Wikipedia:Peer review/The Marshall Mathers LP/archive2

The Marshall Mathers LP

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 am hoping to get the article to GA status sometime soon, but I am interested in hearing thoughts from multiple people before submitting. Feel free to comment on writing quality, maintaining a NPOV, quality of sources, anything that catches your eye!

Thanks in advance, Basilisk4u (talk) 23:13, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I am looking this over. Hope to be done by the end of the week. — Miss Sarita 20:40, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Miss Sarita
I have quite a few items here... Please keep in mind that I am incredibly nit-picky. :-)

Lead

The lead looks rather short in comparison to the article. The lead should be a concise overview of the entire page. For example, there is a large section for "Controversies" but none of it is mentioned in the lead.
Is the mention of the UK release date and record label significant enough to include in the lead? If so, I would also include it in the infobox.
Per MOS:LEADCITE, the lead should contain citations regarding information that could be "challenged". Stating something like the record being the "fastest-selling studio album by any solo artist in American history at that time" should probably be referenced in the lead.

Infobox

Per WP:MOSALT, the album cover should have appropriate ALT text.

I see quite a few references being repeated one sentence after the other. Perhaps consider bundling them? If one ref supports two consecutive sentences, it can be named once at the end of those sentences. You don't need to put them after every single period or punctuation mark.

I'm seeing a lot of random spaces between the punctuation and quotation marks at the end of quotes. You might want to sweep the entire article.

Music and lyrics

Not quite sure what ref 18 is citing. If it's supporting the fact that Kim Mathers is Eminem's ex-wife, that has been mentioned and cited at the beginning of the article and doesn't need to be repeated.

Censorship

The last sentence has a "citation needed" tag. If a ref is found, I think this sentence should be woven into the rest of the section instead of being a standalone sentence.

Release and commercial performance

"...by Aftermath Entertainment, Insterscope Records..." Should be be an "and" somewhere in that sentence?

The end of the first sentence in the third paragraph is awkward: "...selling over 3 Million copies first week".

I believe the "#" symbol is discouraged. Perhaps have a look at WP:NUMBER.

I don't see where ref 52 claims that this album is Eminem's best selling album in the U.S. (although it has been recommended that I need glasses, so I may have missed it).

Ref 54 can cite the two sentences about both international and domestic sales in the last paragraph. No need for two separate refs here.

The last paragraph of the section has five sentences and four of them contain the full name of the album, which I think is a bit redundant. Perhaps replace with words like "album" or "record". Also, I would use words like "over" or "more than" in place of "at least" when talking about total sales numbers.

Reception and legacy

In the "Retrospective acclaim" subsection, ref 74 leads to the front page of "The All-TIME 100 Albums" article. Can you find and link the page that's specific to the album?

Are ref 74 and 81 the same?

Not sure what ref 83 is referring to.

Controversy

This section seems a bit long. Maybe break it down into subsections.

Is this entire section a summary of Misogyny in hip hop culture? Perhaps move that to the "See also" section.

I'm not sure if the paragraph regarding Eminem's usage of ecstasy is appropriate for this article. I don't see how it directly relates to this album. Perhaps the link between the two subjects can be explained in better detail.

Can the last two sentences be blended into the rest of the prose? Or expanded? They seem a little awkward sitting there all by their lonesome.

Charts

The Marshall Mathers LP topped album charts in 13 different countries besides the U.S. and eight more countries had it within the top five, indicating that it was also an international success. I think this is worth noting somewhere in the article (and in the lead).

For the year-end charts, what was so significant in 2011 that the album appeared on the chart a decade after its previous appearance? I may have missed that in the rest of the article...

Ref check

"Hasted", "Vanhoozer", "Ellis", "Guins", and "Bozza" (there may be more). What are these? I don't see footnotes nor is a citation template used.

8 and 12: Redirects to http://www.vh1.com/shows.

35: Redirects to http://www.detroitnews.com/

44, 46, and 47: All link to the same page. Might want to take a look and update the links.

70 and 80: Redirects to http://www.rollingstone.com/news.

75: This one is requiring a login for me.

109: I don't know what's going on with this link, but you might want to locate a replacement.

117: I'm not seeing a peak position on this one (although I don't know how to read Japanese and remember, glasses were recommended for me).

125: Might want to find a more direct reference.

126: I would check this one. Might be best to get the link directly from Billboard.

144: Redirected me to a page that encouraged the download of a Google Chrome extension.

147: Need to click on radio button "2000" to find album.

All in all, this article has a lot of potential. I wish you the best of luck. — Miss Sarita 18:48, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]