Talk:Talking Heads/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Вик Ретлхед (talk · contribs) 12:42, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Make the references format consistent: place the refs in an appropriate template, link the publisher, use "ref name" if the ref has been used more than once.
All information mentioned in the lead should be also discussed in the body of the article. I can't find where is the stuff about the band being included in the Hall of Fame nor in Rolling Stone's lists.
Avoid using superlatives like old school hip hop classic, striking video, etc.
The lead could be expanded a bit; there isn't a single sentence about the bands history.
Nothing unusual with the photos and samples. All the images are from Commons, and the audio file has a proper license, length and sound quality.

Quick failing: Here are several reasons why the candidate shouldn't be promoted.

Broad in its coverage — The article is not well researched. The band's first three albums are covered in a few sentences, with no explanation about the recording process, touring, etc. The legacy section could also use some expansion. For a group inducted in Rock and Roll's Hall of Fame and listed on Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Artists of All Time, there is a lot of things that need to be adressed.
As pointed above, the lead must be expanded in a way that covers all the main aspects. In other words, this contradicts criteria 1b.