Talk:"Weird Al" Yankovic/Archive 3

message: This is a copy of an e-mail sent to me as 'A Message From Weird Al'
  Dear Close, Personal Friend Of Al,
  We're very sorry that the new "Weird Al" Yankovic album is taking a little longer than expected to make its way to a record store   
  near you.  We'll let you know as soon as we have a confirmed release date.
  In the meantime, we thought you might like to download a free mp3 of a brand new Weird Al song (which won't be on the album).  Our  
  gift to you, just for being so darn cool.
  You can download the mp3 at www.weirdal.com.  Hope you enjoy it!
  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  This email was sent to *****************@gmail.com
  Replying to this email will not remove you from the mailing list.
  Click http://www.sonybmgemail.com/arch/Remove?msg=*********  if you no longer wish to receive this mailing.
  Click http://www.jiverecords.com/zombaprivacy/adultpriv.html to read our privacy policy.
  This email was sent by:
  Zomba Label Group, 137-139 W 25th Street, New York, NY 10001
  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
209.33.17.220 02:27, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "You're Pitiful" 

message: In the Trivia section, we have:
"Licensing issues for Yankovic's works are some of the most complicated in the music industry. Largely because of his polka-medleys, he sometimes performs works by dozens of artists on a single album. Because of the potentially crippling amount of royalties required for this, his record labels are required to engage in much negotiation and diplomacy."
This doesn't sound right. One, it's the first I've heard of it and there are no references or any other evidence support this. Two, parody and satire are protected under copyright law, so no licensing should be required for Al's works. Three, he does get permission from the original artists for every song and video he releases, but only as a matter of courtesy and respect. He 'could' legally do parodies of all the Queen and Coolio songs ever made whether they want him to or not, but Al doesn't believe in using someone else's work without their permission even if it would be completely legal.
Any objections to removing/substantially editing the passage above?
:From the "Ask Al" Q&As for August, 1999:
::Luke Owen of West Byfleet, Surrey, UK asks: Which bit exactly is the “Ear Booker Polka”?
::Every songwriter in the polka medley is paid based on the percentage of the medley where their song is heard. “The Ear Booker Polka,” basically, is the name given to every single part of the medley that is not directly attributable to another songwriter - that is, if somebody else didn’t write it, I get the credit (and the royalties). Recently the name was changed to “The Way Moby Polka” for accounting reasons.
:For the record, Al is a nice guy, and it's true that satire and parody are protected so he's not required to obtain permission, but if he was to record and release (on a commercially available album) a parody or song-portion in a polka without permission, the owner of the copyright of the original song would then be in their rights to sue for royalties.  They wouldn't be able to sue to prevent the song from existing, but they'd still be able to demand a significant chunk of the profits.  This is why the James Blunt parody got released for free, because he wasn't able to get permission, so he decided to "release" it in such a way as to prevent the whole royalties thing.  So it is true the courtesy and respect is a big deal to Al, it's not the only reason he obtains permission, as he's admitted several times.
:A bit of related trivia, Weezer denied Al permission to use "Buddy Holly" in one of his polkas, so he didn't use it, but it was too late to remove his "thank you" from that album's liner notes. - Ugliness Man 07:35, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Licensing Issues? 

message: Recently the albums section was edited to indicate that no "singles" were released from Poodle Hat.  I think the problem is the definition of the term "single".  In the age of vinyl, there was little question.  When a song was designated as a "single", it was in the record stores as a 7", 45 rpm record, and also sent to radio stations in the same format.  These days, with widespread peer-to-peer use and official label sites offering free streams of current hits, the general public has little use for an actual consumer product featuring only 2 or 3 songs, so "CD singles" are getting less and less common.  And indeed, the song "Couch Potato" was never released, in stores, as a CD single.  It was, however, played on radio stations upon the release of the album, and it was considered by many, in whatever official or unofficial capacity you want to go with, to be the "lead single" from that album.  The prime factor preventing it from being an obvious single was Eminem's reluctance to allow a video to be made.  Since there was no video to give the song Mtv exposure, the label didn't bother putting a whole lot of promotion behind it.
I think the big problem is that, since the definition of "single" in this context can be so vague these days, we won't be able to settle on one specific definition as the "official" meaning of the term for Wikipedia purposes.  Sure, if a song has a video in heavy rotation, a CD single in the stores, and a presence in the Top 40 on mainstream radio, then obviously it's a single.  Sometimes, as with "Couch Potato", it's not so obvious.
I'm not going to bother adding it back to the article right now, I'll just sit back and hope that my pondering prompts a bit of discussion on the term. - Ugliness Man 11:08, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Volcano released tangible (promo) singles for "The Saga Begins" and "It's All About The Pentiums" but nothing for "Couch Potato."  Since Volcano continues to releases tangible singles to this day for other artists, I think that should be the criteria.  -- Elvis 19:28, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Singles 

message: There's far too many of them.  The official site and MySpace, the WOWAY forum and the three directories are fine, but beyond that I think the rest are mostly linkcruft.  Wikipedia isn't a link directory, and WeirdAl.com maintains its own list.  So, I think it's time to start cutting, but I want to see that there's consensus first. --Maxamegalon2000 17:08, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guys, We've Gotta Do Something About the External Links 

message: From the Biography section:
:Yankovic's first show with his entire band (excluding Rubén Valtierra, who joined in 1991) was not successful at all. The audience threw items at Yankovic and his band and they were booed off the stage. After the show, a kid approached Yankovic and asked if he was Weird Al Yankovic. When Yankovic replied that he was, the kid said, "You suck!"
I added a "citation needed" to this anecdote for two reasons.  First of all, it doesn't mention the date that this supposedly happened, not even the year.  Second, even though a date isn't indicated I'm pretty sure that the first show with the full band would've happened in '81 or '82, maybe '83 at the very latest.  That usage of the word "suck" was practically non-existant back then.  I'm not saying I have my doubts that early Yankovic shows got negative responses, Al himself has confirmed that this is the case, but this story seems rather vague, and sounds like of something that somebody had a fuzzy memory of (maybe) reading somewhere. - Ugliness Man 10:57, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This event was described in the Permanent Record booklet, page 22-23. --Happy 18:54, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Al also talked about the show on his Behind The Music. He opened up for the new wave act Missing Persons -- Doc Strange 13:12, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  First show anecdote 

message: There should be something on this page about his wife and his daughter —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.2.234.66 (talk • contribs) .
:The following appears in the biography section:
::Yankovic married Suzanne Krajewski on February 10, 2001. Their daughter, Nina, was born February 11, 2003.
:Seems fairly clear to me. - Ugliness Man 05:32, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wife 

message: Does anyone have a better picture they can post of Al? The image is sized so small that I wouldnt recognize him without the credit.  A face or torso shot of him would be nice, or at least a full body image that will show significantly enlarged when clicked on —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mleinart (talk • contribs) .
I agree with that - I like the picture, but it's fairly low quality, and Al's face isn't very prominent, which is what I thought the point of an indicivual's picture should be - let you see what they look like.  The picture there doesn't terribly do that very well; unfortunately I don't have a suitable replacement.  Plus it should be his current look, not the old school "glasses" Al look.  Dopefish 14:44, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better picture? 

message: I found out via the songs on Bad Hair Day that Weird Al has a slight lisp. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Master50 (talk • contribs) 22:05, 24 September 2006  (UTC)
:I suggest that you listen to "I'm So Sick of You" again!  Gromreaper 13:27, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Al has stated that "I'm So Sick of You" was mostly a tribute to This Year's Model-era Elvis Costello, and Costello had a bit of a lisp in those days (it's nearly impossible to sing "Pump It Up" properly at karoke without spitting), so it was likely intentional. - Ugliness Man 14:03, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I was replying to the original post...I meant to say that I couldn't hear any lisp in ISSOY... I didn't know how to indent or put the whole "previous unsigned comment" thing there.  Gromreaper 01:35, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Gotcha... I didn't notice any lisping, either, I just interjected that theory in case someone else thought there was some... and I fixed up the thread indenting and added one of those unsigned things (click here to check out the markups available for that if you wish). - Ugliness Man 13:22, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lisp 

message: Could someone revise this part?  The mentions of Al's "curt" answers and Rover's attempt to ask unrelated questions seems to make it sound as though Al was being rude to HIM, and seems to want to defend Rover, who shouldn't be defended in this situation!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 162.51.152.80 (talk • contribs) 07:27, 28 September 2006  (UTC)
:How is that?  Gromreaper 02:41, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I REALLY don't think this belongs here anyway.  For one thing, the DJ's never really tried to make Al feel better.  Quite the opposite really.  They kept coming back to the subject, made jokes about the personal tragedy after the interview, and tried to justify their actions.  And frankly, I don't see why it was even brought up at all here.  --Happy 15:42, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In response to this, I believe that Rover was unable to move on due to the fact that Weird Al's quick and unsatisfying answers.  Al decided to dwell on this.  Although I concur with the last post.. why are we discussing this here? Ccmolik 02:04, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rover's Morning Glory 

message: This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of September 29, 2006, compares against the  six good article criteria:
:1. Well written?: Decent, but there could be improvements.
:2. Factually accurate?: It would seem to be accurate, but there are not nearly enough references. For example, in section 2.1.1 (Positive, Reactions from original artists) none of the conversations with Cobain and Jackson are referenced.
:3. Broad in coverage?: Very.
:4. Neutral point of view?: Yes.
:5. Article stability? Not at all. There have been over 50 edits in the past 24 hours.
:6. Images?: None of the images' fair use rationale is explained.
When these issues are addressed, the article can be resubmitted for consideration.  Thanks for your work so far.
---- Cielomobile talk / contribs 05:18, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wait like two weeks after the new album hype (Straight Outta Lynwood) is over and the editing should go down. Michael Greiner 14:27, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Failed "good article" nomination

message: I added some references for the the sections in the Reactions part, but there are still some things like the Cobain journals that need referencing.Gromreaper 12:04, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wait like two weeks after the new album hype (Straight Outta Lynwood) is over and the editing should go down. Michael Greiner 14:27, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Work to be done

message: I think someone should add and refine such an area. It can address things such as the whole "027 only" thing. Just for fun at least. I see no harm in it. --MeridianiGusev 21:31, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Easter eggs, trivia, references, etc.

message: Apparantly lots of people believe that Canadian Idiot is Weird Al's latest single and this song has even made it to the 80-something spot on the Billboards singles 100. Despite this, this song is not a single in the physical manner that it can be bought from a physical store. As far as I can tell, this song is beings sold digitally and this is why it has made it to the charts. But as I've said it is not a physical single though it could be a de facto single. I've been deleting mentions of this song being a single but given that the song is in essence a "digital single", I do not know how it should be treated on this page. Gdo01 01:58, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's sold as part of Straight Outta Lynwood, which is sold in stores. --Mike 21:23, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I know that but for some reason people believe it is a single like White & Nerdy eventhough you cannot actually buy Canadian Idiot by itself. The only other way you can buy Canadian Idiot by itself is online and presumably it has been selling well online for it to warrant a top 100 spot on Billboard. Gdo01 22:26, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I say add it to the chart, then use a footnote to describe the situation. Michael Greiner 03:40, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Canadian Idiot 

message: This is really silly:
Although he has claimed that he had been referred to as "Weird Al" during high school, there is no confirming evidence of this.
err, he's not saying "I invented Calculus". I think him saying so counts as "confirming" evidence in this case. I'm removing the completely misapropros skeptical language. Brentt 04:46, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: No confirming evidence

message: I'm going to add rapping to Weird Al's instruments, because he's proven being a pretty good rapper from such songs like "I Can't Watch This" and "White & Nerdy"... Litis 12:29, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weird Al as a rapper 

message: In the second-last paragraph of the Biography section, is it really fair to mention Nirvana as an example of a parody target that Al's career has outlasted?  I mean, if someone says that they probably wouldn't have lasted much longer than another album or two if Kurt hadn't died, I wouldn't argue, but it's pure speculation.  The point of mentioning artists that Al has "outlasted" is to point out that their music careers basically fizzled and faded due to lack of popularity or other such things.  Nirvana's music, however, continues to sell and get notice in the form of various retrospectives and demo collections that pop up now and then.  Please believe that I'm not saying this from the perspective of a Nirvana fan (which I am), I just think that the comparison isn't quite accurate or fair.  Also consider that there are at least a dozen other artists more suited for this comparison, such as Men Without Hats, [Milli Vanilli]] or Fine Young Cannibals to name but a few. - Ugliness Man 12:47, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And...done.  ~ Gromreaper 06:51, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nirvana 

message: ===Results===
:*It needs more citations. Some paragraphs have no sources.  DONE?
:*In some sections there are some stubby sentences. They need fixing so that the article flow gets better.  DONE?
:*The "Trivia" section is short and listy. Get rid of it, incorporating the information there in the prose of the other sections.  DONE
:*I think the discography is long. For GA this may not be a problem, but in FAC you'll be asked to make a selection with his most important works and make a seperate article, if you want to have all his discography. DONE
:*"Directing career" is stubby for me. I propose you merge it in some other section about his career.  DONE?
:*I also think the the "Notable Television Appearances" should go before "discography". Give us a full image of his whole career (songs, TV etc.) with the right structure of the relevant sections and then go to discography.  DONE
:*Alphabetize categories at the end of the article. DONE--Yannismarou 07:22, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Shows how bored I am...I used Elliott Smith and Elliott Smith discography as a guide for the discography section/article split...hopefully there's no objections?  ~ Gromreaper 12:06, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I think I've done all that...I'm removing "See also" as per above and placing the list here, just in case anyone wants to add it back. ~ Gromreaper 14:04, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I re-added it shortly after with some culling, plus the addition of Allan Sherman, who was curiously lacking from the list. ~ Gromreaper 14:28, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just removed it again seeing a category for parody artists, Category:Parody musicians, making the see also section redundant. Michael Greiner 14:32, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good thinking!  Nominated for featured article status.  ~ Gromreaper 14:57, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review 

message: :*It needs more citations. Some paragraphs have no sources.  DONE?
:*In some sections there are some stubby sentences. They need fixing so that the article flow gets better.  DONE?
:*The "Trivia" section is short and listy. Get rid of it, incorporating the information there in the prose of the other sections.  DONE
:*I think the discography is long. For GA this may not be a problem, but in FAC you'll be asked to make a selection with his most important works and make a seperate article, if you want to have all his discography. DONE
:*"Directing career" is stubby for me. I propose you merge it in some other section about his career.  DONE?
:*I also think the the "Notable Television Appearances" should go before "discography". Give us a full image of his whole career (songs, TV etc.) with the right structure of the relevant sections and then go to discography.  DONE
:*Alphabetize categories at the end of the article. DONE--Yannismarou 07:22, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Results

message: How's about we get cracking ASAP?  I'll start in a few days, when I get time.  Anyone with free time before that can feel free to start now. ~ Gromreaper 11:23, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Shows how bored I am...I used Elliott Smith and Elliott Smith discography as a guide for the discography section/article split...hopefully there's no objections?  ~ Gromreaper 12:06, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I think I've done all that...I'm removing "See also" as per above and placing the list here, just in case anyone wants to add it back. ~ Gromreaper 14:04, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I re-added it shortly after with some culling, plus the addition of Allan Sherman, who was curiously lacking from the list. ~ Gromreaper 14:28, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just removed it again seeing a category for parody artists, Category:Parody musicians, making the see also section redundant. Michael Greiner 14:32, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good thinking!  Nominated for featured article status.  ~ Gromreaper 14:57, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Plans of action

message: It is even better now. Just a few minor remarks for further improvement:
*Since the article got bigger, I think you should also expand a bit the lead per WP:LEAD.
*Throughout the article try not to have stubby paragraphs. They are not nice and, if you try to merge or expand them, you'll find out that not only the layout, the image of the article will be better, but the prose as well.
*Don't re-link is "See also" things you have already linked. For instance, I see that List of singles by "Weird Al" Yankovic and List of songs by "Weird Al" Yankovic are already linked. In general, have in mind that "See also" sections are not so trendy nowadays.--Yannismarou 08:26, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I think I've done all that...I'm removing "See also" as per above and placing the list here, just in case anyone wants to add it back. ~ Gromreaper 14:04, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I re-added it shortly after with some culling, plus the addition of Allan Sherman, who was curiously lacking from the list. ~ Gromreaper 14:28, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just removed it again seeing a category for parody artists, Category:Parody musicians, making the see also section redundant. Michael Greiner 14:32, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good thinking!  Nominated for featured article status.  ~ Gromreaper 14:57, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Further comments

message: In 1988 Yankovic worked with Wendy Carlos (A Clockwork Orange) on a new interpretation of "Peter & the Wolf", released by CBS Records in 1988.  The album also included a tribute to Saint-Saens' "Carnival of the Animals" with poems written by Yankovic.
Source:  http://www.wendycarlos.com/+pwca2.html
:Already mentioned in the full discography page. ~ Gromreaper 06:14, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it is. I remove the editprotected tag. NCurse  work 06:34, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Work with Wendy Carlos 

message: I'm going to suggest we use Americna Standard English on this article. Weird Al is American, and predominantly American in demographics; he isn't widely known outside of North America. Things such as rumour should be rumor, etc. I'm also suggesting American punctuation, where punctuation goes inside quotation marks. ~ UBeR 20:46, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Edit: It appears it was changed from American English to British Emerican, against Wiki policy, by a certain user (23:41, 26 October 2006). ~ UBeR 20:50, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Yeah, this one's a no-brainer.  It was only "reluctantly" that Al's British label even agreed to release his new album. --Maxamegalon2000 21:20, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Yeah, I noticed one day that someone changed from US to British spelling for some reason.  Anyway, if you notice me using British spelling, just edit it...I'm an Aussie and use British spelling unconsciously, so apologies on my behalf.  I'll try to be conscious of the fact it should be US spelling from now on. ~ Gromreaper 03:07, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  American English 

message: I noticed a reference to http://www.weirdalforum.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=4730&view=findpost&p=306317. Forums almost always non-encyclopedic and are listed under Wikipedia:External links as:
:7. Links to blogs, social networking sites (such as MySpace), or discussion forums unless mandated by the article itself.
I'd highly suggest that the link be replaced with another source. thadius856talk 04:57, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The post linked was by the guitarist of Weird Al's band...even with that knowledge, does it need to be taken down? ~ Gromreaper 05:07, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources