Wiki: Dubstep

kaini · Post by **kaini** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 9:08 am

[quote="epithet]Did you do that ? Exactly how long you been into dubstep for if you don't mind my asking ?

No offense, but the whole thing seems like an ammuntiuon hype piece. Do you work for them ?[/quote]

about two and a half years, and say no offense all you like but i find that offensive. and i'm starting to think you're trolling.

epithet · Post by **epithet** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 9:43 am

kaini wrote:
about two and a half years, and say no offense all you like but i find that offensive. and i'm starting to think you're trolling.

2.5 years

. Well it's no wonder you don't know about the breakstep influence and its relevence to dubstep outweighing even that of drum and bass. So just exactly what is it you find offensive ?

deapoh · Post by **deapoh** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 11:41 am

Ok, I'll find a bunch of articles and write something up.

Nice one

kaini · Post by **kaini** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 1:42 pm

epithet wrote:
kaini wrote:
about two and a half years, and say no offense all you like but i find that offensive. and i'm starting to think you're trolling.
2.5 years .

i thought that this sort of elitist attitude was reserved for idm forums

obviously i was wrong.

4linehaiku · Post by **4linehaiku** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 2:22 pm

epithet wrote:
kaini wrote:
about two and a half years, and say no offense all you like but i find that offensive. and i'm starting to think you're trolling.
2.5 years . Well it's no wonder you don't know about the breakstep influence and its relevence to dubstep outweighing even that of drum and bass. So just exactly what is it you find offensive ?

I swear to god I don't understand how people find the inner resolve to complain so much on the internet. Isn't it tiring?
It's Wikipeida. ANYONE can edit it. This is the whole point. Please gather up some sources and contribute to the page with the wealth of knowledge you've clearly built up listening to dubstep for the last 40 years or whatever.
Or just keep being a prick and maybe Kaini will put "BREAKSTEP IS WELL IMPORTANT I LOVE IT THANK GOD FOR EPITHET" at the top of the page.

chu · Post by **chu** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 3:22 pm

My favourite encounter with Wikipedia was when I went to the page for Rap and all it said was "Not even music, actually it's just crap."

ashley · Post by **ashley** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 3:34 pm

Months ago, about August time maybe..or a bit after I added my two sites to the list and within a few days they were removed so thought fuck it, stnuc.

What I don't get is who thinks that they have authority on an "open encyclopedia" to remove links and add/remove stuff where they see fit?

How can we build up a picture of a scene on the worlds most used source of information when we arent allowed to edit it to add references...kinda beats the point of being able to edit it if someone is just going to remove it.

I have tonnes of videos and articles on getdarker.com which some people may find intresting, especially if they are quite new and there are also a few mixes people have uploaded on our sister site, gotdarker.com

slothrop · Post by **slothrop** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 4:27 pm

Ashley wrote:Months ago, about August time maybe..or a bit after I added my two sites to the list and within a few days they were removed so thought fuck it, stnuc.

What I don't get is who thinks that they have authority on an "open encyclopedia" to remove links and add/remove stuff where they see fit?

How can we build up a picture of a scene on the worlds most used source of information when we arent allowed to edit it to add references...kinda beats the point of being able to edit it if someone is just going to remove it.

Find a verifieable reference on the importance of getdarker to the scene and they won't be able to.

But they kind of have to have some standard, otherwise the entire site would be deluged by two bit producers and bloggers spamming links to their myspace pages and blogs by way of free advertising. And although you know and I know that getdarker and barefiles are more relevant than DJ Knobhead's myspazz or some irrelevant blog, we wouldn't actually be able to prove definitively that that was the case and we weren't just mates of DJ Knobhead or SpackBlogger or whatever unless we could find a reference in a respectable source.

I have tonnes of videos and articles on getdarker.com which some people may find intresting, especially if they are quite new and there are also a few mixes people have uploaded on our sister site, gotdarker.com

The thing is, it's an encyclopedia, not a repository of interesting links.

jim · Post by **jim** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 4:31 pm

4linehaiku wrote:
epithet wrote:
kaini wrote:
about two and a half years, and say no offense all you like but i find that offensive. and i'm starting to think you're trolling.
2.5 years . Well it's no wonder you don't know about the breakstep influence and its relevence to dubstep outweighing even that of drum and bass. So just exactly what is it you find offensive ?
I swear to god I don't understand how people find the inner resolve to complain so much on the internet. Isn't it tiring?
It's Wikipeida. ANYONE can edit it. This is the whole point. Please gather up some sources and contribute to the page with the wealth of knowledge you've clearly built up listening to dubstep for the last 40 years or whatever.
Or just keep being a prick and maybe Kaini will put "BREAKSTEP IS WELL IMPORTANT I LOVE IT THANK GOD FOR EPITHET" at the top of the page.

ashley · Post by **ashley** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 5:18 pm

Slothrop wrote:
Ashley wrote:Months ago, about August time maybe..or a bit after I added my two sites to the list and within a few days they were removed so thought fuck it, stnuc.

What I don't get is who thinks that they have authority on an "open encyclopedia" to remove links and add/remove stuff where they see fit?

How can we build up a picture of a scene on the worlds most used source of information when we arent allowed to edit it to add references...kinda beats the point of being able to edit it if someone is just going to remove it.
Find a verifieable reference on the importance of getdarker to the scene and they won't be able to.

But they kind of have to have some standard, otherwise the entire site would be deluged by two bit producers and bloggers spamming links to their myspace pages and blogs by way of free advertising. And although you know and I know that getdarker and barefiles are more relevant than DJ Knobhead's myspazz or some irrelevant blog, we wouldn't actually be able to prove definitively that that was the case and we weren't just mates of DJ Knobhead or SpackBlogger or whatever unless we could find a reference in a respectable source.
I have tonnes of videos and articles on getdarker.com which some people may find intresting, especially if they are quite new and there are also a few mixes people have uploaded on our sister site, gotdarker.com
The thing is, it's an encyclopedia, not a repository of interesting links.

I understand, but I just dont get why that it has to be so strict.

Surely who ever maintains the article might be able to visit the links and see any obvious references to the genre.

But in contrary to your post, there are still links that I have never seen before that are on there

P.s. who ever done it is doing a good job. No disrespect to you guys just got a little annoyed thats all.

seckle · Post by **seckle** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 6:29 pm

Slothrop wrote: The thing is, it's an encyclopedia, not a repository of interesting links.

exactly. it's also a massive burden because never before has anything like wiki been tried. britannica was created and maintained by committees of scholars, researchers and phd's that they chose.

wiki is truly a globally fed experience.

epithet · Post by **epithet** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 7:11 pm

jim wrote:
4linehaiku wrote:
epithet wrote:
kaini wrote:
about two and a half years, and say no offense all you like but i find that offensive. and i'm starting to think you're trolling.
2.5 years . Well it's no wonder you don't know about the breakstep influence and its relevence to dubstep outweighing even that of drum and bass. So just exactly what is it you find offensive ?
I swear to god I don't understand how people find the inner resolve to complain so much on the internet. Isn't it tiring?
It's Wikipeida. ANYONE can edit it. This is the whole point. Please gather up some sources and contribute to the page with the wealth of knowledge you've clearly built up listening to dubstep for the last 40 years or whatever.
Or just keep being a prick and maybe Kaini will put "BREAKSTEP IS WELL IMPORTANT I LOVE IT THANK GOD FOR EPITHET" at the top of the page.

please lets leave god out of it yeah ? you can swear to him all you like but it doesnt actually give your opinion any more weight.

Ashley wrote:Months ago, about August time maybe..or a bit after I added my two sites to the list and within a few days they were removed so thought fuck it, stnuc.

What I don't get is who thinks that they have authority on an "open encyclopedia" to remove links and add/remove stuff where they see fit?

How can we build up a picture of a scene on the worlds most used source of information when we arent allowed to edit it, to add references ?...kinda beats the point of being able to edit it if someone is just going to remove it.

Using caps, highlighting things and making them bigger now that adds weight to an opinion

muffstep · Post by **muffstep** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 11:03 pm

woops put sommat in the wrong place

bailey_187 · Post by **bailey_187** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 11:13 pm

cool arfff

kaini · Post by **kaini** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 1:02 am

i would love anyone who wants to contribute to the article from here to do that. the more people contributing to the article the better. the one thing i wanna stress though is that the article is already regarded as 'good' by the wiki powers that be. there's all sorts of things that make them regard an article as that.

i guess the best thing to do is post the essential shit.

verifiability, not truth yeah, i know this one takes time to get your head around, well it did me anyway. but you can also see why. floodgates again.
neutral point of view peace, love, unity, wobbler
this is sort of tricky as well. i don't care if you have made a sub that can cause skanking a kilometre away. show me a source talking about it.

Sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing

Code: Select all

----~~

- wiki converts it to your username and the date.

you WILL want to be referencing shit, and this is fuckin a for it;
magnus' makeref.

4linehaiku · Post by **4linehaiku** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 1:03 am

epithet wrote:please lets leave god out of it yeah ? you can swear to him all you like but it doesnt actually give your opinion any more weight.

Aye yeah fair enough let's leave God out of this, but let's leave the complaining out too. I don't actually contribute to wikipedia, but I swear it is among the best things ever ever ever. So I get a bit vexed when people diss it, and the people who work on it.
All the joking aside, you seriously should contribute some breakstep info. Just follow the guidelines and get some references. If you're that passionate about it should be pretty straightforward. People going "I can't believe they haven't mentioned... x" is exactly the reason why wikipedia is so great. Positive moves, yeah?

Edit: Oh and just to spell it out, big up Kaini and all the others contributing to the article. I appreciate what you're doing and I'm sure a lot of other people do too. It's not nitpicking and pointless rules, it's fucking important I swear.

kaini · Post by **kaini** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 1:15 am

Big up Zeibura and P4K as well. Even in wiki's terms it is a model article cos it is a truly collaborative effort so far.

martyn · Post by **martyn** » Sat Mar 22, 2008 1:34 pm

If I had no clue what dubstep was, and I wiki'd it, I expect to read a comprehensive, well written article mentioning artists, releases, websites and nights that have had a significant impact on the development of the music and have a major importance.

I don't need to read about "everyone else who is also making dubstep, has a wicked blog, runs a label or has lots of mixes online" - for the answer to that i can use any of the external links or references. Wiki is an encyclopedia - it should be a comprehensive summary of what dubstep is.

The reason why Wikipedia is (imo) one of the greatest inventions of the century is that everyone who can come correct with useful information can contribute, now don't get sad if you get denied by the common denominator, for all those people i suggest you buy the brittanica and look up dubstep there.

Doctor J · Post by **Doctor J** » Sat Mar 22, 2008 4:15 pm

I can almost guarantee you it's nothing personal. That's just how they do over there.

cite: Wikipedia: lamest edit wars

Some funny reading on that link

stanton · Post by **stanton** » Sat Mar 22, 2008 5:08 pm

Why doesn't someone just make an article about dubstep on t'internet? The net has been incredibly important in the evolution (probably not creation) of the sound. I can see why Deapoh was pissed off, he's a true soulja of the scene and respect is definitely due. Hope there's something up about barefiles soon.

Wikipedia is great, I use it everyday, but it has to be taken with a pinch of salt. A lot of it seems to be created by PR companies, super fans or pedantic fuck wits.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darius_Danesh

For example, yes it's technically true, but in reality don't we all remember this guy for being an object of ridicule and hatred of the entire nation?

That Dubstep article is ok, needs a re-write though, it's very fragmented at the mo. That seems to happen with Wiki though, people add a sentence here and there and it becomes bloody awful to read. Much like this post of mine.

Wiki: Dubstep

Who is online