Talk:En Vogue/Archives/2013
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
reconstruction
I hope you guys like the page. post ideas here if you want:
Fair use rationale for Image:En Vogue-Soul Flower (album cover).jpg
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f7/Nuvola_apps_important.svg/70px-Nuvola_apps_important.svg.png)
Image:En Vogue-Soul Flower (album cover).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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:36, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:En Vogue-EV3 (album cover).jpg
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f7/Nuvola_apps_important.svg/70px-Nuvola_apps_important.svg.png)
Image:En Vogue-EV3 (album cover).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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:36, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Logo in infobox
I recently deleted [1] from the infobox with the following edit summary "Removed logo per Template talk:Infobox Musical artist." I have been reverted twice and am bringing the discussion here. There was an extensive discussion on the template talk page that the infobox is an inappropriate place to have a band's logo. A logo can be used in the article text given that it is an official logo that has been used for a given period of time and that there is critical commentary about the making and design of the logo. The logo currently used in the article is not an official logo seeing how only one album, Best of En Vogue has a somewhat similar design. Also there is no critical commentary of this logo in the article. For these reasons I am deleting the logo again with a description for people to discuss it here. Aspects (talk) 17:53, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
The need for sources
An IP contributor has recently been on a bit of a blanking spree, wiping out most of the article. I've reverted his edits, as they seemed a bit extreme, but a good point is nonetheless raised; there's a lot of information in the Music section, but virtually none of it is supported by citations. I don't doubt its accuracy, but it would be good to find some sources for at least some of the statements therein. Yunshui (talk) 09:27, 29 July 2011 (UTC)