Talk:Ministry of Sound

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

Early unlabelled comments[edit]

ministryofsound.net CLOSED DOWN


Ministry of Sound, Gaunt Street, London.OWNS THIS DOMIAN NAME

and yet it has been disconnected from the Web by ....

Matthew Henton who is Head of Marketing at Madasafish (Brightview), on 29th Jan 2008.

He sent this message to ALL USERS of That Domain.......


Dear Customer

I am sending you this email as a final reminder that we will

be closing ministryofsound.net on Wednesday 9th January.

Please note that you will be unable to use this email

address - auser@ministryofsound.net - and any other

services you have with us from that date.

Once again I apologise that we have to do this, but

unfortunately the number of customers on ministryofsound.net

has now dropped to the point that it is no longer feasible

to run it as a separate brand.

It is very important that if you wish to retain any contacts

from your address book or correspondence from Webmail, it is

vital that you transfer these elsewhere before Wednesday, as

after this date it will be impossible to retrieve them.

If you have enjoyed the service you have received from us in

the past, and want to transfer to a Madasafish account,

please call us on 0844 395 0830 (8am to 8pm, 7 days a week)

or email care@madasafish.com , to check the availability

of your desired username.

Many thanks for your custom over the last few years.

Kind regards

Matthew Henton Head of Marketing


............................ 

This is all very well, but although MADASAFISH
were running the hosting, it is not up to them
to close the domain and try to then bully the
users to switch to thier "inhouse" domain instead.

............................ 

These matters have been reported to
James Palumbo,
The Ministry of Sound,
Gaunt Street,
Elephant and Castle, 
London.

........................ 

Madasafish is part of the Brightview Group, established in April 2001.
Brightview is fully owned by BT plc. Brightview has grown
quickly into one of the UK's largest consumer Internet groups. 
Delivering speed, reliability and above all simplicity to our 
customers, Brightview continues to make significant investments
in technological innovation and customer care.

........................ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.131.235.199 (talk) 01:08, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone put in some information about the current state of the club, like capacity and location, like the information about the other afterhour clubs? (e.g. Fabric club & Turnmills //Danny

Reads like a PR piece - did they write it themselves? No mention of the old Ministry magazine?

I agree. No references either. Still, the article is far from a "stub", should probably be designated as an article lacking references rather than a stub. No mention of sub-record label, Data Records, which puts out original music/artists, not just the Hed Kandi & MoS compilations. Sundevilesq 18:02, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


the magazine alone deserves a segment. Not that the subsequent ones were any good. It's like musik, mixmag, etc..an era w/ a free disk and some of them are golden to own.

Why is the sound system in ministry so acclaimed? is it true that there is a 'box' surrounded with speakers?

I have heard rumors that there is going to be a Ministry Of Sound club opened in Brisbane Australia. Ann St in the Valley currently has a new club being built and this is where the Ministry Of Sound club is rumoured to be opened. Anyone else heard of this?

Separating the discography into it's own article?[edit]

Well it seems the Ministry of Sound Discography is nearing 50 albums, isn't it time that painfully long list is made into it's own discography page? (btw if you guys haven't heard their compilations they're really good :) just my opinion) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GBobly (talk • contribs) 12:16, 10 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I agree, as from viewing the MoS's website earlier, they seem to be churning out albums at the rate of one every month. It's stupid not to try and create a proper list else where. Istabo 23:22, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FIFA 2002 Soundtrack[edit]

In the sound settings screen there is a symbol of "Ministry of Sound"... Did it mean the tracks were provided by them? Midmaestro 15:18, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bomb plot[edit]

No mention of the failed bomb plot targeting the club?Andycjp 11:31, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rave?[edit]

The MOS isnt exactly a rave. Raves are (usually) illegal parties set up in warehouses and fields, and are often raided by the police for drugs. I've deleted the project template. Racooon 12:09, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In New Zealand there's an venue called MOS, they have the same logo and everything, it's frequently used for Raves, not illegal here bro —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.57.107.113 (talk) 00:55, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah with all due respect Racoon most of the raves I know of are not illegal. However I agree with your assertion that MoS is NOT a rave. Fatrb38 (talk) 08:09, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Compilations[edit]

First of all, all MoS Guide-releases never start with "The" (except the obvious: "The Annual" etc), why I changed to "Clubbers Guide" (note that the correct term is "Clubbers" not "Clubber's".) Also, I see no reason why Anthems 1991-2008 should be placed in this section since it is not in the category of "...compilations which run in a series..." since it's a one-time release. -Fernandicus 18:37, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jakarta[edit]

Two clubs I go to often in Jakarta, Indonesia recently closed because apparently they will be replaced by a massive Ministry of Sound. Can anyone confirm? Guus Hoekman (talk) 10:35, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Biased Intro[edit]

Here's what it says: "Ministry of Sound (MoS), now MSHK Group, is the home of the best known dance music and lifestyle brands, the largest independent record company and the most famous nightclub in the world[who?]."

We can't have opinions on here, at least not without being a direct quote from a famous or well-known source, that MoS is the best at [whatever]. Also if the claims are going to be made that it is the most famous nightclub in the world (first of all, which one? If London then that needs to be stated) or that it's the largest independent record company (whatever "independent" means) then these statistics need to come from a source. I'm going to edit it to make the claims less "bold" until someone can come up with some proof. Fatrb38 (talk) 08:13, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay it now reads: "Ministry of Sound (MoS), now MSHK Group, is the name of one of the largest dance music and lifestyle brands in the world[citation needed]. MSHK Group is best known for its ownership and management of its self-titled independent record company dance club chain that extends throughout four continents (Europe, Asia, North America, and Australia), including a Superclub based in London, England."
Feel free to fix it up if you'd like but keep opinions out of it. Fatrb38 (talk) 08:33, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yep just cleaned it up some more --86.72.247.30 (talk) 13:35, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

# 2 Fatal incident[edit]

Article mentions fatal incident. Does not describe incident. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scmdn (talk • contribs) 16:15, 4 October 2010 (UTC) See a google search on "Nankani, ministry of sound". This gives the BBC story. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.179.198.184 (talk) 12:40, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-10984673 . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:5B9A:E01:FD8C:21E0:E0DC:8DE6 (talk) 12:20, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:WEIGHT[edit]

An editor, using multiple different IP addresses, has been attempting to add to the article information on a fatal event in some way connected to patrons of the nightclub. I have reverted these edits on the basis of WP:WEIGHT, which says, in part:

An article should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject. For example, discussion of isolated events, criticisms, or news reports about a subject may be verifiable and neutral, but still be disproportionate to their overall significance to the article topic. This is a concern especially in relation to recent events that may be in the news. Note that undue weight can be given in several ways, including, but not limited to, depth of detail, quantity of text, prominence of placement, and juxtaposition of statements.

If there was a pattern of incidents, noted by a reliable source, or the nightclub had a reputation (again, noted by a reliable source) for violent incidents connected with its patrons, then discussion of that aspect of the club would be acceptabale, but a single isolated incident has no place in the article, even if it is sourced (as this one was, by the BBC). I have warned the editor -- under his or her multiple addresses -- not to continue to attempt to add this information. He or she may, of course, come here and discuss it in the hope that a consensus of editors will agree that the information should be in the article, but in the absence of such a consensus, the information will continue to be reverted, and if the attempts continue, without discussion, they will be considered to be vandalism, for editing against policy and without consensus. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:06, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

P2P Lawsuits[edit]

This article is lacking anything on their controversial file-sharing lawsuit campaign. http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1723229/ministry-sound-sues-alleged-filesharers http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2010/jul/17/file-sharers-legal-action-music-downloads http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/ministry-of-sound-chases-thousands-of-file-sharing-brits-703966

Something so controversial being blatantly left out of the article makes it read like the Ministry of Sound wrote it themselves! Infernoapple (talk) 04:57, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you think it's important to have in the article, why not write it up and add it? Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:53, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ministry of Sound logo.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Ministry of Sound logo.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:44, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Conflict of Interest editing[edit]

It should be noted that 62.244.189.244 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) resolves to MSHK Ltd, one of the Ministry of Sound companies owned by James Palumbo. The IP has also been editing the James Palumbo article, and others in the Category:Ministry of Sound. I have placed a Conflict of Interest warning on the IP's talk page, and shall be keeping an eye on things. I shall also raise the issue at Admin noticeboard. DuncanHill (talk) 15:22, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ministry of Sound. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:28, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:08, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this page language selection separated from the spanish page[edit]

Just went on to search for some ministry of sound details and found that this page is not linked to some other languages, as is there are completely different pages. 2800:2181:E400:62F:FC71:7EC4:8F79:B5CC (talk) 17:11, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ministry_of_Sound&oldid=1209083710"