This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Roots music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to roots, folk and traditional folk music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Roots musicWikipedia:WikiProject Roots musicTemplate:WikiProject Roots musicRoots music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
The link itself isn't dead. It goes to the latest page of the reviews archive. However, there is no content there. There is no June 23, 2003 review on the Rolling Stone site. There is a June 9 review of an Elvis Presley album and June 18 reviews of R.E.M. and Black Eyed Peas. There is no result in searching the website. There is no indication there was ever any content there. I'll leave things as is for right now, in case there is a reply to this. Otherwise, after a reasonable time, I will remove all references to it. Holford (talk) 05:02, 29 November 2011 (UTC)Reply
It is a deadlink. It redirects to a different location because the review has been removed. You will leave things as they are forever unless you can find a current link on the site (I couldn't which is why I added the deadlink tag) or an archived version at someplace like wayback machine. If no ref can be found, it's perfectly acceptable to leave it since the media was also in print. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:12, 29 November 2011 (UTC)Reply
