Wikipedia:Peer review/Enter Sandman/archive2

Enter Sandman

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it's a Good article, which has been reviewed once, failed FAC but was copy-edited since then by User:Malachirality of the League of Copyeditors. The only procedure missing there is proofreading, but it's taking a while for anyone to do that. Anyway, I'm very thankful to Malachirality. So, I think the article is near the FA quality, but I'd like to check any flaws it might have here. My aim is FA, tell me what the article needs to get there and what I can do. Any help appreciated.

Thanks, Serte ^{[ Talk · Contrib ]} 02:05, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR _t 02:20, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

J Milburn

• "which deal with nightmares." Link to nightmare?
• "in the US" Shouldn't that be U.S.?
• Music sample- instead of ""Enter Sandman"'s original main riff" which looks silly with the apostrophe, why not rephrase to "The original main riff from "Enter Sandman""? Rephrasing it in the 'caption' would also be good.
• "equal-rhythm guitar tracks" Link to rhythm guitar, and is there a link somewhere that could explain what is meant by 'equal'?
• "Now I Lay Me Down To Sleep bedtime prayer and afterward reciting a variation of the childs nursery rhyme Hush Little Baby" I think they should both have speech marks (despite the fact the prayer doesn't in its article...) and 'To' shouldn't be capitalised.
• ""Hush little Baby don't say a word, and nevermind that noise you heard. It's just the beasts under your bed, in your closet, in your head"." Why is 'Baby' capitalised, and why is that in italics? It may be meant to be in italics, but what guideline is that based upon?
• "the same riffs of the buildup" Same riffs as the buildup, surely?
• Last paragraph of the section is a little short- could it be merged elsewhere or expanded?
• "a folklore character" how about "a character from European folklore"? Sandman is vague about where he actually comes from, otherwise a more specific link would be better...
• "producer Bob Rock tells Lars Ulrich" Tenses- Bob Rock told Lars...
• "opening track and first single of the album." It looks poor to not end a paragraph with a reference.
• "the song was also nominated"- 'Also' is redundant- you've already said 'in addition to'
• Not sure about the Richard Cheese category- the article isn't about his version of the song...

This article's fantastic, and the prose is brilliant. It will make a great featured article. J Milburn (talk) 13:48, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. I think everything is addressed.

• • Instead of U.S., it is United States.
  • By equal, I meant playing the same thing, the same music, the same riff. Is it more clear now?
    • Yup, that's better. J Milburn (talk) 21:23, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
  • About Sandman's origin, I don't know. Sandman's article is not that good, so I just use the information I've got from Encarta, which has a footnote, but does not mention his origin.
    • Yeah, no problem about the lack of details- the article's about the song, not the sandman. However, I would still change it from "The title is a reference to the sandman, a folklore character that makes children sleep." to "The title is a reference to the sandman, a character from western folklore who makes children sleep". J Milburn (talk) 21:23, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
      • Changed.--Serte ^{[ Talk · Contrib ]} 00:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
  • One question for you: "while the band plays the same riffs as the buildup intro in reverse". By "in reverse", do you understand it is the same riffs played the same way, but the last riff of the buildup intro is played first and the first riff of the buildup intro is played last, right? I'm asking this just to be sure, English is not my native language, so I have some doubts it is clear and if people can make a confusion between reverse and something like backmasking.
    • Oh, I didn't actually, I read that as the music being played backwards. Should have realised it wasn't correct, I absolutely love the Apocalyptica cover... You could perhaps rephrase to "while the band plays the same riffs as in the song's buildup, in reverse order." J Milburn (talk) 21:23, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
      • It was there before, but the user who copy-edited the article removed the word "order" and now I wasn't sure it was clear. I added it back again. Thanks.--Serte ^{[ Talk · Contrib ]} 00:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

So, is it all ok now, for you? Any more suggestions? Thanks a lot.--Serte ^{[ Talk · Contrib ]} 17:00, 12 February 2008 (UTC)