Edge Rewrite
Jump to content

Talk:MTF Labs

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 26 days ago by Andrewdubber in topic References

Untitled

[edit]

I'd like to make the case for Music Tech Fest being suitable for inclusion into the encyclopedia. I'd be happy to help edit to bring the article in line with guidance - but would like to underline that the festival is a significant and sufficiently notable global cultural event that is certainly worthy of a page. I also know of others who are keen to help develop the page and add corrections and verifications. This is a community festival and it will be a community edited page. The page was kindly started by one member of the community today, who then notified me of this, and the page will be further developed and modified by others.

The purpose of this Wikipedia page is not advertorial, but rather to provide factual information about a festival of ideas that started as an annual London event and now takes place in different places around the world.

I shall make some initial corrections and remove anything that may be read as advertorial, but in the interests of avoiding any conflict of interest, I will leave further edits to members of the wider community.

Andrewdubber (talk) 22:54, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

As I wrote to the original author: To me, it reads like one big advertisement with a tremendous coat rack to hang all the famous names. To make it worse, it is poorly sourced. Not that you have not enough sources, but you have the wrong sources. When looking at sources, your should keep in mind Wikipedia Reliable Sources. In general, you should use independent (not related to the festival), reliable (no social media like Facbook, YouTube, Tmblr etc.) prior published sources. That is not as hard as it sounds to be. The Banner talk 23:23, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the feedback Banner. I have made suitable edits following your guidance. Hopefully this rectifies the worst of the problem, and that the contributions of community members will also improve and develop the page over time.

Andrewdubber (talk) 00:51, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Media coverage

[edit]

@Maxbaraitsersmith: Instead of a "Media coverage" section with a long list of sources, I suggest you use those sources that are independent to write additional content for the Wikipedia article. Please also add the URL in each of the {{cite web}} templates. With so many sources, I don't see the value in listing press releases (e.g. the Insider coverage). Thanks, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:52, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Typo in home page URL reference

[edit]

It seems like there is a typo / switched characters in the first reference: it says http://www.mftlabs.net/ (which also doesn't resolve), but should rather by http://www.mtflabs.net/

COI Edit Request

[edit]

I’m making this paid edit request on behalf of MTF Labs. I am proposing the following edits to improve neutrality, consistency, structure, and alignment with reliable sources, and to reduce excessive detail in certain sections in line with Wikipedia style guidelines, including WP:SUMMARYSTYLE and WP:NPOV.

Thank you for your consideration. Emprine (talk) 04:58, 29 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Reply 11-JUN-2026

[edit]

  Edit request declined  

  • The request relies too heavily on sources connected to the subject organization (>30% of all sources used in the request). While the company is a valuable resource for information on itself, it ought not be a dominant factor in sourcing. Consider swapping out sources which originate with the company, in favor of replacement sources of higher quality from a third party.

Regards,  Spintendo  15:41, 11 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

COI edit request: revised resubmission (September 2026)

[edit]

I have a conflict of interest with this article and am therefore requesting these changes here rather than editing directly. This is a revised resubmission of the edit request of 29 April 2026, which was declined on 11 June 2026 on the grounds that more than 30% of the sources originated with the subject organisation. This revision addresses that concern directly:

  • Affiliated sources have been reduced from 27 of 95 unique sources (28%) to 5 of 63 (8%).
  • The five remaining self-published citations (the organisation's event-history page, two programme-description pages, its Bandcamp page, and the MIReS project site) are used only per WP:ABOUTSELF, for uncontroversial facts about the organisation's own events: dates, locations, themes, and programme structure. None supports an evaluative or self-serving claim.
  • Press-release sources (PR Newswire, MyNewsDesk) have been removed, as have citations to personal websites connected to the organisation.
  • Details that could not be supported by an independent source have been trimmed rather than re-sourced.

@Spintendo: Courtesy ping as the reviewer of the April request.

Thank you for your consideration. Andrewdubber (talk) 20:54, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply