This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
The GIF. version of the logo is a more accurate version of the logo, it doesn't have rounded edges. A SVG. image does not trump any image of better accuracy. GIF. is an acceptable image file to use in articles and this version is of good quality as well. I think the GIF. file is a bteer logo to use for those reasons. MusiMax (talk) 14:05, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm quite certain the logo has rounded edges and is black, not slate grey. www.muchmoremusic.com/. Here's a comparison:
The SVG is sharper, so I say we should use the SVG.Tkgd2007 (talk) 16:01, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't agree that the logo has rounded edges but I do agree that when you compare the two, I do see that the SVG. version is sharper. I don't see this as being a huge deal so I would say have at least 1 more user weigh in on it (but obviously more can weigh in as well, the more the merrier) and whatever they think we should use, then use that one. Seems fair enough. MusiMax (talk) 16:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm going to agree that the SVG. logo is the better choice to add to the article. I've taken a closer look at the logo from the web site and others and it does look to have rounded edges and so forth, a better and more accurate logo to use in the article, adding to the fact that the SVG. logo is a better picture quality as well. So, I'm going to add it back to the article now. MusiMax (talk) 04:36, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
I have suggested a merge from the MMM Profile article. I don't think MMM Profile is a notable show, so I did an AfD. The result of the AfD was "keep", and I was assured MMM Profile is a notable show. The MMM Profile article is languishing; it really needs to be more than a list of artists who've been profiled on the show if the show is truly notable. Since a deltion nomination already failed, let's try merging the MMM Profile article into the MMM page. -- Mikeblas 15:23, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
I don't think merging MMMProfile with this article is a good idea. The MuchMoreMusic article is about te channel itself and not about going into specific detail about a mondain show that airs on it. MMMProfile is fine having its own article, theres no need in merging it with MMM. 184.108.40.206 17:57, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
I trust that you mean "mundane". You've not provided much of an argument in substance. (What is your specific reasoning for thinking the MMM Profle article should stand alone?) I'm interested in performing the merge because MMM Profile is mundane; I tried to have the article deleted, but the AfD failed. As such, I think it's appropriate to merge it to this article. Merging related topics is common practice in wikipedia. A musician in a band, for example, wouldn't have fame if it weren't for the band but is likely to have one little notable work of their own. As such, many band articles include information about the musicians, merged from non-notable articles about their members. I think that analogously applies to a notable network and its non-notable shows. -- Mikeblas 20:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
I just don't think that filling up the MuchMoreMusic article with pointless info about one specific show that really isn't that important is a good idea. Just mention the show like it is now in the article and having a link to specifics about the show. And the MMM Profile article is worth keeping around on its own anyways I think. Its a tv sow and why should this tv show not have its own article and others should? 220.127.116.11 18:29, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
This tag has been up for a very long time now and there has been no consenus on the issue... removing tag MusiMax 23:25, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
There's been no legitimate argument against merging, and merging was also suggested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MMM_Profile. While the show might be notable per Wikipedia's weak standards because its often on and broadcast well, it has apparently done nothing to advance the genere, change its market, and so on. The MMM Profile article has been a sub-stub for a very long time without improvement, and I think that speaks to how little can be written about the show.
The "other articles" argument is a fallacy, and ill-founded at that. -- Mikeblas 14:48, 24 February 2007 (UTC)