text:
Talk:Bob Dylan/Archive 1

Antechamber

 * Dear Rhobite, concerning the "genius" issue, I'm sorry but "considered by many" does sound odd to my ears. Can we compromise on the word "gift"? After all, a gift is a democratic thing, I have a gift, you have a gift, Bob Dylan has a gift. I'm thinking of the words in Dear Landlord:
 * Now each of us has his own special gift/And you know this was meant to be true/And if you don't underestimate me/I won't underestimate you.
 * Best wishes Mick gold 08:28, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Dear Rhobite, I've made some changes to the Chronicles section which I would be happy to discuss. I feel strongly that Dylan's account of first hearing Robert Johnson, and his analysis of Pirate Jenny by Brecht/Weill are the most revealing accounts Dylan has given us of how he came to unlock his song writing genius. user: Mick gold

 * Thanks for the note. I think the section is very good now. A little worried about calling his song writing "genius". Although we obviously agree that Dylan's songwriting is genius, it isn't a neutral term. Rhobite 22:59, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks for your reponse. Glad we can work together. Dylan's song writing genius is probably the one thing every contributor to this page will agree about. To call it Dylan's song-writing talent seems mealy-mouthed and inadequate. user: Mick gold London 23.04 //10 March 2005

I added a short section regarding the autobiography. I am happy to defend its inclusion, should anyone object.

I do question the list of Dylan's "best" songs as voted upon by a certain subset of his fans. I do not see the objective role this plays, especially in its position following a list of verifiable "most famous" songs. user: barry21

Much of this article appears to be derived from:

http://www.malaspina.com/site/person_434.asp

Do we have copyright permission for this? user:sjc

They have "Adapted from wikipedia". Not a very big attribution in the link-back and it actually appears to be the article itself. user:sjc

 * Holy living . Someone copied "my" article.  -- User:GWO

Yep, they got from here, not the other way around, and they attribute it, so it's completely legit on their part. --LDC

 * Shouldn't their link-back be active? I clicked on it and nothing happened. --mav

 * Worked OK for me mav. user:sjc

Somebody came in and changed the quote "What is this shit?" to "Who doesn't like Bob Dylan?" Since that person also created some nonsense articles, I am dubious about the change, but I also know nothing about the Rolling Stone quote so I am not changing it back, but perhaps it should be restored.
 * The new version was wrong. Its been reverted' -- User:GWO

Made mild changes to a few phrases, added a few mostly neutral statements, re-ordered and expanded the most famous songs list, added a 'best songs' list. Hope this is ok. I'm new here. Please let me know if I've broken any unstated rules. user:JDG - I made changes to the *fueled by drugs* line to *fueled by inner poetic vision*.The fueled by drugs line is based on speculation and not fact.The line also gave me the impression that without the use of drugs Bob wouldn't have written some of his best works, which (sadly) takes away from his poetic genius. -patti

I restored the 'fueled by drugs' statement but modified it with 'some say fueled by drugs'. I think patti's change wasn't too fitting. If she knew the drug thing to be untrue, it would have been better to simply remove the reference without substituting an unrelated phrase for it. However, there's little doubt Dylan used drugs pretty extensively in those days. Whether the lyrics were 'fueled' by them is a debate readers ought to know about. User:JDG - I know Bob did drugs .The word *fueled* is a bit harsh. Upon reading the sentence I get the idea that drugs might have taken a larger part in the creative process than creativity itself.
 * I wrote the original sentence (I think. It certainly reads like one of mine), and that is certainly not what I intended.  Dylan's creative burst was from within himself, but it was the drugs that enabled him to maintain such a sustained burst without collapsing (or, at least, delaying the inevitable crash).  I meant fuelled a quite literal sense: it was what enabled him to keep going.  Having said that, I've absolutely no problem with the rewrites... -- User:GWO

I think one might mistake the intended surreal artform for spur of the moment, drug induced visuals. The debate among Dylan fans is whether or not certain phrases are drug references. To think a brillant collection of works like Dylan's is *fueled* by drugs is a gross misunderstanding of drugs.

patti - well patti, I hope you can live with the 'some say' modification user:JDG

Hm, this article has some POV issues both pro- and con-, as far as I can see. Dare I step into the fray? Koyaanis Qatsi 19:03 21 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Yeah, I think there are som POV issues here. Also someone put a weasel word in the very first line with is widely regarded as perhaps America's greatest popular songwriter born in the Twentieth Century. That "perhaps" has no business being there. I hate "one of ... greatest" constructions, but even that's better, imo.

 * Could one of you expand on possible POV issues? Is it the 'greatest popular songwriter' bit, something else or something in addition to that? JDG 17:29, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * Much of his best work... strikes me as suggesting a very definite point of view. Anyway, it's still a great article.  -- Tlotoxl 17:45, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)

The first two paragraphs struck me as general material that would serve better as a preamble, rather than as part of the 'Beginnings' section. I've also shifted the picture to the top of the article. If people really hate it like that, then move it back by all means, but it looks smarter to me. R Lowry 15:07, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * Well, for the record, those first two paragraphs were the original stub article, before I added a much longer, chronological article beneath (most of which comprises what is now this article.) Thats why it seems disjointed, it is. FWIW, I think it works well as a preamble, as you've arranged it. -- GWO 18:27, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * That's fair enough then. I can see how that came about. Glad you prefer the change. R Lowry 00:06, 23 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * I would like to formally apologize for any insensitivity I may have show to the work of others in my substantial edit of the Dylan page. I think that it is a function of both overzealousness as a new Wikipedia reader, and cockiness (at least in the realm of Dylan) which I became aware of only AFTER the edit.

I am still unsure about the 'most famous' and opposed the the 'best' lists. 'Most famous' can have some objective basis, if the songs so designated are accompanied by Billboard chart positions or lists of how many artists have subsequently covered them, but it is shaky ground. "Knockin' On Heaven's Door" certainly did better for Guns 'N' Roses than for Bob.

 * I have to agree. "America's greatest songwriter" would depend upon a majority of Americans knowing who he is, and few people I know have heard of the guy. Perhaps "one of America's greatest songwriters" wou;d work better? --b. Touch 13:20, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

To deem any subset of his output as the best is much more difficult to argue objectively. To his record label, the best songs would be the most famous, as they probably made the most money. To an English professor nominating Dylan for a Nobel, the complexity of thought and construction might determine the song's quality. To a fan, the 1976 version of a 1965 compostion might bring it new life and raise it in that fan's esteem.

I understand the drive to include such a list, but I am convinced of neither its basis or value. Actually, I think the list is inappropriate for reasons similar to the headings that I took from his lyrics. If it is not a fanzine, then the article should not include a section which will be a cause for debate. Along with the authors before me, I did try to include the most famous or best (or whatever they are) songs within the body of the text.

 * It seems the Wiki style to include a list of singles & chart positions for musicians. Most of the other articles for musical acts feature such lists. --b. Touch 13:20, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The "fueled" by drugs line can be defended. By 1965, Dylan was a full-on speed freak. This does not diminish the songs of that period; drugs do have a long and noble history in the arts. Furthermore, meth cannot put together a thought, strum a guitar, or sing a note. It can however, occupy an important postition in the life of the artist, supplanting meals at times. The speed use was evidenced in his demeanor in interviews from that time, the sharpening features of his face as he lost weight, and second-hand accounts from the likes of Allen Ginsberg and Robbie Robertson. I think that the word 'fueled' was the sticking point; I never meant to suggest that a fuel somehow guided the inspiration and brilliance of his writing.

I am really sorry for all the toes that I now see I stomped on. I hope I have cleared up some of the mess I made. (To be honest, this is the first time I have visited this 'talk' page, as I didn't even know about it then.) I would be happy to discuss any of my points further if necessary. Barry21 2/19/04 15:45

I also made a small addition in the text concerning The Basement Tapes and John Wesley Harding. I think it might be useful to highlight Dylan's self-imposed exile from the psychedelia he helped create. There is not enough said about Dylan influencing The Beatles on Revolver and beyond. Revolver is clearly referenced on both "Blonde on Blonde" and The Beach Boys' "Pet Sounds." Paul McCartney has said the "Sgt. Pepper" was the Beatles' effort to match Brian Wilson's brilliance. These guys tried to one-up each other with each release, and then Dylan took himself out of the game with JWH. He seemed to derive more pleasure from stern Biblical allegory than from LSD, Maharishi, or sandboxes in the living room. Barry 21 2/19/04 16:08

One more thing... the documentary is called "Dont Look Back". I don't know why, but they left out the apostrophe. Barry21 2/19/04 16:28

 * Well Barry, you've made quite a few worthy additions. Unfortunately you've also deleted quite a few sentences and phrases which certainly belonged. Also, proofreading isn't a particular strength of yours (example: "His 1978 album Street Legal was well reviewed and lyrically one of his most complex and absorbing, although its production was uncharacteristacally intrusive."). Have you discovered the PREVIEW button yet? You should preview all your changes carefully before committing them... On the whole I think the article will benefit from your coming around, but GWO and I and others will have to wade through it with pruning hooks. JDG 21:34, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

This article is beginning to suffer from the obsessive detail beloved of devotees. I urge future contributors to stay away from factoids and tidbits and concentrate instead on saying something incisive about the music and its importance.JDG 21:01, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be a better idea to have an actual photo of Bob Dylan, as opposed to some portrait of him? Shakeer 05:39, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * We had a pic for a while but somebody removed it due to copyright issues. I'm pretty sure it was ok under fair use but haven't got around to checking it out. Actually this portrait is sort of growing on me, and it's probably better to have an image from his later years.JDG 18:57, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I'd like to suggest a convention for album and song titles. Album titles should be put in normal quotation marks while song titles should be italicized. I think it helps the look of the text. I've done quite a few but many more need to be changed. JDG 19:21, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * A convention already exists, and its the other way round. Italics for albums title, plain text and double quotes for song titles.

How did this article get Featured Article status when the photo would be an obvious copyvio? Crculver 16:28, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Because the photo was added today, as the slightest check would tell...

 * I notice that one of the copyrighted photos (The cover to The Essential Bob Dylan) is still being used on the Main Page as a link to this article. Presumably it shouldn't be there either... is there anything that can be done about getting it removed? R Lowry 19:08, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * An album cover is fair use. The previous image that was on the front page is the odd vector art illustration of Bob, which has no upload summary, and may not be fair use/PD/Creative Commons. If you want proof album covers are fair use, WikiProject Albums is the place to go, under the heading Album cover. -- user:zanimum
 * Thats not proof, its opinion. Big difference.
 * It's not opinion, its policy. I could see "That's not proof, its interpretation of law.", but even still, its the common standard. If you want to debate, don't do it here. Fair use backs the page up. Sign your posts. -- user:zanimum
 * Fair use backs the page up.  It does no such thing. It merely lists albums as one case where fair use may apply.  I refer you to this -- http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2004-February/014457.html -- for a more reasoned response.  PS : I'll sign what I choose to sign, thanks.

Either way, a record cover is 100% more legitimate than an image by "T. Ho", uploaded by a user who hasn't done anything else on the English Wikipedia, other than upload this file and add it to the article. This image is now listed on Possible copyright infringements. -- user:zanimum
 * Fair Enough. Can you list it add Hideously ugly pictures that add nothing to the article, too.

Well, the album cover ain't hideous but it's all wrong anyway. Why have the cover of a particular album, especially one that carries the album title, as the showcase image for the entire article? I don't think T. Ho's vector portait is that bad, but would prefer it down at the "Hard-Working Elder Statesman" section. Can somebody find a decent fair-use photo, preferably from `65 or `66 as this was Dylan's height? JDG 20:36, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
 * There was one in this article once (the classic half-lit face photo), but it was removed due to copyright concerns. GWO

Sleeping in subways?
The part about sleeping in the subways comes from the guardian article with a 100-point dylan trivia in it. It's available on the Internet even, or at least used to be. --Lussmu 12:50, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * That's not really enough. The Guardian has a well deserved reputation for inaccuracy, and their fact checking -- in the jokier sections in particular -- is laughable. I can't begin to count the number of demonstrably untrue things I've read in G2.  I'm reverting, until you can come up with a decent secondary (or better, primary) source). -- GWO 14:16, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Ok. Hey, it's not my job to make this a good encyclopedia, I just try to do my part and if you think my sources don't count, it's OK. This is just kind of dull, if regularly cited literary sources aren't counted.
 * Besides, you'd have a hell of a job cleaning all the guardian links and citations from all the other wikipedia articles. --Lussmu 23:03, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * You don't make a good encyclopedia by inserting apocryphal from uninformed tertiary sources. I've read plenty of Dylan biogs, and none mentions him sleeping in subways -- GWO

List albums?
Should we just list all the Bob Dylan albums? 'Recommended' is a POV issue, I personnaly like 'Hard Rain' very much. Can I just add a headline dicographies? --georingo 10:51, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

"Loyal and Obsessive"?
Umm... Isn't "Obsessive" (Re: "Loyal and Obsessive Fanbase") kind of POV? -Thorns among our leaves 17:36, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Recent picture
I think the article needs a more recent picture of Dylan in addition to this one of when he was like 20. Mlessard 03:38, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

POV probs
Would anyone care to look at the Chronicles Vol. 1 section and remove the POV? Filiocht 15:43, Dec 2, 2004 (UTC)

 * Other sections need POV work too. It's very hard to write about an artist neutrally, but in some places the article doesn't even attempt to be neutral. Calling the "Dylan" album appalling is unnecessary, the Masked & Anonymous paragraph has a little POV, etc. I think this article is featured quality but there are too many value judgments here. Rhobite 04:00, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

Sorry!
Is it advisable to post potential addtions here first for vetting? Also - I would like to discuss with you POV problems in order to avoid them in the future; they are not jumping out at me yet! barry21 december 2 10:53 am EST

THATS A DISCRACE!!!! BOB DYLAN WAS A GREAT ARTIST!!!!

Update
Took a bit of POV out of Oh Mercy description. bgk 05:22, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Neutrality
I hate to respark an old debate, but I think the neutrality needs to be considered in this article. The section on Dylan's recent tours is particularly slanted, as I (and many others) agree that he isn't performing as well lately. With that said, I love Dylan (I, personally, think he is the greatest living artist in the world today) but the neutrality of the article is something to consider. I'm going to clean up the paragraph about his recent concerts right now, but if there's any objection we can revert. Gsgeorge 06:44, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * I like the additions you made. I am a large fan of his, but I personally don't think his concerts these days compare to in the 60's and 70's. however, when you compare them to his 80s live stuff...=P But yeah, good changes. SECProto 16:06, Jan 5, 2005 (UTC)

Image removal
Why was Image:dylan_jams_with_campbell.jpg removed from the article under the "Recent live performances" section? Gsgeorge 05:36, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Reference to other famous song-writers
I think the reference to other song writers in the first paragraph is completely unnecessary and pointless. It seems someone is simply trying to draw attention to songwriters they admire. Note that the pages of these writers don't have links back to Dylan's page. I think this should be removed as these artists have no link to Dylan whatsoever other than being the same profession (they aren't even the same time period or music genre). Posted by Zoso Jade
 * Agreed. I've removed that sentence. Taco Deposit | Talk-o to Taco 22:23, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

 * Totally disagree. The reference to the other great American songwriters through the centuries is essential in conveying to the reader just how esteemed Dylan is. Your deletion leaves the impression that Dylan ranks somewhere near the top of his generation, among the Carole Kings, Diane Warrens, Neil Youngs and Kris Kristoffersons. This is a misleading impression. By consensus, Dylan is considered to be in a class of his own-- a consensus fully shared by almost all other contemporary songwriters. The best way to convey this is to list him among the nonpareils of preceding generations. In fact, the Stephen Foster-->Woody Guthrie-->Bob Dylan lineage constitutes the main trunk of American song from the mid 1800s to the present. Removing the expression of this lineage seriously diminishes the entire article... The primary author of this long-Featured article is GWO. I have been the secondary author. We will need more than the whim of Zoso Jade and TacoDeposit to overturn this long accepted intro paragraph. Reinstating references. JDG 00:04, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * First of all, nothing was done on my whim. I stated an opinion.  Second of all, I do not believe that in order to convey Dylan's status as premiere song-writer of his generation requires premieres of other generations to be included at the top of his article.  If it were to be referenced somewhere else later in the article that could be understandable, but it's place in the first paragraph of Dylan's page implies some sort of strong link between the writers when none really exists.  Note, Bill Gates' first paragraph has no reference to, say, John Rockerfeller and rightly so.  Third of all, if it is necessary to state the consensus that Dylan is in a class of his own for his generation it is probably less misleading to overtly state this fact than to simply list him with other writers who the average reader is less likely to have heard of than Dylan himself.Zoso Jade

 * Sorry if my tone was a bit brusque-- I didn't mean it to be. But I must continue to (respectfully) disagree. I think if you were to look into the matter more you would be surprised at how consciously Dylan, and even certain other contemporary songwriters who are basically thought of as "rockers" by John Q. Public, have considered the past greats and the continuum of American song. Even before he seriously began writing his own songs, Dylan had made an informal but intense study of Stephen Foster's works, as well as Robert Johnson's and Kurt Weill's. And it's well known he all but patterned himself on Guthrie. You say it's wrong to imply "some sort of strong link between the writers when none really exists". I'd say the phrase "strong link" is an understatement. The Foster->Guthrie->Dylan continuum is beyond strong-- it's fundamental and irreducible and Dylan was aware of it the whole time (check out Chronicles Vol. 1). JDG 05:58, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Just finished reading that book and I do not recall any mention of Foster; Weill/Brecht yes, but they are hardly American. Filiocht 09:44, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

 * See (http://www.calendarlive.com/music/pop/cl-ca-dylan04apr04,0,3583678.story) particularly:"'It's only natural to pattern yourself after someone,' [Dylan] says, opening a door on a subject that has long been off-limits to reporters: his songwriting process. 'If I wanted to be a painter, I might think about trying to be like Van Gogh, or if I was an actor, act like Laurence Olivier. If I was an architect, there's Frank Gehry. But you can't just copy somebody. If you like someone's work, the important thing is to be exposed to everything that person has been exposed to. Anyone who wants to be a songwriter should listen to as much folk music as they can, study the form and structure of stuff that has been around for 100 years. I go back to Stephen Foster.'"JDG 04:40, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Interesting, in that throwaway style he often uses in interviews, but not exactly a quote from Chronicles, is it? Filiocht 08:30, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * Nope not from Chronicles but you can find statements by him on Foster going back to the 60s. I expect Chronicles Vol. 2 will fill the official void, in addition to his recent contribution to a Stephen Foster tribute album. JDG
 * I think what's needed is a ==Background and influences== section, covering the musicians and writers Dylan has acknowledged a debt to: Gutrie, Ramblin' Jack Elliot, Foster, Weill/Brecht, T.S. Eliot, Harry Belafonte, The Clancy Brothers, Charlie Patton, Robert Johnson, various Beats, Dave Von Ronk, Ma Raney, Dominic Behan, the Cash/Carter clan, French symbolism, and so on. This would add to the article by 'placing' Dylan's work in a broader context of both American and Folk music and 'modern' poetry. Filiocht 10:06, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I'll float the idea to GWO who really deserves first dibs at major new section. JDG

Mention of Jakob Dylan
I was trying to figure out a place to mention Bob's son, but it doesn't seem to obviously fit anywhere. Any ideas on where it can be worked in? --Improv 22:16, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I personally don't think it's necessary unless all his children are listed somewhere. Bob should be at least mentioned on Jakob's page, but not necessarily vice versa. Tix 09:10, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

POV and "widely regarded as America's greatest living popular songwriter"
BlankFaze changed the line "[Dylan is] widely regarded as America's greatest living popular songwriter" to "[Dylan is] widely regarded as one of America's greatest living popular songwriters". At first glance it looks like a laudably NPOV edit. But in fact it's just a watering down of an already NPOV statement. And the act of watering down detracts from the article and its ability to convey just how strongly Americans of the post-WWII generation feel that Mr. Dylan is in a class of one. This is not fan stuff. It's just accurately portraying the consensus of a generation on one of its most important artists.

How can the line "[Dylan is] widely regarded as America's greatest living popular songwriter" be NPOV already? The key is the word "widely". Yes there are some who would not give Dylan this title. They are among the narrow strip of people with opinions on the matter who would choose someone else. The others (the great majority) are expressed in that phrase "widely regarded". That is all the qualification the statement needs to be NPOV. It is not the writer's POV, it's an accurate reporting of the American public's POV. Let's not doggedly try to level everybody out. Give greatness, and great renown, its due in articles and don't be ashamed of it.

If you find yourself disagreeing, please remind yourself that we are talking here strictly about songwriters, not singer/songwriters or performers or recording artists. This is not Bob Dylan vs. Aerosmith or 50 Cent or Madonna. It is Bob Dylan compared to other crafters of original lyrics and melodies. It makes no statement on the rank of his own recordings or live performances. Now, who will you seriously put up with Dylan since 1950 as a lyricist and tune composer? Remember also that we're talking about lifetime output. JDG 07:42, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * The statement at current is most definitely not NPOV. I don't see how you can call any statement that refers to a person as the one and undisputed "greatest" of anything NPOV.  I don't think he is "widely regarded" as America's greatest living songwriter.  A lot of people can't stand him.  I know some people that think he's terrible.  That statement has to be NPOVed. BLANKFAZE | (что??) 07:55, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * You misread the sentence. If the sentence read "he is America's greatest living songwriter", THAT would be POV. Saying "he is widely regarded as" is both NPOV and true. Yes, some people can't stand him. They are far outnumbered by those who belive him to be the greatest songwriting talent of his generation and nearby generations. Are you going to force me to cite surveys and polls to back up something so obviously true? Citations for common knowledge are tiresome and just act as sludge in an article. JDG ADDED: Ok, you just go on reverting despite having no real argument about the numbers involved. I'll let it stand until I have time to bring in a mediator. (JDG)

 * "... Americans of the post-WWII generation" don't alone make up "widely". Is Dylan widely regarded as the best in Japan? Russia? India? The rest of the entire world? If so, do cite. If not, accept NPOV. - Vague | Rant 10:33, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)

 * We're talking about the estimation of an American artist by other Americans as ranked among Americans, though there'e no doubt of the tally among non-Americans also (those plugged into American culture enough to have an opinion at all, of course). Would they say "Dylan is the best songwriter in the world?" No. Would they say he is the greatest living American songwriter?" Yes, and that's what the pre-Blankfaze article said... You guys aren't using your heads. Come up with even one songwriter (not "singer", not "rock star", not "musician", not "performer") that can be mentioned in the same breath as Dylan for a body of original songs. You simply can't. But whatever. This is one of Wikipedia's big weaknesses and it will never change (blandness and timidity in all non-sci/tech/history topics). Have it your way. JDG 16:53, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't think anyone except you wants to argue about Dylan's merits. Arguments like this one are why we don't get into superlatives and peacock terms. Let the reader judge for himself - yes, even in art topics. I agree with Blankfaze. Rhobite 07:22, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

 * This makes two Admins unable to see the difference between reporting a widespread POV in an article and inserting an editor's POV in an article. A worrisome trend. JDG 02:14, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * We don't have any more control over the content of this article than you do. Please don't bring adminship into this. You brought up an issue, and several people expressed their disagreement. To answer your previous question, Bruce Springsteen and Paul Simon come to mind. Joni Mitchell and Neil Young if you count Canada (hey, restricting it to America is pretty arbitrary). Whether one of these artists is "widely regarded as America's greatest living popular songwriter" is unknowable, and discussing this is pointless. I'm not going to discuss the merits of any of these artists - I just want to point out that many people would disagree with the unqualified statement that Dylan is widely regarded as the best. Qualifying the statement doesn't detract from the article, nor does it signal the death of Wikipedia's boldness. Rhobite 03:46, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)

 * The above NPOV point may seem reasonable in the abstract, but seems like a silly position in the context of what's actually been written by music and literary critics. I'm a big fan of Springsteen, and also of Simon, Mitchell and Young.  And if a vote for greatest were taken, I suppose each would get a few votes; ever fan is entitled to an opinion.  But to put them in the same league as Dylan in terms of the mass of critical opinion about who is the greatest living American songwriter is silly.  I mean let's get real. We can argue about whether Dylan actually is the greatest, but I don't think there's really any argument that he is widely viewed as such.  The fact that some would disagree about his merits does not change this; the fact that some think he's terrible doesn't change this.  To argue that one has to be universally viewed as such before one can be objectively said to be widely viewed as such really would be a worrying trend for Wikipedia to go down.  Dylan's songs have been covered far more widely than any of the above, far, far more has been written about them, he's been more influential, and so forth.  Particularly with regard to the lyrics, I think there is absolutely no quesiton that he can objectively be said to be widely seen as the the greatest.  His lyrics are, for instnace, considered to be serious poetry by serious students of poetry who are otherwise unconnected to the entire genre of popular music.  He has been nominated for the Nobel Prize for literature by serious literary scholars.  Nobody would take seriously the nomination of any of the others you mention, probably not of any other songwriter. living or dead.  The merits of an artist will always be a matter of opinion, but even matters of tast, broad (though never universal) consensus does sometimes emerge, and it seems fair to report on it: Bob Dylan is widely regarded as America's greatest living popular songwriter69.110.151.176 18:34, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Why not just stick in some citations from reputable critics, on the lines of "described by Blah Blah as America's greatest living popular songwriter"? Filiocht | Talk 07:30, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)

 * If we're talking about American opinions of Dylan, then that should be said in the article. It doesn't say American opinions of Dylan. Are readers expected to check the talk page and ensure that yes, you are advocating the point of view that "opinions" means "American opinions"? - Vague | Rant 10:22, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)

Love and Theft, the theft part
I think the discussion of Love and Theft is incomplete without some reference to the "thefts" that the record is full of: both the musical appropriation of older songs for Tweedle Dee & Tweedle Dum, Bye and Bye, Floater, and Sugar Baby, and the lyric thefts from Junichi Saga's Confessions of a yakuza, should be mentioned. Not only as an example of Dylan's "collage" style of writing, which puts L&T and Empire Burlesque in the same category, and the "folk" way of regarding tradition, but also as an opportunity to comment on the numerous accusations of plagiarism (Canadee-I-O, many of the early songs, Dignity, etc.). I think it's a necessary complement to the notion of folk-icon-turned-crooner. I've written quite a lot about this on my site, dylanchords, and I can easily put together a encyclopedia style summary of it, if it is wanted. eyolf
 * Yes, please. I've been using your site for years, by the way. It's great. Filiocht | Blarneyman 13:18, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

I don't know too much about your general point, but I do know that on the official Bob Dylan page, Canadee-I-O (like everything else on Good As I Been To You) is not attributed to Dylan, it is said to be "arranged" by him, not written. He certainly arranged it, did he not?

Request for references
Hi, I am working to encourage implementation of the goals of the Verifiability policy. Part of that is to make sure articles cite their sources. This is particularly important for featured articles, since they are a prominent part of Wikipedia. Further reading is not the same thing as proper references. Further reading could list works about the topic that were not ever consulted by the page authors. If some of the works listed in the further reading section were used to add or check material in the article, please list them in a references section instead. The Fact and Reference Check Project has more information. Thank you, and please leave me a message when you have added a few references to the article. - Taxman 17:06, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)

Vocabulary of popular music
I don't see how this can possibly be true:
 * More broadly, Dylan is credited with expanding the vocabulary of popular music, moving it beyond traditional boy-and-girl themes into the heady realms of politics/social commentary, philosophy, and a kind of stream-of-consciousness absurdist humor that defies easy description.

American popular music, especially folk music (which is what Dylan played) has never been composed primarily of "traditional boy-and-girl themes". Long before Dylan it was characterized largely by themes of political and social commentary. Woodie Guthrie is one obvious earlier example, but even he hardly invented the genre. --Delirium 19:26, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)

 * I think you're a bit off on the meaning of the term "popular music" here. The old folk music you refer to was not "popular music" in the sense meant here. It may have been "music of the people" (what else would "folk" music be?), but it was not "pop". The contemporary understanding of this term ("popular music") implies charting music at and since the advent of mass media. So, Dylan did expand the vocabulary of pop by opening it to the weird goings-on of the old folk stuff as well as his own rhymed-stream-of-consciousness stuff, which was new at the time even if it was inevitable, given what was happening with poetry and fiction. So... Woody Guthrie, Leadbelly, etc.,. weren't pop. Pop was Bing Crosby, Elvis, Nat King Cole, Bobby Vinton, 1963 Beatles. Dylan was the first to chart using a vocabulary that busted through all those well-worn themes. Why else do you think John Lennon knew it was time for a sea-change upon first hearing Freewheelin'? JDG 23:47, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure I really see the distinction. Woodie Guthrie recorded several albums that sold quite well for major-label recording houses in the 1940s.  How is that not "charting music at and since the advent of mass media"?  At the very least, I think "popular music" ought to be changed to "pop music", as the two terms no longer mean the same thing, despite the historic derivation of one from the other. --Delirium 01:20, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)

John Wesley Harding/Nashville Skyline
It isn't entirely clear that The Band didn't actually perform on Harding. And maybe some mention should be made of (and I know it's a little bit of a cliche) the Nashville studio musicians who are rather prominent on Skyline.

Also, where's Mick Ronson's name in the list of Live 75'ers. His signature guitar work really contributed to the overall sound of the shows.

Links
I've done some cleaning up and organizing of the links. Updated some, removed some (I don't know if a dylan tribute band home page belongs here, e.g., nor a blog post about Chronicles - why that particular one, and not the millions of other similar posts...?), and added some. I've also categorized them. The headings are just a suggestion.--eyolf 10:11, May 3, 2005 (UTC)

I agree with Rhobite's general statement, that only links to sites with new contents should be included, but one of the links that was removed (the one to "It's not a house it's a home page") actually does contain new information: it is not simply a lyric site, but has outtakes, alternative versions, live covers, etc. - much of the same as dylanchords.com, but still with quite a lot of additional information. I won't re-add it, but I think it should be considered, as a useful resource well worth a link. Some of the other links also need some reconsideration, I think.--eyolf 15:33, May 3, 2005 (UTC)

 * Eyolf I think you should "be bold" and add whatever links you feel are truly noteworthy. You seem to be versed in `net Dylandom so I think we can trust you to keep out schlock sites and people looking to boost their Google ratings, etc.,. I agree with Rhobite that we don't need various lightweight lyrics sites because bobdylan.com is up there with all official lyrics and a good dedicated search engine. However, since the D man is always stirring, and has always stirred, the pot so much, there are dozens of alternate lyrics for officially released songs as well as lyrics for never released songs which make no appearance on bobdylan.com. So, we should welcome one or two lyrics sites that have been prominent in Dylandom long before Wikipedia existed and that provide these variant and unreleased lyrics. Maybe you can decide which should be included here? Also, Rhobite, keep in mind that bobdylan.com does not have chords or tabbing. JDG 00:29, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Yeah I try not to remove sites with additional info such as guitar tabs. Sorry if I removed a useful site, please don't hesitate to put it back. It's just irritating to see all these drive-by lyrics spammers. Lyric sites are a dime a dozen and Wikipedia gets spammed with them all the time. Rhobite 05:58, May 17, 2005 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 20:28, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Bob Dylan/Archive 1


text:
Talk:Mira

Mercury & discovery
"Mira was discovered (or at least noted as special for the first time) after a series of observations by the astronomer David Fabricius beginning on August 3, 1596. Observing the planet Mercury, he needed a reference star for comparing positions and picked a previously unremarked third-magnitude star nearby."

On August 3, 1596, Mercury was nowhere near Mira and could not possibly have been involved in its discovery. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.70.216.86 (talk • contribs) 16:32, 15 June 2005
 * Here: the discovery history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Illythr (talk • contribs) 08:24, 24 July 2006

"helium shell" should be "helium core"?
Not my area of expertise, but the clause "fusion of hydrogen continued along a shell surrounding the inert helium shell" strikes me as incorrect; shouldn't that be "inert helium core"? Peter Delmonte (talk) 01:02, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * changed shell to core; seemed like a typo. --warnthepenguins —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.244.144.141 (talk) 21:32, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Mira Means what as far as names go
what does the word Mira mean? Other articles on planets etc. mention this particular question. Why not with Mira? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aquarius2283 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 00:10, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Phonetics
The pronunciation is /ˈmi:rə/,, not /ˈmaɪrə/, somebody please change this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.24.235.200 (talk) 07:23, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Ref, please. Lithopsian (talk) 13:15, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 29 January 2024

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) BilledMammal (talk) 12:56, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Mira → Mira (star) – Confusion of given names Οοβεττττμεντττσααβ (talk) 19:43, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Mira (disambiguation) → Mira

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Question, are you advocating for Mira to become a redirect to this page or do you want to be moved to this base name? Also, it doesn't seem like "Mira Star" is a commonly used name for this star, so the proposed destination probably should be ? Skynxnex (talk) 20:15, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
 * support if: Honestly, it would be better to have a disambiguation when you search up Mira, and “Mira (star)” should be the article about the star. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:586:CD00:FF0:6D65:70D:64EB:F8D2 (talk) 21:04, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment Made some changes to improve the clarity of the nomination. 162 etc. (talk) 22:01, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose No indication that the star is not the primary topic and move was proposed by an LTA. SevenSpheres (talk) 22:04, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. No primary topic here. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:39, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Support the star has 3,484 views but the 2022 film has 7,221 and the give name has 2,827] so it doesn't seem like there is a clear primary topic by either criteria.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 17:18, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose The film's notability is unclear, and potentially non-notable. Furthermore, the user proposing the move has been blocked and it could be bad faith or advertising. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:23, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The star is primary topic by long-term significance. — Amakuru (talk) 21:04, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Zxcvbnm. –  21:21, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Mira


text:
Talk:White meat

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Cierrabeck, Mengyin Zhang.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Potential addition to page
As white meat is a main component of many individuals diets, and when looking up white meat on wikipedia, people might be interested in learning more about the dietary effects of white meat, and how this effects their health. I have been drafting a potential section addition, titled "module 6-final paragraphs" on my sandbox, linked at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cierrabeck/sandboxannotatedbib. I have included several academic sources for my writing, included and analyzed in the module 5 and module 4 sections. Please let me know your thoughts on the importance of this addition, and any comments and criticism you may have! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cierrabeck (talk • contribs) 23:43, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Alternative white meats
What about rabbit??? What about cat????? Remember me 16:33, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Pork: Red meat or white?
I've removed the assertion that pork is a white meat, because it contradicts our Red meat article. Whatever the final conclusion on this is, the two articles should agree. FreplySpang 15:37, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I'ved moved the following statement here as it's not only poorly sourced but likely false:

 * The meat of young mammals such as veal and milk-fed lamb, and that of pork is usually considered "white"; while the meat of duck and goose is considered "red", though the demarcation line has been shifting.

The demarcation line shifted long ago! --Amit 02:58, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * There are sources for the previous version of the article; no sources for your version. Are you sure you aren't confusing the gastronomic and the nutritional sense of "red/white meat"?  --Macrakis 03:59, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

In your latest blanking of well-sourced content, you say "Please get a source that is not 18 years old". It would be nice if up-to-the-minute reference sources were available for everything, but the revision schedules of major reference works simply aren't on that sort of schedule, and frankly 18 years isn't that long a time anyway. Moreover, WP is based on sources. Simply because you believe the meaning has changed in the past 18 years doesn't mean that you can demand a source proving that it hasn't! I realize that the U.S. medical community has been trying to redefine "red meat" as meaning all animal meat, but I don't believe the gastronomic community agrees. What's more, WP tries to have a world-wide perspective; do you have good evidence of a change world-wide? But as a compromise solution, I will add the word "traditionally" to the sentence. That is non-committal about the current meaning while reflecting the well-documented meaning as recently as 18 years ago. Instead of blanking again, please discuss here first. --Macrakis 18:56, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

 * The oxford english dictionary isn't the best source for this kind of info. Here's one that calls pork dark meat, though from what I understand it's a pretty irrellevant classification, kind of like vegetable - it's not a scientific term.  WLU 20:54, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

 * We really need scientific sources. Dictionaries aren't good sources for this definition as it is controversial, and they are therefore unacceptable. If you'd like to continue to have those statements listed, I recommend getting at least two scientific sources.
 * I understand that the views of the medical and gastronomic communities likely differ. The correct thing to do then is to list both views, as long as they're both properly sourced. It should be obvious that I insist on a proper definition because I believe the gastronomic community cares less about my health and the health of my family and friends than the medical community.
 * As for a world perspective on the definition of red/white meat, I'm open to having that listed but only with the name of the regions where that opinion holds true. --Amit 21:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Ah, I see where you're coming from! Well, it's not at all clear that "red meat" and "white meat" are scientific terms.  As far as I can tell, in current nutritional/medical discourse, they are terms used to communicate the concept of low-saturated-fat meats, though the "redness" of meat has to do with its myoglobin concentration (0.005-0.2% in chicken; 0.1-0.3% in pork and veal; 0.4-1.0% in young beef; 1.5-2.0% in old beef), not with its saturated fat content (which seems to be what is nutritionally relevant).  The fat of beef, veal, and chicken is about equally saturated, but beef happens to be not only red, but also more marbled, that is, it contains more intramuscular fat mixed in with the meat, so even if you trim the visible fat off, there is a significant amount of (saturated) fat left in the meat.  This is not true, by the way, of veal.
 * The pork industry's slogan "pork, the other white meat" takes advantage of the traditional meaning of "white meat" to get across their point that well-trimmed pork loin meat has relatively little fat compared to beef. Obviously, the slogan wouldn't work if people didn't still classify pork as "white meat".
 * It would be interesting to have good sources on the history of these rhetorical adventures.... --Macrakis 14:52, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

 * A correction about saturated fats: According to the USDA food database, beef lard is 49.8 % saturated fatty acids, lard is 39.2 % and chicken fat is 29.8 % (and btw note that fat is roughly 5 % glycerol and only about 95 % fatty acids). Of course, the numbers vary depending on breed and fodder, but the fraction of saturated fatty acids is significantly different in these 3 kinds of fat. Icek 21:30, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

 * Wouldn't the fact that a pork chop is WHITE in color have something to do with it? After all, the vast majority of people think of white meat as a color...216.29.165.106 21:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Another quibble
The article currently says, "... domestic chicken and rabbit are invariably considered "white", while the meat of adult mammals, such as beef, mutton, and horse is invariably considered "red". Er, rabbits are mammals. Should this say "large mammals"? But then the pork controversy comes in. Any ideas on how to resolve this? FreplySpang 20:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging
This article talk page was automatically added with WikiProject Food and drink banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here. If you have concerns, please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 11:55, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Logical alternate terms
Right now we have in the intro in terms of the slow/fast twitch fibres of meat (not talking about white/red) we have white/light versus dark.

This got me thinking. The opposite of 'white' would technically be 'black' but we don't use black I guess because that makes you think of burnt meat. Plus I've never seen dark meat that's literally dark enough to be black whereas the meat does look rather pure white when it's lighter.

One thing I was wondering was, as opposed to "light" meat, has it ever been called "pale" meat? Maybe that's a bad choice because pale may imply that there's some kind of pallour but I think that pale is an apt an antonym to dark as light is. Nym (talk) 15:00, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

 * The opposition white/red meat should be in a single place, so I've suggested merging this article into red meat, which has much more. --Macrakis (talk) 15:56, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Removed
In November 2012, the line stating that the fields of biology, husbandry, and a couple others all agree (blank) was labeled as needing a citation. It's November 2015, and there's still no citation. I deleted the line, and rewrote in more neutral voice. I used the citation on the topic used in the [Red Meat] article. -Laced 96.41.75.84 (talk) 10:39, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:White meat


text:
User talk:Zombiejesus

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Flcelloguy 16:33, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:18, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Zombiejesus


text:
Portal talk:Aviation/Selected picture

4
"Glacier Girl," a P-38 Lightning dug out from 268 feet of ice in eastern Greenland in 1992. Photo credit: Tech. Sgt. Ben Bloker, af.mil

9

From left to right, an A-10 Thunderbolt II, F-86 Sabre, P-38 Lightning and P-51 Mustang fly in formation during an air show at Langley Air Force Base, Virginia, USA. The formation displays two generations of Air Force fighters and a 1970s vintage ground attack aircraft.

Image credit:U.S. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Ben Bloker.

10

A B-2 Spirit soars after a refueling mission over the Pacific Ocean on Tuesday, May 30, 2006. The B-2, from the 509th Bomb Wing at Whiteman Air Force Base, Mo., is part of a continuous bomber presence in the Asia-Pacific region.

Image credit:U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Bennie J. Davis III.

11

An F-16 Fighting Falcon from Balad Air Base, Iraq, takes fuel from a KC-10 Extender over Iraq Nov. 20. The KC-10 refueled two jets that afternoon in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. The KC-10 aircrew is deployed in support of the pp380th Air Expeditionary Wing]].

Image credit:U.S. Air Force photo by Capt. Justin T. Watson.

title: Portal talk:Aviation/Selected picture


text:
Richard Layard, Baron Layard

Peter Richard Grenville Layard, Baron Layard FBA (born 15 March 1934) is a British labour economist, co-director of the Community Wellbeing programme at the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics, and co-editor of the World Happiness Report. Layard is an economist who wants public policy to be targeted at the wellbeing of the people. To this end he has written 6 books and some 40 articles.

His work on mental health, including publishing The Depression Report in 2006, led to the establishment of the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) programme in England.

Family and education
Peter Richard Grenville Layard is the son of John Layard and his wife Doris. He was educated at Eton College, where he was a King's scholar; at King's College, Cambridge; and at the London School of Economics.

Work
Layard was Senior Research Officer for the Robbins Committee on Higher Education, and later developed a reputation in the economics of education (with Mark Blaug at LSE), and in labour economics (in particular with Stephen Nickell).

Labour economics
In the 1980s he and his colleagues developed the Layard-Nickell model of how the level of unemployment is determined. This has become the most commonly used model by European economists and governments. It assigns an important role to how unemployed people are treated, and provides the intellectual basis for the welfare-to-work policies introduced in many countries, including Britain, Germany and Denmark.

The basic message is in Unemployment: Macroeconomic Performance and the Labour Market. This was first published in 1991, and a second edition in 2005 showed how well the model predicted the development of unemployment in different countries over the years between 1991 and 2003.

Drawing on this work, Layard was active in the policy field on unemployment, both in the UK and outside. In 1985 he founded the Employment Institute to press for welfare to work policies, and his proposals were largely implemented in 2007 in the Labour Party’s New Deal policies for young people, and then older adults. His influence also spread to Europe. In the 1980s he was Chairman of the European Commission’s Macroeconomic Policy Group and in the 1990s the Hartz reforms in Germany were influenced by his work. From 1997 to 2001 he was a part-time consultant to the British government on welfare-to-work and vocational education.

On inequality, his work shows the key role of education in influencing the income of individuals and families. He has been a strong advocate of better vocational education (including apprenticeship) for less academic youngsters. The case he made led to major increases in apprenticeship and the 2009 Apprenticeship Act which guaranteed access to an apprenticeship for qualified applicants (unfortunately repealed).

He advocated many of the policies which characterised the New Labour government, particularly the New Deal, partly by founding the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics. He supported the idea of welfare-to-work, where social welfare payments are structured in a way that encourages (or forces) recipients back into the job market.

As well as academic positions, Layard worked as an advisor for numerous organisations, including government institutions in the United Kingdom and Russia.

In 1990 he was founder-director of the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics where he is presently a programme director. The Centre has become one of Europe's leading research institutes

Happiness and wellbeing
Layard became active in the study of what has since come to be known as happiness economics. This branch of economic analysis starts from the argument that income is a bad approximation for happiness. He has always believed, as in the 18th Century Enlightenment, that societies should be judged by the happiness of the people. And since the 1970s he has urged fellow economists to return to the idea that public policy should maximise a social welfare function depending on the distribution of happiness. In 1980 he wrote (according to Richard Easterlin) "the first paper to focus specifically on the policy implications of empirical research on happiness". In 2005 he wrote Happiness: Lessons from a New Science, which was published in 20 languages.

In his early research on wellbeing, he focused heavily on the role of relative income as a determinant of wellbeing. He showed how in many countries the income of one’s reference group reduces one’s own happiness – and he showed the implications of this for tax policy and the measurement of the “excess burden” of taxes. He also studied (with co-authors) the form of the income-happiness relationship. This pioneering and much-quoted study found that happiness was approximately linear in log income.

He then turned to the whole range of influences on wellbeing as it develops over the life cycle, using longitudinal data from 4 countries. This co-authored work was published in 2014 and more fully in a book called The Origins of Happiness: The science of wellbeing over the life course (2018). It revealed, among other things, the huge impact of schools and teachers upon subsequent wellbeing, and the huge role that the independent variation of mental health plays in explaining the variance of wellbeing.

Mental health
Given this, he argued strongly for more attention to mental health, both as a key factor affecting wellbeing, but also as an important factor of production affecting productivity and employment. He argued that the economics is quite different for mental and physical health. Mental illness is mainly a disease of working age, with huge economic costs, while physical illness is mainly a disease of retirement. Thus, inexpensive treatments for mental illness will pay for themselves in reduced welfare and increased taxes.

Working together with the distinguished psychologist David M. Clark in 2007 resulted in the development of Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT), an initiative to improve access to psychological therapies in the United Kingdom. It established a new psychological therapy service for anxiety disorders and depression (renamed in 2023 to NHS Talking Therapies). This was established in 2008 and now treats over 700,000 people a year, of whom half recover within an average of 8 sessions of treatment. The programme has paid for itself and has been copied in 5 other countries. In a series of co-authored articles he showed how psychological therapy affected employment and thus paid for itself in savings on welfare benefits and lost taxes. This work also showed what factors affected the recovery rates in different local services. This led to significant improvements in recovery rates. He summarised his analysis on mental health in a book (co-authored with Clark) called Thrive (2014).

He also helped develop a major programme for mental health prevention in schools. This was a weekly 4-year curriculum in life skills for pupils aged 11-15 called Healthy Minds. It was highly manualised and when evaluated in a randomised trial in 32 schools, was found to be highly cost-effective.

Wellbeing science
Meantime in 2012 he became a founder co-editor of the annual World Happiness Report in which he has written numerous articles. In one of these (2021) he published the first estimates of the Wellbeing-Years (WELLBYs) a person could expect to experience if born in different areas of the world. His central aim has always been to develop wellbeing science to the point where it can provide key evidence for the selection of all policy priorities. In 2014 he laid out the framework for this approach in one chapter of the report Wellbeing and Policy, chaired by Gus O’Donnell. But the crucial need was to bring together the evidence on all the factors which affect wellbeing. In 2023 he did this in the first comprehensive textbook on wellbeing (with Jan Emmanuel De Neve) – Wellbeing: Science and Policy. This aims to persuade policy-makers that wellbeing is a feasible goal for them, and also to develop the cadre of trained analysts to help them target it. As the book makes clear, the aim is not to supplant traditional cost-benefit analysis (based on revealed preference), but to supplement it in the myriad of cases where revealed preference can provide no plausible evidence, but direct measures of wellbeing can. Layard’s current research is focused on showing how this approach can illuminate public priorities through worked examples of benefit/cost ratios across the whole field of policy.

Wellbeing policy

Layard’s policy work has reached far beyond mental health. He has been a major leader in the effort to put wellbeing at the centre of the movement to go “Beyond GDP”. In 2010 he persuaded the British Prime Minister David Cameron  that wellbeing would be a major government objective, and be regularly measured in the national statistics. The measures were then recommended by the OECD to all member countries. More recently his team have been influential in getting evidence on subjective wellbeing officially accepted in the UK Treasury's manual on subjective evaluations. Internationally,  he chaired the World Economic Forum Global Agenda Council on Health and Wellbeing, which in 2012 launched a report at Davos “WellBeing and Global Success”.

Since then the World Happiness Report has provided a stream of evidence for policy-makers on the ways in which they can improve the wellbeing of their people. Layard summarised more of the evidence on what can be done in each sphere of life in Can We Be Happier? (2020). Layard has co-founded two movements to promote the wellbeing of society. One, called Action for Happiness (founded in 2012), is a popular movement for personal change to produce a happier world. It now has 600,000 members and 6,000 trained volunteers providing courses and leading groups. The other is the World Wellbeing Movement (founded in 2022), a top-down movement targeted at decision-makers.

Subsequent books have included "The Good Childhood" (2009), Thrive (2014) Thrive (2014), Can We Be Happier?: Evidence and Ethics (2020), and Wellbeing: Science and Policy (2020)

Russia
From 1991-1997 he was a part-time economic adviser to the Russian Government, and co-authored The Coming Russian Boom (1996), which correctly forecast the rapid growth in Russia over the following years.

House of Lords
In 2000 he was made a member of the House of Lords. He has served on various Committees including the Gambling Industry Committee, Youth Unemployment Committee and for much of his peerage, since 2004, has been a member of its Economic Affairs Committee.

Climate change
In 2015, he was co-author of the report that launched the Global Apollo Programme, which calls for developed nations to commit to spending 0.02% of their GDP for 10 years, to fund co-ordinated research to make carbon-free baseload electricity less costly than electricity from coal by the year 2025.

Critique
Recent research on happiness questioning part of Baron Layard's thesis and suggesting that people do obtain happiness from increased income forms part of ongoing investigations into the Easterlin Paradox.

Personal life
In 1991, he married Molly Christine Meacher, who was formerly married to Michael Meacher. Molly, styled Lady Layard between 2000 and 2006, was herself created a life peer in 2006 as Baroness Meacher. They are one of the few couples to both hold titles in their own right.

Layard has said he was strongly Christian at school, lost his faith at university, and in his later years 'has to be believe there is some purpose in the universe... which gives me comfort.'

Honours
In 2000 he was made a Labour peer of the House of Lords.In 2003, Layard was elected a Fellow of the British Academy (FBA). In 2016, he was elected a Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences (FAcSS). In 2020, the Economic and Social Research Council recognised Richard Layard with a rare Lifetime Achievement Award to celebrate the outstanding contribution he has made to social science and society in the UK and beyond.

Selected bibliography

 * Books

title: Richard Layard, Baron Layard


text:
Talk:Can't Help Falling in Love

When was it written?
I thought it was written in 1919 tommylommykins 16:34, 15 June, 2005 (UTC)
 * hello? If it was written earlier then we need to delete the date on the main page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tommylommykins (talk • contribs) 07:21, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

 * it was definitely not written in 1919- do a little bit more research, friend. 203.37.239.88 (talk) 01:02, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Cover versions
there was a cover version by the band 'lick the tins' but i cant find any info on them anywhere.??helpp?Daniel625 01:01, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

This song was covered by the female singer Marmalade. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kishkash04 (talk • contribs) 18:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

"Fools Rush In"?
Isn't this song called 'Fools Rush In'?? That has always been the impression that i've gotten. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.168.164.70 (talk) 11:07, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I believe there's a different song called Fools Rush In, from the doo wop era. 130.101.100.153 12:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Merge
Merge They are the same song. 130.101.100.153 12:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * AgreedMpassman 15:40, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I dissagree, it's not the same song ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.212.83.236 (talk) 23:23, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

The original music for this song was in reality a piece of classical music called Plaisir d'amour ("Pleasure of Love") which was written by the composer Giovanni Martini (1741-1816) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.176.34.181 (talk) 15:57, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

The Who?
Seems to me that the main chorus of this song was used in The Who's "Real Good Looking Boy", as the intro piano melody and once as a chorus. Anybody want to comment? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.111.17.121 (talk) 13:47, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I just heard Real Good Looking Boy on Pandora and it is credited to The Who and dated 2004. So the entry under additional versions seems fine. There was an entry under Covers which references the version by The Who, but since it is not a real cover song and it did not specify any particular band I removed that from the list. 207.38.221.16 (talk) 02:07, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Why Prominence to the A*Teens Version?
The A*Teens version was just a radio hit and never successful in the US charts and a minor single reached #12 in Sweden, #16 in Argentina and #41 in Australia, hardly meritting the prominent place that they have been given alongside the Elvis Preseley and UB40 versions which were veritable huge successes. I suggest relegating the A*Teens version to the section of all the other artists who have done far more memorable versions. I've added a few actually werldwayd (talk) 12:15, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It's an infobox and a paragraph, which many editors consider to be minimal coverage for a released single. Any chance you could increase converage on some of the versions you consider to be more notable?—Kww(talk) 13:01, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Elvis Presley's version
Hello! Why was the section "Elvis Presley's version" deleted?? You can still read it in the old versions of this page or in: http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Can%27t+Help+Falling+in+Love I think it was a good paragraph. GastonSenac (talk) 01:38, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

UB40 did it better. That had to be said. Sorry.--24.177.0.156 (talk) 22:29, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

 * but this isn't a page about UB40 s version- it is elvis presley and his origional "cant help falling in love" 203.37.239.88 (talk) 01:04, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Anti-war song?
Why is this listed as an anti-war song in the categories? marbeh raglaim (talk) 18:58, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I too just discovered and removed these two categories. If you object, let's talk about it.  Men have feelings too, you know.
 * Category:Anti-war songs
 * Category:Protest songs
 * Carptrash (talk) 06:03, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Elvis - Rock a Hula.jpg
The image File:Elvis - Rock a Hula.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --10:27, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Robert Schumann
It has a very similar melody to Shumann's op. 15 "1. Von fremden Landern und Menschen". (1' 04''). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.188.216.155 (talk) 06:10, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Hardly. That has a repeated first line, then the beginning of another repeat before moving into a variant and then resolving, then the whole theme is answered. Plasir d'amour matches harmonically throughout and melodically but for the second and third beats.--Hugh7 (talk) 07:08, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * On that one is more notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.188.216.155 (talk) 06:10, 17 May 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.188.234.157 (talk)

Original Recording Descrepancy
Certainly the most popular version of Can't Help Falling In Love, was recorded by Elvis Presley. It was his first version that spawned so many other versions by various other artists, including newer versions by him as well. However, in the first paragraph of this document, it says that the song was originally recorded by Elvis Presley in 1961. Further down under the category, "Additional Versions," there is a reference to actor Montgomery Cliff playing and singing the song in 1949 in a movie titled, "The Heiress." This recording would certainly pre-date the one by Elvis Presley. A song for a film also constitutes a "recording." If the version by Elvis Presley is the first version released for sale to the public on a record, perhaps that should be said for purposes of clarity. 96.231.44.9 (talk) 04:34, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Recently halved "Other versions" list needs restoring
Someone recently halved the "Other versions" listing on 21 July 2015, albeit in good faith, quoting "Other versions: trim per WP:SONGCOVER... Singles are notable but most album tracks are not, nor are most live performances" as their rationale, and the 24,268 bytes section was reduced by a hefty -11,133 bytes. But WP:SONGCOVER is obsolete - it redirects to Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs and on that page there's no such recommendation or guideline about deleting album versions, except insofar as it says under "Cover versions/multiple renditions" that inclusion is okay if "the rendition itself meets the notability requirement at WP:NSONGS." - although WP:NSONGS is also obsolete, redirecting to "Wikipedia:Notability (music)" and the "Songs" section of "Wikipedia:Notability (music)" says that Songs with notable cover versions are normally covered in one common article about the song and the cover versions.). Meanwhile other people have started to "add" versions they think are missing, not knowing they were recently deleted en masse, and the list will now start to get a bit messy as the process continues. For example someone recently added an all-too short "Twenty One Pilots in 2013". But the pre-July list had a much better (fully informative and cite-referenced) entry for that cover version (quote: "Twenty One Pilots covered the song on their 2012 UK exclusive EP, Holding On To You. A live music video was also released on YouTube for the cover.") Ultimately the mass-deletion has led to a situation of one step forwards, two steps back... Take Dylan's cover version as another example - significant enough to be mentioned in the Lede, but nowhere else in the article! The pre-July list included it, giving a good short explanation of its significance (Quote: "Bob Dylan recorded a version of this song for the New Morning sessions in 1970, which was released by Columbia against his will on the 1973 album, Dylan (Columbia Records).") But as the page stands now, the Dylan version's notability can't be understood. Some slight pruning of the listing on 21 July 2015 may have been needed - it was a long list - but the mass deletion of every non-single was like throwing the baby out with the bath water. A cover version doesn't always have to be a single to be significant. The 21 July list should be restored, and then retitled "Significant versions by other artists", and then pruned according to notability - not just according to whether or not a single. Pete Hobbs (talk) 18:43, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Crazy Rich Asians
My edit to include a cover of the song in Crazy Rich Asians and its associated soundtrack was reverted because of "trivial WP:IPC use/WP:COVERSONG". The cover has received significant coverage in media publication including Bustle, Slate, The Oklahoman, Elite Daily, and Entertainment Weekly. I think this speaks that the cover is more than trivial. Pinging User:SummerPhDv2.0 if she would like to comment. Shuipzv3 (talk) 03:34, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

 * Yes, it's certainly in the film, but that clearly doesn't demonstrate a significant impact on popular culture, per WP:IPC.

 * That leaves WP:COVERSONG. Essentially, for inclusion here the project is looking for "the rendition is discussed by a reliable source on the subject of the song," or "the rendition itself meets the notability requirement at WP:NSONGS." The other covers pass WP:NSONG (if weakly) on their own by having charted. From what you added, I got that the cover exists. The coverage in the sources given is mixed. One says the artist is on the soundtrack, but stops short of saying anything about this song. Of the rest, all but Bustle say little more than "I really like this and other people do to" (thought the prediction it will be used as a lot of weddings would be worth mention. Bustle has something to say about the song, but none of that comes through in "An acoustic version sung by Kina Grannis appears in the 2018 film Crazy Rich Asians and the accompanying soundtrack." If we're going to include it based on the rave in Bustle (which I had no clue existed), I think we should include something from it. Knowing that the source is there, I'd be fine with adding it. I'd encourage you to add some of the substance. Otherwise, it risks looking like just another random cover that exists and nothing more. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 04:37, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

 * I'll add the charting position. Thank you for your insight. Shuipzv3 (talk) 05:40, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

The song was written specifically for Elvis/Blue Hawaii
There's a claim in this article that the song was originally written from the perspective of a woman, on the basis of a broken rhyme scheme. However, if you actually look at the underlying source, it's a For Dummies book, which in turn cites no sources. Suspicious, I performed a few searches for the putative title of this supposed demo, "Can't Help Falling in Love with Him", and what I found seems like a pretty bad case of citogenesis. Almost every article I could find copied this article's wording verbatim, and none cited any independent sources (or even this one).

Seemingly at a dead end, I thought to search for interviews of the song's listed writers. Though there were no interviews with Hugo Paretti that I could find, both George David Weiss and Luigi Creatore were independently very clear before they died: The song had been written for the scene it appears in; it was not a repurposed composition that had been lying on the shelf! A Star-Ledger article from February 1, 1994 even says: "Of the many performers he has worked with, Presley is one of the few he never met, although he wrote "I Can't Help Falling in Love with You" specifically for him, said Weiss. The screenplay for Presley's film Blue Hawaii was the impetus for the song, but Weiss couldn't stand the movie." [emphasis added] [1 ]

If that Weiss article is insufficient, there's an episode of The Paul Leslie Hour where the host asks Creatore about this song, and he says that it was commissioned through Elvis's publicist and the title (and consequently the song's wonky rhyme scheme) was the product of improvisation. (From their YouTube channel, here is the video, starting at the first Elvis question.) Incidentally, if any of the interviewers had noticed the song's non-rhyme, they never seem to have brought it up with the people who wrote the thing!

I bring this up here rather than attempt to edit it myself because despite the relative age of this account, I'm a fairly green editor. One of the two sources I just gave is primary A/V matter probably under copyright, the other a digital reprint of a print article. I figured I'd rather talk things out with other editors, as seems to be proper etiquette here anyway, and perhaps catch the attention of regulars who would have more resource access. Cheers! Katrina || (I need to get this t.A.T.u. covered up sometime...) 16:40, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Can't Help Falling in Love


text:
User:John Z/drafts/Wedderburn's little theorem

Wedderburn's theorem is that every finite division ring is commutative, and thus a field.


text:
Deathlands

Deathlands is a series of novels written by Christopher Lowder under the pseudonym Jack Adrian and published by Gold Eagle Publishing. The first novel, Pilgrimage to Hell, was published in 1986. This series of novels was written by Lowder until he became ill following his development of the plot and writing most of the book. Laurence James, under the pseudonym James Axler, then completed the series.

The series exists in both an episodic style and a series format. Some novels can be read as standalone works, while others are dependent on the previous release. There are also a few trilogy sets within the series.

Plot
On January 20, 2001, the climax of the Cold War turns the world into a postapocalyptic wasteland. The endgame began with a preemptive strike on Washington, DC. Underground nuclear bombs were detonated from within the basement of the Soviet embassy, by an elite group of Spetsnaz operatives, destroying the central command structure and political system of the United States. For an indefinite period of time, a nuclear exchange between the United States and the Soviet Union devastated both countries and, subsequently, the entire planet (but little details are known of what occurred outside the two countries). All manner of genetic contagions were released infecting the survivors of the firestorm with horrible illnesses. The remaining survivors lived harshly during a time of prolonged nuclear winter known as Skydark. The geography, climate, and ecosystems of the world changed dramatically. What was left of the United States came to be known as the Deathlands.

Nearly a century later, civilization begun to reappear, albeit brutal, short lived, morally confused, and crazed from mutation. Between the many hot spots are small plague pits ruled by warlords who have no limits to establish their rule and expand their influence. These individuals are known as the Barons. Their rabble pits are known as villes and baronies. Civilization unknowingly resembles the Dark Ages. Trading resumes between the villes: jack (a regional currency), jolt or "joltsky" (a hallucinogenic mixture of mescaline and heroin), ammunition, and slaves are the primary forms of currency. Life is a strange mixture of ancient history and limited technology scavenged from the twentieth century. Military technology is the most prized possession of all and success is often measured by the number of bullets one possesses. Ryan Cawdor leads a group across the deathlands. Ryan has extremely secret knowledge of the 20th century — the understanding of hidden underground complexes, known as redoubts, that contains teleportation technology. He and his companions guard this knowledge with their lives. The technology is called MAT-TRANS.

Each novel typically begins with the companions arriving at a previously unknown redoubt via MAT-TRANS. If the situation is impossible or hostile, the companions can use the transporter's "last destination" feature to return to the sending point. If the redoubt is unknown, the companions usually explore in search of weapons and supplies, which they rarely come across. They occasionally get lucky and find a working shower or stored food, which they always use or take. The plot picks up speed once the characters leave the redoubt and explore the surrounding countryside. Frequently, the companions are apprehended or forced into a confrontation with the local barons. Each novel reveals a little about the characters' backgrounds, motivations, and the region in which they arrived.

Main characters

 * Ryan Cawdor: In the novel, Cawdor is the youngest son of a powerful baron in Virginia. He first appeared in the novel Pilgrimage to Hell by Jack Adrian. His middle brother, Harvey, is responsible for the loss of Ryan’s left eye after murdering Morgan, Ryan's eldest brother. Ryan’s nephew, Nathan Freeman now controls the barony of Front Royal. Ryan was named after his great grandfather, the original founder of Front Royal. He joined the Trader's convoy approximately ten years before the beginning of Pilgrimage to Hell, at the age of 21. Over the years, he climbed the ranks rapidly in Trader's convoy, soon becoming Trader's second-in-command. It was during this time that he met his best friend J.B. Dix, who joined Trader a little over a year later. Ryan is a master of many forms of combat, including knife fighting, and unarmed combat. He learned a great deal from both Trader and J.B. Ryan was portrayed by Vincent Spano in the Sci Fi Channel original movie version of Deathlands: Homeward Bound.
 * Krysty Wroth: In the novel, Wroth is a skilled and talented combatant and markswoman. She is a valued member of the companions' party for both her natural fighting abilities and her limited "feelie" (precognitive) abilities. She was initially introduced in the first book in the series, Pilgrimage to Hell in 1986, and it was in that book that she established a mutually monogamous romantic relationship with Ryan Cawdor. She is a mutant, though possessing a rare combination of beneficial mutant traits, unlike the myriad of mutilated and deformed “muties” the party comes across throughout their travels. Her most notable characteristic is her long red, semi-sentient animated hair as a result of her mutation.
 * John Barrymore Dix: In the novel, J.B. Dix, also known as The Armorer, has been Ryan Cawdor's closest friend and travelling companion since both men worked for and travelled with the Trader. He is a thin, wiry, tough man who wears wire rimmed spectacles and a brown fedora.  He is very quiet, never using four words when three will do.  He is a living encyclopedia on weapons from pistols to tanks to missiles.  He is also an explosives expert and decent hand to hand combatant, although only an average shot.  He carries a large canvas satchel containing his explosives and other weapons at all times. Born in Cripple Creek, Colorado, he spent his early years exploring the local area and salvaging trade goods (primarily firearms) from abandoned dwellings and shelters.  He developed severe claustrophobia in one such incident as he was trapped in a cave-in with a corpse for several days while exploring an old mine.  After serving several years serving with the Trader he entered the MAT-TRANS with Ryan and his other companions.  He began a romantic relationship with Dr. Mildred Wyeth.  He has also learned that he has glaucoma and will eventually go blind.
 * Dean Cawdor: In the novel, Dean is the teenage son of Ryan Cawdor. Despite his youth he is a full member of the team of warrior survivors that comprise the primary characters. Dean is the result of an affair Ryan Cawdor had with Sharona Carson when Ryan was still traveling with his old mentor, the Trader. Dean's existence is first revealed in Time Nomads, and he first encounters the group in Seedling.
 * Jak Laurent: In the novel, Laurent is an albino distinguished in the books by his unusual syntax when speaking. Jak was introduced in the third book, Neutron Solstice. He is a young man, in his late teens, and is an extremely capable hunter and warrior. His signature weapons are his leaf bladed throwing knives, of which he has between 8 and 12 hidden on him at all times, and often uses them as thrown weapons or for melee when guns are inappropriate, and his .357 Colt Python revolver. He comes from the suburb of West Lowellton in Lafayette, Louisiana, where the group first meet him. At the time, he is leading a group of rebels against an extremely sadistic baron known as Tourment.  When Ryan and the other's first met him, and saw just how skillful of a fighter and leader he is, they are surprised to find he is only 14 years old.  He is later married to Christina Ballinger, and temporarily leaves the group to settle down in Latitude Zero, but tragedy strikes and his wife and daughter are savagely murdered, and he rejoins the group. In the Deathlands: Homeward Bound movie from the Sci-Fi Channel, his personality was altered to that of a "savage".
 * Dr. Mildred Winona Wyeth: In the novel, Wyeth is a stocky black woman, known for her corn rowed hair, and smartass comments to life in general. She is also a medical doctor from the twentieth century who was cryogenically frozen before the nuclear holocaust. After her introduction in the series she joined Ryan Cawdor and the other characters in roaming the Deathlands via the Redoubts. She has been romantically linked to J.B. Dix, one of the original characters of the series. Mildred is both a skilled physician and a person to contend with firearms wise, having been an Olympic pistol champion before her cryonic freezing, she has the ability to shoot with a level that almost defies belief, notably hitting Stingwings, small fast terrors that are generally feared in Deathlands, as they attack the group while in flight.
 * Dr. Theophilus Algernon Tanner: In the novel, Tanner, also known as "Doc", was rescued by Ryan Cawdor and his people from the ville of Mocsin, where he was being kept captive by Jordan Teague, the ville's baron. Dr. Tanner speaks in a very strange, Victorian way. Physically, he is very tall and skinny. His face is deeply lined and framed by long gray hair. He has perfect teeth and speaks with a deep, rich voice which commands attention. He is a doctor of philosophy, as well as having studied ichthyology. Tanner was actually born on February 14, 1868, in South Strafford, Vermont. During a time traveling experiment by scientists, he was brought one hundred years into the future, to 1998. Since he proved to be a nuisance and kept trying to escape, the scientists pushed him a further one hundred years into the future, to the Deathlands. The time travel has put a strain on his body, and his memory has partly lapsed. His knowledge of pre-apocalypse redoubts (hidden government fortresses) proves invaluable to Ryan Cawdor and his team. He possesses knowledge of several other projects besides the one which "Time Trawled" him to the deathlands time period, notably TITAN, there is a past drug induced psychotic break whenever something brings that particular project to the forefront, and Doc fails to think clearly until the moment passes or he is distracted to another subject. Dr. Tanner was left out of the 2003 film Deathlands: Homeward Bound.
 * Trader: In the novel, there are many people in Deathlands who bear the title "trader", but only one who used it as his name. Trader is a legend all over Deathlands - a man known for fair deals, a distinct lack of mercy, and the largest and most powerful convoys anywhere. Trader was about 56 years of age at the time of his final appearance (and, it is presumed, death); he had grizzled salt-and-pepper hair and a beard, a burly build, and a chronic cough from his radiation sickness (though he was later cured of this). He carried a battered Armalite rifle, often using it as a crutch.

Enemies
Over the course of the series, Ryan Cawdor and his band have fought and defeated countless power-mad villains, and most died within one book. Many villains were Barons- rulers of small dictatorships scattered across The Deathlands (notably, Barons are also the primary antagonists of the sequel series Outlanders, except there are now only a small number of technologically adept superhuman barons instead of the hundreds of lesser kingpins). Another notable group are the mutants- humanoid beings that have adapted and gained inhuman powers, psionic and otherwise, due to radiation exposure and natural selection. There are a few notable villains in this list, which include:

 * Cort Strasser: Former Security Man for Baron Teague and sado-masochistic mastermind behind many plots against Cawdor's crew. He appeared three times: as the Sec Chief in Pilgrimage to Hell, as the leader of a group of formidable soldiers in Pony Soldiers, and finally as the leader of a group of raiders who travel by railway in Latitude Zero, in which he killed himself in an attempt to kill Ryan Cawdor.
 * Major Zimyanyin: Major-Commissar Gregori Zimyanin was a member of the Russian Security Bureau (sort of an amalgam of the KGB and the army). He appeared multiple times throughout the series, opposing Cawdor's team. He kills himself after a plot to kidnap Ryan Cawdor's son because he was too honorable to allow a small child to bear such a heavy grudge.
 * Straub: A powerful psionic mutie who had the abilities of mind-reading and hypnosis. He was encountered two times throughout the series: as a leader of a group of bandits in Shadowfall (where he also presumably killed major characters Abe and Trader), and as cohort to evil Baroness Katya Beausoleil in Circle Thrice, where he was shot by Doc Tanner.
 * Magus: A former slaver of genetically engineered mutants, he had his eyes, hands, and jaw destroyed in a fight against the Trader, and later was repaired and learned to master pre-dark technology. He's believed to have magical abilities by the more superstitious in the Deathlands.
 * Baron Harvey Cawdor: The brother of Ryan Cawdor and the leader of a barony in Virginia. He tried and succeeded, with the help of his father's young wife, to kill his father and brothers so he could rule the barony- although Ryan escaped with one less eye. Because of a breech-birth, he was a misshapen hunchbacked man with a proficiency in guns and knives. He was killed in his first appearance in Homeward Bound.
 * Dredda Trask: A woman who lived in an alternate universe where the nuclear detonations never occurred. She was the CEO of a corporation that controlled most of the world, and was genetically altered to be the "perfect" human being. She was later destroyed by parasites that inhabited the void between the universes.
 * Baron Willie Elijah: A powerful Baron who believed in genetic purity and sentenced all other kinds of humans to forced labor. While never being more of a secondary antagonist himself, he has caused a number of villains incidentally, such as...
 * Johnson Lester: His former Sec Man who was later badly burned and later became the leader of an army of mutant stickies.
 * Kaa: A powerful psionic mutant under the captivity of Baron Elijah, but eventually making it into his good graces. He had the ability to control mutants with his pineal third eye. He then tried to commit genocide of all non-mutants in the Deathlands.

Series history
The series had begun as a joint project by Christopher Lowder (pen name "Jack Adrian") and Laurence James (pen name "James Axler"), with the first book called Pilgrimage To Hell. Laurence James then solely wrote the Deathlands series up to and including Eclipse at Noon. However, due to failing health he was forced to leave the series in 1995. Prior to his death in February 2000, James wrote one last novel, Crucible of Time, which was released in 1998. All other Deathlands novels have been written by a number of other authors, including Mark Ellis who produced the first post-Laurence James entry, Stoneface. Gold Eagle is owned by Harlequin. In 2014, Harlequin was purchased by HarperCollins. It was decided that Gold Eagle would be shut down. After December 2015, Deathlands novels stopped being produced following the company's closure, with the rights transferred to Graphic Audio and all subsequent sequels being in an exclusive audio drama format. Graphic Audio have produced over one thousand hours of audio set in the Axlerverse.

The Sci Fi Channel adapted Homeward Bound into a television movie in 2003.

In January 2024, a ten-part television series adaptation to be directed by Jonathan Frakes was announced.

As of April 2024, the Axlerverse consists of 231 stories (The Trader 1-3, Deathlands 0-152, and Outlanders 1-75), not including the 2003 television film.

The Trader prequel series (audiobook exclusives) Gold Eagle novels

Post-shutdown titles (audiobook exclusives)

Following the closure of Gold Eagle Publishing in 2015, Graphic Audio, the primary provider of audiobook adaptations of the Deathlands franchise, acquired the rights to produce more content for the series. All titles produced in-house by Graphic Audio are exclusively in a narrated audio drama format.

Adaptations
Deathlands also made it to film in 2003 as a low-budget telefilm that aired on the Sci-Fi Channel. Deathlands: Homeward Bound starred Vincent Spano and Traci Lords. Ryan, Krysty, J.B., and Jak were featured characters in the movie. Cannies (cannibals), sec men (security men), a war wag (war wagon), and a redoubt (bunker) were depicted in the movie. The characters of Doc Tanner and Lori Quint were absent from the movie.

All of the Deathlands and many of the Outlanders novels have been adapted to the Graphic Audio audiobook format. The Deathands Saga was initially produced by Random House Audio, but never completed. The adaptations have an average running time of nearly 8 hours, and utilizes a full cast, score, and sound effects. The Deathlands Graphic Audio series continued from the events of the books' end, with the first completely original story, Survival in Doubt, released in Fall 2016.

Related works
Created in 1996 by Mark Ellis, Outlanders is the official sequel series to Deathlands, set a century after the original series. Outlanders provides a more expansive and complete backstory for the "Axlerverse" and the causes for the nuclear holocaust rather than relying on the "US vs. USSR" template. After 75 novels, the series ended in November 2015 with the closure of Gold Eagle. Graphic Audio have adapted the first 56 novels.

In 2022, Graphic Audio launched an audio-exclusive prequel series entitled The Trader, set in the 2080s, over a decade before the original series.

title: Deathlands