Talk:The Pass (song)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs 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.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

Rock music

	Rock music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock 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.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Please Replace Original Material (theory) With Citable Fact Or Delete

I tried to do this and was reverted by an anonymous user.

The contents of the article as it stands right now are one person's opinion/interpretation; ie. "original theory". It also directly contradicts statements made by the author of the song that is the subject of the article.

Remove the opinion and put in facts/cites attributable to the author of the song that is the subject of the article (I tried to do this but was reverted to the prior opinioned piece) or delete the article completely.

Having someone's pet opinion here in lieu of easily referenced fact is more harmful than no entry at all.

http://www.nimitz.net/rush/faq3ans.html#128

That's a cite/quote from the author of the song that is the subject of the article, from a reliable source. And the original source for for the cite/quote isn't too far behind that.

The current entry is an embarrassment to Wikipedia standards and to the subject of the article. It's hard to take Wikipedia as a reliable resource with entries like this.

I can see how the anonymous user who reverted my changes may have believed he/she was acting in the interest of WP standards, but what's currently there is far worse.

Thanks.

-- ManfrenjenStJohn 22:49, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Please Replace Original Material (theory) With Citable Fact Or Delete

Just wanted to add that I understand why my changes were removed -- In fact, it has helped me to learn WP standards better. I would have preferred it if the anonymous user explained his/her reasons.

I've modified the entry to conform to WikiP standards to the best of my knowledge. There is one unsourced statement that needs a citation. If you want to keep it, fill it in.

--

ManfrenjenStJohn 23:19, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BTW. on talkpages it is best to use a colon before your reply like i did instead of creating a new heading. ~~I think the unsourced statement should be removed. Although original research can be interesting, it belongs at a different projects.~~ FrodoBaggins (blackhat999) (talk) 19:35, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Added citation. It turns out this was an official statement by Rush. FrodoBaggins (blackhat999) (talk) 19:35, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]