Wikipedia:Peer review/Megadeth/archive1

Megadeth

Been working a lot the past month or so to elevate this one (with major citation help from LuciferMorgan). It is a bit long, but the band have a long history, and judging by other comparable music GA and FA pages, it's not that long... One thing I wondered is if it's better to have all cite's the same format - as some are external html links, and some use the footnote style. Thanks for any and all help! Skeletor2112 07:56, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

• Comment All embedded links need converting into inline cites - check the The KLF for a real great example of a band FA. LuciferMorgan 17:49, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

All html links have been converted, and I am just a few sources away from hitting all the needed cites in the "Lyrical themes" section. Skeletor2112 06:26, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, AZ _t 23:23, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

• The cites need to be inline throughout, and there should be no space between the punctuation and the citation (like this, not this. ) per WP:FOOTNOTE (you'll have to go through taking out the spaces). The article is quite long, but comparable to The KLF so I guess it's alright, and it seems quite comprehensive. Trebor 16:56, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I fixed all the spacing issues. Skeletor2112 06:26, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

• Reads weasly in parts. Also the "Popular culture" section needs conversion into prose, a change from its listy nature. LuciferMorgan 02:12, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Is a "trivia" style list section frowned apon for FA's? I can understand that more than 5 or so facts would be considered "long", but I'm not sure how good a prose paragraph would sound using those facts - maybe they are better used on Mustaine's page, or somthing. I can put them together in a "Megadeth have been mentioned in many popular films and shows, such as ___ and___" type thing, but I don't know if it would sound any better than the list now. I still intend to write a "Legacy" type section at the end of the "History" section, to include artists Deth influenced, awards, worldwide sales - a conclusion. I might just incorporate the Pop culture stuff into that section altogether.

Also, regarding the weasly parts - I tried to cite anything and everything that seemed like an opinion, such as the "Risk caused backlash/was a commercial failure" part, I used 4 cites. It's just that Risk is widley considered to be Deth's low point (even Mustaine himself says as much in the Risk remaster booklet) and I feel it should be mentioned. I was careful not to put my personal favorites on a pedestal, and to primarily base the popularity of albums on US sales, (the only ones I can really find verification of) Grammy nods, and then secondly on reviewers (such as AMG). Skeletor2112 06:28, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

• Comment Yes, a trivia style section is frowned upon for FAs. It'll be immediately focused upon as evidence of criterion 1. a. not being met. If you want this to be FA, you need to change the "popular culture" section from list to prose.

You could divide each form of culture into each paragraph; console game appearances, movie references, TV references and so on. If I have time, I'll see if I can help. LuciferMorgan 15:46, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

• • Legacy and popular culture are parts of the same spectrum. Also, it should round off the article, not be before Controversy. LuciferMorgan 02:20, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I combined the two, but the section still may need reorganization. Also moved it to the end, following Controversy and Lyrical themes. Anything else you notice off the top of your head? Thanks as usual! Skeletor2112 12:46, 27 November 2006 (UTC)