Talk:Beastie Boys/GA1
GA Review[edit]
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Main points[edit]
I will be undertaking this review. This article contains a lot of detail, and covers the full history of the band. Although it has strengths, it has a long way to go before meeting the standards for good article status, and i will effectively quick-fail it. If editor(s) believe they can respond to the issues below in a week, by all means ping me on my talk page and we can-reconsider, or take it to GAR, but my view is that it would be better to deal with the issues over time and re-nominate.
- The article is seriously under-referenced, and has citation tags. All major claims should be referenced, and quotes, whether of band members or others, should certainly be referenced.
- The in-line citations that are there need work on their presentation (need more than just link titles - publisher info, retrieval dates etc)
- Wikipedia itself should not be used as a reference, which occurs in several of the footnotes
- There are references use where it is unclear why they should be treated as reliable sources (eg what seem to be minor commercial websites)
- There are published books about the BBs, or which incorporate their work in some way. At least some of these should be read and cited for such a major band.
- The section on the upcomnig album is way too detailed, given the thing isn't even out yet, and is padded with band quotes. This is a product of recentism and should be resisted.
- There should be an awards and nominations section (though it need not be in table form, as in Rage Against the Machine).
- There are one-sentence paragraphs with facts that do not seem to fit into the broader theme of the section. This is most obvious in the Hello Nasty seciton - the earliest parts of the history don't suffer from the same problem.
- Although it may need copyediting in places, the written text is actually pretty good for the most part.
For examples of GAs on long-lived bands, see Hoodoo Gurus, Rage Against the Machine or The Beatles (though for my taste, the RATM article has too many direct quotes of band members).
As a fan of BB, all I can say is keep on improving this article, and I hope it'll come back to GA nominations one day! hamiltonstone (talk) 04:28, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Massive removal of content[edit]
A massive removal of content has taken out some very encyclopedic content. It needed better sourcing, but I don't see any indication that search took place. Some other changes were also made, and I don't have time to sort them all out, but here are the two version [1]. ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:29, 9 August 2009 (UTC)