The result was delete. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia. An encyclopaedia requires multiple, reliable non-trivial sources - these have not been provided. The evidence presented fails to prove, therefore, that Mr Nysted - at this time - meets the requirements of WP:MUSIC, therefore is at present not suitable for an article. This may change in the future. I will not protect this article from recreation, but will not hesitate to do so if it is without being substantially different (in spirit as well as in appearance), and asserting - within Wikipedia policy - why the article now assert Lee Nysted's notability. Proto:: ► 16:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Self-published Myspace artist, who has attempted to post about himself in several guises, namely: Lee Nysted ( deleted and salt), Nysted Music (now subject of AfD), and now The Lee Nysted Experience. Ohconfucius 08:31, 19 January 2007 (UTC) reply
The above comment; nomination "reason" for deletion, and start to this discussion is patently false and misleading. See article "The Lee Nysted Experience" for sources such as AMG, that Wikipedia states are to considered as reliable.
Huntress829 19:55, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
reply
Most editors have not returned here since the revisions were started on the 21st of January. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 04:52, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
I think the objectivity of this debate is horribly distorted at best. It appears that the Nysted guy has been met with the same criticism for each Wiki entry -- whether Lee Nysted, NystedMusic, or this current one. Reviewing the deletion discussion forums, it seems the central argument against deletion is that Nysted's group (in whatever form) lacks notoriety/credibility.
Let's look at this objectively. WP:MUSIC defines the following as "central criteria" for inclusion. I've bolded those which Nysted clearly meets:
1. Has had a charted hit on any national music chart.
2. Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one country.
3. Has gone on an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one large or medium-sized country,3 reported in reliable sources.
→4. Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable).
→5. Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable; note that it is often most appropriate to use redirects in place of articles on side projects, early bands and such.
6. Has become the most prominent representative of a notable style or of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.
→7. Has won a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno or Mercury Music Award. (Ok, nominated with a Grammy, but I think that fits the bill)
8. Has won or placed in a major music competition.
9. Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that page.) →10. Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network.
11. Has been the subject of a half hour or longer broadcast on a national radio or TV network.
For composers and lyricists:
→1. The person has has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the person and reliable.
2. Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a musician or ensemble that qualifies above, a notable theatre, or has been taken up by a musician or ensemble that qualifies above.
3. Has written musical theatre of some sort (includes musicals, operas, etc) that was performed in a notable theatre that had a reasonable run as such things are judged in their particular situation and time.
4. Has had a work used as the basis for a later composition by a songwriter, composer or lyricist who meets the above criteria.
→5. Has written a song or composition which has won (or in some cases been given a second or other place) in a major music competition not established expressly for newcomers. (see Grammy nomin above)
6. Has been listed as a major influence or teacher of a composer, songwriter or lyricist that meets the above criteria.
→7. Appears at reasonable length in standard reference books on his or her genre of music.
While I'm not a Nysted fan -- all I've seen of him is from this article in question -- it's interesting enough that an open forum like Wikipedia would rather have NO information about this musician than SOME information. When I think of Wikipedia, i think of an "end all, be all" information forum. Why not let Nysted and his cohorts have their say? He may meet only the minimal requirements, but they should be sufficient; now, if there's something UNTRUE or DISHONEST about his entries, then we're on something different, but I don't see this being a dishonest quest.
While he's certainly not of Bob Dylan notoriety, I vote Keep -- his notable group members (some from my beloved Chicago) should easily qualify him.
Does anyone think Wikipedia is any less credible because his entry exists??!! -- Chicago60607 23:48, 20 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Strong KeepNote: struck to avoid double counting.
Ohconfucius 08:25, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
reply
Reply: The truth as proven. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 15:05, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Reply: Argument fails based on new data. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 15:05, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment:All artists in all bands directed by labels and production companies are "hired hands." The Back Street Boys were all hired hands. Billy Corgan's band were all hired hands. Double standards are not seemly. All members of established bands that are now back on the road, are hired talent. A band is a band. The Experience is a band/ensemble by definition. You have simply chosen to re-write the rules and criteria; definition of band/ensemble. Majority rules? Let's get a rope?
Comment
As I suspected all along, this is nothing more than a "witch hunt" (as seen by all the "new" posts from MySpace users.) The article meets the guidelines and Wikipedia criteria. I am in no way involved with any false or misleading information about Lee. Billy Corgan wrote all the material for the Pumpkins, yet it is a band/ensemble.
The Lee Nysted name and the name of his band should be available to the world as it is on thousands of sites. If that does not happen on Wikipedia; for the wrong reasons, then Wikipedia guidelines and criteria do not amount to more than the gang rape that is happening here.
This is the reason I asked the question above.
I resent the idea that Lee and his fans would add to this charade.
C.H. 1-20-07
Comment It's interesting that all of the Nysted reviews posted everywhere all seem to be written by Keith 'MuzikMan' Hannaleck, a press agent (scroll down). Static Universe 07:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC) Comment: Please read some of the links. There are more coming each day. There are approximately 1400 reviews out there. Huntress829 00:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC) Every site has reviews, sometimes hundreds of reviews. Huntress829 00:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment: How on earth did Wikipedia suddenly get caught up in changing the rules to require reviews? Huntress829 00:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC) "Wikipedia states: Resources recommended: AMG." Huntress829 00:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Thanks Bill W. Smith, jr. for shedding light on the false accusations (Above.) Huntress829 15:08, 21 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment: Mr. Dhartung, I believe Mr. Smith was trying, and rightly so, to correct a remark that is considered against Wikipedia guidelines and that is to assume that Mr. Nysted is lying about his Grammy nominations. There is nothing phony about Mr. Nysted's claims; unless the author of that statement can prove otherwise, it must be withdrawn as not credible. The comment was made by someone that has no knowledge of the "Grammy" process, and thus committed an error in judgment, by "our" standards. I am a user here. Huntress829 00:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Reply to reply by Mr. Dhartung:
See above and below, and you will see the link to 1 of three "private" nomination ballots for Lee Nysted and hundreds of Grammy "hopefuls." The ballot was found in Google.
Song #264 was nominated in the second tier. There is nothing unusual about being a nominee. It happens all the time and it is the truth. Claims that is was a "phony" should be stricken as false and misleading, aside from being insulting to my name.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 14:51, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
reply
Reply: Entry list are those that were nominated and made the list. If you go to the end of the list you will see verification that said list came from NARAS. As I said earlier, the nominations were done and I ended up in the third tier, after the voting members, including me, voted. I had 3 nominations, one of which was for Best Gospel performance? Go figure. End of Grammy story.
You sir, Mr. Dhartung, are not following your own guidelines of assuming that what I tell you is correct. I back it up with a document from NARAS and you still do not get it. Thank you Mr. Smith for your accurate depiction of what is happening here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 20:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
The ballot, you see, is very real. I cannot use it in the article, because that would be a copywrite violation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 20:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment: To: Mr. Dhartung
I think it is imperative that "reviews" not be made a central issue here. If you want reviews, many of the links in the article will give you reviews. (Hundreds, in fact.)However, reviews literally have nothing to do with the reliablity, notability and verification issue, all of which have been met. If you want reviews, we will list dozens from the various sites out there. That is not seemly and it is not part of the issues that Rambling Man stressed as the keys to keeping my article about Lee's band.
Strong Keep.
Huntress829 00:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
reply
Reply to Dhartung reply: Mr. Dhartung, It is ironic that one of the reviews that was here, was deleted for copywrite infringement. On my web site, you will find a copy of it.(a pdf file.) I own the copywrite, now. Not a soul took the time to find that out. The link is out in the article. There are at least 90 reviews, if you want to go to the article? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 16:17, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
The reviews at AMG are listed in iTunes. The author of the AMG review signed his name on iTunes. AMG is listed as the source. AMG is one of 2 sources considered reliable by Wikipedia for albums. There are at least 5 additional reviews listed in the links provided. Independent networks around the globe. If you are now making reviews a central issue, we will be happy to provide hundreds of reviews and their links. CLEAR CHANNEL and the authors of this article will provide this page with additional notability sources, including the other key member of the band, Scott Bennett, who won a Grammy for his work on the SMILE album (Brian Wilson.) We never intended to make this a parade, but that is what we seem to have here. The unforunate part is that no one wants to help edit the truth, you seem to rather prevent the truth from coming out. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 14:45, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment: I think anyone looking at the references in the article today, and the days ahead, will see very clearly that the "non-trivial works," reviews, and the notability issue is clear "as a bell." If the editors of Wikipedia want more I will provide more. I am prepared to add 1400 reviews, comments from over 10,000 sites worldwide, and the links to same.
"NON-Trivial works." That says nothing about reviews, by the way. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 04:23, 24 January 2007 (UTC) reply
I believe I am prepared to offer up any and all information to satisfy any and all requirements for a legitimate article in this noble work, known as Wikipedia. I also stand ready to help make this institution more free of vandalism, which threatens us all to the core. Thank you, C.H. Huntress829 04:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Reply: Since when do reviews on Amazon, or other established "non-trivial works" lose the credibility? Please leave us something to use as a reference to your "new rule." Mr. Ohconfucius. You seem to be able to pull rules out of a hat. I have been around for 6 months, and I do not read your rules anywhere in Wikipedia. Guidelines are not in "stone." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 04:23, 24 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment by Lee Nysted: Reply to Ohconfucius:
I changed my mind and came back here to defend my name and my rights. I will salt this article and the arguments, because I find it absolutely astounding. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 15:27, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Is that what you are doing Mr. Dhartung?
Is that what the rest of the editors are doing, Mr. Dhartung?
Now back on topic:
The article is in need of some polishing but clearly has what it takes to qualify for entry. I would like my name taken out of salt, and have it directed to this article, please.
Thank you, one and all for your time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 01:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Most editors have not returned here since the revisions were started on the 21st of January. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 04:52, 23 January 2007 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 04:55, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
I removed your second delete vote below, Mr. Fox. You voted below and above. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 04:29, 24 January 2007
I hope this doesn't look like I'm blowing my own horn in this post...
Basically, if your project is well-known enough to merit a Wikipedia article, we expect that somebody other than you will want to write an article about it! Please take a look at our welcome page. You might find some of the information there helpful. ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 06:18, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Lee Nysted, Do NOT edit the discussion posts of others. If you continue, you WILL be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 18:26, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
'Comment:' Please read the sources of the article, Peter. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 02:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC) reply
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 14:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Reply: Mr. Martin, Your reasons have no foundation and are simple every day "put downs." Clearly against everything this organization stands for. Arguments fail. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 04:44, 24 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Reply: Please keep your argument to the points at hand. It fails per guidelines and criteria being met. There is no conflict of interest. I am defending my good name and honor. When people lie about me or my family, I feel a great obligation to defend same. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 04:44, 24 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment:Out of 17,000 articles and listings by every media company on earth, I believe you are not looking. I will be as blunt as you are. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 02:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment: AMG has the C.D. AMG is one of 2 sources WE require.
Comment: Argument fails. Asked and answered. No sales data is required and either are reviews. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 02:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Reply by Lee Nysted: Thank you for clearing the AMG thing up, C.H. AMG does not have to "review," but they did. Stewart Mason wrote a review and it is up all over the world. The most visible place is iTunes. I believe I am, by rights, an editor and user here, as is C. H., and anyone that uses Wikipedia. I am reviewing the article and making changes that should qualify the article for inclusion. That is what editors are supposed to do. This group seems more intent on not allowing information, than in trying to get at the truth. The truth is like water...it will come out and it will find a level. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 20:17, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Please refrain from deleting my replies and comments. I am an editor and after 6 months of being here, I have as much time as many of you. I will defend an article that was up long before many of you arrived here. (Not written by me.)Please refrain from being condescending and, please leave out the "I cannot find routine."
I have provided everything required of any article, per Wikipedia rules guidelines, reliability tests, criteria, etc. I will post dozens of links to sites all over the free world to show you that my music is out there.
Lee Nystedhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 02:16, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, Mr. Dodge. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 05:01, 24 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Thank you Bill W. Smith ! For helping to edit and clean up links; for your help. I regret that only a couple of editors came back after the edits and additions, thus far. For those of you that have helped to clean up the article, I say, thank you. I would like the administrator that does the final clean-up for entry to please tell me what links he/she wants from foreign sources. "The Experience" is now getting picked up by CLEAR much more in Asia, as well as, Central Europe. Thanks. C.H. C.H. Huntress829 15:31, 24 January 2007 (UTC) Huntress829 15:37, 24 January 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia. An encyclopaedia requires multiple, reliable non-trivial sources - these have not been provided. The evidence presented fails to prove, therefore, that Mr Nysted - at this time - meets the requirements of WP:MUSIC, therefore is at present not suitable for an article. This may change in the future. I will not protect this article from recreation, but will not hesitate to do so if it is without being substantially different (in spirit as well as in appearance), and asserting - within Wikipedia policy - why the article now assert Lee Nysted's notability. Proto:: ► 16:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Self-published Myspace artist, who has attempted to post about himself in several guises, namely: Lee Nysted ( deleted and salt), Nysted Music (now subject of AfD), and now The Lee Nysted Experience. Ohconfucius 08:31, 19 January 2007 (UTC) reply
The above comment; nomination "reason" for deletion, and start to this discussion is patently false and misleading. See article "The Lee Nysted Experience" for sources such as AMG, that Wikipedia states are to considered as reliable.
Huntress829 19:55, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
reply
Most editors have not returned here since the revisions were started on the 21st of January. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 04:52, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
I think the objectivity of this debate is horribly distorted at best. It appears that the Nysted guy has been met with the same criticism for each Wiki entry -- whether Lee Nysted, NystedMusic, or this current one. Reviewing the deletion discussion forums, it seems the central argument against deletion is that Nysted's group (in whatever form) lacks notoriety/credibility.
Let's look at this objectively. WP:MUSIC defines the following as "central criteria" for inclusion. I've bolded those which Nysted clearly meets:
1. Has had a charted hit on any national music chart.
2. Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one country.
3. Has gone on an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one large or medium-sized country,3 reported in reliable sources.
→4. Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable).
→5. Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable; note that it is often most appropriate to use redirects in place of articles on side projects, early bands and such.
6. Has become the most prominent representative of a notable style or of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.
→7. Has won a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno or Mercury Music Award. (Ok, nominated with a Grammy, but I think that fits the bill)
8. Has won or placed in a major music competition.
9. Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that page.) →10. Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network.
11. Has been the subject of a half hour or longer broadcast on a national radio or TV network.
For composers and lyricists:
→1. The person has has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the person and reliable.
2. Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a musician or ensemble that qualifies above, a notable theatre, or has been taken up by a musician or ensemble that qualifies above.
3. Has written musical theatre of some sort (includes musicals, operas, etc) that was performed in a notable theatre that had a reasonable run as such things are judged in their particular situation and time.
4. Has had a work used as the basis for a later composition by a songwriter, composer or lyricist who meets the above criteria.
→5. Has written a song or composition which has won (or in some cases been given a second or other place) in a major music competition not established expressly for newcomers. (see Grammy nomin above)
6. Has been listed as a major influence or teacher of a composer, songwriter or lyricist that meets the above criteria.
→7. Appears at reasonable length in standard reference books on his or her genre of music.
While I'm not a Nysted fan -- all I've seen of him is from this article in question -- it's interesting enough that an open forum like Wikipedia would rather have NO information about this musician than SOME information. When I think of Wikipedia, i think of an "end all, be all" information forum. Why not let Nysted and his cohorts have their say? He may meet only the minimal requirements, but they should be sufficient; now, if there's something UNTRUE or DISHONEST about his entries, then we're on something different, but I don't see this being a dishonest quest.
While he's certainly not of Bob Dylan notoriety, I vote Keep -- his notable group members (some from my beloved Chicago) should easily qualify him.
Does anyone think Wikipedia is any less credible because his entry exists??!! -- Chicago60607 23:48, 20 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Strong KeepNote: struck to avoid double counting.
Ohconfucius 08:25, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
reply
Reply: The truth as proven. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 15:05, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Reply: Argument fails based on new data. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 15:05, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment:All artists in all bands directed by labels and production companies are "hired hands." The Back Street Boys were all hired hands. Billy Corgan's band were all hired hands. Double standards are not seemly. All members of established bands that are now back on the road, are hired talent. A band is a band. The Experience is a band/ensemble by definition. You have simply chosen to re-write the rules and criteria; definition of band/ensemble. Majority rules? Let's get a rope?
Comment
As I suspected all along, this is nothing more than a "witch hunt" (as seen by all the "new" posts from MySpace users.) The article meets the guidelines and Wikipedia criteria. I am in no way involved with any false or misleading information about Lee. Billy Corgan wrote all the material for the Pumpkins, yet it is a band/ensemble.
The Lee Nysted name and the name of his band should be available to the world as it is on thousands of sites. If that does not happen on Wikipedia; for the wrong reasons, then Wikipedia guidelines and criteria do not amount to more than the gang rape that is happening here.
This is the reason I asked the question above.
I resent the idea that Lee and his fans would add to this charade.
C.H. 1-20-07
Comment It's interesting that all of the Nysted reviews posted everywhere all seem to be written by Keith 'MuzikMan' Hannaleck, a press agent (scroll down). Static Universe 07:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC) Comment: Please read some of the links. There are more coming each day. There are approximately 1400 reviews out there. Huntress829 00:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC) Every site has reviews, sometimes hundreds of reviews. Huntress829 00:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment: How on earth did Wikipedia suddenly get caught up in changing the rules to require reviews? Huntress829 00:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC) "Wikipedia states: Resources recommended: AMG." Huntress829 00:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Thanks Bill W. Smith, jr. for shedding light on the false accusations (Above.) Huntress829 15:08, 21 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment: Mr. Dhartung, I believe Mr. Smith was trying, and rightly so, to correct a remark that is considered against Wikipedia guidelines and that is to assume that Mr. Nysted is lying about his Grammy nominations. There is nothing phony about Mr. Nysted's claims; unless the author of that statement can prove otherwise, it must be withdrawn as not credible. The comment was made by someone that has no knowledge of the "Grammy" process, and thus committed an error in judgment, by "our" standards. I am a user here. Huntress829 00:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Reply to reply by Mr. Dhartung:
See above and below, and you will see the link to 1 of three "private" nomination ballots for Lee Nysted and hundreds of Grammy "hopefuls." The ballot was found in Google.
Song #264 was nominated in the second tier. There is nothing unusual about being a nominee. It happens all the time and it is the truth. Claims that is was a "phony" should be stricken as false and misleading, aside from being insulting to my name.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 14:51, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
reply
Reply: Entry list are those that were nominated and made the list. If you go to the end of the list you will see verification that said list came from NARAS. As I said earlier, the nominations were done and I ended up in the third tier, after the voting members, including me, voted. I had 3 nominations, one of which was for Best Gospel performance? Go figure. End of Grammy story.
You sir, Mr. Dhartung, are not following your own guidelines of assuming that what I tell you is correct. I back it up with a document from NARAS and you still do not get it. Thank you Mr. Smith for your accurate depiction of what is happening here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 20:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
The ballot, you see, is very real. I cannot use it in the article, because that would be a copywrite violation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 20:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment: To: Mr. Dhartung
I think it is imperative that "reviews" not be made a central issue here. If you want reviews, many of the links in the article will give you reviews. (Hundreds, in fact.)However, reviews literally have nothing to do with the reliablity, notability and verification issue, all of which have been met. If you want reviews, we will list dozens from the various sites out there. That is not seemly and it is not part of the issues that Rambling Man stressed as the keys to keeping my article about Lee's band.
Strong Keep.
Huntress829 00:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
reply
Reply to Dhartung reply: Mr. Dhartung, It is ironic that one of the reviews that was here, was deleted for copywrite infringement. On my web site, you will find a copy of it.(a pdf file.) I own the copywrite, now. Not a soul took the time to find that out. The link is out in the article. There are at least 90 reviews, if you want to go to the article? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 16:17, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
The reviews at AMG are listed in iTunes. The author of the AMG review signed his name on iTunes. AMG is listed as the source. AMG is one of 2 sources considered reliable by Wikipedia for albums. There are at least 5 additional reviews listed in the links provided. Independent networks around the globe. If you are now making reviews a central issue, we will be happy to provide hundreds of reviews and their links. CLEAR CHANNEL and the authors of this article will provide this page with additional notability sources, including the other key member of the band, Scott Bennett, who won a Grammy for his work on the SMILE album (Brian Wilson.) We never intended to make this a parade, but that is what we seem to have here. The unforunate part is that no one wants to help edit the truth, you seem to rather prevent the truth from coming out. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 14:45, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment: I think anyone looking at the references in the article today, and the days ahead, will see very clearly that the "non-trivial works," reviews, and the notability issue is clear "as a bell." If the editors of Wikipedia want more I will provide more. I am prepared to add 1400 reviews, comments from over 10,000 sites worldwide, and the links to same.
"NON-Trivial works." That says nothing about reviews, by the way. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 04:23, 24 January 2007 (UTC) reply
I believe I am prepared to offer up any and all information to satisfy any and all requirements for a legitimate article in this noble work, known as Wikipedia. I also stand ready to help make this institution more free of vandalism, which threatens us all to the core. Thank you, C.H. Huntress829 04:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Reply: Since when do reviews on Amazon, or other established "non-trivial works" lose the credibility? Please leave us something to use as a reference to your "new rule." Mr. Ohconfucius. You seem to be able to pull rules out of a hat. I have been around for 6 months, and I do not read your rules anywhere in Wikipedia. Guidelines are not in "stone." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 04:23, 24 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment by Lee Nysted: Reply to Ohconfucius:
I changed my mind and came back here to defend my name and my rights. I will salt this article and the arguments, because I find it absolutely astounding. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 15:27, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Is that what you are doing Mr. Dhartung?
Is that what the rest of the editors are doing, Mr. Dhartung?
Now back on topic:
The article is in need of some polishing but clearly has what it takes to qualify for entry. I would like my name taken out of salt, and have it directed to this article, please.
Thank you, one and all for your time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 01:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Most editors have not returned here since the revisions were started on the 21st of January. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 04:52, 23 January 2007 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 04:55, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
I removed your second delete vote below, Mr. Fox. You voted below and above. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 04:29, 24 January 2007
I hope this doesn't look like I'm blowing my own horn in this post...
Basically, if your project is well-known enough to merit a Wikipedia article, we expect that somebody other than you will want to write an article about it! Please take a look at our welcome page. You might find some of the information there helpful. ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 06:18, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Lee Nysted, Do NOT edit the discussion posts of others. If you continue, you WILL be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 18:26, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
'Comment:' Please read the sources of the article, Peter. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 02:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC) reply
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 14:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Reply: Mr. Martin, Your reasons have no foundation and are simple every day "put downs." Clearly against everything this organization stands for. Arguments fail. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 04:44, 24 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Reply: Please keep your argument to the points at hand. It fails per guidelines and criteria being met. There is no conflict of interest. I am defending my good name and honor. When people lie about me or my family, I feel a great obligation to defend same. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 04:44, 24 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment:Out of 17,000 articles and listings by every media company on earth, I believe you are not looking. I will be as blunt as you are. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 02:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment: AMG has the C.D. AMG is one of 2 sources WE require.
Comment: Argument fails. Asked and answered. No sales data is required and either are reviews. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 02:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Reply by Lee Nysted: Thank you for clearing the AMG thing up, C.H. AMG does not have to "review," but they did. Stewart Mason wrote a review and it is up all over the world. The most visible place is iTunes. I believe I am, by rights, an editor and user here, as is C. H., and anyone that uses Wikipedia. I am reviewing the article and making changes that should qualify the article for inclusion. That is what editors are supposed to do. This group seems more intent on not allowing information, than in trying to get at the truth. The truth is like water...it will come out and it will find a level. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 20:17, 23 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Please refrain from deleting my replies and comments. I am an editor and after 6 months of being here, I have as much time as many of you. I will defend an article that was up long before many of you arrived here. (Not written by me.)Please refrain from being condescending and, please leave out the "I cannot find routine."
I have provided everything required of any article, per Wikipedia rules guidelines, reliability tests, criteria, etc. I will post dozens of links to sites all over the free world to show you that my music is out there.
Lee Nystedhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 02:16, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, Mr. Dodge. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lee_Nysted 05:01, 24 January 2007 (UTC) reply
Thank you Bill W. Smith ! For helping to edit and clean up links; for your help. I regret that only a couple of editors came back after the edits and additions, thus far. For those of you that have helped to clean up the article, I say, thank you. I would like the administrator that does the final clean-up for entry to please tell me what links he/she wants from foreign sources. "The Experience" is now getting picked up by CLEAR much more in Asia, as well as, Central Europe. Thanks. C.H. C.H. Huntress829 15:31, 24 January 2007 (UTC) Huntress829 15:37, 24 January 2007 (UTC) reply