Talk:Planet Sound

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Disability (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon Planet Sound is within the scope of WikiProject Disability. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

For anyone who regularly reads the excellent Planet Sound pages, this page is both fascinating and hilarious.barry thompson-- 16:12, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Personally i feel that the singles and albums that got 9/10 lists should be removed considerong that they are not complete, nor will they ever be.

i think they should remain, as they give an idea to readers of what type of music planet sound rates highly.

John Earls here: For what it's worth, I'd be in favour of the lists staying where they are. —Preceding unsigned comment added by John Earls (talkcontribs) 18:40, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Wow, it's John Earls! Cool. Also, I'm pretty sure that there are more albums,and singles to get 9/10. I just can't rememeber them all.If anyone knows, you can add them in wherever. Cm619 22:22, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I added the part about their repeated misspelling of Kele Okereke's name and their description of Million Dead, and it was removed. I'll remove the praise then, seeing as the article looks a bit on the biased side. Deanster123 19:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

What a shame Rwiggum saw fit to remove the section on Peter Pinsent; I fail to see how such a memorable contributor is merely a "non-notable letter writer". Interesting to note someone wrote into Planet Sound the other day requesting someone undoes the butchering of the article. (talk) 01:31, 20 March 2009 (UTC)


if u have sky it is on page 820 on itv

New sections[edit]

I think that the 'Singles/Albums that have received 9/10' should have their own pages since they take up too much space on the main article. I'll leave it open to discussion for a month to see what people think. 21:28, 11th September 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marv Karkian (talkcontribs) 20:30, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

The 9/10 lists already take up over a third of the page and they're only going to get bigger. I doubt that moving them to their own pages would significantly decrease visibilty. I'll leave it for a couple more weeks and if there are any more objections I'll leave them as they are. Marv Karkian 18:33, 6 October 2007 (UTC)