Jump to content

Talk:Brian Wilson

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by J-Ham2000 (talk | contribs) at 21:37, 7 May 2017 (→‎Photo issue again). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archive
Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2

Grammy award winning

The article's opening sentence used to have the phrase "Grammy award-winning" in it: Brian Douglas Wilson (born June 20, 1942 in Inglewood, California) is a Grammy award-winning American musician, best known as the leader and chief songwriter of the rock group The Beach Boys. In the last several days, the phrase "Grammy award-winning" has been removed twice by User:Indopug, first without explanation and then (after my revert noting the lack of edit summary) with the explanation "POV". Perhaps Indopug meant to reference WP:NPOV. I would like some editor viewpoints to achieve a consensus on whether including the "Grammy award-winning" fact in the opening sentence is a WP:POV (or WP:NPOV) issue. In any event, my view is the fact that Wilson won a Grammy award" speaks to his notibility as a musician and there is no POV or NPOV issue with this fact being in the opening sentence. Thanks, --hulmem (talk) 22:56, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's POV at all... it's more like a merit badge. Or like saying "Martin Scorsese is an Oscar-winning director." The irony is that the acknowledged master of symphonic pop, famous in part for his flawless harmonic vocal arrangements, won his only Grammy for an instrumental. But no matter - it can stay as far as I'm concerned. --Seduisant (talk) 01:36, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with 'Grammy-award winning' (or maybe just 'Grammy winning') in the opening sentence; I don't see how it would be POV at all. It's just an accomplishment of his. (I don't see how his Grammy award is ironic either, but that's another story.) Santa Claus of the Future (talk) 02:34, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's three of us ok with the "Grammy award-winning" language and no objections so I put it back in. --hulmem (talk) 04:25, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is a peacock term. See WP:PEACOCK. It is alright to mention the Grammy later on in the lead ("Wilson won the Grammy for ..."), but to describe Wilson as Grammy-winning even before we mention that he is a musician gives the opening statement a pro-POV flavour. Further, since pretty much every notable musician has won some award or the other, practically every Wikipedia musician can begin with a description of the subject as 'award-winning'. The opening statement should thus be as simple as possible.—indopug (talk) 11:39, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Photo issue again

Hate to bring this up again but the previous concerns were archived. Is there no better photo of Brian Wilson available? This one is not truly terrible; it just makes it look like his nose is being swallowed by the microphone, or that he has a cone on his nose, or something.

The new, superior picture must be uploaded to Commons, clear all the rights issues that come with that, and then linked here. If you just put up any old photo you find, it will be removed. Someone out there has a very-good-to-great photo of Brian Wilson. This is a Wikipedia article about one of the most famous rock musicians in history... let's have a photo that is worthy of that. Thanks! Jusdafax 21:45, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(Collapsed text not relevant to improving the article per WP:TPOC)

I have uploaded a photo that shows the current appearance of Brian Wilson. Another user reverted it back to an eight-year-old black-and-white blurry photo because they didn't like the one I uploaded. Could this user please provide an explanation for his/her action?

Dick Dale

I,d like to see this get to Brian personally.I,m a lifelong fan of surf music-especially Dick Dale.I know him & the Beach Boy,s have done quite a few benefit concerts for other musicians who find themselves in dire straits.Dick had colon cancer in 2008-he was incapacitated for quite a while.His cancer has returned & its bad.I know he,s having a hard time keeping his head above water.Anything that you can do Brian??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.52.238.169 (talk) 23:20, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'Possible Beach Boys 50th anniversary reunion' section pulled out

I have deleted this section as being moot (since Brian Wilson is not reuniting with the Beach Boys) and in any case is covered in the Beach Boys article as well. Jusdafax 18:20, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Other musicians

...is a lengthy, unsourced section filled with tributes. Unencyclopedic and looks cringe-inducingly like an extended blurb/tribute. Would like consensus before deleting. 99.12.241.215 (talk) 20:40, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • It appears some sources have been added in the past few months but I agree the section is over the top. Perhaps it would function better as a separate article. Otherwise I'd look at trimming or eliminating the section as unencyclopedic. Jusdafax 17:06, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I also wanted to start writing something about this section. The section can't stay like this, at least not in this format. This way, it looks like a fanboy-ish (though these probably aren't boys anymore ;-) attempt to show how hot Brian Wilson is. Using one or two of these quotes in a reception section would certainly be alright (the Beach Boys fans will probably want to use McCartney, as already used on several Beach Boys-related articles), but then it's important to also list some negative opinions as well, which this section currently doesn't, because I'm pretty sure there are folks who believe him to be overrated. So, a decent reception section would be alright, but this section is fancruft rubbish that should be removed ASAP. --The Evil IP address (talk) 20:54, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

photo

The photo is plain horrid. He looks in it like Johhny Cash the day before he died. I`m sure a better shot of this pop culture icon exists, can be found and finally used in complience with the laws that apply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.15.237.72 (talk) 16:57, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Brian Wilson portrait by David Anderle.jpg

File:Brian Wilson portrait by David Anderle.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 01:00, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sections

Over the past couple of weeks I've been trying to find a way to properly organize the different biographical sections in a way that doesn't look jumbled. 1967-1972 / 1982-1994 / etc. is accurate, but maybe too dead-on? Separating by...

1940s–1950s
Early life
1960s
Initial career with the Beach Boys
1970s
Mental illness
1980s
Under psychiatric malpractice
1990s–2000s
2010s

...might look most neat. Also to do away with the hyphenated years in-section altogether. --Ilovetopaint (talk) 20:17, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since then I've noticed that the article is written too much in a timely, chronological order for its own good. Looking at other musician articles (like George Harrison) leave me thinking that the article would be a lot better off if scattered information like performances, songwriting, styles, production for other artists, etc. were split off into a "Musicianship" section. Music career could also do better being split between his Beach Boys era and present solo years. Not to mention moving a lot of the early Beach Boys info to its article where it fits more appropriately. I don't know if his Landy stuff should be moved under "Personal life". He was extremely involved with Wilson's music career so I'll just leave it under there. I'll try getting on all the above now; anybody else is open to give input and/or help out.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 03:32, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
While I appreciate your candor, I am going to have to disagree your ideas, to be frank. Wilson's life is fairly well represented as it is in my view. Wilson was the Beach Boys through most of the sixties, but moving material out willy nilly to the Beach Boys article seems like a bad idea to me. Wilson's life is very chronological and one period builds directly on the next... indeed, informs the next. I don't think that the article needs this treatment. Again, I am in disagreement with the proposal to radically reshape the structure of the article, and urge you to rethink your proposal. Jusdafax 04:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I do think that the way it is now, carrying out those suggestions would be reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaally tedious and need a looooooot of context rewriting. You can see what I had in mind at User:Ilovetopaint/sandbox (I only went about a quarter of the way through). "If it ain't broke don't fix it." Everything does look rather unbroken.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 04:31, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

'Experimenting' with drugs

Do we really have to replicate this old media cliché, that is supposed to sanitise dope. I think 'indulging' is a better word. Valetude (talk) 15:39, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Best known for...

Wilson is clearly best known for his work with the Beach Boys. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:15, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No discussion to the contrary, I'm changing it back. - SummerPhD (talk) 22:57, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 26 June 2014

In the "1960s" section (early history of Beach Boys), I find the following. Please insert a comma just before "both". Otherwise, the remark is OK.

>The only songs the group recorded were "Barbie" and "What Is a Young Girl Made Of?" both Morgan compositions. 128.63.16.20 (talk) 20:13, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Adding the comma seemed awkward to me so I reworded the sentence slightly. Does that work? Ivanvector (talk) 20:19, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Try a colon, not a comma, after "two Morgan compositions". The intent of the remark is apparently to name those two Morgan compositions, but a possible (erroneous) interpretation is two Morgan compositions which are UNNAMED, PLUS those two titles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.20 (talk) 22:21, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

use of "the rest of his life"

The last sentence before the header line "Pet Sounds and Smile" is this: >A week after his first LSD trip, Wilson began suffering from auditory hallucinations, persisting for the rest of his life.

I don't know enough about the reference material to suggest a change, but I usually see "the rest of his/her life" either as:

1. referring to a person who has already died

or

2. referring to the future, regarding a condition which will last for the rest of the subject person's life

However, Brian Wilson is living. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.20 (talk) 20:21, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The condition is virtually incurable and is still with him (as of 2013).--Ilovetopaint (talk) 21:52, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it sounded like it was in the past, as though he had already died. I changed it to "which have persisted throughout his life" which seems more current to me. Ivanvector (talk) 21:59, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Much better wording and improves the article, thanks. Jusdafax 22:47, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

possible tinnitus?

Off topic

it's known that people who often work with loud noise can get tinnitus. the result is hearing a sound that does not exist. the person may be confused about what he has, and believe it is a mental problem. the brain can trick the person into trying to interpret the sound.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tinnitus— Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.176.108.8 (talk • contribs) 03:19, June 28, 2014‎

This talk page is for discussing improvements to the article, not for general discussion of the topic. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:03, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wording?

There's a couple of odd wording choices here and there. The "1970's to 1980's" section says "Wilson's reputation suffered as a result of his eccentricities of lore," and the "Landy Interventions" section says the editorial piece for Rolling Stone "included eccentric accounts between Brian and Landy to Felton." What are "eccentricities of lore?" What is an "eccentric account?" I'll let someone else tweak the wording, because I'm not sure I understand what is meant. I'd suggest "Wilson's reputation suffered as a result of his purported eccentricities" and "included bizarre exchanges between Brian and Landy, witnessed by Felton." Or something.Sadiemonster (talk) 04:47, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Addition to lede reverted re: movie release date

I'd suggest we add to the lede that the new Brian Wilson movie "Love and Mercy" was released widely, or nearly widely (480 theaters according to Box Office Mojo .com) in June 2015. The reason for this addition is to ease confusion because the movie has an official 2014 release date. What generally happens in a case like this is that numerous people will try to put the "correct" date in, which they will think is 2015, resulting in confusion. I inserted it in the lede, but was reverted. Again, as it reads now, the movie appears to the uninformed to have been released in 2014. Jusdafax 04:33, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the movie should be mentioned in the lede at all. Ray and Walk the Line aren't mentioned in the Ray Charles and Johnny Cash ledes, and those were much bigger movies. Santa Claus of the Future (talk) 00:49, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think their biopics should be mentioned in their articles. They are pretty significant to their legacy.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 02:16, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In the article, of course. Just not in the lede. Santa Claus of the Future (talk) 02:17, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Unless there is policy or guideline or something along the line of best practices to exclude it, I see no reason why mentioning the film should be excluded from the lede. Because similar articles don't have mention of a biopic on the article subject in the lede is no reason to leave it out (see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS). -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 02:33, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Right -- I meant it should be in the lede.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 02:59, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Shortnin' Bread"

Wilson is praising the song itself, not bragging about his arrangement/performance. Hence, the link to the composition. I slightly altered the name of the album in question because of a scripting quirk. When the article about the album is linked to, the name is correct. Tapered (talk) 09:52, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Brian Wilson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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

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

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:56, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:09, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Brian_Wilson&oldid=779250689"