Wikipedia:Peer review/Enter Sandman/archive3

Enter Sandman

 * Previous peer review
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for December 2008.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for December 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review so you can help me bring to FA status. It's been over a year since I've worked hard on it and most of the issues raised at the time, including copy editing have been addressed. I believe the article has no major flaws and it has the potential to become a Featured Article, but I wanted to bring it to peer review before taking that step.

Thanks in advance, Serte [ Talk · Contrib ] 00:27, 3 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Review by User:BuddingJournalist Hmm...I think there's plenty of work to be done on the prose side of things before this rises to FA level. Might want to a recruit a copy-editor to work with you on combing through the text (you'll probably have to be actively engaged with them though, if they don't know the material, as some of the problem sentences are rather ambiguous).
 * On Wikipedia (as in academia), it's common practice to combine citations; that is, if multiple sentences in a row come from the same source, one can put citation at the end of the last sentence. This then implies that this citation "covers" all of the previous sentences. Makes for much more readable text.
 * I don't understand the citation style for the Classic Albums DVD. Why are there multiple names given? Are these chapter titles? If so, they should be set apart in some fashion (quotation marks).
 * "Metallica's songwriting method involved lead guitarist..." Awkward, long sentence, especially with the "involved...'verb'ing" construct.
 * "in Ulrich's house in Berkeley, California" "at (Ulrich's house)" seems to work better here. Avoids the slightly ungainly repetition of "in" and emphasizes the locale rather than the physical location inside the house, which "in" does.
 * "The song was quickly finished," That's a bit contradictory to the latter half of the sentence. The "music", perhaps? Also, what does "quickly" mean?
 * "for a long time" Again, the more specific, the better.
 * "and the lyrics featured in the song are not the original" Could use some context here. What changed and why?
 * "For the first time in Metallica's history, however" This sets up a landmark action, but readers (or at least those unfamiliar with the band like myself) are left wondering why telling Hetfield this is so important. Is it because this is his first crack at writing a song? Also, the way the sentence is constructed, it seems as if the emphasis is placed on the rather specific act of telling Hetfield specific information, and would not necessitate such an important lead-in as "for the first time in Metallica's history". Moreover, what is the "however" doing here?
 * "Nevertheless, according to Ulrich, the song was..." Two things: again, another odd use of a contradictory connector (nevertheless)...what's being contradicted? Also, another confusing use of "song". "Music", perhaps?
 * The first paragraph of the Writing and recording doesn't mention when the writing of the song took place.
 * "According to engineer Randy Staub, close to 50 takes of the drums were recorded..." Three variations of "record" in the same sentence.
 * "Because it was difficult to get in one take the "intensity" that the band wanted," The use of "get" here and in the next sentence is rather informal.
 * "producing team" Isn't it "production team"? I could be wrong though.
 * "spent much time" Unspecific.
 * "Bob Rock had to create the sound for the entire album" What does "sound for the entire album" mean?
 * In the Music and lyrics section, musical terms are introduced without being linked (minor, flat, sharp, etc.)
 * P. J. Howorth <-- who is he?
 * "The song then follows a common structure, playing" Odd personification here. A song doesn't play. What exactly is the common structure? IN my opinion, "The song then launches into two iterations..." would be just fine.
 * "After the solo, the breakdown starts," Long, run-on sentence.
 * "Lyrically, the song is about" Wouldn't it be better to quote a band member instead about the song's meaning?
 * "The title is a reference to the sandman, a character from Western folklore who makes children sleep.[15]" Misleading citation here. There's no need to cite what the word sandman means. What you want is a citation backing up the first part of the sentence, "The title is a reference to the sandman".
 * I stopped here, but that should give you ample examples on what to look for in improving the prose. Budding Journalist 10:19, 13 December 2008 (UTC)