Talk:The Book of Taliesyn

}}

<^>v!!This album is connected!!v<^>

• All song titles serve as redirects to this album, have their own pages, or have had disambig links placed at the appropriate article or disambiguation page.--Hraefen ^Talk 20:27, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Writing Credits

Could someone please fill in the first names for the "Leander" and "Russell" listed for "Oh No No No" or the first names for the "King" and "Berns" listed for "It's All Over"? It's so pointless, stupid and annoying to only be able to see the last names.

Beethoven?

The track Exposition is part-credited to Beethoven. It does in fact contain music lifted from a conveniently-out-of-copyright classical piece. Only it appears to be themes from Romeo and Juliet by Tchaikowsky which are being reworked by Jon Lord - Beethoven is nowhere to be found? 92.25.180.132 (talk) 23:33, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Miscellaneous

"thehighwaystar.com", as reliable a source as it is, does not guarantee accurate reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.28.22.130 (talk) 03:52, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

--Rock Soldier 16:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Deeppurple-thebookoftaliesyn2.jpg

Image:Deeppurple-thebookoftaliesyn2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 13:56, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Deep Purple - River Deep single.jpg

The image File:Deep Purple - River Deep single.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --09:02, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

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

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

Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 16:13, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

• Hi there, I'll review this. FunkMonk (talk) 16:13, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
• At first glance, it seems at least four or five paragraphs end without citations. I can see the sources are listed within some sentences, but they should come after.

Thank you for picking up my submission. I'll wait for your complete review to start the correction process. Lewismaster (talk) 18:28, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Alright, may take a little time though. Sometimes I add comments across a few days. FunkMonk (talk) 18:30, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Don't worry, take all the time you need. I'm quite busy myself. Lewismaster (talk) 18:51, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

• "The situation was quite the opposite at home, where the band had been heavily criticized by media and audience." Why, if their debut album hadn't even been released in the UK?

Both critics and audience criticized the band for their music, their appearance and their attitude since their live debut and during the first short UK tour. The result of that initial bad reception was that Deep Purple were later ignored by the press and their releases did not sell. Thompson and Robinson describe in great detail those first negative impressions, which the band made before any record was issued. I added another reference for Robinson.

• "a single sung by Ike & Tina Turner in 1966" Sung sounds a bit weird here, how about released by?

Ok, done.

• "neither Tetragrammaton nor EMI had any use for them" EMI is mentioned for the first time here, could add they were their UK label.

added Deep Purple's British label

• "Moreover, the eight tracks recorded in May and performed live" What happened to these tracks?

They are Shades of Deep Purple tracks. Fixed

• It seems odd that the "release" section comes after musical style and cover. Would logically come after, as it does in most other articles.

I don't know. I followed the MoS sequence. It can be easily changed if you really think that it's important.

That's funny. Doesb't make sense to me, anyone know why the order is like that there? Ritchie? FunkMonk (talk) 18:31, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

No idea. When anyone says "it's in the MoS" my eyes tend to glaze over and I look for another article to edit ;-) ... I tend to put musical style straight in the "Recording" section, explaining the style of the songs, how they recorded. The only real deal-breaker for a GA is MOS:LAYOUT which just says " Contributors are advised to follow their instincts in proposing an order for sections in the body then seek community consensus in establishing a final order." I'm personally happy with what Lewis has done here, it didn't detract from me learning a bit about this rather overlooked album. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:42, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Alright. By the way, such "rules" can be challenged, I've done that before, with good results. I think I'll bring it up on the talk page of that guide. FunkMonk (talk) 18:47, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

• "and shows a more mature band in greater control of its own means of expression.[38] The mood is darker[18] and the compositions are generally longer and more complex than in their debut album,[10]" Claims like these need attribution in the text, as to who said these things.

Many people said those things. I rewrote the paragraph and added more references.

• "even though songwriting and arrangements are considered by critics Deep Purple's first real group effort." What is meant by this? Written a bit weirdly.

Rephrased

• "the guitarist defined the album "lame"" I think "as lame" would sound better.

Done

• Evans isn't introduced at first mention (full name, role).

Fixed

• Same for Simper.

Fixed

• Lord's role isn't mentioned either.

Fixed

• "Cover art and sleeve notes convey Tetragrammaton's decision to aim the album at the vast American hippie audience, which was very influential in the US at the time.[18] The notes in particular were written in a mystical tone, evoking the bard Taliesyn as a spiritual guide and comparing listening to the songs to an exploration in the band members' souls.[19]" Wouldn't this make more sense under the cover section?

I agree. Moved.

• "changing to "Hard Road" the title of the instrumental "Wring That Neck"" This does not seem like standard English sentence structure (swap the position of the songs and move "to").

Fixed.

• "already recorded and released in the US their third album Deep Purple" Same with the position of "in the US" here, should be moved to the end of the sentence.

Fixed

• " only single extracted" Extracted seems a bit odd word choice.

Fixed

• "which contains as bonus tracks previously unreleased recordings taken from the sessions of August and December 1968 and from TV shows appearances" Move "as bonus tracks" to end of the sentence.

Fixed

• "increased even more Deep Purple's popularity in the US" Even more should be moved to the end of the sentence. That is the main grammar issue of the article, weird sentence structure.

Rephrased.

• "which would have been released by Tetragrammaton in the US only in June 1969." Odd tense. Would have been makes it seem as if it never happened.

Fixed

• "new takes at songs from their published albums" Takes on songs. Also, "published" is a weird choice of word, this is not a book (despite the name)...

Fixed

• "when they learned that for his young age Paice could be drafted for the Vietnam War." How old?

21. Added the age.

• Any word on why the covers of the reissues have been changed?

Actually the only issue with a different cover is the Remastered Edition by EMI of 2000. The label repackaged the new editions of the three albums by the Mk.I line-up with similar cover art, probably to give a sense of continuity to the reissues. However, I found no source to confirm my assumption.

• The lead seems a bit long for an article this length. Could do with three paragraphs.
• The lead should be a summary of the whole article, some things are described in too much details, such as the cover and Taliesin stuff, whereas for example critical opinions are not mentioned.
• "Despite these marketing gimmicks" These things are not called "gimmicks" in the article, there should not be conclusions and info in the lead not found in the article.

I shortened the lead and rephrased some parts. Do you think it works better now?

• I'd replace "extracted" and "published" with more conventional terms (released) throughout the article.

Done

• That's about it from me. Perhaps Ritchie333 has something to add, he seems to be well versed in Deep Purple history.

I contacted him for a second opinion. Lewismaster (talk) 11:30, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Alright, though I already did that by "pinging" him. I'll respond to your answers later today. FunkMonk (talk) 11:42, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

I have an original 1969 Harvest vinyl copy somewhere but I don't think I've listened to it for about 20 years at least. I can't really think of much to add, which isn't surprising since FunkMonk does a good job with album GA reviews. The main fact I think is missing is that "River Deep, Mountain High" started with an arrangement of "Also sprach Zarathustra" bolted on the front. Since the tour narrative goes up to 1969, I would drop in somewhere that Blackmore, Lord and (to a lesser extent) Paice were getting fed up of the pop / hippie sound and wanted straight hard rock, which of course led to the Mk II line-up. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:49, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

"Also sprach Zarathustra" is cited in the musical style section. As suggested, I added a line about Evans and Simper's dismissal. Lewismaster (talk) 17:37, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Cool. Well, I learned something from reading this article, so it must be good! Have to admit I never liked MkI much as MkII is just so much better, but some of their stuff wasn't too bad I guess. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:27, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

• Everything is looking nicely, so I'll go ahead and pass this. By the way, I feel quite nostalgic towards the MK1 albums, since I brought them with me on a long vacation when I was 18, and had nothing else to listen to... FunkMonk (talk) 18:48, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

The first Deep Purple LP I got was a double-set called "Anthology" in the late 1980s, that I bought reduced in Our Price in the days when vinyl was still the mainstay of the shop. Played the MKI tracks, "hmm not bad, nice organ", then turned over to hear In Rock's version of "Speed King" and that was it - MkII is the best. I bought a 25th anniversary CD of that years ago, but I've no idea where I've put it, otherwise that would be one to put on the "improve to GA" pile. Anyway, well done Lewis for another Purple GA. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:20, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you to both of you for you reviews... and for your memories! I must confess that I never listened to these albums before starting to write the articles and I knew nothing about Deep Purple Mk. I. It's all a discovery to me! I think that the Concerto is next... Lewismaster (talk) 19:46, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

• By the way, I just started a section on album section order:[1] Also, just noticed that there are two paragraphs here under "Release" that end without citation, also one under "Touring"... FunkMonk (talk) 11:07, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Fixed two out of three. Lewismaster (talk) 16:23, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

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.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Book of Taliesyn. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141010000437/http://www.guitar.com/articles/ritchie-blackmore-recalls-life-deep-purple to http://www.guitar.com/articles/ritchie-blackmore-recalls-life-deep-purple

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 11:22, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Mk1, etc.

The terms "mk1 lineup" and such are used in this article without any linking or explanation. I know these are terms of art for Deep Purple fans, but I shouldn't have had to figure it out the hard way. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 16:55, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Classical music

The article contains the statement: "Anthem" is perhaps the band's deepest venture into classical music on a regular studio album, with its baroque-style interlude reminiscent of a Bach fugue written by Lord and performed using Mellotron and string quartet.

Well, what about "April"? Jules TH 16 (talk) 21:48, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

What about it? As you should know, you are free to add to the article any text properly referenced by a book or a valid online source. If you have one about "April", go for it. Lewismaster (talk) 17:16, 4 April 2022 (UTC)