Talk:The Pitchfork 500

This article was nominated for deletion on 25 January 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

	Books portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.
	It is requested that a picture or pictures be included in this article to improve its quality.

Untitled[edit]

Hi guys. I'm new. But at #Statistics on this page, the sentence seems very confusing: "Prince and Talking Heads had the most songs featured on the list with four each (New Order(3) and Joy Division(2) total five)." Does anybody want to fix this?

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move per request.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:44, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pitchfork 500 : Our Guide to the Greatest Songs from Punk to the Present → The Pitchfork 500 — The guide is more commonly referred to simply as "The Pitchfork 500". Subtitles are often excluded from Wikipedia article names unless required for disambiguation. I considered returning it to "Pitchfork 500", where it was before being move to its current title, but the actual title (see http://thepitchfork500.com/) includes "The". An image of the guide's cover is at that link, where you can see the subtitle is not given much prominence. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 23:54, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Proposer gives well-reasoned explanation why this is preferable. We want article titles to be as simple as possible and to follow usage in our sources. Ucucha 12:54, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - no question. PL290 (talk) 20:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Pitchfork 500. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090227055704/http://thepitchfork500.com:80/about/ to http://thepitchfork500.com/about/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:00, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]