Talk:Screeching Weasel

Sources

For the people who request that this article have more sources, please put citations next to the information that is in doubt. Most of what I added to the page was based on the information in the liner notes from Kill the musicians, which verifies much of the information here.

The article needs to be substantiated by reliable third-party sources. The liner notes from the band's CD does not count. —Centrx→talk • 08:39, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok then put where citations are needed and I'll find reliable third-party sources to add to them.Hoponpop69 20:39, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

There are currently no reliable third-party sources whatsoever, so the whole article needs them. —Centrx→talk • 10:02, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Which specific parts do you want certified though, you have to be more specific, Im not gonna certify everysingle sentence in this article.

You don't need to cite every single sentence in the article, though ultimately that is a goal for any article, but you should include references—reliable third-party sources—in a reference section at the bottom, and most or all of the information in the article should be substantiated by those sources. As it stands now, the "life story" appears to just be a some propaganda from them or their record company, which a vested interest in making it legendary or interesting; it is not reliable. —Centrx→talk • 10:24, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

FYI, I voted to keep this. I think someone should check to make sure nothing has been copy/pasted from somewhere else. Davidpdx 08:47, 26 December 2006 (UTC) I understand but what SPECIFIC facts do you want references for, put next to them so we know what to put references to.Hoponpop69 06:10, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Anything. Everything. It just all does not need specific explicit citations on every single line, but there should be independent reliable source that cover most everything in the article. —Centrx→talk • 06:14, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Only the first two sentences and the discography are fairly reliable. —Centrx→talk • 06:15, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

You're still missing the point. As I said earlier add {{Fact}} next to anything you want a source for, I will not add references to every single sentence.

You don't need to. Add references at the bottom, but the references should cover or nearly cover the contents of the article. —Centrx→talk • 22:26, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

There's still a ton of unsourced material in this article. I'd like to delete it all but the whole article will be massively gutted and I don't want to do that with my third edit. At the same time, it's a lousy article riddled with inaccuracies. It's a fan piece, not an objective article. BWeasel27 (talk) 01:54, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:My Brain Hurts.jpg

Image:My Brain Hurts.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:RamonesLP.jpg

Image:RamonesLP.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Third Reformation

I removed the fan MySpace blog post regarding the SW's reformation as well as the term "questionable" that preferaced Jughead's post. I realize that the issue of SW's reformation without Jughead is controversial amongst fans and if someone wants to note that in the article (with citations), that is fine, but the Screeching Weasel page on Wikipedia should be written without bias. Ben Weasel is the legal owner of the Screeching Weasel name and therefore has the legal right to use that name with any line up he choses. Therefore, the issue of Jughead's involvement and the "questionability" of the reunion in that regards is simply a matter of fan opinion. There is no need to post a fan's MySpace blog on Wikipedia. It is an opinion piece and not a proper reference for the article. The Civilized Worm (talk) 16:26, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Grammer fix

Because the name of the band is singular, even though the group is composed of individuals, "is" should be used instead of "are" to be grammatically correct. I made the change. Dantedanti (talk) 01:34, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Punx dont give a flying fuck dude

Screeching Weasel II

Can someone please cite some evidence that this supposed recording really exists? Ben Weasel has penned extensive liner notes that detail that band's history for several SW CD releases, including to the 1997 reissue of the band's first LP and has never once mentioned the existence of an unreleased album from the same sessions as the first album. The Civilized Worm (talk) 16:22, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

SXSW 2011

I had a pretty decent write-up on the SXSW debacle and its ensuing fallout but one of my references (dyingscene.com) has been blacklisted. I will try to get this ban lifted. In the meantime, someone cited the punknews.org story about the backing members resignation but this update does not explain what happened. I feel this whole incident deserves its own section with a full explanation of the events. --Brendanmccabe (talk) 18:47, 24 March 2011 (UTC)