Talk:The Marshall Mathers LP 2

New single

"Survival" just became the second single to be released by the album, you can look for it on iTunes. Is anyone going to create an article for that? --79.13.227.6 (talk) 14:54, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

See "Survival".—Iknow23 (talk) 03:28, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Tracklist confirmed

http://consequenceofsound.net/2013/10/eminems-tracklist-for-the-marshall-mathers-lp-2-features-kendrick-lamar-and-rihanna/

From his Instagram post:

1. Bad Guy

2. Parking Lot (Skit)

3. Rhyme or Reason

4. So Much Better

5. Survival

6. Legacy

7. Asshole (Feat. Skylar Grey)

8. Berzerk

9. Rap God

10. Brainless

11. Stronger Than I Was

12. The Monster (Feat. Rihanna)

13. So Far

14. Love Game (Feat. Kendrick Lamar)

15. Headlights (Feat. Nate Ruess)

16. Evil Twin

70.15.29.127 (talk) 23:31, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

DJ Premier

Back in 2009 and then in 2011, during the BET Cyphers, DJ Premier did state that there had been plans for an Premier / Em collabo, but he himself confirmed on Twitter that the Beats Per Minute-fueled rumor is not true - they didn't record anything in early 2012. Who knows, it maybe happened afterwards, or he sent him a beat prior to the whole thing, but unfortunately, it doesn't seem that they did. Too bad though, one of the greatest producers plus one of the greatest rappers would have been awesome. --Khanassassin ☪ 16:05, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

GA?

Who'd be ready to give this article a big clean-up and source it up, format it up, all of that, so we can bring it to GA-Class? I've added a considerable amount of references today and fixed some of the ref templates up, plus contributors such as STATicVerseatide consistently and constantly clean up the article as well. Of course, it can't be promoted prior to its release, but polishing it up as much as possible before the reviews come in wouldn't be bad thing to do. So, who's willing to collaborate on a large-scale fix up? --Khanassassin ☪ 18:29, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

I am always willing to lend a hand, it just sucks that the reason it looks not that good for the most part, is due to the horrible condition the Eminem's eighth studio album article was in. I wish I could have started it from scratch when it was announced, but Em is one of the few artists people want to create "____ number studio album" articles for the second they announce they are working on their untitled next album. Not much press this time around either, considering the amount of promotion he did for Recovery. We might want to hold off a little bit, because since now that the tracklist is revealed and we are less than a month out a lot of information is sure to be pouring in. I will try to expand it in the coming days though. It definitely is a long way away from GA status at the moment, so there is no rush at all. Even after its release there is normally a wait time of at least six months before an article should be nominated for GA status. STATic message me! 19:57, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

If we're going for GA (and potentially FA) status then I'm in, although I think we should go through a peer review sometime in late November before nominating it in early 2014. As I've learned from the iPhone 5S's FA nomination, nominating articles right after release doesn't go over too well. Zach Vega (talk to me) 23:38, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Cool, noticeable progress is already being made. STAT, you're right about that once an article is already created, and is in a messy state, it's hard to get it cleaned up. It should START off clean. And Zach, thanks for the barnstar. :) --Khanassassin ☪ 09:56, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

STAT, I completely understand what you're saying about writing about everything chronologically, but I placed the 50 Cent info towards the end because it didn't actually happen and the first thing that a reader would find out shouldn't be how Fifty said that he'll be on the album and he actually wasn't just because he said it before Rihanna's tweet, etc. :) --Khanassassin ☪ 10:22, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

It just makes it easier to read with things being stated in the order that the events happened, then by the time they get to the end of the section they find out who Eminem actually decided to have featured on the album. STATic message me! 13:43, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Singles chart

I have added a chart with the position and sales of the two currently released singles. Zach Vega (talk to me) 14:31, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

They are generally discouraged in GAs and FAs, they are one of the reasons Recovery failed a recent GAN, as they were advised against there. That kind of information is easily found on the singles articles, and in the discography. It becomes redundant having it in the album article too, you know? STATic message me! 14:52, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

I saw no objection to the singles chart in Recovery's GA review. It was referring to chart succession (e.g. Album 1 charts before Main Album then Album 2 succeeds it). Zach Vega (talk to me) 15:45, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh your right, an editor completely changed the article before he/she nominated, my mistake. However, my other points still remain the same, and other GAs such as MBDTF, Thank Me Later, and Watch the Throne do not include them. I was also under the impression that they are generally discouraged. STATic message me! 16:00, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

I haven't seen the singles chart being discouraged in any article. The chart also provides a more encompassing view on the album's commercial reception. Zach Vega (talk to me) 16:08, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Not really, it gives a view of the singles commercial reception, when the article is about the album. If anyone wants to know more information about the singles, we link to their articles three times in this article. That is why we just have a summary of them on this page, and not the entire article copied into the Singles section. Major chart positions can always be mentioned in the Singles section, and unless something changed that information is already there. STATic message me! 16:16, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

The commercial reception of the singles is directly related to the commercial reception to the album. Proving the singles chart in the article would provide easier access and a more in-depth look at reception and sales data. Zach Vega (talk to me) 17:18, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Not really, MCHG and Yeezus did not have a single precede their releases and both sold 500,000 and 300,000 copies in their first weeks. Same thing with My Name Is My Name, none of its singles charted on any chart including Bubbling Under charts, and it is projected to sell 80-90 thousand copies first week, single sales are not relevant to the album's sale performance. As I said, any significant chart positions/certifications can always be mentioned in the "Singles" section as they already are. Anything additional is trivial in this article and can be easily found in the discography article, and in the single's articles. STATic message me! 17:34, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

"Holy Grail" charted in the top 10 of the US Billboard 200. But that's not really the point. We don't have a reason to not include the singles chart - it's notable, it can easily be sourced, it's more convenient than going to the singles and articles pages, and it adds to the article overall. Zach Vega (talk to me) 20:47, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Personally, I prefer not adding it. The references will be filled with just some Billboard bullshit and we'll just be re-sourcing what's written in the discography and single articles. Most album GAs and FAs don't usually include single charts anymore, anyways. --Khanassassin ☪ 12:54, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

What's wrong with sourcing charts websites? We're going to be sourcing them in the prose anyways. Album chart positions and sales are included, and they are in the artist's discography. Just because many GAs and FAs don't feature singles charts doesn't mean this one can't. Zach Vega (talk to me) 13:24, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with it, it's just that 50% of the references will be dedicated to some numbers that can easily be found with a click on a wikilink. I just like to keep single information a bit brief in the main article, rather in prose, and expand in the single's article, rather than filling this one with needles chart tables. And this, again, seems to be a preferred system for music articles. --Khanassassin ☪ 16:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

I see what you're saying. It makes sense to include the majority of singles information in the article itself. Zach Vega (talk to me) 20:11, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Bonus Tracks are out

why no one has added them yet, they are on the Eminem website for sake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.216.223.233 (talk) 18:53, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

I do not see them there, could you provide a link? STATic message me! 19:36, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't think they are on the site, however the pre-order bundles confirm that there are 5 bonus tracks (which doesn't include the Call of Duty: Ghosts promotional bonus track). But Amazon.fr provides a list with five tracks (three of the tracks are repeated a few times, lol) and HipHop-N-More re-posted it as well. It should perhaps get a mention, but I'm not sure about listing a full template in the track listing section yet, because Amazon does occasionally provide false information (not always, but it has happened). --Khanassassin ☪ 19:42, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

98% of the time Amazon is right, we should just add them and if it ends up being a little different we can fix it in a second. Koala15 (talk) 20:07, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

HipHop-N-More along with Amazon are not reliable sources per Wikipedia:ALBUM/SOURCES. HHNM is a blog that reports rumors a lot, and Amazon is not reliable when it comes to track listings, Dave Matthews on Wolf or the four non-existent bonus tracks on Yeezus anyone? Both rumors started on Amazon, ended up on Wikipedia, ended up not being true. This is why Wikipedia:ALBUM/SOURCES specifically says Amazon is not reliable, the French Amazon is the one that reported that too. Because it is dubious and we have not gone any official word on this, we should just leave it off until we get that, rather than have incorrect information on the page. The mention in the "release and promotion" section is enough for now. STATic message me! 20:27, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

It says it on the MMLP2 preorder page ("includes 5 bonus tracks"), however it doesn't name them. Zach Vega (talk to me) 20:47, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

don't make such a big deal, just post them. its real.., whats the difference of writing them now than tomorrow or in 2 days when more websites start to provide them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.216.223.233 (talk) 22:43, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Survival

Survival is not a single off MMLP2, although it will be featured on the album. The second single is Rap God. --188.109.153.81 (talk) 14:00, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

It was released for retail sale on iTunes and Amazon.com, and is also featured on the standard edition of the album. How does that make it not a single, and "Rap God" a single? What is the difference between the two? STATic message me! 16:08, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

"Survival" also has a music video. Zach Vega (talk to me) 20:28, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it's a single "Survival - Single Eminem" HERE.—Iknow23 (talk) 20:34, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

It IS a single, but not a single of MMLP2, although it will be featured on the album. Understood? --188.109.153.81 (talk) 19:57, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

So it is a single, and it is featured on the album. That makes it a single from this album, many many sources call "Rap God" the third single, and what is the reliable source saying that "Survival is not a single from this album. STATic message me! 20:24, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Good work, fellas

Good work, everybody. The article's slowly starting to shape up. I know that it'll take months for it to actually be nominated, but GA status isn't looking to be a problem. References are well-formated, the articles is sectioned properly, and most of the important information has been added. A bit more polishing, particularly with prose, but there's still time. :) --Khanassassin ☪ 16:02, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Eminem feat. Rihanna - The Monster (Single)

Eminem is slated to release "The Monster" as his next single off The Marshall Mathers LP 2, an album scheduled to be released November 5.

Detroit, Michigan radio station 98.7 reports that it is slated to premiere the single October 28.

Eminem and Rihanna have collaborated on several selections, including "Love the Way You Lie," "Love the Way You Lie 2" and "Numb."

Um, okay? This is already mentioned, and I removed your promotion. STATic message me! 01:38, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Leak

Article should be modified to indicate that MMLP2 leaked on October 30, 2013.

hasitleaked.com/2013/eminem-mmlp2/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.13.110.177 (talk) 19:25, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

See WP:LEAK, why would we advertise its availability for illegal download? I do not think it has even leaked, only one random person stated that. STATic message me! 19:44, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

I do not think it has even leaked, only one random person stated that. Are you sure? Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 19:58, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Well what do you want, me to apologize for being optimistic? Either way no matter what sources report it, refer to WP:LEAK. STATic message me! 20:45, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 31 October 2013

Please change mis-spelling of song title "bezerk" to "berzerk" The error is in this line "A sample of the album's lead single "Bezerk"." Zaltod (talk) 15:49, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. --Stfg (talk) 16:23, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Song "Legacy" Name Corrections

The song "Legacy" writers name is spelled incorrectly as David Brock.... his correct name is David Brook.

And the other writers correct name is Polina Goudieva.

It would be great if you could correct these.

thank you.

Iamversatilemusic (talk) 17:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 18:07, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

The Marshall Mathers LP 2 - Critically Acclaimed instead of Generally Positive

In the Critical Reception section of this album, you mentioned that The Marshall Mathers LP 2 had gotten generally positive reviews from music critics.

However, based on all the near-perfect reviews across all music critics, I think that it should be stated that The Marshall Mathers LP 2 has been getting universal critical acclaim.

Literally every review I've read has stated how nearly-perfect the album is and how it is up there with one of Eminem's best work.

To say that the album has gotten 'generally positive reviews' is frankly an understatement and an insult.

I really hope you would change the status of the album and confirm its status as an universally acclaimed album.

Thanks, and please consider my request.

Here are some sources regarding the excellence of his new album.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/music/2013/11/01/eminem-marshall-mathers-lp-2-listen-up-review/3322311/

http://noisey.vice.com/en_uk/blog/the-marshall-mathers-lp-2-is-the-album-that-every-eminem-fan-could-have-hoped-for

14.192.215.182 (talk) 03:40, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

It is a bit too soon to change it to acclaim, not even half of the reviews have been released. Koala15 (talk) 04:06, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

I've removed the "generally", though, as that makes it sound half-hearted. --Stfg (talk) 09:50, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

This deserves more expansion.

I think this page needs more info. 14.192.215.182 (talk) 08:28, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please make your request in a "change X to Y" format. Also, please stop peppering this page with repeat requests. One of each is enough. I have removed duplicates. --Stfg (talk) 10:04, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

critical reception

international business times gave Marshall Mathers LP 2 4.5 stars out of 5 saying In "Marshall Mathers LP 2," Eminem raps like an athlete. His chops are fluid, and rhymes - heavy. It seems like the 41-year-old has explored and unearthed a new "Slim Shady" in "Marshall Mathers LP 2." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.200.14.223 (talk) 07:25, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.200.14.223 (talk) 08:36, 4 November 2013 (UTC) 

critical reception

HIPHOPDX gave marshall mathers lp2 4 stars out of 5 saying - The production and detrimental hyper-lyricism showcase Eminem's worst habits throughout the album, but there is plenty of good on "The Marshall Mathers LP 2."

http://www.hiphopdx.com/index/album-reviews/id.2174/title.eminem-marshall-mathers-lp-2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikhil112 (talk • contribs) 17:09, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Marshall Mathers LP2

its better to mention in critical reception category that Marshall Mathers LP2 has received mostly positive reviews instead of generally positive as it has a metacritic score of 78 equal to that of its prequel,later on if the score is 78 you can change it to acclaim from critics.

it would be better if u consider my request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.200.15.245 (talk) 04:26, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

81 or higher is considered acclaim, so at the moment we cannot say that. Also there has already been 3-4 mixed reviews, so at this point it is "generally positive" not mostly positive. STATic message me! 05:22, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

i refered to many pages of albums. this album has many positive reviews and only some negative ones, so generally positive is not suitable in this case for example recovery had many negative reviews and more positive also then you gave it generally positive, but marshall mathers lp 2 has many positive reviews though only some mixed so, you can call it positive instead of generally positive. positive would be the best mention. consider my statement — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikhil112 (talk • contribs) 16:57, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

The Metacritic score is now 74. Literally all other albums with a score like this are referred to as having "generally positive reviews". Eminem does not get special treatment just because he's Eminem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.190.89.130 (talk) 04:06, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Pitchfork's review has been released today http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/18733-eminem-the-marshall-mathers-lp-2/ 4.7/10. somebody please add this to the ratings. i believe the metacritic rating has dropped because of this too. thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kanyestan (talk • contribs) 18:48, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

SUPERBAD (2007 film) sample

Superbad was sampled in "Brainless". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.188.30.77 (talk) 04:14, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Producer on Don't Front

That song is produced b Da Beatminerz with Buckshot on the hook. "I Gotcha Open" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.228.145.233 (talk) 20:48, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

singles and general matter

in singles section you can also mention the chart performance of monster on billborad hot 100 and other charts just like you mentioned for berzerk and other singles. add this monster was released as a fourth single from marshall mathers lp 2 and debuted at no. 3 on the us billboard hot 100 and also topped the hot r&b chart becoming eminem's first single to do so. it also topped the charts in many countries. i think addition of this matter would be useful in singles section and general introduction of the page. i hope you will add this as its useful and reliable information with many sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikhil112 (talk • contribs) 07:21, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Singles chronology?

I'm just wondering, since "Survival" was premiered first, should the paragraph mentioning it be moved to the top on singles? JDHuff185 (talk) 15:10, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Yeah it was premiered first, but it was officially released two months later as the second single. Koala15 (talk) 15:17, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Charted Number 1 in Germany

just sayin — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.24.144.129 (talk) 19:32, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

alt-texts of the pictures of Dre and Rubin

Well, they're not wrong, but not very useful either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.82.217.19 (talk) 08:12, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

David Brook is not credited in the personnel section.

David Brook is left uncredited under personnel for MMLP2. AllMusic got it incorrect as seen in sources.

http://www.discogs.com/Eminem-The-Marshall-Mathers-LP-2/release/5069151

http://www.xxlmag.com/news/2013/11/eminem-real-production-credits-mmlp-2/

http://rapgenius.com/Eminem-mmlp2-credits-lyrics#note-2396142 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Codeword87 (talk • contribs) 03:42, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

[1][2]

Codeword87 (talk) 02:51, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Already done Thanks, Celestra (talk) 20:47, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Spelling Error

Under recording and production ""Legacy" was written approximately two years ago during a session between singer-songwriter Poline and songwriter David Brook"

should read ""Legacy" was written approximately two years ago during a session between singer-songwriter POLINA and songwriter David Brook..."

http://www.discogs.com/Eminem-The-Marshall-Mathers-LP-2/release/5069151

Codeword87 (talk) 03:36, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Done with thanks, NiciVampireHeart 09:07, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Personnel is incorrect.

Personnel now is:

   Aalias – Producer
   Michael Aiello – Composer
   Erik Alcock – Composer, Guitar
   Maurice "Malex" Alexander – Vocal Engineer
   Rod Argent – Composer
   Maki Athanasiou – Composer, Instrumentation
   Bebe – Vocals (Background)
   Jon Bellion – Composer
   Jeff Bhasker – Composer, Producer
   Delbert Bowers – Mixing Assistant
   Phillip Broussard Jr. – Assistant Engineer
   Vincent Brown – Composer
   Tony Campana – Engineer
   Larry Chatman – Project coordinator
   R.J. Colston – Mixing assistant
   David Covell – Assistant engineer
   Anthony Criss – Composer
   Dennis Dennehy – Marketing, publicity
   Jeremy Deputat – Cover photo, photography
   DJ Khalil – Producer
   DJ Mormile – A&R
   Dr. Dre – Executive Producer, Mixing
   DVLP – Instrumentation, Producer
   Eminem – Additional Production, Mixing, Primary Artist, Producer
   Robyn Fenty –Composer
   Filthy – Producer
   John Fisher – A&R
   Frequency – Producer
   Brian "DJ Frequency" Fryzel – Composer
   Chris Galland – Mixing assistant
   Brian "Big Bass" Gardner – Mastering
   Laura Giordano – Composer
   Keir Gist – Composer
   Polina Goudieva – Composer
   Alicia Graham – A&R
   Alexander Grant – Composer
   Skylar Grey – Featured Artist
   Larry Griffin Jr. – Composer
   Stephen Hacker – Composer
   Holly Brook Hafermann – Composer
   Emile Haynie – Composer, Producer
   Adam Horovitz – Composer
   I.L.O. – Keyboards
   Pranam Injeti – Composer, Guitar
   Mauricio Iragorri – Mixing
   Sarah Jaffe – Choir/Chorus, Composer
   Joe Strange – Engineer, Keyboards, Programming
   Alex Da Kid – Producer
   Aaron Kleinstub – Composer
   Brent Kolatalo – Digital Editing
   Jason Lader – Bass, Digital Editing, Engineer, Guitar, Keyboards
   Kendrick Lamar – Composer, Featured Artist
   Mark Landon – Composer
   Ken Lewis – Digital Editing
   Eric Lynn – Assistant Engineer
   M-Phazes – Producer
   Keira Marie – Choir/Chorus
   Manny Marroquin – Mixing
   Marshall Mathers – Composer
   Kevin Mazur – Photography
   Ziggy Modeliste – Composer
   Alina Moffat – Sample Clearance
   Josh Mosser – Engineer
   Arthur Neville – Composer
   Cyril Neville – Composer
   Sean Oakley – Assistant Engineer
   Ashley Palmer – Assistant Coordinator
   Dart Parker – A&R
   Polina – Vocals
   Khalil Abdul Rahman – Composer, Drum Programming
   RedOne – Producer
   Luis Resto – Additional Production, Composer, Keyboards
   Gian Piero Reverberi – Composer
   Bebe Rexha – Composer
   Rihanna – Featured Artist
   Jenny Risher – Photography
   Liz Rodrigues – Choir/Chorus, Composer
   Paul Rosenberg – Photography
   Rick Rubin – Composer, Executive Producer, Producer
   Nate Ruess – Composer, Featured Artist
   S1 – Producer
   Jason Sangerman – Marketing
   Mike Saputo – Art Direction, Design
   Les Scurry – Production Coordination
   Sid Roams – Producer
   Manny Smith – A&R
   Billy Squier – Composer
   Mike Strange – Composer, Engineer, Guitar, Guitar (Bass), Mixing
   Streetrunner – Producer
   Vinny Venditto – Composer, Producer
   Nicholas Warwar – Composer
   Adam Yauch – Composer
   Bigram Zayas – Composer

should read

Personnel

   Credits for The Marshall Mathers LP 2 adapted from Discogs 

http://www.discogs.com/Eminem-The-Marshall-Mathers-LP-2/release/5069151

   Aalias – Producer
   Michael Aiello – Composer
   Erik Alcock – Composer, Guitar
   Maurice "Malex" Alexander – Vocal Engineer
   Rod Argent – Composer
   Maki Athanasiou – Composer, Instrumentation
   Bebe – Vocals (Background)
   Jon Bellion – Composer
   Jeff Bhasker – Composer, Producer
   Delbert Bowers – Mixing Assistant
   David Brook - Composer 
   Phillip Broussard Jr. – Assistant Engineer
   Vincent Brown – Composer
   Tony Campana – Engineer
   Larry Chatman – Project coordinator
   R.J. Colston – Mixing assistant
   David Covell – Assistant engineer
   Anthony Criss – Composer
   Dennis Dennehy – Marketing, publicity
   Jeremy Deputat – Cover photo, photography
   DJ Khalil – Producer
   DJ Mormile – A&R
   Dr. Dre – Executive Producer, Mixing
   DVLP – Instrumentation, Producer
   Eminem – Additional Production, Mixing, Primary Artist, Producer
   Robyn Fenty –Composer
   Filthy – Producer
   John Fisher – A&R
   Frequency – Producer
   Brian "DJ Frequency" Fryzel – Composer
   Chris Galland – Mixing assistant
   Brian "Big Bass" Gardner – Mastering
   Laura Giordano – Composer
   Keir Gist – Composer
   Polina Goudieva – Composer
   Alicia Graham – A&R
   Alexander Grant – Composer
   Skylar Grey – Featured Artist
   Larry Griffin Jr. – Composer
   Stephen Hacker – Composer
   Holly Brook Hafermann – Composer
   Emile Haynie – Composer, Producer
   Adam Horovitz – Composer
   I.L.O. – Keyboards
   Pranam Injeti – Composer, Guitar
   Mauricio Iragorri – Mixing
   Sarah Jaffe – Choir/Chorus, Composer
   Joe Strange – Engineer, Keyboards, Programming
   Alex Da Kid – Producer
   Aaron Kleinstub – Composer
   Brent Kolatalo – Digital Editing
   Jason Lader – Bass, Digital Editing, Engineer, Guitar, Keyboards
   Kendrick Lamar – Composer, Featured Artist
   Mark Landon – Composer
   Ken Lewis – Digital Editing
   Eric Lynn – Assistant Engineer
   M-Phazes – Producer
   Keira Marie – Choir/Chorus
   Manny Marroquin – Mixing
   Marshall Mathers – Composer
   Kevin Mazur – Photography
   Ziggy Modeliste – Composer
   Alina Moffat – Sample Clearance
   Josh Mosser – Engineer
   Arthur Neville – Composer
   Cyril Neville – Composer
   Sean Oakley – Assistant Engineer
   Ashley Palmer – Assistant Coordinator
   Dart Parker – A&R
   Polina – Vocals
   Khalil Abdul Rahman – Composer, Drum Programming
   Luis Resto – Additional Production, Composer, Keyboards
   Gian Piero Reverberi – Composer
   Bebe Rexha – Composer
   Rihanna – Featured Artist
   Jenny Risher – Photography
   Liz Rodrigues – Choir/Chorus, Composer
   Paul Rosenberg – Photography
   Rick Rubin – Composer, Executive Producer, Producer
   Nate Ruess – Composer, Featured Artist
   S1 – Producer
   Jason Sangerman – Marketing
   Mike Saputo – Art Direction, Design
   Les Scurry – Production Coordination
   Sid Roams – Producer
   Manny Smith – A&R
   Billy Squier – Composer
   Mike Strange – Composer, Engineer, Guitar, Guitar (Bass), Mixing
   Streetrunner – Producer
   Vinny Venditto – Composer, Producer
   Nicholas Warwar – Composer
   Adam Yauch – Composer
   Bigram Zayas – Composer

David Brook was not there.

http://www.discogs.com/Eminem-The-Marshall-Mathers-LP-2/release/5069151</ref>

http://www.xxlmag.com/news/2013/11/eminem-real-production-credits-mmlp-2/

http://www.discogs.com/Eminem-The-Marshall-Mathers-LP-2/release/5069151

Codeword87 (talk) 16:43, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Edit request

In the intro, please change "The album received generally positive reviews from music critics, with praise going to Eminem's technical rapping skill and production choices" to "The album received generally positive reviews from music critics, with praise going to Eminem's technical rapping skill and daring production choices"

Not the inclusion of "daring" before the final two words. This adjective is important because the production choices themselves did not garner unanimous praise. Quite the contrary. However, the fact that Eminem took risks and went in a new direction with his production was praised. Hence the inclusion of "daring" or a similar adjective being needed to change the meaning. 138.73.72.73 (talk) 05:53, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Not done: Flowery adjectives like "daring" are not encyclopedic. Please read WP:PEACOCK. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 20:52, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Chart Positions

Belgian Albums (Ultratop Flanders)-1 http://www.ultratop.be/nl/showitem.asp?interpret=Eminem&titel=The+Marshall+Mathers+LP+2&cat=a </ref> Belgian Albums (Ultratop Wallonia)-5 http://www.ultratop.be/fr/showitem.asp?interpret=Eminem&titel=The+Marshall+Mathers+LP+2&cat=a </ref> Croatian Albums-19 http://www.hdu-toplista.com/index.php?what=albumi&w=details&id=2467 </ref> Czech Albums-26 http://www.ifpicr.cz/hitparada/index.php?a=titul&hitparada=14&titul=151986&sec=1a22f551f6d2884f42d64c7faee68c8d </ref> Italian Albums-2 http://www.fimi.it/main/chart_id/1683 </ref> Japanese Albums-10 http://www.oricon.co.jp/rank/ja/w/2013-12-02/more/2/ </ref> South Korean Albums-40 http://gaonchart.co.kr/digital_chart/album.php?nationGbn=T&current_week=47&current_year=2013&chart_Time=week </ref> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.245.160.218 (talk) 06:30, 29 November 2013 (UTC) Taiwanese Albums http://www.g-music.com.tw/GMusicProduct.aspx?ProductID=0602537588121 </ref> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.43.154.75 (talk) 02:09, 10 December 2013 (UTC) Greek Albums http://archive.is/Dni4J — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.43.157.226 (talk) 09:53, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

The Marshall Matters LP 2 add

It has been listed as one of the best albums of 2013 http://www.rollingstone.com/music/lists/50-best-albums-of-2013-20131202/vampire-weekend-modern-vampires-of-the-city-19691231 72.22.155.87 (talk) 17:49, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Already done Thanks, Celestra (talk) 03:54, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Add

http://www.complex.com/music/2013/12/best-albums-november-2013/eminem-the-marshall-mathers-lp-ii#gallery

Complex named it the best album of November 65.48.135.231 (talk) 11:18, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

The list is not ranked, it just throws out the albums they thought were the best of November. Either way, Complex does so many lists its not really notable enough to mention, that he was included on the list.STATic message me! 17:00, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 December 2013

http://www.complex.com/music/2013/12/the-50-best-albums-of-2013/eminem-marshall-mathers-lp-2#gallery

Complex listed it at #6 of the best albums of 2013, the source is provided above 216.110.126.156 (talk) 19:05, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

 Already done STATic message me! 03:45, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 December 2013

http://www.popmatters.com/feature/177166-the-75-best-albums-of-2013/P2/ It list at #49 on popmatters list

http://www.musicomh.com/features/lists/musicomhs-top-100-albums-2013-complete-list It listed at #64 on this list here as well

69.73.243.251 (talk) 02:09, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please make your request in a "change X to Y" format. --Stfg (talk) 11:12, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 December 2013

http://www.fasterlouder.com.au/features/37856/FLs-Top-50-Albums-of-2013?page=5

It listed at #17 on this list of best albums of 2013

http://www.popmatters.com/feature/177166-the-75-best-albums-of-2013/P2/

And its listed at #49 on popmatters list of best albums of 2013 69.73.242.165 (talk) 00:33, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please make your request in a "change X to Y" format. --Stfg (talk) 11:12, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

umm how do I do that ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.73.242.165 (talk • contribs) 12:08, 12 December 2013‎

You state the text you propose to be added, and where you want it to be added. If it replaces something already there, identify that. For example:

• Change "Carrots are green" to "Carrots are blue"; or
• After "Carrots are blue" add "and broccoli is purple".

(This is in addition to providing your sources, of course.) Also, please add any new message at the end and sign it again. Regards, --Stfg (talk) 14:55, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 December 2013

Under the heading accolades

After "It was positioned at number 64 on MusicOMH's list of the top 100 of the year" add "It was listed at #49 on Popmatter list of the best albums of 2013 http://www.popmatters.com/feature/177166-the-75-best-albums-of-2013/P2/", after "It was listed at #49 on Popmatter list of the best albums of 2013 http://www.popmatters.com/feature/177166-the-75-best-albums-of-2013/P2/" add "It was listed at #17 on fasterlouders list of best albums of 2013 http://www.fasterlouder.com.au/features/37856/FLs-Top-50-Albums-of-2013?page=5" after "It was listed at #17 on fasterlouders list of best albums of 2013 http://www.fasterlouder.com.au/features/37856/FLs-Top-50-Albums-of-2013?page=5" add "It was was placed at #14 on Digital Spy's list of the best albums of 2013 http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/thesound/a538709/digital-spys-top-albums-of-2013-15-1.html" 69.73.195.138 (talk) 15:34, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Done. Thanks, that's perfect (Actually, PopMatters has it at #48.) --Stfg (talk) 16:51, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 December 2013

After "It was listed at #17 on fasterlouders list of best albums of 2013 http://www.fasterlouder.com.au/features/37856/FLs-Top-50-Albums-of-2013?page=5" add "It was was placed at #14 on Digital Spy's list of the best albums of 2013 http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/thesound/a538709/digital-spys-top-albums-of-2013-15-1.html" 69.73.242.173 (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

• Not done: This page is no longer protected. Subject to consensus, you should be able to edit it yourself. Technical 13 (talk) 03:58, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 December 2013

After "It was listed at #17 on fasterlouders list of best albums of 2013 http://www.fasterlouder.com.au/features/37856/FLs-Top-50-Albums-of-2013?page=5" add "It was was placed at #14 on Digital Spy's list of the best albums of 2013 http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/thesound/a538709/digital-spys-top-albums-of-2013-15-1.html"

216.110.127.26 (talk) 20:56, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

• Not done: This page is no longer protected. Subject to consensus, you should be able to edit it yourself. Technical 13 (talk) 03:58, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 December 2013

Metacritic rating at critical reception section should be 72/100, not 73/100 per the updated source http://www.metacritic.com/music/the-marshall-mathers-lp-2/eminem 178.235.183.165 (talk) 09:54, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

 Done STATic message me! 01:04, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

The List of Critic Reviews

All the reviews featured are positive reviews. Pitchfork's review of the album is negative and, while I'd consider myself both a fan of Eminem and of this album, I feel as though its inclusion would help maintain a fair and balanced display of this album's reception. Since there's only a limit of ten reviews to list, I think this review should be included in place of the review from the Los Angeles Times. If we're going to feature the LA Times, why them? Why not the Boston Globe, Miami Herald, or New York Times? It seems biased to include one city's review. Besides, newspaper reviews aren't exactly lauded for their knowledge of music whereas publications such as Pitchfork and Rolling Stone are solely focused on music. (EGorodetsky (talk) 23:34, 22 December 2013 (UTC))

Well the Los Angeles Times is a bigger publication than Pitchfork Media. Koala15 (talk) 00:33, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

The section is not meant to be "balanced out", it is meant to summarize the general consensus by the most major publications. Those other newspapers would be included, but not all of them reviewed it and it is a "ratings template." At least I know that NY Times and the Boston Globe only give reviews and do not give actual ratings, like the LA Times does. Not to mention that the LA Times is a much more prolific and older publication than Pitchfork by quite a bit. STATic message me! 00:57, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

What about the Toronto Sun? Why them? I hardly think of Toronto as a major publication for music reviews. Here's the review by the Chicago Tribune. Here's the review by the Austin Chronicle. Why not these cities? And why does the age of a publication matter? It's that kind of thinking that put newspapers out of business in the first place. When I think music, I'd at least think of Entertainment Weekly before the LA Times. But we don't post their mixed review] either. All I'm saying is the list is biased. EGorodetsky (talk) 03:51, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Its not biased, we didn't write these reviews. We just picked 10 reviews from the most reliable publications. Koala15 (talk) 03:59, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Right. Ten positive reviews from questionable publications like the Toronto Sun. Seriously, how the hell is that one of the ten most "reliable" publications? (EGorodetsky (talk) 04:07, 23 December 2013 (UTC))

Sorry but the only one with any type of bias at all is you, against newspapers from some reason. TBH I see the LA Times as of more significance then the Tribune or the AC. What is your reasoning for continuous pushing to remove the LA Times of all the sources? It is very questionable and I do not understand if your bias is for the city in general or just the newspaper. STATic message me! 06:46, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Lol I'm not biased against Los Angeles. In fact, I'd be okay with keeping it if we were to substitute the Toronto Sun (which is in no way more significant) with either Entertainment Weekly or Pitchfork. So how bout it? 76.119.238.20 (talk) 02:42, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

STATic, I think you misunderstood EGorodetsky- he didn't mean to restore Toronto Sun (which I agree really is questionable). Regardless of review ratings, Los Angeles Times absolutely should be included, and so should Pitchfork. SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 19:23, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

I did not misunderstand anything, Toronto Sun was seemingly removed without a reason, when it better summarizes the general consensus of the album much better then the Pitchfork rating does. The uncivilness if this editor is appalling, and his borderline personal attack comment should be subject to removal, and I have as such. This talk page is for discussing the content of the article, not other contributors. However, in hindsight, I realize I mistaked the Sun for Toronto Star, but it should be replaced by a reviewer that gave a score more relevant to the general consensus. We already use EW for a mixed review. STATic message me! 19:35, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

It was rude of EGor, but Toronto Star would be a good substitute for Toronto Sun. Between Sun and EW, definitely go with EW. Feel free to add another mixed review. SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 20:17, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Some serious over quotation

The critical reception section is pretty much a WP:QUOTEFARM at the moment. Every sentence is just how the reviewer perceived the album followed by a quote. The section could be seriously condensed if some points were either omitted or paraphrased. If anyone wants to undergo the task of shortening the section then feel free to do so, because at the moment it's a chore getting even half way through it. Et3rnal 21:16, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Not to come off as harsh at all, but WP:SOFIXIT. The encyclopedia is a collaborative effort and all positive edits to the article are appreciated. STATic message me! 04:47, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm aware it's a collaborative effort, I'm also aware that it's WP:NOTREQUIRED for me to do it. I don't feel obligated nor interested in contributing to this article, thus why I explained it here, for anyone that actually wanted to do it. Et3rnal 15:43, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 January 2014

http://www.hiphopdx.com/index/news/id.27167/hip-hop-album-sales-week-ending-1-20-2014/

You should update the sales of this album, here's the source 216.110.116.57 (talk) 15:56, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Already done The source you give is from June, the current text of the article is "As of February 16, 2014, the album has sold 1,939,000 copies in the United States." So, it is more up-to-date than you're asking for. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 16:44, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Singles

Headlights is NOT single. — Preceding unsigned comment added by YArvili (talk • contribs) 12:05, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

@YArvili: Maybe not in your country, but it was released as one in Australia as [3] and [4] indicate. STATic message me! 19:02, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 March 2014

Please change Track 5 in the track listing from: 5. "Survival" to 5. "Survival" (featuring Liz Rodrigues)

This is credited on the wiki for this specific song here: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Survival_%28Eminem_song%29 Peterskm (talk) 17:24, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

 Not done She is not credited as a featured artist on the song or album. STATic message me! 19:54, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 March 2014

As of February 16, 2014, the album has sold 1,939,000 copies in the United States. SlimJimmyBRabbit (talk) 13:23, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

As of March 03, 2014, the album has sold 1,976,000 copies in the United States. SlimJimmyBRabbit (talk) 13:23, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 14:10, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 March 2014

http://www.hiphopdx.com/index/news/id.27763/title.hip-hop-album-sales-week-ending-3-2-2014 you should change the sales in US it's already 1,976,000 not 1,939,000 . SlimJimmyBRabbit (talk) 13:28, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Done — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 14:14, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 March 2014

http://www.hiphopdx.com/index/news/id.27864/title.hip-hop-album-sales-week-ending-3-9-2014 change the sales it's not 1,976,000 it's up to 1,990,000 SlimJimmyBRabbit (talk) 21:36, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Already done now reads 1,975,597. Cannolis (talk) 03:23, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

No, it hasn't been done, it should say 1,990,000, not 1,975,597. About to change.

Semi-protected edit request on 23 March 2014

Critical acclaim instead of generally positives Ejejdnrn (talk) 11:19, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Not done: As the article says "the album received an average score of 72, based on 33 reviews, indicating "generally favorable reviews."". Sam Sailor ^Sing 13:42, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 March 2014

Change generally positive reviews to critically acclaimed. Ejejdnrn (talk) 11:21, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Not done: Looks like a dupe request. Sam Sailor ^Sing 13:43, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 March 2014

Change to critical acclaim 203.45.155.112 (talk) 08:15, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Not done: Please see above requests. Sam Sailor ^Sing 08:26, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

GA status

Hi as mentioned above in the talk page, i guess that the article should be fixed of all it lacks to be a good article and then nominated to become one. I can help as much as possible but i may need few others to help me out too.Abhinav0908 (talk) 22:03, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

As the top contributor, I will nominate it very soon. I was letting time pass after its release for it to settle. STATic message me! 23:33, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

STATic Thanks Abhinav0908 (talk) 07:17, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

RIAA Certifications

There seems to be a confusion regarding the album being certified by RIAA. "User:RockNRollStaa" is removing the certifications and sales from the table consistently and thus the stability of the article is affected. So, i guess we must reach a conclusion on that. So all those who contributed to the article please do comment and solve the problem.Abhinav0908 (talk) 04:01, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

If the edit warring/content dispute keeps up, the article will be unstable and therefore ineligible for GA. Since I know you and STATicVapor don't want this to fail again, I hope this is resolved as soon as possible. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 19:56, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Not really a huge issue at all, stability is not even close to being questionable. This is not Xscape (album) or Justin Beiber, it is just a minor content dispute. Relax guys. STATic message me! 22:42, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

True. Lack of stability was one of the major reasons why the Biebs failed miserably for GA in addition to disastrous referencing (both in reliability and formatting) and poor prose. Xscape is pretty damn unstable as well. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 22:58, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

I believe this was just one disruptive user, any high profile article is bound to get those every once in awhile. I am happy to listen to their opinion on the talk page here, but he/she has yet to participate. STATic message me! 23:49, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes it is true that this is about just one disruptive user and can easily be solved, by the way "User:RockNRollStaa" has not made his user page yet. He did the same for Megadeth certifications where his edits were removed too and he once again removed the certifications here but his edit was reverted again. Should he be warned?Abhinav0908 (talk) 05:15, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

I have restored the sales info of the album in the table. He had no valid reason to remove it also. If he reverts again, he should be warned because that would be disruptive. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 06:53, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Let us see if he does it again i asked about warning him because he has been doing that for 3 or 4 days continuously now.Abhinav0908 (talk) 07:28, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Sixth single?

Pasting the content of the IP's huge post into the article reveals that he wishes to file an edit request to add this content to the info box: | single 6 = [[So Far...]] | single 6 date = {{start date|2014|06|15}}

I have checked on AllMusic and the song does not appear to have ever been released as a single. -- Diannaa (talk) 03:21, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

• IP, if you are reading this: you could have just made an edit request asking to include such information. However, for things like this you would need to include a reliable source that you got the information from. SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 03:25, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 September 2015

The door on the cover says "19946" not "1946" as stated in the article EckoImmortal (talk) 00:10, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Done Cannolis (talk) 03:27, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 January 2016

Hi I would like to edit the worldwide sales for this album as this album has sold at least about around an estimated 5.5 to 9.5 million copies worldwide as his other albums have sold 10 million or more copies worldwide I also have a link that tells how much the album has sold worldwide http://www.twcc.com/articles/2015/08/03/r/ripped-rapper-eminem-s-startling-transformation the link is right here next to the left corner at the very end of the article it says he sold 5.5 million copies worldwide. yours sincerely

Look what I really meant was that the article was disscussing about MMLP2 and I aint trying to change my words here mate but if you clearly read the article it clearly says that the album has sold 5.5 million copies worldwide and look at which country the album debuted number one at then look at how many copies it sold in its first week alone then see that it outsold beyonces album and justin timberlakes album. 116.86.143.225 (talk) 18:34, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. --allthefoxes ^(Talk) 19:28, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

To be honest, I'm not entirely sure if that link is credible. Snuggums (talk / edits) 20:39, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi I would like to request to edit the worldwide sales of this album and the link that was given as a reliable source is actually a reliable one the article on it was about Eminem himself and how he has gone on to become the most successful rapper in the history of Billboard and how his latest studio album MMLP2 matched with compared to other albums if you would like to see the proof for yourself go back and click that link then towards the end read the end of the article where it says the worldwide sales for this album.

59.189.76.11 (talk) 09:27, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

If you are talking about the twcc.com link that another IP suggested, you'll have to explain how the site itself is credible. "It was about Eminem himself and how he has gone on to become the most successful rapper in the history of Billboard and how his latest studio album MMLP2 matched with compared to other albums" is not in itself definitive proof as any website can do that sort of thing. Alternatively, try using any of the sources recommended at WP:WikiProject Albums/Sources. Snuggums (talk / edits) 14:58, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

The Marshall Mathers *LP2* vs The Marshall Mathers *LP 2*

I see it sometimes written with the space between "LP" and "2" left out. Is this just a typo? What is the official title? 154.121.251.250 (talk) 21:25, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

An example of this usage would be the iTunes store. 154.121.251.250 (talk) 22:12, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Austria/certification

Please change Austria's certification to 2x platinum! The source is the same as always. Thanks in advance! --2A02:B98:4732:2E58:90D1:35B6:2B4A:EFA6 (talk) 00:08, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Not done: Not supported by the source; possible block evasion as well. See Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Nikita. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 01:10, 3 September 2017 (UTC)