Talk:The Slickee Boys

	Biography portal 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
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians.

Alternative music

	Rock music portal This article is part of WikiProject Alternative music, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage of articles relating to alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.Alternative musicWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative musicTemplate:WikiProject Alternative musicAlternative music
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Bill list

Akuvar (talk · contribs) asserts "I think who they played with says something about a band's caliber." in this edit summary. Nobody is questioning the caliber or notability of this band, (hell, I saw them perform dozens of times back in the '80s) but unless you can find reliable sources to back up the members of this list and provide citations, it doesn't belong in the article.

Beyond those basics, it's rather uncommon to have a section of an article (and a significant section at that) listing acts that a band shared the bill with. It's generally considered irrelevant. Toddst1 (talk) 16:17, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You removed the list initially because of relevance. I offered my reasoning why it was relevant and restored it. Now you say it needs to be cited, which is fine, but a different reason altogether. I was not the original author of the Bill List, but if you mark it with {citation needed} and post a note here, maybe someone will step up to the plate. If your argument is that the list isn't relevant, we can debate that here. If you want to use both reasons, fine, but don't slam me about citations when that was not offered as your original reason for removing the info - I don't deserve that abuse. Akuvar (talk) 19:29, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes the section is irrelevant and yes if it's going to be there, despite being irrelevant, it needs to be cited. That's two reasons it may be deleted.

If you thin think that's abuse, you should probably not be editing on Wikipedia. Toddst1 (talk) 21:50, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to scold you about how charming your lack of civility is, but I've decided to forgive you and move on instead.Akuvar (talk) 04:34, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, I see you added the citation and sources banner above the Bill List which is awesome and spot-on! Akuvar (talk) 19:32, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]