Talk:Legião Urbana

message: If someone want to add reference to the claim that this band "draw influence" on English bands such as The Smiths or Joy Division, seek www.allmusic.com and the album overviews made by Eduardo Rivadavia (http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=10:0zftxq9kldje). --Homem de Letras (talk) 13:27, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: don't be sorry, life would be just great if everyone did. though renato russo is not the only thing brazilian art has to offer, his poetry deserves a good treatment (should i say coverage) worldwide, just as cazuza's or some others. yet i want (need) to tell you two things: 1.there are many reasons why brazil is being guided towards complete failure, and among them let's just say submissive economic policies, and popular politcal apathy. yet, instead of just crying our pitys about it won't change anything. 2. please, sign whenever you talk to someone. capi 16:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've done some work and expansion on most of the albums' individual articles, and I think they still can be improved further. My opinion is that the band's article should have a rundown of the band's history, important events, changes and such. The details for each album specifically, such as track lists, comments on the songs, etc., should be placed on the respective album's article. That's how most band articles are done here, and the format works well. I've based the albums' articles on the WikiProject model, and created a "template" to be placed on the footer of each article. I hope they are useful enough. As an aside, it's quite a stretch to say this band is the best the country has to offer. It's just that most of the best acts are too obscure nowadays; with that in mind, it's easy to understand why os Mutantes are touring on Europe and on the USA and not here. SirMustapha 02:20, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference to the claim 

message: At this time, I'm not interested in seeing a merger of all of the album pages for this band. The two that I have suggested above have been suggested due to issues within those articles. The other articles seem to at least assert notability, and thus pass WP:BAND. Whether they should actually be merged with this article is more of a stylistic determination, and thus I'll leave it for discussion by individuals more active in the editing of this particular article. Jo7hs2 (talk) 17:42, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Keep both. If you look carefully, there's really quite a lot information on those two pages besides track listing (covers, release and song information), also sales could be added to these articles. I think that the focus of these articles should be on improving them, merging them to the main article would be almost like deleting them because it would be too much to move all of the information there. It would also be a mess, if there's extended information on two albums while others have own articles. As I see it, the album article fails to meet the requirements if there's only a line like "*** is an album by ***, released in ***" besides the track listing. Anrod (talk) 16:52, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

text: Keep both per above, merging them would lead to an unnecessary increase of the size of the article. A few more information could be provided, though. Victão Lopes I hear you... 17:46, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Note On Reason Why I'm Not Suggesting A Merge For All Pages