Oooooookay.
So I logged on to Wikipedia tonight and found a nice little present. The auditors removed my Devil's Bit Sessions page.
Here's the note they left:
Non notable album by a non notable group.Non-notable group. Umm, how about this...
With Celtic Woman, Mairead Nesbitt had:
- 15 albums that got to the top 10 in the Billboard World Albums chart
- 12 albums that got to #1 in the Billboard World Albums chart
- 2 top 10 albums in the Billboard 200 chart (A New Journey, Songs from the Heart)
- 11 albums that appeared on the Billboard 200 chart
- The debut Celtic Woman album reached #1 on Billboard's World Music Chart and occupied the top slot for an unprecedented 81 weeks.
- It remained there until the release of Celtic Woman's second album, 2006's A Christmas Celebration
- Celtic Woman remained in the top spot for a total of 112 consecutive weeks!!!
- A GRAMMY nomination (should have won)
She had a solo album (Hibernia) that was in the top 10 of the Billboard World Music chart and Devil's Bit Sessions made the top 10 as well. But I guess that's not worth noting at all...
Let's see. What else. She's appearing on Broadway with Rocktopia. She was an important inspiration for Lindsey Stirling, played for multiple US presidents, and ... oh yeah is one of the BEST VIOLINISTS IN THE WORLD / EVER!!!!
Non-notable??? That's completely inaccurate. Nearly slanderous!
What exactly is their criteria to be noteworthy? Does one have to be a rapper, spit out 50 expletives during the course of a song, and make music that completely SUCKS???
How about if one writes a song that was widely regarded as one of the most hated songs ever ... one of her subsequent songs that didn't even make the Billboard 200 chart at all has it's very own Wikipedia page! For one song, much less an album! Are you kidding me? I'm not saying that song shouldn't have a page. I am saying if that deserves to have a page, there is NO WAY that they can get away with calling Mairead Nesbitt a non-noteworthy artist.
Obviously they don't care that it took me in excess of 10 hours to research everything, type it, format it, source it, test the links, cross-link it with other articles etc. They probably feel like they should delete my account and ban me for making them take 15 seconds out of their time to delete the page.
Well, there's definitely going to be more articles I wrote getting the axe. They'll probably go ahead and convert O Christmas Tree back in to a redirect to the main Celtic Woman page, because it makes WAY more sense to have a page that just redirects in a loop instead of having ACTUAL USEFUL CONTENT on that page.
I added myself as a watcher on ALL the pages I previously worked on so I will be notified if they pull this nonsense again. Furthermore, I'm going to back up all the wikimarkup for all that content and if they do something stupid enough, I'm just going to make another account, connect through a VPN to mask my IP address, and post the article again. You messed with the wrong Celtic Woman fan. Game over, auditors. GAME OVER!
Anyways, I dug a backup of the Devil's Bit Sessions article out of their archive, so if anyone wants to see what it was like before they removed it, here it is:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Devil%27s_Bit_Sessions&oldid=793193866