Talk:Title TK

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Title TK. 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/20151002142430/http://www.nyrock.com/reviews/2002/jon.asp to http://www.nyrock.com/reviews/2002/jon.asp

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) 16:47, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Editing suggestion (cite placement)
Several sentences have duplicate citations. For example: "The first engineer she hired—Mark Freegard, who had co-produced Last Splash[1][7]—has remarked that Deal was "totally lost" and that after seven weeks in the studio, there were no usable recordings.[7]". We see reference [7] posted twice. The reader would be better served to eliminate the middle [7] and move [1] to the end – IAW WP:CITEBUNDLE. Comments? – S. Rich (talk) 18:05, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
 * If we over bundle just for the sake of it, any intervening information added by a third party cuts across the info, and they don't know which cite supports which piece of information, which helps no-one. - SchroCat (talk) 18:34, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I posted the CITEBUNDLE guidance because it shows citations at the end of sentences. It does not show duplicate citations within sentences. Accordingly, the proposal is to eliminate duplicate cites in the particular sentences. 'Intervening' edits can be handled case by case. And such intervening edits are likely to provide new citations. In which cases they will likely support the new text in loco, most likely at the end of the sentences. Again, the proposal is cleanup those sentences where the same cite is seen more than once. – S. Rich (talk) 19:40, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Which does not negate the fact that over-bundling leads to problems later. There is no need for such a "clean up" if readers are confused by what information is supported by which citation. That is not "better serving" people. Please actually read what CITEBUNDLE says: it should be used when "each source applies to the entire sentence". That is obviously not the case here.
 * BTW, I have seen several problems with your editing. Please do not change page numbers to be in the format "111–12": they should be in the format "111–112". This is not the only problem I've noticed, but it is the most obvious. - SchroCat (talk) 22:12, 23 May 2019 (UTC)