Talk:The Gamits
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Untitled edit
I beleive that this page should not be deleted because it is providing valid information about a proffesional Band. I see no reason for this article to be deleted.
- Has gone on an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one large or medium-sized country,[1] reported in notable and verifiable sources.
-The Gamits Have Travled to Japan On Tour
- Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable).
-The Gamits are published by Suburban Home Records who have a consideralble roster of preformers
Sigh Why is this not in the article? Read the article, and tell me if the content of it alone passes WP:MUSIC. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 17:01, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV edit
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
- This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
- There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
- It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
- In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
- This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 03:01, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
removing History section as copyright violation edit
I've removed the entire history section. It was almost a word for word duplicate of the bands official website [1]. Their website contains a copyright notice at the bottom of the page. Sperril (talk) 18:07, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Notability template added edit
I'm not seeing the WP:MUSIC met here. I removed one source while editing but it was a basic discog-type aggregated stats page on the band. It had nothing to do with the claim it was supposedly supporting. Anybody have any way to improve this article to notability? I can't find much online about these guys besides mentions in local news articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skeletor3000 (talk • contribs) 06:03, 12 November 2019 (UTC)