Raybeezer

Reliable sources

Please note that Facebook and Amazon are NOT reliable independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 09:06, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

I understand the official artist's Facebook page is accepted for releases news (and anyway, I was merely copying from a ref previously posted by another editor years ago, just moving it from pages possibly to be merged). But Amazon is certainly a source that is independent of the artist and is used only for reviews to indicate the public's reception of an album. Should I NOT post a ratings tag? Raybeezer (talk) 09:21, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

But anyone can post to Amazon. It certainly can not be used to establish notability, which is based on how much has been independently and reliably published about the topic. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:26, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

I'm confused. As soon as the above editor removed the facebook news post (which had been there for years and was not posted by me), another dropped in a needs citation tag. So I placed the citation back. And I have seen tons of albums using the ratings tag. Why is it not allowed for this band? Also, I did suggest merging the 5 volumes into the main compilation album. Why is it that everyone is trying to remove only the first of 5 EPs, and the main compilation? Raybeezer (talk) 10:21, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

One of the strong points of Wikipedia is that anyone can edit it. It's also a weak point - there are millions of articles and hundreds of thousands of editors, so there will be things that are incorrect and need fixing.

If you're adding or restoring anything to an article, the onus is on you to check that your edit is appropriate and within policy. If someone disputes your edit, follow the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle to understand what the problem is and get input from other editors on how to resolve it.

Yes, there will be inappropriate Facebook and Amazon links on Wikipedia - if you see any then your first action should be to fix that error, not copy it.

Take some time to read through the Wikipedia:Reliable sources policy, whilst your questions about tagging/merging are probably best discussed on the article Talk page. Blue Sonnet (talk) 11:56, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

Yeah. I wasn't using FB as a means to prove notability. But when someone asks for a citation for a fact like how many songs are on a compilation album, and they will not allow a post to the artist' webpage and they ignore what discogs and musicbrainz shows, then FB is all that is left, and I didn't even post it to begin with. I simply reverted to what was there already, only to fix a tracklist because someone else linked to the band site next to every single song. I love how everyone suggest "Be Bold, discuss". I have been doing exactly that. Raybeezer (talk) 13:13, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

What happens when a ref that has been used in an article can't be verified? I came across a few refs on other subjects that are used to support promotional or self-serving statements, yet nothing can be found online that indicates the publication ever existed? Archive.org is great when I have a url to start with. But now I have found mark-up like this (just an example) "John Doe, Some Publication, pg#, (year 2007)" ...no city, no url... A google search for said publication literally brings up nothing, and it's not like I am looking for pre-internet. Do I flag it, remove it and the statement? Also, there are a few examples of circular references I came across. Example: A magazine or blog quotes the subject of an interview in which the subject says "We sold X amount of something." Then that interview is used as a ref in the wiki to make an outlandish claim of being the biggest seller of something. It reeks of trumpery. It also seems to fall into the personal knowledge category because the source is the one providing the claim, and the publication is simply quoting, not investigating. Raybeezer (talk) 09:13, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi again, unfortunately we are seeing AI-hallucinated references being added a lot and it's like trying to squash ants outside an anthill.

If you see any that flat-out don't exist then please remove them with an edit summary that explains why it's been removed. You can either remove the sourced statement or add a citation needed tag, depending on what you think is best.

If you see one person doing it a lot and think they're using AI, then you can report to Wikipedia:WikiProject AI Cleanup. If you have any more questions then the Teahouse will be happy to help!Blue Sonnet (talk) 11:31, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

AI. Wow. I never even considered that. But in this case, I think the post was made before AI was a thing. I think a lot of statements fall under sps, pov, and promo. I guess I will just have to "be bold." I'll check out the teahouse. Thanks. Raybeezer (talk) 22:14, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

Good idea! Blue Sonnet (talk) 00:18, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ebonshire-1.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ebonshire-1.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:26, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Legion-of-Shadows.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Legion-of-Shadows.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:39, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The-Haunted-Symphony.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The-Haunted-Symphony.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:54, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nox Arcana, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Grimm Tales. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 07:59, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

CS1 error on Nox Arcana

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Nox Arcana, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A dates error. References show this error when one of the date-containing parameters is incorrectly formatted. Please edit the article to correct the date and ensure it is formatted to follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style's guidance on dates. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 21:21, 12 February 2026 (UTC)