Talk:Theatre of Pain

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Former good article nomineeTheatre of Pain was a Music good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
August 19, 2020Good article nomineeNot listed

Credits section[edit]

There's obviously something wrong here. First it states that vince neil played Rhythm Guitar and in the next line is says "mick mars - ALL guitars". Well, which is it, then? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:41, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Correct spelling[edit]

The album is actually called Theatre of Pain. I'm moving this article there. Taco Deposit | Talk-o to Taco 21:47, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)

Heavy Metal[edit]

This album is cleary not a heavy metal album it is a glam metal album. Like it says in the sentence in the article Tha album marked a step away from the traditional heavy metal sound of Too Fast for Love and Shout at the Devil towards a more glam metal influenced record in both sound and image. Who keeps editing this page and heavy metal Please Stop. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:31, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

"Clearly"? It sounds pretty similar to their previous two albums to and to most. It sounds nothing similar to something like "Pyromania" by Def Leppard which is supposed to be Glam Metal. It may have certain Glam Metal elements that would be used on their next two albums but this one is still primarily a heavy metal album. Even if it sounds like their next two records, those two are considered Heavy Metal. It makes no sense to ONLY have this as "glam metal". (talk) 23:52, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, this should have heavy metal featured. (talk) 18:49, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

And Glam metal is a Sub-genre of heavy metal, so Calling it heavy metal is correct anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:39, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Theatre of Pain. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:05, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Theatre of Pain/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 07:35, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose (Symbol comment 2.png) 1b. MoS (Symbol oppose vote.svg) 2a. ref layout (Symbol comment 2.png) 2b. cites WP:RS (Symbol comment 2.png) 2c. no WP:OR (Symbol oppose vote.svg) 2d. no WP:CV (Symbol comment 2.png)
3a. broadness (Symbol comment 2.png) 3b. focus (Symbol comment 2.png) 4. neutral (Symbol comment 2.png) 5. stable (Symbol comment 2.png) 6a. free or tagged images (Symbol comment 2.png) 6b. pics relevant (Symbol comment 2.png)
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked Symbol comment 2.png are unassessed

On first glance seems a bit messy but I will look into further detail soon. --K. Peake 07:35, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Quick fail[edit]

Saddens me to do this since you were very eager after finding out that I was reviewing this article, but it will have to be failed by me immediately. This is because there are multiple tags for unsourced information, as well as many citations in the infobox/lead which is not an appropriate procedure. The lead itself is poorly written, while the charts and certifications sections are not laid out well at all. Sorry for this quick fail. --K. Peake 07:51, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

No need to apologize, it's a learning experience. SolarFlashDiscussion 08:18, 19 August 2020 (UTC)