Talk:OOoOO

According to Last.fm, oOoOO has more listeners than the similar White Ring (21,880 vs. 12,876). As White Ring currently has a Wikipedia page, it is only reasonable that oOoOO have one as well, as oOoOO is just as notable, if not more so, than White Ring. Furthermore, various sources have pointed to oOoOO as a pioneer of the Drag sound, making the project even more notable.Blackmagnetictape (talk) 04:03, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Drag itself is contested term for a supposed mirco-genre which is heavily unknown, with little to no history. Only in recent months have releases and recent hype surface from entertainment-gossip-gype sites and departments. This seems more like promotion than anything else Diskotech (talk) 22:45, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

The age of a band or genre has no bearing on it's notability. It has been well documented by a variety of cited sources. To call something "Heavily unknown" when it has received extensive media attention in high-profile news sources is absurd. The most recent release has been reviewed by many publications, and the band has received a great deal of media attention. This in and of itself is notable.Blackmagnetictape (talk) 04:38, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on OOoOO. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101123041749/http://www.batheticrecords.com:80/dark_as_night/ to http://www.batheticrecords.com/dark_as_night/

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:05, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 30 September 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved (closed by non-admin page mover)Kostas20142 (talk) 18:26, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

---

OOoOO → Ooooo – Unnecessary stylization. — Zawl 15:07, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose the title is completely opaque and unhelpful to readers already, but at least oOoOO gives a clue that it'll be something entertainment related. Ooooo might be mistaken for a noise or a math article. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:52, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose per User:In ictu oculi. Funny, I see this as an example of necessary stylization. —  AjaxSmack  20:35, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose, clearly necessary stylization. bd2412 T 11:55, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

101010010110010100101010100101010101010