Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ride the Lightning/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Laser brain via FACBot (talk) 15:00, 26 March 2016 [1].

Ride the Lightning

edit
Nominator(s): Retrohead (talk) 16:33, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Metallica's second studio album, and the fourth one I'll attempt to improve to FA standards. The good article review went smoothly, and hope to receive support from my peers.--Retrohead (talk) 16:33, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Media check - all OK

  • Lead image and 2 song samples with valid fair-use rationale - OK.
  • Please make sure to mention the original song length in rationales for audio samples to allow verification of minimal usage (just fyi, fixed already for both) - OK.
  • Flickr image (CC BY 2.0) shows no signs of problems, source and author provided - OK. GermanJoe (talk) 19:49, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - all OK

  • All sources are correctly formatted
  • Sources are reliable
  • Verified footnotes 1,7,37,39,47 and 55
  • had a problem with footnote 31: The name was taken from one of Lovecraft's main stories featuring Cthulhu, The Call of Cthulhu, although the original name was modified to "Ktulu" for easier pronunciation. The song begins with D minor chord progression in the intro, followed by a two-minute bass solo over a rhythmic riff pattern. Michael Kamen rearranged the song for Metallica's 1999 S&M project and won a Grammy Award for Best Rock Instrumental Performance in 2001. Footnote only covers the last sentence.
The first two sentences from your passage are cited from McIver's book (footnote 30). I moved ref 30 a bit down to cover all three sentences. Thanks for the review.

Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:45, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. All good. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:41, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by DannyMusicEditor

edit

Note: I don't have any of the book sources here, so reviewing this may be difficult for me.

  • I'm not liking the first section. Not every sentence is cited, which I believe is encouraged although not required. It would be nice to have a few more citations there. For example, Frontman James Hetfield felt uneasy about performing vocals and the band offered the job to Armored Saint singer John Bush, who turned down the offer because Armored Saint was doing well at the time. I'd like a citation for the uneasiness, and about John Bush. I would've thought this needed to be fixed for GA.
One citation can cover more than a sentence, so I think it wouldn't be necessary to have a ref at the end of every single sentence. The couple of sentences you're concerned about are referenced with the fourth chapter of Winwood and Brannigan's biography about Metallica.
I agree with the nominator here; not every sentence needs to be cited, unless each sentence comes from a different source. To simply repeat the same citation after every sentence is plain stupid. CassiantoTalk 19:26, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Might want to specify that Bush was the one who claimed the band was doing well in that sentence. You also need a comma after "vocals."
Actually, the book's author was the one who thought Armored Saint was doing well at the time, not Bush.
  • After finishing its promotional tour, Metallica began composing new material and during the autumn began performing the songs that were to make up Ride the Lightning at concerts. Put a period after "material", delete "and", and just start off again with "During the autumn, the band...".
  • If that whole swath of text from "Frontman James Hetfield..." to "the band's following two albums" is in fact cited only at the end of the next sentence, you need to make the citations more clear. Put tags to the same citation in so it doesn't look like an unreferenced chunk. Next paragraph!
The book's chapter that's cited is over 20 pages, and all of the material you've mentioned is from there. If you insist, I can add the same reference at the end of each sentence, but I don't think it would be much of a help.
No, this is incorrect. Please see my comment above. CassiantoTalk 19:28, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can't tell if the riff tape info is sourced or not; was citation number 7 supposed to cover it? If so, repeat it at the end of the second sentence. If that's not the case, [citation needed].
Those two sentences are backed with ref number 7. Both are mentioned in the chapter about Hammett and Hetfield in the book Legends of Rock Guitar: The Essential Reference of Rock's Greatest Guitarists.
The reviewer may think it's a great idea to plaster unsightly {{cn}} tags all over the place, but frankly, I don't and this should be discouraged on an article heading for FA. CassiantoTalk 19:32, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
For the record I didn't mean add a tag, I just meant that I wanted a citation '^^ dannymusiceditor ~talk to me!~ 02:14, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Although four tracks were already arranged, the band members worried that the album featured songs created in the studio, unlike Kill 'Em All. It doesn't even look like this was attempted to be referenced.
They are referenced, with the Rolling Stone article, which has a link to it!
  • Because the group was looking for a major label deal, a number of A&R people were visiting the studio. were visiting visited. On to the next one.
Those visits lasted a bit longer, so I want to emphasize that by using past continuous.
  • Recording finished on March 14 and Megaforce released the album on July 27. Comma after the first date.
  • How about adding "only" before "$20,000"? Feel free to reject this one if you don't like it.
I think it would be a bit vague if we put that, so I'll skip this one if you don't mind.
Quite wise; $20,000 to some, is not "just", it's a lot of money. Best to state the fact here, and nothing else. CassiantoTalk 19:35, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Metallica was unhappy with the lack of promotion by Megaforce, and decided to sever ties with Zazula. Source?
Page 52 from Martin Popoff's book on Metallica, reference 13 in the article.
  • Major label Elektra Records employee Michael Alago noticed Metallica at The Stone gig in San Francisco and invited Elektra's chairman and the head of promotion to see Metallica's August show in New York. I think you might've tried to reference this with ref number 13, but please add it again here.
It is covered with the excerpt from the book by Popoff. I can add it at the end of every sentence, but I think that a reference stands for every sentence before the ref that is not covered by any other source.

That's all for the first section. I'll get to the rest later. Jeez, Retro, I'm sorry, I love this band, but this might take an awful lot to fix in one FAC. dannymusiceditor ~talk to me!~ 23:08, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, if you have other work to do here on Wiki, I totally understand. Cassianto's input might be needed here to resolve the misunderstanding about the use of references. Thanks for the input so far Danny.--Retrohead (talk) 17:27, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
DannyMusicEditor, please familiarise yourself with WP:CITE and all the other essays before reviewing anymore FAC's. If I saw an article using the same cite after every sentence, which appears to be something you are keen on, I would oppose. Having said that, I think the nominator, although he is right here, should check to make sure all references refer to each piece of information. CassiantoTalk 19:39, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Welp, I tried. At least I noticed some things. :/ dannymusiceditor ~talk to me!~ 02:39, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Kudos for trying, but you're wrong to think that every sentence should finish with a cite from the same source. The only times a cite should be repeated repetitively is after a quote, and if an intervening cite from a different source is used and you then need to continue from the initial source. CassiantoTalk 08:52, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Where in WP:CITE does it state that consecutive sentences based on the same source should not both have the same cite added? Essays are just opinions and there are plenty of people who support the one-sentence-one-cite notion. Everyone needs some familiarity with policies and guidelines, but I think you're doing fine, DannyMusicEditor. A brief comment on the article: it could do with a Releases section, as most of the relevant info is currently in the Background and recording section, when neither background nor recording applies. EddieHugh (talk) 23:55, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by 3family6

edit
  • "Although four tracks were already arranged, the band members worried that the album featured songs created in the studio, unlike Kill 'Em All." And? How was this resolved? This sentence primes the reader to see how this worry was sated, if indeed it was, but the article just drops it there.
They worried in a way that they found it odd to write songs in the studio. There was nothing to resolve, the members simply weren't used to compose in that manner.
I'd recommend re-wording the sentence so it is clear that they were just unused to the circumstances.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:37, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Reworded.
  • "'Fade to Black' was released as a promotional single in 1984, in glow in the dark green." I found this in the "Music and lyrics" section, in which it is very out of place. I also found the following two sentences in the same section: "Metallica performed 'Escape' live only once, at the 2012 Orion Music + More festival while performing Ride the Lightning in its entirety." "'Creeping Death' was released as a single with a B-side titled Garage Days Revisited made up of covers of Diamond Head's 'Am I Evil?' and Blitzkrieg's 'Blitzkrieg'." I would change the "Touring" section to "Promotion and touring", and move those three sentences to there.
How about renaming the "Music and lyrics" section to "Songs"? That way the information about the "Escape" live performances and "Fade to Black" single issue can stay in the same section.
That could work as well, yes.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:37, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Renamed.
  • "Hammett wrote the bridge with its chant "Die, by my hand!" while in Exodus for the song "Die by His Hand", which Exodus recorded on a demo but which did not feature on a studio album." - link to Exodus
Exodus is linked in the previous section: "It was inspired by one Hammett's former band Exodus".
Sorry, I thought I might have just missed the link (I did a CTRL+F search, which doesn't always go to the first entry.)--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:37, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Michael Kamen rearranged the song for Metallica's 1999 S&M project and won a Grammy Award for Best Rock Instrumental Performance in 2001." - While this factoid is interesting, I don't know if it's relevant to this article.
Since the song "The Call of Ktulu" doesn't have an article of its own, I thought this would be the right place for the information.
Wouldn't the S&M article be a better location?--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:37, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It could work I guess, but that article's a mess and I don't know where to put the sentence. I'll remove it if you insist, but I don't think it's a big deviation from the topic. After all, this is where the track has originally appeared.
I just really don't think that it fits in with the discussion, since this article is about the Ride the Lightning album, not the S&M album.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 20:48, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should note that the AllMusic review is retrospective, or else remove that note from the mention of the Sputnikmusic review.
Corrected, I've put Allmusic after Sputnik.
  • "Kerrang! implied that the album's maturity and musical intelligence helped Metallica expand heavy metal's boundaries." - Kerrang! did more than imply, it stated this.
Corrected.
  • "Many rock publications has ranked Ride the Lightning on their best album lists." - should be "have ranked"
Corrected.
No special meaning, only to break the monotony of having just walls of text. Unfortunately we don't have images from this period on Commons, and this was the most appropriate I've found from those available.
Okay, I'll accept that.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:37, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hey 3family6, many thanks for the review. If you can give feedback on the unresolved points it would be great.--Retrohead (talk) 17:47, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Nergaal

edit
  • The article seems fine but I don't understand why there is essentially no coverage of performances after the initial tour. A few of the songs became stables in their later concerts, and were featured in other audio or video albums. Nergaal (talk) 19:16, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for commenting. Regarding the expansion on later live performances, there isn't much to be said about it except that three songs became live staples. There isn't choreography, special occasions they were performed at, etc. After all, anything regarding a certain song can be written at its own page.--Retrohead (talk) 23:25, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Curly Turkey

edit
I can elaborate on that in the lead, but can you please return the information about the payment of the recording cost? I think it's one of the more important aspects from the album's background.--Retrohead (talk) 23:25, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I added something about the implementation of acoustic guitars and slower tempos in the lead. Going deeper would require describing each song, and I don't think that should be elaborated in the introduction. Hope you don't mind that I've returned the sentence about the recording cost.--Retrohead (talk) 13:42, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Ian Rose

edit

Recusing from coord duties, I was asked to review for prose and, not being a Metallica fan (though nothing against heavy metal per se) I can hopefully be severely objective. Copyedited throughout so pls check I haven't inadvertently altered meaning. Outstanding points:

  • "during the autumn" and “By the autumn of 1984” -- can we reword, as not all readers live in the northern hemisphere?
Changed with "from September".
  • The Songs section seems a tad jargon-heavy -- even I'm not sure what a "standard down-stroked riff" is, so it may benefit from some re-wording on Retrohead's part, or failing that another pair of eyes. For that reason I'm not really comfortable with registering outright support for promotion, but nor am I opposing.
I think it is about riff in a downstroke pattern, I'll see if some other modifications are possible. Thanks for the c/e and the review.
I've linked to downpicking. Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 22:33, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:54, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Hurricanehink

edit

Stumbling here from my FAC, looking at it strictly as a trained musician.

  • "Metallica promoted the album on the Bang That Head That Doesn't Bang European tour in late 1984" - considering the tour name is a little unusual, I think you should change the sentence structure. Something like - "Metallica promoted the album in late 1984 with a European tour of the name Bang That Head That Doesn't Bang. IDK, something that makes it clearer.
I could, but it will sacrifice the sentence's conciseness. The "European tour" tag afterward disclaims suspicions that the name might be something other than a tour name.
  • "Frontman James Hetfield felt uneasy about performing vocals so the band offered the job to Armored Saint singer John Bush, who turned down the offer because Armored Saint was doing well at the time." - you should clarify that Hetfield did end up doing the vocals. The article doesn't say that specifically, just inferred based on the "Personnel" section
  • Here's something I noticed, but you treat "Metallica" like it's a singular unit. Is that proper? For example - "Metallica initially had sound problems because its gear". Is Metallica a single unit, or is it a collective term for the members therein? Is there policy that agrees with this approach?
In American English, bands are treated as singular entities if the collective noun is not plural. See Comparison of American and British English#Nouns.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 17:21, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I didn't know this. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:22, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't either for a long time. I forget who pointed it out to me.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 20:06, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's more complicated than that—there are contexts in which NAmEng treats groups as plural, but Wikipedia requires more uniformity than reflected in actual use. In most cases groups are singular, though, so to a North American "the government are" sounds like broken English. Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 22:06, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • You should probably explain what "several A&R people" means. It's fairly jargon-y (as Ian Rose mentioned before, that's a bit of a problem in the article).
I can write the full term "artists and repertoire", but since the term is wikilinked, I think the reader will figure it out, if not from the context, then from the article linked.
  • "Ride the Lightning exhibited greater musical maturity, with sonically broader songs, than Metallica's debut Kill 'Em All, which was noted for its one-dimensional sound." - this is part of the problem with the article. Who noted the one-dimensional sound? Who believed that it had more maturity? Music is an art form, so there are some things you can talk about objectively (length, recording, promotion) and some that you need authoritative sources to back up things like maturity, style, complexity, whatnot. I'm going to stop at the "Songs" section, because I don't feel the article is quite ready for FA status. Foe example, this sentence seems a bit dramatic - "The extended solo section at the end dissolves in a sound effect of a vast nuclear explosion." Unless there's a quote for this, I think there is a better, more encyclopediac way to say it. This is a problem for many music articles, especially for albums for big artists. I think the article could be featured without a huge amount of effort, but I don't think it's there now. It needs to be a bit more objective. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:09, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
From the books I've consulted, every author thinks that Lightning is an upgrade in style, complexity, etc. compared to the previous album. I can write "critics" or "scholars", but I think there is consensus among music biographers regarding that question. I agree there's a certain amount of fancruft in the article, and I'll get to cleaning it up. Thanks for the review, and if you have time, please write back at the unresolved points for ideas.--Retrohead (talk) 17:38, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

From all being said above, I think there's consensus among the reviewers and the nominator that the article needs more work to get to FA level. Therefore, Ian Rose, if you could please close the nomination. Thanks to the reviewers for their effort and time.--Retrohead (talk) 17:23, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tks Retrohead. Although I doubt it would be controversial since you've asked to withdraw, as I recused to review I might invite Andy to do the honours... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:47, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Ride_the_Lightning/archive1&oldid=1136095762"