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: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I don't know very much about this band, but the article seems too "fan-based" and not neutral.-- Palindrome7 17:15, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. There is way too much POV in the article. BreakerLOLZ 23:55, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
I also agree. But: please listen to my arguments for keeping the text as it is. Being a music fan, I read about music as much as I can; I must have read about a million texts on Wikipedia about various bands or performers. This article has to be THE most beautiful article on a band in the entire encyclopedia, ever! It IS biased, but the style, the composition, the logic of the article is flawless, and you cannot object to the data either. It is clearly the work of a fan, the sentimental overtones pour out of every sentence, but the text does not lack credibility. Please don't change it, because this is still a good article. Horizont Ocekivanja ( talk) 19:09, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
In fact, this article appears to be a straight rip-off of the bio on the band's own webite: http://www.uds.nl/biography.htm ... Radioflux ( talk) 01:16, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
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: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I don't know very much about this band, but the article seems too "fan-based" and not neutral.-- Palindrome7 17:15, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. There is way too much POV in the article. BreakerLOLZ 23:55, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
I also agree. But: please listen to my arguments for keeping the text as it is. Being a music fan, I read about music as much as I can; I must have read about a million texts on Wikipedia about various bands or performers. This article has to be THE most beautiful article on a band in the entire encyclopedia, ever! It IS biased, but the style, the composition, the logic of the article is flawless, and you cannot object to the data either. It is clearly the work of a fan, the sentimental overtones pour out of every sentence, but the text does not lack credibility. Please don't change it, because this is still a good article. Horizont Ocekivanja ( talk) 19:09, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
In fact, this article appears to be a straight rip-off of the bio on the band's own webite: http://www.uds.nl/biography.htm ... Radioflux ( talk) 01:16, 1 May 2008 (UTC)