 | This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Brooklyn may be able to help! The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Comment
editI have to go soon, but I will definitely explain the notability later today. I'm impressed with how fast you put in the speedy deletion tag btw. There's plenty of reviews out there, the band has connections with another notable band, and they're incredibly unique. The medieval vocals and awkward rhythms are a notable feature. Also they were recommended by Battles if that helps. From the dusted magazine review: "Every so often there's a record so accomplished that it makes most albums of its type sound ridiculous, and Secular Works is one of those" Pwrong (talk) 01:33, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
- The problem is that all material on Wikipedia must be verified by reliable sources. A MySpace page is not by any means a reliable source, and "Dusted magazine" may not be either. The relevant policies are WP:RS and WP:V. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:19, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
- Is there a list somewhere of reliable sources for music articles? Or some way to determine whether a source is reliable? Dusted Magazine has a wikipedia article, so does Stereogum and Rate Your Music.Pwrong (talk) 07:03, 26 November 2008 (UTC)