![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 1 December 2008 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mfl, I don't think blogs, no matter where they are, have much authority. The New York Times has a blog too--standards are simply lower and expectations are less. That's why they're blogs. I hadn't looked at those magazines because they weren't listed in the article, and my subscription to those magazines ran out. However, and here's a note on verifiability, if those magazines would be cited, and the citation looks alright, I'll take you on your word. Now, the lack of a hair salon actually helps there: boring old drudges like me are more likely to believe you and take you seriously if you write, well, boring. Believe me--I'm working on a work evaluation, and my boss told me to take out all the jokes (I had some really good ones).
So bring in those articles, cite from them, give a proper reference (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners, and then Wikipedia:Template_messages/Sources_of_articles/Citation_quick_reference). But simply mentioning that those magazines say that this or that band is hot shit won't convince many people: place it in a context, just like in the research paper in freshman comp-I'm sure they teach that too at UNC ;) Cite! Unless, of course, the mention of VV isn't all that major...
In short: if (IF!) those magazine articles are about VV (not just mentioning the band in passing), and there's the article from the Newsobserver (the first, not the second--that's not enough by itself), and that Indy blog, then I think the article will stand (you understand, I, nor any other individual, makes these decisions). Does that help? We're all on the same team here, and I'll be glad to help. Though I think I like my music a bit louder than what VV has to offer. Drmies ( talk) 04:28, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 1 December 2008 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mfl, I don't think blogs, no matter where they are, have much authority. The New York Times has a blog too--standards are simply lower and expectations are less. That's why they're blogs. I hadn't looked at those magazines because they weren't listed in the article, and my subscription to those magazines ran out. However, and here's a note on verifiability, if those magazines would be cited, and the citation looks alright, I'll take you on your word. Now, the lack of a hair salon actually helps there: boring old drudges like me are more likely to believe you and take you seriously if you write, well, boring. Believe me--I'm working on a work evaluation, and my boss told me to take out all the jokes (I had some really good ones).
So bring in those articles, cite from them, give a proper reference (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners, and then Wikipedia:Template_messages/Sources_of_articles/Citation_quick_reference). But simply mentioning that those magazines say that this or that band is hot shit won't convince many people: place it in a context, just like in the research paper in freshman comp-I'm sure they teach that too at UNC ;) Cite! Unless, of course, the mention of VV isn't all that major...
In short: if (IF!) those magazine articles are about VV (not just mentioning the band in passing), and there's the article from the Newsobserver (the first, not the second--that's not enough by itself), and that Indy blog, then I think the article will stand (you understand, I, nor any other individual, makes these decisions). Does that help? We're all on the same team here, and I'll be glad to help. Though I think I like my music a bit louder than what VV has to offer. Drmies ( talk) 04:28, 2 December 2008 (UTC)