| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Untitled
editWe need to keep racist point of views out of Wikipedia. Good job at reversing the racist stupidity.
"This article does not cite any references or sources?"
Sources for what exactly? Can the person who put the tag on give an example of something in this article that needs a source or a reference? Audiori (talk) 06:32, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- I agree. I don't see anything in this article that is even questionable. What needs sourceS? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.66.143.175 (talk) 19:23, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Everything needs sources. Doesn't matter if you guys know it's a fact, but everyone else has no idea if this is actually a band, or if those are correct album names, or if the yare still active, and so on. Only things that are universal truths (e.g, sky is blue) don't need sources. Please read up on WP:V, WP:CITE, WP:RS, and WP:OR. 124.186.135.244 (talk) 06:01, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- So what you're saying is... every single line needs a source? "The band released such and such album in this year" and that needs a source link? Thats crazy. Thats also not true of any article on Wikipedia. Should we go through every article and put a "needs reference or source" tag on every sentence? Audiori (talk) 02:51, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Checking your link.. it says
- "All material in Wikipedia articles must be attributable to a reliable published source to show that it is not original research, 'but in practice not everything need actually be attributed. This policy requires that anything challenged or likely to be challenged, including all quotations, be attributed to a reliable source' in the form of an inline citation, and that the source directly support the material in question."
- So not everything needs a source.. just anything that is challenged or likely to be challenged. So the question is, what is being challenged in this article? Audiori (talk) 02:53, 30 April 2010 (UTC)