User talk:Poundthiswriter

Hi Poundthiswriter! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! :Jay8g [V•T•E] 07:05, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the warm welcome mate! I already did a bit of digging figuring out the basics of wikipedia editing, but I really appreciate you reaching out, I love how welcoming this place is to newcomers and I certainly don't take it for granted. I hope you have a great day :D Poundthiswriter (talk) 00:14, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

To edit in the Israeli-Palestinian topic area on Wikipedia accounts must be at least thirty days old and have at least 500 edits. This includes editing talk pages, with the sole exception being for very specific edit requests, which should be in the form of "change x to y for reason z". IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 05:57, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I didn't know the requirement extended to Talk Pages, thanks for letting me know. If I may ask, why is this rule extended to Talk pages? I think restricting articles makes sense to prevent these articles to be perpetually in edit wars, which degrade their quality and reliability, but I do not see the same issue for Talk pages, could you shine some light on the matter? Poundthiswriter (talk) 06:08, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Because one can still disrupt the consensus building process on the talk page. I believe that's why, couldn't say for sure. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 06:46, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello Poundthiswriter! Your additions to Signale für die musikalische Welt have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, it's important to understand and adhere to guidelines about using information from sources to prevent copyright and plagiarism issues. Here are the key points:

• Limited quotation: You may only copy or translate a small portion of a source. Any direct quotations must be enclosed in double quotation marks (") and properly cited using an inline citation. More information is available on the non-free content page. To learn how to cite a source, see Help:Referencing for beginners.
• Paraphrasing: Beyond limited quotations, you are required to put all information in your own words. Following the source's wording too closely can lead to copyright issues and is not permitted; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when paraphrasing, you must still cite your sources as appropriate.
• Image use guidelines: In most scenarios, only freely licensed or public domain images may be used and these should be uploaded to our sister project, Wikimedia Commons. In some scenarios, non-freely copyrighted content can be used if they meet all ten of our non-free content criteria; Wikipedia:Plain and simple non-free content guide may help with determining a file's eligibility.
• Copyrighted material donation: If you hold the copyright to the content you want to copy, or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license the text for publication here. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Copying and translation within Wikipedia: Wikipedia articles can be copied or translated, however they must have proper attribution in accordance with Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. For translation, see Help:Translation § License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices. Persistent failure to comply may result in being blocked from editing. If you have any questions or need further clarification, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 21:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Neophyte Records. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because it is promotional and reads like an advertisement and you may have a possible Conflict of Interest. I have converted it 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 the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Broc (talk) 21:15, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi friend, I am not sure I agree with it reading like an advertisement. It is hard to talk about Neophyte without acknowledging the disproportionately large role they play in shaping the genre which I know sounds like glazing of the highest tier lol. Nonetheless I can assure you I did not write the article with a promotional intent and am not involved or associated with Neophyte Records. I'm simply a longtime listener of the genre who was met with surprise at how few of these major artists and labels have wiki pages! I have also written pages on State of Anarchy and done edits on Mokum Records and other Dutch hardcore artists, and am planning on working on translations from the Dutch Tha Playah article for example. It is a niche genre from a small country, so it is hard to find secondary sources, but these are noteworthy events and people, often racking up millions of streams and playing at major events known the world over, so they merit a wiki page. It's a very weird blend of niche and popular; so I get how it can easily seem too inundated with primary source material. If you wish to edit the article to be less commercial, or tell me which areas specifically you think need a rework, I'd be happy to work on it with you, but I think this article should remain on the main page for the above mentioned reasons. I won't move it back yet in anticipation of your reply, but I do hope you understand my reasoning. Poundthiswriter (talk) 21:49, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

I cannot move the page back because you inserted a redirect page that blocks the draft when I try to move it to mainspace. I don't know how you did that because for some reason I can't undo it. Poundthiswriter (talk) 23:46, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. My main concern is the promotional tone used throughout the article: "it is among the most successful hardcore labels", "have become household names", "major festivals". Please keep a neutral tone, see MOS:PUFFERY. I understand your excitement as a fan but you need to stick to what the sources say. I hope you now understand better why I draftified the article. Broc (talk) 20:15, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

Well here's the problem; I'm not even really a huge fan of Neophyte Records hahaha! It genuinely *is* one of the most (if not THE most) popular hardcore labels today, and I think you'd be hard pressed to find people who don't consider festivals like Defqon or Decibel to be major. The Dutch festival scene is known worldwide, it is possibly *the* most important country for electronic music festivals outside the United States' Coachella. Some of the secondary sources I listed even reflect this sentiment! I'm glad it's resolved and reviewed now but I really want to encourage you to keep an open mind in the future especially when it comes to niche communities in a country you're (presumably) not deeply familiar with. However, I do want to thank you for reminding me to stay vigilant about my writing style, I understand that you, like me, are simply trying to make Wikipedia the best it can be. Poundthiswriter (talk) 00:19, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

I understand your point of view. However, if you make a statement "it is among the most successful hardcore labels" it needs to be supported by a source, even if you think everyone would agree to this. Otherwise it's just your personal opinion. Do you have some sources supporting the claims you make in the article? Broc (talk) 10:35, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Ah, I understand, fair enough. The claim doesn't come from a single convenient source but rather me (rather painstakenly lol) cross referencing different labels in the genre using the Label Analytics tool sourced in the article (as well as cross referencing THOSE with third party tools and although the numbers are probably far from perfect it does give you a good idea of a ballpark and since nobody except MoH is even CLOSE to Neophyte Records I'm not too worried about a lost million streams here and there).

While there are labels (like DirtyWorkz for example) that manage to reach levels waaaay beyond 400 million streams, DirtyWorkz is a "general" hard dance label which also publishes a lot more hardstyle (a less niche and far far farrrr more popular genre numbers-wise), their most streamed releases are hardstyle, and do not meet the BPM criteria of hardcore.

There aren't that many major hardcore labels to begin with, and most of them are not putting up numbers anywhere near 400 million. I'll just list a few here for your convenience but you're free to go down the rabbit hole yourself; Traxtorm at 100mil, the infamous Italian Brutale at 22-something mil, even industry darling Dutch Master Works only reaches 368mil. Listing all of that as a justification to call Neophyte Records one of the most successful labels just bloats the article but the numbers are all there if you wanna check it out. Also for a convenient list of labels see this site. Masters of Hardcore is an important exception, blowing NR out of the water at more than 1.5bn streams worldwide, but number two (or even if it was #3 #4 or #5) still justifies "among the most successful hardcore labels" in my book.

I hope this satisfies your curiosity, but let me know if there is more I can do to explain my claims :) Poundthiswriter (talk) 20:47, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

I've declined your submission at WP:3O. The thread you linked to has more than two editors involved, and if there truly is an active RfC then that would take precedence over a request for a third opinion in any case. You are welcome to re-file with more clarity regarding what you are requesting feedback on, or pursue other forms of dispute resolution. Please note that when submitting a request at 3O the request must be neutrally worded; please do not list any of the disputants, including yourself. DonIago (talk) 02:18, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Read wp:cir, if you ask us to change wording, we do not say, you are wasting our time. Slatersteven (talk) 14:52, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

That is not what CIR stands for and I think you know that. If anything you and the other nitpickers on that page are going against CIR by pretending they can't understand the english language unless everything's phrased like the intro para of a PhD thesis. Everybody who can speak English on a level higher than a 5th grader can understand what I wrote, and instead of engaging with the argument in comes a wikipedia moderator trynna tone police because he gets a hard-on for oxford grammar. To that I say boo fucking hoo, Wikipedia is about content, not about snooty assholes grandstanding on the usage of casual phrases on talk pages. If you're not competent enough to understand an argument because someone used "trynna" instead of "trying to" it is YOU who is wasting time, not me. Also, someone decided unilaterally to close the discussion so unless you wish to reopen it this has no business still being here. Poundthiswriter (talk) 18:48, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Please refrain from personal attacks such as the one I just removed from Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. WP:NPA is the policy in question. You are free to reinstate your comment if you wish, but absolutely must not make a personal attack when you do so. --Yamla (talk) 13:33, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Excuse me? THIS WAS A RESPONSE TO SOMEONE BEING OPENLY RACIST AGAINST ME. What is wrong with you people to remove my comment but not his comment OPENLY CALLING ME AN UNCLE TOM? Jesus fucking christ man Poundthiswriter (talk) 13:35, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Russians in Ukraine, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Striker was added. 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) 23:47, 23 February 2026 (UTC)