Talk:You Can Call Me Al

instrument?

If the bass solo rates mention, why not mention the type of instrument used for the "whistling" solo during the song? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.107.219.92 (talk) 08:56, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

interpretations

Why do people keep deleting the possible interpretations of the song? As long as they are valid, and could be used to understand the song better, who are they hurting? The Beatles' "a Day in the Life" has 3,000 words written about it, many of them speculative; Bohemian Rhapsody has an almost note by note analysis - is this just Paul Simon bashing I'm witnessing here? AshcroftIleum 18:04, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:NOR (no original research). If these interpretations have been published, then they can go in the article with citations (it's the unpublishedness, rather than the speculativeness, that's the problem). It's true that NOR is often poorly enforced on Wikipedia, especially in articles about songs, but since it's a fundamental Wikipedia policy the only solution is to increase, not decrease, enforcement of NOR. --Allen 21:00, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

irony

this isn't the place for me to say it, but it is funny that Al Gore used this song back in his vice presidential bid, since the song (it seems to me {although i wouldn't write this in the article proper, lacking basis, besides my own judgement}) is about a pair of homeless men.

on a more serious note, i don't see anything wrong with wikipedia writers trying to interperet this song, so long as their motives and the limits of their expertise are made clear. this is usually done by titling a section "possible interpretation" as is done in the film articles.

I think it's funny that Al Gore used the song because the song is about a man whose "role model... ducked back down the alley with some roly-poly little bat-faced girl. All along, there were incidents and accidents; there were hints and allegations." AJD (talk) 10:25, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Political history is littered with instances of someone liking one or two lines of a song and using it for campaign purposes without looking deeper into the rest of the lyrics and/or song's meaning. "Born in the USA" by Bruce Springsteen comes to mind is an excellent example 162.210.1.125 (talk) 15:37, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:40379.jpg

Image:40379.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 05:14, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The lyrics describe?

It originally said something like "the lyrics the describe a man who faces an identity crisis, which is resolved when he decides to take a trip to the Third World." Okay, whoever wrote that just might have heard the song once at least ten years ago, but I highly doubt it. I changed the lyrical synopsis to something more general (and accurate), but it'd be nice if someone could expand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.94.236 (talk) 07:50, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is your objection to the previous, more detailed version? What you reduced it to is very vague and omits all mention of the final verse, where the resolution is. AJD (talk) 10:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In an interview for the Classic Albums TV series, Simon explains the meaning of the song, and particular lyrics, with greater specificty than is explained in this article. It is about a man who lacks confidence, and is seeking a relationship for questionable reasons (to shore up confidence, rather than because of love, hence (and now I'm doing OR: "you can be my _bodyguard_" -- bodyguard is juxtaposed to lover.)

On that show, Simon also explicated that the 'short little span of attention' lyric is a circumlocution for 'short little penis,' consistent with subject of the song being someone who has confidence issues. The article should be amended to better explain the meaning of the lyrics, which can be done w/o any OR. Non Curat Lex (talk) 19:20, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong wife

"Betty" in the song is Simon's first wife, Peggy Harper, not Carrie Fisher as stated in the article. Simon says this in interviews promoting the song. If I can find a reference, I will change it. --Jdd204 (talk) 23:50, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Music Video

As per the music video, it appears that Paul intends to lip sync the entire song, but Chevy buds in and steals his thunder. Thus the upset tone at the beginning of the video. I think this is important as per the intended interpretation of the video. I'll let the "professional" editors take sides. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.138.105.38 (talk) 19:02, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Wig?

In the description of the music video it states: A replacement video was conceived partly by Lorne Michaels and directed by Gary Weis, wherein Chevy Chase (wearing a wig to look like Art Garfunkel) lip-synced Simon's vocals, with gestures punctuating the lyrics.[8]

Chevy Chase is not wearing a wig. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uq-gYOrU8bA

The description of how the video plays out seems inaccurate and crass. I will remove the reference to a wig and the description. I will further alter the reference to the VEVO Paul Simon Channel on YouTube surfingus (talk) 22:51, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Marmoset?

When in the video does this allegedly happen? Having been rather familiar with the video before reading this and having not seen this previously I have watched a few times now focusing specifically on the door the entire time it is shown in the video and fail to see this. Can someone confirm that this happens? Even if it does happen, is it actually notable enough to warrant a mention in the article? I'm rather tempted to remove it but want to confirm first. →ClarkCT^Talk @ 01:42, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It came in the article on 13:57, 13 February 2013‎ by 134.167.1.1. I think it is a joke, I watched the video also a few times with focus on the door. - 217.252.73.114 (talk) 23:59, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of uses

I've removed this section, because it seems to be to be a place for every college band that plays this song to mention it. Anybody feel strongly that it needs to go back, and if so, should we be requiring strict third-party sourcing to establish that individual items are worth mentioning? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:17, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Official Video

I changed the choice of video from one uploaded by a fan to the one Paul Simon approved to switch from a possible copyright violation to something that is the artist's. Technically, the fan's addition addition of "Im [sic] Paul Simon" in a small flag is an addition to Simon's official video, and is the official video changed, not the official video itself. People going to the video from this page will already have seen a good picture of Paul Simon (upper right corner), and will know what he looks like. Also, it is a courtesy to the artist to send traffic and hits to their own material, rather than to something uploaded by a fan. A bot reverted the change and I will try to restore it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Al Leluia81 (talk • contribs) 15:59, 8 September 2015 (UTC) I reverted it. Al Leluia81 (talk) 16:18, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Supposed "tribute band" named "Troubled Waters"

   Early in Stephen Colbert's gig as the new Letterman (and rebroadcast the next month), there appeared the apparently put-together-for-the-occasion band Troubled Waters (named for the "Bridge over Troubled Water" song and album), headed by Simon. Colbert addressed him as "Alan" (or "Allen"), eliciting Simon's spoken response, quoting this article's song's lyric (in its variable chorus), "You can call me Al".
   We were saying (perhaps with many other under-committed fans) "Yeah, that does look like Simon .... doesn't it?", but the key to the "riddle" of the "tribute band" is, AFAI can see, a (half-hidden, otherwise misleading) insinuation, "My name isn't really Alan", which could imply either "..., it's just plain Al" or "..., even tho we both know it's really Paul."
   It's likely the "tribute band" is not notable as a topic for an article, but also likely that its appearance deserves a mention in the accompanying article as a cultural reference (to the accompanying article's song) -- which would be linked to (from the Dab section Troubled Waters#See also), e.g.

Troubled Waters, mock Paul Simon tribute band whose leader said "You can call me 'Al'."

to a 1- or 2-sentence description about the Colbert appearance, say a slight fleshing out of

Simon appeared on a Late Show with Steven Colbert episode, as "Alan", leader of a supposed Paul Simon tribute band named "Troubled Waters", who, being addressed as "Alan" by Colbert, responded

You can call me "Al".

--Jerzy•t 07:37, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Appearances in other media section

Though initially unreferenced, I found references and returned the information to this page. The first fact, that this song is the background music in one of the 1989 Parenthood movie trailers is true, and can be heard on YouTube. However, the videos uploaded to YouTube are by fans. If someone can find a good reference there or elsewhere, feel free to add it again. The others are the kind of detail interested readers are looking for. Note that facts are not "notable"; subjects are. Further deletion of this material, now referenced, I would consider vandalism. Also, another site uses this information, so deletion took away their source. Should be okay now. Al Leluia81 (talk) 22:22, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the site that references this Wikipedia article: https://www.tititudorancea.com/z/you_can_call_me_al.htm

This is one reason why it's better to add references than to delete entire sections; other sites have created articles based on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Al Leluia81 (talk Al Leluia81 (talk) 22:27, 10 November 2015 (UTC) [reply]

Gangster rapper, are you sure?

As far as I know he is far from being a gangsta. Szobonyai (talk) 12:56, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]