What happened on Wikipedia ?
They deleted my Devil's Bit Sessions page without warning, with the justification that it was a non-notable album by non-notable performers.
I'm 100% sure they'll delete O Christmas tree again if the same auditor is the one that reviews it. After all, it doesn't have songs with billion hits on YouTube, so it must be irrelevant, right?
I get that they need to prevent people from posting their own home-made albums on there, but I do think they should have more respect for content providers and the things that those content providers take the time to provide. Or maybe they'd just prefer to see how complete a resource Wikipedia is if we just let them do all their articles themselves. Good luck with a few hundred people writing 5,548,444 articles.
What's the most ridiculous about it is that they didn't even fully delete the page, per say. They erased the content of the article and replaced it with a redirect tag back to Mairead Nesbitt's page. What was the point of that?
Anyways, I'm probably going to go into Mairead's article and add the most relevant stuff about the album (as my own humble opinion as a superfan /
expert as to what's relevant in this subject area, thank you very much, Wikipedia).
Oh, here's an interesting fact:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Size_of_WikipediaWikipedia continues to grow, and the number of articles in Wikipedia is increasing by over 20,000 a month. The number of articles added to Wikipedia every month reached its maximum in 2006, at over 50,000 new articles a month, and has been slowly but steadily declining since then.Hmm. Why could that be? Perhaps because the auditors are starting to make content providers feel like they're wasting their time writing all these articles only to have them removed?