Jump to content

Talk:TuskHead

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

COI Declaration: Patrick van Zandwijk (TuskHead)

[edit]

Hello, I am Patrick van Zandwijk, the artist known as TuskHead and the subject of this article. I would like to openly declare a conflict of interest as per Wikipedia’s guidelines.

I have made edits to this article to ensure that the information is factually accurate and fully supported by reliable, verifiable sources. I have aimed to follow Wikipedia’s neutrality standards and have only added sourced, publicly available information without promotional intent.

I welcome and encourage independent editors to review, adjust, or improve the article to maintain neutrality and meet Wikipedia’s standards.

Thank you.

Pvanzandwijk (talk) 11:12, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Onel5969 as they tagged the article for undisclosed paid editing. I just took a look and I don't think this article is that problematic, if anything it could be tagged for notability. The Apple Music and Bandcamp links as sources are unsatisfactory but hopefully this can be resolved. Given the subject of this article has now come forward, I would prefer to remove the UPE tag as it's sort of a mark of shame to a certain degree. Are you okay with this, Onel5969? MediaKyle (talk) 15:06, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely, as it no longer applies. COI should still apply, unless you're comfortable with the tone and scope of the article. Onel5969 TT me 15:09, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Onel5969: Thank you. I've swapped out the tag for a notability one for now, but I wouldn't contest its removal if someone more familiar with music content thinks the sourcing is good. I tried to find sources for this, but it's difficult when I don't speak Dutch and it can be hard to differentiate blogs from real publications when you're not familiar with them.
@Pvanzandwijk: You made the right call letting us know about this, and the article is actually decently well-balanced all things considered. I think it could do with more sources, though. If you might be able to leave some links here to articles from reliable publications which discuss you in-depth, that would go a long way towards helping us with improving the article.
If anyone wants to take a shot at working on this further, the "media coverage" section should be turned into prose summarizing what was said in that coverage rather than simply listing the articles. Cheers, MediaKyle (talk) 15:29, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]