Wikipedia:Featured article review/The Supremes/archive2

Notified: User:Buidhe [1], Wikipedia talk:WikiProject R&B and Soul Music [2], Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music [3]

FA criteria questioned way back in 2020 and listed on WP:FARGIVEN, but no actions were taken. I think the article is very lacking.

"History" section seems poorly structured, with vague headers like "impact".
"History" section also seems very sparse and speeds through four singles all in a row without context. Compare Exile (American band), which is only GA-class but has more substance on each individual single and album, and makes the Supremes' article seem very sparse in comparison.
By 1965, the Supremes were international stars. WP:PEACOCK
knocking the Beatles' Revolver out of the top spot - informal tone
Several unsourced sentences under "Ross's departure"
spring of 1962 - MOS:SEASON
"The Supremes in the 1970s" header has a ton of one-sentence paragraphs and uncited text.
"Legacy": the Tony Award-winning musical Dreamgirls WP:PEACOCK
With the death of Florence Ballard in 1976 and the death of Mary Wilson on February 8, 2021, there is no longer any possible reunion of the original classic lineup. -- seems WP:SYNTHy
"Post-Supremes groups" mostly uncited
remake of Sparkle was in development in the early 2000s with R&B singer Aaliyah as the lead, but the project was shelved when Aaliyah died in 2001. - this content is not supported by the citation at all
Source 20, "Contemporary Black Biography", is mirrored at answers.com, which does not seem like an RS.
Citation to Facebook in "Post-Supremes groups" should be removed.

Sourcing seems mostly fine outside the two. Main concerns are prose quality and comprehensiveness.

Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 23:33, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]