Talk:Girls (band)

Latest comment: 7 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified

The band has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician or ensemble itself and reliable.

The band has received non-trivial coverage in a reliable source of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country.

The band has had a charted single or album on any national music chart.

Examples:

http://cgi.sfbg.com/entry.php?entry_id=9122&catid=107 http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/13477-album/ http://pitchfork.com/features/staff-lists/7572-the-100-best-tracks-of-2008/ http://www.emusic.com/charts/ch/b/-dbt/b/0-0/553/0.html

Don't delete this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Howl5 (talkcontribs) 22:53, 30 September 2009 (UTC)Reply


Who the hell are those ugly kids in the current photo [[1]]? That is clearly not them... [[2]] --98.243.208.146 (talk) 02:06, 30 June 2010 (UTC)Reply


The claims to notability of this band appear overstated. Dates are missing from points in the article where there should be dates. The claim that the band is the subject of non-trivial published works is equivocal. Once one has cleared away the trivial (and some of these ARE blogs), there is this issue: is the band the subject or is it merely mentioned? Is it mentioned in one of those e-lists where the band member can provide the only vote that exists? Is it mentioned because one can pay for the service? Could this simply be yet another study in self-promotion that has for some reason drifted into Wikipedia? All that said, it is true that Girls #10 in Pitchfork's list of top 50 albums for 2009. It is true that Pitchfork is one non-trivial indie mention. 71.114.60.49 (talk) 20:25, 15 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

So improve the article. Search Google and you'll find plenty of sources that can be used.--Michig (talk) 22:04, 15 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Girls (band). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:17, 17 October 2017 (UTC)Reply