Talk:Dig, Lazarus, Dig!!!

Albums Unassessed

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Australia: Music Unassessed

	Australia portal Dig, Lazarus, Dig!!! is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian music.
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

The proper title spelling

Damn, what's with the exclamation marks anyway? Stick with one version already. Please. Or maybe you guys like the band !!!?... --Kochas (talk) 01:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick thought. The exclamation marks again. Should we keep to the double-tripled version - as the cover shows?...
So that then the album title would be Dig!!! Lazarus, Dig!!! --Kochas (talk) 19:03, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked up the official Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds website, they refer to the album there as "Dig, Lazarus, Dig!!!" Therefore, id say, the album should stay referred to in this way on this page. I mean, its the way the artists refer to it, one assumes this should translate into our references. Joshy116 (talk) 05:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

I've removed the notability tag. This is an album by an established, notable artist. I don't think its notability is in dispute.Hughteg (talk) 02:17, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability is not inherited. Not every album by every band is notable. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:23, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't recall arguing that every album by every band was notable, I specifically stressed the notability of the artist, and given the fact that you haven't added this tag on any of the band's other albums, I presume you're not disputing that. I'm further presuming your argument is that the album can't be considered notable until it's actually released, or until singles from it create some notability. Is that the case? Hughteg (talk) 20:07, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct, sir! --Orange Mike | Talk 20:40, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That being the case I'm tempted to not debate this any further, since I believe the first single will be out in mid January and the album out in March, so this dispute is likely to only matter for a short period. I am interested to note that the notability guides don't appear to say anything on the subject of forthcoming albums.Hughteg (talk) 22:19, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The burden is always on the creator of an article to show notability. Most forthcoming album articles would get deleted if anybody would exert the minimal effort to do the "paperwork" necessary. Me? I had a final paper due today. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]