Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Long and Winding Road

The Long and Winding Road
Self-nom. Raul removed this and a few other nominations, so I'm renominating a couple that I think are head and shoulders above the rest. Johnleemk | Talk 01:57, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Support: Same reason as for the other Beatles article. - Ta bu shi da yu 07:57, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Ambi 08:36, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Support, but same as before - can we make sure there's no copyright violations? Zerbey 17:02, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * See fair use for an explanation. Johnleemk | Talk 08:47, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Object. Same primary reason (tertiary references) as other Beatles song articles.  Other nitpicks: I don't think any article that needs to use the word "arguably" in the lead is a FAC.  The Naked album cover should not be bigger than the original Let It Be cover; in fact I don't know why we need album covers in a song article.  The article itself would be crisper if it stuck to the song rather than the whole Get Back/LIB project .  Jgm 18:41, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * All objections have been resolved for this article. Half the quotes are from a newspaper linked in the references, and the others either have their source directly mentioned in the text (Macdonald's quote, and McCartney's interview with the Evening Standard) or are in the book I just added to the references. I'll try to get to work on the other nomination tomorrow. Johnleemk | Talk 16:06, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * See the "A Day in the Life" nomination for my response. Better to have some references than none. I don't write anything which is contradicted by another source unless it's a sufficiently major urban legend. The article does not even begin to cover the Get Back project. Details are mentioned where necessary to provide context. If you're referring to the court case, McCartney specifically named the song as one of six reasons for dissolving the Beatles (it's in the article). The word "arguably" is used because some would disagree with the assessment. If you disagree with my opinion, can you provide a better word to replace it with? Johnleemk | Talk 08:42, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. I also think the word "arguable" and its derivatives are a little over-used in the article (in the lead and the image of the single sleeve). It's not a show-stopper, but maybe it should be rephrased.  Also, I added some wiki links to music theory articles in the Lyrics and melody section. - Karl Ward 14:34, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * The awkward sentences have been rephrased, and I reworded the caption a little to make it clearer. I withdraw my objection.  - Karl Ward 17:08, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Maybe we need a List of words not permitted in featured articles? ;-) Filiocht 08:48, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. --Tothebarricades.tk 00:48, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. +sj + 20:30, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)