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.

Biography: Musicians

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians.

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted on 28 July 2009 by reviewer Bovineone (talk · contribs).

Sweden Low‑importance

	Sweden portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles 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.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Reliance on Stephen Colbert references

Untitled

I feel that we are at risk of turning this article into an article on what Colbert says about the band. While I agree that him bringing them onto the show (After discovering them on reddit!?) is a huge step towards gaining popularity in the US (perhaps even the world) and should be mentioned. We could perhaps look for other sources on the relevant things he says? Such as the rise in popularity on Amazon.com. --Dront (talk) 02:42, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t know if you’re joking or not. The whole Wikipedia is made up of stuff that some random person said, as long as it’s written on a site that sounds somehow like an authority and not on Wikipedia. Which of course makes no fuckin’ sense at all, since there is no absolute scale to measure reliability in terms of closeness to reality, since it’s 99% based on trust in the source, which is a very personal thing, and 1% on logical proof and measurements, which is called “original research” and for retarded reasons a taboo here anyway. And after that, people still reject everything that does not fit their world view, since a neural network by definition can’t process/store such a thing. (I’m an expert in these things, and can prove neurologically, why it’s the same thing as fear of death for a brain.) Additionally, the source itself usually also has its own trust-relationship with its source, and so on. Often many times. Finally, to make this joke of lying-to-oneself a total failure, you sometimes end up with Wikipedia as the original source again.
So as the final effect, some admin group decided the reliability thing on their own views of trust and their own mental model of reality, which makes Wikipedia about as reliable as a Nazi propaganda magazine. The only difference to that, is that the Wikinazis’ view usually overlaps the average users’ mostly. Which only makes it better, if you like being ignorant in case you (and them) are wrong. So don’t start about reality, or you’re looking like an idiot. (Not saying that you are. Since this all may be news to you. But if you now still would ask thin, I’d have to call you one, based on proper logic. ^^ But I doubt that it comes to that.)
—188.100.192.146 (talk) 03:25, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: There are even studies out there, proving this. Like the one mentioned here: http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-10309840-71.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.100.192.146 (talk) 03:28, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How is your comment even vaguely related to mine which pointed out that perhaps we need a multitude of sources instead of using a single one for vast multitude of facts which could be supported elsewhere (such as sales records on Amazon)? I would say that the one appearing as a bit out of touch with reality here is the person trying to force a lengthy POV reply to fit a question which is completely unrelated.

"And after that, people still reject everything that does not fit their world view, since a neural network by definition can’t process/store such a thing. (I’m an expert in these things, and can prove neurologically, why it’s the same thing as fear of death for a brain.)" If you can show me that on my talk page I bet you can get a paper into a journal (if it has not already been published). Mind you, if you are basing your conclusions on an Artificial neural network I hope that you don't think it reflects biology too much. But as I said, my talk page, since it is not related to this wiki page. -- Dront (talk) 04:24, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Movits!. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090802123736/http://www.digfi.com/p3lab/Default.aspx?id=8732 to http://www.digfi.com/p3lab/Default.aspx?id=8732

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) 07:15, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]