Wikipedia:Peer review/List of Megadeth band members/archive1

List of Megadeth band members

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for February 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I need help with grammar, as well as other suggestions.

Thanks, Cannibaloki 20:05, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Huntthetroll

I made a few fixes to the lead:

• Gar Samuelson was a jazz fusion drummer before he joined Megadeth—at least, that's what his Wiki bio says. Fusion (music) could refer to any one of over a dozen different genres, so calling him a "fusion drummer" is like calling him a "music drummer"—it provides no additional information.
• Added a link to the Wiki page for Chris Poland's current band, Ohm.
• Corrected a smattering of minor grammar and formatting errors: punctuation, sentence structure, capitalization, italics, etc.

Otherwise, the article looks really nice; it even has a timeline! Since it is a list, I'll evaluate it according to the featured list criteria:

• Prose. It features professional standards of writing.
  • This shouldn't be a problem, because I fixed every grammar and style error in the lead that I could find, and the lead constitutes most of the actual text. Which brings me to...
• Lead. It has an engaging lead section that introduces the subject, and defines the scope and inclusion criteria of the list.
  • The lead certainly introduces the subject; in fact, it almost covers the subject. I honestly think that it is too long. It's also unclear on the criteria for inclusion.
• Comprehensiveness. It comprehensively covers the defined scope, providing a complete set of items where practical, or otherwise at least all of the major items; where appropriate, it has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about entries.
  • The list looks pretty comprehensive to me, but then again I'm not a hard-core Megadeth fan. I've never even heard of half these guys.
• Structure. It is easy to navigate, and includes—where helpful—section headings and table sort facilities.
  • Since much of the information is concentrated in the relatively dense lead, this list doesn't really need many ease-of-navigation edits. The headings are descriptive and necessary.
• Style. It complies with the Manual of Style and its supplementary pages.
  • This list could definitely use more citations and links than just Megadeth.com. That shoud be top priority.
• Visual appeal. It makes suitable use of text layout, formatting, tables, and colour; it has images if they are appropriate to the subject, with succinct captions or "alt" text.
  • As I said before, the article looks good, and the timeline is a nice touch.
• Stability. It is not the subject of ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured list process.
  • Looks like there was a bit of an edit war between you and The Elfoid, who is currently on editor review. In light of that, I'm not sure if this list satisfies the stability criterion. I'll have to wait and see.

• Strong points: Comprehensive. Nice timeline graphic.
• Weak points: Sources (important). Grammar (fixed). Lead (too long).

This list is not ready for featured list review yet. It still needs some work. Huntthetroll (talk) 10:17, 20 February 2009 (UTC)