Talk:The Singles 86–98

Fair use rationale for Image:The Singles 86-98 - Depeche Mode.jpg

Image:The Singles 86-98 - Depeche Mode.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 01:39, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WTF is this genre war for

There's no question: This album can't be described as just "synthpop". Look at the SOFAD and Ultra material: There's almost no "synth pop" there at all BY DEFINITION. And even the other stuff is too different from most other synth pop material, so more genres should be listed. Alternative Dance and New Wave or Dark Wave AT LEAST should be there.

Besides, MANY albums/singles have 2-4 genres listed (or if not, should have them listed), not 1.

Though those 2-3 genres should be added, please keep the article protected so those other retards won't edit them out. Angry Shoplifter (talk) 04:38, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is the second time I've seen you be abusive to other editors. Please stop of you will be reported to admins. --JD554 (talk) 08:03, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of how "abusive" or "threatening" I am, those 2-3 other editors are plain WRONG. Simply, INCORRECT, WRONG. WRONG!!! If SOFAD and Ultra aren't true synth pop (which is by definition, as there's almost no new-wavish ness in them, not synth-dominated, etc.), and that those two plus MFTM and Violator are very alternative-esque, only "retards" would describe this album as just synth pop, let alone being a compilation with more of the modern Depeche Mode than the 80s Depeche Mode.

Protecting this article because of the genre wars is reasonable, but it's ABSOLUTELY FREAKING STUPID to protect it under the just "synth pop" as opposed to 3-4 genres side, as the other is completely absurd. Keep the protection, but add the genres please. "Alternative Dance" and "New Wave"/"Dark Wave" (choose one) Angry Shoplifter (talk) 05:39, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Singles 86–98. 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/20090430064926/http://www.blender.com/guide/67144/500-cds-you-must-own-alternative-rock.html to http://www.blender.com/guide/67144/500-cds-you-must-own-alternative-rock.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:36, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]