You're right, and this was also true for when we added the GaragePunk Hideout to Wikipedia (here's the link), which will probably end up getting deleted because it lacks notability. There just aren't enough news sites out there "reporting" on websites like ours! I guess it doesn't matter that we have 7,500 members or over 12,000 likes on Facebook... if you don't have a proper press article that explains the site with "verifiable facts" then you're screwed. So it's lacking verified citations, but what can you do? You can't write those articles yourself, and most "journalists" (and I use that term VERY loosely these days) rarely ever care about a site like this to even bother with visiting it, let alone spend any time here to get the general vibe or learn more about the Hideout Comps, GPPR, etc. I think there's just too much gray area around "press articles" vs. blog posts. What should make one a proper citation and the other not?
G. Wood said:
I was asked to write a Wikipedia page for my friend's band. After reading the requirements detailing who qualifies for a page that won't be deleted, I questioned whether my friend qualifies, even though she's released 3 albums for actual labels, has tons of press, and plays regularly from LA to NY.
It's not easy to write a proper Wiki article. It needs to have verified citations from press articles (not online blogs), and be composed of verifiable facts. It's very different from just dashing off a promo bio full of adjectives. Which is why I never finished it.
But yeah, it's true. No one cares about my garage band. I have maybe 25 fans worldwide, and half of them are musicians, who are on the last album. I don't have a band, I have a circle of friends.