Talk:Sister Hazel

first paragraph

I have a problem with the first paragraph.. it is maybe pedantic in the extreme but in the first sentence Sister Hazel IS a musical group; in the second sentence THEIR is used - strictly speaking I believe it should be ARE and THEY, or IS and IT'S.. just my 2p's worth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.10.127 (talk) 09:23, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Is it better now? --Merovingian (t) (c) (e) 09:53, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Two changes

The its/it's or their change does need to be done. Also, the unverified research tag can come down; at the moment it looks like 100% of the article references to the band's own website and news archive. What would be a proper blanket citation for this? Lawtalkingguy 00:04, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Sisterhazel6.png

Image:Sisterhazel6.png 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 11:08, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Incomplete Discography

Bam is part of the music industry because of Sister Hazel 's you deleted? does not appear even the live cd of 2004! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Findingmladic (talk • contribs) 04:34, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I've twice reverted the list to remove BAM because BAM is already listed in the next section titled "Other Releases". Since BAM contains previously released songs, plus B-sides and other songs, it isn't a true "studio album" like the others in the "Studio albums" section. The live albums, EPs, and other special releases belong in their own section separate from the studio albums, so that is where they are. There's a reason why there are two distinct sections. Please don't keep changing it because it will get reverted every time. Thanks. --Mtjaws (talk) 16:23, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

20 in 10 Collection

Sister hazel released a free, Amazon exclusive, digital only album called "20 in 10". it seems like it should be included. It appears to be only a compilation album though.

Here is the link: http://www.amazon.com/20-In-10-Collection-Exclusive/dp/B00367PYKK TheOnlyMerlin (talk) 19:42, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sister Hazel. 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/20090803092842/http://www.swigged.net/ to http://www.swigged.net/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 05:32, 12 December 2017 (UTC)