Talk:Fitts for Fight

Notability
I count no less than nine articles about the band. That should certainly make them notable enough. // Liftarn

Theft claims
I see nothing to support claims of theft in the article. Note that copyright infringement, while illegal, is not theft. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.234.43.68 (talk) 10:03, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Not notable.
I marked the page as I think Fitts for Fight does not meet the general notability guideline. All sources only report on the 2007 "theft" but don't prove their notability in any way. The article seems to deal with minor artists who used music from other minor artists. I suspect the page was created as an attempt at spreading the word about the theft. 017935 (talk) 23:00, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * With at least nine newspaper articles they certainly are noticeable enough. // Liftarn (talk)
 * The links to sources 1, 2 and 6 are dead - leaving only three different sources left (Fvn.no, Dagbladet and Ballade.no). Two of them report about the "theft", which would suggest that this article should be renamed to "2007 Fitts For Fight plagiarism controversy" like the 2007 Timbaland plagiarism controversy article. The more neutral claim at the end of the article has a [citation needed] after it. Again, I highly suspect this article was created to try to get more attention for the theft. 017935 (talk) 14:24, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * That the links gave gone down route 404 is of no relevance so that is a moot point. The article might be moved yes, but unlike the case with the 2007 Timbaland plagiarism controversy that article has a main article. // Liftarn (talk)
 * I think you're a bit quick to remove the Notability tag. I have restored it, though I don't want to start an edit war. I'd like to hear the opinion of other people besides you, because it seems like you're rather protective of this article. I think that just because a theft is notable (according to you) does not mean one of the parties is. Not all artists they stole music from have their own article, for example.
 * Do other people also want to keep this article? If no one else joins this discussion it would kind of prove my point of lack of notability (imagine the response to the suggestion of removing the Timbaland article!), but I'd rather have more peoples' views on this. 017935 (talk) 23:02, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I would like to repeat that with nine articles references the demand for notability certainly is met. You could probably find more articles, but they would not add much new info. // Liftarn (talk)

Meaning of name
The article makes no mention of it, but I wonder, considering the mentioning of vulgar lyrics, if fitts might be a reference to the vulgar Norwegian term fitter, meaning ''cunts? __meco (talk) 19:59, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Fitts for Fight. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070211110653/http://www.adressa.no:80/kultur/festivaler/bylarm/article787566.ece to http://www.adressa.no/kultur/festivaler/bylarm/article787566.ece

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 12:04, 20 January 2016 (UTC)