User talk:Basvossen

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Basvossen. You have new messages at Ukexpat's talk page.
Message added 19:10, 1 March 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Basvossen. You have new messages at Ukexpat's talk page.
Message added 13:33, 21 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

The next time you post such a comment on my talk page, I won't dignify it with a reply. ukexpat (talk) 13:33, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Further reply... – ukexpat (talk) 18:43, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Band articles[edit]

There is an entire separate guideline dedicated to exploring the intricacies of what qualifies a band for an article of its own in Wikipedia; "bands with small budgets, who are without label or record company" are unlikely to qualify, even if they are not down at the level which inspired the article "No one cares about your garage band". What it boils down to, is that articles in Wikipedia aren't how you become notable, they aren't for the "up and coming"; they are created after you become notable. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:58, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay Mike, thank you so much for your opinions, now I know the wiki has been hijacked by university personnel. I have kept to the asked terms of factual media coverage, and still am not taken seriously but put down like we are a garage band. I do not have to agree with that, do I?

The monopoly on information is apparent. Any deviating opinion is futile. It is a Catch 22: to get booked, more and more stages are looking at Wikipedia to see if the band is in it!!!

Wisdom and politics should always be separated, just like religion and education. Universities are basically paid after some political consensus. Wisdom needs to be freed of money!!! Poor bands deserve to get attention too. Rich bands take most of the music fan's budget, especially in a financial crisis like we have to deal with now.

I did not even get any answer on my "Wikipoordia" suggestion. So I guess I should do that. As soon as I can find funding it will be the main site for information about non-elitarian phenomena. Probably anyone who has a university job AND wants to volunteer on this Wikipedia, does not have enough time to ponder the weight of my topic and just wants to shove me away like a bad musician or startup band.

The history is what people want to see. Fashion is a thin layer.

Alles van waarde is weerloos, Bas

As usual, the once innocent and basically unbiased WIKIPEDIA database, has been hijacked by the Powers that Be. This is proven by people removing the 'conspiracy theory' parts out of the article about Prescott Bush. Are they afraid to go the same way as JFK? Obviously, the power of the Bush family is off limits. Reveal, expose, understand that billions of people base their opinion on what is on these pages. Who checks them? What choices are being made, for what reasons? Why do we keep clearly proven facts like on JFK 2 documentary or Zeitgeist, hidden?

First of all, please don't modify others' comments on talk pages, as you did with this edit. See WP:TPO.

I explained on that talk page why I removed the Bush-Nazi conspiracy: Because it didn't cite any reliable sources. That's not due to the "power of the Bush family"; I've just as happily argued for including well-sourced content that alleged Prescott Bush might have been an incompetent graverobber. If you know of reliable sources that allege Bush had Nazi sympathies or that he conspired with the Nazis, please raise the issue on the article's talk page. Huon (talk) 12:04, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Factual information about Prescott Bush[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that Category:Factual information about Prescott Bush, a page that you created, has been tagged for deletion. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It is unambiguous vandalism or an obvious hoax. (See section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please do not introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia; doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.
The category has been empty for four days or more and it is not presently under discussion at Categories for discussion, or at disambiguation categories. (See section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)

If you think that your page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Dawn Bard (talk) 17:54, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

===INCREDIBLE HOW RUDE THE WIKI PEDIANS ARE! I've been too busy to see these termites at work. They are verrrry active! Look at their FANTASTIC talk pages. They piles of shit are too big to rake they seem to think. However, I HAVE CITED sources for the Prescott Bush article. That these people DON'T LIKE my sources is a whole different (political) thing, than that I have been wrong in my additions.

TRUTH and FACTS are the content of encyclopediae. NOT a political viewpoint, even if it has ZILLIONS of monetary units behind it, or BILLIONS of believers. Sometimes TRUTH is a political game...

Blanking of User:Rhododendrite[edit]

Constructive contributions are appreciated and strongly encouraged, but your recent blanking of the userpage of Rhododendrite may be considered vandalism. In general, it is considered polite to avoid substantially editing others' userpages without their permission. Instead, please bring the matter to their talk page and let them edit their user page themselves if they agree on a need to do so. Please refer to Wikipedia:User pages for more information on user page etiquette.

You may also be interested in reading this essay on why Wikipedia prefers reliably-sourced information to "true" information, even if it means we have to leave out information we'd rather share with the world. Our "identifying reliable sources" policy (which applies to everybody's contributions) may answer some of your concerns as well. FourViolas (talk) 15:08, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage blanking[edit]

Hi Basvossen,

I don't know if you intended to or not, but please be careful when editing people's user pages. It appears you blanked mine. I received your email about affirmative action and responded to it. I'll copy my response here just in case:

Regarding this removal of content you added to affirmative action: You raise a good point about other countries being unsourced as well. It was nothing personal and nothing particular to the Netherlands -- I just didn't notice the others. Affirmative action is a contentious subject so sourcing policies (see WP:RS, WP:V, WP:Citing sources, etc.) are especially important to enforce. I took a look after receiving your email and removed the handful of other sections which were also entirely unsourced.

In general citing sources is important for any addition to Wikipedia and in fact if you see someone add content without a source you're usually welcome to simply remove it, requesting a source. If it's on a less controversial issue, you could also tag it with the citation needed template by simply adding "cn" in double curly braces to the end of the sentence, after the punctuation like this.{{cn}} --— Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 15:09, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

New and upcoming artists and bands[edit]

Dear wikipedians,

greatly admiring your honourable work, and seeing the wiki-policy is to only include the Rich and Famed, I was asking myself if there could be a part of this website dedicated to lesser known artists and bands. What I encounter here, is that mainly people are included who have had the chance to build up their name and fame in previous decennia. These artists are still touring and in the news and are responsible for radio stations playing the same music for a quadrillion times.

The choice to do so is probably given by money. If the music industry would be open to new artists, there would be more coverage of us. Yet they already have their stalls with bands, and in this millennium the audience goes out to electronic dance music more then to live bands. The few bands that are still performing have the money to sponsor press agents.

So I am talking about a vicious circle that disallows any new artists. The Freewheelers Cello Band however is still getting coverage in newspapers, festivals and independent media like the Indiebible.

Please don't just listen to money....

Hope you get my point!

Bas Vossen www.thefreewheelers.nl

Erwin Musper[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Erwin Musper, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://en.muziekencyclopedie.nl/action/entry/Erwin+Musper?name=Erwin+Musper&.

It is possible that the bot was mistaken and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 20:59, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (January 26)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:

This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Basvossen/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 21:27, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Basvossen, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Robert McClenon (talk) 21:27, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, User:Basvossen/Cello Blues[edit]

Hello, Basvossen. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Cello Blues".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. DannyS712 (talk) 20:41, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, User:Basvossen/Freewheelers Cello Blues (blues band)[edit]

Hello, Basvossen. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Freewheelers Cello Blues (blues band)".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. DannyS712 (talk) 20:41, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Basvossen/Freewheelers Cello Blues (blues band)[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on User:Basvossen/Freewheelers Cello Blues (blues band), requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
It appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free Web hosting service. (See section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Legacypac (talk) 02:41, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Freewheelers Cello Blues (January 26)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by David.moreno72 were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Freewheelers Cello Blues and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Freewheelers Cello Blues, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

David.moreno72 12:50, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's completely clear how this world works. First, you need to have friends in the media, so they will write about your band, if it's any good or not. Second, when you have enough articles written by friends, you'll include them in a website, preferably built by the most professional company, so you look professional. Third, you ask wikipedofilia to write about your band, and because you've been mentioned in 'the media', your article will be written, which will give you entry in the 'serious music world' (which actually has succumbed to exist somewhere in the 1990's). Incestuous. Esp. when it's about children of famed ppl.

Your draft article, Draft:Freewheelers Cello Blues[edit]

Hello, Basvossen. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Freewheelers Cello Blues".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:18, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived[edit]

Hi Basvossen! You created a thread called Dutch 20th century musicians at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:03, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tea House! Two things I hate. Tea is for muslim hugging mayors of amsterdam, and house is the end of real live music.

Funny incomplete site claiming to be an 'encyclopedia'[edit]

The legendary pop/rock festival 'stomping grounds' held in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, with acts like Dr. John, Santana etc has no coverage in the list of 'historic rock festivals'.

This is just one example of the multitude of ommissions of wiki-pee-dia.

In my talk page you may notice how I've tried to keep up with the guidelines, but continuously, to my horror, had to see how more 'senior' users deleted my entries. So, I just see it as another dark side of the interwebs.

One of the more bespoken journalists of the moment, Oliver Bullough, does not have an entry here. Wikipedia should have a page where members can put ideas for new entries, without having to write them with the cumbersome, time hogging wiki demands.

I just saw this. You can request articles at WP:RA, or if you spend enough time learning the rules, you can create an article at WP:AFC. Be sure to provide plenty of independent reliable sources that discuss the topic in detail with a neutral point of view. Make sure the topic is notable.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:36, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[[reply]

BV> Why would I? It doesn't pay, and I do not agree with many rules here. Anything I've written has been deleted!~~Bas Vossen~~

Then you should probably write things that will last. Read the sections of the welcome at the top of your talk page and that might happen one day. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:38, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AH! I see. Again some mofo killing my work because i won't ever fit within bureaucratic guidelines. Well you know I've got plenty of time to waste here, keeping academic morons busy. BASICALLY ANY TIME AN ORGANISATION CHOOSES FORM OVER CONTENT IT MAKES ME ITCH!

Wikipedia Bio quite random[edit]

Dear Wikipedians,

Sometimes I do encounter biographies, where I ask myself: 'why is this person or band included here, and my own band is not?' Which have been answered here with the quite denigrating 'don't push your garage band'.

Now I do think there actually are quite some garbage bands around (not even worth the 'garage' term). Instead of pointing fingers, I wish to state that what SHOULD be included IMHO are acts that are doing something extra-ordinary. NOT those label-pushed-'image'-bands like Rammstein, that need a fire-show to gain attention, or wear fashion to become boi-bands. It seems that Wikipedia is pure commerce as they are only allowing this sort of 'entertainment' to be included here.

Now, when a band decides to bring back the cello -acoustic and (home built) electric- in the quite closed minded world of Blues Music, that is Extra-Ordinary! When they're performing in America, Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands, and Spain, getting some media coverage, existing for fourteen years, wikipedia's comment about 'garagebands' is simply laughable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Basvossen (talk • contribs)

June 2021[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:32, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

=> Thanks (but not) for your comment on what I have to say. It's clear that you're a bureaucrat, not interested in what motivates people, but more what form they use. Basvossen (talk) 17:14, 4 June 2021 (UTC)BV[reply]

Bias[edit]

Since discovering huge bias here not supporting it any more and not using as reference. Basvossen (talk) 21:57, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Livin' Blues moved to draftspace[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to Livin' Blues. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 20:33, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

the source is the Dutch page about this band. It is part of too many news articles to mention here, of which most are in Dutch. As the band is of special interest for the development of blues rock in the Netherlands, I do hope the lemma will stay on Wikipedia, so that more people than me can find it. Thank you; in case you would like to offer your help to improve the discography section, that would be approved. ~Basvossen Basvossen (talk) 22:35, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1 December: ANI notification[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Remsense留 23:22, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

why am i not involved in discussions involving me?

Is this the new policy of wikipedia? Basvossen (talk) 22:30, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Trolling, personal attacks, Islamophobic comments, disruptive editing and self-promotion are among the factors leading to this block. Cullen328 (talk) 02:43, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1. this is not self promotion. I am not related to that band. Proof me wrong.

2. I am from the Netherlands. We have our own culture. Livin'Blues is part of this culture.

3. You blame ME for disruptive editing : i blame the side that DELETES ARTICLES and BLOCKS USERS.

4. Actually, this discussion is proof for me that wiki pedia is not for me.. and I will always question and disprove the contents, and help start building an opposite information source which will be OBJECTIVE, NOT SUBJECTIVE.

5. Thank you for making OUR side bigger. Good luck with your crusade. NOT. Basvossen (talk) 20:41, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your sarcastic email[edit]

Please do not contact me again. Thank you. Cullen328 (talk) 22:59, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

why would I?

now you call me 'sarcastic' while i think you are caustic. Basvossen (talk) 23:03, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]