DZ
DefZone.Net

Kien thuc cong nghe & giai tri

Wiki Article

Talk:Bob Dylan

Nguồn dữ liệu từ Wikipedia, hiển thị bởi DefZone.Net

Xem trên WikipediaBài ngẫu nhiên khác


Bob Dylan's high school yearbook "caption"

[edit]

Was this meant to say that Dylan's stated ambition was to join Little Richard? Or that the yearbook editors guessed that that was his ambition? The way it's written is unclear. YamSuf (talk) 18:25, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All we know is that Hibbing High School Yearbook carried the caption "To join Little Richard." To the best of my knowledge, no major Dylan biography has discussed whether this was written by young Dylan or the Yearbook editors. You can see it here: [1] The curator of this website, Jeff Gold (an acknowledged Dylan expert), interprets it thus: he lists his ambition as "To join Little Richard". Should this be added to the WP article? Mick gold (talk) 13:14, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, yearbook captions are generally (almost always?) written by the yearbook staff and are jocular in a hopefully harmless way. You know -- "Most likely to be a movie star", "Most likely to become a comedian", like that. Some times it's "most likely to", sometimes it's "secret ambition:", what have you. Here they didn't prepend anything, but I figure it's given once as a header: "Most likely..." Avoids repetition. "...to join Little Richard" is a presumably jocular reference to his messing around with and playing rock 'n' roll music.
Anyway, here is a scan which proves it. These captions were not written by the subjects, period. Gold may be a Dylan expert but not an expert on yearbooks it seems. Here is the master image. IMO this is so incontrovertibly sky-is-blue proof that the staff wrote the captionsthat we can use it as a ref. Herostratus (talk) 00:30, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Herostratus
This article currently contains the sentence:
In 1959, Dylan's high school yearbook carried the caption "Robert Zimmerman: to join 'Little Richard'".
Which part of this sentence do you disagree with? Best, Mick gold (talk) 05:42, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's probably OK now IMO, User:Mick gold. It's just that User:YamSuf had said the authorship of the caption should be clarified, and the source has "...he lists his ambition as 'To join Little Richard'..." according to Jeff Gold, whom you say is a Dylan expert. Apparently no biographer has addressed the authorship of the caption, so the putative expert Gold is our only source, so we could and possibly should change it to "In Dylan's 1959 high school yearbook, he captioned his photo with 'Robert Zimmerman: to join 'Little Richard'". You seem to lean in that direction. If we want to clarify authorship. But if we do, it should instead be something like "In 1959, the editors of Dylan's high school yearbook gave his photo the jocular caption "Robert Zimmerman: to join 'Little Richard'" or something ("jocular" because readers outside the United States might think these things are serious predictions). Maybe we should, since User:YamSuf was confused and so probably were others. I dunno. Herostratus (talk)
Thanks Herostratus,
I'm inclined to leave the sentence as it is. It's concise and factually correct.
In this 2011 article on Dylan [2], Michael Gray who is a Dylan authority (author of The Bob Dylan Encyclopedia) wrote:
He hammered out Little Richard numbers on a 1922 Steinway Grand. And when he was leaving school in 1959, he wrote in his high school yearbook under "Ambition": "To join Little Richard."
We simply don’t know whether Zimmerman/Dylan wrote his high school yearbook entry, or whether Hibbing High School editors were being "jocular", as you suggest. So I favor the WP:NPOV version.
Best, Mick gold (talk) 13:17, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:53, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

name

[edit]

Zimmermann is a german name, so can be jewish but he has german ancestors too. 2A00:1E:D906:3601:91B7:2730:4336:F417 (talk) 08:45, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Too long

[edit]

Nikkimaria has posted a tag saying “This article may be too long to read and navigate comfortably. Consider splitting content into sub-articles, condensing it, or adding subheadings. Please discuss this issue on the article's talk page.”

As an initial response, I’ve trimmed some material that seems extraneous to the main narrative of Dylan’s career. I would be interested in Nikkimaria’s opinion about the best way to reduce article length, and other editors’ opinions. It’s 64 years since BD signed with Columbia Records and he’s still operating artistically on many levels. Mick gold (talk) 14:58, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Some of the material could be broken out into additional sub-articles, with a summary in the main article. I agree with you that we don't need extensive coverage of Dylan as a sculptor or artist or writer (although the writing part is already pretty short). Dylan is not known for these things, they are sidelines to his music career. That could be broken out into another article. The Legacy section might also be a good target to summarize and then break out into another article; that might even give some room to expand on the subject further. Brianyoumans (talk) 17:15, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Both of those are good thoughts. I think there is also opportunity to streamline the main text. To give a quick example: Dylan@80. Do we really need to specify the number of sessions and days in addition to speakers? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:00, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for feedback. I've continued to trim article including your suggestion above. Mick gold (talk) 15:48, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Dylan number of records sold, inaccurate info

[edit]

The number of records Bob Dylan has sold world wide. It's been well documented that he has sold in excess of 125 million records world over. Until recently, wikipedia also had the number at 125 million, for some reason that has changed here in the past few weeks. A more accurate number would be over 130 million, since the number 125 has been around for over ten years. He has certainly sold several million in the past 10 years or so. A quick look at billboard, uk record charts will confirm that, please update with the recent estimates ~2025-32145-99 (talk) 17:50, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It would be helpful to find some good source that actually has an estimate on his sales. Having us cobble together an estimate from past numbers and recent sales would be kind of original research, which we should avoid. Brianyoumans (talk) 20:26, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
According to the Bob Dylan Center, Tulsa, OK, Dylan has sold 125 million records worldwide. Added to article with cite. Mick gold (talk) 09:20, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Reverted. bobdylancenter.com isn't an independent or reliable sources for Bob Dylan's record sales TheWikiholic (talk) 18:25, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Brianyoumans Can you explain why you made this revert? — TheWikiholic (talk) 19:09, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted because the change wasn't made without discussion, it was discussed as above. And the change was made by Mick gold, who has been for years the principal editor of this article and not at all someone to put in unreliable material. I will leave it up to Mick to discuss how good of a source the Bob Dylan Center is for things like this.Brianyoumans (talk) 15:12, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Bob Dylan Center is the official archive of Dylan material, supported by the artist and Columbia Records. Everything they have published has been to the highest editorial and curatorial standards. If they publish an online biography of Dylan (as cited) I think it can be regarded as a WP:RS on the life & work of Dylan. Mick gold (talk) 00:56, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For this reason I restored the figure 125 million. TheWikiholic If you think the Bob Dylan Center is publishing false or misleading material on Dylan, can you give an example? Mick gold (talk) 10:44, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Numbers supported by the artist and record labels, like Columbia Records, aren't considered independent or reliable. Record labels are known for inflating artists' sales for promotional purposes, and we don't use sales numbers from such sources on Wikipedia, so you should revert your edit. TheWikiholic (talk) 11:38, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Before reverting, I shall do some further research to try to find a source we can agree on. Mick gold (talk) 13:17, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For what it is worth (not much?), this site] gives a total of about 130M sales if you add up albums and "other LPs". (Dylan is on the second page of listings).Brianyoumans (talk) 19:03, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Chart masters is considered a self-published source and is actually on the list of websites to avoid. TheWikiholic (talk) 20:19, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The figure of 100 million worldwide sales for Bob Dylan seems to be sourced to this 2016 article in The Irish Times. [3]

An article on PBS/Associated Press in 2020 gives a figure of 125 million worldwide sales for Bob Dylan. [4] I’ve added this cite to the article.

According to WP:RSP “There is consensus that the Associated Press is generally reliable. Syndicated reports from the Associated Press that are published in other sources are also considered generally reliable." PBS is also "considered generally reliable by editors".

TheWikiholic Are you suggesting that a 2016 figure from The Irish Times is more authoritative than a 2020 figure from PBS/Associated Press? Mick gold (talk) 07:32, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Even though Associated Press is generally reliable, this particular article looks like PR after the sale of his catalogue to UMG, especially since similar articles with identical wording have appeared in multiple media outlets 1,2,3, 4. --TheWikiholic (talk) 15:42, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure it is in our wheelhouse to judge whether NPR, AP, and other generally reliable sources have done proper fact-checking. Shouldn't our assumption be that they do, unless we have a strong reason to think otherwise? I'm not sure why a figure of 125 million in 2025 is super suspicious given 100 million in 2016. Dylan has continued to be in the public eye, has had several albums out, won the Nobel Prize in 2016, etc. Brianyoumans (talk) 17:07, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Although PBS/Associated Press have been evaluated by Wikipedia Reliable Sources as generally reliable, you make the subjective assertion that "this particular article looks like PR". I would favour an AP report from 2020 over an Irish Times report from 2016 if we're looking for a reliable figure for worldwide record sales by Bob Dylan. Mick gold (talk) 18:11, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed removal of “article too long” tag

[edit]

I’d like to request the removal of the “may be too long to read and navigate comfortably” tag from this article. The notice doesn’t seem appropriate for several reasons: The article is not unusually long for a figure of Bob Dylan’s cultural and historical significance. 

Featured articles on comparable artists (e.g., major 20th-century musicians, songwriters, or cultural icons) often exceed this length or are roughly comparable in size. Given Dylan’s six-decade career, extensive discography, literary output, and global influence, the current article length is proportional to the subject matter.

The tag creates the misleading impression that the article is unwieldy or poorly structured. 

In reality, the page is already well-organized with clear sections, making it easy to navigate even for casual readers. Labelling it as “too long” may discourage readers from engaging with the full content, which is counterproductive on a topic where depth and detail are essential.

Condensing or splitting may actually reduce the article’s clarity. 

Most sections are already concise summaries of major periods or themes in Dylan’s life. Splitting off content into sub-articles could fragment the narrative and make the page harder, not easier, to understand. Unless there is a specific section that demonstrably violates WP:SUMMARY, the tag isn’t warranted.

The tag has been present without accompanying discussion. 

Since the template suggests the issue should be discussed, it would be preferable to either identify concrete proposals for restructuring or remove the tag. As it stands, the article meets the expectations for a comprehensive page on an artist of Dylan’s scale.

For these reasons, I believe the tag should be removed unless there is clear consensus and specific evidence that the article violates Wikipedia’s content length guidelines. Bchungustwerkgod (talk) 18:38, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bchungustwerkgod Discussion of the "Too long" tag has been taking place in this section of Talk page: Talk:Bob_Dylan#Too_long. Mick gold (talk) 00:17, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]