Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Wikipedia deletes ANUS, again

Re: Wikipedia deletes ANUS, again
December 04, 2008, 08:15:10 AM
Could it be possible to communicate with some of their leaders...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hersfold
Is the guy who deleted http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Legions_Archive the first time.
Have anyone tried communicating with him?

EDIT:
I rather want to use Dark Legions Archive instead of anus...
I tried add a review on this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Holocaust
Where I also link to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Legions_Archive
But then again, there are no article about Dark Legions Archive... it could be easier to add an article about Dark Legions Archive instead of ANUS, where we then link to anus.com. Just an idea.
If we want it to look legit and "professional", we would want to have a Dark Legions Archive article on wikipedia which the reviews also links to.

2nd EDIT:
Of course did what I posted get deleted too...
The reason I was given: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#LINK

Re: Wikipedia deletes ANUS, again
December 07, 2008, 07:31:57 PM
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Comments:British_ISPs_restrict_access_to_Wikipedia_amid_child_pornography_allegations#Anti-Multiculturalism

Having fun with the debacle over "Virgin Killers" cover picture from Scorpions.

Seems there's an anti-ANUS political bias at Wikipedia. Most obvious culprit: fear of our perceived political direction.

Re: Wikipedia deletes ANUS, again
December 07, 2008, 09:53:58 PM
had it not been for a mention of ANUS' 'best of' black metal list on the wiki page for Vikingligr Veldi, i probably never would have known of this place.

I actually discoverd ANUS.com and the Dark Legions Archive through a Google search.  Can you believe that?

It was during my years halfway through college as a metal newbie.

Re: Wikipedia deletes ANUS, again
December 07, 2008, 10:03:24 PM
Hey, I'm a new member but I've been lurking for quite some time now.
When I arrived at ANUS I was listening to Lamb of God and Pantera, ANUS and the band reviews have given me an education.
Additionally the discussions on nihilism and our current society have opened my eyes, I used to be what T Kaczynski called an over-socialized leftist, but again I've been educated.
The Dark Legion archives was my first exposure to ANUS, and from there I entered the main site and the forum.
I've decided to first post in this discussion because, as Istaros says, an ANUS wikipedia article isn't immediately necessary for exposure, though it would be useful. In this frame of mind I figure it would be effective to post links to the band reviews from the Dark Legions archives. I've done this on the At The Gates article on Wikipedia under external links, I figure the review is of the same nature as an Allmusic review (though of higher quality) and thus hopefully won't be a target for removal from the external links. If this is done for all bands which have articles on Wikipedia and reviews in the DL archives, we'd be both improving Wikipedia as a source, spreading knowledge of high quality metal and also advertising ANUS. If no one has any logical objections I'll get started with all bands under A. Also, adding an external link to a Wikipedia article is fairly easy once the guide is viewed, I got it right on my first attempt so it can't be too difficult. I look forward to working with you folks.

Welcome Zarathrusta_Son.

I can relate almost exactly to you.  I discovered better metal through ANUS.com's Dark Legions Archive.  I actually found it, as I mentioned already, on a Google search when I was trying to find an honest, accurate, unbiased webpage source on the history of heavy metal.  Behold!  And I also received a greater awakening to everything else in life, finally pinpointed and answered in a way I could understand through the help of ANUS - all during my four years in college.

So I agree that we don't need to necessarily have "Dickiepedia.orgasm" have an ANUS page on us to get our greater information out there and made aware, as Istaros mentioned himself.  Google worked for me, hopefully the same luck may come to others who stumble upon us.

Enjoy the debates and I look forward to discussing further topics with you here in the future.

By the way, be sure to also check out Hessian.org/  Perfect for metal studies. ;)

Re: Wikipedia deletes ANUS, again
December 08, 2008, 06:05:25 AM
So I agree that we don't need to necessarily have "Dickiepedia.orgasm" have an ANUS page on us to get our greater information out there and made aware, as Istaros mentioned himself.  Google worked for me, hopefully the same luck may come to others who stumble upon us.

Who is "we" and "us"?  Please don't mistake the readers of this forum (which is NOT the ANUS site) for some collective, particularly in the same breath with being dismissive about providing the site greater exposure.  The point in part of the Wikipedia page is to improve search engine rank and get more eyes on the page.  Pretending that the door is closed because YOU found the site, and encouraging others to feel that way, is a ludicrous club mentality and it will help absolutely nobody.  Please stop.

Re: Wikipedia deletes ANUS, again
December 08, 2008, 07:51:05 AM
It seems the only way ANUS is going to get a wikipedia page is if you somehow beat them at their own game.  In other words, ANUS needs some kind of "legitimate" (read: liberal mainstream) media coverage.  I'm sorry I can't provide any concrete ideas at this point, but I believe that is where attention should be focused.

Re: Wikipedia deletes ANUS, again
December 08, 2008, 08:43:44 AM
So I agree that we don't need to necessarily have "Dickiepedia.orgasm" have an ANUS page on us to get our greater information out there and made aware, as Istaros mentioned himself.  Google worked for me, hopefully the same luck may come to others who stumble upon us.

Who is "we" and "us"?  Please don't mistake the readers of this forum (which is NOT the ANUS site) for some collective, particularly in the same breath with being dismissive about providing the site greater exposure.  The point in part of the Wikipedia page is to improve search engine rank and get more eyes on the page.  Pretending that the door is closed because YOU found the site, and encouraging others to feel that way, is a ludicrous club mentality and it will help absolutely nobody.  Please stop.

Sorry...I apologize.  I wasn't intending a "club mentality."  Next time I will be careful how I word my response.  I do support greater exposure of ANUS.  And I'm not trying to pretend the door is closed because I found ANUS either.  I hope you can understand.

What I meant to say is that there is more than one way to find ANUS.com/ online and that not necessarily does Wikipedia need to provide that outlet of information, although I do agree that it helped play an important role in bringing greater exposure and awareness to people about the writings, as well as a greater understand of metal music and metal subculture to the uneducated, uninformed individual.  I should have thought out my response more precisely earlier BEFORE I typed it.   

I hope this clears everything up.

Re: Wikipedia deletes ANUS, again
December 08, 2008, 02:08:17 PM
In other words, ANUS needs some kind of "legitimate" (read: liberal mainstream) media coverage.

http://www.anus.com/zine/media/

Re: Wikipedia deletes ANUS, again
December 08, 2008, 02:48:48 PM
Anus.com
fiddles with itself
whilst
Rome
burns.

If you ever had a golden opportunity for mounting the high horse, this is it. Surely this is your area of expertise? Wikipedia, Heavy Metal, Controversial subject matter?

Making a press release/vocal support of wikipedia in this case of trial-by-media would
A: make you a notable media mouthpiece.
B: Make you a notable media mouthpiece that speaks out in favour of wikipedia.

They would have no option but to reinstate anus.com as a notable website, if it got involved in this discussion AND was speaking out in favour of wikipedia. They would also have to swallow a large chunk of humble pie in acknowledging the support offered to them by a website they had snubbed as "unimportant".

But will anything get done? I'm placing no bets....

Re: Wikipedia deletes ANUS, again
December 08, 2008, 03:25:41 PM

Re: Wikipedia deletes ANUS, again
December 08, 2008, 03:52:22 PM
ehh... that would be the "fiddling with itself".

Re: Wikipedia deletes ANUS, again
December 08, 2008, 04:51:31 PM
You are suggesting that your plan will be an obvious success and then casting doubt on action at the same time, so either a) ANUS looks like your bitch for following your plan, or b) ANUS looks like a bitch for not following your plan.  Clearly there was already awareness of the issue, and its possible that what you are putting forth has already been considered and rejected, or perhaps not, but being snipey doesn't really improve matters.

Re: Wikipedia deletes ANUS, again
December 08, 2008, 07:50:34 PM
Stoke the flames some more with this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nevermind
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy<---several pictures of naked boys on this page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_Bride


Re: Wikipedia deletes ANUS, again
December 15, 2008, 05:20:47 AM
I haven't used Wikipedia very much but if you want this to work, you'll have to want to work with them. They shouldn't be able to keep the ANUS article deleted. If you're sick of it, contact the higher-ups at Wikipedia and have them lock it so no further changes can be made.