Talk:(Don't Go Back To) Rockville

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on (Don't Go Back To) Rockville. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120205195817/http://www.remhq.com/albums.php to http://remhq.com/albums.php
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.hermenaut.com/a135.shtml

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:51, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Edit-war
, why are you removing the sourced genre Category:Alternative country songs that User:IMMAEDITTHISPAGE has added? ―Justin ( koa v f ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:56, 8 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Because one journalistic opinion does not fact make? Seasider53 (talk) 15:15, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * It seems like you are contradicting WP:V. When we have a reliable source that states "x", then we follow what those sources say. If we have a reliable source stating that the song has a certain genre, then it really doesn't make sense to keep it in the body of the article, but remove a category. How is that better? ―Justin ( koa v f ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:37, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * It seems like you’re saying we should remove it from the body of the article and from the categories. I’m OK with that suggestion. Seasider53 (talk) 15:48, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Or have both. Is the source for the genre reliable? ―Justin ( koa v f ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:49, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * It doesn’t appear to be. Plus, if the journalist says that Shiny Happy People is death metal, should we include that reference in the relevant article too? Seasider53 (talk) 15:57, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Paste is reliable: WikiProject Albums/Sources. The instance where what a bulk of sources would call bubblegum pop and one source would say is death metal is an issue of WP:UNDUE or fringe opinions. Have you seen these guidelines? ―Justin ( koa v f ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:01, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Again, is one journalist's opinion permissible for inclusion as a blanket statement? You seem to be confused about the source of the reference itself. And what bulk of sources are you talking about here?  Seasider53 (talk) 16:16, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * You answered my question with questions. ―Justin ( koa v f ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:18, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Clarification required, hence the question marks. I don't know how to ask questions without including them. Seasider53 (talk) 16:21, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, we can include a critic's opinion on a song's genre as information in the article. I don't know what you mean by a "blanket statement". Nor do I know what you think I'm confused about: Paste is clearly a reliable source and I provided you reasoning why. As for a "bulk of sources", I'm responding to the hypothetical you posed: you wrote, "Well, what if Person A says something wacky, then do we include that in an article?" and I expounded on that example. ―Justin ( koa v f ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:30, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Reliable_sources would disagree. As stated there, it would be one thing if the prose stated "Clueless Writer, of Reliable Source, believes the song is in the alt.country genre." But nope, let's have it ingrained into a fact-based website because it was written on the Paste website during someone's lunch hour. Seasider53 (talk) 16:41, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * The inherent nature of music genres is that they are arbitrary opinions. Is there some kind of objective measure of music genres? Also, you still have not answered my questions. Have you see WP:EDITWAR? ―Justin ( koa v f ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:56, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * A-and we're into the obligatory ramblings portion of proceedings, instead of admitting defeat. Have you see WP:EDITWAR? What does that mean? Seasider53 (talk) 17:10, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Defeat about what? "Have you seen WP:EDITWAR?" means "have you seen WP:EDITWAR"? You're edit-warring and it's not clear to me if you know that you're not supposed to. Again: you are not actually answering my questions. ―Justin ( koa v f ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:25, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * You're being needlessly belligerent here. What does that mean? What it means is – you're edit warring. The impression I'm getting is that you personally disagree with the conclusion of the source so you think it should be disregarded. — Czello (music) 17:42, 8 February 2024 (UTC)