Talk:Mr. Tambourine Man (album)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Mr. Tambourine Man (album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091012183429/http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg to http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=17:706149

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 05:43, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mr. Tambourine Man (album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101028024421/http://ebni.com/byrds/relassociates12.html to http://ebni.com/byrds/relassociates12.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:38, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Mistake under Release and reception? Last paragraph seems to have repetition and attribution error.
In the last paragraph of Release and Reception, the quote 'a significant step in the evolution of rock & roll itself, demonstrating that intelligent lyrical content could be wedded to compelling electric guitar riffs and a solid backbeat' is repeated and attributed to two different authors. Unterberger and then Fricke.

Mr.datsun (talk) 12:18, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Well spotted! Don't know how that snuck in there. The comment is Unterberger's, not Fricke's. Fixed it now. Thanks. --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 07:00, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Professional reviews
Is there a reason why only one professional review is included? Most album pages have several reviews -- this one is only one review from 1965. Some more recent assessments would be better.  freshacconci  (✉) 15:03, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
 * It's a good point. I just added the AllMusic review to that section. But I agree finding other contemporary (or vintage) reviews would be good. --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 10:49, 5 February 2024 (UTC)