Talk:Deep Purple (album)/GA1

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 00:00, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't take this until now, since I already reviewed the preceding album in the discography, and wanted to let someone else try, but four months is simply an incredible wait, so I'll review it soon. FunkMonk (talk) 00:00, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking your chances with another article by my humble self. I'm honored. Lewismaster (talk) 20:57, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The fair use images could have some of the more up to date description templates.

Changed.

You could give a citation for the personnel list, as in other articles.

Done.

You may consider adding the |upright| parameter to the vertically long Jon Lord photo.

Done.

Since the original Bosch painting is in the public domain, could be interesting to show it in colour (or the approximate part the album cover is taken from) in the cover art section?

Good idea! I added the picture and a small description.

"the opener "Chasing Shadows" was based upon African rhythms created by drummer Ian Paice,[13] whose drum patterns were reversed and double tracked in the short instrumental "Fault Line"" When I first read this, I thought the drums from Chasing Shadows had been reused and modified for Fault Line, and I'm still not sure whether this is what's meant...

I changed the sentences.

"which had been a Top 40 single in the US in the autumn of 1968" For who?

For the author... added.

"On Deep Purple Lord has still a great influence, which finds maximum expression in the harpsicord-flavoured "Blind" and in the orchestral section of "April" Why suddenly resent tense? Also, the bolded part seems awkward ("still has" is better).

Changed

Much of the rest of that section is in present tense, which flows badly with the rest of the article, which is past tense.

I checked the tenses. It should be correct now.

"The same Bosch painting (in colour) had previously been used as an album cover" Perhaps specify it was anothe rpart of the painting, if the source allows, of course.

Done

"is the Remastered CD edition of 2000" would look better as "is the Remastered 2000 CD edition".

Done

No contemporary views from critics at all?

Unfortunately no. No DP fan site has anything. The books used as sources say the same thing. The album was ignored by critics.

"more evidence given to the guitar parts" This seems like a strange formulation.

Rewritten

"During the tour, Deep Purple showed a remarkable progress as performers" Doesn't seem to be explicitly stated outside the intro?

It is a synthesis of sentences such as "begun to develop their stage presence into something grander", "focusing more and more on the instrumental interplay between Blackmore and Lord", "having turned into a highly proficient band on stage" and the one about Lord's new sound with his Hammond. I don't think that it should be changed. Lewismaster (talk) 20:57, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you have more comments, send them in. Lewismaster (talk) 20:57, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Changes look good, I have one final question; is there anything on why they chose this name for the album?

Apparently the band had nothing to do with the album's name. When they delivered the album, no name had been chosen and it was Tetragrammatron Records execs who set up the cover and the name. Lewismaster (talk) 21:24, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, is this in any source so it can be added? FunkMonk (talk) 21:26, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Two sources report that the band delivered a yet-unnamed album in March 1969. Meanwhile, the record label had trouble releasing it for financial issues and for the misprinting of the cover. Who chose the name between March and June 1969 is not reported in my sources. Lewismaster (talk) 21:33, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I think the article looks good now, so will pass. Hope to see more classic rock nominations! FunkMonk (talk) 21:47, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review. I am at work, although at a slower pace than before, on two other classic rock albums. To the next... Lewismaster (talk) 06:40, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.