Talk:The System Has Failed/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Bruce Campbell (talk · contribs) 04:44, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will review the article. Comments coming soon. Bruce Campbell (talk) 04:44, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Lead

Why the unneeded extra space after the lead? Done--L1A1 FAL (talk) 02:24, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Remove the two references in the lead. They're both used elsewhere in the article and leads generally only need references if they're referencing a quote or a controversial statement, neither of which overly apply here. Done--L1A1 FAL (talk) 02:44, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

General

Move the songs section before the critical reception section. Done--L1A1 FAL (talk) 02:44, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Can't there be more said about most of the songs? Each of the songs should have plenty of discussion in the reviews, and no mention of production styles or influences are made. Endgame (Megadeth album) does this much better, to cite an example.

There originally was some more info but I removed some of it because of a lack of verifiability. I really haven't found much in reliable sources about individual songs other than some of the main ones.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 02:24, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the stuff in the songs section discusses promotional things, such as songs being featured in movies and whatnot. Like with music videos, that should be in the promotional section. Done--L1A1 FAL (talk) 02:44, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Critical reception

Megadeth is a legendary band and the album was a top 20 Billboard performer; are there not more reviews? After a quick Google search I found Sputnik music review. Add information from the MusicOMH and KNAC reviews to the reception section to expand it a little more. It's very brief currently. Done--L1A1 FAL (talk) 16:28, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I had looked around for more reviews, and indeed, I thought there would have to be more. Unfortunately, many that I had found were unprofessional (user reviews rather than staff ones, etc), but I will look around some more. So far as adding from the other two, I must have gotten caught up in other stuff with the article and forgot about it, so I will add some prose from those two.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 02:24, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE: I did find another review, which I did add into the article. I believe that there are now five there.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 16:28, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Personnel and bellow

No need to reference every single personnel credit individuality. Look what is done at Channel Orange, that's a better example of how it can be done. Done--L1A1 FAL (talk) 02:24, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The charts aren't quite done properly; take a look at how they're done at Channel Orange for example, the full charts need to be written out. Done--L1A1 FAL (talk) 03:16, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is Blabbermouth like, the only publication that covers heavy metal?

It's just the one I use the most. If you would prefer, I can try to diversify it a bit more.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 02:24, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article has some issues before it can be passed. If you have any trouble or concerns let me know. Bruce Campbell (talk) 21:45, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]