Talk:Rufus Wainwright

Cover

... his cover of Jeff Buckley's cover of Leonard Cohen's ..." seems confusing. Is there any particular reason why Buckley's cover is mentioned?

-Because his cover was intended to be a tribute to Buckley, as they were friends.

Actually, RW has stated that he hadn't even heard Buckley's version before he wrote/recorded his own. However unlikely this sounds, we can't prove that RW's Hallelujah is NOT a direct cover of Leonard Cohen, especially since there are ties between himself and Cohen (he lived at the house of Cohen's daughter for a while, I think LC had his own appartment at the same place). It is even possible that both Wainwright and Buckley were inspired by another source, the song has been covered a fair few times...

Buckley's 'Hallelujah' is mentioned because (as the article states) Wainwright references it in the song 'Memphis Skyline', and 'Memphis Skyline' is the subject of the paragraph. - NeilH

Songwriting saved my life - Tomas Bartlett "I had to sing "Hallelujah" for "Shrek," and I recorded my version before hearing his version, and then I heard his, and it just dawned on me at that moment the incredible loss, and the incredible talent that he was. The opportunity for me to sing with him would have been mind-blowing." the full text may be read here: [1] -Danny

Contributions to soundtrack of Brokeback Mountain

You might want to add his two performances on the soundtrack. The first song is a cover of Roger Miller's "King of the Road" (with Teddy Thompson), and a good one at that. However, the second song "The Maker Makes" is an original, I believe. It may have even been written for this film. Either way it's classic, haunting Wainwright (to this non-Wainwright fan's ear).

The movie may or may not meet with wide acclaim or financial success, but it will undoubtedly be a milestone in mainstream cinema, at least for gay filmgoers. This was probably his motivation for contributing.

Whether or not the film or its actors do well during the awards season, the composer & arranger for the score (Gustavo Santaolalla) may receive a few prizes for good writing and bringing together a collection of iconic country and gay musicians as dichotomous as cowboys and homosexuals. 70.213.12.217 18:22, 17 December 2005 (UTC) T.Morris

American? Canadian-American?

I'm curious about the recent reversion of the Canadian-American label. Is he really not Canadian? Given that Kate McGarrigle is Canadian, he would automatically have Canadian citizenship under the rule of jus sanguinis (right of blood) at birth, even though he was born in the United States. Darkcore 22:45, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Themes

I think much of the recent additions to the "Themes" section lacks NPOV and is original research. For example, I don't agree at all with the notion that becuase "many of his songs contain phallic references" necessarily makes "it largely impossible for anyone but a gay man to author or perform his songs." One, it doesn't seem accurate to state that "many" songs contain phallic references, and two, just becuase they have phallic references doesn't mean that only a gay man could write or perform them. --mtz206 03:57, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

You may be right... As far as I can tell, there isn't much "research" when it comes to Rufus Wainwright. From what I have seen, however, the question of whether RW's songs do not reach wide spread appeal because a straight man and/or woman can't sing along without realizing that he/she has just said a very gay thing or not is much discussed. I think it is an important question and should be addressed in one way or another. As for "many phallic references" I could supply you with a list, but we're easily talking about 15-20%. That's a theme. I invite anyone to expand "themes" but when I arrived... there was nothing there of any worth. RW's themes are vitally important to understanding and appreciating his music and, really, what set RW appart. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Theowarner (talk • contribs) 05:12, 4 March 2006 (UTC).

"RW's songs do not reach wide spread appeal because a straight man and/or woman can't sing along without realizing that he/she has just said a very gay thing or not is much discussed." That just doesn't make any sense to me at all, and I still question the encyclopedic value of the sentiments of this section. --mtz206 13:27, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah... let me try again. 1) Why is it that RWs songs are both critically successful and popularly unsuccessful? 2) One reason may be that some of RWs songs are about gay love. 3) But, wait a minute, saying, "I love you" is neither gay nor straight. 4) That may be true, but some times RW says, "I'm a man and I love a man." 5) Oh... I see. A straight man or woman can't identify with "I'm a man and I love a man," in the same they can identify with "I love you."

Maybe there's another section that this deserves to be in. Any ideas? But, that some of RW's songs are from a gay voice to a gay object is an undeniably important theme. It's got to go somewhere. -theowarner

yeah, i can see that the "gay voice to a gay object" might be an important theme to mention, I'm just not sure about the argument that such a theme keeps non-gay folks from enjoying his songs. I can sing along to a gay song and appreciate it for what it is, no matter whether I can fully relate to its sentiments. --mtz206 19:23, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

IMO, the 11:15, March 13, 2006 edit by Theowarner does a good job indicating some of the themes, without opining/speculating as to their "possible implications" --mtz206 18:02, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

How is Rufus's list of gay icons related to the themes of his songs? Could this information be removed? Unetta 13:32, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it really matters whether he is singing about men or women. Love is a universal term that everyone can interpret in their own way... just a thought. --Ignatiuswiki 02:14 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Contributions

Not sure why RW's contribution to Craig Armstrongs Album has been deleted, but I've just added it back in Ninefish 01:48, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

This list is getting way too long. Is it really necessary to mention eg. the tv shows that have featured his music, or compilations that include music already on his studio albums? Unetta 11:29, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Loudon Wainwright as 'folk singer'

To assert that father Loudon Wainright is a 'folk singer' is quite absurd (why? Because he plays acoustic guitar?) Wainwright himself has made fun of this stereotype on the song 'Taking New Bob Dylan Blues' in 1992. He's a songwriter who plays acoustic guitar. Folk? In 37 years I think he's done about 2 cover versions. User: Tim Gadd

Missing citations

The "Themes" section seems to be missing quite a number of citations. While the content of some of his songs are obvious, the less obvious ones ("Tulsa" and "Matinee Idol", as examples) should have citations for their inspiration. Also, if there are rumors about Wainwright and Brandon Flowers being lovers, that should definitely have a cite, as that's potentially highly controversial. Parthenogenetic 21:54, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

True, and I also think we're being a bit broad with the "themes". Brandon Flowers would not count as a theme unless Rufus had written a number of songs about him. I vote that we either remove this piece of information entirely (it's mentioned on the Release the Stars page, anyway) or move it - and other bits like it, such as the anecdote about Jeff Buckley - to another part of the article or section. --DearPrudence 02:37, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Opening for the band Sloan?

Didn't Rufus open for the Canadian band Sloan several times on their tour in either 1998 or 1999? I know he opened for them for three of four shows in a row performed at the Palais Royale in Toronto back in November of 1998 or so...Though none of his performances were recorded and added to the live Sloan double disc album "4 Nights At The Palais Royale". I was just wondering if this would be something to add to the article? (I'm not quite sure but I remember reading somewhere that he opened for them a number of other times before the Palais shows and this is why I'm bringing it up.)

Absolutley Fabulous Cameo

Under the addiction subheading, it's mentioned that during his debaucherous week, Rufus "played a drug addict in a cameo role in a UK comedy television programme 'Absolutely Fabulous.'" I have just seen the cameo in the episodes entitled 'Gay' and his role is less than five seconds, and only consists of him small talking with Patsy, echoing her drunken mannerisms. Am I missing something? I will retool the reference. Kurtto (talk) 15:56, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

"Direct descendant"

[Loudon Wainwright III (a direct descendant of Peter Stuyvesant, the last Director-General of New Netherland.]

What does this mean? If he is a "direct descendant of Peter Stuyvesant" in the male line, then why isn't his surname Stuyvesant? If he is not a descendent in the direct male line, what is he? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.176.5.121 (talk) 12:43, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Artists that have covered Wainwright

Just for the record, in case this information pertains to an "impact" section for the article, following is a list of artists that have covered Wainwright:

• "Damned Ladies" - Audra McDonald on Build a Bridge
• "Dinner at Eight" - Keane on Connect Sets
• "Going to a Town" - Mathilde Santing on 49 + TV performance
• "Greek Song" - The Manhattan Transfer on Vibrate
• "Imaginary Love" - Jasper Steverlinck on Songs of Innocence
• "Oh What a World" - Sonos on Live on KCRW (EP)
• "Poses" - Dave Douglas on The Infinite; Keren Ann; Christine Tobin on Secret Life of a Girl; Academical Village People on Academical is Not a Word; Julia Dollison on Observatory; Mel Flannery on Mel Flannery Trucking Co.
• "Rebel Prince" - The Beautiful South on Golddiggas, Headnodders and Pholk Songs
• "Vibrate" - The Manhattan Transfer on Vibrate

Feel free to add to the list if more covers emerge in the future! --Another Believer _(Talk) 03:14, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

• http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203499704576623022689560618.html

--Another Believer _(Talk) 16:50, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Shakespearian sonnet cycle

There should be something here about the Shakespearian sonnets he was commissioned to score for a play in Germany that debuted recently. 66.41.253.22 (talk) 22:33, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Baby!

This article isn't structured such that it has a personal life section, so I am not sure how to include this. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 05:05, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Marriage

• http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/rufus-wainwright-partner-jorn-weisbrodt-plan-tie-knot-august-long-island-article-1.1030956?localLinksEnabled=false

--Another Believer _(Talk) 20:32, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Want albums, references badge

So why aren't you so kind and tell us what you want to be sourced? What in that paragraph do you doubt? It's just ordinary data, nothing controversial. No reader will stumble upon this thinking, "oh is this really true". That stupid button does help nothing at all.--Sylvia Anna (talk) 18:08, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Sylvia Anna that the 'Unreferenced' tag is unnecessary for this section. However, that's not because sources are unnecessary (they nearly always are) but because the section already contains perfectly good sources, i.e. wiki-links to the Want albums themselves. Adding other book, journal or magazine sources would be superfluous. Vacarme (talk) 12:41, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Internal links are not considered reliable sources per WP:CIRCULAR. If the linked articles have reliable sources, they can and should be copied to this article. If they don't have reliable sources, that's a problem with those articles. Doniago (talk) 13:29, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

You still haven't answered my questions and comments.--Sylvia Anna (talk) 19:21, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I somewhat thought you were being rhetorical given the tone you opted to use. Frankly, it looks like every statement in that section should have a citation as its discussing years of release of various albums, even if it's multiple uses of the same reference. One doesn't need to doubt that information is true nor feel that it is controversial to feel that it should be cited...you might want to review WP:V. As to "that stupid button does help nothing at all", that's simply incorrect. Among other things using that tag places the article in a category so that editors concerned with article clean-up are alerted to the fact that this article could use improvement. It's also, I believe, far more polite (and appropriate in this case) than simply removing the unsourced information, which is also a legitimate form of addressing it, though oftentimes not "best practice". Cheers. Doniago (talk) 20:00, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

The least would have been to explain on the talk page what in that paragraph you think should be sourced. I don't know if there is a policy here that requires one to do so, but it would have been a reasonable and helpful thing to do. Just putting in a badge and moving on is not quite helpful. Those "editors concerned with article clean-up" would certainly appreciate it, too. Apart from that, they have probably better things to do than to look for sources for something that has not and probably never will be challenged. And readers seeing that badge may thnk that there is something wrong with the information in that paragraph, although there actually is no reason to doubt that information. IMO, a badge like the one you used makes only sense if you have reason to believe that the information given is incorrect.--Sylvia Anna (talk) 20:38, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't see how the tag is unclear. "This section does not cite any references or sources." seems pretty clear-cut to me, and marking the section seems infinitely preferable, IMO, to tagging every sentence individually. For the record, by putting the tag in place the information has been challenged. I'm not inclined to remove it anytime soon, but there would certainly come a point, probably in 3 months or so, where I'd remove it for lacking sourcing...I'd probably move it here at that point, in fact. The fact that the information has no reliable sources is wrong. We provide citations so that readers don't have to assume that information is accurate, and there is no requirement that an editor believe information is incorrect before tagging it for being unsourced. The standard for inclusion here is verifiability, not truth. Doniago (talk) 20:48, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

It might be worth considering whether our time would be better spent updating the information with reliable sources rather than arguing over whether a tag is appropriate...especially since if the former is done the latter will be a moot point. Doniago (talk) 20:49, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

So you have challenged the information by inserting this badge, but you have no concrete reason to challenge the information. Very funny. "This section does not cite any references or sources" does imply to a reader who doesn't now about the internals of WP that there must be something wrong with the information given. This is absolutely not necessary here.

When was the last time - if at all - that you have done constructive work on this article? There are two people taking care of this article (me and Another Believer), both of us dedicated to keeping it up to date and in good state. I would never allow wrong or in any way harmful information to stay in this article. But I have a life outside WP. And you have nothing better to do than to bother us with the threat to remove perfectly fine information. A hint on the talk page that it would be good to source this information when we find time would have been enough. Your behaviour is definitely not motivating to the editors of an article.--Sylvia Anna (talk) 21:41, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Not really in the mood to be snarked at, thanks. The information isn't sourced, it should be. I won't remove it at this time. You've got a few months before I'll do anything about it. You're welcome to source it, you're welcome to remove it. Obviously I can't speak for whether other editors might remove it in a shorter timeframe, but there are editors who will argue that it's better to include no information than to include unsourced information. If you want to discuss my personal conduct, this isn't the place for it, and I'm pretty sure you've been around here long enough to know that, just as I'm sure you know that an editor's claim that they're keeping an article accurate while failing to provide sources doesn't actually mean much of anything. Editors aren't reliable sources either. Done here unless you'd like to continue discussing this in a way that involves discussing the article rather than discussing me. Doniago (talk) 22:10, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Looks like another editor chose to set up and take care of the problem. Awesome. Doniago (talk) 22:20, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Citizenship

I don't know why people keep changing it. Rufus is American-Canadian. He is both of American and Canadian descend and he has dual citizenship. I'm adding a reference from a Vanity Fair article where he comfirmed dual citizenship.--Sylvia Anna (talk) 18:25, 8 August 2013 (UTC)