Talk:Aphrodite's Child

Untitled

I undertook editing and revision of this article. The original author was certainly enthusiastic enough about the group but there were unfortunately several flaws in his approach. I hope I have maintained the spirit of the original while bringing it in line with encyclopedia standards. - Happydog

Mercury or Polydor?

Discussing the delayed release of 666, this page states "Mercury finally agreed to release 666 two years after its completion, and it came out in 1972."
On the same subject Irene Papas says "the album being withheld from release for two years by Polydor Records."
Which is correct? Mercury Records or Polydor? One or other page should be corrected. --David Edgar 16:47, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

• At the time of her involvement with 666, Irene Papas was signed to Polydor Records in Italy and may have got confused. The record company was definitely Mercury.

Defining example of the concept album?

I would like to question the phrase "in time the album became recognized as one of the most important early progressive rock works, and a defining example of the concept album." In the article about Concept albums neither the group or this album is mentioned, nor in the article about Progressive rock. As i can tell, there have been several concept albums before this, even in the decade before this album. And as this album was released in 1972, it cannot have been "one of the most important early progressive rock works." In my view, progressive rock was very much defined by 1972. Had it been released in 1970 the story might have been different. --Sverre M. Vikan 23:09, 13 May 2006 (EST)

• As someone who remembers those times with great affection, looking back on the whole progressive rock movement from this distance, I would say that 666, as well as being great music and a bold statement, certainly sits well with the descriptions of prog rock and concept albums at the popular evaluation, but its lack of commercial success, and its relatively late arrival on the prog rock scene, probably mitigates against it being regarded as "important," "defining example" etc. But hey, it's still great music, so just put it on and enjoy!

rewrite

I've radically rewritten this entry. The old version paid too much attention to the band's last album (70% of the entry) almost ignoring everything else. Therefore, I moved the information for their last album to 666 (album), expanded the section of their first two albums (which was previously squeezed into a tiny paragraph) and also expanded the discography.

• Nice work! I was going to do this myself but you beat me to it!

I don't believe 666 sold 20 million copies as the article currently states. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.248.12.239 (talk) 03:41, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

20 million is guaranteed a typo

The italian article claims that A.C. sold 20 million albums while they existed. This is guaranteed wrong. It must be a typo, meaning 2 millions while they existed. Or a misunderstanding meaning 20 millions upto the date the article is written. Either way, it's still way out of propotion. With the exception of the 20 most selling anglo-american stars like Beatles, P.McCartney, M.Jackson, Pink Floyd etc., no other artists can do that. IT'S IMPOSSIBLE. I got chart books at home, and I can assure you that A.C. didn't chart any albums at all in USA, UK, West Germany, Holland, Australia or Norway. That means that they didn't sell huge amounts in these countries at least. That leaves us with: the rest of Western Europe, NZ, Canada, South Africa and Japan which were the only countries who had a functioning record industry in the 67-72 period. Except for France, Italy, Canada and Japan, none of them are populous countries. Where it is possibly to sell hundreds of thousands of records in. My guess (when comparing with equally successful groups) is that A.C. sold max. 1 mill. albums in their existance, and max. 3 mill. later.

¨¨Stein¨¨

Edited by Sheled (talk) 20:02, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Chalkitis1.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Chalkitis1.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:18, 16 November 2011 (UTC)