Talk:Led Zeppelin III/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Ojorojo (talk · contribs) 18:28, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

I'll review this – one of my favorites. Should I start with a mark up on User:Ojorojo/Sandbox3? —Ojorojo (talk) 18:28, 21 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Drive-by comment - Damn you, Ojorojo, I wanted to review this! I was a bit surprised that the article doesn't mention the "eastern influence" on Friends (first such Eastern number by them), and that they apparently did some trial recordings of Friends and Four Sticks with an Indian orchestra in India later? Those recordings have since been released as extra materials on the deluxe edition of Coda. Here are some sources: FunkMonk (talk) 18:37, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I suppose we could both review it. It seemed to work OK for Having a Rave Up when Curly Turkey made a lot of comments. Several folk guitarists mentioned in the "Background" section were into eastern sounds; Fahey recorded several raga-type pieces. Maybe this could be tied together.  —Ojorojo (talk) 19:11, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Anyone can comment at a GA review; the final decision is reached by the initial reviewer but I'm sure consensus will be considered here. I thought the Bombay Orchestra stuff was all on the fourth album article, but only "Four Sticks" was name-checked, so I've dropped a mention in here. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  19:33, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
 * It's fine, that was the main issue I wanted to bring up. The album version of Friends is also Eastern influenced, which warrants a mention if a source can be found. Here is one book: and one magazine: FunkMonk (talk) 19:34, 21 August 2018 (UTC)


 * "Too much detail for first lead sentences" - I'm not so sure. The lead is a pretty brief pair of paragraphs for a 12K prose article, which sounds about right in terms of balance, in my view. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  09:38, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Better sequence, but the lead is supposed to summarize the key points of an article. The fact that the album was released 18 days later in the UK receives one sentence in the article and Atlantic (who released all their albums) isn't mentioned. The "Packaging and artwork" section has a fair amount of material, but isn't noted in the lead.  Also, I wonder about "This surprised many fans and critics": the fans reaction is only drawn from the initial strong sales, followed by a decline; the critics by panning it (the first two albums also received generally poor initial reviews). How about a mention of some songs? "Immigrant Song" rocks as hard as anything on I and II, "Since I've" as slow electric blue-sy, and "Friends" introduced Eastern-influenced band arrangements ("Black Mountain Side" is essentially a Page solo), etc., while side two is really where the folk/acoustic tag comes from. Also, the last "like folk" probably isn't necessary, since acoustic and folk are already noted.  The lead was inherited from a much earlier version and could benefit from a reappraisal of where the article stands now (sometimes, I try to write it last after finishing the main body). —Ojorojo (talk) 17:47, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, most of the time I get the body in the state I like it and then do the lead from scratch. I think I'll do that here as well, then. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  12:22, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

I've redone the lead and the stuff already commented on in the sandbox. I checked Lewis 1990 and it says "Since I've Been Loving You" was recorded in November '69 and was in the live set for the next gigs in January 1970. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  13:52, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Looks good, although maybe add a paragraph break at "The album was one of the most eagerly..." If "Immigrant Song" is linked, maybe link GP and TTW also (or unlink IS). —Ojorojo (talk) 16:24, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Done. I can't remember what songs we converted to redirects. :-/ <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  16:34, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
 * What's the current status of this? <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  13:03, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 * There isn't much left: in "Accolades", the countries should be abbreviated, if needed at all; "Packaging and artwork", "2014 reissue", "Track listing" look OK; common instruments should not be linked in "Personnel"; for "Charts" (in order of appearance) RPM, Oricon, PROMUSICAE, OCC, Billboard, AllMusic (no longer has chart info), charts-surfer.de, Argentina, Dutch, and Solo exitos don't seem to work. I'm surprised that the 2014 reissue didn't chart in more countries (the last Billboard link in "Release and reception" dosn't work).  I hope to finish reviewing the references in the next couple of days. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:10, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The external links tool is working again, so that's given me a chance to fix all the dead links, or at least the ones it's reported. I tried running InternetArchiveBot but it didn't want to know about them :-( <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  19:04, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 * As with LZ IV, maybe remove the lesser known charts if you can't find them (OCC is linked in the "Release and reception" section and the general LZ Billboard link leads to the Hot 100 for the "Immigrant Song" single). The rest of the references look OK, except that the Q magazine score links to CD Universe that only seems to have  customer reviews and the Virgin Encyclopedia links to Acclaimed Music (WP:ALBUMAVOID includes "Reviews and ratings which only summarize other reviews and ratings should not be included either, such as Artistdirect's reviews from AllMusic"). I think we're about finished. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:14, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Made some misc fixes, including OCC & Billboard links. All that's left is to remove/replace the chart and accolades entries noted above. Maybe has some ideas. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:24, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
 * My apologies, I had a bad accident with a Chinese restaurant and five pints of Dim Sum beer last night - I'll hopefully look at the remaining issues this evening. <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  16:28, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
 * It's time those damn steam carts are licensed – I hope they're insured. —Ojorojo (talk) 18:10, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Right, I've taken out the charts that failed verification and added a source for the UK chart position of the 2014 reissue. The accolades seems to be sourced mostly to rocklistmusic.co.uk - what should we do about that? I thought the issue came up with the GA review for IV, but I can't see where now. <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  18:23, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I think CD Universe (a retailer) and Acclaimed (includes Piero Scaruffi) are a bit different – rocklistmusic seems more like a straight archive. The more I get into charts and lists, the less verifiable the smaller ones seem. It's up to you. I'm ready to pass, if FunkMonk doesn't wish to add anything first. —Ojorojo (talk) 19:09, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

I'm easy either way; I do remember a debate about whether Scaruffi was reliable or not, but can't remember the details. To be honest I'd rather just switch this album on side one track one and go "aaaaaAAAAAAAAAAARGH" along with Immigrant Song if it's alright with you :-) Unless has anything to add, I think we should probably close this one down and move onto the next one. <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk)  <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  19:48, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Looks fine to me, listed a few things below. FunkMonk (talk) 00:08, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
 * "Zacron has subsequently graduated at" I'd remove the "has", it reads kind of like it happened recently.
 * That's a typo - I obviously meant to type "Zacron had subsequently...." and hit "s" (which is next to "d") by mistake (I wonder if you can integrate Grammarly into the edit window?) Anyway, I've taken the word out entirely as it still makes sense without it. <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  12:33, 1 September 2018 (UTC)


 * "the group took out a full page advertisement taken out in" Seems repetitive, reword or remove last instance?
 * I've rewritten this bit to make it much simpler. <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  12:33, 1 September 2018 (UTC)


 * The roles of each musician should probably be stated at first mention.
 * Good point - done <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  12:33, 1 September 2018 (UTC)


 * There are some duplinks.
 * One day I'll remember to run the tool before sticking an article up to GA ... anyway, fixed :-) <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  12:33, 1 September 2018 (UTC)


 * "it was later popularised in the movie" Better to just give the date than say "later".
 * Done <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  12:33, 1 September 2018 (UTC)


 * I think the initial bad reviews are notable enough to mention in the intro.
 * I added a bit. <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  12:33, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

I think that's about it, anything else? On a personal note, the album does tail off towards the end; I'm wonder if they could have put side 2's running order as "That's The Way / Bron-Y-Aur / Tangerine / Hats off / Gallows Pole" - have a strong track kicking it off, and the big dynamic epic at the end. Shoulda woulda coulda.... <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  12:33, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Not from me, and got to agree, Hats off kind of makes the album fizzle out... FunkMonk (talk) 12:41, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not) <hr width=50%>Most of my comments are in my sandbox or above. Another job well done. These articles are coming so far from where they were. Also thanks to for their suggestions. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:31, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: