Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/Marilyn Manson/archive1

< Wikipedia:Peer review‎ | Marilyn Manson

Marilyn Manson edit

I rewrote the introduction and the entire band history section to make them more comprehensive. I think this may eventually be a good Featured Article candidate but right now it's quite long, and I'd like to be sure that it's not filled with the sort of fancruft that music articles often have; I've tried to avoid writing that way but I'd like help pulling out anything that I may have unconsciously slipped in :) --keepsleeping say what 16:44, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Some of the images need license information. --Ryan Delaney talk 01:25, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Content is good. The introduction kind of seems like a staggered mix of the two points of view (parents etc. and fans etc.) instead of a fluid, neutral combination of the two, so I think it could be written a little better, but there's nothing really wrong with it. History is written very well, if a bit long. Reads like a small biography and doesn't get too crufty. I think a little blurb about the drama with Reznor deserves a mention, right about where he drops Nothing for Interscope. There's really no explanation given as to why he changed labels, making it seem like it's an insignificant part of his story.  freshgavin TALK   02:21, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yeah, I get what you're saying. By that point in the article, I was concerned about its length, so I kind of glossed over recent history in favor of a comprehensive history of the band at its peak. If you (or anyone else) want to go through it with a new pair of eyes and start trimming the fat, I'd appreciate it. --keepsleeping say what 16:04, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • A few minor points. First, the images are a bit big (as one whose dial-up connection is sometimes a bit sluggish, they make the page load rather slowly); could they be thumbed rather than framed? Secondly, is the "tour history" section useful? Without any other information, it doesn't convey very much. Thirdly, is there another band infobox that you could use? The current text warning about the TfD is a bit ugly (and it'll be worse if the template is in fact deleted). Fourthly, I'm not well up on this, but would a featured article need some samples? In general, though, the article looks fine. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 19:06, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • The images were supposed to have been thumbnails. Apparently they were both thumbed and framed — a syntax error on my part. I've elected to expand the tour history rather than delete it outright, but now the article is even longer; that's a separate concern, though, and I may eventually fork off a Discography of Marilyn Manson article. As for the band infobox, the debate over its TfD seems to be leaning quite sharply toward "keep", so I'm going to leave it in place unless that changes. --keepsleeping say what 20:00, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The images look much better now. I'm still unsure about the usefulness of the Tour section. The band have toured extensively — I'm a bit worried that the detail doesn't add anything and looks rather fancrufty.

Am I wrong about the samples? I seem to remember that being an issue at another FA nomination (which failed). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:09, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    • You're right about the samples: the FAs that are about bands all seem to have them. I suppose I ought to make some, then. --keepsleeping say what 21:18, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry for not commenting sooner. I think it's a very good article, well-written and free from POV. This is more than can be said about many articles on contemporary musicians, many of which are fangushy and swamped with excessive details about the sales and chart performance of their records. The description pages for the images will need source and copyright holder information, as well as fair use rationale. Check out the images at the Sunset Boulevard (1950 film) article if you are unsure about the last part. It may be wise to send an email to the group's official website asking them to release an image of them under a free license (see Wikipedia:Boilerplate request for permission for a few sample letters). Also, the discography and videography section could be split off into a Marilyn Manson discography and videography article, and the tour dates could be moved into a Marilyn Manson concert tours list (though the latter may be WP:AFD'd). A few more quotes from critics about their work wouldn't go amiss either. On an unrelated note, maybe you could start a Marilyn Manson wiki at Wikicities. Extraordinary Machine 19:11, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good read. I'd like it to be more obvious to the reader that they can get to an entirely seperate article about Marilyn Manson (person). I always skip listy things in articles, so it might be good to mention in the article's lead what Manson's real name is, since you begin the History section with it. This needs a reference note: "despite evidence that both Harris and Klebold were not fans of the band" I'd get rid of the inline links in the "on the internet" section if you want to get this through WP:FA. I don't know what to think about the table-formatted discography, but it doesn't follow the "standard appendices" section of the WP:MOS, which is likely to be another FA problem. I agree with User:Mel Etitis about the tour listings as well. I'd rather see a paragraph or two of actual text if there is something to be said about the tours than a list of every single one. Furthermore, if the band is going to tour again, it will require indefinite upkeep. All that said, it's a pleasure to see that Wikipedia's article on Marilyn Manson is this good. Jkelly 07:31, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Marilyn_Manson/archive1&oldid=1144649280"