Previous peer review

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 want to fix any flaws before I nominate it for GA status. CrowzRSA ^{23:33, 25 April 2010 (UTC)}[reply]

From Philcha

OK, I'll review using the GA criteria - I'll have a quick read through first. --Philcha (talk) 20:45, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

•  Done No obviously missing aspects, nothing superfluous - seems to comply with that part of the GA criteria. --Philcha (talk) 22:07, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Why is there a gap between "Early life: 1973–1991" and "Later life: 2002–present"? --Philcha (talk) 22:07, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(not a GA criterion, but a poor structure makes an article hard to understand, and may it unstable because changes have side-effects elsewhere - which would fail in a GA review)

• I'm not sure the section heading "Biography" is a good title, as the whole article is a biography. How about e.g. "Personal life"? --Philcha (talk) 22:07, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Biographical articles always have some connection between the personal life and the career. In some cases it's very simple, e.g. the events that led to the start of the career. In other cases there's a series of connections, possibly both ways: a life event such as a death or break-up may inspire a new type of work, or a success / failure in the career may have consequences in the life. We may have to keep looking at the structure. --Philcha (talk) 09:27, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To be a GA, any article has to comply with WP:V, WP:NOR and WP:NPOV. This article must also comply with Biographies of living persons, to minise the risk that WP may be sued. As the article has not been deleted, it may be "clean". But we'll to check. --Philcha (talk) 22:07, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Several of the most sensitive items - e.g. addiction, legal custody by grandmother, children and their mothers - appear to be based only on Arnopp. He could get something wrong, or he or his publisher may have a point of view. It would be safer to use more sources. --Philcha (talk) 09:27, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "He and his father currently have a strong relationship" cited Voliminal: Inside The Nine. Roadrunner Records, but the citation is incomplete - there's no way for anyone else to find and check it, see WP:V. --Philcha (talk) 09:27, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Where can another editor check the album notes for Come What(ever) May? Is there a museum that keeps a copy? --Philcha (talk) 09:27, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Towers Record' "Stone Sour (CD)" does not support "Drummer Joel Ekman came back on board as well. This "reformation" later resulted in Stone Sour recording at Catamount Studios in Cedar Falls, Iowa" --Philcha (talk) 22:27, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• allmusic ((( Stone Sour > Charts & Awards > Billboard Albums ))) does not support "It was released August 1, 2006, and charted on twelve different charts". --Philcha (talk) 22:27, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• allmusic ((( Roadrunner United: The All Star Sessions > Overview ))) does not support "During the recording of the album, drummer Joel Ekman left the band for personal reasons. As a result, drummer Roy Mayorga was recruited, taking his place". --Philcha (talk) 22:27, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• So there are 3 refs with problems in the 2 paras about Stone Sour. If I were acting as a GA reviewer (and I've done a few), if I found another 3-4 I'd stop looking, put the review on "Hold", and fail the review if there was even one defective ref after the end of the "Hold" period. It's the responsibility of the nominator to make the article as near 100% as possible - GA review is a type of quality control, not a service to editors. --Philcha (talk) 22:27, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• In the ref for "Corey Taylor and his father first met on March 28, 2005, when he was 31 years old", the citation (description of the source) is "Corey Taylor NNDB. Retrieved 2010-04-01". This has some problems:
  • Required information is missing, e.g. author, title, date, ... --Philcha (talk) 19:49, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's standard formatting for this information - there are many examples in the articles. --Philcha (talk) 19:51, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This varies between OK and really poor. As with the refs, after 6-8 examples, a GA reviewer might "Hold" and fail the review if there are still problems at the end of the "Hold" period. Some examples of poor writing:

• "Prior to them viewing the series, there was a trailer for the 1978 horror film Halloween." Better "Before the series, ..." --Philcha (talk) 21:01, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "Taylor considers this to have "developed some sense of Slipknot in [himself]." (next sentence!) Better ""Taylor said this "developed some sense of Slipknot in [himself]." --Philcha (talk) 21:01, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "With Halloween introducing Taylor to masks and horror themes, Taylor's grandmother introduced him to rock music, showing him a collection ..." (next sentence!) has more than 1 problem:
  • It's ungrammatical as well as clumsy. Better "While Halloween introduced Taylor to masks and horror themes. --Philcha (talk) 21:01, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Worse, it's hard to see why "... masks and horror themes" is connected with "Taylor's grandmother introduced him to rock music ...", as Taylor wears a mask when performing with Slipknot. --Philcha (talk) 21:01, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "Taylor has had a prolific recording career to date and has appeared as a guest musician on albums by a number of high profile bands such as Soulfly, Apocalyptica and Damageplan" is verbose and WP:PEACOCK. Better "Taylor has had a prolific recording career to date and has appeared as a guest musician on albums by a number of high profile bands such as Soulfly, Apocalyptica and Damageplan and other bands." --Philcha (talk) 21:01, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Active voice is usually better than passive voice. Instead of "Corey was confirmed to appear on rapper Tech N9ne's album K.O.D., but did not submit his vocals in time, and was removed" I suggest "rapper Tech N9ne confirmed that Taylor was to their album K.O.D., but was removed because Taylor did not submit his vocals in time". --Philcha (talk) 21:01, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "Corey Taylor is the writer of an exceeding amount of songs for both of his projects" is verbose and WP:PEACOCK, and does not gives the reader any information - delete the sentence. --Philcha (talk) 21:01, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "Unlike the previous vocalist for Slipknot, Ander Colsefini, Taylor had a vocal style that was characterized by drummer Joey Jordison as having "really good melodic singing and he had a great personality"" is a train wreck - how much damage can you see. --Philcha (talk) 21:01, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

•  Done Lead image has OTRS ticket, I assume that's OK. --Philcha (talk) 22:03, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Non-free media use rationale for the house needs work, esp the Purpose. --Philcha (talk) 22:03, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Please check that the clips for "Three Nil" (34 sec)and "Bother" (27 sec) are not too long - there's policy some where. --Philcha (talk) 22:03, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A good reviewer will do these checks - but will expect you will have done them your well, as the article should be as good as it can be before the review. Check that:

• The URL checker has found no web that are using the article but are deads otherwise defective. If there are problems, you can often fix them. For example see User:Philcha#Links_that_have_died. If that does not work, you will need to look for new sources and, if that does not work, you may need to delete unsupported content per WP:V. --Philcha (talk) 05:12, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Check that wikilinks in the article do not to DAB pages, and fix any wikilinks. --Philcha (talk) 05:12, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you make a sub-page of your User page where you can note these and other tools and techniques, so you're not dependent on other users' pages. Of course it would be better if WP had a central, update and well-advertised page for this - I wish! --Philcha (talk) 05:12, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As a editor and as a reviewer I deal with the lead last, to ensure that it contains items that are only in the main text (see WP:LEAD) and that it prioritise the items - the lead can't cover everything. It will be particularly difficult here because of WP:BLP, as the phrasing and emphasise could make or break the article. I can't look at the lead now, because the rest of the article needs work first. --Philcha (talk) 06:04, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- - - - - - - - - - -

That's the end of my comments, I hope they've been helpful. If you find of them unclear or even wrong (it happeneds :-D), please comment - possibly next to the items I raised. --Philcha (talk) 06:04, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note to reviewer Philcha: Your review work is much appreciated, but please remember not to divide your review by level-3 subheadings, which messes up the PR page. I have converted them to level-4 which is fine. Brianboulton (talk) 23:27, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry! --Philcha (talk) 12:14, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]