Threatin: Moderators Flagged and Deleted Wikipedia Page Months Ago for False Claims [Transcript Available!]
[If you’re new to the whole Threatin story, get caught up right here.]
Did you know that anyone can view the edit history of any article on Wikipedia? Every single edit, and the reasons the site’s moderators have given for deletions or alterations they make, can be viewed by anyone at all — it’s all part of the open source ethos that makes Wikipedia what it is.
I sort of knew this but had largely forgotten until MetalSucks reader Jake P. alerted us to the existence of this page on Wikipedia in which the site’s moderators debate deletion of Threatin’s Wikipedia page (they succeeded: it was stricken from the site in March of this year). In it, the moderators mention the great lengths “someone” has gone to to promote this artist, pointing out that many of the sources referenced aren’t credible and seem to exist solely to promote Threatin.
There are a lot of technicalities in the text relating to Wikipedia guidelines that I don’t understand, but you really don’t need to in order to get the gist: Threatin, naturally, created his own Wikipedia page — full of grandiose promotional language and fake accolades — and even seemed to be fighting for himself to keep the page online using the alias LisaGolding. Another day, another alias for Jered.
Here are a few highlights, starting with a moderator concerned about the article’s promotional language:
“Can you explain the regular usage of promotional language such as ‘the famous musician Threatin’ and ‘an award-winning solo artist who recently rose to fame and is considered one of the most influential figures in current Rock music’ in your edit summaries?”
One moderator questions the reliability of the sources cited within, saying “this all seems to be an elaborate promotional scheme:”
“The article does not contain any reliable sources, every reference is related to the subject or to sites such as ‘toprockpress.com’, ‘celebritymusicscene.com’, etc. Nothing in the article is verified, so you cannot cite the article as evidence that the subject meets the criteria. I’m not going to go too deep down this rabbit hole but this is all seems to be an elaborate promotional scheme, which has not worked out due to the article averaging 3 views per day (this is not typical of ‘an award-winning solo artist who recently rose to fame and is considered one of the most influential figures in current Rock music.’)”
This one hits the nail on the head about EVERYTHING related to Threatin in one fell swoop:
“Article looks pretty but on examination the sources are all primary, user-generated or fake.”
And this one snuffed out the scheme completely:
“It’s almost comical in it’s peacock language (‘prominent label’…’highly anticipated’…’released globally’–FWI, I guess wikipedia editors could be considered ‘authors whose words are read globally,’ LOL) that is backed up by zero reliable sources. As stated, everything is user generated, self-download, first-person, etc. An obvious attempt by publicists to package a client, including creating content for dubious sources such as ‘New York Music Review’ and ‘Top Rock Press,’ which seem to exist only to promote this person. Perhaps it’s unfair for this subject, as he may genuinely find success someday and merit an article, but this one as it is is a gross example of how the internet can be abused to hype ones way into notability. (Just for fun, I clicked on the ‘Followers’ link on his Twitter to see how legitimate his fan base is. Unsurprisingly, it’s mostly accounts from click farms from the other side of the world.)”
For all the shit Wikipedia gets for being an allegedly unreliable source, these moderators did a really fucking good job keeping Threatin off the site. And they did it eight months before the rest of the world had a clue. You can read the entire article here.
But hey, look at how sick this band is live!!! Book them for South America ASAP, since that seems to be where all their Facebook fans live.