Talk:Cultural impact of the Beach Boys

Orphaned references in Cultural impact of the Beach Boys

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Cultural impact of the Beach Boys's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Stylus":

• From Smile (The Beach Boys album): "The Stylus Magazine Non-Definitive Guide: The Lost Album". Stylus Magazine. September 2, 2003. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |website= (help)
• From Adult/Child: "The Stylus Magazine Non-Definitive Guide: The Lost Album". Stylus Magazine. September 2, 2003. Retrieved 13 July 2014.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 00:40, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Attribution

@JG66:

(WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV) Avoid the temptation to rephrase biased or opinion statements with weasel words, for example, "Many people think John Doe is the best baseball player." But "Who?" and "How many?" are natural objections. An exception is a situation where a phrase such as "Most people think" can be supported by a reliable source, such as in the reporting of a survey of opinions within the group.

The relevant claim is "one of the most critically acclaimed, commercially successful, and widely influential bands". These are not subjective assertions. You can observe the band's "critical acclaim" and "commercial success" at acclaimedmusic.net (Pet Sounds at #1) and List of best-selling music artists (the band sharing the #31 position with the Who, Chicago, McCartney, etc). "Widely influential" is harder to quantify, but it's an uncontroversial statement that receives a degree of substantiation in this very article. This removes it from being a WP:REDFLAG.

(WP:INTEXT) It is preferable not to clutter articles with information best left to the references. Interested readers can click on the ref to find out the publishing journal: ... Simple facts ... can have inline citations to reliable sources as an aid to the reader, but normally the text itself is best left as a plain statement without in-text attribution:

--Ilovetopaint (talk) 12:39, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cultural impact of the Beach Boys. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141204153729/http://www.techgnosis.com/index_beach.html to http://www.techgnosis.com/index_beach.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://sks.sirs.swb.orc.scoolaid.net/cgi-bin/hst-article-display?id=SNY5419-0-6412&type=ART&artno=0000075107

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 10:18, 3 December 2016 (UTC)