# Talk:Dystopia (Megadeth album)

Despite the album not yet having a name, this article has been cleared as an exception to TenPoundHammer's Law.
If this article is absolutely deemed unnecessary (by group consensus) as of now, please revert it back to user draft status, rather than delete it, because I have put months of hard work into this and would hate to lose all that. Thank you.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 15:30, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

The name of the album is Crepuscular.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.37.64.48 (talk) 02:42, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Now that the singles "Fatal Illusion" and "The Threat Is Real" are released, and judging by their style (genre, or sound), the new album's genre should be Thrash metal, indicating that the band has returned to their thrash sound. So I say that the genre should be mentioned as Thrash. DayKey (talk) 21:19, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Just an observation, but I think there are more important things than the sub-genre to focus on. Best wait until the album is either released, or available for streaming. Besides, Someone or other is gonna come along in about three weeks and change it to their liking anyway, followed another month later by someone else who is a self-described authority on genres and whatnot.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 05:32, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Pages for other albums talk briefly about the cover art. Can I add the name of the artist to the article? And would this interview with Dave Mustaine from Brave Words be an adequate source?  I'm afraid I don't have access to the liner notes.
Thanks! Greenpointless (talk) 11:39, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Do it, just don't start a new section for it. If you have something valuable to contribute, feel free to just go ahead in the future.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 21:16, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dystopia (Megadeth album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: DannyMusicEditor (talk · contribs) 01:07, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

I'll take this one, and I'll do it soon, but I don't know exactly when. I'll do my best to get to it within the next few days. dannymusiceditor  Speak up!  01:07, 2 August 2016 (UTC)


### Lead and infobox
First of all, it's thin. Very thin. Not much at all in here. Add some more text summarizing the body details.
Will address--L1A1 FAL (talk) 00:34, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
By my current judgement, I think this is now okay for passing, though it might not do for an FA. dannymusiceditor  Speak up!  20:16, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Second, there's a Youtube source in here that's copy-pasted and practically makes up the first paragraph. Can't you do better than that?
Could you clarify which source please? Are you talking about a source with an embedded youtube video?--L1A1 FAL (talk) 00:34, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Maybe I'm using the tool wrong. '^^ I was using the copyvio detector and the only thing different about it was Toby Wright rather than Chris Rakestraw. It's possible that the video was published after this was already written. dannymusiceditor  Speak up!  17:38, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Dang, hit the wrong button when I was using it. I had "search engine" checked on it, and when I unchecked it, the link was gone. My bad. dannymusiceditor  Speak up!  17:42, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Some might argue that this album's not thrash (even though I wouldn't). Can you provide a source for it?
 Done--L1A1 FAL (talk) 00:34, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
"Dystopia" was not an official single. It was just uploaded as a streamable song before the album's release. That does not make it a single. The other two actually received official, separate releases. Please remove the title track from the infobox.
 Done--L1A1 FAL (talk) 00:34, 3 August 2016 (UTC)


### Background and recording
There's not really recording info here. A whole lot of background (you're good there), some writing, and suddenly release, but there's no recording information.
I changed the section header to "Background and production" and am trying to rework it (WIP as I type this)--L1A1 FAL (talk) 00:34, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
The recording data in the infobox should be in here somewhere. I don't see it.
The only thing that was missing was the end of recording (July 2015) which has been added. Again though, I am now reworking the section.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 00:34, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
It's a bit scattered up. I'd recommend making one section for background, and one for writing and recording. Make sure it's ordered chronologically, too.
WIP ongoing--L1A1 FAL (talk) 00:34, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
The last paragraph before we get to the album cover should be moved to the Release section. Most of the time, album articles should have info about the single releases in the release section, unless there's some funny timing going on with the dates of the singles.
 Done--L1A1 FAL (talk) 05:23, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Add the month in which Nick Menza died (May).
 Done--L1A1 FAL (talk) 05:23, 6 August 2016 (UTC)


### Songs
Note: I have reworked this section--L1A1 FAL (talk) 16:28, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Add some text about the Thrash metal sources in here, if possible.
 Done--L1A1 FAL (talk) 16:28, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Make note that "Why We Lie to You" didn't make the final cut, or, if this song did, make sure we get the details on its apparent retitling from its demo version.
Removed--L1A1 FAL (talk) 16:28, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
It's skeptically small and would surely be scrutinized for an FA, but I think it barely scrapes by for GA. I mean, I hope there's more. If there's not, it may be starting to become difficult to make Megadeth GAs.
Addresed. Part of the problem is the way I wrote the article in the first place. I really should have gone through this with a fine tooth comb and re-written the majority of the prose before nomination. Anyway...  Done--L1A1 FAL (talk) 16:45, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
The release of the snippets of "The Emperor" and "Conquer or Die" would probably fit better in the Release section. That being said, when we do that, we will have a quasiparagraph in its place. (Quasiparagraph (n. meaning "almost paragraph") A short paragraph with less than three sentences. One should generally do their best to avoid writing like this.) The paragraph should be expanded, or, if you can find some good way to do it, merge it.
Removed--L1A1 FAL (talk) 16:28, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
I'm okay with that, so long as you re-add the info about "Conquer or Die" and "The Emperor" - it was reliably sourced and relevant, just not in the right section. dannymusiceditor  Speak up!  19:48, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Re-added --L1A1 FAL (talk) 16:46, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
New point (8/6): I'd prefer the singles in the release section, but if you'd really like to keep it here I don't see why it wouldn't be okay for a GA. dannymusiceditor  Speak up!  20:10, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Moved--L1A1 FAL (talk) 16:49, 7 August 2016 (UTC)


### Release
You're all good here, except that this will be filled with what I asked to be moved from previous sections.
Oh, one thing. Make a separate paragraph for the deluxe edition and move the DiVita info about the title track to the previous paragraph.
 Done--L1A1 FAL (talk) 05:21, 6 August 2016 (UTC)


### Critical reception
Okay, the first thing I see is that the section's prose is shorter than the table of reviews. That generally means expansion.
 Done--L1A1 FAL (talk) 16:40, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
You mention Metacritic in the lead, but not here? I'm shocked. Please put something about its MC score here.
 Done--L1A1 FAL (talk) 05:20, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Most of the reviews you've added to the prose are not ones in the table. I would most encourage you to just add content from these sources you did not write about: Kerrang!, Metal Hammer, Rolling Stone, Now, and Consequence of Sound. However, if you'd just like to replace a couple for ones in the prose already, I'm okay with that, but I'd at least like you to include the missing ones with the most notability - at least the Rolling Stone and Kerrang! review please, or more if you think you should.
Kerrang is cited from Metacritic. If you feel that this isn't sufficient, just let me know and I'll remove and replace it in the table. (I just replaced it with the Blabbermouth.net review.)  I have added the rest in the prose--L1A1 FAL (talk) 16:40, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Great job on expanding the content, but now we've got a clunky instance of phrasing and a ref problem. For example, Kory Grow declared that Megadeth "sound reborn" on the album said the band has "rarely sounded tighter or more cutting." See the problem? Next, you done goofed on the reference for Metal Hammer's review. Also, link Consequence of Sound in the prose. dannymusiceditor  Speak up!  20:07, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Got it. I played with that a couple times, and just missed an "and" and missed a space in the Metal Hammer ref tag. Done--L1A1 FAL (talk) 03:59, 7 August 2016 (UTC)


### Personnel
Not a GA requirement, but I think it'd be much better looking if you wrote "Credits are adapted from the album's liner notes."<ref>blehhhhh</ref> instead of having a ref next to every header.
 Done Fixed this one since it was a quick fix--L1A1 FAL (talk) 21:25, 3 August 2016 (UTC)


### Charts
No changes necessary. However, I'd like to take time to say I like the idea of having a little prose chart overview before the table! Cool!


### Overall checklist
Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors: 
Good enough, I guess. There are several places I'd prefer different wording, though. I strongly suggest sending this to GOCE after the review has been closed.
B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists: 

Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section: 

B. Cites reliable sources, where necessary: 

C. No original research: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects: 

B. Focused (see summary style): 

Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias: 

Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc: 
Not recently, though I remember some when it had come out seven months ago.
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: 
B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 
Alright, so I'll give you seven days to start, and if progress is coming steadily and you're still not done, ask me for more time. I love a lot of Megadeth's stuff (I have Cryptic Writings and the deluxe edition of Countdown to Extinction), and even though I love this one a little less but still more than their last one, it's been an honor to review one of these articles. The above seems like a bunch of work even with all the green in the checklist, but I think it's still possible. Good luck! dannymusiceditor  Speak up!  17:48, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
P.S. If I do end up passing this, I'd strongly recommend you nominate this for Good Topic. Their discography is an FL and all their other studio albums are rated GA! dannymusiceditor  Speak up!  17:53, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

@L1A1 FAL: This article is very close to finishing all my requirements! Since you've clearly committed yourself to getting this article GA, I am willing to give you more time if more things pop up past the 10th of August. I'd love to see this go perfect in my eyes! dannymusiceditor  Speak up!  20:14, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
@L1A1 FAL: Everything checks out great! I will now promote the article, but in doing so, I'd also like to ask that you mention its peak position was the second highest of any Megadeth album behind Countdown to Extinction, or the highest charting since Youthanasia. A number-three album is incredibly impressive these days for a thrash metal band, even for the big four, and especially after they had been declining. dannymusiceditor  Speak up!  18:03, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Is Fatal Illusion noteworthy enough for its own article? I'm asking for two reasons.
1. It was released as a single from the album. Many songs which are released as singles have their own articles, even if there isn't much more detail on them than their placement on charts.
2. There is an interview with Dave Mustaine in which he explains the idea behind the song.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.39.133.216 (talk) 02:15, 5 November 2018 (UTC)