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 editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 19:34, 13 March 2007 edit69.237.115.101 (talk) Fannish Tone is rampant - Mr Anonymous← Previous edit Revision as of 21:50, 4 April 2007 edit undoHisSpaceResearch (talk | contribs)Rollbackers14,814 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 5: Line 5:
*<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 40+ years the band have existed</s>
*Fannish tone. *Fannish tone.
*After cleanup, improve to good article status.

Revision as of 21:50, 4 April 2007

  • 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 40+ years the band have existed
  • Fannish tone.
  • After cleanup, improve to good article status.
Talk:The Rolling Stones/to do: Difference between revisions Add topic