Talk:Glay

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

Respect the Wikipedia style guidelines[edit]

"Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules even if the trademark owner encourages special treatment, e.g. avoid: REALTOR® instead, use: Realtor"

"All proper names should be capitalized in the body of the text." (noting that 'capitalized' is not ALL CAPS)

"Avoid using special characters that are not pronounced"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_%28trademarks%29#General_rules

(Special exceptions are trademarks with initial uncapitalized letters such as iPod and CamelCase)

Reduce track titles on albums where all tracks are in all capitals to title case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_%28capital_letters%29#All_caps


Most of the arguments that I see about retaining letters 'because that's the artist's official name for the album/song/person' misunderstand the role of the encyclopedia: to inform about the topic, not to display in the body typographically these 'official' names. The place to do that is sidebars and album notes at the end of an article which can inform of these typographic vagaries - the body text should not. English readers simply are interested in legibility.

Whatever people's feeling about this, it is still important to respect style guidelines which have been developed over hundreds of years for a good reason. Nobody can arbitrarily over-ride these 'official' guidelines. Of course, common sense should be observed and the occasional judgement call (ABBA, for example) can be made but having the names in this article in all-caps/small letters goes against Wikipedia rules.

In short, use sidebars and end-notes to display official styles - not the body of the text. I'll be making changes in a week or so to the page to reflect the rules of Wikipedia and the correct way to style English in an encyclopedic setting. If anyone has objections, feel free to discuss it here within the framework of the official style guidelines. If you don't discuss it here, don't moan about such changes later :-) My common sense call is to leave GLAY itself all caps. Macgruder 12:11, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Important Titles Note for ALL artists (please copy this on other asian artist talk pages)[edit]

I must note something very important for future editors of this page (also try to observe this for any non English speaking band or author... etc): If you see a single, album, dvd, concert, or book title that contains poor grammar, please consider that even though the English spelling or grammar may be incorrect, that it still may actually be the official title. If someone is searching for the single, and cannot find it the official way... then what good is wiki? Please do not tamper with titles unless you have found hard evidence that the title has been written incorrectly from the official spelling. also note, some OFFICIAL japanese titles are titled in all CAPS (or with stars and hearts or other "non-letter/number characters) this is NOT a mistake, please leave them like this. All one must do is observe the picture or written info of the single/album/book on the official page which is linked in the article at the bottom. Please help keep wikipedia encyclopedic and correct! Thank you. -- NatsukiGirl\talk 04:13, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, can you provide arguments on why should we break the convention? why not putting redirects in the all uppercase titles? The article text could use uppercase, but I don't see compelling arguments for changing the convention of the title. Also, for the "people wil lsearch for the upper case title", well, that's what the redirects solve. So far I haven't seen a discussion (perhaps you can point it to me) and since there's no consensus yet, I suggest not to change albums titles to uppercase (as in AROUND THE WORLD from the existing titles). -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 04:16, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not change the locations[edit]

The locations/venues for GLAY EXPO 2001 are exact translations from the official website and were confirmed with a search. Please do not change them to inaccurate locations (in regards to the change form Kitakyushuu to Kyuushuu).

--Ladymercury 21:04, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Misspelling[edit]

I've heard that Glay became their name because they accidently misspelled their name at an early/first(?) live and decided to stick with it. The reason given now for the misspelling that they 'wanted to be different' being perhaps used in retrospect when it became apparent that to English-speakers' eyes at least this particular misspelling (deliberate or not) is a disaster of epic proportions. It would be difficult to prove either way, but misspellings that coincide with common misspellings are rarely if ever used for commercial reasons especially when the misspelling doesn't appear to be deliberate. (Compare deciding to call your band The Recievers. ) Macgruder 15:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Revert POV back[edit]

"Due to their musical diversity, beautiful lyrics and wonderful melodies"

This is POV


"The Beatles also influenced this misspelling, as they had purposely misspelled their own band name ("beetle" became "beatle"). "

This has no citation. Beatle is not a misspelling. It is a play on words. 'Beat' is a word. Glay is a straight misspelling. The connection between Gray-->Glay, and Beetle--> Beat + Beetle --> Beatle is tenuous at best.

"they have become one of the most successful and well known bands in Japan, and most of Asia."

This needs a citation. What is 'most of Asia'?


It's clear that the writer of these elements is a 'fan'. There are many online tools to write a fanzine if that's what's required. Wikipedia is not the place though.

Macgruder 19:49, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a Fanzine. Do not revert without discussion[edit]

This whole article reads like the gushing commentary of a fan. Wikipedia is not a place for fans of the band to try to promote them by saying how 'wonderful' they are etc:

"Due to their musical diversity, beautiful lyrics and wonderful melodies,..."

"Unlike many bands, GLAY makes their music according to what they feel, not what others tell them to do. Because of this all of their songs come straight from their hearts. Their thoughts and feelings of their surrounding days is put into music so everyone is able to share a small part of their lives. With inspiration coming from various people and musicians from all over the world, mixed with the courage to try something new, GLAY's sound is truly unique and one that is always evolving."

The above two are the worst examples, and have been reworded or removed.

Due to the dispute regarding the name of the band, everyone should remember to adhere to Wikipedia policy and not revert and article back without discussion and reasons. Saying 'it was fine before' is not a reason. Macgruder 04:51, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Different opinions about the name[edit]

Whether there are different opinions about the name is irrelevant to whether the discussion is included. It's precisely differences of opinions that Wikipedia reports. Admittedly the citations could be better. I'm not sure why the editors of this page are so desperate to hide the issue of the name. The Beatles never had to say "The Beatles (btw. that's a deliberate misspelling", Google neither. What fans should do I guess is write Glay (sic). It would save a lot of typing.

Addition of cleanup tag[edit]

This article needs a cleanup. It suffers from:

Some non-encyclopedic style English:

"continuously producing one #1 hit after the other, with very little time to rest."


Non citated, fanzine, and/or weazel words. e.g.

"By being able to work with many foreign professionals, they gained a different perspective into the music industry from different parts of the world and were able to change and shape their band's sound to become something different from "typical" Japanese rock"

"Although GLAY's style had once again changed in "THE FRUSTRATED", it was a change that still retained the classic GLAY sound that made them rise to the top, and yet introduced new dimensions to their music which presented fans with something fresh and exciting"

And many more. Macgruder 14:34, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalization of member names[edit]

In Japan, artists like to work with the aesthetics of romanized words when it comes to proper nouns. Some times it's spelled with capital letters, like GLAY members'. Some times it's spelled with small letters, like L'Arc~en~Ciel members' (hyde, tetsu, ken, yukihiro). Some times it's mixed up and has unusual symbols like a dot or a star. That also applies to songs, CDs, etc. iori

"aesthetics of romanized words". Hardly. Capitalizing all words has nothing to do with the aesthetics of romanized words, and is amongst native speakers the typographic equivalent of shouting. It's more likely the use of capitalized names is to suit the typography of kanji which is essentially square and has no descenders (g, j, y etc) . There is no good reason to capitalize names in the English because it doesn't have a good typographic reason to do so. It makes Japanese artists look like they studied typography from that well-known tome: "Typography for 6 year olds" because having bolded names throughout English text has no aesthetic quality to speak of but instead, in English, at least looks like a name desperately striving for attention. Macgruder 03:56, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"It's more likely the use of capitalized names is to suit the typography of kanji". This is not true. Just look at the exemples I gave. Japanese artists and media also spells romanized names all in small letters or mixing them. So it has all to do with how it looks, the visual aspect of the words. GLAY members also use small letters on some songs/CD titles. iori 30 December 2006
But a big majority are all caps. Mixing up the capitalization is a minor part of typographic aesthetic when compared with other elements such as typeface etc. There is a limit to what can be said to be the 'official' elements of a name when it comes to specifying how the name should be written in text. For example, ABBA's officially reversed the first B in their name, but since that element does not exist in standard typographic elements their typed name remains ABBA. The addition of a dot or a star, simplistic as it is, could either be an official part of the name or simply a design element. Elements like a dot or star are more likely to be a design element in the form of a trade mark, and thus have little to do with how the name is written in text. Thus in ABBA's case the reversed B logo is their trademark. In the case of mixing of caps and all caps, clearly these can be their official typed name such as iPod or may just be a typographic design element. Frankly, the whole playing-around-with-case stuff is typography at its most basic. So yes it's true one's working with the 'aesthetics of romanized words' but that is true of anytime a word is part of a design, so in design terms it's a meaningless statement. Also it doesn't change the fact that in English at least, capitalisation of every aspect, such as member names, album names is simply very bad typography. No doubt westerners too are not very good with Japanese typography either, but while throwing caps/stars/mixture of case etc could be called working with the aesthetic, it doesn't change the fact that it is often a poor aesthetic - especially in the case of a band like GLAY who seem to capitalize almost everything thus making albums names hard to read. Macgruder 07:53, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"but while throwing caps/stars/mixture of case etc could be called working with the aesthetic, it doesn't change the fact that it is often a poor aesthetic - especially in the case of a band like GLAY who seem to capitalize almost everything thus making albums names hard to read" - That's just your opinion. Shall not be applied in an encyclopedia criteria. What is official is official and that's it. The official spelling of the names are not only used on all os the artists' works and promotional material, but also in the Japanese media. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Iori (talk • contribs) 22:25, 1 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]
What is not my opinion is the style rules of English which are very clear. You insist on "encyclopedia criteria". Well, here we have it in black and white:
"All proper names should be capitalized in the body of the text."
"Avoid using special characters that are not pronounced"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_%28trademarks%29#General_rules
(Special exceptions are trademarks with initial uncapitalized letters such as iPod. Plus CamelCase)


In other words, it doesn't matter what is the official way the band writes their names etc. In the body of the text, you respect the style rules of English, and the official style rules of Wikipedia. This is as clear as it can be. Read through the style rules carefully, and you'll see that sidebars are the place to show the way the names are officially represented. Macgruder 10:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"(Special exceptions are trademarks with initial uncapitalized letters such as iPod and CamelCase)" -- An artist's name can be seen as his/her trademark. Plus, the songs and releases names were all registred with that capitalization. —The preceding Comment added by iori 14:51, 4 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Exactly, 'CamelCase' and 'initial uncapitalized letters'. ALLCAPS is not one of those special cases. 221.133.86.254 12:08, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeesh, people. Just explain the capitalization in the article, then use the "official" capitalization throughout. Putting the band member's band names in "standardized English capitalization" is like replacing "iPod" with "Ipod" or "ABBA" with "Abba" in their respective articles. I know that, in American online culture, uppercase is yelling, but as long as GLAY is capitalized by GLAY themselves, their choice should stand.
I base my opinion largely on the album ONE LOVE. On this album, nine song titles are all uppercase, five are in kanji or hiragana, three are standard capitalization, and one is all lowercase. The capitalization appears to me to be an artistic decision on the part of the band.
Recapitalizing would be like renaming the John Wayne article "Marion Michael Morrison", because it's his birth name, or calling the C.S. Lewis article "Clive S. Lewis" because it's not the standard form of the name.
Another Japanese recording artist has an album with the name break the rules, which follows a similar unconventional capitalization scheme. Why not just make a page dealing with nonstandard capitalization of English in Japanese culture and link to it in every relevant article? Because that would be too commonsense.
Don't forget, "Ignore all rules" is official policy, and this seems to be a case where it applies. --BlueNight 07:38, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Consensus is to not respect trademarks except in very few specific cases (in example, when the second letter is the capitalized one). As I stated here, this has been discussed many, many times, and we have already agreed not to use uppercase. That other articles do not respect the convention doesn't give you right to break it yourself. -- ReyBrujo 14:36, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't makes sense to respect just a few trademarks and don't respect others. That's an unfair policy. -- iori 08:40, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't agree with the policy then you act to get it changed. You still cannot break it. (And besides it's not 'unfair' policy anyway - CamelCase and iPod(etc) are kept the way they are for legibility reasons, and these policies are based on hundred's of years of typographic convention) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 221.133.86.254 (talk) 12:06, 7 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Statistics section[edit]

The statistics sums up some information about GLAY's discography and adds info on compositions of songs and the PVs they have released. Please do not delete it. It's not hurting you. Don't act like you could decide what people want to know or not.

Label[edit]

Acording to the credits on GLAY's 2006 live DVD "Re-birth ~ROCK'N'ROLL SWINDLE at NIPPONBUDOUKAN~", the band's present labels are TOSHIBA-EMI, Capitol Records and TAKURO's lover soul. Please, don't take off this info. I don't know why would someone do it. Denial or links with the old record company, maybe.

First album name[edit]

"ダイヤモンド" is in katakana, which is the Japanese form of spelling foreigner words. In this case, it stands for "diamond". So the name of GLAY's first album should be romanized as "Hai to Diamond".

Discography[edit]

I think the article stays clearer with the discography in other page, once it's so big. Please, do not revert it back without dicussing it here. -- iori 08:44, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Current situation of the article[edit]

I've just remastered the page, by placing the sections in proper order, removing most of the weasel words and removing the "Music" section, because almost every sentence of it was unsourced and contained weasel words. It would be great if someone could rewrite it properly. I'm going to work on the articles about the albums and members, and then, I'll create articles about the remaining albums, and perhaps even about the singles. Once all this is done, I'm also planning to remake the template of GLAY so that it follows the same style as Dir en grey, B'z and X Japan ones. If you would like to comment on this, do it, because I'm going to spend the next weeks on this. If you would like to help, remember to cite sources and please avoid trivia and fanclub material. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, keep that in mind. Victao lopes (talk) 23:38, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sources and information[edit]

I wrote some information in the "history" section, since it wasn't making much sense and was lacking relevant facts. Please, if there are "weasel words" or whatever, try to rewrite it without taking out the information. For instance, there is a reason why the section "Rebirth" has this title, and it's not just because of their tour name. I gave sources for most information, though I find some unnecessary. Even for the type of music played by the band there was a tag of "citation needed". I've read other articles by Japanese bands and it doesn't seem that they cite references to every bit of information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.68.101.152 (talk) 21:16, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"灰とダイヤモンド(Hai to Diamond)" → "Hai to Diamond"[edit]

It doesn't matter whether it's Japanese or not. This is the English Wikipedia, so it should be written as English primarily. And if the Japanese title is so important, why isn't it even included in the album's article? Eugeniu Bmsg 20:49, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, you shouldn't translate a name simply because it's the English Wikipedia. What you could have done more nicely is to simply put the romanization first and then the original kana in parenthesis (as very common in most Japan related articles). If it's not Wikipedia standard, then good luck in re-working that aspect in all those articles. By the way, I don't agree with the way "ダイヤモンド" is romanized in this title, but I fear it would only bring in more discussion. As for why the Japanese kana is not in the album article, I don't know, need to ask the author about that. That doesn't mean anything though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DalilaDaf (talk • contribs) 15:53, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
English Wikipedia. Everything is English first. What other way should "ダイヤモンド" be romanized as? "Daiyamondo"? Lastly, there is no one author for an article on Wikipedia. There's usually dozens if not hundreds or thousands of authors. Eugeniu Bmsg 18:37, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Everything is English first" - no, it's not. And it's not only for Japanese names, but names in any language. It's good to translate it into English, but you write the original name first. Unless it does have an official title in English, which is not the case.
And yeah, "ダイヤモンド" should be romanized as "daiyamondo", simply because it's not the English translation, but just the romanization of the original title.
"There's usually dozens if not hundreds or thousands of authors." - Hm. You understood what I meant, didn't you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DalilaDaf (talk • contribs) 18:48, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Daiyamondo means diamond, right? Right. Sailor Moon is really "Sērā Mūn" (セーラームーン), but even if it wasn't released in English, the Wikipedia article would not be titled like that. Morning Musume is really "Mōningu Musume." ("モーニング娘。"), but the Wikipedia article is not as that because "Mōningu" means daughter. And no, I do not understand. Since there are many authors, which one would we contact? You really must explain that. Also, please sign your comments by placing ~~~~ at the end of your comment so bots don't have to fix your mistake. Eugeniu Bmsg 19:40, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Daiyamondo means diamond, right? Right. " Yeah, but that's also a very commonly used word in standard Japanese communication. An English word made into a Japanese one (just like "chocolate", for example. Either you don't have a Japanese word for that or the Japanese word became less used in favor of the "import" one. It's very different from the other examples you gave, which are simply English words writen in katakana, maybe for style choices. However, I don't think it's that important. What really matters is that you won't "translate" a name just because it's the English Wikipedia, and there's no mistake in mentioning the original kana.
And, of course, I know there are "many authors" for an article, although I know that one article specifically doesn't have many. It's not important "which author" though, as I didn't suggest asking them for real (LOL). What I meant is that the fact that the Japanese name is not mentioned in that article is simply because the contributor(s) didn't write it, but that doesn't prove your point, though (whatever it is). Actually it's something to be corrected in that article, since Japan-related pages (as well as pages whose themes are related to other languages with different alphabetical systems) usually mention the original name in the original writing system. I hoped you had undertood what I meant, because pointing out the "authors" fact was too besides the point. As it is pointing out my "mistake" (if someone doesn't want to sign something, I wouldn't call that a "mistake"; maybe the person is just clueless, or, maybe, she/he is just lazy). But, thank you. As it seems to bother you, I will sign it. DalilaDaf (talk) 15:54, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I realize that, daiyamondo is the word for diamond in Japanese, but when we're translating the title from kana to English, it should still be diamond. "I don't know, need to ask the author about that." sounded completely serious and not sarcastic at all to me.
My point regarding the albums article is that the Japanese title should be included in the albums article, where more facts are welcome, rather than in this article. But yes, forgetting your signature is a mistake, because signatures are needed. And forgetting one is making a mistake. If you don't sign a comment, either a bot or an editor will eventually do it. Eugeniu Bmsg 18:30, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"My point regarding the albums article is that the Japanese title should be included in the albums article, where more facts are welcome, rather than in this article. " Well, why not in this article? Doesn't make sense. Also, feel free to include more facts in that article as well. You certainly didn't make your point very clear as you were obviously just saying we should translate everything, and you did imply the Japanese original wasn't important ("And if the Japanese title is so important, why isn't it even included in the album's article?"). And unless you can actually explain why "this should be like this and that should be like that", it's hard to agree with you. However, as I said from the beginning, I'm not that interested in how you think it should be "romanized" (not "translated"), as it wasn't even the topic of the discussion, neither do I care if my terrible "mistake" bothers you so much (and why that should be relevant to this discussion). I already made my point on what I think really matters for this article and I'm fine with that.DalilaDaf (talk) 17:33, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you serious? Have you not come to understand that no extra material about an album should be shown in a list of albums on any article except that album's article, unless it's material that it's something that can be compared to another album, such as sales count and release date? This type of material is meant to be placed in it's topic's article. And no, the Japanese title is not nearly as important as the English title on the English Wikipedia. If one speaks Japanese and is looking specifically for the Japanese title, I'm sure he or she will find it on the Japanese Wikipedia. Eugeniu Bmsg 21:17, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OMG, although I had made a decision to stop this discussion long ago I have to comment this. "Extra material" in a list? What are you talking about? I told you to feel free to include more facts in the album's ARTICLE. DUH. That's all. People with bad comprehension only makes you talk in circles, which is a wonderful waste of time.DalilaDaf (talk) 17:39, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Extra material such as, say, the kanji/kana title of Hai to Diamond. That's what I've been talking about the whole time. I just removed it again, since I still don't agree with the placement of it on this page. (Oh, by the way, I'm Eugeniu B, I changed my username since having this ancient conversation.) Sorafune +1 18:50, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Visual kei[edit]

Why is nothing mentioned about them being visual kei? Xfansd (talk) 20:43, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Glay. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:17, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GLAY[edit]

This band's name is, always has been, and always will be GLAY, stylized in all caps. While I realize it would be awkward to write it that way every time on an English-speaking article, the idea that it cannot even be mentioned in the article when other bands in the "j-rock" genre are given this privilege no questions asked is equally ridiculous. Google GLAY and you're not generally going to see it written as Glay anywhere ever... except in this article. Also before someone chides me about not logging in and using different IPs and whatnot, I just do not care about being recognized. What I care about is this page being accurate and it's crazy that it's still a tug-of-war after all these years just to give this band accurate representation. 174.71.59.17 (talk) 05:37, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Glay. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:49, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Glay. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 18:29, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Glay. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 17:55, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Glay. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 00:52, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Glay&oldid=1207437595"