Talk:Rust in Peace/GA1

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

Reviewer: CrowzRSA (talk · contribs) 18:37, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

3 Release 4 Critical reception 4.1 Retrospect 5 Legacy−
 * Sorry for the delay, I've been a bit busy lately. I'll have the review up very soon. For now, look for ways you can transition some sentences better. For example, It was released on September 24, 1990 by Capitol Records. The album was produced by Mike Clink. Rust in Peace is the first album to feature guitarist Marty Friedman and drummer Nick Menza, following the departure of Jeff Young and Chuck Behler in 1989. -- these could easily be combined into two sentences: It was released on September 24, 1990 by Capitol Records and produced by Mike Clink. Following the departure of Jeff Young and Chuck Behler in 1989, Rust in Peace is the first Megadeth album to feature guitarist Marty Friedman and drummer Nick Menza.
 * IMO, I think the article may look better if the article layout changed from

to

3 Release and reception 3.1 Critical response 3.2 Retrospect 3.3 Legacy
 * Generally, on many of the Megadeth articles, "Critical reception" is separate from release. I could see "Legacy" going under that though possibly. I merged the single "Release" paragraph with the "Background", since "Release" was a single paragraph--L1A1 FAL (talk) 10:13, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Update I reversed myself here. On second thought, I decided that "Release" goes better with ""Reception", as you suggested. I believe "Legacy" should be separate though, at least at this time--L1A1 FAL (talk) 11:15, 18 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Several dead/broken links need to be repaired.
 * In Progress... Fixed or replaced a few of the dead ones.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 10:58, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Update All links listed in red and yellow on the checklinks page have been fixed, removed or replaced. What do the green ones mean though, I'm not certain about what that means?--L1A1 FAL (talk) 05:29, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Background

 * I think this section should be renamed "Concept" because it talks about the background, title, artwork, recording, and mixing.
 * I believe "Background and recording" sounds better. "Concept" sounds like something that would describe the lyrical meaning--L1A1 FAL (talk) 00:18, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * ...alongside Iron Maiden, Kiss, Helloween, Guns N' Roses, and David Lee Roth, performing to an audience of more than 100,000 people.[1] The band was soon added to the "Monsters of Rock" European tour... this could be arranged to read better. Something like: ...alongside Iron Maiden, Kiss, Helloween, Guns N' Roses, and David Lee Roth. The band performed to an audience of more than 100,000 people, and they were soon added to the "Monsters of Rock" European tour...
 * Done--L1A1 FAL (talk) 05:02, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * ...Due to further issues within the band, Dave Mustaine fired both drummer... take out "Due to" and reword to: Further issues within the band caused Dave Mustaine to fire both drummer...
 * Done--L1A1 FAL (talk) 05:02, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * ...guitarist Jeff Young, and canceled their scheduled 1988 Australian tour... instead of "and canceled their scheduled" go with resulting in the cancellation of their...
 * The search for a new guitarist was a drawn out process. Mustaine examined... instead of a period, I would connect these sentences with a semi-colon.
 * Addressed--L1A1 FAL (talk) 00:18, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * ...had sent him a CD, Dragon's Kiss. Upon listening to the CD, Mustaine had... don't use CD twice, rather say recordings, disc, record, etc.
 * Addressed--L1A1 FAL (talk) 00:18, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Mustaine declared that "we really didn’t make... sounds a bit weird, change to Mustaine declared that they "really didn’t make...
 * Addressed--L1A1 FAL (talk) 00:18, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Composition

 * Inconsistency with the capitalization of "The Cause"/"the cause".
 * Fixed (for the record, I believe it should be caps)--L1A1 FAL (talk) 00:20, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Musically, the song features twin guitar solos after the lyrical part.[22] "Rust in Peace... Polaris", addresses the topic... bad transition, try to give it have more flow.
 * Addressed. I flipped the order, the Hangar 18 stuff is now behind the RIP... Polaris stuff now.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 00:20, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment Can we return the The Rolling Stone Album Guide review? Look at page 534–it's half a sentence only ("Rust in Peace upped the ante with "Hangar 18," an impressively expansive conspiracy number, and Countdown to Extinction..."), but FAs cite that book, and along with Encyclopedia of Popular Music, is regarded as notable source for music criticism.--Retrohead (talk) 07:27, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I removed that because in the ref check thing that Crowz did, it came up as not working. I tried to look it up via google books, but it wouldn't show me the page. That said, I guess just doing it as a book cite without an internet link (since it's out of a book anyway) would work though--L1A1 FAL (talk) 15:20, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * No problem, I've filled the citation template properly. Check the preview of the first title here if you need the album recension. The link to page 534 is removed for some reason, but since we are citing a printed source, it is not necessarily required.--Retrohead (talk) 21:14, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Release and reception

 * Why are there two different AllMusic reviews? Shouldn't these be together rather than in different paragraphs?
 * One (cite 14) is a review of the original album. The other (cite 35, I think) is a review of the rereleased album, which bears significant differences to the original (bonus tracks, remixed, and a few small parts replaced or rerecorded)--L1A1 FAL (talk) 23:41, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * On second thought, I put them back to back, while differentiating between them--L1A1 FAL (talk) 15:50, 20 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Both Kim Cooper and Tom Nordlie say the album is "mature"--is there someway you can say that it was thought of as "mature" by multiple reviewers without making it a weasel word? Just think the use of "mature" is redundant and could be easily fixed.
 * I'll just reword the first one.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 23:48, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Actually, I feel like such a consistency ought to be noted in the lead. In other words, I feel like people saying the album was mature would greatly describe the critical reception in the articles introduction. And the prose in "Release and reception" could be reworded to::::Spin reviewer Tom Nordlie praised the album, deeming it a "mature, complex, surprisingly consonant and sparely produced album", and concluded that Rust in Peace "never sleeps". Music journalist Kim Cooper noted the album's maturity as well, and went on to say that it "transcended the hard rock genre and raised the bar to a whole new level". Another positive reaction came from Rock Hard, whose writer Holger Stratmann stated that the record was "pure Megadeth", filled with "razor sharp guitars" and "snotty vocals". or something along those lines. Crowz  RSA  02:28, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Done--L1A1 FAL (talk) 15:36, 20 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Can you find no negative reviews/comments on the album?
 * I haven't really seen any for this, but I haven't ever specifically sought out negative reviews for anything. I'll take a look. More on this later--L1A1 FAL (talk) 23:48, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Update I don't really seen any criticism within any or the reviews that is worth including here. It is a widely-acclaimed album as well, so the lack of a negative reaction won't exactly be skewing point of view of the article.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 15:36, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Legacy and influence

 * "almost permanent" -- reword
 * Done--L1A1 FAL (talk) 15:50, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Final comments

 * There seems to be a bit of info missing from the lead. For example, you fail to mention any themes or anything about album name's origin.
 * Is that particularly relevant to the lead? Personally, I feel that is material for the body of the article--L1A1 FAL (talk) 23:51, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
 * To an extent, but I think that stating the technical complexity of the album may be a good idea. Also, siting the basics of the lyrical themes (religion, politics and warfare) would help the article to meet WP:LEAD
 * I'll work in the complexity, lyrics and a BRIEF summary of the artwork--L1A1 FAL (talk) 01:55, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Update✅--L1A1 FAL (talk) 02:37, 23 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Does the album's artwork relate to "Hangar 18"?
 * While I believe that it is, I have not seen any sources explicitly saying so, so to include that would be OR--L1A1 FAL (talk) 23:51, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
 * After doing some research, I found this by Roadrunner Records.


 * You know, the ironic thing is that the info about the world leaders was in the article previously, but either Retrohead or myself (probably myself) removed it due to lack of a citation. Bush and Gorbachev (and maybe Major) are obvious, but the other two are a little more obscure. In any case, got some work to do here.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 01:55, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Update ✅--L1A1 FAL (talk) 02:37, 23 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Make sure there is no overlinking
 * ✅--L1A1 FAL (talk) 23:51, 22 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Why is there no singles section of the infobox?
 * Added. Cited from Discogs, though I'm not sure if that's an RS or not. Otherwise, I got no obvious sources for release dates, which is why it was originally omitted.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 02:59, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, CD Universe is not a reliable source. I believe the same goes for metalassault.com and discogs. I will look at the single section later to see what I can do.
 * Gonna knock out CD universe and Metalassault. CD universe was added because it was citing a review (I believe Q magazine's review is quoted on there, but like I said, that's gone in a moment. I'll hold off regarding the singles for now then.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 03:16, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Done Crowz  RSA


 * "British album certifications – Megadeth – Rust in Peace". British Phonographic Industry. Enter Rust in Peace in the field Search. Select Title in the field Search by. Select album in the field By Format. Click Go -- does this comply with WP:MOS?
 * I'm not certain if it does, but I know that type of citation is used in some other Megadeth GAs, so I didn't see issue with it.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 03:16, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Final final comments

 * Inconsistency of "AllMusic" and "Allmusic" (I think it's AllMusic now)
 * I actually noticed an instance of that earlier, (though "corrected" it to a lowercase "m". I'll go through and take care of that--L1A1 FAL (talk) 05:46, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Update✅--L1A1 FAL (talk) 06:11, 23 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Per WP:DASH, all the reference dashes should be "–" not "-". So for example: "Megadeth - Where to Start with". Kerrang!. Retrieved October 24, 2013. should be "Megadeth – Where to Start with". Kerrang!. Retrieved October 24, 2013.. HOWEVER, things like australian-charts.com and ISBN 1-135-87921-4 should remain how they are. Does that make sense? I know it's a stupid requirement but someone brought it up in a FAC a while back.
 * The (policy about the) dash thing confuses me and seems trivial, but I understand why you're bringing it up. It's a mistake I frequently make. I'll take a look through and see what I can do--L1A1 FAL (talk) 05:46, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Update I think I have the Mdash thing fixed. One question though, last sentence, second paragraph in "background and Production" section ("...focused on Guns N' Roses' Use Your Illusion I and II — which were also being recorded at Rumbo — and stated..."), should ehose be M or N dashes? I assumed M dashes--L1A1 FAL (talk) 06:11, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Nominator questions
In the criteria check below, you indicate concerns with the sources. Could you expand on that? Thanks--L1A1 FAL (talk) 01:58, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I actually just need to check each of the sources and make sure it accurately verifies the information. Shouldn't take too long.
 * Ah, my mistake, I thought you were indicating that there was a problem with one or more sources already.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 02:39, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Criteria check

 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass:

Very close to passing! Okay, I'm passing it now. Excellent job on the article and thank you for being so quick to respond to comments. The only suggestions I have for the article if you were wanting to go onto a FA quality article are:
 * Add Alternative text for images, add a music sample, add a "Release history" section, work on the lead a bit more as to sum up the entire article, and possibly expand the "Composition" section. I do suggest a thorough copyedit as well, even though it reads quite well. So its not far off from featured-quality IMO. Again, excellent job man, good to see another metal article get attention. Crowz  RSA  18:07, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

One more thing then I'll pass it!!!!!!

 * The "Accolades" section—to an extent—appears to be in random order. I see it goes from Canada to the US to the UK. 3 things:
 * 1.)This is inconsistent with the "Certifications" order, which goes Canada, UK, US ←(correct pattern)
 * 2.)With that in mind, it should be "Region" not "County," correct?
 * 3.)There ought to be a sub-pattern. In other words, I understand the main pattern goes by Region, but within the Region pattern it seems there is a random listing order. It would be logical to order it by year (preferable) or even alphabetically by publication. If you do choose to order it by year (again, preferable), then the year ought to be the first column.
 * How does it look now?--L1A1 FAL (talk) 09:12, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

After these issues are resolved, consider it a good article. Crowz RSA  06:38, 23 August 2014 (UTC)