1828:. It's worth commenting that as far as I'm aware many musicians consider recordings to be the definitive sources for information about popular compositions, especially when published sheet music can often contain inaccuracies or idiosyncrasies intended to make the song easier for amateur musicians to play. Since I am one of those amateur musicians and my ear for music is relatively poor I will try consulting with musicians I know and see if they can provide any further information. As I said before there is a limit to how much can be stated before we either get into
867:, you probably don't need to cite a source since the recording itself can be considered the source. Obviously you should be wary about going into too much depth using the work you are describing as the source, but I would consider it perfectly reasonable to do that so far as saying "the song is recorded in a 4/4 time signature" etc. is concerned. Obviously copyright restrictions mean you can't reproduce large portions of the lyrics or sheet music in the article.
2000:"Respectively" is usually a horrible construct, forcing the reader to read back ... instead of ... The song was released as a single on 7 May 1966 in the United States and 13 May in the United Kingdom by London Records and Decca Records, respectively. ... why not ... The song was released as a single on 7 May 1966 in the United States by London Records and 13 May in the United Kingdom by Decca Records.
154:
1140:"Eastern pentatonic song" seems a little dubious—unless a source says this specifically—I would recommend "Eastern-style song" or perhaps more clearly, "Eastern-influenced/Asian-influenced". I see later you use "Eastern pentatonic melody" which seems fine, the earlier one is phrased that it appears to be implying the work is an "Eastern song", which well, it's not.
529:
2568:
591:, the infobox's release date and label only display the original ones (For songs, this applies to B-sides as well). With this being known, since the US release came one week before the UK one, do you think only the US info should be displayed in the infobox while the UK info is only shown in the body? I'd love to know your opinion. –
2504:
Basically the whole film has characters humming a version of what is thought to be a creepy nursey rhyme, but is revealed at the film's climax to be "Paint It Black." "The song becomes the key to uncovering the dark secret of the film." I will have to think about how to include a concise explanation
1158:
Reworded using more from the book source in the body. In full, it cites the Indian influence (sitar and vocal melody), Middle
Eastern influences, Eastern European rhythmic influences, blues, and pop. Later on on the same page, it states that the song has a "whirling dervish tempo and vaguely Eastern
1109:
This doesn't appear to have been covered in any sources that I have been able to locate to date, period or otherwise. I have increased the number of period sources referenced in the article in general, however. If you are aware of instances where this has been discussed, please let me know so that I
734:
I am digging through more databases, but I am surprised by how little I have been able to locate about the song that isn't just a passing mention saying that they played it during X concert or isn't about entirely unrelated matters (a lot of papers entirely unrelated to it seem to like it as a title
1874:
I would also comment that it may be worthwhile for someone who is able to to see if there has been any substantial academic analysis of the song, for example from music theorists or musicologists. Given its stature I would expect there to at the very least be some writing on the matter, although it
1696:
That is indeed the approach. Thank you for noting the inconsistencies you have so that I can correct them. I am spot checking others now. Ref 51 is annoying, but that would probably require a template feature to resolve or ref duplication (which resulted in that and was something I was cutting down
888:
Thank you for commenting. Unfortunately, I know absolutely nothing about time signatures or the like. If you do and there is something you think that can be added in that relation etc., please feel free; I do believe that you are correct. I just wish that the song had been covered more (or at least
3327:
That's a good question. I just took a look through newspapers.com and only find one (that was the barest of) passing mention of the song ever being performed on
American Idol. It appears there haven't been any notable covers...and only 5 results that mention "Paint It Black", "Rolling Stones", and
715:
Those articles cover recent pop songs. This is one of the most famous rock songs ever and was released decades ago by a band which has been covered in great detail in multiple high quality sources in an era of
British music which has also been extensively covered. There's no way that a single para
3068:
I am not sure if both single covers are necessary. I know that it is encouraged to keep non-free media usage to a minimal and I believe having alternate album/single covers is discouraged unless there is something particularly notable to have both (like critical commentary, etc.). However, to me,
3507:
I would like to point out that "Blank Space" has that configuration because it combines the commercial performance parts in with the parts on the song's release as a single. I do not really have any issue with the current structure of the article, but this was something I noticed and thought was
2550:
What about: "The song was a plot device in the supernatural horror film Stir of Echoes (1999). At the beginning of the film, the song is presented as a nursery rhyme, but the characters discover that the song was loudly played during the victim's murder to drown out her screams." The wording can
621:. I just think as a UK group it is kind of lacking to not mention the UK date in both and one could argue that that was essentially the same release, but oh well; this isn't the place for that discussion. Thank you for bringing this up so that I could bring it in line with the template's docs. --
983:"has noted that the influence of Harrison's sitar playing, and, in particular, the Beatles' song "Norwegian Wood" on the Rubber Soul album, draws parallels with "Paint It Black" – most noticeably in Jones' droning sitar melody" - passive voice, and wordy and hard to follow as a result
1143:
I don't know if this will have any affect on the article, but it may be helpful to keep in mind that the
Rolling Stones appear to be mixing cultures quite a bit; Indian classical music, which the the sitar is from, does not actively use pentatonic scales (afaik), that's more of an
932:"some stating in 1966 that the addition of the sitar was merely the band "aping the Beatles"" - the quote marks here indicate that multiple critics used the exact same words, which isn't supported by the source (or likely). Put this in your own words to avoid this confusion.
2144:
This is evident from the sessions for
Aftermath (1966), where for the first time, the duo penned the complete track list." I would flip this to say, "This is evident from the sessions for Aftermath (1966), where the duo penned the complete track list for the first time."
3226:
The lead mentions that this was performed on several tours, but I do not see that information supported in the article (but I could just be missing it). The article does mention its appearance on concert albums, but I do not think that is really the same.
1607:
The linking of publishers/works is rather inconsistent throughout, there seem to be too many to name, I recommend using the find and replace tool and doing find for "=name of publisher/work" and replace with "=]" or vice versa depending which route you go
2799:
is a good example of how this can be done. The current method is not technically wrong, but I find it takes up a significant amount of space. But after reading the full article, I am uncertain if this title should be referenced in the lead as it was a
297:
The song was released as a single on 7 May 1966 in the United States and 13 May in the United
Kingdom by London Records and Decca Records, respectively, and included as the opening track on the American version of the band's studio album Aftermath
1041:
Thank you. I managed to get some via newspapers.com during the mother's day free access; my request for the wikipedia library has been approved but is pending
Newspapers.com actioning it and has no ETA. Does it look a bit better now sources wise?
3323:
covers of the song are notable enough to mention here? I do not think they would be and it is better to be selective since this song has just been covered so much, but it was a thought I had while reading the article so I wanted to ask anyway.
1433:
is often background and release→music and lyrics→critical reception→commercial performance. This however can be adjusted as long as it suits a specific song's case (like I swapped the critical reception and commercial performance sections for
1900:
In my searching, there has been surprisingly little coverage in academic texts that wasn't either a passing mention or a false positive. Jonathan
Bellman is the only musicologist to comment on it in some detail that I have located so far.
3531:
and I believe I only know of this song through covers. I look forward to seeing this in the FAC space and hats off to you for tackling such a well-known (and widely-covered) song. If possible, I would greatly appreciate any feedback for
3386:"The unexpected success of the single in the US caused the Stones to add the song to the American release of Aftermath, where it appeared as the opening track; it replaced "Mother's Little Helper", which proved controversial in the UK."
1853:
As a further point, there is a degree to which general materials surrounding its release are a primary source. For example if information doesn't come up elsewhere in what may be considered a superior source, the liner notes can be
1002:
The 'Critical reception and legacy' section is hard to follow, as it mixes up 1960s reviews with modern reviews. Separate them. For FAC, I'd expect to see dead tree references such as back issues of 1960s music publications cited.
1875:
may require both someone who is able to access such publications (for example through a university library) and who is able to translate the information contained in them into layman's terms suitable for a general encyclopaedia.
1071:
I will have to review newspapers.com more when I have longer term access to it, but it does not appear to be something discussed by any sources that I have been able to locate to date. This also applies to the below point.
3046:
200:. And when you close this peer review, please be sure to remove it from there. Also consider adding the sidebar to your userpage so you can help others by participating in other pre-FAC peer reviews. Regards,
1809:" section by simply including information which is intrinsically true about the recording. For me the easiest thing to verify is that (unless I have somehow made some grave error in counting the beat) the song
1836:'s sections about when the work which is the subject of an article is obviously the source of certain information can apply here if there is difficulty finding other sources to describe the song/recording.
1950:
The song has seen widespread commercial use in film, video games and other entertainment mediums. Is "widespread" supported by sources, or is it original research? Let the facts speak for themselves ...
3154:
Did Jagger elaborate on what he meant by describing this as "this kind of
Turkish song"? I am not really sure what I am supposed to take away from that since it is not really clear what he means by this.
3230:
Concert albums would cover this as they are from tours, but explicitly mentioning would also be fine. Where would you suggest this? I can provide sourcing for multiple tours that it has been performed.
3076:" was released for context. Also, why is the full song title not used here? I know absolutely nothing about the Beatles so apologies if this is super obvious, but I think the full title should be used.
2299:
Unfortunately, there isn't much to work with here. All that is there is the following "There were some weird letters, racial letters. "Was there a comma in the title? Was it an order to the world?"". --
1274:
Now that I'm reading what the song is about, I'm thinking maybe the lead should be adjusted to state what type of death/grief we're talking about, since it's a pretty broad subject without specification
1067:
For a song this prominent and frequently covered, the 'Cover versions and usage in media' section should include discussion of how and why the song has been covered, rather than just instances of this.
2261:"the comma being an error by Decca, but, nonetheless, stirred controversy among fans over its racial interpretation." Way too many commas. Also, did the comma bring racial controversy to the song?
3533:
2064:
Since you commented above that you are still following this PR, I'll post some comments. I know this song, but I am not familiar with music scholarship or theory, so consider me a non-expert.
827:"Richards noted that the conclusion of the track was over-recorded and that a different guitar could have potentially improved the song" - wordy, and 'noted' seems an odd choice of word
3253:
It might be worth mentioning very briefly in the lead that this song was performed live on tours. The lead does not mention the concert albums (or at least I am not seeing that there).
2519:
I read the movie's synopsis on
Knowledge and it doesn't mention the song, so I am unsure how Paint it Black "uncovers the dark secret." Which source are you using for this information?
617:
Apologies for the delay. That is an interesting point. I don't really agree with it, but won't argue against precedent and have already removed the UK date from the infobox per
3474:
Most song articles I have seen put the commercial performance section after the critical reception one. I am not sure if it is necessary, but I thought it was worth sharing.
3354:
covers are not notable for mentions in the song's Knowledge article (with some exceptions of course). I really need to learn more about how covers are treated on Knowledge.
1661:
and is behaviour it doesn't look like you can override. I have made ref 5 wikilink Billboard instead of 36. Otherwise, it does not appear to be an issue with billboard. --
2773:
I would recommend attributing the genre sources by name in the text, in the manner of " and have described it as , while calls it ", and so on. Otherwise, looks great!
1601:
Is there anything you can add to ref 15 to make its format clearer? I'm not sure what that is, a booklet, review etc.? (is that a magazine? what issue/volume, any ISSN?)
1378:
Hmm well the only fix I could see would be something like "Just seven days..." or "Only seven days..." but this may be too much editorializing; probably fine how it is
1850:
An example of something fairly easily verifiable as being intrinsically true about the recording would be whether it has been released in stereo or mono, for example.
701:(non-nominator comment) As long as the background section covers necessary/relevant information regarding the song's conception, length should not be a priority imo.
2881:
1277:"It is often claimed"—is this claimed by the band members? If not, I wonder if something like "Commentators often speculate" would make more sense. Up to you though
3410:
I was talking about how "Stupid Girl" and "Long, Long While" are the song's b-sides, but it is only mentioned in the lead and the track listing and not the prose.
1636:
I don't understand things like linking The Washington Post in ref 82, but not the The Washington Post refs after or before that, likewise with Billboard in ref 51
1088:
What influence did the song have on the band's career and musical direction? Have they recorded other songs like this? Do members of the band still like the song?
3180:
Thank you for the response here. It probably should be fine as it currently stands since the next sentence picks up on this song having a Middle Eastern sound.
2398:"was "better than ever". However, Valentine was critical" We can remove the period and short sentence by saying, "was "better than ever" while criticising..."
1752:
The main issue is a lot of inconsistencies with how you're formatting web refs; sometimes you give the website name, sometimes the publisher, sometimes both.
525:
Thank you very much for taking the time to review this. I have asked two questions above but otherwise believe I have resolved your points. Again, thank you!
76:
1361:
since it's been a couple of paragraphs since the reader read the year, but now I wonder if something like "7 days after it's UK release" would be better?
171:
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to take it to FAC and want to see areas for improvement to help streamline the process.
2861:
I would avoid the "with x verb-ing y" sentence construction as I have received notes about this in the past. An example of this in the follow bits,
3350:
Thank you for checking this out. That is what I had assumed, but I am glad to know with greater certainty. I would imagine that a majority of the
126:
986:
Passive voice is definitely a problem for me. That tends to be how I naturally speak/write...hmm. How would you recommend freshening that up? --
2278:
Prose looks good, but I want more of an explanation of why the comma brought controversy. Can you explain this in a half-sentence or sentence?
1924:
New Musical Express is mentioned and linked, followed by a duplicate link a few paragraphs later to NME, and the acronym NME is never defined.
1458:
I'll look at the sources at a later day, the prose and research is great! I'm not sure I'm able to judge the comprehensiveness/coverage myself
1110:
can expand this to include it as this would be great to have if it exists. I'll continue looking in the meantime. Thank you for your review. --
428:
If you're talking about "Mother's Little Helper" having been proven controversial in the UK, this should be in the pluperfect (i.e., "which
3073:
556:
508:
394:
337:
285:
122:
1396:
I wonder if having the "Critical reception and legacy" section after the "Commercial performance" would make more sense, chronology-wise
1137:
is a bit distracting in the prose when the only difference is the grammatical error; I wonder if this would be more appropriate in a note
451:
The "Critical reception and legacy" section might be the section that trips up an FAC. I have no qualms about it myself, but be sure to
1322:, not sure that the "however" is needed, and I would think using "In response" and "responded" in the same sentence is less than ideal
582:
Generally, later releases or in secondary markets, reissues, on compilations, etc., should only be included in the body of the article.
3559:
3022:
should also be linked in the first instance (both of the ones that I have mentioned are in the "Background and development" section).
2494:"The song was used as a plot device in the supernatural horror film Stir of Echoes (1999)." How? Can you describe this in a sentence?
2044:
to help aim a rewrite and probably put it up for GOCE as a good measure. I greatly appreciate your taking the time to look at this! --
1815:
107:
2927:
Was this performance particularly notable for some reason? It seems rather odd to single out this specific performance in the lead?
1266:
in addition to the current instrumentation? (if so I'd recommend "an additional guitar") Or in place of something, like the sitar?
222:
are you still following this peer review, or should it be archived now? PRs are typically archived after a month of no activity.
3014:
1619:
588:
197:
1657:
With respect to the Washington Post, that was a mistake and now corrected. Billboard's specific wikilink in ref 51 is thanks to
641:
This is far from my favourite Rolling Stones song, but I'm pleased to see it's a GA. I'd like to offer the following comments:
99:
69:
2715:
This PR has been open since January, and hasn't received comments since March. Are you still interested in keeping this open?
1579:
publisher locations are also a bit inconsistent with the books (likewise, with the "City, State" vs just state or just city)
2073:
You have a lyric video linked in the infobox. Is this the official lyric video for this song? If not it should be deleted.
2213:
1183:
for words that end in s you have some instances of s's and others with just s' — either is fine just try to be consistent
889:
in more readily available sources) than just "stones performed it at X show", which is just TRIVIA for the most part. --
1880:
1863:
1841:
1573:
be consistent whether you include retrieval dates for books or not (either is fine, just needs to be one or the other)
1430:
872:
2216:? If not, I think this is jargon and can be changed to "The sitar was introduced when" or "The sitar was used when"
1766:
For example, for ref 51 you have Billboard linked as the work, but for ref 52 you have it unliked as the publisher
62:
2264:
Taking a look, it does appear that the comma did bring controversy. Cleaned it up a bit. How does it look now? --
1404:
676:
50:
949:
Nope. The wording says that "some stated" those words. Put this in your own words to avoid the confusing quote.
735:
etc). JSTOR is basically empty and I've been adding as I find them, but it seems to overall be slim pickings. --
2379:"Harrison's sitar playing, and, in particular, the Beatles' song" Delete in particular. Too many commas again.
849:
I agree that it could use some beefing up, but sources don't seem to have discussed it much that I can find. --
552:
504:
390:
333:
281:
2401:
I reworded based off of your suggestion a bit as it seemed a little awkward to me. How does that look now? --
1805:
Regarding an earlier response I made, I think that there is a limited degree to which one can flesh out the "
2795:
2459:"with the 2011 20th" The back-to-back numbers look weird. Can you move the year to the end of the sentence?
1981:
1675:
Ah I see, makes sense, I would then assume your linking approach is to link the first mention of each work?
1542:
910:
do you know about time signatures and, if so, would you be able to add that to the article by any chance? --
196:: to get quicker and more responses to pre-FAC peer review requests, please remember to add your PR page to
2737:
3 days ago I asked for some new input from Nick-D but haven't heard back yet. Otherwise, I would say so. --
3545:
3517:
3494:
3459:
3441:
3419:
3397:
3363:
3337:
3302:
3284:
3262:
3240:
3219:
3189:
3167:
3145:
3114:
3092:
3061:
3038:
3001:
2979:
2939:
2908:
2852:
2816:
2782:
2760:
2746:
2724:
2694:
2673:
2659:
2638:
2624:
2609:
2584:
2560:
2545:
2528:
2514:
2485:
2471:
2445:
2424:
2410:
2391:
2365:
2336:
2322:
2308:
2287:
2273:
2254:
2228:
2205:
2176:
2157:
2130:
2104:
2085:
2053:
2034:
2030:
2012:
1993:
1963:
1936:
1910:
1895:
1884:
1876:
1867:
1859:
1845:
1837:
1789:
1775:
1761:
1744:
1720:
1706:
1684:
1670:
1645:
1631:
1594:
1566:
1502:
1481:
1467:
1447:
1416:
1387:
1373:
1364:
I like the "seven days" idea. Changed to that. Something feels like it is missing though grammatically? --
1348:
1334:
1312:
1289:
1256:
1222:
1209:
It unfortunately could've been either of them as they both were around by 1966 (according to the times in
1195:
1168:
1119:
1097:
1081:
1051:
1029:
1015:
995:
972:
958:
944:
919:
905:
898:
883:
876:
868:
858:
839:
820:
797:
783:
769:
744:
725:
710:
688:
657:
630:
604:
560:
542:
512:
488:
467:
444:
412:
398:
380:
355:
341:
323:
300:
is too wordy. I don't quite know how to reword it, but perhaps it can be broken into different sentences.
289:
257:
236:
232:
214:
210:
183:
44:
757:"Wyman's playing clicked with the band and inspired the uptempo and Eastern pentatonic melody." - clunky
1658:
574:
17:
2533:
It is cited immediately following that statement in the article. It is from Amsterdam University Press
2921:
1180:— perhaps "prominent" is a better word here? Signature almost sounds like its a trademark of the band
808:" By all accounts, the sitar was brought into the mix" - 'By all accounts' doesn't add anything here
458:
I have swapped it around a bit. Do you think it would be best for a GoCE review too, prior to FAC? --
2041:
1944:
548:
520:
500:
452:
386:
329:
305:
277:
115:
3528:
3486:
3433:
3389:
3329:
3276:
3232:
3211:
3159:
3137:
3084:
3053:
3030:
2971:
2931:
2900:
2844:
2808:
2774:
2738:
2710:
2686:
2651:
2616:
2576:
2537:
2506:
2463:
2437:
2402:
2383:
2357:
2328:
2300:
2265:
2246:
2220:
2197:
2168:
2149:
2122:
2096:
2077:
2045:
2004:
1985:
1955:
1928:
1902:
1829:
1781:
1698:
1662:
1623:
1586:
1558:
1494:
1408:
1365:
1326:
1304:
1281:
1248:
1214:
1187:
1160:
1111:
1073:
1043:
1007:
987:
964:
936:
911:
890:
850:
831:
812:
789:
761:
736:
680:
649:
622:
534:
480:
459:
436:
404:
372:
347:
315:
249:
219:
175:
1970:
Recorded at RCA Studios (Los Angeles) is cited in the text; why not repeat the citation here ?
648:
Removed for now. Does it look okay removed or would you suggest something else in its place? --
2021:
2003:
I have generally been a fan of the construct, but agree it can be a little clunky. Changed. --
1975:
716:
appropriately covers what the literature discusses in regards to the background to this song.
243:
223:
201:
3485:
has as you suggest. If this point was raised, I'd probably go with whatever was suggested. --
3541:
3513:
3455:
3415:
3359:
3298:
3258:
3185:
3110:
2997:
2864:
2778:
1093:
1025:
954:
779:
721:
3428:
You are absolutely correct. That was a complete oversight. Fixed. Thanks for raising this,
2756:
2720:
2669:
2634:
2605:
2556:
2524:
2481:
2420:
2318:
2283:
1771:
1757:
1740:
1716:
1680:
1641:
1477:
1463:
1383:
1344:
599:
2076:
Yes, that is official by the label that owns the rights to this era of their material. --
1947:
would make that section more compelling. Right now it is a "he said, he said" collection.
1604:
some of your rolling stone refs are formatted differently, refs 1 vs 17 vs 21 for example
1557:
More to come. I dont have access to 62, so will have to find a substitute most likely. --
1443:
1243:
He would've been concerned with it having distorted playback (and my memory confirmed by
706:
368:
I don't know if "aped" is appropriate for an encyclopedic context, but I could be wrong.
3450:
Thank you for addressing it. If it helps, I have made far sillier oversights than this.
3158:
Unfortunately, it hasn't been elaborated on in any sourcing that I have seen to date. --
1320:
In response to claims that he was merely imitating the Beatles, however, Jones responded
3374:
I would think both b-sides are worth mentioning in the prose of the "Release" section.
3207:, as it reads more like praise to me rather than an objective description of the song.
1749:
I suggest adding translated titles with "|trans-title=" to refs with non-english titles
92:
3477:
I think it is a flip of a coin; I don't have any Stones examples to reference, but FA
3553:
3319:
3203:
2956:
2949:
2876:
2793:
I would put the original title as a footnote. I know this is not a song article, but
2095:
Not that I am aware of. Content from that era typically doesn't have music videos. --
1833:
1297:
864:
476:
The last sentence in the "Media" section can be merged into the preceding paragraph.
2685:
Done. Thank you very much for taking the time to give your input on this article. --
3482:
2242:"it replaced "Mother's Little Helper", which had proved controversial" remove had?
1400:
1244:
1203:
668:
161:
3129:, I believe that it is supposed to be in the past tense and not the present tense.
1280:
Changed to 'Commentators often speculate". That is indeed a better word choice. --
371:
It is part of a quote. Perhaps just something else should be used for the lead? --
3536:
on a far, far more obscure subject. Either way, have a great start to your week!
3385:
3105:
Everything is looking good so far. Thank you for addressing some of my comments.
311:
3537:
3509:
3478:
3451:
3429:
3411:
3379:
3355:
3294:
3272:
3254:
3181:
3106:
3080:
3026:
3019:
2993:
2965:
2894:
2868:
2838:
2191:
2092:
Is there an official music video for this song? Can it be added to the infobox?
1711:
Sounds good. I'll leave some final comments later today or when you get to FAC.
1472:
Haven't forgotten about this; will get to the source comments sometime tomorrow
1435:
1230:
1104:
1089:
1036:
1021:
950:
775:
717:
672:
2327:
Sounds good. I agree that it is too bad that they didn't write more on that. --
2190:
compared to "Songs for Jewish weddings". Should the s in songs be capitalised?
2118:"with some music critics believing that its sitar sound was an" Remove "that"?
1269:
This line was removed and shortened in response to comments above this section.
1229:
Anything that "over-recorded" can link to? I'm not sure exactly what it means,
2752:
2732:
2716:
2680:
2665:
2645:
2630:
2601:
2552:
2520:
2499:
2477:
2416:
2314:
2294:
2279:
1767:
1753:
1736:
1712:
1691:
1676:
1652:
1637:
1613:
1488:
1473:
1459:
1439:
1379:
1340:
1238:
1210:
1153:
1145:
1064:
The abbreviations in the 'Commercial performance' section don't seem necessary
1006:
How do you get your hands on those? Not really familiar with "back issues"? --
702:
612:
593:
2615:
Thank you very much for giving your input! Comments and replies are above. --
2534:
1832:
research territory or start violating the publisher's copyright, but I think
846:
The 'Music and lyrics' section seems rather short for such a well known song
1533:
there seem to be quite a few page numbers missing (refs 5, 9, 10, 62, 109)
426:
it replaced "Mother's Little Helper", which proved controversial in the UK.
1984:
of that section. Thank you for pointing it out so that I could revert. --
1735:
these are some of my impressions, I will be sure to look closer tomorrow
963:
Meant to comment here some time ago, but changed "aping" to "copying". --
499:
Otherwise, that's basically it, and I think it would fare well at FAC. –
2960:
to be more concise. I think the current version is unnecessarily wordy.
2885:. I would check throughout the entire article and revise it accordingly.
645:" signature sitar sound" - 'signature' doesn't seem the right word here
533:
I am glad to hear that you believe it would have an okay time at FAC. --
1943:
A rewrite of "Critical reception and legacy" per the excellent essay
276:
I'll look into this sometime tomorrow. Thanks for letting me know. –
248:
I am following it and it has not been a month since last comment. --
2353:""Paint It Black" has further appeared on numerous" Delete further
1407:, but at the time this one didn't have a legacy heading. Moved. --
2751:
No problem, just wanted to make sure it was not forgotten about.
830:
Tweaked and changed "noted" to "believed". How does that look? --
3127:
part Music scholar James E. Perone says that the lyrical content
2629:
Commented above about racial interpretation and Stir of Echoes.
2551:
probably be improved, but I think it is verified by the source.
2212:"The sitar was brought into the mix when" Are you talking about
3527:
I hope this review is helpful. I am actually not familiar with
1524:
Hi, yes, sorry about that, thanks for the ping. Comments below:
2829:
What is the difference between death and loss in this context?
148:
1618:
This was mostly by request at the GAN and is consistent with
2433:"Keith Altham considered the "Paint It Black"" Delete "the"
2164:"In addition, Jones, overshadowed by" Delete "In addition"?
1429:(non-nominator comment) The standard structure for Songs at
1264:
a different guitar could have potentially improved the song
2219:
Yes, it is referring to audio mixing. Added a wikilink. --
1148:
thing, mainly China, Japan and I think Indonesia as well.
3125:
When discussing critics and their opinions, like in this
1247:) due to it being recorded "using too large a signal". --
2970:
What are your thoughts on how that section reads now? --
2899:
What do you normally swap it out for, structure wise? --
577:
and noticed a few things that might be of use to you:
141:
134:
103:
3200:
I am not sure about the word "striking" in this part,
435:
That was the intent. Fixed, thank you for spotting. --
2919:
To promote the song, the Stones performed it live on
679:
all have background sections of comparable length. --
1233:? Too many instruments/too thick a texture perhaps?
935:
That is a direct quote from Rolling Stone though? --
385:The lead should be paraphrasing a quote, anyway. –
863:For some basic information, unless I'm misreading
3018:on its first mention in the body of the article.
2867:believing its sitar sound was an attempt to copy
495:Sources seem adequate and of high enough quality.
2843:Good point. Changed to just "grief and loss". --
2505:in the article; I am open to any suggestions. --
664:The background section seems too short for a FA
1325:Rewritten slightly. How does that look now? --
432:proved...); otherwise it should be reworded.
70:
8:
2827:The lyrics are about grief, death, and loss.
2600:Those are my thoughts. I hope this helps.
77:
63:
32:
1020:Libraries, books, online databases, etc.
1813:as recorded by The Rolling Stones is in
1545:as it was verified in a resource that I
1399:Done. I was basing the structure off of
1206:is the one in question, but am not sure
1135:originally released as "Paint It, Black"
3271:Added to the body. How does that look,
2825:I have a question about this sentence:
2664:Responded to comma and Stir of Echoes.
788:Trimmed out. How does that look now? --
35:
3201:
3126:
2947:
2918:
2873:
2862:
2826:
2040:Thank you! I will take a look through
1358:
1319:
1263:
1177:
1134:
760:How would you suggest streamlining? --
581:
425:
296:
2536:page 79/80 ISBN 978-94-6298-651-0? --
1493:Have you been able to take a look? --
1213:). Sources just say "RCA Studios". --
7:
3074:Norwegian Wood (This Bird Has Flown)
526:
3136:I think I've addressed this now. --
2917:I have a question about this part:
1357:I was thinking you add the year to
3069:that does not seem to be the case.
573:Hi SandDoctor! I was checking out
24:
3481:has it in this config whereas FA
3079:Done x2. How does that look now,
1800:Comment(s) from HumanBodyPiloter5
1159:pentatonic melodic direction". --
2566:
1620:Aftermath (Rolling Stones album)
589:Aftermath (Rolling Stones album)
527:
198:Template:FAC peer review sidebar
152:
774:Restructure to avoid "clicked"
1:
3029:! Will tackle rest shorty. --
1911:18:18, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
1745:08:15, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
1503:18:19, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
455:and not "he said, she said."
2313:We should leave as-is then.
2054:20:19, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
2035:18:05, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
2013:20:19, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
1994:20:19, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
1964:20:19, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
1937:20:19, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
1885:07:29, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
1868:07:21, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
1846:07:05, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
1582:ref 8 has an author missing
1482:09:09, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
1468:05:04, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
1448:14:35, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
1417:05:36, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
1388:09:09, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
1374:05:36, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
1349:09:09, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
1335:19:53, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
1313:05:36, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
1290:05:36, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
1257:19:53, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
1223:19:53, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
1196:19:53, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
1169:19:53, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
1098:04:49, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
1030:00:36, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
1016:05:26, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
996:05:26, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
959:00:36, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
945:05:26, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
899:18:36, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
877:04:49, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
859:05:26, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
840:05:26, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
821:05:26, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
798:04:47, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
784:00:36, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
770:05:26, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
745:04:45, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
726:00:36, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
711:14:35, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
689:05:26, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
658:05:26, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
631:15:41, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
605:22:56, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
561:16:50, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
543:16:43, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
513:15:50, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
489:16:37, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
468:16:43, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
445:16:36, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
413:18:28, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
399:16:50, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
381:16:36, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
356:18:28, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
342:16:50, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
324:16:39, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
312:"...respectively. It was..."
290:05:09, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
215:00:14, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
184:05:03, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
3072:I would add the year that "
1431:Knowledge:WikiProject Songs
1296:are we talking drone as in
1133:By no means necessary, but
3576:
3317:I am assuming none of the
2882:greatest songs of all time
2674:22:34, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2660:22:00, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2639:19:55, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2625:04:36, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2610:02:02, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2561:22:33, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2546:22:00, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2529:19:55, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2515:04:36, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2486:19:55, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2472:04:36, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2462:How does that look now? --
2446:04:36, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2425:19:55, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2411:04:36, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2392:04:36, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2366:04:36, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2323:22:33, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2309:22:00, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2288:19:55, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2274:04:36, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2255:04:36, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2229:04:36, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2206:04:36, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2177:04:36, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2158:04:36, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2131:04:36, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2105:04:36, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
2086:04:36, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
1980:It was sourced, but an IP
1790:22:27, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
1776:22:06, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
1721:22:32, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
1707:22:30, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
1685:22:28, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
1671:22:27, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
1646:22:06, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
1632:01:13, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
1595:01:30, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
1567:01:30, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
258:01:11, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
237:23:46, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
3560:January 2021 peer reviews
3518:05:10, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
3495:04:52, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
3460:05:45, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
3442:04:46, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
3420:01:30, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
3398:22:09, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
3384:It is already mentioned?
3364:05:45, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
3338:04:48, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
3303:04:08, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
3285:01:54, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
3263:01:30, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
3241:22:13, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
3210:You're right. Removed. --
3146:04:53, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
3062:04:40, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
3002:04:46, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
2980:04:42, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
2909:05:05, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
2853:05:05, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
2817:05:05, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
2695:14:22, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
2585:14:22, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
2337:14:22, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
1762:01:23, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
1405:1989 (Taylor Swift album)
1178:its signature sitar sound
1120:13:21, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
973:13:21, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
920:13:12, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
677:1989 (Taylor Swift album)
453:make sure it's copyedited
3546:03:46, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
3220:04:56, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
3190:16:58, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
3168:04:55, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
3115:16:58, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
3093:05:03, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
3039:04:53, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
2948:has been the subject of
2940:05:03, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
2783:05:51, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
2761:23:53, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
2747:22:11, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
2725:19:53, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
1541:Couldn't view ref 9, so
1186:Good catch. Resolved. --
1082:05:54, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
1052:05:52, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
310:What would you think of
2796:Raiders of the Lost Ark
1303:Yes. Wikilink added. --
2880:ranking it one of the
1982:blanked a good portion
1576:date missing for ref 2
1538:Added page # to ref 5.
314:to break it in two? --
3293:It looks good to me.
2992:It looks good to me.
1697:on to begin with). --
1659:Template:Single chart
575:Template:Infobox song
164:discussion is closed.
18:Knowledge:Peer review
2922:The Ed Sullivan Show
3508:worth bringing up.
3328:"American Idol". --
3052:Good idea. Done. --
2953:, I would just say
2148:Good idea. Done. --
2020:Good luck at FAC!
1128:Comments from Aza24
3529:the Rolling Stones
2374:Critical reception
3025:Done. Thank you,
3012:Remember to link
2650:Replied above. --
1896:HumanBodyPiloter5
1877:HumanBodyPiloter5
1860:HumanBodyPiloter5
1838:HumanBodyPiloter5
906:HumanBodyPiloter5
884:HumanBodyPiloter5
869:HumanBodyPiloter5
169:
168:
142:Watch peer review
87:
86:
3567:
3492:
3489:
3439:
3436:
3395:
3392:
3387:
3383:
3335:
3332:
3282:
3279:
3238:
3235:
3217:
3214:
3165:
3162:
3143:
3140:
3090:
3087:
3059:
3056:
3036:
3033:
2977:
2974:
2969:
2959:
2937:
2934:
2906:
2903:
2898:
2850:
2847:
2842:
2814:
2811:
2744:
2741:
2736:
2714:
2692:
2689:
2684:
2657:
2654:
2649:
2622:
2619:
2582:
2579:
2574:
2570:
2569:
2543:
2540:
2512:
2509:
2503:
2469:
2466:
2443:
2440:
2408:
2405:
2389:
2386:
2363:
2360:
2334:
2331:
2306:
2303:
2298:
2271:
2268:
2252:
2249:
2226:
2223:
2203:
2200:
2174:
2171:
2155:
2152:
2128:
2125:
2102:
2099:
2083:
2080:
2051:
2048:
2027:
2010:
2007:
1991:
1988:
1979:
1961:
1958:
1934:
1931:
1908:
1905:
1899:
1827:
1826:
1825:
1824:
1807:Music and lyrics
1787:
1784:
1704:
1701:
1695:
1668:
1665:
1656:
1629:
1626:
1617:
1592:
1589:
1564:
1561:
1500:
1497:
1492:
1414:
1411:
1371:
1368:
1332:
1329:
1310:
1307:
1287:
1284:
1254:
1251:
1242:
1220:
1217:
1193:
1190:
1166:
1163:
1157:
1117:
1114:
1108:
1079:
1076:
1049:
1046:
1040:
1013:
1010:
993:
990:
970:
967:
942:
939:
917:
914:
909:
896:
893:
887:
856:
853:
837:
834:
818:
815:
795:
792:
767:
764:
742:
739:
686:
683:
655:
652:
628:
625:
616:
540:
537:
532:
531:
530:
524:
486:
483:
465:
462:
442:
439:
410:
407:
378:
375:
353:
350:
321:
318:
313:
309:
255:
252:
247:
229:
207:
181:
178:
156:
155:
149:
139:
130:
111:
79:
72:
65:
47:
33:
3575:
3574:
3570:
3569:
3568:
3566:
3565:
3564:
3550:
3549:
3490:
3487:
3437:
3434:
3393:
3390:
3377:
3333:
3330:
3280:
3277:
3236:
3233:
3215:
3212:
3163:
3160:
3141:
3138:
3088:
3085:
3057:
3054:
3049:to the images.
3034:
3031:
2975:
2972:
2963:
2954:
2946:For this part,
2935:
2932:
2904:
2901:
2892:
2848:
2845:
2836:
2812:
2809:
2790:
2771:
2742:
2739:
2730:
2708:
2690:
2687:
2678:
2655:
2652:
2643:
2620:
2617:
2580:
2577:
2567:
2565:
2541:
2538:
2510:
2507:
2497:
2467:
2464:
2441:
2438:
2406:
2403:
2387:
2384:
2361:
2358:
2332:
2329:
2304:
2301:
2292:
2269:
2266:
2250:
2247:
2224:
2221:
2201:
2198:
2172:
2169:
2153:
2150:
2126:
2123:
2100:
2097:
2081:
2078:
2062:
2049:
2046:
2025:
2008:
2005:
1989:
1986:
1973:
1959:
1956:
1932:
1929:
1921:
1906:
1903:
1893:
1823:
1817:
1816:
1814:
1802:
1785:
1782:
1702:
1699:
1689:
1666:
1663:
1650:
1627:
1624:
1611:
1590:
1587:
1562:
1559:
1515:
1498:
1495:
1486:
1412:
1409:
1369:
1366:
1330:
1327:
1308:
1305:
1285:
1282:
1252:
1249:
1236:
1218:
1215:
1191:
1188:
1164:
1161:
1151:
1130:
1115:
1112:
1102:
1077:
1074:
1047:
1044:
1034:
1011:
1008:
991:
988:
968:
965:
940:
937:
915:
912:
903:
894:
891:
881:
854:
851:
835:
832:
816:
813:
793:
790:
765:
762:
740:
737:
684:
681:
653:
650:
626:
623:
610:
603:
538:
535:
528:
518:
484:
481:
463:
460:
440:
437:
408:
405:
376:
373:
351:
348:
319:
316:
303:
253:
250:
241:
227:
205:
179:
176:
153:
145:
120:
97:
91:
83:
51:Manual of Style
43:
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
3573:
3571:
3563:
3562:
3552:
3551:
3534:my current FAC
3525:
3524:
3523:
3522:
3521:
3520:
3500:
3499:
3498:
3497:
3471:
3470:
3469:
3468:
3467:
3466:
3465:
3464:
3463:
3462:
3445:
3444:
3423:
3422:
3403:
3402:
3401:
3400:
3371:
3370:
3369:
3368:
3367:
3366:
3343:
3342:
3341:
3340:
3314:
3313:
3312:
3311:
3310:
3309:
3308:
3307:
3306:
3305:
3288:
3287:
3266:
3265:
3246:
3245:
3244:
3243:
3224:
3223:
3222:
3197:
3196:
3195:
3194:
3193:
3192:
3173:
3172:
3171:
3170:
3151:
3150:
3149:
3148:
3131:
3130:
3122:
3121:
3120:
3119:
3118:
3117:
3098:
3097:
3096:
3095:
3070:
3066:
3065:
3064:
3043:
3042:
3041:
3009:
3008:
3007:
3006:
3005:
3004:
2985:
2984:
2983:
2982:
2950:cover versions
2944:
2943:
2942:
2914:
2913:
2912:
2911:
2887:
2886:
2858:
2857:
2856:
2855:
2831:
2830:
2822:
2821:
2820:
2819:
2802:
2801:
2789:
2786:
2770:
2767:
2766:
2765:
2764:
2763:
2706:
2705:
2704:
2703:
2702:
2701:
2700:
2699:
2698:
2697:
2598:
2597:
2596:
2595:
2594:
2593:
2592:
2591:
2590:
2589:
2588:
2587:
2492:
2491:
2490:
2489:
2488:
2454:Cover versions
2451:
2450:
2449:
2448:
2431:
2430:
2429:
2428:
2427:
2396:
2395:
2394:
2382:Cleaned up. --
2371:
2370:
2369:
2368:
2350:
2349:
2348:
2347:
2346:
2345:
2344:
2343:
2342:
2341:
2340:
2339:
2259:
2258:
2257:
2234:
2233:
2232:
2231:
2210:
2209:
2208:
2182:
2181:
2180:
2179:
2162:
2161:
2160:
2136:
2135:
2134:
2133:
2110:
2109:
2108:
2107:
2090:
2089:
2088:
2061:
2058:
2057:
2056:
2018:
2017:
2016:
2015:
1998:
1997:
1996:
1968:
1967:
1966:
1948:
1941:
1940:
1939:
1920:
1917:
1916:
1915:
1914:
1913:
1888:
1887:
1871:
1870:
1856:
1855:
1851:
1848:
1819:
1818:
1811:Paint It Black
1801:
1798:
1797:
1796:
1795:
1794:
1793:
1792:
1750:
1747:
1733:
1732:
1731:
1730:
1729:
1728:
1727:
1726:
1725:
1724:
1723:
1709:
1605:
1602:
1599:
1598:
1597:
1585:Good catch. --
1580:
1577:
1574:
1571:
1570:
1569:
1555:
1554:
1553:
1552:Added to ref 9
1550:
1539:
1531:
1530:
1529:
1528:
1527:
1526:
1525:
1514:
1511:
1510:
1509:
1508:
1507:
1506:
1505:
1455:
1454:
1453:
1452:
1451:
1450:
1422:
1421:
1420:
1419:
1394:
1393:
1392:
1391:
1390:
1355:
1354:
1353:
1352:
1351:
1317:
1316:
1315:
1294:
1293:
1292:
1275:
1272:
1271:
1270:
1261:
1260:
1259:
1227:
1226:
1225:
1200:
1199:
1198:
1181:
1175:
1174:
1173:
1172:
1171:
1138:
1129:
1126:
1125:
1124:
1123:
1122:
1086:
1085:
1084:
1065:
1061:
1060:
1059:
1058:
1057:
1056:
1055:
1054:
1000:
999:
998:
981:
980:
979:
978:
977:
976:
975:
930:
929:
928:
927:
926:
925:
924:
923:
922:
844:
843:
842:
825:
824:
823:
806:
805:
804:
803:
802:
801:
800:
754:
753:
752:
751:
750:
749:
748:
747:
729:
728:
713:
694:
693:
692:
691:
662:
661:
660:
639:
638:
634:
633:
597:
585:
584:
571:
570:
566:
565:
564:
563:
549:John M Wolfson
547:No problem. –
521:John M Wolfson
501:John M Wolfson
497:
496:
493:
492:
491:
473:
472:
471:
470:
449:
448:
447:
431:
422:
421:
420:
419:
418:
417:
416:
415:
387:John M Wolfson
365:
364:
363:
362:
361:
360:
359:
358:
330:John M Wolfson
306:John M Wolfson
278:John M Wolfson
274:
273:
272:John M Wolfson
269:
268:
267:
266:
265:
264:
263:
262:
261:
260:
167:
166:
157:
147:
146:
144:
90:
85:
84:
82:
81:
74:
67:
59:
56:
55:
54:
53:
48:
38:
37:
30:
28:Paint It Black
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
3572:
3561:
3558:
3557:
3555:
3548:
3547:
3543:
3539:
3535:
3530:
3519:
3515:
3511:
3506:
3505:
3504:
3503:
3502:
3501:
3496:
3493:
3484:
3480:
3476:
3475:
3473:
3472:
3461:
3457:
3453:
3449:
3448:
3447:
3446:
3443:
3440:
3431:
3427:
3426:
3425:
3424:
3421:
3417:
3413:
3409:
3408:
3407:
3406:
3405:
3404:
3399:
3396:
3381:
3376:
3375:
3373:
3372:
3365:
3361:
3357:
3353:
3352:American Idol
3349:
3348:
3347:
3346:
3345:
3344:
3339:
3336:
3326:
3325:
3322:
3321:
3320:American Idol
3316:
3315:
3304:
3300:
3296:
3292:
3291:
3290:
3289:
3286:
3283:
3274:
3270:
3269:
3268:
3267:
3264:
3260:
3256:
3252:
3251:
3250:
3249:
3248:
3247:
3242:
3239:
3229:
3228:
3225:
3221:
3218:
3209:
3208:
3206:
3205:
3202:The striking
3199:
3198:
3191:
3187:
3183:
3179:
3178:
3177:
3176:
3175:
3174:
3169:
3166:
3157:
3156:
3153:
3152:
3147:
3144:
3135:
3134:
3133:
3132:
3128:
3124:
3123:
3116:
3112:
3108:
3104:
3103:
3102:
3101:
3100:
3099:
3094:
3091:
3082:
3078:
3077:
3075:
3071:
3067:
3063:
3060:
3051:
3050:
3048:
3044:
3040:
3037:
3028:
3024:
3023:
3021:
3017:
3016:
3011:
3010:
3003:
2999:
2995:
2991:
2990:
2989:
2988:
2987:
2986:
2981:
2978:
2967:
2962:
2961:
2958:
2952:
2951:
2945:
2941:
2938:
2929:
2928:
2926:
2924:
2923:
2916:
2915:
2910:
2907:
2896:
2891:
2890:
2889:
2888:
2884:
2883:
2879:
2878:
2877:Rolling Stone
2871:
2870:
2866:
2865:music critics
2860:
2859:
2854:
2851:
2840:
2835:
2834:
2833:
2832:
2828:
2824:
2823:
2818:
2815:
2806:
2805:
2804:
2803:
2798:
2797:
2792:
2791:
2787:
2785:
2784:
2780:
2776:
2768:
2762:
2758:
2754:
2750:
2749:
2748:
2745:
2734:
2729:
2728:
2727:
2726:
2722:
2718:
2712:
2711:TheSandDoctor
2696:
2693:
2682:
2677:
2676:
2675:
2671:
2667:
2663:
2662:
2661:
2658:
2647:
2642:
2641:
2640:
2636:
2632:
2628:
2627:
2626:
2623:
2614:
2613:
2612:
2611:
2607:
2603:
2586:
2583:
2573:
2564:
2563:
2562:
2558:
2554:
2549:
2548:
2547:
2544:
2535:
2532:
2531:
2530:
2526:
2522:
2518:
2517:
2516:
2513:
2501:
2496:
2495:
2493:
2487:
2483:
2479:
2475:
2474:
2473:
2470:
2461:
2460:
2458:
2457:
2456:
2455:
2447:
2444:
2435:
2434:
2432:
2426:
2422:
2418:
2414:
2413:
2412:
2409:
2400:
2399:
2397:
2393:
2390:
2381:
2380:
2378:
2377:
2376:
2375:
2367:
2364:
2355:
2354:
2352:
2351:
2338:
2335:
2326:
2325:
2324:
2320:
2316:
2312:
2311:
2310:
2307:
2296:
2291:
2290:
2289:
2285:
2281:
2277:
2276:
2275:
2272:
2263:
2262:
2260:
2256:
2253:
2244:
2243:
2241:
2240:
2239:
2238:
2230:
2227:
2218:
2217:
2215:
2211:
2207:
2204:
2195:
2194:
2193:
2189:
2188:
2187:
2186:
2178:
2175:
2166:
2165:
2163:
2159:
2156:
2147:
2146:
2143:
2142:
2141:
2140:
2132:
2129:
2120:
2119:
2117:
2116:
2115:
2114:
2106:
2103:
2094:
2093:
2091:
2087:
2084:
2075:
2074:
2072:
2071:
2070:
2069:
2065:
2059:
2055:
2052:
2043:
2039:
2038:
2037:
2036:
2032:
2028:
2024:
2014:
2011:
2002:
2001:
1999:
1995:
1992:
1983:
1977:
1972:
1971:
1969:
1965:
1962:
1953:
1952:
1949:
1946:
1942:
1938:
1935:
1926:
1925:
1923:
1922:
1918:
1912:
1909:
1897:
1892:
1891:
1890:
1889:
1886:
1882:
1878:
1873:
1872:
1869:
1865:
1861:
1858:
1857:
1852:
1849:
1847:
1843:
1839:
1835:
1831:
1822:
1812:
1808:
1804:
1803:
1799:
1791:
1788:
1780:See above. --
1779:
1778:
1777:
1773:
1769:
1765:
1764:
1763:
1759:
1755:
1751:
1748:
1746:
1742:
1738:
1734:
1722:
1718:
1714:
1710:
1708:
1705:
1693:
1688:
1687:
1686:
1682:
1678:
1674:
1673:
1672:
1669:
1660:
1654:
1649:
1648:
1647:
1643:
1639:
1635:
1634:
1633:
1630:
1621:
1615:
1610:
1609:
1606:
1603:
1600:
1596:
1593:
1584:
1583:
1581:
1578:
1575:
1572:
1568:
1565:
1556:
1551:
1548:
1544:
1540:
1537:
1536:
1535:
1534:
1532:
1523:
1522:
1521:
1520:
1519:
1518:
1517:
1516:
1513:Source review
1512:
1504:
1501:
1490:
1485:
1484:
1483:
1479:
1475:
1471:
1470:
1469:
1465:
1461:
1457:
1456:
1449:
1445:
1441:
1437:
1432:
1428:
1427:
1426:
1425:
1424:
1423:
1418:
1415:
1406:
1402:
1398:
1397:
1395:
1389:
1385:
1381:
1377:
1376:
1375:
1372:
1363:
1362:
1360:
1356:
1350:
1346:
1342:
1338:
1337:
1336:
1333:
1324:
1323:
1321:
1318:
1314:
1311:
1302:
1301:
1299:
1298:Drone (music)
1295:
1291:
1288:
1279:
1278:
1276:
1273:
1268:
1267:
1265:
1262:
1258:
1255:
1246:
1240:
1235:
1234:
1232:
1228:
1224:
1221:
1212:
1208:
1207:
1205:
1201:
1197:
1194:
1185:
1184:
1182:
1179:
1176:
1170:
1167:
1155:
1150:
1149:
1147:
1142:
1141:
1139:
1136:
1132:
1131:
1127:
1121:
1118:
1106:
1101:
1100:
1099:
1095:
1091:
1087:
1083:
1080:
1070:
1069:
1066:
1063:
1062:
1053:
1050:
1038:
1033:
1032:
1031:
1027:
1023:
1019:
1018:
1017:
1014:
1005:
1004:
1001:
997:
994:
985:
984:
982:
974:
971:
962:
961:
960:
956:
952:
948:
947:
946:
943:
934:
933:
931:
921:
918:
907:
902:
901:
900:
897:
885:
880:
879:
878:
874:
870:
866:
862:
861:
860:
857:
848:
847:
845:
841:
838:
829:
828:
826:
822:
819:
810:
809:
807:
799:
796:
787:
786:
785:
781:
777:
773:
772:
771:
768:
759:
758:
756:
755:
746:
743:
733:
732:
731:
730:
727:
723:
719:
714:
712:
708:
704:
700:
699:
698:
697:
696:
695:
690:
687:
678:
674:
670:
666:
665:
663:
659:
656:
647:
646:
644:
643:
642:
636:
635:
632:
629:
620:
614:
609:
608:
607:
606:
601:
596:
595:
590:
583:
580:
579:
578:
576:
568:
567:
562:
558:
554:
550:
546:
545:
544:
541:
522:
517:
516:
515:
514:
510:
506:
502:
494:
490:
487:
478:
477:
475:
474:
469:
466:
457:
456:
454:
450:
446:
443:
434:
433:
429:
427:
424:
423:
414:
411:
402:
401:
400:
396:
392:
388:
384:
383:
382:
379:
370:
369:
367:
366:
357:
354:
345:
344:
343:
339:
335:
331:
327:
326:
325:
322:
307:
302:
301:
299:
295:
294:
293:
291:
287:
283:
279:
271:
270:
259:
256:
245:
240:
239:
238:
234:
230:
226:
221:
220:TheSandDoctor
218:
217:
216:
212:
208:
204:
199:
195:
194:STANDARD NOTE
192:
191:
190:
189:
188:
187:
186:
185:
182:
172:
165:
163:
158:
151:
150:
143:
138:
137:
133:
128:
124:
119:
118:
114:
109:
105:
101:
96:
95:
89:
88:
80:
75:
73:
68:
66:
61:
60:
58:
57:
52:
49:
46:
45:Copying check
42:
41:
40:
39:
34:
29:
26:
19:
3526:
3483:Shake It Off
3351:
3318:
3013:
2920:
2875:
2794:
2772:
2707:
2599:
2571:
2476:Looks good.
2453:
2452:
2415:Looks good.
2373:
2372:
2236:
2235:
2214:audio mixing
2184:
2183:
2138:
2137:
2112:
2111:
2067:
2066:
2063:
2042:WP:RECEPTION
2022:
2019:
1976:SandyGeorgia
1945:WP:RECEPTION
1919:SandyGeorgia
1820:
1810:
1806:
1546:
1401:Shake It Off
1339:Much better
1204:RCA Studio B
669:Shake It Off
640:
618:
592:
587:As shown in
586:
572:
498:
275:
244:SandyGeorgia
224:
202:
193:
173:
170:
159:
135:
131:
117:Article talk
116:
112:
93:
27:
3479:Blank Space
3020:Brian Jones
2930:Removed. --
2869:the Beatles
2192:MOS:CONFORM
1954:Removed. --
1927:Defined. --
1854:referenced.
1830:WP:ORIGINAL
1436:Blank Space
1231:Overdubbing
811:Removed. --
673:Blank Space
162:peer review
104:visual edit
3491:SandDoctor
3438:SandDoctor
3394:SandDoctor
3334:SandDoctor
3281:SandDoctor
3237:SandDoctor
3216:SandDoctor
3164:SandDoctor
3142:SandDoctor
3089:SandDoctor
3058:SandDoctor
3035:SandDoctor
2976:SandDoctor
2936:SandDoctor
2905:SandDoctor
2863:with some
2849:SandDoctor
2813:SandDoctor
2743:SandDoctor
2691:SandDoctor
2656:SandDoctor
2621:SandDoctor
2581:SandDoctor
2542:SandDoctor
2511:SandDoctor
2468:SandDoctor
2442:SandDoctor
2407:SandDoctor
2388:SandDoctor
2362:SandDoctor
2333:SandDoctor
2305:SandDoctor
2270:SandDoctor
2251:SandDoctor
2225:SandDoctor
2202:SandDoctor
2173:SandDoctor
2154:SandDoctor
2139:Background
2127:SandDoctor
2101:SandDoctor
2082:SandDoctor
2050:SandDoctor
2009:SandDoctor
1990:SandDoctor
1960:SandDoctor
1933:SandDoctor
1907:SandDoctor
1786:SandDoctor
1703:SandDoctor
1667:SandDoctor
1628:SandDoctor
1591:SandDoctor
1563:SandDoctor
1543:removed it
1499:SandDoctor
1413:SandDoctor
1370:SandDoctor
1331:SandDoctor
1309:SandDoctor
1286:SandDoctor
1253:SandDoctor
1219:SandDoctor
1211:RCA Studio
1192:SandDoctor
1165:SandDoctor
1146:East Asian
1116:SandDoctor
1078:SandDoctor
1048:SandDoctor
1012:SandDoctor
992:SandDoctor
969:SandDoctor
941:SandDoctor
916:SandDoctor
895:SandDoctor
855:SandDoctor
836:SandDoctor
817:SandDoctor
794:SandDoctor
766:SandDoctor
741:SandDoctor
685:SandDoctor
654:SandDoctor
627:SandDoctor
539:SandDoctor
485:SandDoctor
464:SandDoctor
441:SandDoctor
409:SandDoctor
377:SandDoctor
352:SandDoctor
320:SandDoctor
292:Comments:
254:SandDoctor
180:SandDoctor
3015:Aftermath
2955:has been
1359:By 20 May
619:Aftermath
3554:Category
3047:ALT text
2807:Done. --
2800:mistake.
2436:Done. --
2356:Done. --
2245:Done. --
2196:Done. --
2167:Done. --
2121:Done. --
1202:I think
557:contribs
509:contribs
479:Done. --
403:Done. --
395:contribs
346:Done. --
338:contribs
328:Sure. –
286:contribs
174:Thanks,
2957:covered
2237:Release
2185:Writing
2068:Infobox
2026:Georgia
1549:access.
298:(1966).
228:Georgia
206:Georgia
127:history
108:history
94:Article
36:Toolbox
3538:Aoba47
3510:Aoba47
3452:Aoba47
3430:Aoba47
3412:Aoba47
3380:Aoba47
3356:Aoba47
3295:Aoba47
3273:Aoba47
3255:Aoba47
3182:Aoba47
3107:Aoba47
3081:Aoba47
3027:Aoba47
2994:Aoba47
2966:Aoba47
2895:Aoba47
2839:Aoba47
2788:Aoba47
2775:isento
2769:Isento
1834:WP:WTC
1245:lexico
1105:Nick-D
1090:Nick-D
1037:Nick-D
1022:Nick-D
951:Nick-D
865:WP:WTC
776:Nick-D
718:Nick-D
675:, and
637:Nick-D
3204:motif
2874:with
2753:Z1720
2733:Z1720
2717:Z1720
2681:Z1720
2666:Z1720
2646:Z1720
2631:Z1720
2602:Z1720
2553:Z1720
2521:Z1720
2500:Z1720
2478:Z1720
2417:Z1720
2315:Z1720
2295:Z1720
2280:Z1720
2060:Z1720
2023:Sandy
1768:Aza24
1754:Aza24
1737:Aza24
1713:Aza24
1692:Aza24
1677:Aza24
1653:Aza24
1638:Aza24
1614:Aza24
1489:Aza24
1474:Aza24
1460:Aza24
1380:Aza24
1341:Aza24
1239:Aza24
1154:Aza24
613:Zmbro
594:zmbro
569:zmbro
225:Sandy
203:Sandy
160:This
136:Watch
16:<
3542:talk
3514:talk
3456:talk
3432:. --
3416:talk
3360:talk
3299:talk
3275:? --
3259:talk
3186:talk
3111:talk
3083:? --
3045:Add
2998:talk
2872:and
2779:talk
2757:talk
2721:talk
2670:talk
2635:talk
2606:talk
2575:. --
2572:Done
2557:talk
2525:talk
2482:talk
2421:talk
2319:talk
2284:talk
2113:Lede
2031:Talk
1881:talk
1864:talk
1842:talk
1772:talk
1758:talk
1741:talk
1717:talk
1681:talk
1642:talk
1622:. --
1478:talk
1464:talk
1444:talk
1403:and
1384:talk
1345:talk
1094:talk
1026:talk
955:talk
873:talk
780:talk
722:talk
707:talk
667:FAs
600:talk
553:talk
505:talk
391:talk
334:talk
282:talk
233:Talk
211:Talk
123:edit
100:edit
3488:The
3435:The
3391:The
3331:The
3278:The
3234:The
3213:The
3161:The
3139:The
3086:The
3055:The
3032:The
2973:The
2933:The
2902:The
2846:The
2810:The
2740:The
2688:The
2653:The
2618:The
2578:The
2539:The
2508:The
2465:The
2439:The
2404:The
2385:The
2359:The
2330:The
2302:The
2267:The
2248:The
2222:The
2199:The
2170:The
2151:The
2124:The
2098:The
2079:The
2047:The
2033:)
2006:The
1987:The
1957:The
1930:The
1904:The
1783:The
1700:The
1664:The
1625:The
1588:The
1560:The
1547:can
1496:The
1438:).
1410:The
1367:The
1328:The
1306:The
1283:The
1250:The
1216:The
1189:The
1162:The
1113:The
1075:The
1045:The
1009:The
989:The
966:The
938:The
913:The
892:The
852:The
833:The
814:The
791:The
763:The
738:The
682:The
651:The
624:The
536:The
482:The
461:The
438:The
430:had
406:The
374:The
349:The
317:The
251:The
235:)
213:)
177:The
3556::
3544:)
3516:)
3458:)
3418:)
3388:--
3362:)
3301:)
3261:)
3231:--
3188:)
3113:)
3000:)
2781:)
2759:)
2723:)
2672:)
2637:)
2608:)
2559:)
2527:)
2484:)
2423:)
2321:)
2286:)
1901:--
1883:)
1866:)
1844:)
1774:)
1760:)
1743:)
1719:)
1683:)
1644:)
1480:)
1466:)
1446:)
1440:HĐ
1386:)
1347:)
1300:?
1096:)
1072:--
1042:--
1028:)
957:)
875:)
782:)
724:)
709:)
703:HĐ
671:,
559:)
555:•
511:)
507:•
397:)
393:•
340:)
336:•
288:)
284:•
140:•
125:|
106:|
102:|
3540:(
3512:(
3454:(
3414:(
3382::
3378:@
3358:(
3297:(
3257:(
3184:(
3109:(
2996:(
2968::
2964:@
2925:.
2897::
2893:@
2841::
2837:@
2777:(
2755:(
2735::
2731:@
2719:(
2713::
2709:@
2683::
2679:@
2668:(
2648::
2644:@
2633:(
2604:(
2555:(
2523:(
2502::
2498:@
2480:(
2419:(
2317:(
2297::
2293:@
2282:(
2029:(
1978::
1974:@
1898::
1894:@
1879:(
1862:(
1840:(
1821:4
1770:(
1756:(
1739:(
1715:(
1694::
1690:@
1679:(
1655::
1651:@
1640:(
1616::
1612:@
1491::
1487:@
1476:(
1462:(
1442:(
1382:(
1343:(
1241::
1237:@
1156::
1152:@
1107::
1103:@
1092:(
1039::
1035:@
1024:(
953:(
908::
904:@
886::
882:@
871:(
778:(
720:(
705:(
615::
611:@
602:)
598:(
551:(
523::
519:@
503:(
389:(
332:(
308::
304:@
280:(
246::
242:@
231:(
209:(
132:·
129:)
121:(
113:·
110:)
98:(
78:e
71:t
64:v
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.