Talk:Nu metal/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Cambalachero (talk · contribs) 16:41, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Comments by Cambalachero

 * Terminology and origins
 * Aren't 5 and 6 references too much? Those do not seem controversial points requiring that much sources.
 * I was also uncomfortable with this at first, but consider the situation. These references are used to cover all the info in that sentence, and some are unavailable to the contributors without paying money for those books (McIver's book, in this case). On the other hand, individual citations to each piece are possible now because all of the other ones in this spot specifically are accessible. So we'll do that.  danny music editor  Speak up! 02:12, 23 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Link Industrial metal
 * Will do.


 * Joe Hahn's photo grows beyond the size of the section, and does not illustrate anything from it. It should be moved somewhere else, or removed.
 * No problem.


 * "Nu metal bands also are influenced by and use elements of genres of heavy metal music such as death metal, rap metal, groove metal, funk metal, and thrash metal". Aren't those too many uses of the word "metal"? Death and thrash should be referred simply that way; unlike the others, there is no death or thrash music genre that isn't the heavy metal one. Still, link to Death metal, and keep the piped link for thrash. Cambalachero (talk) 18:43, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Musical characteristics
 * "Nu metal guitar riffs occasionally are similar to death metal guitar riffs", rewrite it so that you say "guitar riffs" only once.
 * Will do.


 * Vocal styles
 * The section is composed by a single tiny paragraph. It may be better to merge it into the previous one.
 * I have moved the hip-hop information into the vocal style section, since the info was mostly about rapping (vocal style). Are you okay with this?


 * Thanks for agreeing to review!  danny music editor  Speak up! 02:12, 23 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Vocals
 * Try to avoid saying "have rapping in their music" twince in the same sentence
 * If Staind, as a general rule, does not use rapping, then that's it. Remove "generally", the point still stands if only some specific songs depart from that band style a bit.
 * "However, after Staind's departure and subsequent return to their nu metal sound in 2011, the band's new song "Wannabe" contained rapped verses." This is a bit too much information. We are talking about Nu metal as a genre, not about Staind.
 * "Their concerts also drew huge numbers of women, which is much more than you could say for any old-metal band." What does this have to do with the vocal style? Cambalachero (talk) 18:44, 28 April 2017 (UTC)


 * All ✅.  danny music editor  Speak up! 19:10, 28 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Fashion and style
 * All the info is just a list of items, with no in-depth information. Compare with Heavy metal music and Hip hop for well-written similar sections. Cambalachero (talk) 13:51, 2 May 2017 (UTC)


 * 1980s–1993 Predecessors and influences
 * "Nu metal often is influenced" -> "Nu metal is often influenced"
 * Rewrote.


 * 1993–1998 Early development and rise
 * "the genre soon spread across the country" -> "the genre soon spread across the United States"
 * The original of the term "nu metal" and the first band tagged with it should go toguether. However, it needs some clarification: if Robinson made up the term and it was later applied to a specific band, in which context did he made up the term? Cambalachero (talk) 14:42, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * First one is done. That second one is a wordy request to me. What is it you want me to do?  danny music editor  Speak up! 20:50, 2 May 2017 (UTC)


 * 1998–2003 Mainstream popularity
 * "...released albums that draw from the nu metal genre, though they are usually recognized for performing hip hop or another type of heavy metal". It should be rewritten to something like "Heavy metal bands [list] and hip hop bands [list] released albums with influences from nu metal".
 * How's this diff?


 * Did the South Park episode had some actual significance for nu metal, beyond the mere cameo? Korn clearly did not became famous for it, they had already sold a 5x platinum the previous year.
 * Possibly. Consider that it was debuted on a comedy TV show rather than, for instance, MTV or radio.  danny music editor  Speak up! 20:57, 2 May 2017 (UTC)


 * "cover of Michael Jackson's song "Smooth Criminal"" is too long as a link. Just link "Smooth Criminal"
 * ✅ Statik N (talk) 22:25, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * "Despite what MTV wrote..." does not seem to be NPOV. You provide a lot of data about Korn's sales, suggesting that they still remained popular while other bands declined in sales, but the next paragraph says "Despite the decline in sales of bands such as Korn and Papa Roach...". So? Was Korn declining in sales or not? Cambalachero (talk) 18:56, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Changed that. Statik N (talk) 22:25, 2 May 2017 (UTC)


 * 2010–present Minor revival
 * "During the 2010s, there was a discussion within media of a possible nu metal revival because of bands fusing nu metal with other genres, the return of nu metal bands, extant bands going back to the nu metal genre and nu metal bands forming". So much info here, but little detail. You should rearrange the info: one paragraph for disbanded bands that returned, another for bands returning to the music style, and which new bands were formed. By the way, it may sound repetitive, but you should say "new nu metal bands forming".
 * "long-awaited" is not neutral wording, remove it.


 * Infobox
 * "Regional scenes" list Canada, Russia and the United States; the last one pointing to American nu metal. That's actually a redirect to the generic American rock. The article does not seem to mention anything from other countries (only influences to Sepultura and Soulfly, but although they come from Brazil, they have been living in the US long before the nu metal first appeared). So, are there noteworthy nu metal regional scenes outside of the US, or not? Cambalachero (talk) 18:25, 5 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Criticism and controversy
 * Too much stand-alone quotations. --Cambalachero (talk) 01:28, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Comments by Sergecross73
I still don't feel the prose is up to GA-level. There is way too much example bloating going on. So many examples are listed and sourced that you sometimes forget what's even being talked about anymore. There's still too non-notable chart position being rattled off too. Sergecross73  msg me  17:11, 20 April 2017 (UTC)


 * We were actually hoping we'd get suggestions from the reviewers on this. We didn't get a lot of this on the last Peer review. Peer reviews go ignored and are underpaid in attention. GANs do not - reviewer guaranteed. As long as we stay at it, maybe the reviewer will give us time - I've had a GAN sit open for a month while I worked. Still passed. I know Statik has the commitment if he just knows what to do. Can't be too hard to just pull stuff out, right?  danny music editor  Speak up! 02:04, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
 * In theory, yes, though I don't know how well it'll go with Statik, as he's been very reluctant to trim them back in the past. I'm pretty sure he'd still be adding more chart positions on if we hadn't come to a consensus against in on the talk page a few months back. Sergecross73   msg me  13:03, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Toward the end of your point, you might be right. From the talks I've had with him, at this point, I think he'll take out or desize anything necessary to get this promoted. He really wants it. He probably just wasn't aware of how GA criterion 3b could become a problem. He's got one GA already that I helped him with, so I think he knows what's up.  danny music editor  Speak up! 22:47, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Second opinion
I would like to request a second opinion on this article. First, I would like an opinion about the prose from someone else. Second, I would like a second opinion on those very frequent mentions to album sales and similar stuff: is the article staying on topic (the topic is the music genre), or is it straying too much on specific details about the bands? Cambalachero (talk) 14:52, 10 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment from nominator's colleague: I would say it is not. While I have worked on it heavily, I agreed to a GAN because I was hoping that a reviewer would give some advice as to what positions to remove. The last peer review did not get any of those suggestions in a reasonable amount of time. A GAN guarantees a reviewer. In my eyes, simply removing these parts is theoretically easy once it is decided what content should be put on the chopping block. All this was added a long time ago before the nominator had a sufficient understanding of scope. If we can get these types of suggestions from you or another user, Statik and I'd be more than willing to fix them and any prose shortcomings along the way.  danny music editor  Speak up! 22:01, 18 May 2017 (UTC)