Wikipedia

Talk:Deep Blue Something

Latest comment: 7 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Learn more about this page

Merge

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago11 comments9 people in discussion
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result was do not merge into Deep Blue Something. -- DarkCrowCaw 12:30, 6 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Songs and albums that do not meet WP:N and WP:MUSIC by having independent significant coverage about the album or song itself should be merged to the artist. Active Banana (talk) 20:30, 3 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Playtime of MTV doesnt really count as coverage about the topic by reliable sources. Assuming it was "hot" there should be some type of sources that should be added to the article and thereby we would all be happy! Active Banana (talk) 19:46, 14 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
  • The idea that every song which merely happens to have been a chart hit needs an independent article which documents only the chart positions that the song attained, and doesn't have any referenced content about the song's actual impact on the real world, is utterly mystifying and definitely needs to be killed dead with fire. John Lennon's "Imagine" is a notable song independently of whether it ever charted or not, because you can actually document genuine impact and cultural influence — but "Breakfast at Tiffany's" is practically the textbook example of a song whose raw chart performance is the only thing that makes it any more notable than any other song on the album, because it's just a pretty pop song that really didn't have any documentably lasting impact on anything past the end of its chart run. We don't need to become a generic, contentless directory of every song that ever happened to make it onto a pop chart; we need to be a lot more discriminating than that. That said, my general preference when it comes to music is to keep the albums and then redirect the songs to them instead of redirecting everything to the band. Bearcat (talk) 19:32, 21 August 2010 (UTC)Reply
  • I tend to agree with Bearcat on this. I'd vote to keep the albums and merge song information into those articles. In the case of Deep Blue Something I think it makes sense to include the discography with the article about the band. If it's necessary to have a longer article about Breakfast at Tiffany's then I think that should be merged into the band's article as well- it's a reasonably well-known song (I think it was #1 in the UK) but it's not as influential or really merit the same coverage as, say, Stairway to Heaven.
I also vote to merge the Todd Pipes article with Deep Blue Something, at least until more notable information about him becomes available. If the article becomes too large then the subjects can be separated later.
IrishPete 22:46, 21 August 2010 (UTC)Reply
  • Do not merge. Albums do meet the WP:NMUSIC criteria, as the ensemble is notable and the albums have been mentioned in multiple reliable sources (for example: [1], [2], [3] for Home). The song Breakfast at Tiffany's also meets the criteria as it is well known, and have charted in the USA. Vanjagenije (talk) 14:45, 27 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
  • Keep albums, because there is a lot of information out there regarding the controversy surrounding legal challenges for each album, which doesn't need to be shoehorned into the band's bio. 11th Song for instance caused friction with the band due to a copyright fight years after. Further Byzantium was never released in the United States due to the popularity of Home in Europe. Still further, there's their self title's release on the now defunct Aezra Records and the problems artists have had with that label in terms of distribution. All these are relevant topics to each album that would be better served if each album had its own topic, versus being put in the Deep Blue Something article. In addition, the track lists are notable since many of their songs appear on more than one album. Removing the track lists would lead to a loss in information and lead to confusion by readers interested in knowing such information. Thorburn (talk) 08:10, 5 June 2011 (UTC)Reply
gotsources? Active Banana (bananaphone 08:21, 5 June 2011 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Deep Blue Something. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:01, 8 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Deep Blue Something. 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, 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) 01:55, 10 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Deep_Blue_Something&oldid=1201419827"