Talk:Koloss
Add topic | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Last album in infobox
[edit]Should this point to Alive (Meshuggah video), whose infobox points to the previous Meshuggah video (the DVD released with Re-Nothing), or to obZen, the previous album? I think obZen, but would like to hear more input. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 04:25, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
- Well, my input would be that the infobox navigation system should be chronological all the way, as opposed to chronological by certain types and having multiple chronologies. That way, the interested party would be going through the whole discography as opposed to just parts after parts. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 07:54, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
- That seems reasonable, if we then go back to Alive and link it to obZen. Sound like a plan? MrMoustacheMM (talk) 17:42, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Edit request on 29 February 2012
[edit] | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
- [removed copy/paste of article]
99.241.162.221 (talk) 17:43, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- Please don't copy/paste the wikitext of the article in your request. If you have something specific you want changed, just limit the request to the minimum amount of information we would need to identify where in the article you want the change to occur. Thanks, — Bility (talk) 18:26, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Review Removed
[edit]Why was the Metal Injection review removed? It is one of the biggest metal sites on the web, ranked in the top 100k Alexa sites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.229.125.175 (talk) 21:27, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
- Well, can you back up the statement that "it is one of the biggest metal sites on the web"? That is a quite vague statement in itself. Also, how would being in the top 100k of the Alexa rank, alongside 99,999 other websites, establish notability? For further information on what sites can be used on Wikipdia for reviews, see WP:ALBUMS/REVSITE. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 23:50, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
- That was the only one I hesitated to remove, but it's not on REVSITE, and I couldn't find anything on the site itself that made me think it was a reliable source. Also, under the Help Wanted section, they're looking for bloggers, which makes me think it's a blog site, which isn't generally considered reliable according to WP:RS. However, I'm open to discussion if the site can be shown to be reliable. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 00:39, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Popstache?
[edit]Is this Popstache site reliable in any way? They're also on a "Blogroll", which makes me think "blog" (and therefore not reliable). Looks like another non-notable site to me, and thus another unnecessary review. Also not on REVSITE. I'm also concerned that the user who added this review appears to be a single purpose account (or possibly a conflict of interest, I'm not sure which (both?) apply here), whose edits consist entirely of adding reviews from this Popstache site. Keep? Delete? (I think delete). MrMoustacheMM (talk) 22:24, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
- Because of that rationale, I think I will remove it. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 06:33, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
[edit]The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:55, 15 June 2022 (UTC)