Talk:Haircut One Hundred
| 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 Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
 | The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
Untitled edit
The link at the bottom doesn't work. Also there should be something about Evil Smokestacking baby — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.85.83 (talk • contribs) 22:38, 1 April 2007
Official website link defunct now in 2017 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:2E44:9A10:2946:6EA6:3843:8FA7 (talk) 06:24, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Haircut 100.jpg edit
Image:Haircut 100.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 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 05:15, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Were they a new romantic group? edit
Were this group ever said to belong to the genre called New Romantic? If so, they should be categorised as such. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 15:52, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Where did they get that name from? edit
I've seen it only as "Haircut 100" before. But either way, it seems an unusual name for a band. Does anybody have any idea how they came up with the name? It would be nice to cover it - at the moment the article just doesn't comment on the band's name at all. — Smjg (talk) 11:14, 24 December 2013 (UTC)