Talk:Bruce Springsteen/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Awards section

I agree that the old material be examined. Sorry for the confusion! Then, archived if it has been dealt with. In addition, I think that Springsteen should have a section for awards that can open and shut like that of Stevie Wonder. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 19:27, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Kids

"When the children reached school-age in the early 1990s...." - looking at their birth dates, this statement cannot possibly be correct.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:14, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Lead

The lead has been tagged as too short. Any thoughts on this? The word count is 11,264 as of today, for which the MOS suggests "One or two paragraphs" (which is what we have). I can't see anything more to add, beyond that he is married (which I have added). Iadmc (Jubileeclipman) (talk) 06:53, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Bruce Springsteen cancels North Carolina concert for the sake of the LGBT

How is it that this is not mentioned in the article? 173.86.45.90 (talk) https://search.aol.com/aol/search?s_it=sb-top&v_t=loki-tb-sb&q=bruce+springsteen+cancels+North+Carolina+concert — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.86.45.90 (talk) 01:13, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Re Better Days (Bruce Springsteen)

The article Better Days (Bruce Springsteen) is poorly sourced and not clearly notable. please consider if it could be improved or if it should be deleted. Dysklyver 15:28, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Is this a Wikipedia article or an infomercial?

"Each show has been completely restored, remixed and remastered for the highest possible sound quality and are [sic] available for purchase through digital download or CD at live.brucespringsteen.net, where fans can also buy all of Springsteen's live recordings from the High Hopes Tour." Wow! Now tell us about this week's special offers! NicholasNotabene (talk) 01:35, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

 Removed Thank you, - FlightTime (open channel) 01:48, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Significant Legacy Content

It is a deep concern for our community that the article of Bruce Springsteen does not have a 'Legacy' or 'Accolades' section even though all other artists of his stature like Elvis Presley, Paul McCartney and all others do have it. I think this section should have been added a long before though this is not the thing i am presently concerned about. My recent edit was the addition of a very significant info about Bruce Springsteen. Bruce was ranked on no.1 in a list of "Top 25 Best Rock Frontmen (and Women) of all time" published by the most renowned musical platform Billboard. I added this in the lead which was then reverted by Calidum as per MOS:LEADNO. I think this should be in this article because it is of huge importance when somebody is ranked so high by an reliable source. So i ask for a consensus on this issue and my preference on this matter is that the content be added in one of the article's lead paragraphs until a legacy section is added to the article. As soon as a legacy section is formed in the article, one may remove it from the lead and add it in the section itself. Thank you for your kindness to read this long and irritating message. Yours Sincerly 2409:4063:4E13:BC9B:0:0:CA8A:8812 (talk) 04:50, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

So, there are two issues here. I think a legacy section like The_Beatles#Legacy or The_Who#Legacy_and_influence would be fine. I removed your addition [1] because I don't believe a single accolade such as that is appropriate for the lead section of an article, let alone the lead paragraph. Calidum 21:12, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Calidum Yeah i totally understand your point and thats why i didn't just mess up reverting your edits. But i think you can talk to other editors about this situation and construction of a legacy section here. Then maybe i can add this statement in it? 2405:204:A315:E0E2:0:0:1364:40AD (talk) 03:50, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Western Stars

About the new album... it was already completely done for over a year when Bruce did this interview in September 2016. Perhaps interesting to add? https://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/rock/7496105/bruce-springsteen-interview-born-to-run-vanity-fair-book-new-album— Preceding unsigned comment added by Lumdeloo (talk • contribs) 09:17, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Needs more sources; overly detailed

The article needs more sources and is overly detailed. It has been tagged accordingly. SunCrow (talk) 06:16, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

With the exception of a few sources helpfully added by WWGB, nobody appeared to be up for fixing the two huge problems with this article (too much detail; too few sources). The article was painfully long and unwieldy. So I have made substantial edits, removing chunks of unsourced material as well as chunks of sourced material not significant enough to be included in the article. In spite of these major edits, I still count 32 "citation needed" tags. Any help with them would be appreciated. Honestly, I don't know why or how this article was allowed to get to this point in the first place. SunCrow (talk) 06:23, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

I'm aware of some of the reason why it got so out of control. A few years ago, there was a particularly enthusiastic Springsteen fan who insisted on adding every little bit of minutia he could to every Springsteen-related article, including things like lists of songs played in soundchecks, mentions of what songs Springsteen played when he appeared on Jimmy Fallon's TV show, etc. I have no doubt he was well-intentioned, but he clearly didn't understand the difference between a fan site like Greasy Lake or Backstreets.com where people revel in trivia and a site purporting to be an "encyclopedia" (like Wikipedia) where that intense level of detail wasn't necessary. He also didn't seem to have a good sense for standard punctuation rules. Unfortunately, trying to keep up with his revisions to keep things under control got to be too much of a hassle for some of us (for example, if you look at my contributions history overall, you'll see a period of a couple of years where I made no edits to anything simply because I didn't have time due to changed personal circumstances). As I noted in one of my recent edit summaries, I'd like to try to go through and pare some of this down, remove some of the run-on sentences, and clean up some of the sloppy punctuation to make it easier to read, but it'll take more time than I have just now. I'd consider tinkering with it except that as I type this, I'm really just perusing Wikipedia killing time prior to an online seminar I need to attend in 20 minutes, and I don't feel like I can do much with this article in that amount of time. (I'm deliberately not calling out the user in question by username because I feel like doing so might make it seem like a personal attack or some such, and also when I check the article's history I see he's made some edits this summer.) 1995hoo (talk) 13:42, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, 1995hoo. SunCrow (talk) 13:08, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Inconsistent explanation for "The Boss" nickname

In the title it says he earned the nickname because of his energetic performances. Later in the article it says he earned it because he would collect the band fees and distribute payment to the band members. Can we decide on one or the other? --RobertGary1 (talk) 17:08, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

The Promise

Shouldn't 'The Promise' be included somewhere here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.246.252.109 (talk) 10:41, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Sources

The article needs more sources. There are about 30 inline "citation needed" tags. SunCrow (talk) 08:16, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Can someone revert the article?

From looking at today's edit history (May 4), it appears an anonymous user was playing games. Rather than trying to comb through his revisions, I wanted to revert it to the last version prior to the vandalism, but when I did that, it appears Wikipedia didn't save the edit (and I tried it twice). Can someone else please try fixing this? It appears the last valid version was from 17:53 on May 1 by user "Throughthemind." Thanks in advance. 1995hoo (talk) 18:04, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

DWI arrest and Jeep

Looking for consensus on if the November 2020 arrest should be included in the article and also the Jeep The Middle Super Bowl commercial legal ramifications (It is reported the company was never told about the DWI and now lawsuits are being filed. Should this information be included? I vote for inclusion. Whoisjohngalt (talk) 19:10, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Definitely no to the DWI, a minor offence. The Jeep commercial might be included, as it is gaining traction as a "sellout". WWGB (talk) 01:27, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I believe the DUI is relatively trivial. The mere fact that he's a celebrity doesn't make it notable, even though it's been reported on the news (I saw a report on the 6:00 news last night), because thousands of people get charged with DUI every year and, moreover, because it's merely a DUI charge. That's not the same thing as proof. As for possible "legal ramifications," I think there has to be actual proof of any such lawsuits, not merely "it is reported." Mere "reports" arguably violate both WP:NOTNEWS and WP:NOTGOSSIP. I know, of course, that keeping the article clean will be an uphill battle against the people who think every trivial detail of a celebrity's life, including whether he farted at the grocery store the day after eating chili while watching the Super Bowl, qualifies as "notable." If there is actual proof that there's a lawsuit against him by the auto manufacturer, that would be a different matter that could render the incident notable. 1995hoo (talk) 13:01, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

BTW, one follow-up comment, mainly in response to user WWGB's point: In the USA, a DUI is not a "minor offense." It's a big deal for the average person and can cause you serious difficulty in the future in terms of job searching, getting a security clearance, etc. The degree to which it's a problem varies in different parts of the country, but for average people (as opposed to celebrities like Springsteen who don't have to worry about future jobs or security clearances or the like) a DUI is a very serious problem. But it bears noting that being charged with a DUI is not the same thing as being convicted of a DUI. 1995hoo (talk) 18:29, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

AND today CNN reports that the DUI charges have been dropped and that Springsteen pleaded guilty to drinking in public. He paid a $500 fine. This is why you don't rush to include this sort of thing in Wikipedia articles. 1995hoo (talk) 17:32, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

"Podcaster"

A couple of anonymous editors whom I suspect actually to be the same person, though I cannot prove that, are persistently trying to add the word "podcaster" into the first paragraph of this article: "Bruce Frederick Joseph Springsteen (born September 23, 1949) is an American singer, songwriter, podcaster, and musician who is both a solo artist and the leader of the E Street Band." This clearly doesn't belong there even though it's accurate. Springsteen is notable, and is included on Wikipedia, because of his musical career, not because he is releasing (as the article says further down) an eight-installment podcast in which he talks to a former president. I'm not sure whether I would be violating WP:3RR if I continue to revert that change today because I'm not sure whether the addition is coming from the same person and I'm not sure it's really "blatant vandalism." But if we could have an obvious consensus here on the talk page that it's inappropriate, it would be helpful. Can someone point me to the correct Wikipedia guideline explaining why the lead paragraph doesn't need to include this sort of trivial nonsense? 1995hoo (talk) 19:34, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

A relevant section is Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography#Lead section. Including information about some podcast fluff in the lead would be WP:UNDUE. WWGB (talk) 23:35, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Variety

Bruce Springsteen is in talks to sell the rights to his recorded music to Sony Music as well as his publishing catalog, three sources confirm to Variety. Sources tell Variety the talks have been going on for several months; reps for Springsteen, Sony Music and Sony Music Publishing declined or did not respond to requests for comment.

Springsteen, of course, is one of the most successful recording artists of the past 50 years, with 65.5 million album sales in the U.S. alone, according to the RIAA, and a vast song catalog that generates hundreds if not thousands of cover versions every year. Billboard estimated that the Springsteen album catalog generated about $15 million in revenue in 2020, and that his publishing catalog brings in about $7.5 million per year.

Over the decades Springsteen and his manager of nearly 50 years, Jon Landau, have been nothing if not savvy businessmen: In addition to lucrative deals for his publishing and recorded music, Springsteen is one of the most profitable touring acts in history, having raked in more than $840 million in touring dollars between just 2010 and 2019, according to Pollstar — one decade of a nearly 60-year career. Additionally, Springsteen’s team sells dozens of archival live recordings on his website, to which he owns the rights and bypasses record labels completely. Tillywilly17 (talk) 01:58, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

@Tillywilly17: Hi there! Do you have a link to the Variety article? Do you have a specific suggestion for incorporating any of this information into the Wikipedia article? If, in the future, there's a reliable source reporting that he completed the sale, I think that would be worthy of a brief mention. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 02:41, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

https://variety.com/2021/music/news/bruce-springsteen-sell-album-catalog-publishing-sony-music-1235103370/

This is of huge importance in his career, if it goes through. I will keep you posted. fyi, I am an editor at brucebase, so I don't post here re Springsteen, but I will provide any info with sources in here for you guys. Tillywilly17 (talk) 21:36, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Model railroad

Springsteen is a model railroad enthusiast.[2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.5.122.1 (talk) 20:29, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

That article makes no mention of Springsteen being a model railroad enthusiast. Read it again, carefully this time. WWGB (talk) 02:40, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Phenomenon is POV

Bruce Springsteen#1984–1991: Commercial and popular phenomenon

Surely this should read "...success" to be NPOV? — Iadmc♫^talk  16:45, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Instrument

Should piano really be considered a main instrument in the infobox? Springsteen has played piano enough times to consider a semi-primary instrument. 92.3.214.187 (talk) 23:36, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

The infobox is a summary of the article. There is no mention of "piano" within the article.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 23:54, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Because an IP editor has insisted on adding piano twice in the past few days, apparently based on some other IP editor having raised the issue here on the talk page as if that is enough, let me quote what the infobox instructions for musical artists say: "This field is only relevant for individuals. General class(es) of instrument(s) played by the artist (e.g. guitar or violin). Include singing, rapping, beatboxing or scat singing if relevant. Separate multiple entries by using commas, {{Flatlist}} or {{Hlist}}. Instruments listed in the infobox should be limited to only those that the artist is primarily known for using. The instruments infobox parameter is not intended as a WP:COATRACK for every instrument the subject has ever used." (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template%3AInfobox_musical_artist#instrument, with a footnote omitted and boldface added.) The constant desire some people have to add every bit of trivial minutia is a constant problem on Wikipedia and it's why the infobox instructions say not to try to list every last instrument. If it were otherwise, then why stop with piano? Why not add harmonica as well in view of songs like "The Promised Land" or "The River"? 1995hoo (talk) 14:47, 6 March 2023 (UTC)