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 sourcedmust 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 Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music articles
Hi - why were the two Hassles albums onto the Hassles page - particularly without asking on the TALK pages first? The article has already become unwieldy as a result of that, and there's not much room to put any criticism or extended album details (which I was in the process of getting)... Luminifer (talk) 20:47, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you were in the process of adding to the articles, I apologize. I was being WP:BOLD and following WP:NALBUMS, which says "Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article, space permitting," which at the time of merge there is plenty of space. All three pages were stubs and I felt a merge was appropriate. As is, I fail to see how they are "unweildy". If you have more to add beyond the mere stubs they are and you feel that keeping them on a single article would be unweildy, you can easily just bring the individual articles back. Thanks. --Wolfer68 (talk) 21:01, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you just undid a lot of work that I only did a few days ago - they're brand new articles. Of course they will be stubs at first. Now, once this page becomes too big, it'll have to be broken out again. I just don't see how it helped to have done that at such an early stage - especially without checking to see first. There is WP:BOLD but also WP:DICK (I'm not saying you are one, but I am saying it'd help if you thought about what others would think about what you did... Usually when I'm going to do something like that I ask if anyone's going to get mad if I do... You apologized so it's all good, I'm just pointing it out.. Looks like you have a lot to contribute here too - I'm not even a Billy Joel fan, so this is appreciated.. you did a lot of cleaning up on my rushed articles). Luminifer (talk) 21:06, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Remember, your work is all right there in the history, so it's not like it disappeared. A simple click will bring it back. Good luck with the articles. I look forward to reading the expanded versions. Thanks. --Wolfer68 (talk) 21:20, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
