Talk:Editors (band): Difference between revisions
Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
There are issues with prose and referencing throughout...try and give the article a good read through and see what else you find. I'd be happy to take another look after you've done some work on it. Good luck, ''[[User:Dihydrogen Monoxide|dihydrogen monoxide]]'' <small>([[User talk:Dihydrogen Monoxide|H<sub>2</sub>O]])</small> 09:38, 31 March 2008 (UTC) |
There are issues with prose and referencing throughout...try and give the article a good read through and see what else you find. I'd be happy to take another look after you've done some work on it. Good luck, ''[[User:Dihydrogen Monoxide|dihydrogen monoxide]]'' <small>([[User talk:Dihydrogen Monoxide|H<sub>2</sub>O]])</small> 09:38, 31 March 2008 (UTC) |
||
:I've now resolved all the |
:I've now resolved all the issues you have raised and I shall be renominating it proptly.[[User:Wikipéire|Wikipéire]] ([[User talk:Wikipéire|talk]]) 18:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 18:28, 2 April 2008
Editors (band) was nominated as a good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (March 31, 2008). There are suggestions below for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Editors (band) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Alternative music B‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Biography: Musicians B‑class | ||||||||||
|
West Midlands B‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||
|
- "Their debut album The Back Room was released 25 July 2005, to critical acclaim, and broke sales records" - Which records are these? Best selling album that sounds like Joy Division in 2005? I guess that counts Giveitallforcheese 23:10, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- Earlier I added a tidbit about the song Munich being on the videogame Saint's Row. This is surely a step in the right direction for them, right? Well, now it's gone....I'm putting it back and wondering why it was removed.--Dil337
- This should not be the top hit when one searchs on Editors. There are many prominent editors and substantial categories of editors profiled on Wikipedia. Pleasantville 19:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- That's why there's a disambiguation page linked at the beginning of the article. Want to point to these prominent editors? Link to the aforementioned categories in that same bit. But this should be the first hit for "editors" because, well, that's their name and the general concept of an editor is covered under "editor". Drjayphd (talk) 06:49, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Editors thebackroom.jpg
Image:Editors thebackroom.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:00, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Editors-logo.png
Image:Editors-logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 09:03, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Dates
Melvo, the dates must be in the appropriate wiki format, be it "[[mmmm d]], [[yyyy]]" or "[[d mmmm]] [[yyyy]]". The article as it stood had a mix of these formats, which is not allowed per our MOS, and poorly formed versions that omitted some of the links. The use of the second style shown above is preferred here because it is an article about a band from Britain. violet/riga (t) 16:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
GAN unsuccessful
Sorry, a few too many issues for now. Hopefully these notes will help improve - give me a yell to take another look!
- The infobox image caption could be more descriptive Done
- The lead should probably be split into 2 paragraphs - check out some other band FAs like Powderfinger and Silverchair for ideas Done
- Please move all free images to Wikimedia Commons (I can help if needed) Done
- First sentence should say when they formed Done
- References need better formatting. Try {{cite web}} and be sure to fill out accessdate and publisher, at least
- "The band were not always known by their current name," - not really needed, as talking about original names implies this. Done
- "tracks Come Share The View and Forest Fire." - titles of songs should be in "quotation marks" (albums go in italics) Done
- Try and use their biography on their website less, and other sources more Done
- "Onemusic Unsigned and received very good reviews." - what's Onemusic, and do you have a source other than the website call these reviews "very good" Done
- "They then changed the line-up" - how? Who left, etc.? Done
There are issues with prose and referencing throughout...try and give the article a good read through and see what else you find. I'd be happy to take another look after you've done some work on it. Good luck, dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 09:38, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- I've now resolved all the issues you have raised and I shall be renominating it proptly.Wikipéire (talk) 18:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
- Former good article nominees
- B-Class Alternative music articles
- Mid-importance Alternative music articles
- WikiProject Alternative music articles
- B-Class biography articles
- B-Class biography (musicians) articles
- Low-importance biography (musicians) articles
- Musicians work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- B-Class West Midlands articles
- Mid-importance West Midlands articles
- WikiProject West Midlands