Talk:Billy Bragg

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Billy Bragg article.
Article policies
This is not a forum for general discussion of Billy Bragg.
Any such messages will be deleted. Please limit discussion to improvement of the article.
England Portal
This article is supported by WikiProject England, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to articles relating to England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article associated with this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to musicians and musical groups on Wikipedia.
Kim Gordon and Thurston Moore of Sonic Youth
Alternative music Portal
This article is part of the Alternative music WikiProject, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage of articles relating to Alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the Project's importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Sexual Orientation

Billy's been added to the list of bisexual musicians - does anyone have a citation or interview where he mentions having had relationships with men? Although he tends to keep his personal life quiet, he is married (to a woman, Juliet) and has a child. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shinji nishizono (talk • contribs)

Well spotted! I've removed this and left a message for the anon who keeps adding it. We obviously need to adhere to WP:BLP here. Thanks for your good work. --Guinnog 12:06, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requests

Can anyone expand the 'army career' section to include how long he served for? TomViza 23:46, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Done. It was four months. --rbrwr± 00:06, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Which means he never actually served with the Queen's Royal Irish Hussars. He never finished basic training so wouldn't have worn the green beret with its green silk banding. He would have worn the recruits beret of dark blue. He was only "badged" to us at the recruit depot, Catterick. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.31.67.169 (talk) 19:20, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I am unfamiliar with the practice of buying one's way out of the army. How does this work? Is it common? Once in the service here in the USA, you're kinda committed for however long you signed up for (although you can get thrown out for various reasons). I know that the US Army permitted buyouts during the American Civil War but the privilege was abused and the practice discontinued. Granted, this subject is peripheral to an article about Billy Bragg but contributors should be aware that passing references to culturally-specific phenomena will confuse and distract readers from outside the culture. one solution would be a link to an article about buy-outs (which may have to be created). 172.163.44.187 (talk) 18:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)RKH

I think the payment was just a fine administered for opting for a Entry-level separation. 202.81.18.30 (talk) 01:52, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Is he a descendant of the Nobel laureates in Physics Braggs? They lived in England, and both William and Stephen were used as names in their family. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.131.232.129 (talk) 01:04, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Record Company

Isn't Billy Bragg signed to Cooking Vinyl records nowadays? quercus robur

Yes he is. I foresee that this article will occupy much of my day tomorrow... for the moment I will mend his name and date of birth, but no more. --rbrwr

Glad to have kickstarted this thing off. I was wondering how long it should be - as it could lose the average reader in too much detail. Kabads

Well, I'll be careful... but some of these stories are too good not to put in ;-) --rbrwr
I agree, especially the one about the biryani! I can't find my Collins book anywhere, which is why some inaccuracies appeared in the initial version - I must have spent a good 3/4 of an hour in the garage last night looking for it. Kabads 12:00 Dec 8, 2002 (UTC)

Does the image add anything extra to info about Billy Bragg? Do we have rights to display it? If it does stay, should it be a bit smaller, with text wrapping around it? Kabads

Re the image adding info- possibly not, but does make the page look more visually interesting and breaks it up a bit... actually thinking about it, I think it does add something to the article information wise- apparently using pictures like this (record covers) is OK as it's 'fair use'... You casn wrap the text if you like- Sam (Tzartram) does this alot, but I think on the whole pictures look better free standing but don't have strong felings either way... I'll reduce the image size later if I remember.. Cheers quercus robur

Fair use is not a term I'm familiar with in Copyright law. Can you explain a little further? Thanks Kabads
see Fair use. Briefly - it is possible to use portions of copyright material for use in a critique or educational purposes, or as part of a parody.

[edit] Criticisms

To be frank, this reads like a fanzine article. The authour(s) opinions are smattered all over the place. For example: "Billy Bragg, has been described as being amongst the best known and best loved popular musicians". Putting 'described' in the middle doesn't it make appear any more neutral. Moreover, you may be surprised to know that he really isn't that well known, especially in the states. ~~anon.

I am not sure it is a question of POV so much as one of accuracy. In no meaningful sense can he be described as 'well known' compared to M Jackson or Elvis or whoever. Monk Bretton 17:36, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
"Well known" is a relative term. He might not be a household name to the extent of the examples given, but he is well known in certain circles. Someone has a beef with whoever wrote the original text. Best thing to do is go to the article and amend it rather start off a time wasting discussion. Just amend it to show where he is well known. MPLX/MH 17:58, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I've changed it. MPLX is correct that "well-known" is a relative standard, but I cannot think of any way the phrase could be construed in an encyclopediac manner. It's sufficient to allow the reader to know that Bragg's well-known enough to have a wikipedia entry, and let the rest of the article stand for itself in establishing his level of prominance. ~CS 23:52, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)


The section on political life if too long-winded. Basically, he is aligned with various left wing causes and link to them. The places where you have specific instances of his political actions are fine...just trim this down. If I find my wikipedia password I might start working on this. ~~anon

He is now more of a political activist and campaigner for House of Lords reform than he is a musician, so it seems fair to have a largish section on his activities in this area, in fact the section will probably get proportionally bigger, in comparison to the music section as time goes by. Monk Bretton 17:36, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Billy Bragg has always been a political figure who sings his messages. Regarding the comments above concerning his identity in the USA, he has achieved national TV coverage and in some localities such as Dallas, Texas, due to the influence of George Gimarc he was given wide publicity for both his music and his political views. His song lyrics are very clear and easy to understand and there is no mistaking their very specific political messages. MPLX/MH 18:29, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This article needs to be more neutral and it's very true to say that in the states and even britain he isn't that well-known.

Go on then - write it! - An annonymous comment that is badly written to begin with that offers no specific points as to where you find a problem is totally useless. Please do one of two things: a) spend the time to write to encyclopedia standards the sections you disagree with or b) state your disagreements by listing the sections and showing why you disagree with what has been written so that someone else can do all the time consuming work of fixing the problem that you are complaining about:

Example: "I disagree with section --- and paragraph --- and line --- because --- and it should read --- "

MPLX/MH 17:26, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 213.122.71.37

Rather than contribute new annonymous account 213.122.71.37 has decided to hack at the article and without telling anyone what was hacked the history just says "removed POV". This is POV in reverse of the worst sort. Anyone any idea of what has been butchered? Getting into a revert war with an annonymous account is a waste of time. Opinions please. MPLX/MH 04:37, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Here's the diff for 129.170.46.56's change (not 213.122.71.37). You can get to this by going to "history" and clicking the "last" link for the edit you want to see. It seems to me to be cutting out material that is florid and largely POV; this is hardly butchery. I don't understand why you accuse it of being "POV in reverse of the worst sort" when you apparently don't even know what changes were made. Having said that, I think a better job could be made of rewriting the intro, and I'm going to have a quick go. --rbrwr± 07:45, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

No, scratch that, I don't have time; I'll have another look after 1700 UTC. --rbrwr± 07:57, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

My gripe is that when someone edits the entire article and just notes that they have removed POV material, they they do not say what they mean. First of all the term POV is highly subjective, because it may be to one editor and it may not be to others. Secondly I don't want to waste time hunting around trying to find out what was changed. The note is supposed to explain just that: "I changed section X which contained y to z", something very specific. It is courteous to everyone involved.

Okay, so I took the extra time to follow the link and it seems to me that what this other editor did was to hack the article:

The original text:

Stephen William Bragg (born December 20, 1957), known as Billy Bragg, has been described as being amongst the best known and best loved popular musicians, with a career spanning 20 years. His music is a fine blend of poetry and political comment, with a dash of romance, demonstrating his musical flexibility. He has collaborated with many other musicians, from Johnny Marr of The Smiths, protest folk singer Leon Rosselson to R.E.M., Kirsty MacColl, and Wilco.

The new text:

Stephen William Bragg (born December 20, 1957), known as Billy Bragg, is a British musician, with a career spanning 20 years. He has collaborated with many other musicians, from Johnny Marr of The Smiths, protest folk singer Leon Rosselson to R.E.M., Kirsty MacColl, and Wilco.

The only POV bits were:

"His music is a fine blend"

First of all it may well be that Bragg has been described as "being amongst the best known and best loved popular musicians" - what is missing is a REFERENCE to who said this. Otherwise it could be a factual statement. The "fine blend" bit could be fixed by cutting out the word "fine".

What actually happened is that someone came in on a rampage and hacked at the article. (By the way, I did not write the text in question!) MPLX/MH 13:19, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Actually the term "POV" shouldn't be entirely subjective, as it results from the NPOV policy. There are however always grey areas, and I think there may be one here. Anyway, let's look at the disputed passages again:
"...has been described as being amongst the best known and best loved popular musicians, with a career spanning 20 years."
Even if this had a reference to who said it, it would still be POV, because it is a contentious statement presented without any counter-claim. As it stands, it is essentially being presented as truth stated by an unknown authority. Do you even think it's true? Is Billy among the best-known popular musicians? Compared to The Beatles? R.E.M.? Or even Kylie? It cannot stand as it is. Aside from the POV issue, I also think a clearer and more informative, if prosaic, list would make a stronger opening: "...Billy Bragg is a British singer, songwriter, musician and political activist, or something like that.
"His music is a fine blend of poetry and political comment, with a dash of romance, demonstrating his musical flexibility."
"Fine" is a problem, but I also would argue that "poetry" is a term of high praise when applied to the work of a jobbing singer-songwriter; I suspect there are those (poets, perhaps) who would object to the description of Bill's work as "poetry". (I couldn't name any names, though). Take "poetry" out and the rest of the sentence collapses. However, I do think this sentence needed rewriting, not complete removal: The intro should give some idea of the sort of music Bill makes.
So that's why I think these sentences were bad and removing them was more a case of pruning than butchery or vandalism. --rbrwr± 17:47, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"Fine" in "Fine Blend" does not equate to excelent, it's fine as in fine sand, "fine blend" means well mixed. Jamie Kitson

I don't know where this is going because when rbrwr wrote: I also would argue that "poetry" is a term of high praise when applied to the work of a jobbing singer-songwriter; I suspect there are those (poets, perhaps) who would object to the description of Bill's work as "poetry". (I couldn't name any names, though). Take "poetry" out and the rest of the sentence collapses. the red flag of POV shot up high! What do you mean by calling Billy Bragg a jobbing singer-songwriter? Then you added: I suspect there are those (poets, perhaps) who would object to the description of Bill's work as "poetry". That is outrageous snobbishness in the form of a subjective POV. Billy Bragg IS a poet-songwriter because that is what he is and does for a living: he writes poetry and prose and puts it to music. I don't necessarily agree with the thrust of some of his lyrics (poetry), but I do like him as an artist because I like his presentation. Now that you have stated your own position it would appear that you want to flush Mr. Bragg down the toilet because he is beneath your subjective POV that defines poetry. Many will disagree with you. I don't know why you chose to go off on that tangent. MPLX/MH 00:46, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)


Who keeps changing the name to William Stephen Bragg (instead of Stephen William Bragg) and why? Why the negative spin to the entire piece? Those of us who are longtime fans, have followed him through the years, spoken with him and each other know best about what belongs in this article, no? Stephen Walker - Boston USA —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.250.34.161 (talk) 12:22, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Please check your talk page. I've explained why using personal conversations as a reference is not viable on Wikipedia there. -- 192.250.34.161 12:55, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] POV changes

In my most recent edit of this page, I have made the following changes:

  • "His music is a fine blend of poetry..." -> "His music is a combination of poetry..." ("fine blend"? Those kind of words don't belong on Wiki, unless quoted directly)
  • "demonstrating his musical flexibility" -> Removed (so very POV)
  • "and consequently the band failed" -> "and the band failed" (saying it was because of the lack of exposure is not a proven fact)

And yes, I have read the above arguments. As for the poetry bit...anyone can write poetry. Doesn't mean it's good. Kel-nage 13:05, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Weasel words

I removed this:

Many accuse Bragg of being a hypocrite for advocating multiculturalism yet living in an all white area of Dorset.

Who says this? Wikipedia:Avoid weasel words. Joe D (t) 00:04, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Neo-nazis, that's who...I challenge anyone to come up with a single non-right-winger who has accused Bragg of being a hypocrite because of where he lives. Camillus (talk) 00:46, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
All the recent back-and-forth in the Controversy section seem over-the-top to me. Is this sardonic comment really worth the page space? Especially when our article seems to be misrepresenting what was actually said, according to the Guardian article. Do we need a string of extreemist webpages as sources? The Guardian is the only reputable source listed. So what if he's caught the attention of a racist website? Who hasn't? It is perfectly reasonable to provide counter-balance and criticisms if an article is in danger of gushing about a figure, but those criticisms need to be reasonable and well-documented ones, not celebrity gossip from partisan rags. I'm afraid this article has become the target of someone with political motives that have little to do with Bragg. ~CS 01:44, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
"Neo-nazis, that's who...I challenge anyone to come up with a single non-right-winger who has accused Bragg of being a hypocrite because of where he lives."

So right-wingers are all neo-nazis? Steady on. But I wonder: do you think Billy should arguably live nearer his roots and in a community more closely reflecting his support for issues around anti-racism and/or anti-facism? I know I do. Taxonomyyeti 16:47, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, I'll rephrase - come up with a non-neo-nazi/far rightist who has accused Bragg of being a hypocrite because of where he lives. Even "moderate" right-wingers support the right of people to live where they choose. If someone campaigns say, against poverty, are they hypocrites if they don't live in a poor area?
Anyway, I'm sure Bragg would be quite amused to see himself attacked by the far-right. He probably would consider that he'd failed if the neo-fascists weren't up in arms against him. Camillus (talk) 00:46, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
You're evading the point. Some say Billy is a hypocrite to live in Devon, but no-one to my knowledge has ever said he has no right to live there. Perhaps you know different.
"come up with a non-neo-nazi/far rightist who has accused Bragg of being a hypocrite because of where he lives."
Gary Bushell: "RANDOM irritations: Billy Bragg filmed pontificating on a South London council estate when we all know he lives in a lovely big house in West Dorset." [1]
Bushell is a w*nk*r but he is not a neo-nazi or far-rightist.
'Even "moderate" right-wingers...'
Are you seriously suggesting that all right-wingers are the same?
"If someone campaigns say, against poverty, are they hypocrites if they don't live in a poor area?"
If they could campaign more effectively there, yes they would be a hypocrite. And if they made a big fing of their roots in the poor district but didn't live there no more, they would be doubly a hypocrite. Both of those apply to Billy. Also, someone who campaigns against poverty thinks poverty is a BAD thing. Billy thinks multi-culturalism and multi-racialism are v. v. GOOD things, yet he chooses to live in a mono-cultural, mono-racial village where his children are not exposed constantly to other cultures and races. So here's my question again:
Do you think Billy should arguably live nearer his roots and in a community more closely reflecting his support for issues around anti-racism and/or anti-facism? Taxonomyyeti 09:35, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Guess Condie Rice is also a hypocrite then? What a nonsensical argument. It's possible to support a cause that applies to one area while living in another; you might as well say that anyone who supports, say, ending famine in Africa but who lives in the USA and eats a healthy, balanced diet is a terminal hypocrite. He seems to desire greater social and financial equality between folk of various ethnicities - probably he wishes there was more diversity in the place where he lives. Moving to an inner-city wouldn't make that place more diverse, or society more equal, as he sees it. He is just one person. What part of that doesn't make sense?213.86.59.92 15:52, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
I support the right of anyone to live where they choose, "period".
Fine, add Garry Bushell's comment. Everyone knows, as you do, that Bushell's a wanker. And I remember him as a big fan of many extremely dodgy neo-fascist bands in the 80s. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Bushell votes BNP. So there's the BNP, various neo-nazis, Garry Bushell, and, er, you. Camillus (talk) 12:30, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Some might conclude from your repeated failure to answer my simple question that you're on the list too, but I won't embarrass you by asking it again. You're still evading the point by talking about his right to live where he chooses. No-one to my knowledge disputes his right to live in a lovely big house in a 99% white Dorset village. If you know different, add it to the article. Taxonomyyeti 14:59, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Er, what "list"?
I don't know the demographics of the village where he lives. Without knowing, I don't assume that all non-white people live in poor areas. How do you know that his village is 99% white? It might be different if Bragg lived in a closed village where no non-whites were allowed to live. I find it completely normal that someone who's had a bit of success would choose to live in a pleasant country village, there's nothing to stop a succesful non-white person moving there - thankfully, the BNP and their ilk are a tiny minority, always will be, so there's no areas in the UK where non-whites can't live. If most of the people who criticise Bragg got their way, there'd be no non-whites at all in the UK. So to be called a hyprocrite by those low-lifes is something that I guess he can put up with. Camillus (talk) 19:50, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Er, the list of people who think he's a hypocrite. You do too, but you're not honest enough to admit it -- hence the evasions, the non sequiturs and the floundering for excuses. Taxonomyyeti 10:49, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
No, I don't think he's a hypocrite. Neither do I think he's a saint. He's a succesful musician who's earned some money, moved to the country, as many would love to do, but still remembers his roots. I don't have high jesuitical standards for "rock stars" - I don't expect them to wear hair shirts.
But the real point is, what you or I think is not the issue here. The discussion page is for discussing changes to the article. I've stated that mostly the far right calls him a hypocrite. You've added a comment from Garry Bushell. That's fine by me. I don't see much point in continuing a slagging match with no effect on the article. Camillus (talk) 22:44, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ad hominem attacks

I would like to take a moment to remind users that the talk page is not a place to debate personal feelings about Bragg's life, nor a forum to insult his supporters or detractors. Its purpose is to discuss the delelopment of the the article. Wikipedia operates under a spirit of congeniality, and has etiquette guidelines, as well as an official policy of no personal attacks. This policy includes "Using someone's affiliations as a means of dismissing or discrediting their views - regardless of whether said affiliations are mainstream or extreme." I encourage users to turn the venom off, read this essay and reconcider the methods being used in this debate before making further statements here, or edits to the article. ~CS 17:19, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

You're right: I shouldn't have made personal comments. Taxonomyyeti 16:02, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MySpace

Shouldn't his recent controversy with MySpace be mentioned here?

It should really. Here's a link for anyone who wants to add it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/31/business/media/31bragg.html?ex=1311998400&en=47cf184652d2e263&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

172.143.230.59 14:29, 15 February 2007 (UTC).


[edit] addition to popular culture

Perhaps it should be mentioned that Billy Bragg was mentioned in Rancid's song "The Wars End"?

"Little sammy was a punk rocker you know his mother never understand him went To his room and smashed his billy bragg record didnt want him to hear that Communist lecture you know his mother tried to take him to war sammy now the War is over now were at the wars end now its time for you to leave home"

[edit] Famous covers of Billy Bragg songs

I just removed the following section from the article:

In 2001 Lars Frederiksen and the Bastards, a American punk band featuring Rancid's guitarist Lars Frederiksen covered Billy's famous "To have and to have not" with slightly altered lyrics. In the chorus of Billy Bragg version the lyrics are "Just because I dress like this, doesn't mean I'm a public menace", where as the Lars Frederiksen version "Just because I dress like this, doesn't mean I'm a communist".

Firstly, I don't believe that "Lars Frederiksen and the Bastards" are important enough to justify the inclusion. And secondly the stuff about the changed lyrics is just nonsense. The "altered" lyrics quoted from the Bastards version are the original lyrics from the version of the song on "Life's a Riot". Davorg 06:39, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

the orginal lyrics are "Just because I dress like this, doesn't mean I'm a communist". so either you got it the wrong way round or are trolling. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.179.228.231 (talk) 15:26, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Parodies inaccuracy

"at the 2006 Glastonbury festival,"

There wasn't a 2006 Glastonbury Festival - it took a year off last year. There was a 2005 one though, and I believe he did play there (although I forgot about it and missed him - d'oh!)

Howie —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.21.124.49 (talk) 23:09, 23 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Flag

Does anybody mind if I take the flag down? There has been a real proliferation of these on musical articles recently, and reading WP:FLAG has made me realise just how unnecessary they are. Bragg, as an avowed internationalist, seems a particularly unsuitable candidate for the St George's Cross treatment. No information would be lost, just a reversal of the slight dumbing-down of the article that the flag implies. --Guinnog 18:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree, there is really no need for these on bio pages. -MrFizyx 19:45, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discography

I've tidied it up and moved it to Billy Bragg discography (left behind main studio albums) as the article was getting on the long side. -- JD554 13:53, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright issue?

Who copied who? I've noticed that the Billy Bragg biography on Cooking Vinyl's website[2] is word for the word the same as what's here. Having looked at the history of this article it appears to have developed over time in 2002/2003. Does anybody know if Cooking Vinyl has copied what's here or if what's here has been copied from them. Either way there appears to be a breach of copyright. -- JD554 10:34, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Scratch that. Having looked at other biographies on their site, they also appear to be the same as the wikipedia versions. Guess they're copying from here. -- JD554 10:51, 15 August 2007 (UTC)



[edit] Documentary

How about some mention of the documentary about him and Wilco putting music to Woody Guthrie lyrics? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.182.227.54 (talk) 20:44, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] George W. Bush

I think the article should explain why a fairly unimportant British musician should bother to interest himself in the affairs of the United States of America and their democratically-elected President. His own PM Tony Blair fully supported Bush so why should Bragg butt into American affairs instead of putting his own house (in affluent Dorset) in order?! I can imagine the reception he probably really received in Dallas-why doesn't the article mention this as well?jeanne (talk) 09:04, 24 May 2008 (UTC)