Wikipedia:Peer review/The Marshall Mathers LP/archive1

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

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)[reply]

Comments

~~"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 lang= parameter.
Dead links.
Bare URLs.

The Rambling Man (talk) 19:41, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]