Difference between revisions of "Talk:Gigography"
From SistersWiki.org - The Sisters Of Mercy Fan Wiki
m (Table playing about) |
|||
Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
No, bollocks it looks sh*t. Leave it I reckon. [[User:Dancingmeerkat|Dancingmeerkat]] 13:16, 18 Jul 2005 (SAST) | No, bollocks it looks sh*t. Leave it I reckon. [[User:Dancingmeerkat|Dancingmeerkat]] 13:16, 18 Jul 2005 (SAST) | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Some of the links on the gigography page could be redirected to pages already done in the [[bootlegs]] section. [[User:Dancingmeerkat|Dancingmeerkat]] 15:32, 14 December 2005 (SAST) |
Revision as of 13:32, 14 December 2005
Nick if this info is coming from http://www.thesistersofmercy.com/gen/gigog/gigog.htm then please remove this section, the entire official site is copyright.
I've removed all info from the official site, but I've kept up the info I got from this site. Should I also remove this info?
- I've put in an (incomplete) gigography based on my collection and want-list. I can see that I've missed a few gigs out. I don't see how a list of dates and venues can infringe copyrights. Dancingmeerkat 17:09, 15 Jul 2005 (SAST)
(Oh and by the way you should sign posts in talk like this: ~~~~ brings up your user-name and date like so: Dancingmeerkat 17:09, 15 Jul 2005 (SAST)
- And what does anyone think about changing to a non-standard Contents for this page. I think it gets too bogged down. I had this in mind:
Dancingmeerkat 17:49, 15 Jul 2005 (SAST)
No, bollocks it looks sh*t. Leave it I reckon. Dancingmeerkat 13:16, 18 Jul 2005 (SAST)
- Some of the links on the gigography page could be redirected to pages already done in the bootlegs section. Dancingmeerkat 15:32, 14 December 2005 (SAST)