Talk:Conor Oberst

The Magnets?

Why is there a link to "The Magnets" under the "See Also" section? Neither Conor's article nor the linked one mention anything about his involvement in the group.

I just removed it. -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 21:10, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

He has an innie belly button?

I mean c'mon, that does not belong here. This is an encylopedia for heaven's sake.

Cocaine?

Does anybody know anything about him using cocaine? He seems to allude about it an aweful lot on Digital Ash in a Digital Urn and I've heard people who were sure of it.... Underwater 16:11, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

He has alluded to it so much and there have been reports of other people agreeing that he has and perhaps does still use it. No 100% proof however. Fullerov 19:38, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, he does mention and hint at it in quite a few of his older songs, such as A Line Allows Progress, A Circle Does Not and in The Joy in Forgetting, the Joy in Acceptance. I believe that he did it in the past, but I'm not really sure if he does it anymore. DreamScenario 03:35, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

this is unsubstantiated gossip and slightly more irrelevant than his belly button's orientation -- especially the stuff i deleted about friends who heard from friends who heard from well, probably wikipedia (because you didn't sign the posts). --Harlequence 15:13, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

McCarthy Trenching

Last night, September sixth 2006, Conor Oberst played in a band called McCarthy Trenching at the Scottish Rites Hall in Omaha Nebraska with M. Ward. McCarthy Trenching is most of the people from Bright Eyes, except Oberst sings only backup vocals. There is almost no mention of McCarthy Trenching on the internet, and they don't have an album.

Left-handed?

Some of the information on here is superfluous and unsourced; the article claims he is left handed, but the picture of him playing the guitar proves otherwise. --emc! ╬ ^{(t a l k)} 02:03, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

In the video for Easy, Lucky, Free, he writes with his left hand; he is either left-handed or ambidextruous.

Actually, he appears to be writing on a blank screen in front of the camera. Since it's unlikely he can write backward, I would assume that they recorded him writing with his right hand, then mirrored the video.

Lots of left handed musicians play right-handed instruments. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.43.215.86 (talk) 07:08, 10 January 2007 (UTC).

I met with Conor after a show, he signed a c.d. for me with his right-hand, he plays the guitar right-handed as well, in the video he also writes everything backwards. It's probably for effect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.98.150.235 (talk) 22:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Drinking and Drugs

Conor is not straight edge and has drunk in his past, he does not anymore due to the fact he almost died of alchol poisoning.

• edit from Harlequence: there is absolutely no way to know the above to be true. disregard comments like these, especially if they're not signed. --Harlequence 15:14, 3 August 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Harlequence (talk • contribs)

Anyone who has seen Bright Eyes perform live would know that Conor Oberst still drinks. He is rarely on stage without a bottle of something alcoholic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.107.11.129 (talk) 19:33, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

He has in the past been vegan however this changed as he became disillusioned with the whole PETA movement. Conor was playing drunk in milwaukee-April 22nd, at the Rave.

Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.201.90.202 (talk) 13:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC). Actually, he still does drink. He's just calmed it down a lot.

Is Oberst of german descent?

Oberst means Colonel -- I dunno about German. He once stated that German fans frquently tell him that's what his last name means but he has also said his mother is from a big Irish family if you wanna know about his heritage. 69.216.115.51 04:49, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

According to files on Ancestry.com, Conor has mostly German ancestors on his father's side, and the surname Oberst is definitely German. Conor's grandmother on his father's side is part German and part Irish. Conor's mother had the surname Mullen originally, which is of Irish and Scottish origin, but that's all the information I can find about that side of his family. Nanten 19:05, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

At 50 million reported to the US Census Bureau (http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ADPTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000US&-ds_name=ACS_2006_EST_G00_&-_lang=en&-_caller=geoselect&-format=), German ancestry is the most common ancestry in the US - higher than both English and Irish, and it is heavily concentrated in the Midwest where C.O. is from. It's not surprising, really. Billybleak (talk) 07:51, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

External Links

I just removed a bunch of External Links from this article and want to explain why: The links to the web sites for the record label aren't needed since the labels have their own WP pages which are linked from this page. Likewise for the band pages. if anyone disagrees, please discuss here. -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 21:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Relationship?

The summary said he is dating "Australian Nicola Friend" and the trivia said he is dating Maria Taylor. Someone who knows for sure should correct it. he confirmed in a recent AP article that he has been dating(and possibly living with) Maria Taylor.

It doesn't mention any relationships. It should mention Maria Taylor or Winona Ryder, as she was the subject of "Lover I Don't Have To Love" Also, the lyrics of "Breezy" from "Gentleman's Pact" hint at him having a relationship with the late Sabrina Duim that Cassadaga is tributed to.--Nofixedaddress (talk) 09:44, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Religious Views

I was reading the Rolling Stone article under footnote 6 on the Bright Eyes article when I came across a quote from Conor about how he believes in some kind of god, but hasn't decided whether that god is personal or not. This means that Conor is definitely not an agnostic, which is how he is classified in the categories section of the article. I would classify him as a deist, but I'm not sure that it would accurately describe his views. For now, I'm removing the category "American agnostics" from the page. Nanten 19:33, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Oberst is indeed agnostic [1]. Please add the category back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.32.56.204 (talk) 02:19, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

No, you're not characterizing him correctly. In the quote you're referring to, Conor said, "If I’m forced to categorize myself I guess I’d say I was an agnostic." He also said, “Seriously, I thought of Cassadaga as some place leading to a connection to God or the Universe or however you want to say it," and that seems like justification for not using the term "agnostic," since he obviously believes in some kind of higher being. He could even be a pantheist. Nanten 01:12, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Agnostics, by definition, MAY believe in some sort of higher force. They are not atheists, despite often being characterized as such. The definition of an agnostic is someone who questions the idea of a higher power. Also, self-identification wins out, Oberst did indeed characterize himself as an agnostic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.32.56.203 (talk) 02:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be fair to say he is undecided on religious views? He leans toward believing in a higher power; he simply has not committed to one doctirine. I don't believe that is the same as being an avowed agnostic, even if when "forced" he would describe himself thusly. SeanID22 (talk) 23:48, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

For wikipedia, it is fair to say that only verifiable analysis made in reliable sources can be included. The items cited so far do not seem unambiguous enough to allow the application of the category Agnostics to the article. It would be permissible within the article to give the quote "If I’m forced to categorize myself I guess I’d say I was an agnostic." (and the cite) -- The Red Pen of Doom 02:21, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Trivia

Oberst used to be a vegan and has supported PETA[2]. He is now a pescetarian. Please fix —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jax6272427 (talk • contribs) 06:06, August 20, 2007 (UTC).

Sell out cunt. 79.78.91.171 (talk) 22:51, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Height?

How tall is Conor Oberst? I think I saw him today, but I can't find anything verifying his height anywhere. 68.161.95.37 (talk) 05:26, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

He is about 5'7, give or take a inch. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.98.150.235 (talk) 22:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Sexual Orientation?

I've been wondering if Connor might be gay or bisexual? I've never heard any proof that he was straight, or bi, or gay. But sometimes in his writings and recordings, he's mentioned some things about men. Maybe he's just talking in a different point of view (a woman's), or he's quoting someone else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.161.139.111 (talk) 03:10, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I imagine alot of people wonder about this. 20:27, 27 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spanishninjas (talk • contribs)

He is seeing Maria Taylor. I think that serves as evidence that he is not gay.24.63.75.131 (talk) 20:34, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Not necessarily. There has been speculation on the internets that he once dated Ryan Adams. Perhaps he is bisexual. 67.49.1.64 (talk) 07:31, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

the lot of you might find yourselves better suited to contribute here at the gossip girl wiki. this place is supposed to resemble an encyclopedia, not people magazine. --Harlequence 15:16, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree that this is gossipy. However, if it had related to his relations with women, I don't believe you would have troubled to sanctimoniously point this out. It's clear he is not gay, but I don't believe anyone has ever asked him about bisexuality. It's fair speculation. Considering bisexual conduct is now legal in all 50 states, I don't think it's so much a salacious question as a much as a matter of personal politics.SeanID22 (talk) 23:53, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Given that the man sings the lyric "Yeah, I've been fucked. So what?" I think it's a fair question. But don't add anything that's not well sourced and a direct quote or the heteronormativity police will delete it faster than you can say "Ricky Martin." Or "Anderson Cooper." Or "Clay Aiken." Oh, wait... Viciouslies (talk) 16:58, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Why so many links to other pages?

Right now in the article the following words link to their own pages: lawyer, musician, guitar, 7th grade, songwriter, performer, cassette, founders, executives, and America. I can understand links to proper names and places but this article seems to have overdone the linking. I found it quite distracting reading the article and seeing every other noun be a link. I'm not editing them out myself since they've been that way for a while now, but I just wanted to bring it up and see if others agree. 67.183.184.141 (talk) 08:00, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I do not think that it is linked to the point distraction. -- The Red Pen of Doom 23:28, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

one Discography for all work, separate article

Someone should really consolidate his Discography. There's already "List of songs with Conor Oberst", "Bright Eyes Discography", and a #Discography on this and three other articles. Since he IS Bright Eyes, and Commander Venus is just a precursor to that, and Desaparecidos is a side project of his, they should all be part of the same list, with an "other appearances" section at the end. I came here looking for one comprehensive list of his work, with chronology and mentions of unit sales, singles, radio airplay, and videos. And I had to click on six different articles and take notes to figure it all out. If someone who is a little bit better at assembling Discography articles has the time and interest, a consolidation would be really appreciated. 66.209.135.115 (talk) 16:06, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Genres

Why is it necessary to have both folk rock and alternative country? First, of all, it's a bit redundant, and you could even be referencing the same songs with tags like that. When I changed alternative country to "Punk rock" (for his work in Desaparecidos and Norman Bailer) I was hit with an "incorrect edit" message. This should be addressed, since it is clearly not "incorrect information." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.118.171.91 (talk) 02:38, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Musical Career

Bright Eyes is summarized into only 2 paragraphs, while all his other project have a paragraph each and The Mystic Valley Band more than doubles its size with specific tours/dates. To a casual reader, one can go through the article and quickly forget about Bright Eyes, which is definitely his most successful avenue in his musical career. There should be more information there, more accomplishments listed. It barely mentions 2 of his albums.--Nofixedaddress (talk) 09:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Image

What happened to the old image? This one is terrible, you can't even tell its him. 24.128.137.234 (talk) 04:59, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Does not allow audio recording of his shows

Went to record one of his shows was told I could not, asked if it was the venue or the artist. Was told it was the artist request. Asked the house sound engineer who does sound for the Mystic Valley Band and Bright Eyes and has worked with the artist for many tours. He said "the artist has never allowed recording of his shows". I feel this should be on his page. It is helpful. It is something the artist feels deeply about and should be out there. How do I keep this on the page.

There are recordings but they are stealth or are at shows or festivals with other bands who allow such recordings of their live performances . I asked what about opening for Wilco(summer 09) who freely allows recording and the engineer said "we do not like it but we will suck it up"

Also was told that he does not want the general public to document his shows in anyway; either by audio, or visually.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Soundboy1969 (talk • contribs) 00:40, 15 July 2009 (UTC) 

It is unsourced , nonencyclopedic trivia. And even if you found a reliable source that made the statement, only a very small handful of artists DO allow recording of their concerts and so the fact that Orbst is like nearly every other artist is not something that we include in an encyclopedia article. -- The Red Pen of Doom 01:12, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

You have a point that it may not be encyclopedia material. But it is a personal belief and that is a topic of discussion on his page. Is it sourced? - not in writing, first hand from his long time FOH engineer. Just because something is in print does not make it verifiable all the time.

Many of Conors colleagues who he has collaborated with and is touring with now allow audio taping of there concerts. An example would be Jeff Tweedy and Wilco, Jim James of My Morning Jacket, Gillian Welch who is on his record(bright eyes)and toured with. All allow recording and trading of their shows. There are many others to. Many new acts are allowing this type of recording & trading of their live shows. So I do feel this is something that is different and sets him apart. I feel it should not be the first thing about him but is a interesting fact. I do not feel this is disparaging him in any way, just a fact about the artist someone may need or want to know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soundboy1969 (talk • contribs) 16:04, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

FOH engineer is Jacob Feinberg and had been mixing all of Conor Oberst projects since 2002. This was the my source for "Conor Oberst does not allow audio recording of his live shows".

False accusation of rape

More than meets WP:DUE. Tutelary (talk) 01:03, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

The entire personal life sections appears to be rather strange. The mention of him having to travel a lot seems odd. Will begin to move the various parts into the main article. The false rape accusation should be reduced to two sentences. Karst (talk) 13:04, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

I agree. The rape accusation was proven to be false. All my attempts (and attempts of others) to remove the passage have been reverted, and even marked as 'vandalism'. I think there is enough consensus that this passage should be removed, but unfortunately it's those who harbor a personal resentment that get their way around here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.249.117.169 (talk) 23:12, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Removing it entirely without discussion does have an air of blanking. I suggest that somewhere in the text it says 'In 2013 (?) Oberst was falsely accused of rape, but the case was dismissed before going to trail.' with an reliable reference. No need to mention who made the accusation or including Oberst reaction to it. Karst (talk) 09:26, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

The fact that Joan Faircloth (whatever the hell her real name is, that's her pseudonym) signed a notarized statement explicitly saying she made it up should be noted in some way, although it's entirely possible to leave out the woman's name without resorting to horrible circumlocutions. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 02:25, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

That just gives undue weight to the whole episode. Unless there are specific court proceedings that were reported on extensively by third parties, I fail to see the need to elaborate on what is says now without it becoming a BLP issue. Karst (talk) 10:13, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

The fact that the charges were proved false do not make the episode a non-reportable moment the person's life. There were seven months between the accusations and the accuser's notarized statement recanting the entire story as fabricated. We aren't discussing some random, anonymous allegation that sparked a week of attention, but never went anywhere. The person who made the accusation came forward and made her name known. It generated a major lawsuit against the accuser, and the resulting vindication are important. The allegations had a notable impact on his career, his mental health, and reputation that are noteworthy.

I disagree that it would be undue weight to the episode. That suggests it was a meaningless blip in the life. In reality, Oberst himself has publicly stressed the impact this had on his life, and in the past couple of years he has said very emphatically that these allegations were significant, and traumatic; i.e. Oberst himself has assigned these a large weighting value. The text should very clearly, and unambiguously describe the allegations as fabricated entirely, of course, and make his exoneration clear. I think its a disservice to hide this detail, and denies the chance to inform someone that he was, in fact, exonerated. --thecopperbaron (talk) 06:28, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

It was widely reported on both for the accusation, and the later retraction. Someone might remember the former without ever having heard the latter and come to the article expecting to see the accusation: this would be an opportunity to inform them that the accusation was completely retracted by the accuser. It seems super odd to say a story with so many sources available, which ultimately exonerated the subject, can't be reported on in the page. It can be argued not dealing with the accusation harms him more than telling the story as it unfolded, since it looks like censorship. My suspicion is fans just want to pretend it didn't happen, but reporting on a notable public story seems completely appropriate here. Gripdamage (talk) 17:56, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

its crazy how about 50 percent of his personal life is being falsely accused of rape. this is a pattern with male artists on wikipedia now where they are painted as sex predators. 2605:59C8:70BA:9310:DDA8:2EAE:A5C2:897C (talk) 14:41, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Conor Oberst. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.omahacityweekly.com/article.php?id=4286
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080113025943/http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/news/47290-bright-eyes-oberst-forms-band-with-m-ward to http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/news/47290-bright-eyes-oberst-forms-band-with-m-ward

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:53, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Discussion of Oberst and Bright Eyes in Jonathan Frantzen's novel Freedom

I think it would worthwhile to note the discussion of Conor Oberst and Bright Eyes in Freedom. The novel received a lot of critical acclaim, and the main character's attendance at a Bright Eyes concert and discussion of Oberst's lyrics is a significant plot line. I'm not sure where this might be added in the article. Perhaps a new section on Oberst in popular culture or something like that? Jameson Nightowl (talk) 05:25, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

"drunkenness"

Why is this relevant information. The source is very questionable and overall it doesn't add anything meaningful to the article. [2]https://variety.com/2024/music/news/bright-eyes-cancels-tour-dates-conor-oberst-treatment-vocal-problems-1236158865/

I get the information about the tour being canceled sure. But the additional comment about drunkenness seems like a unneeded detail. Overvividartwork (talk) 14:18, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

1. What's questionable about the source? Variety (magazine) clearly meets WP:RS. See WP:VARIETY.

2. Several other sources reported on Oberst's intoxicated concert appearance, which is an indication that the information is relevant. Examples: [3] by Entertainment Weekly, [4] by Consequence of Sound. — Chrisahn (talk) 14:36, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

As I said earlier, of course it's relevant that he appeared heavily intoxicated at some shows, but I went ahead and deleted the following sentence: Chris Willman of Variety described the show as "disastrous" and wrote that Oberst's drunkenness was "not [...] the first time on a tour". My rationale: 1. The sentence is incorrect: These quotes aren't really Willman's observations, he's mostly reporting what fans said. 2. Avoid Wikipedia:Recentism: Such details aren't going to be important for Oberst's biography in the long run. – Maybe we should say somewhere that Oberst had also appeared intoxicated at shows before Cleveland? Maybe add it to the previous sentence? I'm not sure. Anyway, we certainly shouldn't ascribe such observations to Willman. — Chrisahn (talk) 21:49, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Really good points man, I agree with your edit it makes sense totally. Overvividartwork (talk) 22:49, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

I also agree with the edit. I'm a relatively new editor, but that particular sentence seemed a little gossipy to me, even if the source is generally reliable. Jameson Nightowl (talk) 03:40, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

For the record, you not only removed that sentence but you also attempted[5] to scrub all mention of Conor's intoxicated condition at the show. So I am not exactly convinced that removing that sentence was your only agenda. You still have not explained why and how Variety is a "very questionable" source. Οἶδα (talk) 04:27, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Lol I have no agenda dude, I'm quite satisfied with the article now actually. I was obviously a bit dramatic with my initial question. If you had been reading the response from @Chrisahn you would know all that was explained. We arrived at a consensus without your hostility bro. Overvividartwork (talk) 16:25, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

"Lol I have no agenda dude"

I already displayed that you attempted to scrub all mention of Conor's intoxicated condition at the show and paraded the bogus rationale of calling Variety a "very questionable" source. A claim which I will again mention you have still not explained.

"If you had been reading the response from @Chrisahn you would know all that was explained. We arrived at a consensus"

I have. Did you? If you had been reading the thread before you made this reply you would know the consensus has not been completely reached. Chrisahn is not the arbiter of consensus. If you read their post you would see they appealed for comment to their changes, which you then replied to. The discussion is not over because Chrisahn posts something. However they have been very helpful and thoughtful in this discussion.

"without your hostility bro"

Look, Overvividartwork: I have no interest in being combative with you. But I'm not going to play dumb and pretend that you have been honest in this dispute. I am not being hostile when I say that you attempted to vandalise my talk page. I am not being hostile when I say that you vandalised another article amidst this dispute (twice actually). I am not being hostile when I say that you removing this sourced content violates WP:NPOV. I am not being hostile when I say that you describing the sources as "very questionable" indicates you are unqualified to evaluate sources. I am not being hostile when I suggest you familiarise yourself with WP:RS/P. And when you reply to this, you interestingly ignore every single issue to grandstand. And when I directly appeal for you to explain yourself, you again sidestep any substantive discussion and repeat the same perceived grievance which only serves to ignore and distract from the issues. You tried to pass off Chrisahn's changes as your only concern, when your other edit clearly showed your intent to suppress all mention of Conor's "drunkenness". I'll take "I was obviously a bit dramatic with my initial question." as an honest bid to end this dispute. But every time I bring an issue up you don't actually respond to or apologize for any of them. And then you cite several Wiki standards below, which suggests you are actually familiar with Wiki guidelines. So forgive me when I find it hard to believe that you do not know what you are doing. Because I don't. What you want to read as hostility is actually my valid concern for potentially biased motions to suppress reliably-sourced, relevant information. This is not uncommon when the subject matter is controversial and especially when it pertains to a living person. I have enough experience to notice editing that attempts to delete content which a user perceives as being unfavourable about a subject. Such editors typically employ rationales that express bogus concerns over the reliability and relevance of such information. All while purposely obfuscating the truth. Every single time I have added potentially controversial information to a BLP article I have predicted it will be disrupted by an editor shortly. And every time I have been right.

Your editing profile offered up more than enough red flags. But if you would like to erase it all and start over, I would be more than glad to. Just let me know. But I'm not going to stop noticing what I notice on your behalf. Οἶδα (talk) 09:33, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Shoot, I'd be down to start over, how do you do that man? Overvividartwork (talk) 13:37, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

@Chrisahn: It is not inaccurate. He does not state that fans called the show "disastrous", he states that fan reports indicated that the Conor pulled himself together in the third show. If you feel that the previous wording suggested Willman was an attendee of the show then you can amend the text to reflect that was not the case. But it is not correct to suggest ascribe "disastrous" to fan accounts because the text does not indicate that. There were videos all over social media, which Willman directly quotes from. And I do not see how mentioning Conor's history of drunkenness on stage constitutes recentism. I am fine with removing Willman's descriptive verbiage because he is only one voice and the events which he reported on can speak for themself. But I am not in favor of removing the sourced mention of his history of drunkenness. Variety and other sources mentioned this recently and have mentioned it before

• "Oberst has often performed intoxicated"
• "From the moment he came out onto the stage, he was clearly intoxicated, slurring his speech, forgetting the words and verses to songs."
• "British radio station XFM said Oberst “appeared wildly intoxicated throughout his Sunday headline spot on the John Peel Stage,”"
• "In a drunken onstage rant", "An interesting show, yes--but more intoxicated than intoxicating."
• "At times, he sounded drunk, but that isn’t particularly off brand"
• "Oberst, who arrives on stage with a drunken stumble"
• "Some tour stops prior to that one proved worrying, like one in Nashville where Oberst, apparently inebriated"
• "To close the night, an apparently inebriated Oberst started smashing all his instruments and the whole stage ended up being trashed to the tune of deafeningly loud guitar feedback."
• "It could be the alcohol (both Bright Eyes shows I saw found the singer hilariously inebriated)"
• "Those last two songs demonstrated Oberst's immense talent, raw energy, and soaring blood alcohol content."

There have also been several instances of other odd and erratic behavior, which many sources including Variety have previously reported on[6]. This is not recentism, and is indeed relevant to his biography in long run. If anything, it is unusual that the article has not covered this subject. Οἶδα (talk) 05:31, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the additional sources! Good point. Since there have been so many reports since 2005 of Oberst performing (sometimes heavily) intoxicated, the article should probably mention that this has happened many times.

Regarding the accuracy of the sentence I deleted – here's an excerpt from Willman's article: Some fans viewed the “vocal problems” explanations as euphemistic, given that Oberst appeared to be heavily intoxicated at shows earlier this month, and not for the first time on a tour. ... fan reports encouragingly indicated that Oberst seemed to have pulled himself together after a disastrous appearance the night before in Cleveland. I think it's reasonably clear that Willman just reports what fans said, which means the wording Willman described the show as "disastrous" was incorrect. On the other hand, we don't know if fans used the word "disastrous", so fans described the show as "disastrous" wouldn't be correct either. But I think we can avoid all these problems if we simply don't put any of these words in quotation marks. — Chrisahn (talk) 18:05, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the acknowledgement. However I'm not sure how or where to incorporate any of this information. Is it really appropriate to mention this extensive history after the text about the recent shows? That feels more like commentary to me. Which is I why I had opted for Willman's quote. I won't belabor the "disastrous" point because I believe I already communicated my interpretation given the context. But if we are misunderstanding it in this way then the language is not reasonably clear. And as you alluded, it is not relevant to the article anymore. Οἶδα (talk) 10:02, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

It is relevant because it pertains to his health, which is precisely what the section covers. The content you are calling into question is supported in the article by Variety AND Entertainment Weekly. Both are highly reliable sources, top-tier even (See Wikipedia's RS consensuses at WP:RS/P – especially WP:VARIETY). Most music news items are supported merely by adequate web publications like Stereogum or Pitchfork. So for this to be covered in two major American entertainment magazines is more than enough to warrant inclusion here. You describing these sources as "very questionable" is either you just being bad faith (not adhering to WP:NPOV) or proof that you are completely unqualified to evaluate sources. I encourage you to familiarise yourself with the reliable sources outlined at the link above.

I would also remind you to refrain from vandalising Wikipedia articles and user talk pages, which you have already done. You will be blocked from editing if you continue such disruptive behavior. I would also allude to the likely fact that you have edited while logged out, which is generally considered inappropriate. Οἶδα (talk) 20:55, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Maybe cool it on the personal attacks, try and keep the conversation constructive please. Overvividartwork (talk) 23:21, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Maybe don't vandalise my talk page. Thank you for confirming that you are editing and communicating in bad faith and are uninterested in learning from your mistakes. Οἶδα (talk) 04:14, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Shouldn't have to remind an experienced editor of Wikipedia:Civility, Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers, and of course Wikipedia:No personal attacks Overvividartwork (talk) 21:48, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

I warned you against the edits you made two weeks ago. Three days ago you then repeated those edits (read: edit warring) and attempted to vandalise my talk page. You are correct, I have no patience for edit warring and vandalism. First I respond to your discussion with several different issues with your edits and statements. Guess how many you replied to? Zero. Instead you had the temerity to admonish me about being to constructive in this discussion. Οἶδα (talk) 10:52, 26 October 2024 (UTC)