User talk:Mick gold/Archive 2

Hendon Park

Thanks for your message on my talkpage. Unfortunately, I am currently away from home and my books and will be for a while, so I can't consult them, and I am not sure whether they would have a definitive answer in any case. However, my guess from what I can find is that indeed it was Hendon Park where he lived, though the evidence is a bit confusing. Most sources say he bought Highwood Hill, near Mill Hill (and Hendon). But looking more deeply it seems that Highwood Hill may be the name of the area, and that Hendon Park was the name of the house itself. This reliable looking source says it [1], (though the citation given in the text is to the book by the Wilberforce brothers which doesn't mention Hendon Park at all! [2]. But other sources e.g. [www.barnet.gov.uk/bfirst-nov07.pdf]; [www.alangodfreymaps.co.uk/highwood.htm]; [www.hadas.org.uk/wiki/index.php/Newsletter_014_December_1971] suggest that Hendon Park was the name of the house and estate he bought. I hope that helps--Slp1 (talk) 17:02, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

RE: Talk: Bob Dylan

Ah, I see. Thanks for the heads up! Syferus (talk) 17:13, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Subterranean Homesick Blues: Influence

Hi, Mick! I noticed the Influence section for Subterranean has a trivia tag. I took a look at the material and felt that most of it is sufficiently notable if put in narrative rather than random list form. So I took a stab and drafted four paragraphs that I would like to post. Except for one statement, it covers the same facts, plus two minor additions (cover songs). I didn't want to replace what's there without getting some feedback. I should also point out that other than Bjorner, I haven't added any references, though everything that isn't cited jibes with information available elsewhere on Wikipedia. What would you suggest? Thanks. Allreet (talk) 07:32, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply on my talk page. I'll probably post what I have tonight (very late your time), so if you will, watch for it on the Subterranean Homesick Blues page to see if all is okay. I'll dig up additional references to support the un-sourced statements–some tonight, others in due time–and I'll immediately replace the Weatherman link, probably with a book reference. Todd Gitlin's The Sixties most likely mentions the connection; if not, I'm sure there are many others that do. Allreet (talk) 16:33, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Good morning (EST), Mick! Thanks greatly for the feedback and improvement. But a three-page footnote? I'll bet that kept him busy. Now I'll have to get Song and Dance Man...just for that, if not for the more important need to plumb yet another Dylan book. Allreet (talk) 15:50, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Bob Dylan Article reference

Hi Mick gold. Thank you for pointing that out to me. I must admit that I did not look real closely at the rest of the article and I took what it said for fact. Thank you for the link to WP: RS. I noticed that there seem to be a lot a articles that have references that are being used poorly or even maliciously. This policy will help a lot. I certainly have nothing against Bob Dylan, on the contrary.-- Thank you. Elmmapleoakpine (talk) 00:17, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Dylan-related articles

Hi Mick, how are you? I am well. A while back when you were complimenting the progress to the Basement Tapes article you mentioned it'd be nice if we could slowly but surely get more Dylan-related articles up to snuff. I agree, and I have a bit of a proposal: that we start a Dylan WikiProject, then we can be a little organized, a little systematic in targeting articles for improvement, and working them up to GA or FA. We could round up other interested participants, hopefully get other people enthused about our project of progressively improving more and more articles, progressively seeing the list of FAs and list of GAs get longer. Maybe we could start with the Freewheelin' article that you were working on a while back and then the Basement Tapes one I was working on. I'm sure you're quite busy, and I only have a certain amount of time I can dedicate to Wikipedia as well, but we could just take it at our own pace. As you've said before, it can take weeks to get an article in good shape, but, yeah, I just feel that if we were working together and were organized about it we could make some measurable progress. Anyway, let me know what you think. Thanks! Moisejp (talk) 14:37, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Mick, how are you? Sorry, it has been a long time. I have been really busy and haven't been on Wikipedia at all, at least not as an editor. Thanks for taking care of The Basement Tapes (Sessions) merge. I was thinking of doing that a long time ago, but we never seemed to have a clear consensus on that, so I guess that is why it got stalled in limbo there. There were people who were still editing the Sessions article, so I assumed the silent majority was happy with the way things were. But I just checked and no one seems to have undone the merge, so maybe no one really cared either way. Have a good day! Moisejp (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

More from the Biggest

Firstly, I believe I never answered your question here. To rename an article you use the "move" tab which is at the top of every article.

Have you seen Ahwrlaf Topkapi! — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 05:39, 23 December 2008 (UTC) How amusing!

"Blowin' in the Wind"

Thanks for improving the caption I wrote. I'm not an expert on Bob Dylan, or anything music-related, frankly..

While I'm on the topic, could you or someone add at least one more audio blurb onto the article? I think something from later in Dylan's career and/or something more light-hearted than what we've got up might work well. Maybe "Tangled Up in Blue"? "Everybody Must Get Stoned"? "Quinn the Eskimo"? Ah, I'm sure you know better than I do. Brutannica (talk) 09:08, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

No, sadly I don't know how to add audio, either. Brutannica (talk) 08:34, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes and no... I copied and pasted them from their respective articles. Brutannica (talk) 18:32, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

When I have a few minutes I can add a couple of soundbites. I've done it for other articles, and it's not too hard. So you figure "Tangled Up in Blue" is good? I was thinking something gospel might be good, too. "Gotta Serve Somebody" would seem like an obvious choice since he won a Grammy for it, though something like "I Believe in You" could be more interesting (but I shouldn't let my personal tastes affect what should be a neutral article). Then maybe one eighties song, one nineties, one 2000s. I gotta go now, but when I get a chance I'll get on that. Moisejp (talk) 05:29, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Mick, I added "Tangled Up in Blue" so if you could add a little spiel for it, that'd be great. I'll try to get to the other songs in the coming days. I read your note on the Basement Tapes discussion page, thanks. I'll have another look and a think about that in the coming days as well. Cool, I'll talk to you again soon. Take care. Moisejp (talk) 16:46, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the "Tangled Up in Blue" caption. I have added sound clips for "Gotta Serve Somebody" and "Lay Lady Lay". I did a tentative caption for "Lay Lady Lay" but feel free to change it. Also, I used my copy of No Direction Home as the source, so if you decide to use my caption (or a variation of it), please change the page number to reflect your copy of the book. I was thinking "Lay Lady Lay" might be a good song to represent his country period, since it was also one of his biggest hits, but if you or others feel it is not an important enough song, we could also move the sound clip to the "Lay Lady Lay" page. I will get to adding "Things Have Changed" as you suggested. Cheers! Moisejp (talk) 14:14, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I've added "Things Have Changed" music sample, feel free to write a blurb for it. I also see you have been working away at the List of BT songs page. Great! Just now I did some clean-up (still some needs to be done, though) and started adding more references. Still a long way to go, but feels great to finally see that terrible list of unreferenced opinions, speculations and hearsay finally at leach inching towards a semblance of encyclopedic information. I'll try to keep on it. My idea was to ideally end up with separate references for every song, but if you think that is excessive, we can discuss. Take care and talk to you again soon. Moisejp (talk) 14:53, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Iran and the West

My mistake. Apologies for that. TheRetroGuy (talk) 19:39, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I've now added a sentence about Moaveni's book explaining that the two are unrelated. TheRetroGuy (talk) 19:51, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

No worries. I must confess that I didn't look closely enough at the second article, so I guess the lesson here is to do so in future. Thanks for getting back to me and I'm glad you've put it right. Cheers.TheRetroGuy (talk) 12:35, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks from the labyrinth!

Thank you very much Mick, how very sweet of you :) I guess you can see now why I haven't been showing my face around Bob Dylan of late, but I hope now that I've got FW up to speck I can start contributing again. And I'm very sorry I still haven't responded to your lovely e-mail, it's a bad reflection on my character I know, but I promise I will. Thanks again :) Warchef (talk) 19:42, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

You're quite welcome

My pleasure. :-) --User:AlbertHerring ^{Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla!} 17:22, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

A chara

Wow, Nico in 1972?! The John Cale photo is fantastic, and Cale is so photogenic anyway, but this is fine. If you have others that you could share with me privately, then that would be great. I always took it Nico was icy and distant, nice to hear otherwise....Sé do bheatha. Ceoil (talk) 01:30, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

By the way, the VA community here is quite small, it is very grand have you around. Ceoil (talk) 01:36, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure if its the fact that your name is Mick, or that you end each post with coupla fuckal, but I'm guessing your irish. Anyway, looking forward to talking. Slan leat. Ceoil (talk) 12:41, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, you were doing good there with Kerry (I live in Cork), but we dont take too kind to Dublin round these parts. Since you mentioned that place up front, I'll make an exception. Where did you learn Irish? You seem to have a good grasp. Ceoil (talk) 13:18, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey Mick; I was reading over your work on Deposition and its very very good. Have you thought about a GA nom? Its think its quite close. Best. Ceoil (talk) 14:40, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the Breakfastclub link! Stuff like that is always welcome. I'd go for GA if I was you, worst that can happen is that you'll get some insight into how to improve the page. Ceoil (talk) 08:50, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Great work! I'm enjoying watching the page grow...Ceoil (talk) 09:45, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

How many Dylan titles can you spot in this?[3]. Ceoil 07:15, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Wenner quote

Hi, Mick! My read is that Wenner is wrong-headed on this and Bielin is making something out of something that wasn't there to begin with. The evidence is irrefutable. For example, in his 1980 interview with Dylan in the LA Times, Robert Hillburn opens, "Bob Dylan has finally confirmed in an interview what he's been saying in his music for 18 months: He's a born-again Christian. Dylan said he accepted Jesus Christ in his heart in 1978 after a 'vision' and 'feeling' during which the room moved. 'There was a presence in the room that couldn't have been anybody but Jesus.'" As you've been asserting, that's pretty much what everyone has to say, everyone except Wenner (forget Bielin, since Wenner is his only source). Usually, I'd say there's nothing wrong with working in a "minority" view if it's held by someone with Wenner's authority, but it would take a paragraph to set the context and without any great purpose. Since none of Bus Stop's arguments are for simply getting the quote on record and his mission is to prove the "moon landing" didn't occur, I'd support rejecting the quote and the viewpoint as out of hand. Allreet (talk) 20:12, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Mick and Allreet! Mick, thanks for your note. I just added some more to the discussion. I really wonder if we are going to reach any agreement with the other parties in this debate, but I sure hope we do.Moisejp (talk) 14:17, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of genres: Folk Rock

Hi, Mick! Always good to hear from you. Yeah, genres are a fickle fellow. On one hand, they're akin to the compartmentalizing we often need to do to break life's complexities into manageable chunks. On the other, categorization means disposing of uniqueness so everything fits into neat little slots. Or something like that. But I certainly do like your quote from Hamlet, and agree that Dylan is a slippery one in terms of defining what it is he does.

Speaking of genres, I've recently taken an interest in WP's Folk Rock article, which IMHO manages to ignore the subject. By and large, the article says a few things about early folk, pays homage to the Beatles, gives a tip of the hat to Dylan and the Byrds (without so much as a mention of "Mr. Tambourine Man"), and then leaps ahead to British electric folk. In hopes of rectifying this, I've been steeping myself in the online liturgy, which essentially means I've been soaking up the writings of Richie Unterberger.

Here's a loose rendition of my "read" up to this point: Folk rock was basically a marketing term U.S. record companies dreamed up to package the amalgam of styles that came together in response to the Beatles' revitalization of rock and Dylan's "invention" of electrifying acoustic-based music. The genre was pretty much short-lived as a distinct form (2-3 years), but from there it gave birth to psychedelic, British electric folk, country rock and much of everything that followed.

The timeline is hard to pin down (chicken and egg), but the family tree includes all the singer-songwriter types of the era - Fred Neil, Phil Ochs, Gordon Lightfoot, Ian & Sylvia, Richie & Mimi, John Sebastian, Tim Hardin, Richie Havens, etc. - and most of the bands, including the Byrds, Spoonful, Mamas & the Papas, Turtles, Sonny & Cher, Country Joe, Stone Ponys, etc. Even harder to get a handle on is the idea that it wasn't just about folk, because the trend opened the doors for merging all kinds of music - blues, R&B, bluegrass, country, jazz and, of course, rock 'n roll - from which we get The Band, Buffalo Springfield, Moby Grape, Love, Dead, Airplane, Janis, BS&T, Pentangle, Fairport, CSN&Y, etc.

Anyway, it's an amazing story, kind of the missing link in the development of modern rock. I'm mentioning all this because I'd like your feedback. If you will, please refer to the Folk Rock article and the last few posts on its Discussion page, where I've listed a range of possible sources, most of which I haven't gotten to yet. And if you haven't already, take a look at Unterberger. I think he's a pretty decent writer and that he's done us a big favor in chronicling the artists and music of the period. Allreet (talk) 18:55, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Goya

Mick, I'd like to include your interview with Glendinning as counterpoint to an Trueba per JNW's reply on talk. Obviously Trueba's quote would be abbreviated, but its an interesting angle you have shown. Can you provide details of the doc that we could use when citing. Ceoil (talk) 11:15, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Ceoil (talk) 14:41, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Dylan's Backing Band

I'm not sure why I put The Band as Dylan's backing group for Newport - thanks for catching the slip up. It's probably been a year or two since I've read one of my Dylan biographies all the way through... I'm getting rusty! - I.M.S. (talk) 16:04, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

LARS Question

That's synchronistic. I was about to post the following to the LARS talk page when your message popped up. Instead, I'll just ask for your feedback:

I've written 3-4 short paragraphs based on the Hentoff interview, the John Harris/Mojo article, Sounes, Heylin and a touch of Gray. Weaved into this is a mention of the Baez-Sedgwick issue as well as a scaled-back Marqusee quote. Obviously, I believe this episode is notable, first in terms of substance - out of intense internal turmoil springs a song that sets a new direction - and second in terms of interest - how many glimpses do we get of this cat's psyche? The rarity here is that he addresses the issue directly - no wise-cracks or put-ons. My question is, what would be an appropriate way to post a draft for everyone's review?

I'm at work and don't have the draft with me, so I won't be able to do anything until tonight. One other question, what's your thinking in terms of structure. My feeling is it wouldn't hurt to shift a couple things around. BTW, I also wanted to respond to your previous analysis of the Sedgwick issue. I've read Edie twice and somehow the Neuwirth-Dylan night on the town with her didn't stick in my memory. Good catch. Allreet (talk) 14:43, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

I'll post as you suggested. Like you, I've been busy, in my case a combination of two kids just starting college, the coming holidays and the need to pay for it all. I had an additional thought worth mulling over. It seems pretty obvious that all this was the prelude to Dylan's dropping out a year later. It just took another go-round for him to prove that his initial inclination was correct (the allure of becoming a complete unknown). Just food for thought. Regarding structure, the more I look at the article, the more sense it makes to separate the writing from the recording. I'm not sure about the order, but I think it would be cool to lead with the (expanded) writing section, since it fits the chronology, plus the recording story has been told a million times over - and is probably less interesting and ultimately less important. The dif is that there were prominent "reporters" present to recount the recording session, the old "if a tree falls in the forest" conundrum. Anyway, it may take some pain, but I'm sure we'll pull this together into one of the best articles of its type. The material is there. We just have to figure how to sculpt it. Hope your trip goes/went well. Allreet (talk) 19:12, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

"Like a Rolling Stone" PR

Glad to help and glad that you found my peer review comments helpful. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 18:41, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

KQED

Hi Mick, how are you? I hope all is well.

For your edit about KQED [[4]] in Like a Rolling Stone, you use The Essential Interviews as a reference, but I noticed you said that Dylan was laughing when he replied, but in the book (at least in my copy) there is nothing about him laughing. I don't doubt he did laugh, but just in this source there is no mention of it. I was wondering whether maybe you had another source that does mention his laughing, or else perhaps the description in the article should be reworded. What do you think? Take care. Moisejp (talk) 12:14, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Mick, I think you should cite the DVD, assuming it is a legitimate release, but it sounds from your description like it is. You can use the same template to cite it as I used for quoting Al Kooper the No Direction Home DVD, namely: (DVD). {{cite AV media}}: Missing or empty |title= (help). Or, if you feel more comfortable about it, you could cite both the DVD and the book, but personally I think just the DVD is enough. I think we're almost there on this article! Moisejp (talk) 01:13, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Looks great, thanks! Moisejp (talk) 01:32, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Like a Rolling Stone

		The Teamwork Barnstar
		For being an integral part of the WP:DYLAN collaboration team, and working on Like a Rolling Stone, which is now featured! Thanks very much for your hard work copyediting and expanding the article. Sincerely, - I.M.S. (talk) 01:20, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Congratulation Mick. It was great to see all the work put in, and ye can be proud. By the way, are we still on for working together someday? Ceoil ^sláinte 15:47, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I have no sound on my comp at the moment, so maddingly, cant listen to your link. Drat. I have the Robin Muir monograph - somewhere - might and try and dig it out tonight. Deakin was some character, prickly and something of a fag hag, but interesting, his portraits are about as stark and raw as you can get. The phrase 'unforgiving' is used to describe his work a lot - he was certainly that. The shame working on these articles is that you are constrained by FU image usage, which is very fustrating. Ceoil ^sláinte 17:38, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Mick, great work on Deakin - I was delighted to see the expansion. I have a number of books on Bacon to hand at the moment, & will see what else I can find. Later. Ceoil ^sláinte 21:10, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Amusment here. Ceoil ^sláinte 22:56, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Deakin

I was going to upload a few of his portrits of Henrietta, but held back as they are so unflattering. I really like most of his work, but that group creeps me out.[5]. I do have a lot of other material to add to the page, and will in time. To say the least, he was an interesting character, and it is always fun to read up on him. Best. Ceoil ^sláinte 23:23, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I always like reading about Belcher, I think I would have liked her enormously as a person. Also, she had a lot of grace[6]. Ceoil ^sláinte 14:43, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the additions on the Rogier; we might put together an article on a Bacon triptych on Belcher fairly soon? Ceoil ^sláinte 22:13, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Best of luck tonight with the ratings and tomorrow with the critics! Ceoil (talk) 17:33, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Freewheelin' FA

This user helped promote The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan to featured article status.

Congratulations everyone—FW was promoted ! - I.M.S. (talk) 20:23, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations, Mick gold! We had good teamwork again. :-) Moisejp (talk) 11:43, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Karanacs (talk) 17:27, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Tambourine Man

Hi Mick gold, how are you? All is well here. I noticed you made some contributions to Mr. Tambourine Man. I wanted to tell you, a while ago myself, Kouhotek1138 and Riendog decided to, as a side project from our main projects (mine being my collaborations with you and I.M.S.), work on trying to bring at least this GA Dylan article, and possibly other ones, up to FA. I did some work on it just before we got going on TBT and now that we have a lull while we wait for our GAN reviewer, I'm doing a bit more work on it. As you probably know, Kouhotek1138 and Riendog have been doing lots of work on Dylan/Byrds related articles, and you may have noticed that very recently they brought My Back Pages up to GA. Another article that Kouhotek1138 did a lot of work on the Byrds section of, that I have been bit by bit trying to expand the Dylan section of is You Ain't Goin' Nowhere. I have split it up into sections talking about the two 1967 versions and the 1971 version and am looking forward to developing these. I certainly think it has the potential to go to GA. But again, this is very much a side-project for me now that I'm working at only slowly, because I don't have the time to do a serious drive for GA for it at the same time as working on TBT and MTM. But if you're ever interested in making an edit or two now and again, I definitely think it's one that could eventually bloom into a nice little article. Anyhow, I'm sure you have other interests on Wikipedia, so if you don't have the time or inclination to do anything with these, no worries whatsoever, just letting you know the possibility is there if you happen to be interested. Cheers! Moisejp (talk) 15:23, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mick gold, thanks a lot for your suggestions! No worries if you don't have any extra time to work on MTM. Looking forward to collaborating with you some more when the TBT GA review gets under way. Talk again soon and take care! Moisejp (talk) 14:19, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Mick gold. That's interesting stuff! I didn't know that was online. Moisejp (talk) 12:52, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

A Little Thankyou

		The Teamwork Barnstar
		For improving articles with others within the Dylan project. Richhoncho (talk) 12:56, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Country Turtle Records

Hi Mick, could you please be so kind as to have a look at this and tell me if I'm completely wrong in my opinion about that label's notability !?! StefanWirz (talk) 09:48, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Basement Tapes

The article The Basement Tapes you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:The Basement Tapes for things which need to be addressed. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 15:32, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Sound samples

Mick gold and I.M.S., could you have a look at the Rationale I added for the three sound samples and if you have any ideas to improve them, could you? I'm worried about my reason #1, which may be weak. And I used the same reason for "AST" and "OTDH" so I'm worried someone will ask why both files are necessary. Oh well, if you have any ideas, that'd be great. Thanks! Moisejp (talk) 12:58, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

I've made a few changes. Tell me what you think. - I.M.S. (talk) 01:35, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

What you've done with Rationale looks excellent! Mick gold (talk) 07:56, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Looks good, I.M.S. Thanks a lot! Moisejp (talk) 11:20, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mick gold, how are you? I hope all is well. I wasn't sure if it was best to bring this up on the regular FAC page or not, in case you disagree. But anyway, two editors, Indopug ("A particular problem I have with it is that many of its sub-sections are barely a sentence long") and Kitchen Roll ("However I also think more info needs to be added about the lesser songs to make this system work, because some sections are too short") seem to want us to beef up some of the shorter song descriptions. To be honest I am quite busy and tired this week and am not confident I have the mental power right now to add any interesting points. Would you have any ideas to add a line or two to a few of the shorter ones, such as "Yazoo" and "Ruben"? There are actually several others that are not much longer than those. Anyway, since two editors mentioned that, it might be a nice gesture. I can try, too, but you're a lot better than me at coming up with interesting things to say. Anyway, if you have ideas, great, if not let's discuss. Moisejp (talk) 11:37, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mick gold. Thanks for your note. Listen, I'll trust your judgement on the Iachetta quote. I kind of like it, but if you quite want to remove it, that's OK. About the shorter song entries, OK, that's probably a good policy to only add info that is worth adding. I'll try to have a look, too. I'm glad you didn't mind my Helm addition. BTW, for "Goin' to Acapulco" do you think it's worth mentioning the story about how it was the only Dylan song on TBT that wasn't on the demo acetate (or was it GWW?), and that apparently it was Danko who really wanted to release it (begged Robertson to put it on the album?—I'll have to check my sources), and it was the first indication to people that there may be other Basement recordings. But it seems like that story gets told a lot, so if you feel it is too "old news" we don't necessarily have to mention it. Moisejp (talk) 21:36, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I saw your 'post Ceoil' edit summary - I assume thats a pun, he he. I have to admit that although I have more than a passing interest in Dylan, I did'nt have the Basement tapes until I saw the nom and downloaded. Anyway, I'll keep on rephrasing, though spelling is always an issue with me, sorry. Ceoil (talk) 09:18, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Mick, are you sure the Harry Smith bit in Legacy can't be trimmed? Do we really need to know he was a 29-year-old with no fixed address? Also, he is already mentioned in "Crash on the Levee" so I don't know if we need to mention him at all with our Anthology reference in Legacy. I tried to trim that part at one point but you restored it. If you feel strongly that you want to keep it as it is, we can, though. Moisejp (talk) 16:23, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mick gold. I don't mind if you cut the drummer reference from Yazoo if you feel it is worth cutting—I don't have a strong opinion, and as you say I just added it to make the entry longer. Now that you added the Robertson quote it may not be necessary. I still think it's kind of interesting, but I will trust your judgement about whether it is sufficiently relevant. I liked almost all your edits in the Songs sections. You'll see there were just three places where I felt it was better to add the source back into the text to sound neutral and objective, and have added these back in. I hope you and Ceoil don't mind. If you do cut the drummer reference, could you change the Helm <ref name> to a regular <ref> in Early Recordings? Thanks. I know it is not necessary, but I would prefer this article's formatting to be as "clean" as possible, without any unnecessary loose ends. Keep up the great work. Moisejp (talk) 15:27, 16 July 2010

Hi, Mick gold and I.M.S. How are you two? Well, TBT article a long way and hopefully this FA process isn't too far from winding down. Unfortunately, as I mentioned several weeks ago, for the next two weeks I will have only very limited Internet access and so I will not be able to contribute very much if at all. If any decisions need to be made please just go ahead and make them without my input. We're very lucky to have gotten so much help from DCGeist. I'm sorry I have to duck out but I'm very confident you'll do fine. Hopefully it will be smooth sailing from here. Thanks and I'll talk to you again soon. Moisejp (talk) 17:48, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Bob Dylan '66 World Tour dates

Hello, Mick. Right now I am trying to clean up and verify the article about Dylan's '66 World Tour, and there is a serious problem with the "Tour Dates" section: they are all unreferenced and unsourced. I generally use Olof Bjorner's Still on the Road 1966 as a source for tour dates, but now that I see a much longer list than the twenty-five or so that are on the site, I am starting to doubt the information there. If you could give me the name of a website, book, database, et cetera, that can verify these dates (or Bjorner's dates), it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!—Preceding unsigned comment added by BootleggerWill (talk • contribs) 16:22, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks, Mick. The Gates of Eden (^{Talkin' Gates of Eden Blues}) —Preceding undated comment added 17:07, 20 July 2010 (UTC).

Yes, I've noticed the same problem. I'm trying to get that particualr section cleaned up, but it's difficult. It's better than it was, as that section used to lead off the article. I usually try not to write in that style unless it's fiction I'm writing. That section is extremely persumptous in its style; and most of the information (rewritten, of course) should go in the "Aftermath" section. The Gates of Eden (^{Talkin' Gates of Eden Blues}) 17:18, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

It is now gone from the page, Mick. The Gates of Eden (^{Talkin' Gates of Eden Blues}) 16:12, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Bob Dylan in Toronto.jpg

Any idea why this and 2 other images are up for speedy? Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 15:47, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

No, I'm not that familiar either, but it seems to be OK. They were deleted and recreated immediately afterwards. I posted to you because I thought you were active at the time. If there is a problem later I saved copies of the photos to my desktop! --Richhoncho (talk) 15:07, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

In response

Why wasn't this brought to my attention earlier? Now that I have read that article, I realize that there is really nothing I can do. I will avoid doing anything of the sort in the future. And another question: do you happen to know the ISBN number of the '04 edition of Down the Highway, by Howard Sounes? The Gates of Eden (^{Talkin' Gates of Eden Blues}) 21:09, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Dylan, drugs, etc.

Question for you: do you think there should be an individual section on drug use during that time? After all, it was influencing Dylan pretty heavily at the time. I agree, it was rather overwritten, and I should've noticed it earlier, but I do believe that there should be some information about drug use in that article. Do you? Thanks! The Gates of Eden (^{Talkin' Gates of Eden Blues}) 03:45, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Lawd! I need to read the article before I write about it! Disregard what I wrote above. The Gates of Eden (^{Talkin' Gates of Eden Blues}) —Preceding undated comment added 04:14, 27 July 2010 (UTC).

The Basement Tapes and Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Basement Tapes/archive2

If I'd been a little quicker in registering my support, it might have made a difference, but right as I was writing it, Sandy was archiving—I was late by 3 minutes. I suppose there's a two-week wait to nominate it again (though you might ask Sandy for permission to bring it back sooner). When you do bring it back, I think there'll be little trouble achieving the promotion. It's in terrific shape. And it was a pleasure pitching in. Best, Dan.—DCGeist (talk) 18:16, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mick. I assume it was you who added this ref, but for "Yazoo Street Scandal" you had both the Robbie anecdote about no Yazoo in Canada and "Robertson recorded the lead vocal on the first version of the song, but since it was set in the South, it seemed natural for Helm to take over" all attributed to Bowman's Music From Big Pink liner notes, but I could only find the first part in there—so I moved the footnote to after the Robbie quote. I don't have the Hoskyns book, but does the second part possibly go with the Hoskyns ref about "best redneck-wildcat yelp" or if not, can you confirm where it comes from? Thanks! Moisejp (talk) 15:31, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Mick. Now I feel foolish. I also have the 2000 Remaster MFBP CD and I saw the "There's no street up there called Yazoo!" quote and I was scanning for the Levon taking over vocals part but somehow I missed it, even though it was right below. Well, thanks for correcting that. Maybe I'm going to change the wording of the Levon taking over bit slightly, since it is quite similar to Bowman's words. On August 20 you are going away for a few weeks, aren't you? Have a nice time, and come September 8 we can tackle FAC again, this time hopefully to better results! Moisejp (talk) 13:16, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mick and I.M.S. It's September 8. Should I go ahead and put the article back up for FAC? Moisejp (talk) 13:20, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Sure! Go right ahead. - I.M.S. (talk) 20:53, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Sure! Go right ahead. - Mick gold (talk) 10:41, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi! OK, I probably won't have time now to put the article up till the 11th, but that's only a couple of days away. If one of you wants to do it before then, great, or if not I will do it, no probs. I a little bit want to think about the wording—I don't want to dwell too much on the bad timing of the outcome of last time around (I don't want to start the whole FAC on a "complaining" tone), but they'll probably expect some kind of explanation for why we haven't done any work on it since last time. If one of you is confident about how you want to word it and want to take over you can, but, again, if not then I will come up with something on the 11th. Cheers. Moisejp (talk) 15:06, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

The 11th is fine. I know what you mean about wording. What do you think, I.M.S.? We could consult DCGeist for advice? Mick gold (talk) 15:32, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

I've left query for DCGeist & PL290 here. Mick gold (talk) 16:36, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

I think we should simply state the facts but keep it brief - something along the lines of:

"Hi there everyone,
I've nominated this on behalf of the WP:DYLAN collaboration team. This is the article's second FAC—the previous nomination failed due to a crucial support vote coming a few minutes too late."

Or,

"Hi there everyone,
I've nominated this on behalf of the WP:DYLAN collaboration team. This is the article's second FAC—the previous nomination failed due to a last-minute mix-up."

- I.M.S. (talk) 21:53, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, of IMS's two ideas I prefer the first one. I don't think it is completely satisfying (for explaining to them what we mean) but if I say anything more than that it will likely come off sounding negative. Well, I gotta run to work now, but if anyone has anymore thoughts before the 11th let me know, otherwise maybe I'll go with that. Moisejp (talk) 23:08, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, I think we all agree we wish to avoid any hint of 'sour grapes'. Some serious editing has taken place since last FAC failed on 26 July. How about this:

We are nominating this article on behalf of the WP:DYLAN collaboration team. This is the second FA nomination for The Basement Tapes; the first closed with some support votes but no consensus. More work has been done on article, and further indications of support have subsequently been received.

Mick gold (talk) 07:56, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

I like it! I'm going to go with that. I'll do that at some point today. FAC Round #2, here we come! Moisejp (talk) 01:19, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Cheers! Mick gold (talk) 07:07, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Done. Moisejp (talk) 08:05, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Bob Dylan's great grandparents

Hi. You are right and I did that wrong it seems, but a revert is not the right solution either. I changed something which is written in a way that it tempts different interpretations. It looks like an error, because if you follow the sequence, it leaves a gap (the paternal grandparents of his mother). Adding the word maternal should fix it.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 08:37, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Basement

Hi, Mick. I apologize for not responding sooner to your message of a week ago. While I have been unusually busy, that was not the primary reason I avoided weighing in on the issues you were recently confronted with in the FAC. For, how shall I say, historical reasons there's no point in detailing, I felt it would be better for the sake of your excellent article if I let this particular matter play out without my involvement (though I have just now given my opinion on one small element). I hope you're reasonably happy with the result you've arrived at. While I personally preferred the previous format, it is certainly reasonable to prefer the present one and it remains an article of which to be proud. All the best, Dan.—DCGeist (talk) 04:52, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

The article looks well on its way now, but yes, I'll certainly be supporting in a day or two. I just want to read it through again to see if anything leaps out at me.

I'll mention one thing that's niggled at me for a while, which is if it's possible to be, as it were, more precise about the ambiguities of the Band-only tracks in the lead text of the Columbia Records compilation section. For instance, it states, "According to Fraboni, four new songs by the Band were also recorded in preparation for the album's official release, one of which, a cover of Chuck Berry's 'Going Back to Memphis', did not end up being included." I wonder if something like this should be added: "However, there is no scholarly consensus that the three songs on the album Fraboni says were recorded in 1975—"Bessie Smith", "Ain't No More Cane" and "Don't Ya Tell Henry"—were, in fact, recorded then." (On the other hand, it seems far more likely to me that Fraboni/Griffin is right than Bowman, so I dunno...)—DCGeist (talk) 08:45, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

I think the coverage of the Band-only songs does feel stronger now...great. I just added my support in the FAC, but there was one last issue I wanted to go over with you directly.

Particularly given that the individual song descriptions have been removed from the article, I wonder what you would think about adding a sentence or two to the New compositions section addressing the fact that Dylan's compositional approach involved incorporating significant elements of songs by other hands in three evident cases: "Open the Door, Homer" (refrain); "Apple Suckling Tree" (tune); and "Crash on the Levee" (central lyrical allusions). I made a provisional copyedit to the Track listing subsection that relates subtly but directly to this. Feel free to rephrase or revert. It's not a major issue with The Basement Tapes, but it's definitely there and it does form part of the backdrop to the issues with Modern Times (an album I happen to love). Best, Dan.—DCGeist (talk) 08:16, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

P.S. Slight revision of aforementioned copyedit.—DCGeist (talk) 09:18, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. Now mind, I never called Dylan a thief, either. (Though I believe he's made a peckload more money enforcing his copyright claims on songs derived from traditional and not-so-traditional material composed by other people than Woody Guthrie ever did, so if someone wants to call one man a thief but not the other, I wouldn't actually call 'em a darn fool for doing so.)

Those judgments aside, I still do note the fact that, as I said, his "compositional approach involved incorporating significant elements of songs by other hands." I'm well aware that's common practice in the folk tradition, and it's certainly appropriate to frame it that way, but a reader unfamiliar with that tradition will surely assume that "by" means something more individual and original than is actually the fact in every case. To be clear, I was not proposing that the article needed to suggest that Dylan did anything wrong, but simply that it describe what he did. When the individual song descriptions were present, the article conveyed this essential and relevant fact about his compositional process. Now it doesn't. That's all.—DCGeist (talk) 07:31, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mick

How's it going? I'm well. Thanks for your note. It's not just my pet project from a few years ago, TBT, but also yours, FW, that are now FA, so congrats to you, too. Who would have thought a few years ago they'd both be FA someday? Of all the work I've done in Wikipedia I'm most proud of TBT, but I could never have done it without you, so I'm very grateful. I'm sorry it burned you out. Yes, it did get emotionally tiring for me, too, but I imagine you were even more affected by it. There were those two weeks where I was on holiday that you and Dan were editing up a storm, so it must have been pretty intense for you straight through. Plus, since you're the man with all the books, always looking up so many references must have been taxing as well. I understand your wanting to take a break and not start up any collaborations immediately. That's fine with me. I certainly hope at some point we can collaborate on something big again, but in any case, even on a smaller scale, I'll probably keep an eye on what articles you're working on and maybe I'll jump in from time to time if I see things that interest me, even if they aren't GA/FA drives or anything. Thanks also for the Bjorner note on the FW talk page. I'll make a few edits sometime soon to better incorporate the Bjorner addition. Take care and talk to you later! Moisejp (talk) 12:53, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your note, Mick. I think I have fixed the Harvard ref links for the two Marcus sources. But the one that you changed to 2005 I had actually just copied straight from the LARS article, which is to say all throughout the LARS article the book ref is listed as 2006. I'll get around to fixing that sometime soon. Because there is another Marcus 2005, it means changing all the refs to Marcus 2005 (1) and (2), as I did on H61R. But it probably won't take that many minutes if I set about it systematically. BTW, not sure if you saw it, but I left another little note on the FW talk page, just about a decision I made in the Outtakes chart. I'm not sure if it's something you'll necessarily have a strong opinion about, but if you have a second to write a little agreement (or disagreement) then it could help to have consensus on the talk page to refer people to if people try to change the Outtakes chart later. Anyway, if you have time please have a look and see what you think. Thanks! Moisejp (talk) 13:47, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mick! Thanks for your note. I fixed up that ref and others. I'm pretty busy with real life, too, especially this month, so no worries. If we all peck away at it bit by bit we'll make steady progress. I have't gotten to changing the Marcus refs in LARS yet, but I haven't forgotten, just haven't had time—I'll get to it soon. The Bootleg Series 9 article that Allreet is working on is looking great, too, and I'm itching to contribute to it when I have time. Right now I'm going out of town for a couple of days and will be offline. Talk again soon! Moisejp (talk) 23:30, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Hey there, Mick. I finally fixed the Marcus ref to 2005 in LARS. All systems go now! Moisejp (talk) 15:07, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mick, dunno how often you check the H61R Talk page, but just in case it's not often, just thought I'd let you know here that I left you a note there re Heylin 2009 pages. Merci beaucoup! Moisejp (talk) 16:34, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Mick, a few things: (1) I responded to your query on the LARS Talk page. I think it's fine to cut the LARS footnote; (2) You're right, the links weren't working for the LARS refs. Maybe it was only from FW that we started paying attention to that? In any case, I fixed that; (3) On Electric Dylan controversy, ref 22 is from Expectingrain.com, which I would not think would be considered a reliable source on Wikipedia, even if it is an amazing wealth of info and a great website. In ref 23, Williamson also mentions Butler. Do you have the book, and if so does he mention the "Any pop group could produce better rubbish than that! It was a bloody disgrace! He's a traitor!" quote? If so, it'd be great if we could use Williamson as our source and drop Expecting Rain. Or in that link there are mentions of CP Lee (which I think you have used as a ref before) and Andy Gill. If the quote appears in either of their books that'd be fine, too. In any case, I don't think we can use Expecting Rain as a source so if we can't find another source for the quote, we may have to rewrite that part, and mention different thing about Butler; (4) The 1996 picture of Dylan in the 1965–1966 World Tour part seems really out of place to me, and I'd strongly vote for cutting it. What do you think? I hope all is well. Take care, Moisejp (talk) 13:41, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Mick. Thanks for your note the other day and for fixing up the refs on Electric Dylan controversy. I want to also give the Other Side of the Mirror mentions proper refs as I did for the No Direction Home ones. One thing I noticed is that right now it says in ref 4 that "All I Really Want to Do", "If You Gotta Go, Go Now", and "Love Minus Zero/No Limit" at the Newport workshop can be seen on the Other Side of the Mirror DVD, but I believe "All I Really Want to Do" is not on the DVD. Do you have another ref that says he played the song? I couldn't find any mention of that in my books. BTW, it actually wasn't too hard to fix the ref links on LARS—all I had to do was see how the LARS refs were different from the FW/TBT ones, and there were only so many places those differences could be. I've responded to your Sedwick concerns on LARS and actually shortened it even more from what you had. Gotta run, but talk again soon! Moisejp (talk) 13:17, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Witmark Demos: Added new section

Hi, Mick! I've done some research on The Witmark Demos and just added a Background section. I'd appreciate if you'd take a look at this and give me some feedback. I have a few other sections in mind to add, including material on the demos sessions themselves, the evolution of Dylan's songwriting during this period, the business arrangement between Grossman and Dylan, and the legacy of the demos (in particular, the demise of Tin Pan Alley that resulted from the singer-songwriter approach forged by Dylan). An auxiliary article could also be developed on the background of the individual songs. I've already started a couple of the above sections but wanted to see if I was on the right track. Hope all is well. Thanks. Allreet (talk) 08:35, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look. The article's original cites and lead section need cleanup/replacement. For the Background section, I followed the conventions used in Bob Dylan. Let me know if there's a better approach, since everything would be easy to change at this point. I became interested in expanding the article while looking up the Demos on the Internet. Most of what's available, even on sites like Rolling Stone and Crawdaddy, is a re-hash of basic info from the CD booklet. Meanwhile, Wikipedia comes up far down the list in a search on Vol. 9, whereas its articles on Vols. 6-8 are top 10, sometimes as consecutive hits. Based on that and the album's significance, I thought the article worthy of attention. I look forward to your comments. Allreet (talk) 20:57, 28 November 2010 (UTC)