Misplaced Pages

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

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia 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 17:03, 16 September 2010 edit173.76.31.74 (talk)No edit summary← Previous edit Latest revision as of 07:27, 26 April 2013 edit undoJoefromrandb (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users38,279 edits tidy list 
(One intermediate revision by one other user 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>
*Fannish tone. *Fannish tone.
*After cleanup, improve to good article status. *After cleanup, improve to good article status.
*unlike many articles for major musical artists, this page has no section about legacy or influence. *unlike many articles for major musical artists, this page has no section about legacy or influence.
Not sure if this is the correct place for this but the paragraph starting with Some tracks (including "Brown Sugar" and "]") in 69-74 section needs sorting - for some reason i cant save any changes!!!!!!!1 thanks

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.