Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/It's Alright, Ma (I'm Only Bleeding)/1

It's Alright, Ma (I'm Only Bleeding)

 * • [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment/It%27s_Alright,_Ma_(I%27m_Only_Bleeding)/1&action=watch Watch article reassessment page] • Most recent review
 * Result: Kept. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:38, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

The article fails to meet WP:NPOV (WP:GACR #4), specifically WP:AESTHETIC. For example, the second paragraph begins by saying "The song features some of Dylan's most memorable lyrical images." This would maybe be appropriate in a review, but it's not up to Wikipedia to decide which lyrical images in a song are the most "memorable". Other lines I'd call attention to are "Dylan sings in a new prophetic voice that would become his trademark", "...the critique in [the song] is more direct and less allusive", and "These lines seemed particularly prescient...". The first and last of these are WP:PUFFERY, and the middle is a subjective analysis. The prose of the article needs to make clear that these are the viewpoints of certain writers. The Midnite Wolf (talk) 19:07, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I started this article way back in 2006, and it was just a brief account of the song's origins and a list of albums where it had appeared. In fact, my last act with regard to this article was reverting an edit with an unsourced opinion about the song's meaning. I had no idea it would grow into the current immense article, but I'm very impressed. I take your point about WP:NPOV and WP:PUFFERY, but I'm sure the article could be repaired to remove that without sacrificing the - to coin a term - encyclopedic sweep of its contents.ubiquity (talk) 20:32, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Agreed that the article could be fixed without removing much information, the opinions just need to be attributed properly. The Midnite Wolf (talk) 06:17, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I wonder if User:BennyOnTheLoose, having had a recent TFA on Dylan, would be interested in taking a look and giving a view? UndercoverClassicist T·C 20:10, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Looks to me like the article can be fixed up to GA without too much effort, but I haven't checked it against sources. (There could be a some examples of OR, a common issue in Dylan song articles.) Some of the covers may not meet WP:COVERSONG. A couple of the sources (e.g. genius.com, imdb.com) aren't appropriate. If anyone would be able to add inline tags I'm happy to check specific examples; I've got immediate access to most of the Dylan books cited. Regards, 23:43, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Above comment was from me but I think I messed up the signature. I've made some changes to the article, and would be happy to work on any specific issues identifed. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:59, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I can see a citation needed tag, and a few places where the prose could do with tidying up, but to my eyes the WP:AESTHETIC, WP:NPOV and WP:PUFFERY concerns are dealt with. The article does need to be fully cited to meet the GA standards, but once that's done I think it would be over the bar. UndercoverClassicist T·C 17:30, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I've added a citation and tweaked the text (removed the lyrics) to match what the source supports. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 21:59, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Mostly happy: two points on the citation note:
 * : artistic works can be used to cite their own contents (and we don't normally use a footnote in that case), but as we're doing a bit more than simply describing what any idiot can hear (that is, interpreting what can be heard as a "false start"), I think we need a secondary source here.
 * : if nothing else, that inline citation should be a footnote (WP:PAREN), but to keep WP:SYNTH happy, it would be ideal to have a secondary source cited which has explicitly made that connection (I assume the Rogovoy citation above would do the job?)
 * UndercoverClassicist T·C 07:20, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * , did you see the above? &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:34, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * No, I hadn't. Added sources (Dylan's own site) for the false start. Added an additional citation from Rogovoy, as the quote above is in the book and he makes the connection. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 01:03, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Given that, I'd be happy to close this as keep. UndercoverClassicist T·C 17:24, 19 March 2024 (UTC)