Talk:My Back Pages/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Xtzou (Talk) 16:05, 3 June 2010 (UTC) Hi, I am reviewing this article and have entered some comments below:[reply]

I have only two comments, as I think this is a well written article.

The section called Background covers more than background of the song as it describes the actual writing as well as Dylan's subsequent comments. Could a different heading be used that would be more all inclusive?

Hi! I've been working with Rlendog (the user who submitted "My Back Pages" for GAN) towards getting this article up to GA standard. I think that you're right about "Background", perhaps it should be changed to "Bob Dylan's version" like in the "Mr. Tambourine Man" article that Rlendog and myself also worked on? Alternatively, we could subdivide the "Background" section into smaller, more accurately named sub-sections, but I think that maybe the article is too short to really warrant this. I'll wait and see what Rlendog has to say on the matter. --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 18:26, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think "Bob Dylan's version" works better given how the article has evolved, so I made the change. Rlendog (talk) 03:13, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why is so much of the article given over to the Byrds? Where the other covers vastly insignificant by comparison?

Yes, I would say that the other covers are significantly less well known than The Byrds' version. "My Back Pages" is one of a handful of Dylan's songs that is equally as famous as a cover by The Byrds as it is by Dylan himself; "Mr. Tambourine Man", "You Ain't Goin' Nowhere", and "All I Really Want to Do" are other examples. The Byrds made covering Dylan something of a hallmark of their career during the 1960s. With regards "My Back Pages" specifically, The Byrds' cover is to date the only recording of the song to have charted on the Billboard Hot 100 (Dylan's version was an album track and was not released as a single). If you type "My Back Pages" into Google or Google Books, you'll see that after Dylan's own version, the second most mentioned rendition is that by The Byrds. Alternatively, add the word "Byrds" to your search and you'll see that there's a fair bit of coverage of their version – certainly more than there is for covers by The Nice or Marshall Crenshaw for instance. --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 18:26, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with Kohoutek1138. The expanded coverage for The Byrds' version in the article mirrors the additional coverage that version gets over other cover versions in secondary sources, due to its prominence. I will be away for a few days with limited (if any) access to internet (I really did not expect the article to get reviewed so quickly), but I am sure Kohoutek1138 can handle any questions that come up better than I could. Rlendog (talk) 03:16, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reply Regarding the headings, I would prefer "Bob Dylan's version" to be names something else, or broken into two sections, as it discusses his inspiration and writing of the song, his recording of it, and his live performances. The current heading makes it sound like he is covering his own song, which is odd, and only refers to his "cover", not the inspiration, writing, and life performances. Xtzou (Talk) 12:49, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, fair point. I suppose that instead of calling it "Bob Dylan's version" we could split it into two sections, one called something like "Composition and recording" and another called "Live performances" or "Post-release" but the trouble with this is the the latter section will only comprise the last two (rather short) paragraphs. Perhaps a more generic overall header would be better, something like "Overview" for example. What do you think? --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 16:01, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited the article with a suggested heading which hopefully takes care of my concern that it is Dylan's song after all, but that the Byrds made a notable cover version. Xtzou (Talk) 16:30, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that section header is cool with me and I'm sure it will be with Rlendog too. --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 17:39, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Then the article passes, in my opinion. Well written article about a Dylan song. Does a good job. Xtzou (Talk) 17:54, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality: Well written

B. MoS compliance: Complies with required elements of MOS
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources: Reliable sources

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary: Well referenced

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects: Sets the context

B. Focused: Remains focused on the topic
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail: Pass!

Congratulations! Xtzou (Talk) 17:56, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great stuff! Thanks very much for your time in conducting this GA review. --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 18:04, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]