Jump to content

Talk:Shearwater (band)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

comment

[edit]

any chance of a picture showing the entire band?

Anyone want to pick one out from here: [1]? H3xx 22:02, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

did will sheff leave the band? 70.104.16.31 00:50, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone heard of the new release of Palo Santo? I torrented one that has two discs in it and NOBODY seems to know where the hell it came from. H3xx 22:02, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


What the hell? 'emo rock'? 157.193.5.69 (talk) 21:21, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Shearwater.jpg

[edit]

Image:Shearwater.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:39, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

BrillLyle: The fact that other articles have Twitter and Facebook links is not a reason to keep them on this one, see WP:OSE. The guideline I quoted, WP:ELMINOFFICIAL, is very clear on this matter: "Normally, only one official link is included... if the main page of the official website for an author [read: band] contains a link to the author's blog and Twitter feed [which this one does], then it is not appropriate to provide links to all three." Please explain why you think we should go against the guideline in this case. Thanks, --Viennese Waltz 16:16, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Viennese Waltz: Agree that just because it's a common occurrence doesn't make it right, but it does call into question -- at least to my mind -- that it might need to be a policy that is re-addressed, especially given the prevalence of both Twitter and Facebook for many entities. I think it's impractical to delete the links, especially since they are super active resources. Shearwater uses both their Twitter, but especially their Facebook, to communicate news and information directly to the public online. More even, I believe, than their website. So while I wouldn't usually list the Facebook as a link it seems like it would be an absolute oversight to not list it here. Twitter as well. Would these reasons be enough of an exception to the official guidelines? Please advise. -- Erika aka BrillLyle (talk) 16:42, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just to let you know, I'm also a fan of the band and have also been posting in the threads on their facebook page in the past couple of days like you have. I know they use facebook and twitter a lot and like you I want to see this new record do well but I really can't see why that should trump Wikipedia guidance. Further guidance is given at WP:ELNO #10 and WP:ELPEREN. FWIW I fully agree with the guideline, I don't think facebook and twitter links are encyclopaedic. The official website has prominent links to both social media sites. If the guideline (for that's what it is, not an official policy) should be re-addressed then that is something that should be raised on the guideline's talk page. I've therefore had to revert your adding back of the links, but please feel free to discuss further on this talk page. -- Viennese Waltz 09:00, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm disappointed. I think it's a mistake to take them off, especially because it reduces the helpfulness of the external links section if it's not a practical application of the band's web presence. Not a fan of many Wikipedia policies that I think actually hurt the entries, so pretty much disagree completely with this reversion. But thanks for talking about it on the Talk page. -- Erika aka BrillLyle (talk) 14:21, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Shearwater (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) 20:31, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Shearwater_(band)&oldid=1205269573"