Talk:Burt Bacharach

Bacharach's Stylistic Characteristics
Re: "Bacharach's music is characterized by the frequent use of innovative chord changes, striking rhythmic patterns, frequent modulation (that is, key changes), and odd time signatures (for example, 5/4 or 3/2), going from one time signature to another in the same song, often successively.":

I don't think you can reasonably maintain there is anything odd about 3/2. It means precisely the same thing as 3/4 and 3/8 simply using a different note value as point of reference. I also don't think it's the business of this article to define modulation. (Furnish a link to a separate modulation article if you're adamant.) "Innovative" strikes me as awkward and point-of-view; unusual would be better. Changing meter would be less verbose and rambling than "going from one time signature to another in the same song, often successively". TheScotch 18:37, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Tribute albums
To Hal And Bacharach - wonder if this deserves a mention? It's a tribute album with recordings by Australian musicians. I have a copy and I have to say, it's brill! pfctdayelise 13:21, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Partial records list
I wonder if it is useful to have the "known records" section. It is hardly a representative selection, and it seems less than practical to list them all. For a more comprehensive list, see http://www.bacharachonline.com/bacharach_discog2.html Perhaps it would be best to eliminate the section and just rely on the hits section?

Srcastic 04:42, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)

This appears to have been copied from

http://www.bacharachonline.com/bacharach_bio.html

24.54.238.244 did you write this biography? If not we will need to replace it due to copyright problems.


 * The replacement is even better than the "original copy". -- de:Mecki fingerchen 08:35, 28. Okt 2004 (CEST)

We replace with the following:

Burt Bacharach (born May 12, 1928 or 1929) is an American composer of popular music. He teamed with lyricist Hal David and others to write many popular songs in the 1960s and 1970s, including "I Say a Little Prayer For You", "The Look of Love", "Raindrops Keep Falling on My Head", "Alfie" and "What the World Needs Now Is Love".

Bacharach's music has been sung by a number of popular singers including Dionne Warwick, Aretha Franklin, Tom Jones, Carpenters and Dusty Springfield. The music has been praised for the distinctive melodies, sophisticated style and at times a light classical feel. He wrote a total of 52 Top 40 hits in his songwriting career.

He has been married four times, to Paula Stewart, actress Angie Dickinson, lyricist Carole Bayer Sager with whom he collaborated on a number of pieces, and currently (2003) Jane Hanson.

Bacharach has had cameo roles in a number of Hollywood movies including all three Austin Powers movies.

Re: "Bacharach's music has been sung by a number of popular singers...":

It would be better to say either "Bacharach's songs have been sung by a number of popular singers..." or "Bacharach's music has been performed by a number of popular singers...." TheScotch 18:41, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: "He has been married four times, to Paula Stewart, actress Angie Dickinson, lyricist Carole Bayer Sager with whom he collaborated on a number of pieces, and currently (2003) Jane Hanson.":

"Currently (2003) Jane Hanson" makes it sound as if the two were married in 2003. It would be better to say "and since 1990 to Jane Hanson"--substituting for "1990" the year they actually were married, whatever that is. TheScotch 18:46, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Youth
We say he was born in Kansas City, Missouri, and I don't doubt that, but I'm pretty sure he's a graduate of Forest Hills High School in Queens (NYC). Anyone know when his family moved east? -- Jmabel | Talk 05:39, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Little Red Book
Love certainly recorded "My Little Red Book" (and nicely, at that) I believe that the claim that it was written for them is wrong. Any citation on that? As far as I know, it was written for the film What's New, Pussycat, in which it is performed by Manfred Mann. - Jmabel | Talk 23:29, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I've allowed several days, no one has answered, and I'm pretty sure I have this right, so I'm editing. - Jmabel | Talk 06:06, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you're right. Not only did Bacharach not write the song for Love, he strongly disapproved of Love's rendition--according to the extensive liner notes of the Rhino box-set release The Look of Love: The Burt Bacharach Collection. TheScotch 18:50, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Liberty Valance
The song "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance" is listed in the article as being "from the movie of the same name." The song was written after the fact to cash in on the movie's popularity, and appears nowhere in the movie itself. The same would be true of "Wives and Lovers." I'm removing the film reference from the article listing. Rich 03:15, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

We need to be careful, as sometimes the wording will be "after the movie of the same name" in which it is correct if quoted exactly. Sometimes songs are written for the movie and rejected for inclusion, so research and double checking are essential with these.--Tednor 09:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Burt's Blog
I don't know if this is Burt's only blog, official blog, or if he keeps up with it much, but should it be linked to?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/burt-bacharach/

Jake b 22:10, 14 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Doesn't seem worth linking until there is some substance to it. - Jmabel | Talk 01:05, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, it is his blog, and this is his bio, so I'm going to put it in. It has about as much substance as the rest of this bio... Jake b 22:31, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Pronunciation
How is is name pronounced? 67.188.172.165 19:33, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

You don't mention your own language, so I don't have a point of comparison to give you, but the IPA would be approximately /ˈbɜːt ˈbækəræk/. I'll add that to the article. - Jmabel | Talk 04:13, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I'd imagine English, but IPA is useful. Gingermint (talk) 23:08, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

More Details
I would like to see this beefed up. It should be mentioned that his father was a well-known newspaper columnist in Kansas City. And there's an ongoig unconfirmed legend that Bacharach was kicked out of McGill for playing classical music boss-nova style, many have tried to establish whether this was true but nobody has as of yet. I'd love to know. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Megaforcemedia (talk • contribs) 25 September 2006.
 * The guy's alive and well. Has anyone tried asking him straight out? - Jmabel | Talk 04:45, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Bossa Nova wasn't born until after the beginning of Burt's career, so if McGill is a college he went to... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tednor (talk • contribs). Also: Bacharach graduated from McGill. TheScotch 18:54, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Hits should be just that
I humbly suggest that we avoid giving the readers a headache and/or false impressions under the "hits" category. These records should be limited to top 40 hit singles, and only the versions that attained such successs. For example: "i just don't know what to do with myself" was recorded in a version prior to dusty's as well as many after, including Nicky Holland's version for The Best Man and the White Stripes version, neither of which were singles and neither of which charted. I love Dusty more than any singer and would love to see her name many times in this list, which could easily happen if i started putting all the times she sang a Bacharach song in. However, I feel it is most important that she get credit for having the sole "hit" version of "I Just Don't Know What To Do With Myself" and not have that fact muddied by the names of other artists. Do others get what I am saying and agree? Also, please note chart info in brief behind the artist thanks!

One more thing, is there a way to split off the songs into their own subpages (and separate from above, as the focus of such will be different), so that all artists who recorded the songs can be mentioned? With a catalog such as Bacharach's this will eventually prove both necessary and invaluable. Those editing could place the Record Company and year of Recording behind the artists names and the whole list could be alphabetized to avoid double-entry. Bacharach is one of those artists whose researchers NEED a comprehensive Wikipedia page for! --Tednor 08:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * You can turn the song name into a link and write an article there. Please, though, do this only if you have something to say, we have way too many song stubs. - Jmabel | Talk 03:29, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

That is exactly why I'm wondering about creating an "appended page" for this use. I know little of the technical aspects of Wiki and try to focus on bulking up content instead of the technical aspects. Is there such a thing as an appended page in Wiki?? Also I see White Stripes back with no chart placement, begging the question again: WAS THIS A HIT SINGLE OR NOT?? thanks--Tednor 15:53, 8 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I have no clear idea what you mean by an "appended page". You can add a page at any time. If you are asking about a subpage of a particular page, the answer is that they go against guidelines and we almost never do them in article space, except for things like a temporary page used for a translation in progress. - Jmabel | Talk 06:49, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Staccato elements in compositional technique
I am not a musician, nor a composer, but I notice as a listener that Bacharach places many staccato lines in his bridges, and especially horn parts (i can't think a single Bacharach trumpet part which is not delivered staccato!). As I'm out of my depth here, can somebody make note of this using its proper terminology (or tell me I'm off base on this page if necessary :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tednor (talk • contribs) 16:00, 8 December 2006 (UTC).
 * I think that you are responding more to his use of syncopation, and other unexpected rhythmic patterns. Bacharach doesn't really use staccato to any especial degree. The trumpet obbligati to which you refer are not really staccato. 66.108.105.21 18:58, 8 January 2007 (UTC) Allen Roth

Whether or not Bacharach uses "staccato to any especial degree", he does tend to use trumpet or fluegelhorn staccato conspicuously, distinctively, and memorably, which has nothing whatsoever to do with his use of syncopation. "Walk On By" is a case in point. Re: "The trumpet obbligati to which you refer are not really staccato": They're short notes. What would you call short notes other than staccato? TheScotch 18:59, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Daughter's Death
Perhaps Nikki's death should be at the bottom of the 'Bio' section, as in chronological order? It is a bit confusing where you see she died in January 2007 and the next section is 1998. Blackserenity 16:08, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The family information in a biography usually is not put in the middle of the chronology section, so if you have a better idea on where to move it, please do. -- Jreferee 16:16, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Its acceptable to discuss in this article the life and death of Nikki as it relates to Burt. There can be a verifiable entry on the impact of Nikki's life and death on Burt. For example, there probably should be more verifiable information on the song Nikki in the article, including why Burt wrote it and what messages it sends. However, since Nikki herself is not notable, it is not appropriate to include facts about her (birth date, death date, etc.) that are not directly related to Burt. This is especially true at this moment in time since she just died and given the way she died. -- Jreferee 21:43, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Proposed merger

 * The consensus is merge and a selective paste merger was performed. -- Jreferee 21:21, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Nikki's page is very short and it is unlikely to be expanded terribly much. It makes sense to merge the Nikki Bacharach page into this page since Burt Bacharach is a broader topic. Also, Wikipedia is not the place to honor departed friends and relatives. Subjects of encyclopedia articles must be notable besides being fondly remembered. See WP:NOT item #3, Memorials. -- Jreferee 16:16, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed. It should either be merged into this article or deleted altogether. Jvhertum 16:38, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge, her own article really doesn't have enough content to warrant it being separate--Tabun1015 17:13, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed - not information on her page to warrant a separate entry. HornetMike 19:00, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge per nomination - Jreferee 21:20, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

While Asperger's Syndrome is lifelong, it was not officially recognized in this country until the 90s. AS doesn't cause depression, but many Aspies have depression and are slightly more likely to kill themselves than neurotypical people. Being unable to practice her special interest of geology would have been extremely depressing to an Aspie. Since this is in her obit, I have included it, also taken out the reference to struggling with AS to show a NPOV.Berkeleysappho 12:30, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Huh? I happen to have the Asperger Syndrome and have never felt even close to depressed my entire life. I mean I would be disappointed if I couldn't do anything having to do with science, but never suicide! I am determined it wasn't AS that lead to Nikki's death. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.202.220.53 (talk) 01:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Dates and apostrophes
The proper typographic and grammatical use of the plural in dates and abbreviations is without an apostrophe. According to http://www.write101.com/W.Tips176.htm "You don't use apostrophes with dates, so it's the 1960s that we all look back on with such fond memories; neither do you need an apostrophe when you make an acronym plural...". According to The Keables Guide to Writing http://www.iolani.honolulu.hi.us/Keables/KeablesGuide/PartFour/Apostrophes.htm: "Use apostrophes for plurals of words and letters, but not for plurals of numbers, abbreviations or dates." According to the Carnegie Mellon styleguide http://www.cmu.edu/styleguide/dates_numbers.html: "Use an "s" without an apostrophe after the year to indicate spans of decades or centuries, a plural."

Google "apostrophes + dates" and you'll find dozens of sources for this. Please check the sarcasm at the door, it's not useful or in the spirit of wikipedia. Thank you. Freshacconci 11:58, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

And finally, according to wikipedia itself:

Incorrect date formats:


 * Do not use an apostrophe to indicate a decade:
 * Incorrect: 1970's
 * Correct: 1970s

Freshacconci 14:33, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

You appear to confusing style (in my opinion, bad style) with grammar. Save your religious fervor for the Revivalist meeting. Here are some more representative and more authoritative sources:

John Hodes and Mary Whiteman: Harbrace College Handbook, 136: "Either the  '  or s may be used to form such plurals as the following:.... the 1970's or the 1970s".

Margaret Shertzer: The Elements of Grammar, 99: "The  's may be added to figures, signs, symbols, and letters of the alphabet to form the plural. ...In the 1900s (or 1900's) technology spread through every aspect of human life, from transportation and cooking to in vitro fertilization."

A reasonable compromise if you simply cannot tolerate the apostrophe, it seems to me, would be simply to spell out the word seventies (or eighties and so on).

TheScotch 08:03, 24 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm simply pointing out Wikipedia's style guide backed up with a number of sources. Hardly "religious fervor." The apostrophe in dates and numbers makes no grammatical sense. And I was especially responding to the troll and grammar-police wanna-be and his nasty message: "Anyone unfamiliar with this punctuation is unfamiliar with very BASIC rudiments of the English language and show thus not undertake to edit English prose" which I find persnickety and more than a little humourless. Whoever that person is, I'm sure he's loads of fun at a party. It's all too finger-wagging schoolmarm for me. (Especially since he's wrong--the final irony). That's all I have to say on the matter. I believe that Wikipedia standards and style guides should be maintained, even for just the sake of consistency. (And don't you think it a bit odd that the article this person chose to "correct", of all the entries in Wikipedia, is Burt Bacharach? I find it a bit peculiar. Probably just me). Freshacconci 15:56, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

It is just you, and it isn't true that "it makes no...sense" or that "he's wrong". Furthermore, you have no business calling the editor in question "a troll" or "nasty" or speculating here about whether he'd be "fun at a party" or calling him any of the other names you call him in the above paragraph.

As for "grammatical sense": This is of course a matter of punctuation, not grammar. The most obvious consideration is that since numerals and dates aren't words there is no reason to pluralize them in the same manner as words. The next most obvious consideration is that adding the apostrophe makes pluralized numerals and dates easier to read. Perhaps the most important consideration is that the apostrophe for pluralized numerals and dates makes them consistent with how "letters of the alphabet" have to be pluralized to be readable at all, especially if these letters are in lowercase and form an abbreviation. In this case it would be impossible otherwise to tell if the s is intended to be part of the abbreviation.

Re: "(And don't you think it a bit odd that the article this person chose to "correct", of all the entries in Wikipedia, is Burt Bacharach?":

Why should it be? Is Bacharach notorious for his atrocious punctuation? I never heard this.

In any case, the editor in question is quite right that a literate person should be familiar with this punctuation. The removal of the apostrophe is a recent perverse trend that should be resisted. TheScotch (talk) 10:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Cut from article
I have cut the following from the article. It was way too much about one song that, as is acknowledged, "never even dented the 'bubbling under' singles charts". Also, some of the tone is fannish and unencyclopedic.

"In April 1960 a very strange Bacharach composed (also arranged & conducted) song appeared by the late-fifties rockabilly artist and soon to be actor - Paul Hampton. The song was titled: 'Two Hour Honeymoon' and appeared on Dot Records (#16084). This is a bizarre novelty song with haunting music by Bacharach about a couple who have just been married and are driving in their car on the way to their honeymoon, when they have a bad accident and the wife is killed and the husband (narrator) is lying there dying, talking to his dead wife and saying that they only had a 'Two Hour' Honeymoon. This is one of THE strangest records ever issued and never even dented the 'bubbling under' singles charts!" "Fifties rockabilly artist Paul Hampton issued the bizarre song ('Two Hour Honeymoon') in April 1960 on Dot Records. This was co-written with Bacharach and featured his arrangement & conducting of the haunting backround music in a song about a newlywed couple involved in a fatal auto accident right after their wedding."

Paul Hampton (who, I gather, wrote the lyrics, Bacharach just wrote a melody) doesn't even have an article. I'd suggest writing that article — with appropriate citations, in an appropriate style — discussing the song there, and giving it a one-line mention (at most) here. - Jmabel | Talk 17:38, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Opening Paragraph
Re: "He is best known for his many pop hits from 1962-70, with lyrics written by Hal David, many of which were performed by their premier interpreter, Dionne Warwick."

Someone has just changed sung by to performed by their premier interpreter, and I like to know why he thinks his four-word, decasyllabic phrase is superior to the simple verb (and preposition). I concede that premier adds information--if only vaguely--, but, on the other hand, performer subracts (so to speak) information, and, as a whole, the phrase strikes me as inflated and verbose. TheScotch 06:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

It's not only verbose but POV. "Most popular interpreter," maybe, if that's backed by citations. "Most famous interpreter," possibly. But "premier" suggests a value judgment and that doesn't belong. Clampton 17:21, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Year of birth?
The article says he was born in 1928; the infobox says 1927. Which is it? 76.21.0.82 (talk) 10:43, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Club on Long Island?
I recall that during the early 1980s Bacharach had a night club on Long Island, I believe in Oyster Bay. Anyone have a citation with the details of that club? Do people here think it's worth including? Lafong (talk) 04:17, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Pervasive Failure to Use Logical Punctuation
When reading the article, I was appalled at the number of times in the section "1.2 Early songwriting work" that the editor chose to ignore WP's manual of style and had commas inside of the quotation marks in lists of song titles. It was so bad that there were at least two instances of commas flanking an end quote.

As far as I can tell, I've fully repaired that section but I just had surgery and have only been home from the hospital for a day and a half so I may well have missed some. Further, I simply haven't the strength to fix the rest of the article right now and even if I actually remember to come back and fix it later, it won't be for at least a couple of months so it would be great if someone more able could fix it sooner. Thanks. --Kitsunegami (talk) 08:29, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Discography
Bacharach is an unusually prolific composer, arranger, etc. I believe he merits a separate discography page, as so many other session musicians, composers, and the like have. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 23:44, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I completely agree!
 * albabe -  The Writer /Artist Formally Known as  Al Gordon 21:49, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Chord Types and Voicings
I was thinking about adding to "Style: Bacharach's music is characterized by unusual chord progressions..." and chord voicings (Diminished Chords, Augmented Chords and Major 7 and 8 chords are a rarity in Pop music of the 60s and 70s). What do you folks think?

albabe -  The Writer /Artist Formally Known as  Al Gordon 21:48, 15 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Dear friend,

1) "diminished", "augmented" etc. are not "voicing". You can call them "types" or even nothing: "augmented chord" is enough. "Voicing" means something different: it means, today (which is not precise), the way a musician (pianists, guitarists...) uses to put the notes of a chord in a certain order instead of another (ex.: CMaj7 theorically is C,E,G,B but you can use several positions on the piano to play it: E,G,B,C and so on, and these are called inversions; others, adding an A, a D etc., spreading them on the keyboard or putting the notes one close to the others, in an infinte number or possibilities, and all this stuff somedoby calls it "voicing"). 2) Diminished and Major Seventh chords are common in pop music of the 60s and 70s, from the Beatles to the italian and french songwriters, and VERY common in other styles such as soul and so on. Also augmented are not so rare. I would add nothing. 3) What is a 8 chord?!? 4) A chord "progression", speaking precisely, is not a simple number of chords one following the other: these terms should be used to describe a number of chords you can build on a number of degrees of a scale one following the other, no gap. Example: CMaj7 / Dmin7 / Em7 / Fmaj7 is a chord progression; G7/CMaj7 is not. CMaj7 / Bm7b5 / Am7 / G7 is a progression. Ciao! --Simoneschiaffino (talk) 13:31, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Why isn't there a Wiki section on the team of Bacharach and David ?
This seems like a major oversight to me. There are separate sections on Burt Bacharach and Hal David, but surely the duo deserves an entry, the same as Lennon and McCartney , Rogers and Hart etc, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.37.18.239 (talk) 00:41, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

First sentence
"Burt Freeman Bacharach (/ˈbækəræk/ BAK-ə-rak; born May 12, 1928) is an American singer, songwriter, composer, record producer and pianist."

Edited this to the following:

"Burt Freeman Bacharach (/ˈbækəræk/ BAK-ə-rak; born May 12, 1928) is an American composer, songwriter, record producer, pianist, and singer."

He did sing on some of his records, but that's not why he's renowned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.69.222.24 (talk) 09:18, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 10:33, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Books
Here are some books that can be worked in



--Ilovetopaint (talk) 02:59, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Lead accolades
MOS:LEAD (emphasis added):
 * The lead section should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article in such a way that it can stand on its own as a concise version of the article. The reason for a topic's noteworthiness should be established, or at least introduced, in the lead (but not by using subjective "peacock terms" such as "acclaimed" or "award-winning" or "hit"). It is even more important here than in the rest of the article that the text be accessible. Editors should avoid lengthy paragraphs and over-specific descriptions – greater detail is saved for the body of the article. Consideration should be given to creating interest in the article.

Now, given all that, here are the statements of questionable notability Why is any of this important enough to be in the lead? Why not detail any of the other biographies, tribute concerts, or award ceremonies held for Bacharach?--Ilovetopaint (talk) 04:33, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
 * In 1997 he was the subject of a PBS "Great Performances" biography.
 * a 2009 concert by Dutch singer Trijntje Oosterhuis.
 * The ceremony was hosted by President Obama, and included a concert performed with various stars.


 * Unfortunately, you could make the same complaints about any of the other details in the lead. Why is person X named and not person Y? Why is this song listed but not that one? It's logical and common to include a few important honors and/or awards for celebrities. Oscars, Gold Globes, even nominations. As for the PBS show and Gershwin Prize, those are a few major ones chosen from the list in the article. But what peacock terms are you referring to? I only see a few "hits" stated, but those are facts, not peacock terms. Saying a song was a "hit" is a common description and is synonymous with "successful." Like a "best-seller" book.


 * For some strange reason you also keep tagging sourced details saying they were not in the cite. But it's obvious you never looked at the cite. So why do you keep tagging the sourced commentary? --Light show (talk) 07:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
 * You didn't answer my question. It's certainly appropriate to note that Bacharach has received numerous Grammy and Academy Awards, but there is nothing extraordinary about him being the subject of a TV biography 20 years ago, or that a Dutch singer (who 99% of readers won't even know collabed with him unless they visit her page) performed at one of his tribute concerts. This is an encyclopedia, not a press kit.


 * Check out the articles for the other recipients of the Gershwin Prize. Isn't it curious how Paul McCartney, Carole King, and Bill Joel have had tribute concerts, TV biographies, and the honor of being hosted by a head of state, yet that info is absent from their leads? It's almost like nobody bothered to add it because it's trivial fluff.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 08:55, 3 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I just noticed you again tagged that material. You also added a section tag which is totally out of place for a section with dozens of cites. Either prove that the material is not stated in the source or I will consider your repeated tagging and other strange comments as the only edits that are in fact "disruptive." --Light show (talk) 07:21, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I did check the cite, otherwise I would not have even bothered to tag it. I don't remember which specific details did not match up, but it was probably the mention of flugelhorns and other instruments (IIRC). I can check again, but then I may as well just fix the section myself while I'm at it.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 08:55, 3 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Yeah, why don't you go back and check again. And feel free to then apologize for erroneously tagging facts due to what you didn't remember. In the meantime the tags don't belong there. I'm looking at the cite right now and the details are there as stated. --Light show (talk) 15:25, 3 May 2017 (UTC)


 * You know, the reason why I merely tagged it instead of removing the info was to give you a chance to find proper sources. You really should consult the books I linked above instead of relying on YouTube videos.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 21:46, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

To respond to another point raised ("Why is this song listed but not that one?"), per WP:LISTCRITERIA, there actually is logic applied to the lead's selection of songs: "Songs that he co-wrote which have topped the Billboard Top 100". We aren't playing favorites. --Ilovetopaint (talk) 23:36, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Disruptive blitz-tagging
It's totally clear that the recent spate of dozens of tags for minor and insignificant details serves no purpose except to disrupt the readability of the article. See also commentary about non-constructive drive-by tagging.

There are nonsense tags for lists of linked titles which cover the sources; there are tags for video footage of an event noted claiming a better source is needed; there are tags referring to a sourced magazine article cover story showing the actual cover, claiming it as a primary source so another source is required referring to the magazine. After the previous discussion above it's evident that AGF is proving difficult.

Blitz-tagging without any discussion and for such nonsense is considered disruptive to the article. The tagging editor should discuss issue first. In an earlier discussion, also full of nonsense rationales, the editor had repeatedly tagged the same commentary falsely claiming the source was wrong. Only when I stated I had the source, did they finally stop. --Light show (talk) 23:52, 4 May 2017 (UTC)


 * The use of inline tags was per your suggestion: "inline tags more useful for a large section with over 50 sources".
 * WP:BURDEN: All content must be verifiable. The burden of demonstrating verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and is satisfied by providing a citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution.
 * WP:WNTRMT: You should not remove maintenance templates if ... The issue has not yet been resolved
 * --Ilovetopaint (talk) 09:30, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Dionne Warwick
Burt and Hal signed Dionne to their production company in early 1960. Dionne was under contract to produce some more records when Burt and Hal stopped working together in 1970s. That's why she had to sue them for songs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.234.135.204 (talk) 21:11, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

schooling
reasonably wants to add "McGill University, B.Mus., 1948" (with reference) to the infobox; but the template used here has no field for that, so he put it in the birth field, an inelegant solution. Can someone convert to a more accommodating template? —Tamfang (talk) 19:18, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't know. I asked at Template talk:Infobox musical artist. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:32, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Minor edit needed
In the Beginning Work... section Marlene Dietrich is described as "the German..." but she not only was a U.S. (naturalized ca. 1937) but is/was well known for her pride in being an American. Describing her as German is misleading. How about changing it to "...German-born American actress and singer..." ? (not that I'd say she had a good, probably not even average, voice, but it's not what you have, it's what you do with what you have, and she was Great at using her talents - and Bacharach deserves MUCH more credit that this article gives him for her singing success, but I digress.)40.142.185.108 (talk) 22:15, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ No perceived need to mention any nationality in this context. StonyBrook (talk) 11:15, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Korean War service
Bacharach served in the Army during period of the Korean War. It is unclear if he was involved with the war as the more comprehensive refs such as biographies say he was stationed in Germany, and preformed at places such as Fort Dix and Governors Island. One ref seems to indicate he was not in Korea at all. Accordingly, "Category:United States army personnel of the Korean War" was removed until a defining role is established for inclusion of this category. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 01:47, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Burt Bacharach's Death, 8 February 2023.
There will be no mystery surrounding Bacharach's death. He died from "Longevity" at 94. It was a "Natural Death" caused from "Natural Causes". No other reason to be given or discovered...thereafter. He died, at 94, because he lived a long-life. Spenser - The Unknown (talk) 21:06, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
 * That is not how wikipedia, or any reliable encyclopedia, operates. Information is gathered, then presented, based on the providing sources. Often this information changes, either from initial inaccuracy or further discovery. Bacharach died from the the reasons obtained from reliable sources, not just because he was long–aged.-- ☾Loriendrew☽  ☏(ring-ring)  22:55, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Discography
@Tone Hello! Now I get what you said here: the "Discography" section is in a mess right now...

I think I'll be able to fix it myself, but considering the amount of works the late Bacharach was able to boast, wouldn't it be better to organize that section in a similar way as Beyoncé and other good articles (that is, for instance, creating a separate page for his discography)?

Solo albums, collaborative albums and theatrical works might stay there if hyperlinked, but the "Other recordings" paragraph probably has to go (there should be a dedicated list already), whereas I'm not sure about "Tribute albums"...

What do you think about it?

Oltrepier (talk) 09:20, 16 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Also, I see that many album pages still have to be created, so this is definitely not made to be a one-man job, but hey, I'll see what I can do... : D Oltrepier (talk) 09:23, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, you see the problem, the list is massive. Perhaps a (sourced) selection of most notable works could be left in the main article and the rest in a dedicated separate one. I'd be happy with this approach though some people may still want to have everything sourced. Tone 09:30, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 * @Tone Right. Are sources like AllMusic useful enough, or should I turn to other portals? Oltrepier (talk) 11:01, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't have enough experiences with sourcing musical topics, so maybe some other editor would be more helpful. In any case, the sources have to be reliable and not from aggregators. Tone 11:08, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 * @Tone Alright, I've tried my best to retrieve good sources and re-organize the section properly, although it's undoubtedly a difficult job. Also, I've included two red-links for both the solo discography and the production discography, where we should eventually transfer part of that huge list. Hopefully someone else will join in, as well... : D
 * By the way, could this site be considered as a reliable source, or should we avoid using it? Oltrepier (talk) 11:16, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Hm, I checked how long ago he died, it was 10 days ago. I am afraid this is too late for RD :/ But you certainly improved the article, which is a good thing. As for the link you mention, it seems like a blog which is not the best type of source. Tone 08:05, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

@Tone That's fine, thank you for your feedback and help. Unfortunately, most of the artist's solo discography (together with other works he was involved in) looks to be poorly sourced, which is really annoying and disappointing, given his caliber. But anyway, if I can get someone to help me fill those two pages I created about Bacharach's discography, we should be able to tidy up that section permanently, and then focus on the overall quality of the article. There's still hope for a GA or FA nomination, in my opinion... : D Oltrepier (talk) 18:15, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Timeline of partnership with Hal David
The article is unclear about when Bacharach and Hal David began writing together. One paragraph begins "Bacharach and David formed a writing partnership in 1963." A little farther down, a paragraph mention's Dionne Warwick's "Don't Make Me Over", written by Bacharach and Hal David and released in 1962.

Was the "partnership" referenced in the sentence above a contractual partnership that followed some one-off collaborations by Bacharach and Hal David? 135.180.126.4 (talk) 15:48, 20 June 2023 (UTC)


 * This is pretty unclear. I've removed the earlier "partnership" language -- Bacharach was still writing songs with other lyricists at the Brill Building for several years before he starting working exclusively with David. However, I don't see (quickly) when the formal relationship began. And Dionne Warwick needs to be in this formulation too. --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106;&#x1D110;&#x1d107; 16:07, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
 * What Bacharach and David formed in 1962 or 1963 was a production company, and that company signed Dionne Warwick, so all three of them were contractually obligated to each other. This is the reason that ten or so years later, when Burt decided to stop working with Hal, Dionne filed a lawsuit against Burt and Hal. They formed an ad hoc, non-exclusive songwriting partnership as early as 1956 (their song "I Cry More" featured in the 1956 film "Don't Knock the Rock", and Alan Dale's recording of that song was released as Coral 9-61699 that same year). But it became a formal and exclusive partnership in 1963. Burt mentions this in his autobiography in chapter 7, "Make It Easy on Yourself." Burt does not provide a year, but discusses the company forming right around the time Dionne cut her first demos and saw Jerry Butler record one of the songs, "Make It Easy on Yourself", that she considered "hers" before she was given a chance to record it. 135.180.126.4 (talk) 06:15, 27 June 2023 (UTC)