Talk:Bob Weir

Date of passing

Greetings, please edit using strict sourcing around this topic. There is no rush.

None of the sources list date or location.

I am sure you understand, comments appreciated, Augmented Seventh (talk) 00:33, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Rolling Stone magazine published a date. It did not give a location. Augmented Seventh (talk) 03:27, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

@Augmented Seventh: Rolling Stone explicitly says that a date of death wasn't immediately available so what are you talking about? DrKilleMoff (talk) 08:52, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for asking. RollingStone published an In- Memorium photo spread at around 7 pm last night, explicitly giving bobby's death date as the 10th. Prior to that publication, we had revert-edited accordingly— because facts matter.

After I read the rolling stone article (oh, it's got to be true! ~flo and eddie), i stopped gatekeeping the article, and then posted the talk page comment to which you're referring.

As no family has called, i do not know the facts surrounding his passing, and haven't added content to that effect.

cordially, Augmented Seventh (talk) 23:17, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

The Times has an obituary that says the 10th., source (behind paywall, an archived readable copy of the article here).

La Opinion claims it was on Friday, i.e. the 9th., source (in Spanish, a Google Translate version of the article here).

I recently changed to the 9th, before I was able to read The Times article, which I just now saved to the Internet Archive. Thanks for reverting it as good faith, @Augmented Seventh. I’m not going to go edit warring on this, frankly I don’t know the truth myself, due to the conflicting sources. I see you added that to the source code too, which probably is the most correct thing to do, for now, until the date can be verified. 1000mm (talk) 00:05, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

I see now that La Opinion refers to an Instagram post, on his verified Instagram account, that it happened on Friday. However, the said post doesn’t mention any date, whatsoever. Neither does the exact same post on his verified Facebook page. Based on this, I think we can rule out La Opinion as a source on this subject. 1000mm (talk) 00:14, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

What's going on here? As I said in my edit summary "The San Francisco Chronicle says: "Bob Weir, the singer, songwriter and guitarist who co-founded the Grateful Dead and helped define the sound of the San Francisco rock scene, died Saturday, Jan. 10, after a prolonged battle with cancer and underlying health issues, his family said." What could be clearer than this? Carlstak (talk) 04:08, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

PS: Weir lived in Marin County for decades and his recording studio was there. What could be a more reliable source for this information than the San Francisco Chronicle quoting his family? Carlstak (talk) 04:22, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

You are correct. The SF Chronicle is as good as it gets for this content. Augmented Seventh (talk) 18:29, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

To add to article

Basic information to add to this article (in order to help make it more properly encyclopedic):

• Which type of cancer did Weir have in 2015?
• Which "underlying lung issues" did Weir die from?
• Did Weir die of lung cancer? If so, did he smoke cigarettes and/or marijuana during his life, and could these habits have led to his cancer or "lung issues"?

~2025-31208-44 (talk) 01:18, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Hope this is a sufficient reference for whomever wants it: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/10/obituaries/bob-weir-dead-grateful-dead.html ~2026-21573-7 (talk) 01:37, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Infobox image replacement

Usually after the subject of the article dies, their infobox image is replaced depicting them in their prime or peak years. This proposed image not only follows that but I personally think it’s better in quality as it shows both Bob Weir performing and his full face visible. Thoughts? TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 01:34, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

He had a long peak. I think File:Bob Weir 20100626-01.jpg is a better photo. Gnube (talk) 02:31, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Agree with TDKR. A version that is cropped a tad on the left for better symmetry and so the mic stand is less prominent can also be created. File:Bob Weir.jpg would be my second choice, due to being similar to his appearance in the early 1990s, when GD were a very popular touring act. Xfansd (talk) 04:24, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

This one’s a good pic! TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 15:24, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Bob Weir 1975.jpg is much better for the infobox. There are enough photos of him in the article as an old man as it is. This one shows him as his youthful self when he was the rhythm guitarist for the Grateful Dead. He was a handsome man, and will always be best remembered the way he looked then. Carlstak (talk) 20:38, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

For general readership, Terrapin-era Weir would seem most informative. Augmented Seventh (talk) 23:22, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Agree per tradition. I’ve also uploaded a cropped version of this image in case we agree to use it:

GuyMan529 (talk) 23:09, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Your cropped version is definitely an improvement of the photo. Carlstak (talk) 23:50, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

The cropped image -- File:Bob Weir 1975 (Cropped).jpg -- looks really good to me too. Presumably we would also remove the un-cropped version from the body of the article. And move the image now in the infobox into the body of the article? — Mudwater ^(Talk) 01:19, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes, sounds good to me. Exactly what I had in mind. Carlstak (talk) 02:32, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

• Support. Came here looking to do this and found there was already a discussion. Jahaza (talk) 01:39, 13 January 2026 (UTC)
• Hooray! Good to see this photo in the infobox at the top of the page. It's a great photo of one of the immortals. RIP Bob. Carlstak (talk) 02:05, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes, that's much better. 🙂💀🌹 — Mudwater ^(Talk) 03:04, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Discography references?

@Bagumba: Hello! You tagged the Discography section to indicate that it needs references. I reverted that with an edit summary saying: I might be missing something, but I don't see why this discography section needs footnotes. That is, all of these albums have their own articles, which of course themselves have footnotes." You replied on my talk page, saying: Hi there. For background, the referencing tag at Bob Weir's discography stemmed from the page's "In the News" nomination. The WP:CIRCULAR policy reads: "Do not use articles from Wikipedia (whether English Wikipedia or Wikipedias in other languages) as sources, since Wikipedia is a user-generated source ... Content from a Wikipedia article is not considered reliable unless it is backed up by citing reliable sources. Confirm that these sources support the content, then use them directly." Thanks for the post. I'm going to continue the discussion here, where it's more likely that other editors will see it.

I am under the impression that in Discography sections of articles about musicians or bands, if an album has its own Wikipedia article, it's superfluous or at least unnecessary to have a footnote for that album. For example, if someone is not sure that Ace is really a Bob Weir album, they would click through to the album article, which would have the necessary references. So, it's not Wikipedia being a reference for Wikipedia -- i.e., it's not WP:CIRCULAR -- it's the footnotes in the album article serving as (admittedly indirect) references for that album as an entry in the Discography section. Now, let us consider the Discography section of the Dickey Betts article, here. Albums with their own Wikipedia article don't have footnotes, and albums without Wikipedia articles do have footnotes. I was really thinking that that's the proper way to do it. (Of course, many artist articles Discography sections list albums without Wikipedia articles and don't have footnotes, but we're talking about how to get an article fully up to standards for an In the News entry, so we can ignore that aspect.)

I really believe this is the generally accepted best practice, but if you still think that the Bob Weir discography section would be better with footnotes, could you please describe why, and what that would look like? Thanks.

— Mudwater ^(Talk) 21:11, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Edited to add: About the Dickey Betts discography, there are some footnotes for albums with WP articles, but that's to verify their chart positions, not that the album exists and is a Dickey Betts album. Apologies for the imperfect example, and for the perhaps overly long previous post. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 21:16, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

I can respect your perspective. Perhaps there's no community-wide best practice on this. I was looking at it from an WP:ITN view, flagging it for action in the hopes of getting Weir posted on the Main Page. WP:ITNQUALITY reads: Lists of awards and honors, bibliographies and filmographies and the like should have clear sources. The view is that WP:CIRCULAR advises to take the relevant sources from other WP articles, like the respective albums, and cite them directly in his bio: Confirm that these sources support the content, then use them directly. Regards. —Bagumba (talk) 22:29, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for explaining. I shall ponder this further. And of course, other editors are encouraged to add their thoughts. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 23:00, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

I went ahead and added sources for all the items in the discography, plus the videos. Bagumba should be able to withdraw their objection now, I think. Carlstak (talk) 17:47, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Very good, thank you. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 21:58, 14 January 2026 (UTC)