Talk:Visions of Johanna/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs) 13:33, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Excellent song. Will review it.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Good prose as usual

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   I think "epic" is a little bit povy

The only "epic" I see is this:

Bill Janovitz also emphasizes the urban, unreal quality of "Visions of Johanna", calling it a "sprawling epic".

But this is a direct quote from Janovitz, surely if it's a critic's opinion, it's not POV. Mick gold (talk) 18:08, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh, now I see, "epic" has been removed. Mick gold (talk) 18:47, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

1. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

2. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

3. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

• ISBN check: ok
• Dabsolver check: removed one dab
• Checklinks check: ok
• Reflinks check: ok
• "Some of the New York recordings, released on bootleg recordings, have a faster tempo, and in the fifth verse contain the additional line "He examines the nightingale's code". " - maybe "Some of the New York recordings, released as bootlegs, were uptempo and contain in the fifth verse the additional line "He examines the nightingale's code".

I have changed it to very very close to what you suggested. Moisejp (talk) 15:55, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

ok

• Do you mean New York = New York City?

I have added "City" to the lead. Moisejp (talk) 15:54, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

• "listened closely to full studio tapes of the Blonde on Blonde sessions, and he describes how Dylan guided the New York backing musicians through fourteen takes" - reads better imho

Removed "he". Moisejp (talk) 15:54, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

• Maybe linking hard rock

Done. Moisejp (talk) 15:54, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

• "Wilentz writes that the final, quieter New York takes are close in feel to the Nashville version which appears on the album.[5]" - Can you rewrite it? It sounds a little bit odd.

Mick gold, you have this source. Do you want to address this one? Thanks. Moisejp (talk) 15:55, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

OK, I've had a stab at re-writing, with a direct quote from Wilentz. Mick gold (talk) 18:08, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

good

• Why do we need "(another character in the song)" if this was already explained?

Oops, that was my mistake. I had missed that Mick gold had already talked about Louise earlier on. I have now removed "another character in the son". Moisejp (talk) 15:54, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

• It is the first time I see an audio file in an infobox.

"Like a Rolling Stone" has the audio file in the info box, and it seems to me I've seen it elsewhere as well. I've tentatively moved it out of the info box if you quite prefer it that way. But if you didn't really mind it in the info box, I thought the page layout was less cluttered with it there. Moisejp (talk) 15:54, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Much better now, especially as it is so big. Now it is a GA! Congrats ;) !

Many thanks for your review, Great Orange Pumpkin Mick gold (talk) 11:30, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks from me, too! Moisejp (talk) 14:47, 8 November 2011 (UTC)