Wikipedia:Featured article review/Megadeth/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was removed by YellowAssessmentMonkey 23:52, 20 April 2010 [1].

Megadeth[edit]

Review commentary[edit]

Featured article review/Megadeth/archive1

Notified: Skeletor2112, Almosthonest06, Burningclean, Bongwarrior, Nymf ... WikiProject Metal, ...

I am nominating this featured article for review because... the article seems to have fallen into disarray and may fail numerous FA criteria.

1(a) - there is some junk prose in some areas ("Youthanasia was released on November 1, 1994, Oct.31st 1994 (Halloween ) saw a live broadcast on MTV"). The "Popular culture" section is now 4 paragraphs long and has become a dumping ground for any time a song of the band's has appeared in so much as a TV show. There are currently 4 links to disambiguation pages and a broken link to a section within the article.
1(c) - the aforementioned "Popular culture" section is almost devoid of citations.
2(a) - the lead features 5 paragraphs of disproportionate size. One paragraph is 7 sentences long, while the following paragraph is a single sentence.
3 - the article features several 4 non-free promotional photographs of the band, not all of which may be necessary. The article features over 20 inline sound samples - this seems excessive and it is my impression that inline sound samples should be used primarily for pronunciations. Several samples are missing separate 'non-free media' fair use rationales for each article they appear in.
4 - the article has reached a length of 100kb (it was 82kb when first nominated). Although the band has continued to persist since the article's promotion to FA and the article has required updates to the band history, some trimming to exhibit summary style is necessary. Several sections dedicate 5-7 lengthy paragraphs to only a 2 year period in the band's approximately 27-year history.

Some of these may not be violations of the FA criteria, but they are areas where I see improvement can be made. Overall, the article does not strike me as one that should be considered among Wikipedia's best, at least not in the state it is now. I hope that improvements can be made to address these concerns. Thanks. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 21:10, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Few concerns from just skimming through the article just now.

I have added a couple of CN tags. More are needed though as I didn't go through the whole article.
There are also a lot of punctuation errors. I fixed some of them, but most likely didn't catch them all.
Some of the references aren't located to the right of the ending period as per TCMOS.
There are a lot of weasel words used, e.g. "Considered to be a landmark thrash metal album..."

Nymf _hideliho! 21:59, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the popular culture section, which was a serious amount of dead weight. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 17:32, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FARC commentary[edit]

Featured article criteria of concern brought up in the FAR section include sourcing, prose, length and images/sounds. Dana boomer (talk) 23:00, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Megadeth is not a French band – It seems some pranksters have been inserting this on the page - look at the first paragraph. Just to let you know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.185.113.198 (talk) 11:13, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Already fixed; it was vandalism. If you see vandalism, be bold and fix it! Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 18:55, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delist Length and prose problems still abound, such as weasel words. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 18:55, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delist unless the 24 non-free media usages can be severely trimmed. Music samples should only be used if they demonstrate some notable style or type of performance which is sourced and referenced in the text. Some of the images are problematic as well. As mentioned above, prose and length are dubious. Black Kite (t) (c) 17:28, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.