Talk:The Slickee Boys

Bill list
asserts "I think who they played with says something about a band's caliber." in this edit summary. Nobody is questioning the caliber or notability of this band, (hell, I saw them perform dozens of times back in the '80s) but unless you can find reliable sources to back up the members of this list and provide citations, it doesn't belong in the article.

Beyond those basics, it's rather uncommon to have a section of an article (and a significant section at that) listing acts that a band shared the bill with. It's generally considered irrelevant. Toddst1 (talk) 16:17, 22 July 2011 (UTC)


 * You removed the list initially because of relevance. I offered my reasoning why it was relevant and restored it.  Now you say it needs to be cited, which is fine, but a different reason altogether.  I was not the original author of the Bill List, but if you mark it with {citation needed} and post a note here, maybe someone will step up to the plate.  If your argument is that the list isn't relevant, we can debate that here. If you want to use both reasons, fine, but don't slam me about citations when that was not offered as your original reason for removing the info - I don't deserve that abuse. Akuvar (talk) 19:29, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes the section is irrelevant and yes if it's going to be there, despite being irrelevant, it needs to be cited. That's two reasons it may be deleted.
 * If you thin think that's abuse, you should probably not be editing on Wikipedia. Toddst1 (talk) 21:50, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I was going to scold you about how charming your lack of civility is, but I've decided to forgive you and move on instead.Akuvar (talk) 04:34, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * BTW, I see you added the citation and sources banner above the Bill List which is awesome and spot-on! Akuvar (talk) 19:32, 23 July 2011 (UTC)