Talk:Danny Tenaglia

Latest comment: 1 year ago by DrOrinScrivello in topic Some progress

Untitled

edit

This whole article reads like his publicist wrote it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.104.245.111 (talk) 15:03, 29 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Agreed, the tone of this piece is way off Mongoletsi (talk) 21:19, 17 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

There is nothing factual about this entry. I cannot even believe this has been hosted on Wikipedia for so long. Where are the citations? --Wudhan88 (talk) 14:45, 17 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

Untitled

edit

Didn't Be Yourself win more than two dancestar awards??

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Danny Tenaglia. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 00:38, 12 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Some progress

edit

As mentioned above, the article read like it was written by a publicist. I removed the worst of the original research and peacock phrasing and tried to make the tone more encyclopedic. I tried not to just remove everything that wasn't cited, but as a result it needs a good amount of reliable sourcing on its more verifiable claims. DrOrinScrivello (talk) 16:21, 2 May 2023 (UTC)Reply