Talk:Mitch Hedberg/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Initial comment

11/08/04: Posted the contents of this discussion page to wikiquote — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.86.148.31 (talk) 06:47, 8 November 2004 (UTC)

Disputed

- Can we get rid of the "died of a drug overdose" thing? It's not confirmed and it dishonors Mitch. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.132.10.37 (talk • contribs) 22:09, 12 June 2006 (UTC).

The official report by the New Jersey medical examiner's office cites "multiple drug toxicity" as the cause of death. [1] It's unfortunate, but it's the truth. —chair lunch dinner™ (talk) 03:23, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I feel as though that is not justification for saying he died of a drug overdoes in the first paragraph. I have rarely seen this done with other biographical pages. What about Albert Einstein? I don't see "died of internal bleeding" anywhere in the opening. I, also, feel as though Mitch is being discredited. If noone objects, I'd like to remove that sentence.Jellocube27 14:00, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I object. If Albert Einstein had died at age 37, he, too, would have that fact mentioned in his lead section. Whenever a famous person dies in the prime of their life/popularity at a relatively young age, it is almost always noteworthy enough to mention in the lead section. Especially when the death is relatively recent (as is the case here), and so a large number of people familiar with him may not yet be aware of it. I also find your claim that "Mitch is being discredited" rather bizarre. How does mentioning how someone died "discredit" him or her? Is Mitch less funny now that we know that he's dead? Non sequitur, and irrelevant: an encyclopedia's purpose is to inform. -Silence 14:23, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Allow me to retract my statement, then-- thank you for having corrected my misjudgement. Jellocube27 18:48, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

"At a performance in Phoenix, Arizona in February, Hedberg nearly collapsed on stage and asked the audience for drugs, which he then took live." What's the source on this? I haven't heard this anecdote anywhere else, and out of respect for the deceased I wonder if it ought to be on this page if it can't be corroborated. Savetheclocktower 21:19, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This is a blog review of a Sept. 23rd show that seems to be what's being described on this page, only a couple of months back. Several of the comments seem to back it up, but it's a bit dubious. I changed it to note that several of his preformances in the last year have been marred by noted drug use. --TheGrza 21:54, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)

Alright, this seems to be a different review of the same show, with the same details. I think the story is right, only it's September 23rd, instead of February.

I'm satisfied. Thanks for the quick research. Savetheclocktower 22:07, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I heard a similiar story about Hedberg being disinterested and asking for drugs while doing a show in Chicago at Zanies shortly before his death. --Twintone 16:13, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I was at that show. I left a few minutes before it was over but I can tell you that he wasn't completely intoxicated when he first took the stage... or at least he didn't appear to be. Maybe it took whatever was in his system a little while to "kick in". He was doing his ruitine and then he started to fumble on some of his bits, get distracted, forget what he was talking about, get lines and jokes mixed up/together, etc. At one point he lay down onstage (he probably also "nearly collapsed", but I KNOW he was lying on the stage for a while) and seemed either uninterested or unwilling to get up. I didn't see him take any drugs but that may've happened before I left or maybe I was just covering my eyes when he did it (I'd cover them occasionally for about the last 30 minutes I was there because it was so... I don't know, uncomfortable and embarassing). I don't know if it's worth mentioning or not, but there was a female audience member that basically took physical advantage of him while he was intoxicated. It was..... weird. Ginnna 10:12, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

2005, 3/31, 3:51 eastern: Yep, it looks official now that the news outlets are reporting it. This is textbook proof of rumors spreading over the internet. This site and the IMDB message boards both had people (including myself) speculating about an April Fool's Day Prank. Too Bad.

2005.03.31 9:17 pm greenich time: Comedy Central appears to have an obituary (linked from the their frontpage). I think this hardly something they'd joke about. His official site still doesn't say anything. It lists his upcoming gigs and contact info though. Anybody feel like calling his agent?

This is very suspicious. I hope it's an april fool's day joke. The thing is, I don't know if CNN would even report this if it were true, I don't know if he's famous enough.

2005.03.31 08:30 - Can't find any other source confirmation, but I doubt this is a April Fools Joke. Mitch was scheduled to perform at the Baltimore Improve tonight. Great comedian, what a waste

Right now (Thursday, March 31, 8:30AM eastern US time) only the Howard Stern show is reporting Mitch's death. I can't find anything about it in a google news search. Is this some sort of pre-April Fools joke? --DeanoNightRider 14:01, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Re: Yeah, does anyone know what's going on? By the way, Stern isn't by himself. Monsters in the Morning here in Orlando mentioned it too.

- Still nothing in the news as noon nears. Let's hope Stern will reveal tomorrow on April Fools Day that it was a joke. Maybe Monsters in the Morning merely reported what they heard on Stern. --DeanoNightRider 16:43, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

(Removed entirety of Wikiquote page for sheer superfluosness --TheGrza 22:02, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC))

- At this point, it's been reported that Mitch Hedberg has died of a heart attack (though the actual cause of death is unknown). Do a Google News search for him-there are now plenty of news articles. -Anonymous

Doesn't really seem like his kind of joke, anyway.--Deridolus 09:50, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Website

But, isn't it a little weird? His website has been updated today but still makes no mention of his death. Chad1m 18:38, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Website Now Reporting His Death.

April 1, 2005

To All of Mitch’s Fans,

We are heartbroken to let you know that Mitch passed away on Wednesday, March 30, 2005. He dedicated his life to comedy and bringing joy to his fans. Mitch loved all of you.

We ask that you remember Mitch through his comedy - let him make you laugh, enjoy life and love one another.

The Hedberg Family

JohnJohn

Under the 'Death' section -- "(Since his name was never used in the ads, the company likely felt there was no need to pull the ads after he died.)" Is this true? I go to the http://www.jimmyjohns.com/ humor--ads-radio and listen and in at least three ads Hedberg identifies himself by name.

Quotes Section

There is a link to Wikiquote right next to the quote section, and three quotes should be sufficient for the article. If someone is intrigued, fascinated or interested in learning more, their mouse must move three inches to find a link to an entire collection of his quotes. Wikiquote was invented for just this reason. Please stop arbitrarily adding quotes to the page. --TheGrza 07:25, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)

Quotes Really Necessary?

Do you guys think that the quote section is really necessary? I mean, it's not Theodore Roosevelt-like quotes or anything, and they're just jokes. I think they're best left on WikiQuotes and not on here. Yay? Nay? Chad1m 23:05, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC)

Addendum to my above comments: I've always found that the quotes section on a page is a good indicator of a decent Wikiquote page, which Mitch Hedberg has in spades, and that only three quotes gives some sense, on the page itself, of the humor that is so intergral to the article and understanding the subject. I'm kind of split of removing them, but I'd lean toward no. Just as Teddy R.'s quotes are helpful in understanding the man, so are Mitch's. --TheGrza 17:56, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)

I think that they show of some of the best of his jokes. They should be left as a introduction to the wikiquote; if someone finds those jokes funny than they can then continue on to view the wikiquote. --User:Priest.

The one that was just added, "I don't have a girlfriend, I just know a girl that doesn't know it yet.", I think it properly should be "I don't have a girlfriend, but I know a girl who would be really upset if she heard me say that."Chris 03:29, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

You're right, it was a misquote. But I agree with the posters above that 3 quotes is enough, given that the link to wikiquote is right there and pretty much contains all his jokes, so I removed it instead of correcting it. --TheMidnighters 05:35, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

• The thought occurs that these are "jokes" rather than "quotes" and therefore copyrighted material, certainly intellectual property. Is there a WP policy on this? As a general point, quotes are important but obviously the easiest place for casual contributors to join in and before you know it the page is twice as long and full of misquotes... I've found that removing the quotes section to the talk page on other pages (Don Vito for example) removes a lot of stress when trying to keep things wikified and encyclopedic... ++Deiz 03:55, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

This has been discussed and we are limiting the quotes to three, which has worked rather well. Three quotes gives a good sampling, and the link to Wikiquote will fill any additional need for those who want to read more Hedberg material. Copyright shouldn't be an issue as quotes are fair game — it's not as if we've quoted an entire hour-long show. ⇒ BRossow ^T/_C 03:35, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

• Nice ++Deiz 03:55, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the view expressed by the other editors here and I believe that several quotes by Mitch Hedberg would enhance the information provided in the article and aren't redundant as they provide helpful examples and a good introduction for the WikiQuote page. I am also going to edit the article to put these three recently deleted quotes back in the article. I do not believe that a decision was made to delete them and it goes against the opinions expressed here. If there is a decision made here to delete them then someone could. Ncu s0cc3r (talk) 04:08, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I have trimmed the article again, this time to 5 quotations. I believe the 5 quotations should offer an example of Mitch's common jokes (Paraprosdokian, word play, non sequitor, observational). I doubt we could provide a reasonable set of examples in 3 quotations. If someone else can pick better examples to quote, I'm sure they're out there. I will attempt to make sure that the section doesn't keep growing. Bakkster Man (talk) 14:56, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Weight loss

Some of his friends and colleagues have remarked at how much weight he lost before he died. They postulated that this was due to continuing drug use, and/or worsening heart disease. There are photos to prove it. Is it worth mentioning? - Richardcavell 09:41, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

No. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.176.7 (talk) 20:02, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Death date

Did he die on the 29th or 30th? Both are reported in roughly equal measure. Obviously news broke on the 30th, I guess the inference is that he died over the course of the night and it could have been either?? We still going with the 30th for Mitch Day? Deizio 13:40, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Cause of death

I've just reverted a change to the cause of death. It's well publicized that Mitch had a heart condition, but a drug overdose was the cause of death and the condition a possible factor, rather than the other way round. Sources quoting the medical examiner: USA Today MSNBC MTV.

Mitch Hedberg Day, March 30th (Thursday). Alright. Deizio 23:35, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

First Picture

Doesn't the first picture kind of make Mitch look creepy and weird?

No, you're thinking of his act. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.176.7 (talk) 20:03, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I thought that picture was strange too, anyone have a better one? -GamblinMonkey 22:47, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

POV problem

"Mitch's joke topics rarely, if ever, treaded into smutty or contentious territory, instead focusing largely on deft wordplay, clever non-sequiturs, innocent whimsy, and imaginative "object" observations. Although his stand-up delivery occasionally contained so-called "four-letter words," such language was never central to Hedberg's gags, instead being just exclamation/filler phrases during his stage discourse (his jokes rarely suffered when he performed them on television with the curses omitted - some might argue that they were better for the more universal appeal)." - This section seems to be a bit biased in opposition to "four-letter words" and "smutty" topics. It's fine to state that Mitch's jokes tended to be uncontroversial (though I wouldn't call all of his jokes "clean", per se), but we shouldn't, in the process, convey the POV that it is somehow morally superior to be X rather than Y. References, of course, would help clear this problem up entirely; it's always better to cite evaluations and reviews by reputable sources, rather than review the subject ourselves. -Silence 16:25, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

This Needs To Go

Part of this article states the following:

Shortly after his death, a proposal spread among a number of Internet forums that March 30th should be designated Mitch Hedberg Day, a day when Mitch Hedberg jokes are to be used as often as possible. [2],[3].

While links are provided, they only lead us to two obscure fan forums, one of which, at the very opening of the webpage, features a forum member explaining, to what must be his potentially illerate friends, that "this fucking blows."[2]

So it follows that we obviosuly cannot take the statement seriously. --Pac 03:07, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree, it's pretty non notable, I'll remove it. --TM 17:42, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

First Report Dispute

WIYY was the first to report....they were to have him on the show because he was scheduled to perform in Baltimore that night. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WillC (talk • contribs) 03:55, 15 January 2007 (UTC).

Removing a couple portions, some rewording

Re: My edits to the article today.

In parts, the article reads like a eulogy delivered by his sister. For example:

His onstage persona, though slightly nervous, was always quite endearing. He would happily joke with the audience if they hadn't reacted particularly well to a joke: "That joke's better than you acted. Perhaps it's not, maybe it's dumb, it could be." He was happy to criticise his own weaker jokes, such as his statement on Strategic Grill Locations: "That joke was just a carbon copy of the previous joke." Sometimes he would just simply say "Alright" and the audience would laugh.

That's nice, but it's not encyclopedic. It's fine to say something like "He sometimes joked with the audience when a line was received poorly," but writing about how wonderful he is as though this were an essay doesn't work.

Also, there were a number of references to individual performances that weren't cited. That's original research and has to go as well.

--Aplomado ^talk 23:36, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Influences

Where is the source for his list of influences. Who said that George Carlin was an influence? 72.174.2.252 22:54, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Non sequiturs?? One-liners???

Hi TheHYPO, you second-guessed your correct spelling: non sequitur --- scbomber (only bombs in [[netrek]] 05:14, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Watch his performance on Letterman if you want to be familiarized with him:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=t67mqiziLyY

Definitely not non-sequiters or one-liners. Most all observational comedy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by PyroGamer (talk • contribs) 19:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

I believe the phrase 'non-sequiters' refer to the fact that most of his jokes are completely unreated to the previous joke. For example, in your youtube linked routine, he goes from thinking of something funny at night to bed and breakfasts to manufactured home repo man... non-sequiter. As for one-liners, it could be argued that even many of his longer routines are collections of one- or two-liners. Such as the Fish routine above - each line in the bit is a punchline except the first one. Admittedly the routine you chose is notable built on several of his multi-line routines, though a one/two-liner was included (paraphrased) 'if you understood morse code a tap dancer would drive you crazy.' (with the added second line 'chair the we two? I don't get it'.

If you have either of his CDs, or his TV specials, or saw him live, you'd noticed that there are far more one-liners than on TV specials, for whatever reason. I don't know if this is his reasoning, but I personally think that he had to get the crowd into him before they would 'get' his one-liners (you can see this on the un-cut raw version of his Comedy Central special. It was vary baron when he tried one-liners to start the show. Then they got to know him with his more routined stuff, and his one-liners were received better at the end. On TV, perhaps he felt that they wouldn't go over as well. Perhaps check out this Conan appearance - a few more one-liners - I think a lot of his one-liners also ended up with additional lines added as he worked the jokes. I believe the 'ice cold' joke was originally one or two lines and then he added the beer line. But debatably, each line is a punchline and gets laughs, so it might be said that each line is a one-liner. The '40,000 application' is a one liner with a followup line (that does poorly on this appearance). 'Hippopotamus' and 'fajita cologne', and 'endangered animals' are a one-liners in that performance; the 'dimple' joke is a two liner, as perhaps are the 'belt loops' , and 'magic wands'. TheHYPO 12:48, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Non Sequitor

I wouldnt describe his comedy as non sequitors.

Neither would I, but only because it's spelled sequitur. Many of Hedberg's jokes are very obviously non sequitur. For instance, "I haven't slept for ten days, because that would be way too long." See non sequitur (absurdism). Ari 16:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

That is not a non sequitur, because it does follow. It is a joke based on different meanings of the initial phrase, not disconnected phrases. Skittle (talk) 00:25, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, our own entry phrases it as 'an ... unexpected or absurd turn of plot or dialogue not normally associated with or appropriate to that preceding it.' That does make the 'sleeping joke' an humorous non-sequitur. the_undertow ^talk 05:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. He's famous for his non-sequiturs, that's definitely not something under question. "I saw this wino, he was eating grapes. I was like dude...you have to wait."

Those are not non-sequiturs. You took literally the only sentence from the non sequitur (absurdism) that would seem to support you, out of context. The primary ingredient is a LACK of meaning or explanation. It's all right there in the page. 69.122.244.46 (talk) 14:57, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Claims of Original Research

Please discuss claims of original research here before blindly blanking content. Thanks. SpyMagician 23:23, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Middle Name

I was trying to add his middle name which apparently is not easily found. On http://www.brainyencyclopedia.com/encyclopedia/m/mi/mitch_hedberg.html at the bottom under alternate names, it has Mitchell LeeHedberg. Can anyone confirm? And if so, add it. (I was unaware of how to add it to the "top" of the page...as there is no edit button available

It's on the right, but left of the search bar — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:630:E4:42FD:0:0:6:5F4C (talk) 01:21, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

The Introduction

I changed the introduction almost completely, though I left in th essence of the previous one. I still think it needs improvement but at least it's not too short. Though the whole structure of the lead is a bit messed up now, might try to fix it to a better looking paragraph and change some words when I have the time. --Hst20 07:38, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I have no source but i'm pretty sure it is Lee, I think he may mention it in an act...I don't know maybe someone else can confirm.david what! (talk) 16:48, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Peacock Terms

Another awesome template that alleviates any editing or accountability by explaining things in precise ambiguity. Which terms are peacock terms? Where are the fallacies in this article. Sections, paragraphs, citations - these are all important things that should be discussed when placing this type tag on an article. Please feel free to help us make this article better as templates don't do anything except take up room. I'm sure there's room for great work to be done on this article, but a drive-by picture of a peacock isn't inspiring me. Please use specifics. the_undertow ^talk 20:26, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Earlier I added a note to User: Freshacconci's (who added the template a second time) talk page [3], pretty much repeating what you've said. The user does not seem to have edited since then however.

Please, if you're going to add a template that relates to specific words/phrases, it is pretty standard to point out which exact terms require attention so other editors can address them, or better yet, be bold and actually edit the article yourself, or at least put up cn tags where needed (if applicable). Blanketing an article with generalizing, nonspecific tags and then leaving is pretty unhelpful in my opinion. --TM 00:17, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Observational comedy

Although Observational comedy is mentioned as one of his genres, Mitch Hedberg himself is missing from the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observational_comedy article. I Apologize if this should be on the O.C. article and not here, but I thought people who appreciated Mitch's work would agree with me. Thanks. 87.70.88.207 (talk) 16:06, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Controversy

He obviously needed help. I saw some interviews on youtube where he was clearly under hard drugs such as heroin even to an untrained eye. I wonder if there are sources supporting the notion that it created a controversy the fact that he was allowed to performed by venues without sending him for help. If nobody did anything it's sad. --Leladax (talk) 05:18, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

If clubs rejected comedians for being high, there would be a lot of comics out of work.Comatmebro ^{~Come at me~} 22:26, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

"Do You Believe in Gosh?" in the "Style" section

The last paragraph of the "Style" section is about the above CD. IMHO This is wrong. Maybe it should be on the "Career" section, or a separate new section. Would you agree? Thanks Kvsh5 (talk) 20:47, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

This article...

was mentioned by Jonathan Goldstein on today's episode of the CBC radio program Wiretap. It might be worth keeping an eye on it for a while. On the other hand, CBC listeners are probably not really the vandalizing type!! --Slp1 (talk) 18:52, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

CBC has listeners? Throwaway85 (talk) 10:52, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Letterman Appearances

I have heard him say that he performed on Letterman eight times in one interview and nine times in another, so I assumed he's been on more than the two listed on this page. It says on http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0106053/fullcredits#cast that he appeared 10 times from 1997-2003. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.203.86.65 (talk) 04:42, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Lynn Shawcroft

I removed the link as it redirected back here. Shouldn't the page be deleted instead of having a redirect per [4]?--Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:14, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

This baffles me -- Lynn Shawcroft has a life and career of her own ... yet all references to her redirect to the Mitch Hedberg page. Why??? BayRadioDJ (talk) 22:56, 17 October 2014 (UTC)