Talk:Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller

Edits

I added a few extra facts but essentially left this page alone, thinking it provided a succinct summary of a musically important writing team.--User:Daivd91

That is okay with me. You're dismissed!--OleMurder 23:13, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Spelling and pronunciation

Which spelling is correct: "Leiber" or "Lieber"? Both appear. Is it pronounced LYE-ber or LEE-ber?

"Leiber" is the correct spelling, and his name is pronounced LEE-ber. Laura Pinto 00:40, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

fwiw - both leiber and lieber are german words, leiber is pronounced lye-ber, lieber is pronounced lee-ber (leib=body, lieb=nice, cute). getting the ie/ei spelling right seems to be close to impossible to english speakers. Snottily 21:02, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Just to clarify, while Snottily may be correct about German pronunciation, Laura Pinto is, regardless, correct about both the spelling and pronunciation of Jerry Leiber's name. Pstoller (talk) 21:23, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Should there be two articles? - discuss

As WP has expanded, it's become increasingly unusual to have a single biographical article covering two unrelated individuals. Should there be two articles - one on Leiber and one on Stoller? On the other hand, have either of them demonstrated sufficient notability in their separate work as individuals? I'm not proposing an answer, just raising it for discussion. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:00, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

• You have a point there. I think they always have worked together. Since redirect leading people to this site has taken care of the problem. Will check materials they have sent me. Maybe there should be an expansion of their lives for each one. Ucla90024 (talk) 16:34, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Leiber & Stoller have done almost all of their work together. Each has written a small number of songs without the the other, with only a very few (e.g., "Spanish Harlem," "Jackson," "Down Home Girl") having any notable success…and the first recordings of those songs were produced by Leiber & Stoller as a team. As of now, they are approaching their 60th year as partners; the rarity of such a long partnership accounts for the rarity of such an entry on Wikipedia. Although they are very distinct as people, I believe that it doesn't make much sense to discuss them independently in Wikipedia, since only the personal biographical info would differ and nearly everything about their accomplishments would be redundant.Pstoller (talk) 00:10, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
• I was startled to come across a joint bio page, but on reflection, it makes perfect sense if I think of it as a page about the songwriting team rather than a biography of its members as individuals. That interpretation might come more naturally with some restructuring -- reword the introductory sentence, change subsequent sections to make personal background on each individual more distinct from the description of their accomplishments as a songwriting team... This doesn't seem like a new problem; there are plenty of articles out there on bands whose members aren't notable except as members of the band, and format could be borrowed from those articles. If I don't see any objections, I may proceed with some modifications along these lines in the next few days. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.127.54.42 (talk) 21:01, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Examples: Ashford & Simpson, Category:Musical duos, Leo and Diane Dillon, and Category:Married couples. We can have an article about famous duos, as well as articles about them separately. these two have little notability separately i believe.(mercurywoodrose)66.80.6.163 (talk) 23:13, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

"Defining songs" is not enough

There should be available on Wikipedia somewhere an entire, complete list of all the songs they wrote. Kingturtle (talk) 16:51, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I have added a link to Leiber & Stoller's official website. The site includes a discography that lists not only every song written by Leiber and/or Stoller, but also every recording of those songs known to Leiber & Stoller. Hopefully, that will be satisfactory.Pstoller (talk) 03:32, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Nature of the collaboration?

It's ridiculous that these Wikipedia articles about famous songwriting teams don't immediately and clearly--a fortiori at all--state the nature of the collaboration. Did one of the two write lyrics and the other write music? If so, which? Did both contribute to lyrics and music? TheScotch (talk) 07:33, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. Fixed in line 1. Pstoller (talk) 04:07, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Two articles

Although there would be a lot of overlap, I do think each of these guys is notable enough for his own article. Besides, as of today it is subject to the policy on Biographies of One Living and One Non-Living Persons. Neutron (talk) 02:12, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

I withdraw my statement above that the two are not notable separately. i dont know this, am not a music scholar, and suspect they should have separate articles, as well as this article on the duo. same goes for Ashford & Simpson, with Ashford passing on today as well. each name should probably have a separate article, and then a third, larger article for each duo.(mercurywoodrose)76.232.10.199 (talk) 07:31, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

This was discussed in 2008/09 (see above), with the consensus at that time being that they were not notable as individuals - interestingly, a view supported by User:Pstoller who (we assume) is a family member. However, we have now moved on, Jerry Leiber has sadly died, and I think that both of them clearly already have notability, irrespective of what Mike Stoller now does. Leiber, for example, co-wrote "Spanish Harlem" with Phil Spector rather than Stoller. But, if we do have separate articles, there would clearly be a very great deal of overlap between them. I can see a case for an article about the Leiber-Stoller songwriting team, supplemented by separate articles on each of them as individuals, as (mercurywoodrose) suggests above. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:08, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Would support two articles. We now have the one article in Category 1933 births (as they both were) but nothing in 2011 deaths, as one of them isn't. An odd situation.--Egghead06 (talk) 11:05, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

The way forward might be to draw on the Jerry Leiber obituaries as they emerge, to prepare a new article on him, which also draws on information in this article. For consistency, we should also then consider a separate article on Mike Stoller, leaving this article to focus solely on their work together. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:26, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

So now we are talking about three articles? I can see the logic and don't really object to it, though then there are going to be three overlapping articles instead of two. But if we are going to have separate articles on Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller, and this article is going to be strictly about the songwriting team, maybe this article should be renamed to Leiber and Stoller, without their first names. (All three of those pages are currently redirects to this article.) That is how their songwriting partnership is most commonly known. As a precedent, see Lennon–McCartney, an article about the songwriting team, as opposed to the articles on the two individual members. Neutron (talk) 22:56, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

That's right. But I'm certainly not rushing into creating any new articles - if the Leiber obits and subsequent commentaries present substantial new (to WP) info about him, specifically, then we should move to creating a new article about him, and other changes should flow naturally from that. There should of course be minimum overlap - the Leiber article would indicate that the main article about his partnership with Stoller would be this one, but it would cover other points not related to the partnership - early life, working with other songwriters, etc. Ghmyrtle (talk) 23:13, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

As suggested above, I am a family member, and also VP of Leiber/Stoller Productions. So, take that for what it's worth, plus and minus. At this point, three articles would make more sense than while both were alive. At first, there would be considerable overlap, but Mike Stoller is in good health and still writing, so his bio would change over time. Still, if the relatively small number of individual accomplishments were included in this page on a 61-year partnership, I don't see how that violates the spirit of WP's approach to biographies, even if it conflicts with the letter. In any case, I'll be a fact-check watchdog for however many pages there are. I shudder to think how many errors have been cited from poorly-researched obituaries in the last two days. So far, I've seen Jerry credited with writing "Stuck In The Middle With You" and "Chapel of Love," Jerry placed with Mike on the Andrea Doria, and in one article I was even cited as his partner instead of Mike Stoller. So, just because somebody printed it somewhere doesn't mean it belongs in Wikipedia. Pstoller (talk) 00:34, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

@Pstoller: Thanks for your input here, it's greatly appreciated. In my view, we should collate and incorporate any new information as it emerges, and keep the question of separate articles under review here. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Three articles are the best and do not have to overlap that much. Ucla90024 (talk) 19:13, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Belatedly, I'm hoping to implement this over the next few days. I've noticed that Barry Mann and Cynthia Weil - who have been a married couple for 53 years - have separate articles, so I hope it'll be an uncontentious move in this case. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:27, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't know about "contentious," but the separate articles on Mann and Weil illustrate some of the problems in such a move. Some awards and honors earned together are noted only in the Mann article; Weil is referred to as "Weil" throughout the Mann article, but Mann is identified twice as "her husband" in the body of the Weil article; the list of Mann-Weil songs is longer in the Mann article; the Mann & Weil musical, They Wrote That?, is mentioned only in the Weil article; and so on. Even given Mann's brief pre-Weil career, it might make more sense to combine their article into one than to split this one into two or three.

If L&S are moved into two separate articles, most of the text—barring personal biographical information and a very small number of songs—should be identical. And where do all the existing links to Leiber & Stoller go—to two separate articles with the same content? If you're planning on three articles (as with Lennon & McCartney), you have the question of how to justify the individual articles when all the key accomplishments are in the joint article. Lennon and McCartney have major post-partnership careers; Leiber and Stoller have not. Three years after Leiber's death, there isn't a substantial amount of new material on either Leiber or Stoller. So, is this move simply about protocol? And, protocol or not, is it the best solution to the problem of how best to present the subject matter of this article? I don't know, and I'm arguably not sufficiently objective to say. But, at the very least, I'd suggest putting this to a vote first. Pstoller (talk) 19:23, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't think it's about protocol. The first thing I would say is that this article is too short - it should go into a lot more detail about their songwriting practices, contracts, relationships with musicians and record companies, productions, etc. etc., based on the numerous sources that exist. They certainly deserve a good, comprehensive article. In terms of content, my opinion is that the core of this article - dealing with their joint careers - should in overall approach be similar to now (but expanded), but with the personal details, and their work as individuals, taken out and covered in the individual articles. The individual articles would have, under the heading of ==Joint working== (or similar), a {{main|Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller}} template to direct readers back here. I'd be perfectly happy to work up these ideas in a sandbox or two before any major changes are made. But I'm happy to be guided by others' opinions - I read your 2011 comment up above as broadly supportive of that approach, but if you and others would prefer a simple expansion of this article, so be it. Incidentally, I'm working on a list of Mann & Weil songs as well, and will no doubt get round to improving their articles as well... given time, of course! Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:53, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

If it's not about protocol, then what do we buy with separate articles? As I see it, your suggestion (which I support) that the article needs "detail about their songwriting practices, contracts, relationships with musicians and record companies, productions, etc." isn't served by new articles for JL and MS, since virtually all of that info belongs in the joint article.

Although each has written alone and/or in collaborations outside the partnership, Leiber's significant songs without Stoller come down to "Spanish Harlem," "Jackson," and "Down Home Girl"—the original recordings of which were all produced jointly by L&S, and thus coverable here—while Stoller's most significant work without Leiber is the (non-hit) Broadway musical, The People in the Picture. With separate biographical entries in addition to this one, you could delve further into their relatively obscure individual efforts, as well as their personal lives. My question to you (and other editors) is: Does that relative obscurity put those works beyond the scope of a normally comprehensive encyclopedia article? Likewise, how extensive should the personal biographical information be for people who are famous for their works but not, at present, as public personae? And will covering it in separate articles bring this article closer to or further from an A-class quality rating? (I'm not trying to impose my opinions: I'm genuinely curious about the answers.)

I'm not dead-set against the three-article scenario. I can get behind whatever the consensus is on this issue, and I'm happy to provide support to make one or three articles as good as they can be. (Two articles in place of this one would, I think, be a mistake.) I can easily see how more articles would inure to the benefit of the Leiber family, my family, and myself. I'd like to see you, or someone else, pose one or more good arguments as to why it would be beneficial to Wikipedia readers. Think of what I'm saying here as a bit of devil's advocacy: if there are indeed strong arguments for going to a three article format, then those arguments could be very useful in structuring the three articles; if there aren't, then it'll save you some work. To make that determination, I think we could use input from more editors who've made a specialty of this area.

As an aside, I'm glad to hear about your work on the Mann/Weil articles and song list! Pstoller (talk) 22:58, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

I'd also welcome other editors' views. I'm happy to hold off for the moment, and perhaps the best way forward would be to expand and develop this article first, and then reconsider whether there are any advantages in the two individuals having their own articles as well. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:40, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

"Definitive songs"

That section of the article is unreferenced - that is, there is no mention of who or what organisation has credited that particular list as "definitive". We now have List of songs written by Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller, which lists all those songs that made the US pop, R&B and UK pop charts. Should the list in this article now be retained as it is, or should we attempt to be more specific as to what songs are "definitive", for instance by referring to chart placings such as No.1 hits, or top ten hits? Any thoughts? Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:50, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

As it stands, the "definitive" list seems to consist of whatever a few editors considered "definitive." All but three of the songs are mentioned and linked in the text; and I could argue that those three—"Drip Drop," "Lucky Lips," and "Jackson"—fall short of "definitive," despite all having been hits. It's perhaps noteworthy that none made the cut for Smokey Joe's Cafe. (If you can make a good argument to the contrary, then perhaps it should be worked into the main text.) That said, as an at-a-glance reference, the list isn't purely redundant, and it's hard to argue with most of it. Perhaps it should be more exclusive, but it's best if I don't make the call.

The new list is more comprehensive and has a welcome basis in chart performance; I'll be reviewing it for notable errors and omissions, but it's a fine start. Pstoller (talk) 03:45, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

"American" vs. "Jewish American"

On February 21, 2015, an edit was created changing Leiber & Stoller from "American songwriting and record producing partners" to "Jewish American songwriting and record producing partners." While L&S are certainly Jewish Americans, they did not self-identify as Jewish with regards to their work, which they saw as being in a primarily African American tradition. (They did not approach songwriting from a Jewish tradition until they adapted The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz for musical theater in 1984.) Thus, I think referring to them as "Jewish American songwriting…partners" is, while technically correct, misleading in terms of culture. The biographical section begins by noting that they were from Jewish families; this strikes me as sufficient. However, as I lack personal distance, I'd like the input of other editors before reverting the edit. Pstoller (talk) 23:00, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks - I'd missed that. There is no good reason for including their religious/cultural background in the opening sentence per WP:BEGIN - as you say, it's not a sufficiently important factor in their notability, and it is mentioned in the article. I've removed that link. Ghmyrtle (talk) 23:08, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, much appreciated! Pstoller (talk) 03:20, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Tiger Records?

No mention here? Gets a fair bit of coverage, and an image, at de:wiki: [1]. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:01, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

This article really needs quite a lot of work to bring it up to the standard we should expect for these two. Tiger Records should certainly be mentioned in there, though I don't think it was one of their more successful ventures. Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:15, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

It wasn't, and neither was sister label Daisy, probably because L&S were never as good at—nor as interested in—running a label as making records. Basically, those labels were a rehearsal for Red Bird and Blue Cat, for which George Goldner supplied the expertise in running a label…into the ground with gambling debts to the mob, unfortunately.

Anyway, yes, those labels should be mentioned, if only for Bessie Banks' superb original record of "Go Now" and Alvin Robinson's killer version of Chris Kenner's "Something You Got." And, yes, the article should be much better, though for obvious reasons I can't do the work myself: I can only kibitz. As a resource for the two short-lived labels, I would recommend the liner notes for The Daisy/Tiger Records Story on Sundazed. Pstoller (talk) 01:56, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

See kibitzer. We limeys don't understand these terms! Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:20, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Link added. Happy now? (Jewish limeys understand the term.) Pstoller (talk) 00:34, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090205020054/http://www.audioholicmedia.com/?p=45 to http://www.audioholicmedia.com/?p=45

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) 16:12, 24 November 2017 (UTC)