Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Karanacs 15:55, 4 May 2010.

The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan

 * Nominator(s): Moisejp, Mick gold and I.M.S. 15:38, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because I believe it is well-written, comprehensive, well-referenced and otherwise meets the FA criteria. It was recently promoted to GA and the reviewer said that he or she believes it is a good candidate for FA. Moisejp (talk) 15:38, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I would like to add myself and I.M.S. as co-nominators. This nomination arose from work done by WP:DYLAN collaboration team. Mick gold (talk) 12:18, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment. Link to http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/6598172/97_the_freewheelin_bob_dylan is dead. No dab links. Ucucha 15:47, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Rolling Stone seems to have revamped their website very recently and the Greatest 500 Albums list appears to have disappeared from their archives (temporarily?). OK, I will try to find another source for the information or remove it. Moisejp (talk) 16:04, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * You might want to check the Wayback Machine. Stonemason89 (talk) 18:09, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Stonemason89. It seems Rolling Stone is blocking access to it's archives on the Wayback Machine by robots.txt. Oh well, back to plan B above. Moisejp (talk) 13:11, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. The dead link has been removed and replaced with other sources. Moisejp (talk) 11:03, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Images File:The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan.jpg no valid FU rationale Fasach Nua (talk) 19:48, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Add Template:Album cover fur as a fair use rationale. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:48, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. Thank you, Sfan00 IMG. Moisejp (talk) 13:55, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Query, was User:Mick gold consulted about this nomination? Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 11:32, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for asking. I have added myself and I.M.S. as co-nominators above. Mick gold (talk) 12:18, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for adding yourself and I.M.S. as co-nominators, Mick gold. My apologies for neglecting to do that. Moisejp (talk) 12:59, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Proofread done: made a couple of minor edits. Rest looks good.
 * Section Political & Personal Background - 2nd paragraph - "fraught relationship". Definition of fraught gives "distressing". Does that refer merely to their separation or were their other factors? If it's only distance perhaps another word could be used. If it refers to something more, then perhaps it could be described briefly what the problem(s) was/were.
 * Section, Song Girl From The North Country: "pining for as he finished the song in Italy". That makes it sound like he was pining for her as he finished the song in Italy. But I thought it was her that was in Italy. Can you reword to make it clear?
 * Other than that, a good article. I have no interest in Dylan. Indeed sometimes hate him (he is, after all, a copyright supporting behemoth that threatens us all. And, to think, he stole songs from history. The cheek!). However, I kind of wish I had the album to listen to. So it piqued my interest as a good article should. --bodnotbod (talk) 19:34, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * bodnotbod - thanks for comments.
 * Dylan relationship with Rotolo was fraught. All the biographies comment on this. Her decision to go to Italy was, in part, an assertion of her independence. (Encouraged by her mother who did not approve of her scruffy boyfriend. Not promising son-in-law material.) On her return, there were tensions, in part provoked by Dylan's roving eye (his relationship with Baez began at the end of Freewheelin'); in part provoked by Rotolo's wish to be more than 'Bob Dylan's chick' as his fame and his power grew. Rotolo writes about this in her autobiography. I've added a sentence describing this tension.
 * I've tried to explain Dylan was in Italy when he wrote GFTNC. "Traveling to England" section explains that from London, Dylan went to Italy - to meet Grossman and Odetta - but also in hope of seeing Rotolo. While in Italy, he wrote the song and played it to Carthy when he returned to London. I thought that section was clear. Mick gold (talk) 21:01, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * With the "fraught", you could either add a sentence exploring it a bit, or you could use the [nb:x] style where people can click on it and it leads to a greater explanation. It's like a reference, but instead leads to a footnote instead of a ref. It's a way to add more material without breaking up the flow of the text. People that wonder can find out; people that just want to read on aren't distracted from the subject of the article. I've not done it myself but this appears to be the relevant idea.
 * Re: Italy... OK, looking at it again now, that makes sense. Maybe add in brackets "(she had already made her way back to New York)". I realise it's a repetition from the bit you mention, so y'know... I leave it to you. --bodnotbod (talk) 21:37, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Support anyway --bodnotbod (talk) 21:37, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Re-reading Rotolo's autobiography reminded me that she describes decision to go to Italy as going along with her mother's plans. (Her mother had conceived the plan in part to get her away from Dylan.) She writes she was very torn about whether to go, but in the end accepted her mother's plans "even though they'd been presented to me as a fait accompli". I've tried to add this sense to article. Mick gold (talk) 05:46, 21 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Support Good job, great album...Modernist (talk) 14:03, 25 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment, the album's cover needs alt text. Crystal Clear x3 18:41, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. Crystal Clear x3 05:00, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Article looks to be in good shape. Alt text is not currently a FAC requirement, due to concerns discussed at WP:ALT about its appropriate (or inappropriate) use. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 01:49, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I've added it anyway. Thanks for the support! - I.M.S. (talk) 02:13, 26 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Support, a fantastic read! Cavie78 (talk) 15:13, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I probably won't have time to revisit, but here are a few points I think you should consider:
 * Comments:
 * Not liking the big Outtakes table bang in the middle of the article. I don't see why you should include that table at all, as there is no need to list out stuff that didn't make the album. At least move it down, along with Track listing, so that it doesn't interrupt the prose.
 * Overlinking: New York City, iconic, music manager.
 * This article is about an American, so use American English.
 * The Chart section is unnecessary here. The two chart position for the album are covered by the prose, and the single didn't chart at all.
 * The first paragraph of Returning to New York is stubby (just one sentence). It is also unreferenced, as is the third para.
 * Adrian Denning and Georgiy Stratosin are not reliable sources. Please remove their reviews. (do you need an infobox for just two reviews?)

On the whole, a very comprehensive article.—indopug (talk) 07:51, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for points. I've re-written 'Returning to New York' and added references. As for spelling, I'll happily modify to US English if I knew which words to target.
 * have converted to US English diff. Did this by pasting into Word and using their US English dictionary. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 22:32, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe Outtakes table contains important information. Since recording of Freewheelin' went on for a year, a large number of outtake songs have been released on various albums over the last 40 years. What do others think of moving this table? Mick gold (talk) 15:16, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I only have a minute now, so I can't get to most of the points, but I just want to say that I really don't think you have to change it to American English, Mick gold. You're British, you've written most of the prose on this thing, and if you are consistent in using British English throughout, that's perfectly fine. I don't think there's any rule that American subjects have to be written about in American English. But if any reviewers disagree and think it'd be better in American English, then that's fine. I don't have a preference either way, but I'd hate to see you waste your time unnecessarily changing it—you'd have to go through it line by line making sure every single word was U.S. English. Moisejp (talk) 22:16, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * See note above, it took 5 minutes. WP:MOS would support the use of US English in this article. In addition, I support the retention of the Outtakes table, but I think that it is a valid point that it could be down at the bottom, below the track listing. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 22:32, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, thank you Jezhotwells. Good idea about using Word. Moisejp (talk) 22:51, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Jezhotwells, that's what I had in mind, I knew there were specific words to target. (I remember when Dylan recorded his first edition of TTRH that would go out on BBC radio, he said: "This evening's edition is coming to you from the British Broadcasting Corporation, so my flavours, my colours, and my humours will have an extra 'u' in them.") Mick gold (talk) 07:13, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * For the Outtakes table I have tentatively changed it to a "collapsible collapsed" table which means it is "hidden" until the reader clicks on "Show." That way it doesn't get in the way for people who aren't interested, but people who are can just click on it. Another option would be to make it a "collapsible uncollapsed" table, which means it appears when someone opens the page, but they can click on "Hide" if they don't want to see it. Still other options would be to make it collapsible and move it down at the bottom, as has been suggested, or move it down to the bottom but make it a normal table again, not collapsible. I personally slightly prefer it where it is now (as opposed to at the bottom), because it naturally progresses from the description of the released songs, but what do others think? Moisejp (talk) 01:53, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it looks good. I would support leaving it where it is. - I.M.S. (talk) 02:16, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree it looks good, and would support leaving it where it is. Mick gold (talk) 07:30, 29 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Please take note of the correct use of p and pp in citations (p is singular, pp for more than one page), and WP:ENDASHes on page ranges. Also ^ iTunes 2005 is an inconsistent citation-- it should specify the title-- there is no item listed as iTunes, since the title is listed first, so it's hard to find the corresponding citations.  Collapsible charts do not mirror or print, please don't use them in text, see MOS.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 12:10, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I fixed the iTunes ref. Thank you for pointing that out. I think you caught all of the p and pp inconsistencies (I couldn't find any other ones)—thank you for changing those, as well. Moisejp (talk) 15:13, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * SandyGeorgia above says collapsible charts are not a good idea in text. Shall we convert chart back to non-collapsible? I would favour leaving chart in present position. Other opinions? Mick gold (talk) 05:38, 3 May 2010 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.