Talk:Planet Sound: Difference between revisions
m Automatically signing comment made by Marv Karkian |
John Earls (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
i think they should remain, as they give an idea to readers of what type of music planet sound rates highly. |
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. |
|||
Revision as of 18:40, 30 September 2007
For anyone who regularly reads the excellent Planet Sound pages, this page is both fascinating and hilarious.barry thompson--81.157.154.133 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.
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)
digital
if u have sky it is on page 820 on itv
New sections
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 (talk • contribs) 20:30, 11 September 2007 (UTC)