Jump to content

Talk:Gillian Welch

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleGillian Welch has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Did You Know Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 8, 2010Good article nomineeListed
February 21, 2010Peer reviewReviewed
April 3, 2010Featured article candidateNot promoted
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on January 28, 2010.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that singer-songwriter Gillian Welch met her musical partner David Rawlings at a successful audition for the only country band at Berklee College of Music?
Current status: Good article

Pronunciation

[edit]

I added the pronunciation of Gillian with a hard G, on request of another editor. I can't provide a source, but I have known her since the early 80's, so it is accurate. It can probably be observed being pronounced that way on any of her tv appearances. How does one properly source something like that? - Crockspot 02:44, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how you would reference it, but yeah there are lots of recordings out there of people introducing her. Is there an authoritative biography somewhere that might mention this? Adam McMaster 07:57, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of pronunciation, has anyone noticed the phonetic guide at the very beginning doesn't display properly at all in Firefox 3.6.15? Not sure what, if anything, can be done about this, or even if it's just me. Jvanhoy (talk) 12:33, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have problems with it displaying on other articles? Try Barack Obama.. --CutOffTies (talk) 13:15, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Remove large lists

[edit]

The "Covers" and "Performances and recordings with other artists" sections are getting out of hand. Are we really going to try to list every cover and performance? If there are no objections, I'm just going to delete both sections. (Note that they'll need references for us to keep them. A compromise might be to mention any particularly notable entries in the "Biography and career" section.) Adam McMaster (talk) 09:56, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree with removing the long lists and incorporating the notable performers in the biography and career
Also the article could be expanded a lot. We have the New Yorker reference, they require reg for the full article, but it is here [1]. I'll put it on my to-do list but maybe someone can get it to it first. --CutOffTies (talk) 11:53, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed the lists. Adam McMaster (talk) 09:19, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Major expansion

[edit]

I'm working on putting in the New Yorker ref discussed above. Here's another one that looks good too

--CutOffTies (talk) 20:02, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I still plan on doing a big expansion, I swear. I'm going to try for a good article. --CutOffTies (talk) 00:40, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone would like to help out, please let me know and we can divide up some tasks and do peer reviews.

Thanks

--CutOffTies (talk) 22:59, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Got a working lead done. You can follow my progress, make suggestions/changes, etc here User:CutOffTies/Gillian_Welch
Is anyone here? --CutOffTies (talk) 05:17, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Mainspace article updated! Will be nominated for a wp:good article --CutOffTies (talk) 07:20, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Is anyone here?" Well, not much these days, although I had once done a fair amount of tinkering with the articles on her albums. You've done some fantastic work on this I really like it and I hope that you can achieve GA status with it. Here are some comments, questions that I have:
Hey, nice to see someone is here! I appreciate the feedback. Yep, I just got the GA pass yesterday, now I'm going for a peer review in hopes of a possible FA. Your review is appreciated as well.
  • Why has all mention of and even links to the DVD, The Revelator Collection been omitted from both this article and the discography article? For a while she was selling the audio tracks of this on her website as an Internet only LP. I don't think it's as vital as her four albums, but it is still a noteworthy part of her oeuvre.
I previously made a note to include this, but forgot. I will look for some sources about it to incorporate in the text, though will probably limit to one sentence. I'll also add it to the discography article. But as far as the main article, basically I feel that the DVD is supplemental to her body of work that appeals to fans, but it isn't what makes her notable.
 Done I included a paragraph about the DVD in the Time section of the main article, and added a new section in the discography. Thanks for reminding me! I found some reviews of it through google news, but only through paid archives. -- CutOffTies (talk) 00:35, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've yet to hear Friend of a Friend, but wonder if it should be more prominent. Isn't this album still the Welch/Rawlings duo rebilled as the David Rawlings Machine? Don't they still perform "Gillian Welch" songs in DRM concerts? Maybe I'm wrong about this.
Well, it's sort of the duo rebilled as the David Rawlings Machine, but Rawlings is the singer. Gillian only co-wrote five songs. I haven't seen them live, but based on some articles I've read and online videos, they seem to be staying away from "Gillian Welch" songs.
  • I'm really glad you've kept out any commentary about their personal relationship and kept the article about their musical partnership (it seems an earlier version of this used to cite some obscure source that indicated that they were married).
Thanks.. funny story behind this. While I never cared, I assumed they were married when I started this article, and begin writing it as so. Then it occurred to me that almost all the refs don't refer to them as husband/wife. Only one Australian article did. I wrote her publicist that was listed on her official site, and he immediately said that they're not. There's a ref from MSNBC that says Welch refuses to give any info about their relationship. I rather not mention at all but there has to be a personal section.
  • I think you've done a reasonably good job of integrating positive and negative criticism. She does have her detractors and I think you've made note of most of them.
Thanks..it's obviously more difficult to get articles from the revival/hell era, when I think most of the criticism occurred. Right now I have more of the writers who are making a point of praising her in direct response to "the criticism", but oh well.
Getting images in the revival/time era is also a bit challenging.
  • Nice to see the "future releases" section. I think this is always the burning question for many of us who are fans.
Thanks, given the long break between releases I thought it was necessary.
Thank you again and I'd appreciate any more feedback or anything you can contribute, especially as I go through the peer review/FAC process (it is my first try at this)
I Guess I wasn't reading this carefully. You already made GA status! Nice.
Yep, you're a day late! FYI the article was trimmed a bit, so as a fan you may be interested in some of the trivia that was removed..nothing big but may be worth a read. Here's the old version [2]
--CutOffTies (talk) 22:43, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

O Brother

[edit]

It's noteworthy that she makes a cameo in the movie itself. I don't have a source on hand, but I imagine you could find one. She had a line, something like, "Do you have any records by the Soggy Bottom Boys?" -MrFizyx (talk) 15:00, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done thanks --CutOffTies (talk) 15:47, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I notice that the source refers to her "singing", not acting, the role of siren. Are you sure she made a cameo appearance? - I.M.S. (talk) 16:59, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi I.M.S. - it was acting. See 2nd para, last sent. in source. --CutOffTies (talk) 17:43, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I see it now. I believe I cliicked on the wrong link! - I.M.S. (talk) 18:18, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

copy editor's comments

[edit]
You requested a copy edit from the Guild of Copy Editors. I've completed this, and made some modest suggestions, as well as some MOS stuff, spelling, etc. I've also inserted some notes for clarification. If you click on the edit of that particular section, you can find my comments hidden in the text.
This was very interesting, and clearly you are fascinated by the subject. The greatest problem the article has is variety of sentence structure and presentation. It is generally this critic said X, and this critic said y, and this album did this and this album did that. You can fix some of this by varying your verbs and sentence structure, which will make the article inherently more interesting to read. There are a lot of quotes which can be paraphrased without losing the text.
Although I appreciate you haven't focused on the relationship between Rawlings and Welch, you do need to mention if she's married, I think. It can be very minimal, and probably up front in the family section. You might also include a little more on her parents (adoptive), if there is something. And add her to people adopted category, whatever its called. Good luck taking this further up the ladder. Auntieruth55 (talk) 22:54, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

clarification needed

[edit]

this was a point that could have used additional clarification. What did the New Yorker critic mean? Were there examples that he cited? It would be good to elaborate here. Show us, include examples..."this is what her songs are about"....as if we haven't heard the songs, or read the lyrics. How do these lyrics make her stand out from Loretta Young or Judy Collins? 21:58, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello, sorry for my late reply, I did some editing last Friday and then was on vacation for a bit. Anyway, I understand what you mean. I think my reasoning for not going more in depth is that illustrating the examples could turn out to be very long and add a lot of detail. However, I will take a another look at the New Yorker article and others, and try to add more substance by summarizing and giving examples of the more prevalent themes. Thanks again. --CutOffTies (talk) 14:40, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Themes

[edit]
Nothing in the linked article mentions anything about an "unresponsive" God. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.26.255.218 (talk) 00:36, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Given that the linked article clearly says this "Read the full text of this article in the digital edition. (Subscription required.)", I wonder if you read the complete article... --CutOffTies (talk) 00:54, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
have you read the full article? Why don't you copy and paste here where she says she touches on the topic of an "unresponsive God". It's a theme in here music where she sings regularly about God. And the rider "unresponsive" certainly isn't indicative of her music or her view. So please, attach where she views her music as touching on the "unresponsive God". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.26.255.218 (talk) 05:13, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Me again. Here's from the article: "Her imagination is sympathetic to outcasts who appeal for help to God despite knowing from experience that there isn't likely to be any. Their theology is ardent and literal. They are given to picturing themselves meeting their families in Heaven, where mysteries too deep to comprehend will finally be explained. "Until we've all gone to Jesus / We can only wonder why," she sings in "Annabelle,"". This section is clearly written from the point of view of the person writing the article and not Gillian Welch, because the very next sentence refers to her theology as "ardent and literal". So you tell me, is this an article about Alec Wilkinson's view of Gillian's theology? Or how she views herself. If you're honest with yourself you'll edit the article back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.26.255.218 (talk) 05:19, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your feedback, but I believe you're misunderstanding something important. Regarding this question...
So you tell me, is this an article about Alec Wilkinson's view of Gillian's theology? Or how she views herself.
No, the New Yorker article is not about the author's view of Gillian's theology. It's not about how Gillian views herself. It's an analysis of her lyrics. The section of the Wikipedia article is the same.
Another correction - Gillian's theology is not described as "ardent and literal" - again, it's an analysis of the lyrics in her songs.
I will say this - what you have brought up makes me think that "unresponsive god" perhaps is a simplification of the analysis provided. I do think changing it to just "God" would be worse though. --CutOffTies (talk) 14:01, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Place of birth

[edit]

The article states she was born in New York City but the info box lists her birthplace as Los Angeles. Which is correct? 192.234.13.47 (talk) 22:07, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re; Soul Journey 'introducing' electric guitar' to their work

[edit]

Someone needs to listen to Revival again. It clearly incorporates electric guitar.

John Corzan

Re; Soul Journey 'introducing' electric guitar' to their work

[edit]

Someone needs to listen to Revival again. It clearly incorporates electric guitar.

John Corzan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.181.152.237 (talk) 21:06, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gillian Welch. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:04, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gillian Welch. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:06, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Gillian Welch. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:33, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gillian_Welch&oldid=1210938389"