Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 10:42, 22 July 2005

Albums Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Improvements

The replaced version misstated the album chronology, misstated the release date, the genre, and the recording dates, aside from NPOV/subjectivity problems. Monicasdude 21:40, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

No it didn't. The album didn't chart until January 27/68, making the Columbia release date too far behind. It doesn't take a month for a comeback album to chart. PetSounds 23:59, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Right. Columbia Records is wrong about the release date, as are Clinton Heylin, Glen Dundas, Michael Krogsgaard, Robert Shelton, Howard Sounes, and Tony Scaduto. The copies/summaries of the Columbia session records published in The Telegraph have the recording dates wrong, as did drummer Kenny Buttrey when he was interviewed about the album. Levon Helm was wrong when he said that the last Basement Tape recordings came after the first JWH recording session, and Dylan himself was wrong when he said that very little of the JWH material was written before the sessions began. You have read the All Music Guide, and you know better than these unreliable sources. Monicasdude 06:48, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

It appears you seem to know more about Bob Dylan than Bob Dylan himself! It must be special being all-seeing about these issues. If you're literate enough to follow this, please try: 1) type in: http://everyhit.com/number.html OK? Still with me?..... 2) click on "1960's" in the albums section.... 3) Go to "1968", (that's after "1967" and before "1969") and find the week ending March 9th. 10 weeks at #1. Then go to the week ending May 25th. An additional 3 weeks at #1. 4) Get out your calculator and add "10" + "3". Provided you have trouble with that, you should get something around the number 13. Is that proof enough for you? PetSounds 23:31, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

No. You address neither point I raised. First, the paragraph is excessively subjective, and violates NPOV standards. Second, the page you cite is itself entirely unsourced, and gives no description of its information base other than "everyHit.com is simply an online database of my family's record collection." Third, even assuming the verifiability of the data base, the 13-week run can hardly be termed "incredible" in comparison to other #1 albums, and is not even seen as noteworthy by the site's creators. It is not listed on the charts for the top albums of the decade, and is only in 10th place for 1968, behind, inter alia, two albums by Tom Jones and the soundtracks to The Sound Of Music and The Jungle Book, as well as Fleetwood Mac's debut.Monicasdude 23:44, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Where are YOUR sources then?..... Never seen one. At least I've listed 3 or 4.... And #1 for 13 weeks was incredible for Dylan. PetSounds 00:03, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Please note that due to some sort of caching/cookie problem, my last edit to the main page did not appear under my username. Monicasdude 00:35, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

I have just reverted the undiscussed/undisclosed substantive changes made by user PetSounds, in an edit he misleadingly characterized as "fixed typo errors." Monicasdude 06:10, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

This reversion of all Petsounds edits seems unduly harsh even if he did not discuss them all on the talk page and flagged them as minor. His changes amounted to an assertion that the album topped the British charts "for a long spell", addition of track lengths and a series of wiki link fixes. In my opinion "A long spell " would be better quantified but hardly merits deletion. If you dispute the track lengths, you should state that explicitly for discussion here. I can see no possible justification for reverting the wiki link fixes. As a matter of courtesy, I would hope that you would restore the uncontentious changes that you reverted. To do otherwise can be seen as reverting the editor rather than the edits. —Theo (Talk) 11:45, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Basement Tape(s)

I do not understand why Monicasdude prefers a Basement Tape redlink to a Basement Tapes article. Given the number of reverts I can see that this is not capricious. What is Basement Tape and how does it differ from Basement Tapes? —Theo (Talk) 10:42, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

• Unassessed Album articles
• WikiProject Albums articles