pages. Not that I care but I know the thing was brought up about news archives (which OHG currently has going back to 2004 though earlier archives were lost-read about us section for info). There are some good fansites, there are some ok fansites. I have personally noticed news I posted from the OHG using my name on a few (and for the record, we don't copy and paste the full articles to our news section due to any copyright problems we could face plus we also are strongly against hosting files deemed illegal by the label-a few fansites do not follow that rule). I don't think every fansite should be on there. If you have rules about the sites being in English that should eliminate a few. Less than a handful are up to date and have an extensive history though. As for a response to signing up to our forum. You have to also register with the Stadium-Arcadium site as well to view the forum. We do however provide news on the main site where fans can comment on news WITHOUT even signing up to the forum or registering. Xinit: I would also like to point out that if you look on the right hand side of the OHG page, there is a new archive dating back to 2004. Jason1978 07:05, 20 June 2006
(You don't have to register to access the stadium-arcadium forums.) ReadyMade 17:47, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 8 |
Hi, I am Adam and I have taken this case. The details of the request for mediation are at 2006-06-13 Red Hot Chili Peppers.
Before continuing, I need to find out if all sides will cooperate with the mediation. These are ReadyMade, regrhcp, Maxcap, Xinit, and several anonymous editors. Any other parties who wish to participate must also indicate their cooperation below. ReadyMade has been blocked; when he becomes unblocked he can indicate his cooperation and join the discussion.
During this mediation please refrain from editing the article. Since so many of the participants are anonymous I would like some indication from them that they understand what this mediation is about. If there is continued editing or disruption of the mediation by anonymous accounts I will have to refer this case to a higher form of dispute resolution.
Please indicate below if you will cooperate with this mediation. Ideogram 04:41, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Will the user at 88.111.88.195 please refrain from editing this article. Ideogram 09:36, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
All participants please state your positions and give your supporting reasons below. Keep your statements concise and to-the-point and do not engage in personal attacks. Ideogram 10:16, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Please be sure to read WP:EL. Ideogram 10:42, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm onboard with the process, as I'm one of the people attempting to clean up the EL... -- Xinit 14:38, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Count me in. -- Jason1978 01:35, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Me as well. maxcap 18:32, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
I suppose I should have stated my position on the EL that we've seen added again and again here. I stand pretty strongly by the WP:EL as it's currently written, especially in regard to the fan sites. The problem comes in that all the players seem to want to push their own blog, forum or site to the exclusion of all others, so even if we were to try to pick a representative example of a fan site for the RHCP, we'd run into troubles.
As it stands, I've taken the relatively hard-line approach of removing anything that isn't capable of acting as a citeable reference or that isn't an official organ of the band. Anything that is capable of being used as a reference should be linked from withing the body of the article with the <ref> tag where it can be of use.
I've attempted to bring people to the discussion pages to explain why their fan site or forum or other link should be included, but I recieve personal attacks, circular logic, or cries that I'm trying to assert 'ownership' or that I'm being 'unfair' to the fan sites that I'm removing. -- Xinit 19:01, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm in agreement with Xinit's reasoning, and would like to add that I would be in support of a link to a directory of fansites (if such a directory exists) as it is probably the only fair solution. maxcap 19:18, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Frankly, I think there are four solid non-fan links already and that should be sufficient. An article doesn't need a huge amount of external links, simply external links which are relevant and appropriate. RHCP are a large enough band that it is clear they have numerous fans. Linking to fan sites isn't necessary to prove this. IrishGuy talk 19:31, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Maybe you're just being super paranoid and have too much time on your hands? Infact there was no attempt for me to have multiple identities. If you took the time to think about it, you'll see i have two ip's because my isp provides dynamic ip's. Also my username on wikipedia is readymade, so there you go. I have no relation to regrhcp.
If you're not prepared to listen, then so be it. This discussion is over as far as i'm concerned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.209.222.166 ( talk • contribs)
I feel that I should weigh in because I was the one that started the entire fan site debate in the first place.
The fact of the matter is this: I agree with Anthony. The inclusion of fan sites as external links are of course going to give more enhancement to the article; this article should be only providing general knowledge of the band with fan sites being able to provide extended knowledge of it. To say that the only sites that are officially are organs of the band being the only ones that are allowed because the official websites of the Red Hot Chili Peppers are not helpful at all and generally fan sites are more indepth and give a better wealth of information. Plus, fan sites also get their information from credible sources, whether it is press releases or interviews and profiles and whatnot given out by the official members of the band (i.e. Anthony Kiedis' biography Scar Tissue).
In retrospect, the only reason why we are having this mediation in the first place because I for one found it suspect that while all other fan site addresses got deleted, Stadium-Arcadium.com did not. Now I have been in contact with the owner of the site and apologized for my remarks, but I could not help it but to find it unfair in that sense. While it is true that some might be on here to promote their fan website, some, such as the American sites One Hot Globe and The Red Hot Stadium, the British Stadium-Arcadium.com, and the Italian redhotchilipeppers.it, are of good reference with their providing of news, deep band information, amongst other things.
Despite the fact that on the WP:EL, it states that one major fan site is appropriate, that is difficult when there are four major fan websites. I think everyone on all sides of this debate has to keep in mind that a) this is an article about one of the world's biggest bands, and b) as much as we want to be scholarly about this, we cannot, and we should not either. Plus the fans that being introduced to the Red Hot Chili Peppers or trying to find out more about the Red Hot Chili Peppers, should have fan sites that they can access to not only find more information but to interact with more fans. -- Paralleluniverse
I was looking at all the links posted above that have been added on here before and only 2 of them are actual RHCP fansites. Most of them are non-fan run bios and fan run blogs and message boards/forums. OHG and Stadium-Arcadium seem to be the only two actual sites that are RHCP fansites. I wouldn't really call a blog or forum a fansite because there are tons of those out there, especially on MySpace. One of the links was (the RHCP Turkey one)was just a forum, not in English which you had to subscribe to to even view. Like I have stated before, I do not run OHG though I am a newswriter and moderator for the site. I'm not here to cry and complain, pick any fights because these are only links to websites. I can understand not wanting alot of links and by judging from certain links posted I can see the reasons behind removing most of them but there are not many actual full RHCP websites out there anymore. Like I have stated, OHG has been in contact with the label in the past as well as other RHCP sources which allowed the site exclusive content only allowed to two other sources: RHCP.com and RHCP MySpace. I'm not against the SA site (I actually post there often) and i'm not here to act as if OHG is better. Like I said, they are just links but like someone already mentioned, people looking at the RHCP article on here might want to get more info that they can't get here so they might want to see some fansites. I know that the official site isn't the greatest source (they actually have the wrong lyrics for some songs there)and some fansites give people more knowledge, news, tourdates and info about the band that the official site lacks. --
Jason1978 04:34, 16 June 2006
The stated goals I've heard from the pro-fan site camp is that they want to help fans learn more about the band, and that's what the links to the fan communities do. Well, I would suggest that they use google to search, but maybe we should just link ' Search for more' -- Xinit 02:21, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
All right, allow me to ask you this: is Wikipedia supposed to be a place where people can get information. I know about the bias issue. I have dealt with the bias issue. Hell, I once rewrote the entire RHCP article and edited other band articles to reduce the bias issue. We all understand why there is such a bias aagainst Wikipedia -- the reason for that bias only centers around the fact that people can come in and edit it at anytime.
And I'm going reinterate what I said earlier, I support fan sites that are QUALITY fan sites, not the typical fanboy shrine junk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.88.21.7 ( talk • contribs)
Xinit, your solution for the fansite debate is flawed. If you look at the search results those google keywords bring up, you'll find that there are barely any rhcp focused sites in the list. Surely it would be easier to add 2 or 3 evaluated links directly onto the article. Anthony - Stadium-arcadium
Here is a twist, one of the Fansites you want to throw out, is basically a search of Google Blogs with relevancy, just like the suggestions given to solve the problem. Wiki's are supposed to be communnity, not based on what one or 2 people think. I was not a RHCP fan, but I went to this page, and tried every link there was, before they got tossed, and I gathered a lot of information to help me learn about the band and become a fan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.0.109.73 ( talk • contribs)
Well thank-you to the guy above. He just proves that alot of the links that were present are infact useful to people with an interest in the band. Ask people who've found the likes of OHG and SA through this wiki page, the majority are now loyal members on both sites forums and are pleased they found the links through here. Anthony.
All right, let's be serious here. I don't think a majority of people are going to want to thumb through pages and pages of information that will prove to be nothing more than repetitive information. I thumbed through that. It's pointless! Absolutely pointless! Most people that are looking for information on the Red Hot Chili Peppers are not looking for just stupid news! They want to know about their history. They want to know about their music. Here on Wikipedia you cannot get that indepth about a band with all of that. Wikipedia is to provide basic, unbiased information about the band. If people want to find out more about the band then they can go to websites that are dedicated to the band, not to a Google link where they have to search for more and more mess.
Listen, people are going to be biased when it comes to their favorite band. You cannot avoid that, you cannot police this page enough to avoid that, and if you're policing this page to reach a unrealistic goal, then I am sorry, that is the most idiotic and pointless effort I ever heard. I'm not calling you two, Xinit and Maxcap, idiots, but the unrealistic effort. The WP:EL doesn't even define what an appropriate fan site is, and to refer to an article about it is stupid. If it's a fan site that is going to provide indepth information about the Red Hot Chili Peppers, it's going to provide an opportunity for fans to interact and to get know more about the Chili Peppers, they're not going to do it here. I think the idea of a refernece and external links is to allow fans or other people who are interested in getting a deeper and greater knowledge of the Red Hot Chili Peppers. That's why I support the fan sites. And I'm talking about fan sites that are appropriate -- deep, indepth, informative, somewhere you actually learn something instead of redudnant, fanboy, shrine mess. Paralleluniverse 04:13, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Please do sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~) this will add a timestamp. Ideogram 23:12, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
well with the discography your actually missing a compilation album called "Plasma Shaft" i would add it, but im not certain on how Klyv 07:43, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
This is not good. But don't start an edit war over it. Anthony, are you responsible for this? Ideogram 08:49, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
There are about four or five people against the fansite links being posted. I can promise you the majority of article readers will disagree with that miniroity of people. The difference is, they're not going to debate it or argue it. So you'll never know how many exist. Anthony.
172.209.222.166 11:47, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
That's two. At three I'd advise you to pursue other solutions. I personally have a preference for semi-protection but that is very controversial. Ideogram 16:02, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
You'll find some fans who feel strongly about sa and ohg adding back the links. I can assure you they won't give up. Therefore I advise you to get this page semi-protected because it won't stop any other way. Anthony - stadium-arcadium 172.209.222.166 16:27, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
With all due respect Ideogram (And I do hold a bit for you) I don't care about the consequences of my actions. It's quite clear what xinit and maxcaps true intentions are. If i'm banned for speaking the truth, then so be it. 172.209.222.166 17:16, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
The kylie minogue page is an excellent example of how bad the red hot chili peppers page is. Take a look at the external links on the kylie page. There are THREE fansites on it. It's obvious there are too many people supressing this article. Anthony 172.209.222.166 17:23, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Nothing against either website, but why are those two have to be the center of the debate? What about, Red Hot Stadium, Red Hot Chili Peppers Italy, RHCP France three good resource sites if we're wanting to have resourceful information to be external links for this article. Paralleluniverse 19:31, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
<Personal attack removed> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.209.222.166 ( talk • contribs)
Since when did you become the master? Seriously, what gives you leverage over everyone else to assume yourself as dictator.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.209.222.166 ( talk • contribs)
Why does the mediation even get parts edited out as people please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.209.222.166 ( talk • contribs)
Because it isn't up to you to declare mediation to be over. IrishGuy talk 21:44, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Anyone is free to edit this page and remove comments that are not constructive. If you're going to go away, then go away. Ideogram 21:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
All right, I'm sick of this mediation. We aren't going anywhere; Xinit is declaring himself the persnoal saviour of this article and I've had it. Until the WP:EL has a better definition on what a fan site that is appropriate for being listed under extended links is, we won't allow any until that point and time until it is better defined. This mediation has proven fruitless; nobody on either side will get anywhere. I'm just going to allow Xinit to have his way for now until there's better language in the WP:EL because I have become sick and tired of debating with him. Paralleluniverse 22:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
I would concede to allowing redhotchilipeppers.it because their news archives go back to 2002, though the sources aren't exacly evident maxcap 00:29, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Upon closer inpection Red Hot Chili Peppers Chili Peppers Italy seems like it might be a useful link since it's news archives go back to 2002, what do the fansite supporters think? maxcap 14:47, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Just tossing in my two cents. I haven't extensively looked over the source of the dispute, but per WP:IAR, if the external link, fansite or not, add to or improve the article (and thus the encyclopedia), then it should probably be kept. It seems the argument may have died down already, but perhaps a quick outline of what the each link provides to the article may be in order if anyone is willing to do that. Also, the use of the term 'biggest' when referring to the website does not appear very professional. If the link is kept, perhaps instead of biggest, it should simply state that it is a fansite in the interest of not making it appear more notable than the other links to retain WP:NPOV. Cowman109 Talk 14:43, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Please add what each website brings to the article below. Cowman109 Talk 15:05, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
In that case, why not include both of the fansites as they both provide information concerning the subject of the article? (the english version of the italian one, that is. This IS after all the English Wikipedia) They can both be labeled as an unofficial fansite, as WP:EL does say that in extreme cases links to more than one fansite are acceptable. However, this is only if both add insight or information that is not present in the article in some way (which it certainly does appear to be). Do both of the websites offer knowledge or information about the RHCP that is not available on the article? Cowman109 Talk 16:43, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
So anyways, I just went through the pain of registering for One Hot Globe: RHCP Fansite's forums to check it out. It's a shame that you have to join to view topics, because their posts go back to 2004, and if we're discussing the how resourceful a forum is, age would make it more viable as a source don't you think? maxcap 18:35, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
I disagree completely. Why should age be a deciding factor? ReadyMade 18:39, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
WP:EL states that an external link must be accessible. If one must register to utilize the content, then it isn't accessible. IrishGuy talk 18:52, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
The way I see it stadium-arcadium already has loads more topics and coverage of subjects relating to the band. The majority of RHCP fans are going to be interested in more recent discussions than discussions which have taken place over a year ago. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ReadyMade ( talk • contribs)
And you wouldn't have any personal affiliation with that site, would you? IrishGuy talk 19:00, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
I think we'll all survive without the need for the edit. Thanks ReadyMade 20:44, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Theres no need to be arrogant when we're trying to hold a discussion here. The answer is No, I'm not affiliated. How can you (Irishguy) prove to all of us you are not affiliated with any fan sites? ReadyMade 21:00, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
I have claimed no such thing. Ideogram, can you prove to us that you are not affiliated with any RHCP fan sites? ReadyMade 21:30, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
That is the point. When it becomes and all-or-none proposition, you are forced to go with none. Otherwise everyone who creates any level of RHCP shrine on geocities or angelfire will be able to put a spamlink in this article. We couldn't say no because there are already other fansites. IrishGuy talk 01:38, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Like I have previously pointed out, OHG has been around since 2000(though the site has been changed around a few times and the board/site was lost for a while due to server problems). OHG again is the ONLY fansite that I know of that has been given exclusive content directly from the band's label (OHG was given free copies of the Dani California single to give away through site contests), AOL gave the site exclusive content only avaiable through the RHCP.com site including the full private AOL sessions show (you can look through the news archives for proof of this) and OHG has had the honor of being voted as a top site by MTV (which you can see at the top of the page). While the site has gone under some extensive work in the past few months there is work being done on it to get it back to how it once was. Just thought i'd throw in my opinion again. Like I said, I don't run the page though I do have access to updating the page, moderating the forum etc.. I have no problem with any other RHCP site. All of them are great though I will point out that sites like SA or rhcp.it have been slacking on the news on their pages. Not that I care but I know the thing was brought up about news archives (which OHG currently has going back to 2004 though earlier archives were lost-read about us section for info). There are some good fansites, there are some ok fansites. I have personally noticed news I posted from the OHG using my name on a few (and for the record, we don't copy and paste the full articles to our news section due to any copyright problems we could face plus we also are strongly against hosting files deemed illegal by the label-a few fansites do not follow that rule). I don't think every fansite should be on there. If you have rules about the sites being in English that should eliminate a few. Less than a handful are up to date and have an extensive history though. As for a response to signing up to our forum. You have to also register with the Stadium-Arcadium site as well to view the forum. We do however provide news on the main site where fans can comment on news WITHOUT even signing up to the forum or registering. Xinit: I would also like to point out that if you look on the right hand side of the OHG page, there is a new archive dating back to 2004. Jason1978 07:05, 20 June 2006
(You don't have to register to access the stadium-arcadium forums.) ReadyMade 17:47, 20 June 2006 (UTC)