Talk:Duke (album)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Sparklism (talk · contribs) 08:41, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take this one on. (Confession time: I've never heard this album) :) — sparklism ^hey! 08:41, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

iTunes is thataway. I don't think there's too much "zomg Duke's Travels / Duke's End is the best instrumental Genesis ever did bar none" left in there, but hey I've got a POV and I'm not ashamed to admit it. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 09:50, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Ha! :) — sparklism ^hey! 10:30, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a read through - this is already a decent article of the standard we have come to expect from Ritchie333. Here's a few things I picked up:

Background

You might want to introduce Collins, Banks and Rutherford to the uninitiated reader, since this is the first time we've come across them

I'd be amazed if anyone who read the article didn't know who Phil Collins was, but I know what you mean

You could link (and possibly describe) Sounds (magazine)

Done Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont)

while Rutherford also recorded his first solo album at Polar, Smallcreep's Day might be better as "while Rutherford also recorded his first solo album, Smallcreep's Day, at the same studio"

I went with "there" in place of "at the same studio" if that's okay? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:17, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be honest and say that I prefer my suggestion. Is there another way to say that both solo albums were recorded at the same studio? — sparklism ^hey! 19:44, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've done that, it's a little bit nicer now to not have one word between a comma and a full stop. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:45, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Great - that's exactly why I prefer it that way. — sparklism ^hey! 07:21, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Note a, about Collin's attempt to join the Who - how does this fit into this context? Did this occur at the start of 1979 during the Genesis 'break'?

Yes. The sequence of events is roughly a) Collins goes to Canada; Genesis on hold, b) Banks and Rutherford record solo stuff, c) Collins comes back, marriage irreparable d) Banks and Rutherford still out of the country recording solo e) Collins bored and remembering bands he saw in the Marquee as a teenager f) *briiiing* "Pete, I don't suppose" ..... Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:17, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK. — sparklism ^hey! 19:37, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Writing and recording

Should we also introduce David Hentschel?

I've billed him as "regular co-producer". He had produced all the albums from A Trick of the Tail onwards, but I think that's too much information for this article. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:37, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, fine. — sparklism ^hey! 19:40, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Duchess" is the first Genesis song that features a drum machine I'm not a language expert by any means, but is this written in the correct tense?

Good question. For me, "'Duchess' was the first Genesis song" implies it isn't the first Genesis song anymore, if that makes sense. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:37, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I see what you mean, but it still feels slightly out to me. I think this could be a great DYK hook though (if you're so inclined), so it's worth getting it right. Could it be worded differently? — sparklism ^hey! 19:40, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've rewritten it to avoid this. And yet, it is a good DYK as Phil Collins was well known for drum machine and that drum sound in the 80s, and this is where it started. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:45, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's great. — sparklism ^hey! 07:21, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any more information about L'Alphabet d'Albert? When was it published? Is this the same Albert that appears in the "Duke" suite (i.e. did the art inspire the song, or vice-versa)?

There is, but it's all in unreliable sources or fansites. I'll have another trawl around but I think this is a bit of a stumbling block. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:37, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK, it's not a deal-breaker, I just thought it would be nice to have it fleshed out a bit.. — sparklism ^hey! 19:40, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Release

it reached number one on the UK Albums Chart for two weeks → "it spent two weeks at number one on the UK Albums chart" - better?

Yes, I think so. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:37, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see you haven't included a 'Charts' section/table - is there enough material available for one?

I can do one if it's a deal breaker for GA, sure, but I'm generally not a fan of tables like this as I prefer the background and story behind making the album than what chart position it reached ... but then that's me. Let me look into it. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:37, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It absolutely isn't a deal-breaker for GA. If you're not a fan, then don't worry about it. — sparklism ^hey! 19:42, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

David Fricke noted that "Turn It On Again" is "vibrant rock & roll" and praised "Man of Our Times", "Duchess", "Duke's Travels", and "Duke's End" "possess a refreshing urgency" - the last part of this doesn't quite read correctly

Tweaked Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:37, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You'll need to de-link Sounds here if you linked it earlier

Delinked and copyedited Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:37, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reason that you didn't include the Sounds review in the reviews template?

Yes, I forgot. Fixed Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:37, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

He noted the band's positivity in the opening of "Behind the Lines" and throughout the record Collins's vocals were "more convincing than ... before". Side one is described as a "bright opening" whereas the band "clings to safer ground" on side two. Fielder wished for "more sparkle" on the second side...
- Firstly, the bit that says "...throughout the record Collins's vocals were..." - is there a full stop missing between 'record' and 'Collins', or is this all one sentence? It sort of makes sense either way, but if it's all one sentence, then it needs a tweak for clarity.
- Secondly, the bit "Side one is described as a "bright opening" whereas the band "clings to safer ground" on side two" - is this all part of the same Fielder review? I've got a feeling the tense doesn't work for this line also

I've rewritten this bit, chopping down the quotations and just paraphrasing them. I don't think we need that much information from one reviewer; it can be summarised. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:37, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Much better :) — sparklism ^hey! 19:42, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

...calling Duke "a more confident and successful album" than ...And Then There Were Three...". There's an extra speechmark here, but I'm not sure which one it is supposed to be (if you see what I mean)

I've copyedited this bit Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:37, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

...thought "Duke's Travels" and "Duke's End" is "one of the best... is, or was?

I think it's "were" - this is talking about one person's opinion in the past. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:37, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. — sparklism ^hey! 19:42, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Summary

As I said above, it's a pretty decent article as it stands. I'll give this a more detailed read through later. Cheers! — sparklism ^hey! 10:29, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review so far! Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 16:55, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure - it's a nice piece of work. I see you've addressed most of what I brought up, great stuff. There are two things i think still need a little bit of attention, possibly via rewording - see the comments above about the solo albums and the drum machine. Keep up the good work! :) — sparklism ^hey! 19:47, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I have done the rewording on those two points, and put the year Lionel Koechlin published the book inspiring the cover, with a link. He has an article on the French Wikipedia. Anything else? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:45, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, I think that covers it. My other main criticism of the article is that it doesn't talk enough about the music - what does this album sound like? But, there's enough here about other aspects of the songs themselves that I don't see that as enough of a concern to withhold the GA (this isn't FAC, after all)...so, I'm going to promote this as a Good Article. Well done Ritchie! — sparklism ^hey! 07:27, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'm not sure how I'd describe the album's sound, other than "a mixed bag". Before Duke, Genesis were progressive rock, after it they were 80s pop, this album is slap bang in the middle, showing them crossing over from one side to the other. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 07:58, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]