Wikipedia:Peer review/United Abominations/archive2

United Abominations

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to take the article to FAC. I am open to any comments and would like for the entire article to be reviewed. In the last peer review not much was done, so I want this a very thorough PR. I'd like to get out any debates and big edits here so they are not at FAC, I think people at FAC are getting pissed at me :P

Thanks, Burningclean _[speak] 00:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Review by Efe

• Image:Megadeth_-_United_Abominations.jpg — this images is too big; I think the ideal size is 300px. Also, add copyright licensing on this image.
• Per Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums#Producer, multiple producers should be delimited by a comma.
• Why is IGN in the infobox in italics?
• This disclaimer pints out that metal-observer.com is not reliable?
• "and was recorded with an all new lineup with the exception of the band's singer" — the repetition of "with" in a single sentence sounds awkward for me.
• "United Abominations was well received by critics and fans, debuting at number eight on the Billboard 200, the highest chart position for the band since 1994's Youthanasia." — Are fans acceptable here? Obviously, their reviews or comments would be positive. I believe it should be "real" critics only. The causality thing (I learned this in FAC). "debuting at number eight on the Billboard 200" should not be connected with "United Abominations was well received by critics and fans" as it reads like because of the positive reviews that it debuted on the chart.
• "The lyrics of the album deal with politics and the state the world is in. Ed Thompson of IGN stated the album is the band's most politically charged." — I think this should be merged. They're talking the same thing.

--Efe (talk) 09:48, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

• "This is the first Megadeth album since the 2004 album The System Has Failed, which was released on Sanctuary" — I think "on" here is not proper.
• "The concert this info was announced at was recorded and released " — Huh?
• "He stated the he like the" — You mean "that"?
• "Mustaine stated he didn't" — Avoid contracted words.
  • I don't understand what you mean.
    • Change didn't to did not. --Efe (talk) 00:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
• " Mustaine wrote the songs for the album in an attempt to "stir something in the minds of the listener"." — Although the preceding and next sentences to this one are sourced, this sentence also needs direct sourcing due to quoted material.
• "The lyrics of the album are mostly written about the choices the American government makes that are foolish" — Huh?
• "All of the lyrics and all music, with the exception of one song, were written by Mustaine." — What song particularly?
• "Most of the record was recorded in England" — Any other word?

--Efe (talk) 09:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

• Overdub needs to be linked.
• Just spotted this: "favourite band". Do you prefer British style of spelling?
  • No, I don't. I fixed it.
    • I spotted the same word on the latter part of the article, better fix them. --Efe (talk) 00:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
• I think someone commented in Opeth's FAC that the connector "with" like in "Mustaine produced the album, with additional production handled by Jeff Balding and Andy Sneap." is grammatically incorrect.
  • Not sure how to fix it. Maby I should get someone to copyedit.
• "Appearing at track 11, "A Tout le Monde (Set Me Free)" is a remake of "A Tout le Monde" originally appearing on the 1994 album Youthanasia" — Double use of the word "appearing".
• Up tempo could be linked.
• "and features Lacuna Coil vocalist Cristina Scabbia singing backing vocals." — Could you just write "and features backing vocals by blah blah blah" or something like that?
  • Someone suggested in the last PR that Scabbia and Lacuna Coil be linked.
• "Scabbia stated she was "really surprised about it because 'A Tout Le Monde' is a song that I've always loved. It was a big surprise for me to get this invitation —I was really honoured to be part of it." — No direct sourcing again.
• "however Microsoft" — comma after "however"?
• On caption: "Dave Mustaine on tour promoting United Abominations." Is this a complete sentence? If not, remove the period.
• "Mustaine stated in August 2006" — stated where? what magazine? what media?
• "and received its USA release" — why just directly say "was released..."?
• "The Official first" — why is "O" in "Official" capitalized?
• "Out on the Tiles" — Could you mention the year of this song, like "1999 song..." or "1999 single..."
• "The album was released internationally on May 15" — needs a comma before the continuation.
• Put a year for The System Has Failed.
• "The album also debuted"
• "Megadeth started touring in support of the album in March 2007" — "Megadeth started touring in March 2007 in support of the album"
• "Megadeth started touring in support of the album in March 2007 in Canada opening for Heaven and Hell and Down, followed by a North American tour opening for Heaven and Hell and touring with Machine Head." — needs rephrasing.
  • Yeah, I need a ce, I'm not sure how to do this one.
• "On January 14, 2008" — comma
• "Mustaine said he is happy with Drover's decision and is pleased" — Do you mean "was"?
• "who he said was "doing just fine" — "whom"
• "Broderick said "I realize I have some big shoes to fill and I will do my best." — Needs a comma after said. Also, is this a reply to the preceding quoted sentence? If so, please state.
  • It's not.
• "lasting from April to May 2008" — Remove 2008 because the title already suggest that it was concluded in May 2008.
• "and was thought of as a return to form for Megadeth" — Confusing.
  • Hmm...
• "a 7.5 out of 10" what is 7.5 and 10? Also, is this important? I think you only need to state their sides, not the points the album received. And also to the following points.
• "bands previous albums" &mdash "band's"
• "to be contained" — Maybe you want to say "to be included"
• "Some sentences in the "Artwork" section are choppy. Better merge them.
• Why is this section put almost at the end of the prose? Artwork is part of the production, so it must be above.

I can't get off the computer so I, probably, finished my review for this PR. If you have some questions about the review, just inform me on my talk page. Otherwise, good luck for another potential FA. Cheers! --Efe (talk) 10:50, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Were J Milburn's review during the first PR been addressed? --Efe (talk) 10:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I think they were. Thanks for the review. I need to ask for someone to copyedit this. Burningclean _[speak] 18:29, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Before you go on copy editing, let this PR be closed. Who knows, after this, you will directly go to FAC room. Welcome, BTW=) --Efe (talk) 00:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

---

• It mostly looks good, and would have a good chance at FAC. Some things at a glance (since the prose seems fine); the artwork section should be a L3, and perhaps the Departure of Glen Drover section also. The reception section could be expanded a bit more - I see no mention of IGN in there, for instance, and there are probably more reviews out there. Nearly ready, though. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 03:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Groovy. I added a few more reviews. I don't know what "L3" means though. Burningclean _[speak] 23:28, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
    • I think its "level three" header. Use ===Artwork=== instead of ==Artwork==. --Efe (talk) 09:51, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

indopug

Have you seen my comments on your talk page? Anyway, please do not put this up at FAC until a thorough copy-edit has been done. The writing is quite disconnected, adjacent sentences don't seem to have anything to do with each other, especially in the Background section. The first paragraph of that section is six statements that have nothing to do with one another. A paragraph, by definition, is supposed to direct the reader towards a single idea which is built up over consecutive sentences.

Another major problem with this article is the truckload of completely unnecessary information, which most of the time is in the form of quotations. See, quotes (by the musicians themselves) are supposed to be used when they are in such a form that they express the information in a more unique/interesting way than normal prose. Here, every paragraph seems to have a Mustaine quote conveying completely routine information. Eg: "go into making this record with any pre-conceived notions"-- what is that supposed to mean? Does he generally go with pre-conceived notions? What is the reader supposed to understand from that quote? It's off-the-cuff self-promotion that has no place in a (supposedly) authorative encyclopedia article. Ditto with "Drovers' "sibling chemistry" and Lomenzo is a "legend""--actually, thats even worse. Same can be said for Mustaine quote about Scabbia and those two in the Departure section. "When bassist James Lomenzo was asked about the lyrics of the album, he said to "talk to Dave about that". Although most of the band had no writing credits on the album, they stated that they were excited about recording the music." - also unnecessary, remove completely.

The information about touring is also unnecessarily detailed; remove mention of all their co-touring bands as they add nothing to the article and rather than giving a detailed account of where they performed, add unique/interesting info, if any. The Departure section can go and two lines (one about Glen leaving another about Chris joining) can be added to the touring paragraph.

Potentially the most (only?) interesting bit in the entire article, the UN dispatch rebuttal is sadly hardly written about; please expand it. indopug (talk) 13:53, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, I'm not putting it up for FAC until it is copyedited nice. I've started to clean up stuff you put on my talk page but I've been busy with Metallica discography. Thanks, Burningclean _[speak] 17:26, 5 April 2008 (UTC)