Talk:Going Blank Again

Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified

I'd love to see this become a featured article

edit

Don't know where I'd find the sources, but this album needs justice - in my opinion, it's better than Loveless (album), which is a featured article.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 00:59, 30 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

I've expanded it a bit. Maybe I'll expand it more.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 06:37, 30 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
It's annoying that Google Books won't let me see the full sources for stuff which could be useful to expanding the article.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 07:02, 30 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

The problem is that Loveless has a story behind it; it was influential, popular in the US, and it remains simultaneously the shoegazing album and a superb example of a unique and awesome style. Although Going Blank Again is a great listen it doesn't really have a story to tell. The bands it influenced were swept away by Britpop, and what is there to say? It's not enough for a featured article to cover the topic as thoroughly as possible, the topic itself has to merit such coverage. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 20:44, 5 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Going Blank Again. 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) 03:37, 17 January 2018 (UTC)Reply