Talk:Glasvegas

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Page Cleanup[edit]

Fellow Users. I am going to initiate a cleanup of the page and the article it relates too and try and answer some questions posed.
As it stands this page some entries on this as a whole contribute nothing to Wikipedia. Please let me know if anyone objects!
I deleted the "Dross" entry on this page as it cannot be substantiated and is an opinion. 

(DanScot1970 (talk) 00:06, 14 February 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Notability[edit]

These guys are very notable. Please don't delete them again. User: Johnthepcson
The music community is getting very excited by this band. They have a myspace, http://myspace.com/glasvegas, and the two sources, the bbc articles, are just some of the noise that is being made about this band. This band was important in 2007 and I'm sure they will continue to be in 2008. This band is notable enough to have its own wikipedia article, and even though my editing of this article is shoddy to say the least, it still doesn't take away from the fact that this band is srsly important. User: Johnthepcson

How are "Glasvegas" notable? Look at the laughable articles on all their singles - more extensive than articles for songs which actually WERE enduring, popular hits. Sycophantic garbage or the work of the band themselves - article best deleted. 82.3.66.55 (talk) 00:45, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion from January came to a different conclusion. If you don't think they meet the notability criteria, you could try another AfD. --Onorem♠Dil 14:50, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree: I've just seen Glasvegas at Concorde in Brighton. I was reminded of terrible gigs in the '80s, pretending I was having a good time, praying for an imagined Indie scene that was still years away. I've just witnessed the most fraudulently hyped, self-regarding, pseudo, pastey-faced caledonian cack-fest I've had the misfortune to waste money on in years; and as Gordon Jackson nearly said in the Finefare adverts from that era, "many a mackle makes a mickey-take". Clearly Brighton lends itself to the singer's whinge that we're southern onanists for not appreciating their one-trick dirge. But seriously mate we didn't hate you because you're scottish (I am), or even because you're a transparently cod glasgow geezer, who's about as hard as the gel you use to stack your malevolent coxcomb. We hated you because you can't handle someone laughing at your shades, or your splendid portfolio of six J and Mary Chain rip-off songs. Safe journey! Shetlandmahaime (talk) 00:44, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You obviously don't like them but the fact you've just seen them live just helps to demonstrate their notability - it doesn't make a case for deletion of the article. They are also (at the time of writing) at #16 in the UK Singles Chart. They are notable whether you like them or not. Citizensmith (talk) 23:49, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strange really. Just because a band isn't to your liking doesn't necessitate a deletion. (StevenEdmondson (talk) 20:37, 17 July 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Well they are going to beat Metallica to #1 this weekend so all you who said they are not notable are totally bell ends.

"Well they are going to beat Metallica to #1 this weekend so all you who said they are not notable are totally bell ends." Wrong on both counts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.99.96.75 (talk) 10:25, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RS vs WP:V[edit]

I tried sourcing the statement about the first single (Gonna Get Stabbed), on the only website i could find it on which was a Blogger page. This got removed because it wasn't an RS, but there are no other reliable sources. In this case, should the information not be removed in line with WP:V, "Wikipedia isn't about truth, its about Verifiability"? --SteelersFanUK06 ReplyOnMine! 12:02, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that to be so, hence why I removed ;) If this was notable it would have been written about by a reliable source. Given the NME's support for the band, I'm surprised they haven't mentioned it. --JD554 (talk) 13:13, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
you haven't removed it, you've removed my source, which is a different arguement. My point is that WP:V states that if the information can't be sourced by a reliable one then the information should be removed. See what i mean? --SteelersFanUK06 ReplyOnMine! 15:07, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I do know what you mean, but I don't see it. This is the revert I made. The article no longer mentions the cost of the CD. --JD554 (talk) 15:16, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry i didn't explain myself very well. I added the line about the price to source that and the CD's actual existence, which isn't particularly well told. Do you have a source to say the CD actually existed (Which i know it did just trying to bring it into Wikipedia terms) --SteelersFanUK06 ReplyOnMine! 15:19, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

←Ah, I get what you mean now - I thought the reference was citing your addition about the cost of the CD. WP:BURDEN states Any material lacking a reliable source may be removed, but editors may object if you remove material without giving them sufficient time to provide references. So I think it would be better to simply tag it with {{fact}} for the time-being, as from what I've seen on blogs etc, it is pretty likely to exist. But if a reliable source can't be found within about a month then remove it. --JD554 (talk) 15:29, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorted then, i agree. I'll stick the tag in if it isn't already. Cheers --SteelersFanUK06 ReplyOnMine! 15:34, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, that was my blog page, I agree it wasn't a good enough source, I'm surprised it was linked to, I just noticed on my stats. I came across the single on ebay, the decent source you're looking for is probably the earliest versions of www.glasvegas.net archived on the wayback machine on archive.org, which mention it. The first news item on that archived site, if I recall correctly, from 2004, is that HMV in Glasgow had agreed to stock the single in question due to public demand. Scatterkeir (talk) 02:57, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info, that looks a good enough source. --JD554 (talk) 08:08, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good effort on the source guys! Do you think that there's any way we could access the picture that is on the archive? It comes up as a dead link :( --SteelersFanUK06 ReplyOnMine! 11:12, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I shouldn't think so, the wayback machine seems to be hit and miss about what images it saves. --JD554 (talk) 12:50, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If it had the cover, we could begin work on a song page, or is it non-notable enough? --SteelersFanUK06 ReplyOnMine! 13:15, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it would be the criteria at WP:SONG#Notability --JD554 (talk) 14:07, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

←Well surely they are only as notable as the rest of the singles? --SteelersFanUK06 ReplyOnMine! 14:55, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

With the possible exception of Go Square Go!, they have all either "ranked on national or significant music charts" as per WP:SONG#Notability or, in the case of It's My Own Cheating Heart That Makes Me Cry, have "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" as per WP:GNG. --JD554 (talk) 15:10, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Flowers & Football Tops[edit]

Where has it been announced that Flowers and Football Tops will be a single? I know that they performed it on The Sunday Night Project but would like to know format details. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.5.241.139 (talk) 08:22, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This was a single. The third from their debut album. 

(DanScot1970 (talk) 00:06, 14 February 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Rockbjörnen Awards[edit]

Just wanted to say that Rockbjörnen means something like The Rocking Bear in Swedish, and when you put "the" in front of it, the word gets a double article and looks a bit funny. So instead of writing "The Rockbjörnen Awards is an annual..." I'd just write "Rockbjörnen Awards is an annual...". --Mathias-90 (talk) 22:13, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan Ross?[edit]

Is there a reference as to the claim that Ryan Ross of Panic At The Disco was their original drummer, as I have never heard this before, and I find it quite hard to believe. If anyone knows a source for this it would be good, otherwise I think it should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.3.76.76 (talk) 13:55, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Ryan Ross article has no mention of Glasvegas, and his career history makes it sound improbable. I've removed it - I suspect that there just may be more than one "Ryan Ross" in the music business ;-) Cheers, TFOWRThis flag once was red 13:59, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above paragraph is inaccurate. Ryan Ross was the original drummer of a band containing Robert Allan and James Allan and they had just become Glasvegas. At that time they were a three piece band. He left soon after this. This was verified by James Allan at a impromptu street performance in Glasgow. (DanScot1970 (talk) 00:06, 14 February 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Tags[edit]

Can someone explain the tags; who is the major contributor to this article who appears to have a close connection with its subject? What is the nature of this "connection" and is there any proof? Similarly, is there any evidence that it has "extensively edited by the subject or an institution related to the subject"? Looking at the history, it looks like there have been several edits by a range of contributors, as opposed to one specific user. If nothing is presented here I will remove the tags shortly. Feudonym (talk) 05:59, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Feudonym: I don't know the band or the article's history, and I have no idea who could that person be, but it seems that both tags were added by IP users: COI and autobiography. Mayast (talk) 18:00, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Feudonym: I will be removing these tags and anything that is substantiated or is a opinion as it breaches the terms of Wikipedia.

(DanScot1970 (talk) 00:06, 14 February 2014 (UTC))[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Glasvegas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:42, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Name etymology—need verifiable sources one way or the other[edit]

The current statement about the etymology of the band's name was added in a single edit and has never been cited AFAICT. Prior to that edit, the etymology was given as a portmanteau of Glasgow and Las Vegas (also uncited); the text added in that edit specifically refutes that etymology. Does anybody know for sure (verifiably)? I want to add it to the list of band name etymologies, but it does not deserve to be added until it can be proven. – PointyOintment ❬‽ · ✍❭ 02:13, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Glasvegas&oldid=1195553808"