Talk:Rainbow (rock band)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled

I think this page needs renaming. I could not find it. A search for "Rainbow" took me straight to a page on Rainbows (the things in the sky). I had to go to Deep Purple and backtrack. What makes this inconsistent, is that if I search for something like the work "Thunderbird", I get a page with links about cars, newsreaders and more...

Try to find any band that has a common word for a name. When searching for a band always include "(band)" in your search.

Anyone want to re-arrange this page so it's easier to find? I don't want to break things.... I agree with these gyus. This page sucks...try to do some better page of rainbow PLEASE.

There is a disambiguation page for the word Rainbow, accessible from the page Rainbow (the thing in the sky) which is indeed the first to appear when searching for Rainbow. The first page to show up should be the disambiguation page anyway, but I don't know how to modify that. But I agree this page isn't as good as it should be for a legendary band such as Rainbow. And I always thought Rainbow was a heavy metal band, not a hard rock band... am I wrong? I mean, Ronnie James Dio (and some of the other vocalists of Rainbow too) is definitely a heavy metal singer to me... --IronChris 18:17, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Band?

Can Rainbow really be classed a band when they never had the same line-up from one year to the next? I mean why not just release the next album as Guns'n'Roses? People only know them for their one hit "Since You Been Gone" and that was written by Russ Ballard who writes for everyone. AlfredG 24jun06

Of course they can. Many bands went through numerous changes in line-up. In fact, I think the fact that the band is really called "Richie Blackmore's Rainbow" tells us it is the barinchild of Blackmore. That's no biggie though. Candy 16:23, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

'People only know them for their one hit "Since You Been Gone"...' Correction = the mainstream radio and hard rock community know them only for that one single. The heavy metal community knows them for having the lead guitarist of Deep Purple, one of heavy metal's pioneering bands. Rainbow's first three albums, along with germany's Scorpions(in their 70's era with Uli Jon Roth), would pave the way for mixing heavy metal with influences from classical music. This produced such classic as "Gates Of Babylon", "Stargazers", "Kill The King", "Man On The Silver Mountain", etc.. all sung by Ronnie James Dio, a hugely popular name in metal to this day. He would replace Ozzy Osbourne in Black Sabbath with great success, and later form solo-band Dio, which had its own share of hits in the 80s. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.56.119.37 (talk) 08:09, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Progressive metal?

What makes Rainbow a progressive metal band? Besides, it says progressive metal in the introduction, but not in the infobox, which isn't very logical. IronChris | (talk) 19:05, 8 July 2006 (UTC) Rainbow isn't progressive metal.--Neo139 03:52, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

No idea why they have the preposterous title "progressive metal". Blackmore's band is simply a rock band. I wouldn't even call them heavy metal at all. Candy 16:24, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Dio - No instrument

"Although Dio never played a musical instrument on any Rainbow album, he is credited with writing and arranging the music with Blackmore in addition to writing all the lyrics himself." Doh! What's the voice but and instrument? Someone change this before I do next week. Candy 16:25, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

• Please do not enter it. It will be removed. I haven't checked the history of the article (yet), but most people would agree that an instrument is a tangible object. Tirolion 15:48, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

(Un)Discography

Why isn't Final Vinyl mentioned in the "official" discography? Even if it's a compilation of tracks -- ie there was no specific studio date for the recordings -- there are loads of compilations that are deemed official releases. Led Zeppelin's Coda, Nirvana's Incesticide, the Dead Kennedys Give Me Convenience Or Give Me Death, et cetera, et cetera. Tirolion 15:48, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

It's listed under Live albums. I know, I did a lot of revamping on the album pages. --Vazor20X6 02:34, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

The "Down to Earth" album was also left out of the discography! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.197.213.11 (talk) 09:26, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Incorrect picture

can someone remove the picture? this is not Rainbow but circa 1991 Deep Purple !! 82.37.36.93 17:29, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Power Metal

Rainbow are generally considered to be one of the founders of the power metal genre, yet it isn't listed as a genre, nor is it even mentioned in the article. --E tac 07:20, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

No, rainbow is not generally considered to be a founder of power metal. Perhaps some people do, but most people consider it to be simply hard rock or heavy metal. When comparing Rainbow to other hard rock bands, it does share some more characteristics with power metal than they do, but these characteristics are also shared with many bands of the NWOBHM. Basically, if you call rainbow power metal, you'd have to include many NWOBHM-bands into power metal aswell. 81.235.136.245 19:33, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I am not saying that they should be listed as a straight power metal band, but that at least something about their influence on the power metal genre should be included.--E tac 20:10, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

There's also the fact that Rainbow is not NWOBHM. Even if they can't be unique, they can definitely be first. They also featured Blackmore's neoclassical guitar style, focal in many power metal bands but completely lacking in NWOBHM. ASWilson 04:32, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

There's a difference between Power Metal and just Neo Classical Metal. Power Metal has parts thrash metal in its guitar style and the subgenre starts with Manowar, end of story. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.56.119.37 (talk) 08:16, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

There is absolutely no way that Power Metal starts with Manowar. If you have to pick one band it's probably Helloween. Rainbow definitely helped to create the blueprint though, along with Deep Purple, Judas Priest, Iron Maiden and Accept. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.26.169.70 (talk) 18:07, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Listen to Stargazer, Gates of Babylon, Tarot Woman, and Kill the King. They have neo-classical guitar playing, operatic vocals, medieval lyrics, and symphonic overtones. How is it not power metal? 174.229.66.84 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:51, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Street of Dreams

It says that "Street of Dreams" was banned by MTV (quoting from a bio) but MTV must have played this video 5 times a day for months in 1983. -Opalxx 22:00, 4 February 2007

Agreed, I had never heard of Rainbow before MTV put that video in rather heavy rotation. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 20:36, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

The claim does cite a reference, though I would question whether it's a reliable source. An embedded comment adjoining the references says: "This website is the Official Bio of Ritchie Blackmore (the Guitarist for Rainbow) and it states that in 1983, 'The video for the single, "Street of Dreams," would be banned from the newly-formed MTV as it visually demonstrates hypnosis'". It might be the official website but, frankly, I think it also makes for good publicity. (If Bill Clinton published a claim that he was the best president ever, would we take his word for it and cite it?) I've added the {{Dubious}} tag. Meanwhile, another source would seem to contradict Blackmore's assertion, as it criticizes MTV for airing the video. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 23:02, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I have gone ahead and updated the article with the source I found. I left the part about it being banned on MTV, but made clear that this is Blackmore's claim. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 23:21, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Also note that the Blackmore link had been tagged with {{Verify credibility}} (by me, I think) until someone replaced the tag with {{Fact}}, which wasn't really applicable. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 23:39, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Ritchie Blackmore's Rainbow

Well, it's the name of their first LP and also frequently used when somebody needs to be extra-specific, but why is it shown on the cover of the last LP Stranger In Us All as if it were the actual name? "Blackmore left Deep Purple in 1993 and formed a new Ritchie Blackmore's Rainbow." This would suggest something in connection with the new lineup, but the first reference, "Roy Davies, Rainbow Rising - The Story of Ritchie Blackmore's Rainbow" seems to say otherwise (doubt that they wrote a book about Rainbow 1993-97). As the name variation finds so much parallel usage, maybe it should be mentioned somehow (if official info is available)?  ITAL 19:36, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Editorial Influence?

This whole article does not entirely read like a balanced encyclopedia entry. In many places it sounds more like the views and opinions of someone with an "anti-Blackmore" axe to grind.

For example:

"In 1974, Blackmore became infuriated..."

"Blackmore fired everybody except..."

"Blackmore subsequently decided that Bain was substandard and fired him..."

"Blackmore disliked his playing so much that he fired Clarke on the spot..."

"Blackmore attempted to replace Dio with Ian Gillan, but Gillan turned him down..."

"Blackmore had instigated the sacking of Glover from Deep Purple..."

Some or all of the above may be factually accurate, but without any references to back these statements up they come across as "sour grapes" and detract from an otherwise excellent article.

I would respectfully suggest more moderate wording, and/or references or quotes to substantiate what currently comes across as being very one-sided presentation of a major historical rock influence.81.154.76.27 (talk) 11:42, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Roger Glover joining the band

Glover was originally hired only as a producer and songwiter, because he had just had a few hits with other bands. This was when Dio was still in the band. All of this documented and can be found in several interviews, both by Dio and Glover. Check out the "Rainbow Rising: The Story of Ritchie Blackmore's Rainbow" book, for instance. Dio soon realized that he didn't belong in the new, more commercial, direction and quit. The band was still searching for a full time bass player but, after a while, Cozy Powell convinced Glover (who, in the meantime, was jamming with them as a "placeholder" while writing songs with Blackmore) that all of that didn't make any sense, and that he should join the band permanently. Please, don't change those corrections I've made. --Purple74 (talk) 14:36, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Over The Rainbow

I think that it should be it's own page, as Blackmore owns the Rainbow name, and has no part in this new band. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Muttdog (talk • contribs) 15:36, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

• I'm not sure if they are notable enough for their own page, but if they do meet the criteria go for it. J04n(talk page) 16:12, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I removed it. Skuld (talk) 16:55, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Commercial Success

I'm assuming that no-one connected with this article is from the UK as the single 'I Surrender' isn't even mentioned (it is now). This was definitely their most successful single over here, only prevented from reaching the top spot by Ultravox and Joe Dolce.--Ykraps (talk) 19:12, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

JLT Rhythm Guitar

In this article Joe Lynn Turner is listed as contributing vocals and rhythm guitar. While I'm aware that he plays guitar, did he ever actually contribute guitar parts to Rainbow either live or in the studio? I've yet to see a live Rainbow performance with him on guitar, nor is he listed as a guitarist in any of Rainbow's studio albums (not to mention I can't imagine a control freak like Blackmore to allow anyone else near the six string)

Jobson

Is that true that Rainbow attempted to hire Jobson in 1977? Various sources claim it was in 1975, before Tony Carey joined the band. 1977 was a year when Jobson worked with Zappa and then left him to form UK. 92.36.99.38 (talk) 21:28, 26 August 2012 (UTC)Gregory Durnovo, 27.08.12

Genre

imho the reference genres are 1) hard rock, 2) heavy metal 3) AOR. in '81 - '83 era they got definitely into AOR, being among the pioneers of that genre. i would add AOR in the template. --Nabi.rules (talk) 22:09, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Requested Move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved per request. Favonian (talk) 11:17, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

---

Rainbow (band) → Rainbow (English band) – Incomplete disambiguation; "(band)" is ambiguous because of Rainbow (South Korean band). Powers ^T 22:52, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

• Support. Since there's no claim for WP:PRIMARY since they're both subordinate to rainbow anyway, sure. Red Slash 23:55, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
• Support per nom. The current title should redirect to the disambiguation page -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 00:05, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
• Support per nom. well spotted. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:10, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and WP:TWODABS. First, this use is clearly the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC of Rainbow (band), consistently getting 1500-2000 views per month, while Rainbow (Korean band) gets a few hundred a month. Second, if this move is made, what happens to Rainbow (band)? Does it become a redirect to Rainbow (English band) (then why move?), or a two-entry dab page, which would be contrary to WP:TWODABS? Either way, leaving this title as it is is the best solution. --B2C 21:30, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

A redlinked Rainbow (band) will either be deleted or head to Rainbow (disambiguation), that's what we always do with redundant dabs. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:34, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Move back already?

(British band) seemed weird to me, so I came to request a move. Seems you just had one. How about naming the other "band" Rainbow (girl group) and this one back? The group plays no instruments and is only referred to as a "band" twice in their entire article. This band is called that four times in the lead alone.

Separating them by where they're from rather than what they are is needlessly complex and wordy, and also misleading. Makes one think there's an actual band from another country named Rainbow. And if you search for "Rainbow (band)", you're now redirected to a page of things that unquestionably aren't bands (Edward Rainbowe didn't rock or dance a day in his life, I'll bet).

Madness, I tell ya. Who'll stop it? InedibleHulk (talk) 07:07, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

• I spotted this one after doing some edits and suddenly noticing DPL bot complained about me linking to Rainbow (band). Now I know we shouldn't bow to systematic bias, but the South Korean band called Rainbow seems to have a lot of primary and self published sources. Mind you, the Rainbow with Ritchie Blackmore is currently languishing in C-class, which doesn't help. If I had a decent Blackmore biography, I'd take it to GA status, which would hopefully tip the argument very strongly in one direction. Oh - as for "British Band", since when have Ronnie Dio, Tony Carey, David Stone and Joe Lynn Turner been British? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:06, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 2

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move to Rainbow (rock band). There is a rough consensus that the current disambiguation is off, but that just "(band)" is insufficient to distinguish the article from the one on the South Korean group. Rainbow (rock band) is the alternative with the most support. Cúchullain ^t/c 03:25, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

---

Rainbow (British band) → Rainbow (band) – There are several bands called "Rainbow" (notable and otherwise), but I believe this version remains the most important.

1. The main alternative article, Rainbow (South Korean band) suffers from puffery by citing primary sources and personal blogs. Interestingly, neither band appears particularly high in web searches.
2. A search for reliable sources on "rainbow band" [1] and "rainbow music" [2] returns many hits on many things, but when considering notable bands on Wikipedia, the 70s - 90s group is the only one to have any hits in the first 5 pages, vis Doogie White, Lyrics Freak, Metal Archives, AllMusic. A book search is similar - [3] [4] and so is a news search [5], [6]
3. A search for "what links here" in article space on this band ([7]) returns 577 hits. The same on the other contender ([8]) returns 91.
4. Previous RM had minimal participation, and !votes did not cite any policy beyond WP:PERNOM and WP:ILIKEIT
5. Previous RM also resulted in articles now linking to disambig pages. A search for these ([9]) currently brings up Riot (band), List of Hammond organ players, Stigmata (Tarot album), Mandy Lion and Jeffrey Kollman. All refer to this band.
6. Current name is misleading. Although Ritchie Blackmore was born in Britain, the band was never based there, and two key members, who helped with songwriting, Ronnie James Dio and Joe Lynn Turner were American. If consensus is against this proposal, Ritchie Blackmore's Rainbow or Rainbow (rock band) might be alternatives. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:12, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose WP:NCM the proposed title is insufficiently disambiguous, as you say, there are multiple bands called "Rainbow"; this is not the primary topic of "Rainbow", so should sit at a more disambiguated title. The alternately suggested Rainbow (rock band) works for me. or Blackmore's Rainbow per the article. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 13:21, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
• Support The current name may be disambiguous, but it is not natural, which is also important. Rainbow (rock band) works better for me than Blackmore's Rainbow, since it was not really known by that name for most of the band's career.--SabreBD (talk) 13:53, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:PDAB. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 16:17, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
  • That policy is still under dispute. --George Ho (talk) 16:59, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

• Move to Rainbow (1970s band)? If not, then I recommend "procedural closure" based on problems with notability of the South Korean band and nominate that article for deletion. --George Ho (talk) 16:59, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:PDAB. "Most important" is not a reason to leave the disambiguator ambiguous. I do not at all understand what is the motivation behind move requests of this sort. How is leaving out "British" in any way improving the article or the user experience of readers? What motivates such requests? Dicklyon (talk) 20:28, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

In my case, I was looking for this band, so typed in the most obvious choice and didn't go where I wanted to be. Leaving out "British" allows for more natural searching and Wikilinks. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:24, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

And in my case, as mentioned above, I was notified by DPL bot that Rainbow (band) was a disambig, and scratched my head wondering where the article that had sat at that location for the previous ten years had gone. Just citing WP:PDAB, a disputed guideline, isn't really enough. All that says is you might not be able to just use "(band)" or "(album)" on its own, but says nothing about when that is appropriate or not. By your logic, we should rename Nirvana (band) to Nirvana (US band) and Oasis (band) to Oasis (British band) - but we don't, because one term is multiple orders of magnitude more notable than all the others. Which is what we have here Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 07:29, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose - WP:NCM (recently restated in WP:PDAB) rules out "primary band," no benefit from ambiguating a parenthetical disambiguator. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:10, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

• The phrase "primary band" does not appear in the text of WP:NCM. All I can see is "Use further disambiguation only when needed" (my emphasis). Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 07:29, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

• Support The Korean "band" is a girl group, which may be a band by some definition, but probably not how most people use it (that article notes a distinction from all-female band). Change that one to Rainbow (girl group), and we're fine. (There's a requested move there, if anyone's interested.) InedibleHulk (talk) 03:17, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose per User:In ictu oculi and WP:GEOBIAS. The Korean girl group has had numerous top ten singles and albums — more than the Anglo-American band. If there's a problem with the sources, get to work and find some better ones. As for alternatives ot the current name, I support Rainbow (rock band) if others prefer it and oppose other titles such as Blackmore's Rainbow or Rainbow (1970s band) as both of those are largely inaccuarate. —  AjaxSmack  00:43, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Per Ajaxsmack Rainbow (rock band) sounds like the best solution here. (British band) is semi-accurate, (band) fails WP:NCM and WP:DAB, (1970s band) and (Blackmore's rainbow) are also only semi-accurate. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:56, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

NCM says "use further disambiguation only when needed". No need here. No matter which country the other Rainbow is from, or how many awards they win, we have a distinction between girl group and all-female band. They're a girl group, Blackmore's is a band. Bands have musicians, at least in the common usage. Calling the group a band is semi-accurate, and requires these long qualifiers. Also, wouldn't it be odd to have one Rainbow defined by its nationality, and one by its style? InedibleHulk (talk) 06:12, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

"The Korean girl group has had numerous top ten singles and albums — more than the Anglo-American band" - you'll need a reliable source to verify that assertion, particularly when this Allmusic source would seem to contradict it. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:35, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

"You'll need a reliable source to verify that assertion". No, I won't. I'm not adding said assertion to the article. My source was the relevant sourced Wikipedia articles and, if you think they are wrong, you are welcome to edit them.

The count I got was 5 Top 10 UK albums and 3 Top 10 UK singles (No top 10s in the US) for a total of 8 Top 10s from the Anglo-American band (taken from the Rainbow discography) versus 2 Top 10 Korean albums, 1 Top 10 Japanese album, 3 Top 10 Korean EPs, 3 Top 10 Korean singles, and 3 Top 10 Japanese singles for a total of 12 Top 10s from the Korean girl group (taken from the Rainbow (South Korean band) discography). —  AjaxSmack  03:28, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

• Comment Can we agree to at least not close this discussion till the move request at the Korean band is closed? At that time, the issue of which "band" is primary may be mooted. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:31, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't see why. There is no such thing as "primary" for bands, we have no guideline WP:PRIMARYBAND and the idea is specifically barred by WP:NCM anyway. The reason why it is barred is evident here where (assuming Rainbow the weather phenomenon didn't exist) the hypothetical question "which band is primary" would depend on whether the wp reader is a 20-something from Asia or a 50-something from the US or Britain. Given that (band) is impossible as a dab without changing the definition en.wp uses for (band). In ictu oculi (talk) 08:01, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

I'll just gently throw into the mix that Blackmore's Rainbow spent a lot of time touring Japan and were commercially successful there too ([10]) ([11]) so it's not just a straight question of being notable in different regions. (And, for the record, don't think I'm a particularly big fan of Blackmore just because I've got the same name as him - I think he's an asshole, though he might have mellowed in the last 20 years or so....). Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:33, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand me, oculi. I mean, if the Korean group is no longer listed as a band, at that time, the question of primacy (whether or not it's a valid question) won't matter. There may be only one band named Rainbow, and one girl group (or pop group, if that's less sexist). So no need to distinguish further. If we close this one first, we might end up with (British band) for no more reason than we'd need (British rock band). InedibleHulk (talk) 10:18, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

And when I say "may", I mean it in a theoretical way, not an allowance way. That may help. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:21, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

• Comment there is a related requested move at Talk: Rainbow (South Korean band) -- 70.24.244.158 (talk) 09:02, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

• Can I just gauge consensus on the alternative Rainbow (rock band). I proposed it, and a number of others on both sides of the debate did too. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:56, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

I'd still prefer just "band", but it beats "British band". InedibleHulk (talk) 15:05, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

The lesser evil for me.--SabreBD (talk) 22:54, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Progressive Rock and Pop Rock

Should progressive and pop rocks be added to their profile? The Dio era had a strong prog rock influence, while the Bonnet and Turner eras had a more pop rock influence. I would say yes, but who knows!?

Do you have any reliable sources that support those genre's ? Mlpearc (open channel) 22:15, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Also consider whether to keep arena rock. I've removed it, since it doesn't seem like a distinctive genre. Throw any rock band into an arena, they suddenly become something else? I don't think so, but if most of us do, that's cool. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:23, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

I agree, its not a genre in the sense that heavy metal or hard rock are.--SabreBD (talk) 17:27, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Or that progressive rock is, for that matter. I'm not exactly sure how to define it, aside from "more complex than the old 4/4 verse-choruse-verse stuff". Rainbow seems to sometimes fit that shoe, and we've got a quote from Tony Carey here calling the shows around Rising "really progressive rock".

That album also has the genre in its infobox, for what that's worth. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:41, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Well if there is a reliable source then it may be reasonable. Personally I would not define their sound as prog and they do not even seem to appear in major texts like Macan, so something that describes them in this way in general may be needed.--SabreBD (talk) 18:35, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Timeline

This revert of an earlier edit of mine was undone by Sabred, for which I thank them. I doubt that the IP editor, who never gave an explanation anyway, will come here to discuss, but I'll make my case anyway: since we already have a list of members (with years), and a chronologically organized line-up, we hardly need yet a third way to display the band members. (One could joke and say that it's just Ritchie Blackmore with a backing band, but not everyone thinks that's funny, including me.) Enough is enough--if anyone feels the need to improve the article, let them improve the article. Drmies (talk) 22:53, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

No timeline, please. It was first introduced here in 2010 by Aramil Meliamne when there was not the lineups-by-year section, so it made more sense then. It made a lot less sense after the lineups by year were composed.

I generally don't like graphic timelines, as they typically contain more date precision than the sources provide, making them into many little violations of WP:NOR and WP:V. In this case, the timeline has a big blank section in the middle, so it's silly looking. And it is not needed because the lineups by year provide the needed information in a manner that can be seen easily on mobile device screens. Binksternet (talk) 05:32, 11 September 2015 (UTC)