Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Bob Dylan/Archive 1
This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:WikiProject Bob Dylan. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
New portal
Ok guys me making you a portal!!! {{Portal|Bob Dylan}}
- UPDATE Done and Done...Portal:Bob Dylan...........Buzzzsherman (talk) 06:08, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WP 1.0 bot announcement
This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:01, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Request for comment on Biographies of living people
Hello Wikiproject! Currently there is a discussion which will decide whether wikipedia will delete 49,000 articles about a living person without references, here:
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
Since biographies of living people covers so many topics, many wikiproject topics will be effected.
The two opposing positions which have the most support is:
- supports the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, User:Jehochman
- opposes the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, except in limited circumstances, User:Collect
Comments are welcome. Keep in mind that by default, editor's comments are hidden. Simply press edit next to the section to add your comment.
Please keep in mind that at this point, it seems that editors support deleting unreferenced BLP articles if they are not sourced, so your project may want to source these articles as soon as possible. See the next, message, which may help.
Tools to help your project with unreferenced Biographies of living people
- List of cleanup articles for your project
If you don't already have this and are interested in creating a list of articles which need cleanup for your wikiproject see: Cleanup listings A list of examples is here
- Moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation pages"
If you are interested in moving unreferenced blp articles that your project covers, to a special "incubation page", contact me, User talk:Ikip
- Watchlisting all unreferenced articles
If you are interested in watchlisting all of the unreferenced articles once you install Cleanup_listings, contact me, User talk:Ikip
Madhouse on Castle Street
Just to let you know another editor is taking the above article to Good Article review. --Richhoncho (talk) 17:26, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Notice - TfD and FAC
A notice on two things:
- FA - Our project now has another Featured article added to its ranks - "Like a Rolling Stone". Thanks to the entire collaboration team!
- TfD - Template:Dylan under construction has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Onwards & Upwards
Congratulations to everyone for great collaborative effort on Like A Rolling Stone WP:FA. What shall we do next? The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan? The Basement Tapes? Mick gold (talk) 08:14, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
- Congratulations, everyone! Yee-haw! I'd be happy to work on either one of those next. What do other people want to do? Moisejp (talk) 09:12, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
- I'm leaning towards The Basement Tapes, although Freewheelin' is still high on my list. The Basement Tapes would probably be more of a challenge. Let's see what others think. - I.M.S. (talk) 16:13, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
- To be totally honest, I also have a slight preference for The Basement Tapes, although like I.M.S., Freewheelin' is high on my list, too. Moisejp (talk) 10:18, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- I think we should begin on it soon. The lead needs a little tidying; here's a few things I've noticed (we can shift to the article's talk page when ready):
- The opening paragraph is standalone, and we should find a way to merge it.
- The sleeve notes of the album were written by Greil Marcus paragraph is probably not appropriate for the lead, and should be merged with the main text.
- I think we should re-arrange the following, emphasizing sales first, and long-time legacy last:
- I think we should begin on it soon. The lead needs a little tidying; here's a few things I've noticed (we can shift to the article's talk page when ready):
- To be totally honest, I also have a slight preference for The Basement Tapes, although like I.M.S., Freewheelin' is high on my list, too. Moisejp (talk) 10:18, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- I'm leaning towards The Basement Tapes, although Freewheelin' is still high on my list. The Basement Tapes would probably be more of a challenge. Let's see what others think. - I.M.S. (talk) 16:13, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
- The basement recording sessions laid the foundation both for the approach of Dylan's 1967 album John Wesley Harding, and for the Band finding their own voice on 1968's Music from Big Pink. The Dylan LP, a critically-acclaimed departure from the surrealist rock and roll he had recently pioneered on his milestone trio of albums from 1965 and 1966, was as much of a shock to his fans as were those records to his earlier folk audience. Both it and Music From Big Pink would greatly influence the turn, by many contemporary popular musicians, away from the psychedelic music that reached its height in 1967, toward an embrace of country-influenced folk styles.
- Material from the sessions had been heavily bootlegged since 1968, with the most famous being 1969's Great White Wonder.
- The Basement Tapes peaked at #7 in 1975 on Billboard's Pop Albums chart[7] and reached #8 in the UK. In 2003, the album was ranked number 291 on Rolling Stone magazine's list of the 500 greatest albums of all time.
- IMS, thanks for starting the ball rolling but there are difficulties with The Basement Tapes we’ll have to wrestle with. This article is about the official CBS release of 1975, which was released eight years after the recordings were made in 1967. That makes it a very unusual album. I don’t think it can be compared to any other album by Dylan. With Blonde On Blonde and John Wesley Harding, Dylan went into the studio with some songs, and released an album a few weeks/months later. The Basement Tapes is more like a process, recorded in three different locations over the course of a year. As Rick Griffin points out in Million Dollar Bash: we’ll never know for certain which track was recorded where. Also the official albums bizarrely carries eight songs by The Band with no Dylan connection. Three of these songs were recorded in 1975. I would think that these oddities make The Basement Tapes different from other Dylan albums, and should be acknowledged in the lead.
- So I think it is not right to say: “The Dylan LP, a critically-acclaimed departure from the surrealist rock and roll he had recently pioneered on his milestone trio of albums from 1965 and 1966, was as much of a shock to his fans as were those records to his earlier folk audience.” The album that transformed Dylan into a country artist was JWH (1968), followed by NS (1969). When Basement Tapes was released, there was dismay that the album did not contain "I Shall be Released" or "Mighty Quinn", two of the most famous songs from the demos circulating. The first the public knew of these songs was when cover versions by Julie Driscoll, Manfred Mann, The Byrds et al went into the charts in 1968, followed by the bootleg album Great White Wonder. I remember listening to that bootleg in 1969 and being puzzled by it, because it mixed Basement Tapes songs with songs recorded in Minneapolis in 1961. It was not until I read an article by Greil Marcus (in 1969 I think) that I began to understand this collection of songs. It was only much later (in the 1990s) with more & more bootlegs, that we realised that The Basement Tapes contains 16 songs from a total of more than 100 that Dylan recorded in Woodstock in 1967. Greil Marcus's Invisible Republic, published in 1997, finally revealed the scale of what Dylan had achieved and also analysed more than 100 songs. Sorry, this is long-winded way of suggesting we spell out what was different about the 1975 album, and the differences between that album and the 100+ songs Dylan recorded in 1967. Mick gold (talk) 16:39, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- Very good points, Mick gold - I have pondered what you brought up in the first paragraph of your post as well. As I mentioned, it would be very challenging to bring the article to GA/FA class. How does the idea of an "umbrella" article sound? Say, Bob Dylan and The Band in Woodstock, or Bob Dylan and The Band in 1967. Do you think that Freewheelin' is a better choice? I'm starting to get a headache thinking about all of this... - I.M.S. (talk) 17:17, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- I don't think an umbrella article would help. Moisejp & I wrestled with this material and we came up with two articles: The Basement Tapes about the official 1975 album, and List of Basement Tapes songs about the totality of what Dylan and The Band recorded in 1967. But as you say it would be very challenging to get this article to GA/FA. I find Freewheelin' tempting, because there is a lot of material already in the article, which should probably be edited, and because it was the breakthrough album which propelled Dylan's songs to international fame. What do you think? Mick gold (talk) 18:31, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- I take back what I said earlier ("I'm leaning towards The Basement Tapes"). If we do go with The Basement Tapes, we'll probably make good progress for a month or two, but we'll hit the barriers that you mentioned above, stall, and the entire thing will eventually grind to a halt. I think the prospects of us working on FW are promising and a good deal better than TBT; it would be faster, easier, and more rewarding for us and the project as a whole. As Mick stated, there's a massive amount of information already waiting for us to work with at FW. I am leaning towards that. I'm interested in knowing Moisejp's opinion as well - let's decide, TBT or FW? - I.M.S. (talk) 19:14, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi! Well, if both of you want to do FW next, I don't mind. TBT is my personal area of special interest, and I do sincerely hope we tackle it sooner or later. I agree it will present certain challenges, but I hope at some point (hopefully not too far in the future) we will be able to come together to take a stab at it. If you both feel more confident about FW, then maybe it's best to that first. Since this WikiProject is still young, maybe it'd be better to get a few successes under our belt before we take on an article that has some possibility of being too challenging. OK, so we're going to do The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan next, then? Do we want to go for GA or FA? Part of me thinks the most sensible choice would be to not be too ambitious and to start with GA. But another part of me thinks that if we just go for GA, we probably won't get a chance to come back to it for a long time, with so many other articles to do. From that point of view it might be an idea to go all the way and try to take it to FA. But another consideration is that it might take us twice as long to bring it to FA as GA, so we could do two GAs in the same amount of time as it'd take to do the one FA. Maybe after the long process of LARS it'd be an idea to do something quicker and less ambitious this time. But I don't have a definite preference either way. What do you think? Moisejp (talk) 12:30, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- Perhaps we should complete FW first, then go on to TBT. I'm fine with both of those articles... should we ask some other members of the project to comment here? - I.M.S. (talk) 14:16, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- Because there is an implied request for other members to comment, I would support FW for all the reasons given. As my contribution would merely be supporting cast while you guys will take the deserved top billing, I am equally happy to go along with what you chose. Fortunately there is no barbed wire on this particular fence. --Richhoncho (talk) 16:20, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- Richhoncho, thank you for your feedback and also for bringing up an issue that I have been wrestling with: to what extent should we actively invite the input of all the WikiProject Bob Dylan members when deciding the next article to tackle. There are 20 members now. We could go as far as sending them each a message inviting them to vote. But if, say, we get several votes for Blonde on Blonde, but many of the people who voted don't end up contributing much, then it ends up being the "core" members who will have to write the subject everyone has voted for. But on the other hand maybe some members just need a little encouragement to get more involved? Maybe that's the way to foster a bigger, stronger WikiProject? But really I kind of think that people who are going to get involved will do so on their own initiative. But I'm not sure which is better either way. This is possibly a prickly issue so I avoided bringing it up at first, but maybe it is better to decide clearly what our stand is on this issue. Moisejp (talk) 22:46, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- I think the best course of action is that I post a comment on all the WP members pointing out LARS & MOCS are elevated, an invitation to suggest a next project, in reality I suspect many have found something else in real life or WP to keep them amused. Unless anybody has a better idea, I'll do it over the weekend. Probably not an exercise to be repeated in any event, the project is either on a watchlist or it isn't. --Richhoncho (talk) 23:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- I like the idea of a notice to generate interest in the collaboration. Also, if we're going to !vote, we'll need to follow by these guidelines. All we need is consensus; since most of the active editors of the project have commented here—save maybe Rlendog and Allreet (whose opinions would be very welcome)—and we seem to be leaning towards FW, I think a poll is not needed and would simply complicate things. - I.M.S. (talk) 01:07, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- Like IMS, I'm not sure a poll is necessary. I'd be happy to start work on Freewheelin' and I believe we could take it to WP:FA if we are patient. There is a lot of material there already: 43,000 bytes! It needs to be edited and carefully sourced and re-written, but there's a good beginning. After that, we could tackle TBT, which we are all interested in. Mick gold (talk) 08:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- PS. What do folks make of this [1] ? Mick gold (talk) 08:47, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- I concur, no poll is necessary, anybody could actually say (or not even say) I am working on this or that article either independently or with others who may or may not be members of this project. All is good providing it it "onwards and upwards." Talking of which, I added all (I think) the sound files and images into the main category, but I didn't tag them as part of the project, should I do this? --Richhoncho (talk) 12:12, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- I like the idea of a notice to generate interest in the collaboration. Also, if we're going to !vote, we'll need to follow by these guidelines. All we need is consensus; since most of the active editors of the project have commented here—save maybe Rlendog and Allreet (whose opinions would be very welcome)—and we seem to be leaning towards FW, I think a poll is not needed and would simply complicate things. - I.M.S. (talk) 01:07, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- I think the best course of action is that I post a comment on all the WP members pointing out LARS & MOCS are elevated, an invitation to suggest a next project, in reality I suspect many have found something else in real life or WP to keep them amused. Unless anybody has a better idea, I'll do it over the weekend. Probably not an exercise to be repeated in any event, the project is either on a watchlist or it isn't. --Richhoncho (talk) 23:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- Richhoncho, thank you for your feedback and also for bringing up an issue that I have been wrestling with: to what extent should we actively invite the input of all the WikiProject Bob Dylan members when deciding the next article to tackle. There are 20 members now. We could go as far as sending them each a message inviting them to vote. But if, say, we get several votes for Blonde on Blonde, but many of the people who voted don't end up contributing much, then it ends up being the "core" members who will have to write the subject everyone has voted for. But on the other hand maybe some members just need a little encouragement to get more involved? Maybe that's the way to foster a bigger, stronger WikiProject? But really I kind of think that people who are going to get involved will do so on their own initiative. But I'm not sure which is better either way. This is possibly a prickly issue so I avoided bringing it up at first, but maybe it is better to decide clearly what our stand is on this issue. Moisejp (talk) 22:46, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- I also agree a poll is not necessary. Any doubts I had were erased from this Wikipedia is not a democracy in the link that I.M.S. included. We could go with I.M.S.'s idea of simply sending out a message to all members pointing out that LARS and MOCS (and MTM and IAONBB!) have been promoted in the last little while and that our next project will be FW. Maybe more people will get involved (or maybe they won't) and if so and if they stay involved long enough, they'll be around to give input whenever we decide on our next one.
- So, Mick gold votes we aim for FA for FW. I don't mind that. Any objections?
- About the "Dylan under construction" template possible deletion, I don't have a strong opinion either way. But if some of you feel it has been a useful thing I'd be happy to vote along with you to keep it. Moisejp (talk) 13:23, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- I've been somewhat distracted lately, but I concur that FW is a good idea. As for GA vs. FA, it is not uncommon for collaborations like this to go for GA on the way to FA. I is a nice milestone and provides valuable outside feedback. On the other hand, given the backlog at GAN, it is possible that the article could pass FAC while still waiting for a GA review. Rlendog (talk) 00:32, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
AfD on a couple of bootlegs.
If anybody is interested, The Genuine Royal Albert Hall Concerts and The Genuine Royal Albert Hall Concerts have been listed for deletion. --Richhoncho (talk) 18:59, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Bob Dylan articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release
Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.
We would like to ask you to review the Bob Dylan articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.
We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!
For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 22:07, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
Possible FAR issues with Bob Dylan
Please see here These are completely fixable if a dedicated editor takes an hour to look it over. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:15, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
Comment on the WikiProject X proposal
Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
WikiProject X is live!
Hello everyone!
You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!
Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.
This Wheel's on Fire (song) listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for This Wheel's on Fire (song) to be moved to This Wheel's on Fire. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 12:44, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject
The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.
Portals are being redesigned.
The new design features are being applied to existing portals.
At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template {{Transclude lead excerpt}}.
The discussion about this can be found here.
Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.
Background
On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.
Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.
So far, 84 editors have joined.
If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.
If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.
Thank you. — The Transhumanist 07:27, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
Bob Dylan listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Bob Dylan to be moved to Squeezy Joe. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 20:29, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
A new newsletter directory is out!
A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.
- – Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Request for information on WP1.0 web tool
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
John Wesley Harding (album) listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for John Wesley Harding (album) to be moved to John Wesley Harding. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 05:31, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Key West (Bob Dylan song) listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Key West (Bob Dylan song) to be moved to Key West (Philosopher Pirate). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 03:22, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Project-independent quality assessments
Quality assessments are used by Wikipedia editors to rate the quality of articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class=
parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.
No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.
However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom
parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:37, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
Rainy Day Women ♯12 & 35 listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Rainy Day Women ♯12 & 35 to be moved to Rainy Day Women. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 15:33, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.