Talk:The Badlees

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Unsourced fancruft

Over the past few days, User:Riverofrock and User:IzzyJim have added a massive amount of fancruft to this article. Per WP:TNT, I would like to restore this version of the article and go from there. Furthermore, these two editors have created pages on many albums and songs. I'm going to go through them, but I'd like some input. Chubbles (you seem to watch this article), do you have any problems with this? Furthermore, Chubbles, is there any point in looking into this [1], [2], [3], [4]? . Thanks -- Nolelover It's football season! 19:44, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TNT is a pretty terrible essay, although blanket reverts of long series of questionable edits are sometimes necessary. I don't know if the accounts editing this article are the same person or not, but they're probably either band members or people who know the band personally; sometimes there just isn't anyone else who cares enough to do anything, and I can hardly blame them for wanting to spruce the page up. I don't think the changes are all bad, but there's some really bad ad-copy in the article now, which I'll see about copyediting today. Chubbles (talk) 19:52, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nolelover,

If you check out this page, you'll notice that the Modern Rock Review article (that is cited) has about 80 distinct sources that span 22 years. http://www.modernrockreview.com/Features/2010-1010_Badlees/A-B.php#Bibliography I'll add each of these sources to the page, if it satisfies your standards. I just have not had time to do so to this point.

It is true, that writers at The River of Rock have added much this weekend, but that is only because there has been been (and still is) a tremendous lack of representation of Pennsylvania music on Wikipedia, AMG, and other fine Internet resources.

We will be adding plenty of material on many artists in the near future. We started with the Badlees because they have been one of the more susccessful and prolific of these artists. We are not members of the Badlees, nor agents of the band, nor affiliated in any way beyond their cooperation with the research we have conducted over the past months. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Riverofrock (talkcontribs) 20:10, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]


  • What is the status on this? We've added sources and have stated that this is not "fancruft". We'd like to get back to editing these articles as well as multitudes more in the future but do not want to further offend the overlords. So how should we proceed?

--Riverofrock (talk) 00:10, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on The Badlees. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 08:18, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]