Talk:Britney Spears/to do

• To Prepare for FA STATUS, from Peer Review:
• Sparse inline citations, and many of the ones that are there aren't high quality.
• The Table of Contents is huge.
• Get more critical analysis of her work (look up reviews in Rolling Stone, Entertainment Weekly, newspapers of large cities, etc.).
• (merged into bio)Personal section is light on real substance
• (merged into bio)"Career achievments" is light on real substance.
• Fill in 2 citations
• Format the 2 added in link links into citations
• Some pictures have network logos in them and the logos should be cropped out or another picture should be found as this is copyright infrigment
• a cover picture of Rolling Stone in April 1999 is discussed, yet the cover is not pictured in the article.
• It is mainly structural and syntactical issues like this that which separate it from FA status - there are plenty of facts but they are poorly presented and organised.
• The See also list is also shockingly biased - essentially a list of lists which make Spears look good. I wonder if I should add List of people with the shortest marriages to balance it out!
• the article also has a very messy supporting article base, many needing serious cleanup.
• I'd suggest to do a lot of paragraph merging - keep them nice and long.
• I'd suggest getting rid of the subsections of "personal" and merging everything to get more prose.