| ||||||||||||||
|
In adding project tags to articles, I've noticed most Dylan talk pages already have Album and Rock templates. Before forging ahead, I thought I'd ask if it would be okay to use the ProjectBannerShell template to "package" the three more neatly. I've already done this on the New Morning discussion page as a test case, and as with the banner above, I also included the Talkheader template. Feedback? Allreet ( talk) 15:11, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to bring back up the discussion of the section headings on the Bob Dylan article. Does anyone have any suggestions for better ones? The current ones sound like they're from a critic's biography of Dylan, not an encyclopedia. I don't even think they have much to do with the subject of the sections themselves. Any ideas? I.M.S. ( talk) 15:13, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone know how to add one of those nifty article assessment tables (not sure if that's their official name) like the one we see here Wikipedia:WikiProject_New_York_City#Article assessment? Lots of project pages seem to have them, and as we get further along in working towards improving more and more articles it'd be a handy way to follow the progress we're making. Moisejp ( talk) 12:33, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
course, one difference between the FAR and any articles we targeted for improvement is that the FAR had a time limit, whereas if we target certain articles we can take our time. Still, yeah, for me personally, with the way I work and am motivated, I think I can contribute most if there are clearly specified targets (for example, a list of articles to try to bring up to GA) that other editors are also working towards. But again, that's just me. What do others think about all of this? Moisejp ( talk) 13:07, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
Note: This space was occupied by our project's collaboration area - the said area can now be found further down the page. - I.M.S. ( talk) 23:59, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
The suggestions above are great, and other ideas abound. The sky's the limit. Yet so little time, so much to do. A few random thoughts:
That's all I have to offer for now, other than to say I'm thrilled with the possibilities, daunted by the realities. P.S. I hope nobody minds but I just replaced what was originally posted - I thought I had clicked Show Preview, but when I returned later to finish (I wrote this in Notepad), I was surprised to see what I now replaced. Allreet ( talk) 20:12, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
Bob Dylan articles by quality and importance | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Quality | Importance | ||||||
Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | ??? | Total | |
![]() |
5 | 2 | 1 | 8 | |||
![]() |
3 | 13 | 14 | 16 | 46 | ||
B | 5 | 3 | 8 | 6 | 22 | ||
C | 11 | 22 | 27 | 31 | 91 | ||
Start | 2 | 12 | 53 | 163 | 1 | 231 | |
Stub | 4 | 16 | 70 | 90 | |||
List | 4 | 4 | 3 | 11 | |||
Category | 49 | 49 | |||||
Disambig | 1 | 1 | |||||
File | 47 | 47 | |||||
Project | 5 | 5 | |||||
Template | 13 | 13 | |||||
NA | 2 | 38 | 31 | 71 | |||
Assessed | 26 | 60 | 125 | 328 | 145 | 1 | 685 |
Total | 26 | 60 | 125 | 328 | 145 | 1 | 685 |
WikiWork factors ( ?) | ω = 2,217 | Ω = 4.54 |
-
I.M.S. (
talk)
20:42, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
It appears to me that the Bob Dylan template is big enough as it is, but fails to mention, probably the most important thing for a songwriter - the songs. How about a second template for either Bob Dylan singles or, my favourite, Notable Bob Dylan songs. I prefer the second option because so many of his songs were brought to prominence by other artists. Comments? -- Richhoncho ( talk) 15:24, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
I've just adjusted the project banner - what do you think about it? I.M.S. ( talk) 16:05, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
I understand you - that's why I suggested a task force, so we could have our own banner. I also added those categories to the banner to make the WP's scope clearer. So, do you think a Task Force is a good idea later on down the road? I.M.S. ( talk) 19:44, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Shall we keep the idea under wraps until we have a few people to join the sub-group? Not sure I'd join a sub-group myself. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 06:25, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Just so nobody wastes time trying to do what I have already done. I have covered all of from 4 to M inclusive of
Category:Songs written by Bob Dylan adding the Bob Dylan template to the article if necessary and the WPProject template to the talk page. Please change my assessments if you disagree. No harm would be done. I have also amended the Bob Dylan template so the related articles shows the different cats for Songs recorded BD by and Songs written by BD. Cheers. --
Richhoncho (
talk)
21:09, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Could you all have a look at User:Richhoncho/Artists recording Dylan songs as a possible replacement for the present layout. I can't say I can't think of improvements or variations, so please comment, cheers, -- Richhoncho ( talk) 06:58, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
cites everywhere else, but feel they bloat lists and that song/album material is easily referenceable without them. That's pretty much Critique 101, the abstract being that I'm 65-35 in favor of the change and 100 percent inspired by your desire to innovate. Allreet ( talk) 15:55, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Top 10? More like Top .001!
Responding seriously, I think your chart looks great, and, if you add the alpha table and tweak it a bit, it should certainly replace the original. I.M.S. ( talk) 20:04, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
List of artists who have covered Bob Dylan songs. If that's what's you're referring to as the "original". Allreet ( talk) 04:12, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Regarding article ratings and importance, I see Allreet has has gone through a bunch of them (I only looked at some of the album ratings, so I'm not sure the extent you may have done this to the vast number of other articles). Thanks for doing that, Allreet. I noticed that often (but not always) the importance was made consistent between the Bob Dylan and Rock Music and Albums projects. It was my understanding of how things work that the ratings shouldn't necessarily be consistent. What may be of high importance in Dylan's career may be, say, mid importance in the history of rock music. I didn't go through all of them but one that I noticed in particular was The Basement Tapes, which I changed to High importance (could possibly even be Top?) in the Dylan project but left as Mid in the other two. I'm not sure if there may be other cases like that where the importance should be different among the different projects, but there very likely are. Moisejp ( talk) 01:30, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
that I thought were debatable but didn't change, chalking them up to similar quirks and feeling we'd eventually sort things out as more editors reviewed the class and rating category pages. Anyway, the edit histories tell the tale, plus I documented everything I added or changed in my edit summaries.
importance is missing but is going to be all the more difficult to weave in because the marginal detail is in the way. A rating or assessment system would be most welcomed there, for example, identifying facts of undeniable importance (Top), lesser facts that are also indispensible (High), pertinent supportive detail (Mid), and information of little value to the reader's understanding of the subject at hand (Low). That may seem far-fetched or unnecessary, but without some measure of objectivity and common sense, I'm afraid the road ahead will be paved with low-level struggles rather than productive ones. Allreet ( talk) 07:48, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
I'd just like to make it clear that I wasn't pointing fingers at anyone - I think that Allreet, Moisejp, Richhoncho, Mickgold and others have all made great contributions to WP Dylan. When I said "valid point', I was referring to the fact that all articles don't deserve the same importance rating on different WPs' scales, as you all have been discussing above. I.M.S. ( talk)
I'm working on the WP collaboration right now - I'd like to create a page and get it started by the end of this month. It would probably be located at Wikipedia:WikiProject Bob Dylan/Collaboration (please do not create quite yet). I was thinking of how we could all specialize in different things (e.g., someone could focus on citations, another on just prose). Or, on the other side of the spectrum, it could be very free form and loose. Any opinions, ideas, etc? I.M.S. ( talk) 01:20, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Because it's so simple to do after my earlier trials and tribulations, I have added a sortable table of all articles tagged as WP Dylan, together with their importance rating and categorised whether an individual, a song, an album etc. Rather than discussions about ratings hopefully it will jog a few minds about what should be added to the project. See Category talk:Bob Dylan articles by importance. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 15:17, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Taking a lead from the above list, I have started a similar list for Bob. Again, comments and criticisms are welcome. There's a sample at User:Richhoncho/Artists recording Dylan songs. Cheers. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 10:55, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
I wouldn't bother listing the same version of the same song over and over. I might, however, list different versions, and mark them accordingly (Version 1, Version 2 - then make a note at the bottom of the page - or state directly what they are, e.g., "Bootleg, 1971"). - I.M.S. ( talk) 21:15, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Guidance please. I am listing all these songs and I really need to identify the proposed name of the list, would it be "Songs written by BD," "Songs recorded by BD," Songs written and recorded by Bob Dylan," "Songs recorded in the studio by BD," and I'm sure there's a few other options, including the possibility of more than one list. But here's the rub, whatever is chosen there are songs omitted. Any ideas? -- Richhoncho ( talk) 23:02, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm starting to have second thoughts as to my creation of the "Collaboration Page". Perhaps it would be a whole lot easier and simpler if it was located here, on this talk page. Does anyone Agree/Disagree? - I.M.S. ( talk) 22:22, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
After much confusion, this is the final "resting place" of the collaboration area. It is now active - please add on and help it grow!
This Month's Collaboration - " Like a Rolling Stone"
Goals (add one if you like, strike if accomplished):
I have re-written Like a Rolling Stone with additional quotes from Jules Siegel & Marvin Bronstein, CBC. Mick gold ( talk) 05:33, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
I'll go ahead and move it to the main page.
I.M.S. (
talk)
17:52, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
New comments begin here:
The section is now moved! - I.M.S. ( talk) 23:34, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
I just created this template for collaboration projects:
It would replace the regular "under construction" template. Does anyone have any opinions on this? - I.M.S. ( talk) 16:39, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
OK, Too much Bobbing can make you blind. It's too long, and I am tempted to say let's just have a list of Dylan compositions (whether sole or jointly) and to remove different recordings of the same song. At present I "think" I have added all recordings of songs Dylan wrote, only including live if there is no studio recording, but I know I have missed the bonus disc to The Bootleg Series Vol. 8: Tell Tale Signs, but added any song listed in Lyrics: 1962-1985, I need to research other Dylan songs further. There must be more. Have a look at User:Richhoncho/Artists recording Dylan songs and let me have any comments, especially about the proposed article title. BTW, if you want anything added/amended/deleted note it on the discussion page - I have a nice spreadsheet for edits, Easier than in WP. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 17:31, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Dozens and dozens of unreleased Dylan songs are listed. Some are just rumours, but many have been documented here and there. Moisejp ( talk) 11:33, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Should this bootleg album have an article about it? Fences& Windows 04:24, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
In case anyone is interested in participating, Mr. Tambourine Man is currently under GA review here. I nominated it in September before this project existed and now it has come up for review. 01:10, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Any ideas for the next collaboration? Let's get some ideas, and maybe we can have an informal poll to decide. Here are some of my ideas:
Any more ideas? - I.M.S. ( talk) 00:36, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Here are some of my ideas, but I don't claim my reasons are necessarily good:
It's finally up. Needs more work, references and into. Probably a few entries to be added. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 10:25, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
I just found this very interesting photo on Flickr:
What do others think of it? Does anybody know where it was taken (it was posted to Flickr in Spanish, so I can't discern the description). - I.M.S. ( talk) 19:59, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
I agree. I have encountered this problem many times on Wikipedia - I'll be on the lookout for a free image of Dylan from the mid-60s. - I.M.S. ( talk) 22:50, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
I've added a notability tag to songs which I believe don't express a reason for a seperate article. However some of the songs, such as " Idiot Wind", " Obviously 5 Believers", " Pledging My Time", " To Ramona" etc., I believe notability could be established easily and I will try to improve them. If anyone wants to question my opinion or establish notability for any of the songs I've tagged feel free. Articles like " Dirt Road Blues" have no infomation on them whatsoever so I would suggest an immediate merge with the album article. Any opinions and questions will be welcome. Thanks Kitchen roll ( talk) 12:09, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
I have to write a 4 thousand word essay on this film - English litrature. I need critically analyse the film and also look at deeper meanings - psycho- analyse. Metafors and so on. I'd like to start a discussion on this topc. I would appreciate any input from anyone. Thanx P —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.177.145 ( talk) 20:17, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I've been away, and didn't notice that the article on Echo Helstrom was deleted a while back (in 2008, actually). Doesn't our Echo deserve an article? I think so. And I think the article contains sufficient evidence of her notabilit, and the deletion was hasty.I have recreated the article in my own space, here: User:Herostratus/Echo Star Helstrom.
If anybody has any thoughts on this, leave them here or on the talk page at the above link. If enough people think it worthwhile, I will recreate it. Herostratus ( talk) 06:02, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your feedback. Here's the thing. I don't really know the policy or precedent fully, but I think that restoring an article that was properly (in-process) deleted is probably frowned upon. Deletion review can undelete articles, but that is only supposed to correct process errors (voting irregularities, premature close, etc.) which is not the case here. What IS the case is 1) there really weren't that many votes, it's wasn't an overwhelming decision, and 2) if I had not been away I probably could have tipped the vote to "no decision", and 3) she's notable, in the opionion of me and perhaps some other, and 4) it's been a while, so it might be proper to revisit the subject.
Theoretically I could undelete the article (I am an admin), but 1) this is generally not done, and besides 2) I wrote the article so I am hardly disinterested, and 3) the article hasn't changed since its deletion (obviously). So I won't do that.
How-ev-er, if a third party or parties wanted to work on the article (either in my userpace or by moving it into their own userspace), and the article is thereby changed and improved, then I think those parties could properly restore it.
So I'll leave it at that for now. If anyone wants to pick up the ball, great; if not... Herostratus ( talk) 16:17, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
I think she`s important..that`s all I really have to say about her..she was a notable influence on Dylan..the fact that anyone wrote about her in the 1`st place indicates there is interest in her..
New user here, and very interested in working on the Project. Thought that it might be worth mentioning that a sub-article for A.J. Weberman might be interesting for inclusion somewhere; Maybe not on the main Dylan article but in some capacity. Thoughts? Truthissoap ( talk) 07:39, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
This Month's Collaboration - " The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan"
Goals (add one if you like, strike if accomplished):
(Note: We have actually been working on this article for a while but neglected to put up an official announcement. But by all means, other editors are very welcome to contribute. Thank you.)
Just starting looking here when I stumbled across transfer of copyright. does anybody know or understand the workings of the copyright office, or what this would mean (I can can guess answers... but that's not right!). -- Richhoncho ( talk) 21:36, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Template:Dylan under construction has been nominated for deletion again. See here. - I.M.S. ( talk) 23:15, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
As has been pointed out elsewhere, Rolling Stone has changed its website such that all of its backlog is no longer available. I'm hoping we can clean up all of GA and FA articles to get rid of all the references to the magazine's website. I'm happy to help, but in some cases I am not sure I'll be able to find alternate sources. Mick gold has done a nice job of removing/reworking all the R.S. refs in the Bob Dylan article, and I noticed he removed one from Like a Rolling Stone. I did a quick scan of the other GA/FAs and noticed the following other ones (although it's not impossible that I missed one or two):
Well, I guess that's not so bad. I'll try to get started on those soon. The list ones can probably be easily found on http://www.rocklistmusic.co.uk but the other ones may need some reworking. If anyone else has time to help out as well, that'd be great. Thanks! Moisejp ( talk) 01:12, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
This is a really nice summing up sentence from the Legacy section of Like a Rolling Stone but it's gotta go. We could just cut it, but if Mick gold or anyone else has any ideas for a nice replacement, that'd be all the better: In the words of Rolling Stone, "No other pop song has so thoroughly challenged and transformed the commercial laws and artistic conventions of its time, for all time." Moisejp ( talk) 02:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm just.... I don't get why Suze Rotolo has an article but Echo Helstrom does not. This needs to be addressed. Not by me, though. So I'm moving the article out of my userspace and into this project's space as a subpage. It's out my hands now, but if someone wants to pick up on it, it's there. If the project doesn't want it, delete it. 04:17, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
I just stumbled across the Suze Rotolo article and see it's classed as Low Importance in the Bob Dylan project. For the reasons noted by Kohoutek1138, should it not be at least "Mid"? Newburyjohn ( talk) 06:42, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello. Are we ready to decide on our next "Collaboration of the Month"? In February, we were discussing the possibility of doing
The Basement Tapes next after Freewheelin'. I.M.S. and Mick gold presented some possible difficulties in tackling TBT (see "Onwards & Upwards" above) and it was decided at the time to wait until later to attempt it. I'd be happy to try TBT this time, but if others still feel unconfident about doing it this time, I'm happy enough to do something else. If we do decide on TBT, it might be an idea for us to come up with a plan beforehand about what we want to say—then we could feel like we had a clear strategy to overcome the particular challenges the article would entail.
Other ideas for articles to work on, if we decide against TBT:
Moisejp ( talk) 00:49, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
I am probably being pedantic here, but I don't like the title above. "Cover" signifies somebody doing, say, songs that Elvis Presley recorded. As in "cover" band, which are now called "tribute bands". I'd much prefer List of artists who have recorded songs written by Bob Dylan... Not quite as snappy, but much more precise. Comments? -- Richhoncho ( talk) 16:35, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Now, I know that Dylan and the Band recorded a number of songs in the studio ("Can You Please Crawl Out Your Window?", "Seems Like a Freeze-Out"), but there are a number of tracks that were recorded but never used. I can't think of any specific titles, but a bootleg called "The Genuine Bootleg Series" includes several of them in their set list ( here is the link; you can browse through the other packages under the same name). This seems like an important part in the "white-hot electric" period of Dylan's career. Shouldn't there be a page on the subject? BootleggerWill ( talk) 16:55, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
I have taken it as far as I can go for the moment. It needs some consideration of the following :-
Feel free to edit, I am away for a week or so soon. Cheers -- Richhoncho ( talk) 21:06, 28 June 2010 (UTC) PS. I have covered to 1973, official releases, and memory (when it can be backed by references). I need more books to continue...-- Richhoncho ( talk) 21:13, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps you could split the list up by year, e.g. "Songs Written By Bob Dylan: Recorded in 1966", or you could split them by album or period (acoustic period, electric period, basement tapes period, John Wesely Harding period, et cetera). Or maybe there could be a page dedicated to released songs written by Dylan, and a page dedicated to bootleg songs written by Dylan. These are just suggestions. BootleggerWill ( talk) 18:24, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
So far, I haven't seen a single personnel list for any of Dylan's songs. I don't think we should add them to any articles coming from his acoustic period (except, perhaps "Corrina, Corrina" and "Mixed-Up Confusion"), but much of the information on this subject is bungled together into one long section of each article. Take, for example, " From a Buick 6". For one, it only mentions two members of the band, and only for a brief moment, and it doesn't specify who plays any other instruments besides guitar and organ. I doesn't even mention Dylan (but I suppose this isn't needed; it is, after all, a song by Bob Dylan). And besides, practically every Beatles song page has a personnel list, why not every Dylan song? BootleggerWill ( talk) 18:17, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
I just read Bob Dylan World Tour 1966 for the first time and I'm concerned about this section on Drug Use. Alarm bells ring vis a vis WP:BLP! This section seems to be sourced to Nigel Williamson, The Rough Guide to Bob Dylan. I've never read this book so I can't comment on how the source is used. I'd be interested in opinions of others. Mick gold ( talk) 13:18, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Do you think the page " Talkin' John Birch Paranoid Blues" should be moved to "Talkin' John Birch Society Blues"? I don't know wether the title was invented by Columbia, or is Dylan's original. I know that the early test pressings of The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan that included that song had the name spelled as the latter, but is it the official title? The Gates of Eden ( Talkin' Gates of Eden Blues) 04:26, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Right now, I am in the midst of cleaning up the Bob Dylan World Tour 1966 page, and there is this one section that has been particularly hard to bring up to code: Attitude and Personality. In the beginning, it used to head off the article; and was a total mess quality-wise, but after I moved it to a more appropriate place and re-wrote most of it, I found that it really wasn't benefiting too much to the article, except for the little piece on drugs. Should it be excised from the article, expanded and cleaned, the information moved to another place in the page, or some other suggestion? The Gates of Eden ( Talkin' Gates of Eden Blues) 23:20, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Now that The Basement Tapes is an FA, is there any interest in a new collaboration of the month? Rlendog ( talk) 19:41, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
I see that Slow Train Coming has all the details of Dylan's conversion to Christianity. But since the born-again period is a very important one in Dylan's carrier (like his "Going Electric" period), isn't it better to have a separate article dedicated to it? Slow Train is just an album made up with songs those were inspired by his new point of view, where Dylan's conversion to Christianity affected directly the subsequent two albums as well as many of his later songs. I think it'll will make both itself and Slow train more readable. Thanks.-- Sayantan m ( talk) 06:44, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Congratulations, team. As all of you should know by now, the " Like a Rolling Stone" article has been selected as the main page featured article for January 8, 2011. For the record, here's the announcement as sent to the project team, including the segment that will appear on the main page:
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of
this article know that it will be appearing as
the main page featured article on January 8, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at
Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 8, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director,
Raul654 (
talk ·
contribs). If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of
the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the
Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! User:Tbhotch 20:19, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
" Like a Rolling Stone" is a 1965 song by American singer-songwriter Bob Dylan. Its confrontational lyrics originate in an extended piece of verse Dylan wrote in June 1965, when he returned exhausted from a grueling tour of England. During a difficult two days pre-production, Dylan struggled to find the essence of the song, which was demoed without success as a waltz. A breakthrough was made when it was tried in a rock music format, and rookie session musician Al Kooper improvised the organ riff for which the track is known. However, Columbia Records was unhappy with both the song's length at over six minutes and its heavy electric sound, and was hesitant to release it. It was only when a month later a copy was leaked to a new popular music club and heard by influential DJs that the song was put out as a single. Although radio stations were reluctant to play such a long track, "Like a Rolling Stone" reached number two in the US charts and became a worldwide hit. The track has been described as revolutionary in its combination of different musical elements, the youthful, cynical sound of Dylan's voice, and the directness of the question in the chorus: "How does it feel?". "Like a Rolling Stone" transformed Dylan's career and is today considered one of the most influential compositions in post-war popular music and has since its release been both a music industry and popular culture milestone which elevated Dylan's image to iconic. The song has been covered by numerous artists, including Jimi Hendrix, The Rolling Stones, The Wailers and Green Day. ( more...)
I think there should be a photo for the LARS TFA. I was thinking of this one. What do others think? It can be added to here. - I.M.S. ( talk) 04:40, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
An editor has added material about the alleged relationship between Sedgwick and Dylan, including an alleged pregnancy, to the " Like a Rolling Stone" article. I've removed some of it. Please comment here if you agree or disagree. Mick gold ( talk) 11:14, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Congratulations all round on Highway 61 Revisited getting promoted to GA. This raises the question: where next? Should we try to take H61R to FA? I feel like suggesting we try to work Blonde on Blonde up to GA. After that, we work Bringing It All Back Home up to GA. Then we can decide which of these albums we'd like to advance towards FA. I think that by getting all 3 of Dylan's great mid 60s trilogy of albums to GA level, we will have achieved something substantial as a basis for WP Dylan articles. Any thoughts? Mick gold ( talk) 17:36, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello. I've started a new article for Olof Björner. I was concerned that we sometimes get hassled at GA and FA review time when we try to use him as a source, by people who don't know who he is. So I thought it'd be good if we had a page for him where we could build up his legitimacy as a very reliable source, and then wiki-link to it when we do use him. (If he's mentioned in the text we can obviously just wiki-link him as normal, but if he is only mentioned in the reference, we can use authorlink=Olof Björner.) So far the article is very short but I plan to add to a it bit by bit. If anyone else wants to help you can. Here in Google Books [7] it shows several works that have used him as a source or mentioned him. Take care. Moisejp ( talk) 11:56, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
User:Allreet has pointed out this article is now over 169,00 bytes long and is slow to load and difficult to edit. The answer would be to separate into 2/4 different parts, alphabetical by artist. With this in mind I have created a draft that, instead of having a straight redirect to the different parts, would include a list of all the artists and a redirect to relevant section of the separate articles. You can find the version we agree on at User:Richhoncho/Dylanmain#Variation_of_concept_2. Any comments, criticisms or ways to improve from you guys? -- Richhoncho ( talk) 23:17, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
The above has been moved by an editor to [[Might Quinn (song}}]] on the grounds that in the UK the song was released by Manfred Mann under that title - the same editor says that it was released in the US under the full title, as per BobDylan.com. My thoughts are that it should be under the correct Dylan title Anybody want to agree/disagree with me? I have left a note to this effect on the talkpage. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 19:41, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
I've just started adding a template to the List of Basement Tapes songs; it can be found here. Tell me what you think of it; should I continue with the format I have now, change things, etc. BootleggerWill ( talk) 14:41, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Congrats on Blonde on Blonde getting to GA. What next? Mick gold is keen on taking BoB to FAN. I don't have any strong objections. I was kind of looking forward to leaving BoB behind and moving on to maybe Blood on the Tracks as we previously discussed as a possibility. However, if others feel BoB is pretty much at FA level and that it'd be a shame not to see it through, I'm happy to go along. If so, I propose that we skip any peer review and jump right into the nomination. I also propose that we be prepared to quickly deal with any objections reviewers bring up, without any fuss, so that the process is as speedy and painless as possible and we can move onto other things. I am specifically thinking about the Songs section, an issue that comes up every time. When Silverwood brought up the concern in the "Go for GA?" section of the Talk of Highway 61 Revisited, I went and checked all the FA album articles, and our The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan is the only one of all of them that included a Songs section. I feel we were lucky that it slipped through the cracks and no one objected at FAR time. If it happens that no one objects to the Songs section in BoB, great. But I think it is quite likely somebody will, and I'm just proposing that we be prepared to move the section to a separate article as we did for The Basement Tapes, without a fuss. We know from past experience that it's an issue some people have strong feelings about. I like the Songs section, but not enough to fight very hard to keep it. Whether we decide to bring BoB to FAN now, or come back to H61R and BoB later and bring them to FAN at another time, this issue is going to come up. And of course other issues may come up that we haven't thought of in FAR for BoB or any other article we bring to FAN. And in the same way, I would like to just to be prepared to concede changes with relatively little fuss. (Not that I'm saying we made an especially large amount of fuss in the past.) We saw from The Basement Tapes FAR that it can be a draining process and I'd just be happy to make our subsequent FARs go as smoothly as possible. I hope I don't seem defeatist here. I just think that accepting the Wikipedia community's concept of what constitutes a FA is a reasonable thing, and getting to FA is a very satisfying thing, even if the article is not exactly as we originally envisioned it. Moisejp ( talk) 18:35, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
In related articles there are 3 entries which I am not convinced should be there, namely a) Chimes of Freedom: Songs of Bob Dylan Honoring 50 Years of Amnesty International on the grounds all or no compilations should be there, b) The Lost Notebooks of Hank Williams, which Dylan has one track on, c) The Masked Marauders which only 'purports' that Dylan played on. Also I would suggest that the never ending tour should be one article (irrespective of the fact it split into different years). Am I right or am I wrong? Any comments? -- Richhoncho ( talk) 20:23, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
Is there a need to have both or either {{ Another Side of Bob Dylan}} and {{ Another Side of Bob Dylan tracks}} among others (see more in Category:Bob Dylan album templates)? They are transcluded in the same exact articles and serve the same purpose. Overall, more articles have the track list template because the album navboxes seemed to only have been created for albums in which there is an article for each (or nearly each) song on the album. So there is {{ Desire tracks}} but not {{ Desire}} because only 3 tracks from that album have articles. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars Talk to me 16:47, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
The above cat is up for deletion. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 20:02, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
At bobdylan.com the URL's for lyrics have changed, making a lot of External Links her obsolete. This seems like the kind of thing a bot could handle. Self-explanatory diff:
BTW, thanks for all your good work; the Dylan articles are a real pleasure. regards, Middle 8 ( talk) 06:56, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
I dropped a note at Talk:List of Bob Dylan songs based on earlier tunes wondering if that article isn't a little sketchy. I could be wrong, but if anyone (with actual expertise) wanted to take a peek... Herostratus ( talk) 16:14, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
User SilkTork has added a link to a number of Dylan album articles, including the Featured Articles Blonde on Blonde and Highway 61 Revisited whereby people can apparently freely stream a copy of the album from a website in Romania. The legality seems very dubious to me. I don't think we should be pushing the limits of legality in this way on Wikipedia, especially in Featured articles, but what do others think about this? SilkTork, can you justify how this website is legit? Thanks, Moisejp ( talk) 03:29, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
An editor is removing the Dylan template from song articles and replacing with an album template, as per example. I see no value in removing the Dylan template and little value in the album template. Anybody agree? -- Richhoncho ( talk) 19:33, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
There's a discussion underway regarding a WP Beatles template, Template:Dark Horse tracks, to which editors may wish to contribute. I thought it might be relevant to this artist project also because I've noticed that Dylan song infoboxes carry a similar album-track template. JG66 ( talk) 16:47, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
Within the Nobel project we work on a script for an explainer video about BD & why he received the prize. The video can be then used on Wikipedia. It would be great if someone can review the script and give us feedback. You can find the document here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Simpleshow#Literature_-_2016-10-28 Thank you for your support!-- Norma.jean ( talk) 11:51, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
I noticed just now that an edit I did almost 2 years ago has been undone... Positively 4th Street It said that the song does not appear anywhere in the lyrics ... I changed that. Right now I am sitting here with
BOB DYLAN 1962 - 2001 LYRICS Simon and Schuster, ISBN-13: 978-0-7432-3101-5
on my lap, opened on page 184
I would like to know why my edit has been reverted.
Hildairene ( talk) 00:45, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
I want to add that the lyrics of Positively 4th Street
are also in The Lyrics since 1962 on page 233. Hildairene ( talk) 01:14, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Editor has been adding a OCMS cover on the song articles for this album. I have removed on the grounds of non-notable and unreferenced. I sent the editor to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Songs#Bob_Dylan...Blonde_on_Blonde for further discussion if anybody wants to join in.-- Richhoncho ( talk) 17:21, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
Strange discussion going on here at Compilations. Somebody has decided to agree with an unanswered point from 2013 that the above 2 albums are compilations, and changed the issue order of every Dylan studio album. I have reverted this, but for completeness, perhaps a fuller discussion? -- Richhoncho ( talk) 10:08, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
I'd lean towards calling them studio albums. Most of us here I think agree that they're not the clearest cut example of either—and arguments can be and have been given for how their characteristics match one or the other—but in the continuum between the most quintessential studio album and the most quintessential compilation album, my feeling is that they are more on the studio album side. Like it says in the link given to compilation album, the most commonly thought of single-artist compilation albums tend to be things like greatest hits, box sets, and "retrospectives", which these two albums are not. And I agree with Mick gold and Richhoncho that it's very common for studio albums to come from multiple sessions, and there doesn't necessarily need to have been an "original intent" that the songs were slated for a particular album when they were recorded. Surely it's relatively common for some artists—artists like Dylan who have the liberty and prolificness to be able to do so—to knock off a few songs here and there in the studio without a clear idea of when the next album will be released or which songs will make the final cut, or even whether a session will be used at all. Then they go back and listen to the songs and use some for their next studio album. The Basement Tapes may not fit this description exactly, but it's not that big of a jump. Moisejp ( talk) 02:17, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Hey all, I made The Bootleg Series into a sort of DAB page. However, I was wondering if we should just sort of turn it into more of an article. I think it might serve us well. Thoughts? ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ᐐT₳LKᐬ 16:33, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi all.
Any opinions on whether bob-dylan.org.uk is a WP:RELIABLE source? I had thought not, at first glance, but looking at the list of main contributors, perhaps there is a case for it being reliable.
Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk) 00:32, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Thinking about upgrades to " All Along the Watchtower", prose clean-up, cite clean-up, etc. Then possible nomination. Would be useful to have editors with some Dylan knowledge, since I have done mostly Hendrix updates for his version of this Dylan song. Any one available for joining in? ErnestKrause ( talk) 17:43, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
I've posted about this site on the reliable sources board. I thought some editors here might be interested in contributing to a discussion. Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Searching_for_a_Gem_(www.searchingforagem.com).
Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk) 22:38, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Hi all, please feel free to comment at Wikipedia:Peer review/All Along the Watchtower/archive1. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk) 10:26, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
I see that Markhorst has authored a number of self-published books about Dylan, and contributes to bob-dylan.org.uk. Any views here about using his work as a source for articles? Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk) 22:52, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
| ||||||||||||||
|
In adding project tags to articles, I've noticed most Dylan talk pages already have Album and Rock templates. Before forging ahead, I thought I'd ask if it would be okay to use the ProjectBannerShell template to "package" the three more neatly. I've already done this on the New Morning discussion page as a test case, and as with the banner above, I also included the Talkheader template. Feedback? Allreet ( talk) 15:11, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to bring back up the discussion of the section headings on the Bob Dylan article. Does anyone have any suggestions for better ones? The current ones sound like they're from a critic's biography of Dylan, not an encyclopedia. I don't even think they have much to do with the subject of the sections themselves. Any ideas? I.M.S. ( talk) 15:13, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone know how to add one of those nifty article assessment tables (not sure if that's their official name) like the one we see here Wikipedia:WikiProject_New_York_City#Article assessment? Lots of project pages seem to have them, and as we get further along in working towards improving more and more articles it'd be a handy way to follow the progress we're making. Moisejp ( talk) 12:33, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
course, one difference between the FAR and any articles we targeted for improvement is that the FAR had a time limit, whereas if we target certain articles we can take our time. Still, yeah, for me personally, with the way I work and am motivated, I think I can contribute most if there are clearly specified targets (for example, a list of articles to try to bring up to GA) that other editors are also working towards. But again, that's just me. What do others think about all of this? Moisejp ( talk) 13:07, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
Note: This space was occupied by our project's collaboration area - the said area can now be found further down the page. - I.M.S. ( talk) 23:59, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
The suggestions above are great, and other ideas abound. The sky's the limit. Yet so little time, so much to do. A few random thoughts:
That's all I have to offer for now, other than to say I'm thrilled with the possibilities, daunted by the realities. P.S. I hope nobody minds but I just replaced what was originally posted - I thought I had clicked Show Preview, but when I returned later to finish (I wrote this in Notepad), I was surprised to see what I now replaced. Allreet ( talk) 20:12, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
Bob Dylan articles by quality and importance | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Quality | Importance | ||||||
Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | ??? | Total | |
![]() |
5 | 2 | 1 | 8 | |||
![]() |
3 | 13 | 14 | 16 | 46 | ||
B | 5 | 3 | 8 | 6 | 22 | ||
C | 11 | 22 | 27 | 31 | 91 | ||
Start | 2 | 12 | 53 | 163 | 1 | 231 | |
Stub | 4 | 16 | 70 | 90 | |||
List | 4 | 4 | 3 | 11 | |||
Category | 49 | 49 | |||||
Disambig | 1 | 1 | |||||
File | 47 | 47 | |||||
Project | 5 | 5 | |||||
Template | 13 | 13 | |||||
NA | 2 | 38 | 31 | 71 | |||
Assessed | 26 | 60 | 125 | 328 | 145 | 1 | 685 |
Total | 26 | 60 | 125 | 328 | 145 | 1 | 685 |
WikiWork factors ( ?) | ω = 2,217 | Ω = 4.54 |
-
I.M.S. (
talk)
20:42, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
It appears to me that the Bob Dylan template is big enough as it is, but fails to mention, probably the most important thing for a songwriter - the songs. How about a second template for either Bob Dylan singles or, my favourite, Notable Bob Dylan songs. I prefer the second option because so many of his songs were brought to prominence by other artists. Comments? -- Richhoncho ( talk) 15:24, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
I've just adjusted the project banner - what do you think about it? I.M.S. ( talk) 16:05, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
I understand you - that's why I suggested a task force, so we could have our own banner. I also added those categories to the banner to make the WP's scope clearer. So, do you think a Task Force is a good idea later on down the road? I.M.S. ( talk) 19:44, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Shall we keep the idea under wraps until we have a few people to join the sub-group? Not sure I'd join a sub-group myself. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 06:25, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Just so nobody wastes time trying to do what I have already done. I have covered all of from 4 to M inclusive of
Category:Songs written by Bob Dylan adding the Bob Dylan template to the article if necessary and the WPProject template to the talk page. Please change my assessments if you disagree. No harm would be done. I have also amended the Bob Dylan template so the related articles shows the different cats for Songs recorded BD by and Songs written by BD. Cheers. --
Richhoncho (
talk)
21:09, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Could you all have a look at User:Richhoncho/Artists recording Dylan songs as a possible replacement for the present layout. I can't say I can't think of improvements or variations, so please comment, cheers, -- Richhoncho ( talk) 06:58, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
cites everywhere else, but feel they bloat lists and that song/album material is easily referenceable without them. That's pretty much Critique 101, the abstract being that I'm 65-35 in favor of the change and 100 percent inspired by your desire to innovate. Allreet ( talk) 15:55, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Top 10? More like Top .001!
Responding seriously, I think your chart looks great, and, if you add the alpha table and tweak it a bit, it should certainly replace the original. I.M.S. ( talk) 20:04, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
List of artists who have covered Bob Dylan songs. If that's what's you're referring to as the "original". Allreet ( talk) 04:12, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Regarding article ratings and importance, I see Allreet has has gone through a bunch of them (I only looked at some of the album ratings, so I'm not sure the extent you may have done this to the vast number of other articles). Thanks for doing that, Allreet. I noticed that often (but not always) the importance was made consistent between the Bob Dylan and Rock Music and Albums projects. It was my understanding of how things work that the ratings shouldn't necessarily be consistent. What may be of high importance in Dylan's career may be, say, mid importance in the history of rock music. I didn't go through all of them but one that I noticed in particular was The Basement Tapes, which I changed to High importance (could possibly even be Top?) in the Dylan project but left as Mid in the other two. I'm not sure if there may be other cases like that where the importance should be different among the different projects, but there very likely are. Moisejp ( talk) 01:30, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
that I thought were debatable but didn't change, chalking them up to similar quirks and feeling we'd eventually sort things out as more editors reviewed the class and rating category pages. Anyway, the edit histories tell the tale, plus I documented everything I added or changed in my edit summaries.
importance is missing but is going to be all the more difficult to weave in because the marginal detail is in the way. A rating or assessment system would be most welcomed there, for example, identifying facts of undeniable importance (Top), lesser facts that are also indispensible (High), pertinent supportive detail (Mid), and information of little value to the reader's understanding of the subject at hand (Low). That may seem far-fetched or unnecessary, but without some measure of objectivity and common sense, I'm afraid the road ahead will be paved with low-level struggles rather than productive ones. Allreet ( talk) 07:48, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
I'd just like to make it clear that I wasn't pointing fingers at anyone - I think that Allreet, Moisejp, Richhoncho, Mickgold and others have all made great contributions to WP Dylan. When I said "valid point', I was referring to the fact that all articles don't deserve the same importance rating on different WPs' scales, as you all have been discussing above. I.M.S. ( talk)
I'm working on the WP collaboration right now - I'd like to create a page and get it started by the end of this month. It would probably be located at Wikipedia:WikiProject Bob Dylan/Collaboration (please do not create quite yet). I was thinking of how we could all specialize in different things (e.g., someone could focus on citations, another on just prose). Or, on the other side of the spectrum, it could be very free form and loose. Any opinions, ideas, etc? I.M.S. ( talk) 01:20, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Because it's so simple to do after my earlier trials and tribulations, I have added a sortable table of all articles tagged as WP Dylan, together with their importance rating and categorised whether an individual, a song, an album etc. Rather than discussions about ratings hopefully it will jog a few minds about what should be added to the project. See Category talk:Bob Dylan articles by importance. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 15:17, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Taking a lead from the above list, I have started a similar list for Bob. Again, comments and criticisms are welcome. There's a sample at User:Richhoncho/Artists recording Dylan songs. Cheers. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 10:55, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
I wouldn't bother listing the same version of the same song over and over. I might, however, list different versions, and mark them accordingly (Version 1, Version 2 - then make a note at the bottom of the page - or state directly what they are, e.g., "Bootleg, 1971"). - I.M.S. ( talk) 21:15, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Guidance please. I am listing all these songs and I really need to identify the proposed name of the list, would it be "Songs written by BD," "Songs recorded by BD," Songs written and recorded by Bob Dylan," "Songs recorded in the studio by BD," and I'm sure there's a few other options, including the possibility of more than one list. But here's the rub, whatever is chosen there are songs omitted. Any ideas? -- Richhoncho ( talk) 23:02, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm starting to have second thoughts as to my creation of the "Collaboration Page". Perhaps it would be a whole lot easier and simpler if it was located here, on this talk page. Does anyone Agree/Disagree? - I.M.S. ( talk) 22:22, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
After much confusion, this is the final "resting place" of the collaboration area. It is now active - please add on and help it grow!
This Month's Collaboration - " Like a Rolling Stone"
Goals (add one if you like, strike if accomplished):
I have re-written Like a Rolling Stone with additional quotes from Jules Siegel & Marvin Bronstein, CBC. Mick gold ( talk) 05:33, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
I'll go ahead and move it to the main page.
I.M.S. (
talk)
17:52, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
New comments begin here:
The section is now moved! - I.M.S. ( talk) 23:34, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
I just created this template for collaboration projects:
It would replace the regular "under construction" template. Does anyone have any opinions on this? - I.M.S. ( talk) 16:39, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
OK, Too much Bobbing can make you blind. It's too long, and I am tempted to say let's just have a list of Dylan compositions (whether sole or jointly) and to remove different recordings of the same song. At present I "think" I have added all recordings of songs Dylan wrote, only including live if there is no studio recording, but I know I have missed the bonus disc to The Bootleg Series Vol. 8: Tell Tale Signs, but added any song listed in Lyrics: 1962-1985, I need to research other Dylan songs further. There must be more. Have a look at User:Richhoncho/Artists recording Dylan songs and let me have any comments, especially about the proposed article title. BTW, if you want anything added/amended/deleted note it on the discussion page - I have a nice spreadsheet for edits, Easier than in WP. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 17:31, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Dozens and dozens of unreleased Dylan songs are listed. Some are just rumours, but many have been documented here and there. Moisejp ( talk) 11:33, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Should this bootleg album have an article about it? Fences& Windows 04:24, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
In case anyone is interested in participating, Mr. Tambourine Man is currently under GA review here. I nominated it in September before this project existed and now it has come up for review. 01:10, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Any ideas for the next collaboration? Let's get some ideas, and maybe we can have an informal poll to decide. Here are some of my ideas:
Any more ideas? - I.M.S. ( talk) 00:36, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Here are some of my ideas, but I don't claim my reasons are necessarily good:
It's finally up. Needs more work, references and into. Probably a few entries to be added. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 10:25, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
I just found this very interesting photo on Flickr:
What do others think of it? Does anybody know where it was taken (it was posted to Flickr in Spanish, so I can't discern the description). - I.M.S. ( talk) 19:59, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
I agree. I have encountered this problem many times on Wikipedia - I'll be on the lookout for a free image of Dylan from the mid-60s. - I.M.S. ( talk) 22:50, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
I've added a notability tag to songs which I believe don't express a reason for a seperate article. However some of the songs, such as " Idiot Wind", " Obviously 5 Believers", " Pledging My Time", " To Ramona" etc., I believe notability could be established easily and I will try to improve them. If anyone wants to question my opinion or establish notability for any of the songs I've tagged feel free. Articles like " Dirt Road Blues" have no infomation on them whatsoever so I would suggest an immediate merge with the album article. Any opinions and questions will be welcome. Thanks Kitchen roll ( talk) 12:09, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
I have to write a 4 thousand word essay on this film - English litrature. I need critically analyse the film and also look at deeper meanings - psycho- analyse. Metafors and so on. I'd like to start a discussion on this topc. I would appreciate any input from anyone. Thanx P —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.177.145 ( talk) 20:17, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I've been away, and didn't notice that the article on Echo Helstrom was deleted a while back (in 2008, actually). Doesn't our Echo deserve an article? I think so. And I think the article contains sufficient evidence of her notabilit, and the deletion was hasty.I have recreated the article in my own space, here: User:Herostratus/Echo Star Helstrom.
If anybody has any thoughts on this, leave them here or on the talk page at the above link. If enough people think it worthwhile, I will recreate it. Herostratus ( talk) 06:02, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your feedback. Here's the thing. I don't really know the policy or precedent fully, but I think that restoring an article that was properly (in-process) deleted is probably frowned upon. Deletion review can undelete articles, but that is only supposed to correct process errors (voting irregularities, premature close, etc.) which is not the case here. What IS the case is 1) there really weren't that many votes, it's wasn't an overwhelming decision, and 2) if I had not been away I probably could have tipped the vote to "no decision", and 3) she's notable, in the opionion of me and perhaps some other, and 4) it's been a while, so it might be proper to revisit the subject.
Theoretically I could undelete the article (I am an admin), but 1) this is generally not done, and besides 2) I wrote the article so I am hardly disinterested, and 3) the article hasn't changed since its deletion (obviously). So I won't do that.
How-ev-er, if a third party or parties wanted to work on the article (either in my userpace or by moving it into their own userspace), and the article is thereby changed and improved, then I think those parties could properly restore it.
So I'll leave it at that for now. If anyone wants to pick up the ball, great; if not... Herostratus ( talk) 16:17, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
I think she`s important..that`s all I really have to say about her..she was a notable influence on Dylan..the fact that anyone wrote about her in the 1`st place indicates there is interest in her..
New user here, and very interested in working on the Project. Thought that it might be worth mentioning that a sub-article for A.J. Weberman might be interesting for inclusion somewhere; Maybe not on the main Dylan article but in some capacity. Thoughts? Truthissoap ( talk) 07:39, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
This Month's Collaboration - " The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan"
Goals (add one if you like, strike if accomplished):
(Note: We have actually been working on this article for a while but neglected to put up an official announcement. But by all means, other editors are very welcome to contribute. Thank you.)
Just starting looking here when I stumbled across transfer of copyright. does anybody know or understand the workings of the copyright office, or what this would mean (I can can guess answers... but that's not right!). -- Richhoncho ( talk) 21:36, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Template:Dylan under construction has been nominated for deletion again. See here. - I.M.S. ( talk) 23:15, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
As has been pointed out elsewhere, Rolling Stone has changed its website such that all of its backlog is no longer available. I'm hoping we can clean up all of GA and FA articles to get rid of all the references to the magazine's website. I'm happy to help, but in some cases I am not sure I'll be able to find alternate sources. Mick gold has done a nice job of removing/reworking all the R.S. refs in the Bob Dylan article, and I noticed he removed one from Like a Rolling Stone. I did a quick scan of the other GA/FAs and noticed the following other ones (although it's not impossible that I missed one or two):
Well, I guess that's not so bad. I'll try to get started on those soon. The list ones can probably be easily found on http://www.rocklistmusic.co.uk but the other ones may need some reworking. If anyone else has time to help out as well, that'd be great. Thanks! Moisejp ( talk) 01:12, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
This is a really nice summing up sentence from the Legacy section of Like a Rolling Stone but it's gotta go. We could just cut it, but if Mick gold or anyone else has any ideas for a nice replacement, that'd be all the better: In the words of Rolling Stone, "No other pop song has so thoroughly challenged and transformed the commercial laws and artistic conventions of its time, for all time." Moisejp ( talk) 02:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm just.... I don't get why Suze Rotolo has an article but Echo Helstrom does not. This needs to be addressed. Not by me, though. So I'm moving the article out of my userspace and into this project's space as a subpage. It's out my hands now, but if someone wants to pick up on it, it's there. If the project doesn't want it, delete it. 04:17, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
I just stumbled across the Suze Rotolo article and see it's classed as Low Importance in the Bob Dylan project. For the reasons noted by Kohoutek1138, should it not be at least "Mid"? Newburyjohn ( talk) 06:42, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello. Are we ready to decide on our next "Collaboration of the Month"? In February, we were discussing the possibility of doing
The Basement Tapes next after Freewheelin'. I.M.S. and Mick gold presented some possible difficulties in tackling TBT (see "Onwards & Upwards" above) and it was decided at the time to wait until later to attempt it. I'd be happy to try TBT this time, but if others still feel unconfident about doing it this time, I'm happy enough to do something else. If we do decide on TBT, it might be an idea for us to come up with a plan beforehand about what we want to say—then we could feel like we had a clear strategy to overcome the particular challenges the article would entail.
Other ideas for articles to work on, if we decide against TBT:
Moisejp ( talk) 00:49, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
I am probably being pedantic here, but I don't like the title above. "Cover" signifies somebody doing, say, songs that Elvis Presley recorded. As in "cover" band, which are now called "tribute bands". I'd much prefer List of artists who have recorded songs written by Bob Dylan... Not quite as snappy, but much more precise. Comments? -- Richhoncho ( talk) 16:35, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Now, I know that Dylan and the Band recorded a number of songs in the studio ("Can You Please Crawl Out Your Window?", "Seems Like a Freeze-Out"), but there are a number of tracks that were recorded but never used. I can't think of any specific titles, but a bootleg called "The Genuine Bootleg Series" includes several of them in their set list ( here is the link; you can browse through the other packages under the same name). This seems like an important part in the "white-hot electric" period of Dylan's career. Shouldn't there be a page on the subject? BootleggerWill ( talk) 16:55, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
I have taken it as far as I can go for the moment. It needs some consideration of the following :-
Feel free to edit, I am away for a week or so soon. Cheers -- Richhoncho ( talk) 21:06, 28 June 2010 (UTC) PS. I have covered to 1973, official releases, and memory (when it can be backed by references). I need more books to continue...-- Richhoncho ( talk) 21:13, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps you could split the list up by year, e.g. "Songs Written By Bob Dylan: Recorded in 1966", or you could split them by album or period (acoustic period, electric period, basement tapes period, John Wesely Harding period, et cetera). Or maybe there could be a page dedicated to released songs written by Dylan, and a page dedicated to bootleg songs written by Dylan. These are just suggestions. BootleggerWill ( talk) 18:24, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
So far, I haven't seen a single personnel list for any of Dylan's songs. I don't think we should add them to any articles coming from his acoustic period (except, perhaps "Corrina, Corrina" and "Mixed-Up Confusion"), but much of the information on this subject is bungled together into one long section of each article. Take, for example, " From a Buick 6". For one, it only mentions two members of the band, and only for a brief moment, and it doesn't specify who plays any other instruments besides guitar and organ. I doesn't even mention Dylan (but I suppose this isn't needed; it is, after all, a song by Bob Dylan). And besides, practically every Beatles song page has a personnel list, why not every Dylan song? BootleggerWill ( talk) 18:17, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
I just read Bob Dylan World Tour 1966 for the first time and I'm concerned about this section on Drug Use. Alarm bells ring vis a vis WP:BLP! This section seems to be sourced to Nigel Williamson, The Rough Guide to Bob Dylan. I've never read this book so I can't comment on how the source is used. I'd be interested in opinions of others. Mick gold ( talk) 13:18, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Do you think the page " Talkin' John Birch Paranoid Blues" should be moved to "Talkin' John Birch Society Blues"? I don't know wether the title was invented by Columbia, or is Dylan's original. I know that the early test pressings of The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan that included that song had the name spelled as the latter, but is it the official title? The Gates of Eden ( Talkin' Gates of Eden Blues) 04:26, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Right now, I am in the midst of cleaning up the Bob Dylan World Tour 1966 page, and there is this one section that has been particularly hard to bring up to code: Attitude and Personality. In the beginning, it used to head off the article; and was a total mess quality-wise, but after I moved it to a more appropriate place and re-wrote most of it, I found that it really wasn't benefiting too much to the article, except for the little piece on drugs. Should it be excised from the article, expanded and cleaned, the information moved to another place in the page, or some other suggestion? The Gates of Eden ( Talkin' Gates of Eden Blues) 23:20, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Now that The Basement Tapes is an FA, is there any interest in a new collaboration of the month? Rlendog ( talk) 19:41, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
I see that Slow Train Coming has all the details of Dylan's conversion to Christianity. But since the born-again period is a very important one in Dylan's carrier (like his "Going Electric" period), isn't it better to have a separate article dedicated to it? Slow Train is just an album made up with songs those were inspired by his new point of view, where Dylan's conversion to Christianity affected directly the subsequent two albums as well as many of his later songs. I think it'll will make both itself and Slow train more readable. Thanks.-- Sayantan m ( talk) 06:44, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Congratulations, team. As all of you should know by now, the " Like a Rolling Stone" article has been selected as the main page featured article for January 8, 2011. For the record, here's the announcement as sent to the project team, including the segment that will appear on the main page:
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of
this article know that it will be appearing as
the main page featured article on January 8, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at
Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 8, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director,
Raul654 (
talk ·
contribs). If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of
the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the
Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! User:Tbhotch 20:19, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
" Like a Rolling Stone" is a 1965 song by American singer-songwriter Bob Dylan. Its confrontational lyrics originate in an extended piece of verse Dylan wrote in June 1965, when he returned exhausted from a grueling tour of England. During a difficult two days pre-production, Dylan struggled to find the essence of the song, which was demoed without success as a waltz. A breakthrough was made when it was tried in a rock music format, and rookie session musician Al Kooper improvised the organ riff for which the track is known. However, Columbia Records was unhappy with both the song's length at over six minutes and its heavy electric sound, and was hesitant to release it. It was only when a month later a copy was leaked to a new popular music club and heard by influential DJs that the song was put out as a single. Although radio stations were reluctant to play such a long track, "Like a Rolling Stone" reached number two in the US charts and became a worldwide hit. The track has been described as revolutionary in its combination of different musical elements, the youthful, cynical sound of Dylan's voice, and the directness of the question in the chorus: "How does it feel?". "Like a Rolling Stone" transformed Dylan's career and is today considered one of the most influential compositions in post-war popular music and has since its release been both a music industry and popular culture milestone which elevated Dylan's image to iconic. The song has been covered by numerous artists, including Jimi Hendrix, The Rolling Stones, The Wailers and Green Day. ( more...)
I think there should be a photo for the LARS TFA. I was thinking of this one. What do others think? It can be added to here. - I.M.S. ( talk) 04:40, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
An editor has added material about the alleged relationship between Sedgwick and Dylan, including an alleged pregnancy, to the " Like a Rolling Stone" article. I've removed some of it. Please comment here if you agree or disagree. Mick gold ( talk) 11:14, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Congratulations all round on Highway 61 Revisited getting promoted to GA. This raises the question: where next? Should we try to take H61R to FA? I feel like suggesting we try to work Blonde on Blonde up to GA. After that, we work Bringing It All Back Home up to GA. Then we can decide which of these albums we'd like to advance towards FA. I think that by getting all 3 of Dylan's great mid 60s trilogy of albums to GA level, we will have achieved something substantial as a basis for WP Dylan articles. Any thoughts? Mick gold ( talk) 17:36, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello. I've started a new article for Olof Björner. I was concerned that we sometimes get hassled at GA and FA review time when we try to use him as a source, by people who don't know who he is. So I thought it'd be good if we had a page for him where we could build up his legitimacy as a very reliable source, and then wiki-link to it when we do use him. (If he's mentioned in the text we can obviously just wiki-link him as normal, but if he is only mentioned in the reference, we can use authorlink=Olof Björner.) So far the article is very short but I plan to add to a it bit by bit. If anyone else wants to help you can. Here in Google Books [7] it shows several works that have used him as a source or mentioned him. Take care. Moisejp ( talk) 11:56, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
User:Allreet has pointed out this article is now over 169,00 bytes long and is slow to load and difficult to edit. The answer would be to separate into 2/4 different parts, alphabetical by artist. With this in mind I have created a draft that, instead of having a straight redirect to the different parts, would include a list of all the artists and a redirect to relevant section of the separate articles. You can find the version we agree on at User:Richhoncho/Dylanmain#Variation_of_concept_2. Any comments, criticisms or ways to improve from you guys? -- Richhoncho ( talk) 23:17, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
The above has been moved by an editor to [[Might Quinn (song}}]] on the grounds that in the UK the song was released by Manfred Mann under that title - the same editor says that it was released in the US under the full title, as per BobDylan.com. My thoughts are that it should be under the correct Dylan title Anybody want to agree/disagree with me? I have left a note to this effect on the talkpage. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 19:41, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
I've just started adding a template to the List of Basement Tapes songs; it can be found here. Tell me what you think of it; should I continue with the format I have now, change things, etc. BootleggerWill ( talk) 14:41, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Congrats on Blonde on Blonde getting to GA. What next? Mick gold is keen on taking BoB to FAN. I don't have any strong objections. I was kind of looking forward to leaving BoB behind and moving on to maybe Blood on the Tracks as we previously discussed as a possibility. However, if others feel BoB is pretty much at FA level and that it'd be a shame not to see it through, I'm happy to go along. If so, I propose that we skip any peer review and jump right into the nomination. I also propose that we be prepared to quickly deal with any objections reviewers bring up, without any fuss, so that the process is as speedy and painless as possible and we can move onto other things. I am specifically thinking about the Songs section, an issue that comes up every time. When Silverwood brought up the concern in the "Go for GA?" section of the Talk of Highway 61 Revisited, I went and checked all the FA album articles, and our The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan is the only one of all of them that included a Songs section. I feel we were lucky that it slipped through the cracks and no one objected at FAR time. If it happens that no one objects to the Songs section in BoB, great. But I think it is quite likely somebody will, and I'm just proposing that we be prepared to move the section to a separate article as we did for The Basement Tapes, without a fuss. We know from past experience that it's an issue some people have strong feelings about. I like the Songs section, but not enough to fight very hard to keep it. Whether we decide to bring BoB to FAN now, or come back to H61R and BoB later and bring them to FAN at another time, this issue is going to come up. And of course other issues may come up that we haven't thought of in FAR for BoB or any other article we bring to FAN. And in the same way, I would like to just to be prepared to concede changes with relatively little fuss. (Not that I'm saying we made an especially large amount of fuss in the past.) We saw from The Basement Tapes FAR that it can be a draining process and I'd just be happy to make our subsequent FARs go as smoothly as possible. I hope I don't seem defeatist here. I just think that accepting the Wikipedia community's concept of what constitutes a FA is a reasonable thing, and getting to FA is a very satisfying thing, even if the article is not exactly as we originally envisioned it. Moisejp ( talk) 18:35, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
In related articles there are 3 entries which I am not convinced should be there, namely a) Chimes of Freedom: Songs of Bob Dylan Honoring 50 Years of Amnesty International on the grounds all or no compilations should be there, b) The Lost Notebooks of Hank Williams, which Dylan has one track on, c) The Masked Marauders which only 'purports' that Dylan played on. Also I would suggest that the never ending tour should be one article (irrespective of the fact it split into different years). Am I right or am I wrong? Any comments? -- Richhoncho ( talk) 20:23, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
Is there a need to have both or either {{ Another Side of Bob Dylan}} and {{ Another Side of Bob Dylan tracks}} among others (see more in Category:Bob Dylan album templates)? They are transcluded in the same exact articles and serve the same purpose. Overall, more articles have the track list template because the album navboxes seemed to only have been created for albums in which there is an article for each (or nearly each) song on the album. So there is {{ Desire tracks}} but not {{ Desire}} because only 3 tracks from that album have articles. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars Talk to me 16:47, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
The above cat is up for deletion. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 20:02, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
At bobdylan.com the URL's for lyrics have changed, making a lot of External Links her obsolete. This seems like the kind of thing a bot could handle. Self-explanatory diff:
BTW, thanks for all your good work; the Dylan articles are a real pleasure. regards, Middle 8 ( talk) 06:56, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
I dropped a note at Talk:List of Bob Dylan songs based on earlier tunes wondering if that article isn't a little sketchy. I could be wrong, but if anyone (with actual expertise) wanted to take a peek... Herostratus ( talk) 16:14, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
User SilkTork has added a link to a number of Dylan album articles, including the Featured Articles Blonde on Blonde and Highway 61 Revisited whereby people can apparently freely stream a copy of the album from a website in Romania. The legality seems very dubious to me. I don't think we should be pushing the limits of legality in this way on Wikipedia, especially in Featured articles, but what do others think about this? SilkTork, can you justify how this website is legit? Thanks, Moisejp ( talk) 03:29, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
An editor is removing the Dylan template from song articles and replacing with an album template, as per example. I see no value in removing the Dylan template and little value in the album template. Anybody agree? -- Richhoncho ( talk) 19:33, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
There's a discussion underway regarding a WP Beatles template, Template:Dark Horse tracks, to which editors may wish to contribute. I thought it might be relevant to this artist project also because I've noticed that Dylan song infoboxes carry a similar album-track template. JG66 ( talk) 16:47, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
Within the Nobel project we work on a script for an explainer video about BD & why he received the prize. The video can be then used on Wikipedia. It would be great if someone can review the script and give us feedback. You can find the document here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Simpleshow#Literature_-_2016-10-28 Thank you for your support!-- Norma.jean ( talk) 11:51, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
I noticed just now that an edit I did almost 2 years ago has been undone... Positively 4th Street It said that the song does not appear anywhere in the lyrics ... I changed that. Right now I am sitting here with
BOB DYLAN 1962 - 2001 LYRICS Simon and Schuster, ISBN-13: 978-0-7432-3101-5
on my lap, opened on page 184
I would like to know why my edit has been reverted.
Hildairene ( talk) 00:45, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
I want to add that the lyrics of Positively 4th Street
are also in The Lyrics since 1962 on page 233. Hildairene ( talk) 01:14, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Editor has been adding a OCMS cover on the song articles for this album. I have removed on the grounds of non-notable and unreferenced. I sent the editor to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Songs#Bob_Dylan...Blonde_on_Blonde for further discussion if anybody wants to join in.-- Richhoncho ( talk) 17:21, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
Strange discussion going on here at Compilations. Somebody has decided to agree with an unanswered point from 2013 that the above 2 albums are compilations, and changed the issue order of every Dylan studio album. I have reverted this, but for completeness, perhaps a fuller discussion? -- Richhoncho ( talk) 10:08, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
I'd lean towards calling them studio albums. Most of us here I think agree that they're not the clearest cut example of either—and arguments can be and have been given for how their characteristics match one or the other—but in the continuum between the most quintessential studio album and the most quintessential compilation album, my feeling is that they are more on the studio album side. Like it says in the link given to compilation album, the most commonly thought of single-artist compilation albums tend to be things like greatest hits, box sets, and "retrospectives", which these two albums are not. And I agree with Mick gold and Richhoncho that it's very common for studio albums to come from multiple sessions, and there doesn't necessarily need to have been an "original intent" that the songs were slated for a particular album when they were recorded. Surely it's relatively common for some artists—artists like Dylan who have the liberty and prolificness to be able to do so—to knock off a few songs here and there in the studio without a clear idea of when the next album will be released or which songs will make the final cut, or even whether a session will be used at all. Then they go back and listen to the songs and use some for their next studio album. The Basement Tapes may not fit this description exactly, but it's not that big of a jump. Moisejp ( talk) 02:17, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Hey all, I made The Bootleg Series into a sort of DAB page. However, I was wondering if we should just sort of turn it into more of an article. I think it might serve us well. Thoughts? ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ᐐT₳LKᐬ 16:33, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi all.
Any opinions on whether bob-dylan.org.uk is a WP:RELIABLE source? I had thought not, at first glance, but looking at the list of main contributors, perhaps there is a case for it being reliable.
Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk) 00:32, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Thinking about upgrades to " All Along the Watchtower", prose clean-up, cite clean-up, etc. Then possible nomination. Would be useful to have editors with some Dylan knowledge, since I have done mostly Hendrix updates for his version of this Dylan song. Any one available for joining in? ErnestKrause ( talk) 17:43, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
I've posted about this site on the reliable sources board. I thought some editors here might be interested in contributing to a discussion. Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Searching_for_a_Gem_(www.searchingforagem.com).
Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk) 22:38, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Hi all, please feel free to comment at Wikipedia:Peer review/All Along the Watchtower/archive1. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk) 10:26, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
I see that Markhorst has authored a number of self-published books about Dylan, and contributes to bob-dylan.org.uk. Any views here about using his work as a source for articles? Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk) 22:52, 29 November 2022 (UTC)