This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Latin music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related toLatin music (music performed in Spanish, Portuguese and the languages of Ibero-America, see project scope for more details) on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Latin musicWikipedia:WikiProject Latin musicTemplate:WikiProject Latin musicLatin music
This article is supported byWikiProject Peru. This project provides a central approach toPeru-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editingthe article, and help usassess and improve articles togood and1.0 standards, or visit thewikiproject page for more details.PeruWikipedia:WikiProject PeruTemplate:WikiProject PeruPeru
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Punk music, a project which is currently considered to beinactive.Punk musicWikipedia:WikiProject Punk musicTemplate:WikiProject Punk musicPunk music
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofRock music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music
I think the article is actually pretty good. It could certainly be improved, and it would definitely be better with some footnoted references, but it doesn't seem to be as POV laden as the previous comment suggests. I've added some links to official websites and also a link to an article from The Guardian.— Precedingunsigned comment added by80.168.241.222 (talk)21:03, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have now mademajor changes to the text and format of the article. In addition to beingmuch better sourced, the article is now significantly more neutral and encyclopedic in tone, as well as way more accurate and informative. I have removed unsourced statements that were either spurious or unnecessary and added helpful sourced details. There are still a few places that need to have citations/sources inserted. However, to my best judgment, everything now said here is accurate and verifiable.Garagepunk66 (talk)23:11, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified one external link onLos Saicos. Please take a moment to reviewmy edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visitthis simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set thechecked parameter below totrue orfailed to let others know (documentation at{{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018.After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored byInternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template{{source check}}(last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them withthis tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them withthis tool.
