Talk:Purple Haze/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Viriditas (talk · contribs) 04:32, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits

Resolved

An editor has recently introduced several unintentional errors into the article. This includes changing "We" to "e" in the "Background and recording" section and introducing a period after a comma and citation in the lead.[1] Viriditas (talk) 01:10, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:25, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Ojorojo:, you missed the "We" to "e" error in the quote. It still says, "e got it on the third take as I recall" instead of "We got it on the third take..." Viriditas (talk) 21:17, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

e got it this time. —Ojorojo (talk) 13:58, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation

Dab header looks good. Viriditas (talk) 23:23, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at links...Note, this list does not imply that the links are wrong, just that it isn't clear why they are linked to these particular articles:
- Psychedelic drug songs links to psychedelic rock instead of psychedelic music (see discussion below in lead section)

I thought the psychedelic rock article describes it better (more in Lead discussion). —Ojorojo (talk) 16:25, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

- Eight track recording links to history of multitrack recording instead of multitrack recording (see for example, eight track recording)

Again, I thought the history article did a better job describing analog (tape) 8-track and includes a mention of its introduction to the UK in 1968. However, I added a bit with a link to multitrack to make it clearer, which makes a second link unneeded. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:25, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

- effects unit describes an effects pedal in the context of the Octavia effects unit. Considering the wide usage of the redirect[2] wouldn't a redirect work better in this context?

Since Octavia already links to effects pedal, I left out the additional link. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:25, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

- Distortion unit links to Guitar effects#Distortion which is currently a redirect to effects unit

Again, Fuzz Face links to effects unit and distortion, so I left out the extra link. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:25, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

- Inches per second links to Magnetic tape sound recording#Tapedeck speeds, currently a redirect to Tape recorder#Tapedeck speeds

Changed. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:25, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

OK. Viriditas (talk) 03:35, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Resolved

Everything checks out. Viriditas (talk) 23:23, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Because of ambiguities in the lyrics, it has been often interpreted as referring to a psychedelic experience, although Hendrix described it as a love song.
- Try: "Because of ambiguities in the lyrics, the song is often interpreted as referring to a psychedelic experience..." Viriditas (talk) 03:15, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It was also a regular concert feature and live recordings by each of Hendrix's group configurations have been issued
- Try: The song featured regularly in concerts and each of Hendrix's group configurations issued live recordings Viriditas (talk) 03:15, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hendrix described it as a love song, but it has acquired a reputation as "one of the archetypical psychedelic drug songs of the sixties"
- Links within quotes are generally not recommended, but can be acceptable. I'm curious why you linked to psychedelic rock instead of psychedelic music. I haven't yet checked the quote, so perhaps I'm asking a question I'll be able answer shortly. Keep in mind, if you can link outside of the quote, that's encouraged. Viriditas (talk) 23:56, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Practice noted, but I left the link in because it handles the drug-music connection without overemphasizing it and places it in context. Drmies changed the order, but I think it works. I expanded it in the Lyrics section. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:25, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrote lead. —Ojorojo (talk) 13:58, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

including those by Rolling Stone magazine and Q magazine.
- Is it necessary to repeat the word magazine twice here? Why not "Rolling Stone and Q magazine"? Viriditas (talk) 01:05, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Changed. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:25, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Background and recording

The unit doubles the frequency of the sound it is fed, essentially adding an upper octave, and was developed by Roger Mayer, an acoustical and electronics engineer, with Hendrix's input.
- This version of the current text lacks readability. Please consider rewriting it. Something like this might work: "The unit, which was developed with Hendrix's input by acoustical and electronics engineer Roger Mayer, doubles the frequency of the sound it is fed, essentially adding an upper octave." Viriditas (talk) 01:28, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I liked it better as two sentences, without the "it is fed": "The unit doubles an audio frequency, thereby essentially adding an upper octave.[ref] It was developed by Roger Mayer, an acoustical and electronics engineer, with Hendrix's input."[ref][3] —Ojorojo (talk) 16:25, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lyrics and interpretation

You've got a lot of quotes in this section. Think about the mechanics of paraphrasing. Viriditas (talk) 03:45, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrote. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:01, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Biographer Harry Shapiro commented that "Every time he [Hendrix] was asked about this song, he gave a different answer. The likelihood was even he couldn't be positive about the initial inspiration ... 'Purple Haze' was almost certainly a pot-pourri of ideas neatly parcelled up into one song
- This is the kind of quote that can easily be paraphrased and briefly quoted. if you're going to keep what you have, the rule of thumb is to use the blockquote when it approaches three lines. I think what you've got is fine for now, but it's something to keep in mind. When I read this, I think, "this is probably better off as a paraphrase". YMMV. Viriditas (talk) 03:39, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Paraphrased. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:01, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On January 28, 1967, before the song was completed, Hendrix responded to a question about his songwriting...
- What was the question? Why not put it in that narrative context? Viriditas (talk) 03:40, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Added. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:01, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In an April 7, 1967, interview he offered an another explanation
- An another? Delete "an". "Another" is already "an other". Viriditas (talk) 03:45, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed typo. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:01, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because of the ambiguities in the lyrics, "'Purple Haze' has become known as one of the archetypal psychedelic drug songs of the sixties"
- I'm not sure I really understand why the ambiguities led to it becoming known. Is this a poor paraphrase? Look at the source again, please. Viriditas (talk) 03:48, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrote. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:01, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Composition

Diabolus in musica
- The convention is lowercase: diabolus in musica. Viriditas (talk) 09:14, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Changed. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:01, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

and some believe that its use was proscribed by papal bull
- Who believed? Music historians? Avoid weasel words... Viriditas (talk) 09:18, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Changed. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:01, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"to play it was like ringing Satan's doorbell"
- Best quote ever! Come on, who doesn't want to doorbell ditch mean ole Satan? Loads of fun! Seriously, Ojorojo, you must use that as the DYK! Viriditas (talk) 09:25, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I do His bidding. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:01, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hendrix chord is linked twice in this section, three times if you count the link to the dominant seventh sharp ninth chord in the same section. Since you link to the E7♯9 article three times, is it necessary to link in the caption? If so, then no need to link Hendrix chord in the body. Viriditas (talk) 02:13, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~Just linked Hendrix chord in the body.~~ —Ojorojo (talk) 16:25, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Linked in lead and Composition infographic. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:01, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"almost sound[ing] likes he's playing a blues raga. He starts out playing in the Mixolydian mode and then he goes right into the blues side. The Octavia has the effect of a sitar, kind of like Ravi Shankar meets B.B. King."
- Six links in that quote. Is that standard for music articles? That's pretty much unheard of in other topic areas at the GA/FA level, I believe. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Viriditas (talk) 02:14, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Certain words I link out of habit – genres, artists, musical terms, etc. The key word is Mixolydian, which I think is OK to link, but dropped the rest. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:25, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Releases and charts

Live recordings of "Purple Haze" as performed by each of the different Hendrix lineups have been released[57] – the Experience: Live at Monterey; Gypsy Sun and Rainbows: Live at Woodstock; the Band of Gypsys: Live at the Fillmore East; and the Cry of Love touring group: Live at Berkeley.
- The placement of the citation and the use of the dash here hamper readability. Why doesn't the reference go at the end, and why did you use a dash here instead of a colon? Viriditas (talk) 20:16, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Changed. The first reference doesn't include the newer albums, so I split it into two sentences for readability. —Ojorojo (talk) 23:42, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Recognition and influence

Notes

Footnotes

The Track single release date is listed as March 17, 1967 by Shapiro[1] and the Jimi Hendrix Encyclopedia;[2] McDermott[3] uses March 1, 1967.
The Reprise single release date is listed as June 19, 1967 by Shapiro[50] and Shadwick;[51] McDermott[52] uses August 16, 1967, one week before the American release of Are You Experienced.

Which are the correct dates? Do you know? If you do, indicate them in the footnotes. Viriditas (talk) 04:16, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clarified (hopefully). —Ojorojo (talk) 17:01, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

Criteria

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section:

B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Stable.
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
Valid fair use rationales.

B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Relevant; captions OK
Overall:
Pass or Fail: