Wikipedia:Peer review/The Marshall Mathers LP/archive1

The Marshall Mathers LP
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I plan to promote it to GA. :)

Thanks, Khanassassin ☪ 20:34, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Comments The Rambling Man (talk) 19:41, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * "Released May 23, 2000" released on... but perhaps clumsy USEng now allows us to ignore basic grammar?!
 * "in its first week just in the US" -> "in the US in the first week alone."
 * Take both the above comments into account and write a nice sentence about how well it did in the first week following its release in the US....
 * Link "certified" in the lead.
 * "As of 2005 the album..." umm... it's 2012?
 * " by such magazines as " remove "such magazines as".
 * Avoid # for "number" in the prose.
 * "August 1999 - April 2000" see WP:DASH.
 * "In the album's title, The Marshall Mathers LP is a more serious and personal album than his major-label debut," don't know what this means. "In the album's title...." why does that make it more serious and personal?
 * " in both clean and explicit versions." suitable links for these kinds of releases?
 * Don't overlink The Slim Shady LP.
 * " ("Stan","I'm Back",& "Marshall Mathers")" spaces after commas!!
 * "Eminem went on to answer his critics more frequently in some of his later works." your opinion?
 * "Two lines in "Marshall Mathers" parody the song "Summer Girls" by LFO." ref?
 * "a few other words " not encyclopaedic.
 * "As of July 17, 2011" it's March 2012... any chance all of these "as of" can be updated to be more relevant?
 * "throat splitting" what is this?
 * Is the Track listing table compliant with MOS:DTT?
 * Samples, only one has a reference. Why?
 * Certifications table, put Hungary in the right place.
 * Don't mix date formats in the references.
 * Ensure ref titles meet WP:DASH.
 * Make sure refs have publisher, access dates, etc (e.g. see ref 81).
 * Check ref 43 as well. Odd stuff.
 * Foreign language sources need to use a  parameter.
 * Dead links.
 * Bare URLs.


 * WP Comments
 * There's probably going to be a few months to several before I can get to working on this article, so I thought since you're interested now, I should give you a few notes.
 * The article is fully referenced by web sources. I know it has potential to grow into a very comprehensive contribution, but there are several printed sources that should be considered. Here are some biographic options.
 * By the looks of it, the article's layout is generally good. A section discussing the writing and recording would vastly improve its quality and comprehensiveness. Here's a lovely article from MTV News' archives on "Stan".
 * Chart and certification tables must undergo WP:DTT.
 * Are you sure the Controversy section is a summary of the entire Misogyny in hip hop culture article? If there is a slight relevance, you may consider See also or Further information instead.
 * Much of the information is unsourced and citations need to be provided. Again, printed sources work well.
 * My talk page is open if you have questions. It's great that you're working on this article. Good luck with GA, but it's a long way. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  21:15, 7 March 2012 (UTC)