Misplaced Pages

Talk:The Rolling Stones/to do: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Talk:The Rolling Stones Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 04:15, 20 October 2006 editMike1 (talk | contribs)3,166 edits struck some stuff that's done← Previous edit Latest revision as of 07:27, 26 April 2013 edit undoJoefromrandb (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users38,285 edits tidy list 
(7 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
*<s>The section titles are not written with an encyclopedic tone</s> *<s>The section titles are not written with an encyclopedic tone</s>
*the sections themselves are extremely long. It seems like they could be reorganized so that instead of a chronology of the band, each section focused on one element of the band and how it changed throught the band's history. *the sections themselves are extremely long. It seems like they could be reorganized so that instead of a chronology of the band, each section focused on one element of the band and how it changed throught the band's history.
*<s>Lead should be a summary of the articles content, and is rather brief considering the length of the article and the 40+ years the band have existed</s> *<s>Lead should be a summary of the articles content, and is rather brief considering the length of the article and the 50+ years the band have existed</s>
*<s>Fannish tone.</s> *Fannish tone.
*After cleanup, improve to good article status.
*unlike many articles for major musical artists, this page has no section about legacy or influence.

Latest revision as of 07:27, 26 April 2013

  • the entire article needs to be sectionalized (try more headings and subheadings); it doesn't look or read like a summary.
  • all images need sources and fair use rationales.
  • The section titles are not written with an encyclopedic tone
  • the sections themselves are extremely long. It seems like they could be reorganized so that instead of a chronology of the band, each section focused on one element of the band and how it changed throught the band's history.
  • Lead should be a summary of the articles content, and is rather brief considering the length of the article and the 50+ years the band have existed
  • Fannish tone.
  • After cleanup, improve to good article status.
  • unlike many articles for major musical artists, this page has no section about legacy or influence.
Talk:The Rolling Stones/to do: Difference between revisions Add topic