Talk:Son of a Plumber

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

Pop music Low‑importance

	Pop music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop 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.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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.

Neutrality

I love this album, but the article is ridiculously fanboyish, with none of the formality and neutrality one would expect to find in an encyclopedia article. I agree with all of the superlatives thrown at the album, and Gessle's talent, but it has no place here.--190.37.176.12 23:26, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that there are superlatives, however it is in a musical analysis section which should highlight the good and bad points of an album. I think it should stay, or perhaps be modified to be a bit less biased!! Kojack0 08:09, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But the problem is that the analysis seems to have been done by the contributor himself. That is original research, which is not acceptable on Wikipedia. Citing reputable third-party reviews would be fine, but simply adding one's own opinions is not. I think this is the best album Per has ever done, but we can't just throw that in the article without a reputable source to back it up.--RicardoC 16:58, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nearly 20 years later, but I hope I've finally fixed these issues. ;) Homeostasis07 (talk/contributions) 23:05, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Son of a Plumber. 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/20110616145813/http://www.ifpi.se/wp/wp-content/uploads/ar-20051.pdf to http://www.ifpi.se/wp/wp-content/uploads/ar-20051.pdf

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) 14:13, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]