This is an archive of past discussions about "Weird Al" Yankovic. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Can anyone explain the noteworthiness of "Since the mid-1990s, Al has performed annually at the Minnesota State Fair". So what? Is there any significance to this? Is there a story behind it?
Not to trash anyone's work, but an encyclopedia is more of a "this is what's important about topic X" rather than a collection of interesting or obsure facts.
And why does that sentence get it's own paragraph?
Ok, enough complaining. Donutz 00:02, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Wikipedia's own article about the Fair should give some clue. This venue's sort of infamous in the "demented music" community, at least from what I've read over the Usenet. It's also the most affordable way to see Al in person; his performance there might be a free show. (I don't know if this is still true, hence my reluctance to edit the article proper.) It may also just be the fact that most modern musicians don't have a "regular" stop that they play at year in and year out; many acts only play venues based on tour schedules. -- Des Courtney 18:15, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I'm going to add that Al has made a stop at the Puyallup Fair (near Seattle) every summer he's toured since at least the mid-90's. It may be that whomever schedules Al's tour doesn't lose his contacts and relies on some of the same venues every year. --Measure June 28, 2005 21:12 (UTC)
Coolio
So, I came here looking for information on the Weird Al / Coolio badness over "Amish Paradise". Anyone have any info on that? Glenn Willen (Talk) [[]] 20:16, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)
The short of it is that Al talked to one of Coolio's agents or producers to ask permission to parody the song (even though such permission wasn't strictly necessary under fair use copyright laws for parody). The agent/producer/whatever gave Al permission to parody the song without actually asking Coolio himself if it was okay. When Amish Paradise came out, Coolio was offended because he considered Gangsta's Paradise to be an extremely serious and personal work. Al wrote and sent a letter of apology to Coolio, but Coolio never responded. If anyone can come up with a way to fit this info into the article, go right ahead. - Tyler 11:50, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I think an additional issue may be due to an awards show performance where Coolio and Al appeared on the stage together. With Al decked out with the hair style he had on the Bad Hair Day cover, Coolio may have taken it personally, thinking Al was making fun of Coolio's own hair style. I remember seeing some video of the event, but I can't track down a source or citation of when and what show it occured on. -- Des Courtney 18:25 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The outraged Coolio still cashed all the residual checks instead of sending them back, so I doubt he's that mad. --Measure June 29, 2005 21:09 (UTC)
Unless someone has a source on Coolio personally taking the cheques down to the bank (preferably while laughing all the way, I suppose), I think that's a somewhat flippant and POV characterisation to be putting in the article. Perhaps better to say that he "didn't refuse" them, though even that's in danger of implying he somehow should have refused payment, for his own IP. Probably best to omit the phrase entirely, I think. Alai
Disney Channel
For TV appearances, there was a special that ran on the Disney Channel, not sure if it aired on other networks. A video of this is also on the Running with Scissors cd, but edited for time.
Article in "The Onion" playing off this page
The 10 November 2004 issue of the satirical weekly The Onion has a "column" that plays off this article. It begins: "To whomever or whatever is currently in charge of the free encyclopedia and online community portal at Wikipedia.org, I demand that you remove the mask of anonymity and account for the gross oversights to be found on your site. I must take issue with your entry for 'Weird Al' Yankovic--for in allowing it to remain active, you are perpetrating a great injustice." The article should be available online beginning about 24 hours after the date of this post. Tomgally 05:11, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Here's the link: I Must Take Issue With The Wikipedia Entry for 'Weird Al' Yankovic. ... I gotta say, whoever wrote that knows a lot about Weird Al, but relatively little about Wikipedia. Anyone can edit the Weird Al page, so there's not much point in complaining about it. ... I guess that's the joke though. --Carl 00:43, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Check the beginning again. If I read the backstory correctly, the (fictional) writer was banned for flaming on talk pages. So he can't edit the article! (But I agree that some things don't read quite right.) -- Toby Bartels 07:59, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The user Misterhand43 mentioned in the article is actually registered, but he has made no contributions. I don't know if you can see when he registered. Thue | talk 19:37, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
That last comment is especially true because all the omissions the Onion article mentions have since been added to the Weird Al entry. Life portraying art portraying life...
I hope that whovever added the Onion content into the article, checked the facts cited, I wouldn't think that Groznik is a necessarily reliable source. Paul August 17:47, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)
You know you made it when The Onion satirizes you :P --flyhighplato 04:58, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Funny thing is, the article doesn't say a single bad or satirical thing about Wikipedia itself, just us dweebs who write obsessive articles for it =) Jpatokal 07:44, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Well, the alleged writer, Larry Groznik, is a recurring character that parodies obsessive dweebs, not free wiki reference works. So this is only what we should expect. -- Toby Bartels 07:59, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
You think they don't understand Wikipedia? You must not read the mailing lists. Jimbo forwards the occasional email sent to him personally that reads like this, albiet less exaggerated and less funny because they're not kidding. -- Cyrius|✎ 15:52, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Was Al getting LASIK and shaving his moustache really "controversial", as Mr. Groznik claims? Any source for this (e.g. flamewars on Weird Al fansites, etc.)? Gwimpey 19:31, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)
The Onion archives are subscription-based, so the article's only going to be online for three weeks. Salasks 19:51, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)
I realize it's all in fun, but I don't think permanent changes should be/have been made to the article in response to a parody (in other words, fake) complaint in The Onion. They might be innocuous enough, but the suggestions made there weren't done in seriousness, out ouf a desire to improve the article, but rather to poke fun at those who actually want to do so. --Arteitle 00:25, Nov 11, 2004 (UTC)
So are you saying the changes shouldn't be made? It was a parody, but the changes prescribed were real - like the article really should mention that he has four gold and four platinum albums and that he was in all three Naked Gun movies not just the first. I bet a real Weird Al fan who works at the Onion looked at the entry, realized that a lot of changes should be made, realized what a dork he was for realizing that all those changes should be made, and decided to write the parody article rather than make the changes himself. Salasks 01:42, Nov 11, 2004 (UTC)
The Onion article consists of changes a dork would make to an article on Al Yankovic. This particular (parodic) dork has no concept of Al Yankovic's importance or non-importance, nor any concept of what would be important to include in an article on Al Yankovic pitched at a general readership. So clearly said parodic dork's suggestions for changes are not helpful. - Nunh-huh 01:51, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
It never hurts to have more factual information; I'm just saying that we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that the tone of the article was tongue-in-cheek. --Arteitle 01:54, Nov 11, 2004 (UTC)
On the contrary, I think the fact that the Onion article is a satire of Wikipedia pedantism is wholly irrelevant. If the "proposed" additions are factually accurate and if they improve the article, they should be added. They should be evaluated wholly on their own merit. --Shadoks 11:50, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I can't disagree with that. My initial concern was that some Wikipedians might be taking the parody criticism personally, or not recognizing that it was a humor article. --Arteitle 17:56, Nov 12, 2004 (UTC)
I award this article a picture of a barnstar for its immortalization in The Onion. Tempshill 00:31, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I must simply say the delightful fact that there is now (within two days) a serious discussion based on a parody article going on in the exact place that was parodied is so postmodern it makes me want to sing. Yay! Dada at its finest. BarkingDoc
Uh, yeah, well, it's a hoot. Meanwhile, once we all stop singing, would anyone who's edited the article care to comment on Paul August's question? It seems as if just about everything from the Onion spoof has been tossed into the article. The Onion author may have simply invented some of it for the sake of the joke, or he might be a real Yankovic-enthusiast dork who happened in good faith to misremember a factoid or two. It would be nice if the people who've edited would take a moment to mention here some source(s) other than the Onion to back up any of these statements. (Sorry to be such a killjoy, BarkingDoc. You may now resume singing.) JamesMLane 08:51, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The Onion is a respected source of popular artistic criticism, and it's perfectly reasonable to include its commentary on Weird Al, even though it may be delivered through a parodic medium. On the other hand, our article must be about Weird Al, not about Wikipedia's response to the Onion's parodic criticism of Wikipedia's article about Weird Al. If anything, the latter sheds light on Wikipedia, and thus belongs (if anywhere) on Wikipedia. I think that the current body of the article (as I write this) is good; the relevant paragraph focusses on Weird Al's status as a cultural barometer as reported by the Onion, rather than on why the Onion wrote what it did and how Wikipedia reacted to that. (IMO the external link text goes overboard, but it will need to be updated in a few weeks anyway, so I'm not going to lose sleep over it.)
-- Toby Bartels 21:34, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The Onion does include straight criticism, but it also includes jokes and parodies. I wouldn't be surprised if a column like this one included some statements that were false, because The Onion was making fun of the kind of person who would believe them. I strongly suspect that the parts about the author having been banned from Wikipedia are false, so I doubt that the publication is standing behind all the assertions in the article. JamesMLane 22:40, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I'm only referring to citing its opinion commentary, and how much we should mention the Onion in our article. I'm not talking (here) about trusting its facts. -- Toby Bartels 01:45, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I posted on my blog about the weirdness of an Onion article on Weird Al being taken seriously. Check it out; leave a comment; make yourself at home. Salasks 22:39, Nov 11, 2004 (UTC)
I was the one who added all the info from the Onion, on a lark; I didn't check any of it externally (Hey, the Onion's a newspaper, right...?), though a few facts, such as the gold/platinum records if no their exact number, and the Naked Gun appearances, I recognized anyhow. Most of the Onion's gags of this form are astonishingly well-researched (it's worth noting that everything the article said was missing really was missing), but of course some Weird Al fan with more time should look into them. Cheers. -- 136.142.20.124
I respectfully suggest that some Weird Al fan with more time should look into them before they're incorporated into the article. My preference would be a wholesale revert, with the current version preserved on the talk page as a source of possible additions that could be inserted piecemeal when and if they're verified. Apparently, though, most editors are fine with taking "Groznic's" word for it. Am I being too pessimistic? Is there a consensus for a "zero-based editing" approach to the Onion additions? JamesMLane 00:05, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I trust Groznic as much as I'd trust any anonymous editor. (More in fact, since Groznic has a history of pedantic correctness, as 136 alludes to.) But it's not good that the person that actually added the facts here cannot stand behind them with certainty. I propose making a list of the facts and seeing how much we know are true. I'll begin (under a separate heading) with the ones that I myself have checked out. -- Toby Bartels 01:45, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I trust Groznic less. His purpose in writing is to amuse, and The Onion often writes false stuff because it's amusing. Anyway, because I was whining about verification, I did the one about "Smells like Nirvana". JamesMLane 03:12, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I have to say, that Onion article got me thinking. As someone who's read just about all of "Larry Groznic's" columns for The Onion, I sort of wondered why he picked Weird Al, rather than his more customary obessions, which usually fall more into the sci-fi/fantasy genre. Then someone pointed out that all the facts Groznic bitterly complained were missing from the article really were missing (when he could have made up complaints without really damaging the humor of the article for 99% of the audience). Now maybe the real author of the piece didn't pick something more like Deep Space Nine or any one of the myriad Tolkien pages because those pages are so filled with trivial detail that even Larry Groznic could not find oversights. Which begs the question, given the obessive mania and clinical geekitude of this character over such topics, is this a good thing? I'm honestly not sure. -R. fiend 23:56, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The onion talk takes up an enormous portion of this page, and seems to have been sorted out completely. Should we archive this section of the talk page so there is less clutter? alternatively, we could move the onion sections to the bottom of the talk page? --Measure July 5, 2005 21:35 (UTC)
Verification of Onion facts
Weird Al's works include no less than four gold and four platinum records.
136.142.20.124 = 130.49.145.47 spays (07:42, 12 Nov 2004) that he has such records but cannot verify the numbers.
??? Five platinums ("Weird Al" Yankovic in 3-D, Dare to Be Stupid, Even Worse, Bad Hair Day, and Running with Scissors); three additional gold albums ("Weird Al" Yankovic, Off the Deep End, and Alapalooza). Platinum albums are, more or less by definition, gold as well, so that's eight gold, five platimun. Larry Groznic understated matters. They can all be verified at [1]. A fan site here: [2] provides a short list.
"My Bologna" has a B-side called "School Cafeteria".
Verified by WAIS, the Weird Al Information Source: [3]
Dr. Demento put "My Balogna" atop his "Funny Five" list.
Is correct if this list can be trusted. You can also reach that page by clicking on Playlists in the menu of Dr. Demento's official website, followed by clicking on 1979 and then October 14th.
???
The 1981 Placebo EP release of "Another One Rides The Bus" has "Happy Birthday" as its B-side.
The 1981 Placebo EP release of "Another One Rides The Bus" is rare.
Well, according to WAIS, it is a 7" vinyl, which makes it almost rare-by-definition, doesn't it? Beyond that, I don't know how rare rarity has to be to be rare.
I don't know how rare rarity has to be to be rare. Reading the Onion spoof: mildly amusing. Reading this discussion of it: highly amusing. Reading this sentence which comes from a far reality untouchable by satire: just too funny. Oska 06:23, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)
Only 1000 were made. It's considered one of the rarest items among Weird Al collectors. [5]
The paragraph about Dr. Demento's Basement Tapes.
The songs mentioned are on Basement Tapes Vol.s 4, 5, 9, and 7, respectively, according to the discography on this site: [6] and this page ([7]), linked to from Dr. Demento's Official Site.
Nirvana publicly stated that they knew they had "made it" after Yankovic chose to parody "Smells Like Teen Spirit".
I definitely remember the existence of this paradoy, but I can't verify Nirvana's reaction. -- Toby Bartels 01:45, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
???
More precisely, Kurt Cobain said it. [8] I've edited the paragraph accordingly. JamesMLane 03:12, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Weird Al has directed music videos for himself, Hanson, The Black Crowes, and The Jon Spencer Blues Explosion.
Correct according to the IMDb and Launch. Wålberg 08:18, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
???
Weird Al contributed "This Is The Life" to the soundtrack for Johnny Dangerously.
Weird Al contributed a parody of the James Bond title sequences to Spy Hard.
IMDb confirms that Al wrote the the theme song and that the movie spoofed James Bond, but doesn't connect the theme song to Bond. -- Toby Bartels 01:45, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Having seen all 20 official James Bond films as well as Spy Hard, I can assure you that the title sequence in Spy Hard is a parody of James Bond title sequences, and the song is generally in the style of a Bond theme song. IMDB confirms that Weird Al wrote and sung the song, appeared as himself in the title sequence, and directed the title sequence as well. --LostLeviathan 19:48, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Spy Hard was a 1996 Leslie Nielsen vehicle directed by Rick Friedberg.
IMDb confirms all of this. -- Toby Bartels 01:45, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Are you sure the word "vehicle" is applicable? Leslie Nielsen had done several (more successful) films in the same genre previously. I think the Onion article was being tongue-in-cheek with its use of that word. --LostLeviathan 19:48, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Yankovic decided to get LASIK eye surgery and shave off his mustache, and this was controversial.
The cited source confirms the surgery and the shaving but I don't see anything about controversy. Even if we assume that a few fans expressed disappointment, I don't think that would make it a controversy worth reporting. Let Groznic go start his own encyclopedia. JamesMLane 03:12, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The Weird Al Show featured the Hooded Avenger (Brian Haley), Madame Judy (Judy Tenuta), J.B. Toppersmith (Stan Freberg), and Harvey The Wonder Hamster.
IMDb confirms all characters except the Hamster; and also confirms that there was at least a song about the Hamster. -- Toby Bartels 01:45, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The hamster is uncredited because it was simply a hamster. The joke was that it was an ordinary hamster praised as being extraordinary for doing normal hamster things. A picture of him (on the shoulder of someone else) can be found on the official Weird Al site: [9] --LostLeviathan 20:17, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
From his IMDB entry. The second under "Actor - Filmography" and the others under "as Himself - Filmography" [10]
Faux "Weird Al" songs
The paragraph on comedic songs being arbitrarily labeled "Weird Al" on file-sharing networks is certainly both important and relevant, but it doesn't belong under "Criticism," since it's extremely unlikely that Al is in any way responsible for that trend. Maybe it should get its own topic heading? --LostLeviathan 06:13, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Update: I've gone ahead and reorganized everything that used to be under "Criticism"; although there have been some criticisms of Al's lyrics and behavior, the section seemed to be unrelated to those, and so I've divided it up. I also added a Trivia section. --LostLeviathan 00:08, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Removing the info on the TV show
I only removed the information from this article because I created a new The Weird Al Show article for it. Andre (talk) 01:17, Dec 30, 2004 (UTC)
Honor student Al
I heard on tv years ago that he has a degree in architecture from California Polytechnic State University and was an Honor student there.
I believe that he graduated magna cum laude
The Star Wars Cantina
The Star Wars Cantina is not a Weird Al song, and Rueben V. is a member of the band.
Weird Al appeared on Wheel of Fortune, he even made it to the grand prize round (or whatever they call it). I seem to recall him winning and jumping into the host's arms. It was a touching moment that I will soon forget.
Book..
Should Al's book be placed in Other Works or have another section created for it?
I didn't want to make the change without input from regular contributors.
Photo
Could someone add a photo to the little artist tag thing?
NEED REFERENCES
If someone can put in some good references, this could become featured! --Karrmann
