GaragePunk.com Wikipedia Page

[mark young]

Who here's any good at wikipedia? If someone gets one started, I'm sure we can all contribute.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Music_websites

garagepunk.com needs to be here.

[Johnny Singles]

I've done just that, see how long it lasts, I ain't gonna hold my breath though...

[kopper]

Here are some labels I've found with Wikipedia entries. I'm not sure how these can be linked to the GaragePunk Podcast Network page, but any of you are free to look into it and be creative!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypt_Records
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton_Records
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bomp_Records
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alive_Records
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_The_Red_Records
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goner_Records
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swami_Records
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_IQ
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Get_Hip_Records
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damaged_Goods_Records
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Neck_Records
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sympathy_For_The_Record_Industry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estrus_Records
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirtnap_Records
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gearhead_Records

mark young said:

He just needs an externally sourced footnote.
I think Kopper needs to round up some GP record labels that have wikipedia page and have them link to GPPN wikipage. It'll help with the missing notoriety within the wiki network. And kopper, do all your editing at work, without being logged in.

Johnny Singles said:

He's put a 'citation needed' on the claim that it's "the leading[citation needed] social network, media center and blog portal... etc..." even though that's upheld by the rest of the paragraph (18,500 hits a day, 3000 members, 'Featured Podcast' on iTunes, what other proof in needed?).

[mark young]

We should proceed with caution, as simply linking to a bunch of labels that GPPN plays, without any stronger affiliation with the label, would probably make things worse, since that kind of IS a promotion, rather than a simple organic link.

Like, GPPN plays stuff from Estrus, but GPPN isn't the ONLY outlet for Estrus, and therefore isn't a significant link. If the label owners would mention GPPN in their article, that'd be pretty slick, but popping superfluous links in the See-Alsos all over wikipedia is something they'll probably discourage.

..in my opinion.

And, why hasn't that guy tagged all those other shitty podcasts yet?

[kopper]

I've been thinking about the Wikipedia page lately, and I really think it needs to be redone. Right now it's pretty much all about the GaragePunk Podcast Network. Obviously that needs to be a PART of the page, but not the title. The site isn't all about the podcast, and hasn't been for a couple of years now. When you go to GaragePunk.com it takes you to the Hideout, so I think someone needs to fix this entry so that it's retitled "GaragePunk Hideout" and is redone so as to include information about the social networking site here, and then include info in that about the GPPN, as well as GRGPNK Records (Hideout comps), etc.

In fact, when you read it, it ain't even correct! It starts off by saying "The GaragePunk Podcast Network is a leading social network, media center and blog portal..." and that's just wrong! The GaragePunk *Hideout* is the social network, NOT the podcast! See what I mean?

But again, I'm not allowed to do this since I own the site (and they know me by what IP addresses I use), so someone else will have to do the editing for me/us. Any volunteers?

[mark young]

It is a main philosophy of the wikipedia to maintain a "neutral point of view", which none of us have.  It's difficult to construct a neutral article from a non-neutral point of view, without raising the eyebrowels of the wikinazis.

 

[kopper]

We're not looking for a "point of view," just simply redoing the page so it's accurate. As it is right now, it's not. It's incorrect.

mark young said:

It is a main philosophy of the wikipedia to maintain a "neutral point of view", which none of us have.  It's difficult to construct a neutral article from a non-neutral point of view, without raising the eyebrowels of the wikinazis.