Talk:Britney Spears: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m Signing comment by 84.25.98.70 - "→Make A Seperate Section For 2008: new section" |
←Replaced content with 'IT IS ALL WRONG !' |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
IT IS ALL WRONG ! |
|||
{{oldpeerreview|archive=5}} |
|||
{{skiptotoctalk}} |
|||
{{talkheader}} |
|||
{{notaforum|your personal opinions towards [[Britney Spears]]}} |
|||
{{controversial}} |
|||
{{ArticleHistory |
|||
|action1=GAN |
|||
|action1date=06:47, 5 December 2005 |
|||
|action1result=listed |
|||
|action1oldid=30198657 |
|||
|action2=PR |
|||
|action2date=09:45, 25 May 2006 |
|||
|action2link=Wikipedia:Peer review/Britney Spears/archive1 |
|||
|action2oldid=55036333 |
|||
|action3=GAR |
|||
|action3date=16:47, 28 February 2007 |
|||
|action3link=Talk:Britney Spears/Archive 5#GA Delisting |
|||
|action3result=delisted |
|||
|action3oldid=111606119 |
|||
|action4=PR |
|||
|action4date=02:33, 6 March 2007 |
|||
|action4link=Wikipedia:Peer review/Britney Spears/archive2 |
|||
|action4oldid=112968417 |
|||
|action5=GAN |
|||
|action5date=1 October 2007 |
|||
|action5link=Talk:Britney Spears/Archive 7#GA Review |
|||
|action5result=listed |
|||
|action5oldid=161710547 |
|||
|action6=PR |
|||
|action6date=10:01 21 October 2007 |
|||
|action6link=Wikipedia:Peer review/Britney Spears/archive3 |
|||
|action6oldid=166020660 |
|||
|action7=FAC |
|||
|action7date=04:25, 4 November 2007 |
|||
|action7link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Britney Spears/archive1 |
|||
|action7result=not promoted |
|||
|action7oldid=169073224 |
|||
|action8=FAC |
|||
|action8date=20:17, 8 March 2008 |
|||
|action8link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Britney Spears/archive2 |
|||
|action8result=not promoted |
|||
|action8oldid=196824280 |
|||
|action9=PR |
|||
|action9date=18 March 2008 |
|||
|action9link=Wikipedia:Peer review/Britney Spears/archive4 |
|||
|action9oldid=199256661 |
|||
|topic=Arts |
|||
|currentstatus=GA |
|||
}} |
|||
{{WikiProjectBanners|blp=yes|1= |
|||
{{WPBiography|nested=yes|living=yes|class=GA|priority=Mid|filmbio-work-group=yes|listas= Spears, Britney|musician-work-group=yes}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Louisiana|class=GA|importance=High|nested=yes}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Mississippi|class=GA|importance=High|nested=yes}} |
|||
{{LGBTProject|class=GA|explanation=Display of this '''WikiProject LGBT studies''' project tag does not reflect Britney Spears's sexual orientation; Spears falls within the scope of the project because of her status as a [[Gay icon|gay icon]].|nested=yes}} |
|||
}} |
|||
{{DEFAULTSORT:Spears, Britney}} |
|||
{{WPCD-People|small=yes}} |
|||
{{maintained|{{user4|Ogioh}} |
|||
{{user4|Bookkeeperoftheoccult}} |
|||
If you wish to leave your name here please feel welcome provided you regularly contributer to this article and/or talkpage.}} |
|||
{{FAQ|collapsed=yes|small=yes}} |
|||
{{archive box| |
|||
* [[Talk:Britney Spears/Archive 1|Unattributed, undated]] |
|||
* [[Talk:Britney Spears/Archive 2|Aug 02, 2004 - May 30, 2005]] |
|||
* [[Talk:Britney Spears/Archive 3|Jun 14, 2005 - Jul 21, 2006]] |
|||
* [[Talk:Britney Spears/Archive 4|Jul 31, 2006 - Feb 18, 2007]] |
|||
* [[Talk:Britney Spears/Archive 5|Feb 19, 2007 - Apr 28 , 2007]] |
|||
* [[Talk:Britney Spears/Archive 6|Apr 29, 2007 - Aug 31, 2007]] |
|||
* [[Talk:Britney Spears/Archive 7|Sep 01, 2007 - Nov 04, 2007]] |
|||
* [[Talk:Britney Spears/Archive 8|Nov 05, 2007 - Mar 05, 2008]] |
|||
* [[Talk:Britney Spears/Archive 9|Mar 05, 2008 - Aug 3, 2008]] |
|||
* [[Talk:Britney Spears/Archive 10|Aug 03, 2008 - Sept 21, 2008]]}} |
|||
<!-- Please do not archive anything above this line. The current talk page started on Aug 3, 2008 --> |
|||
== Reminder on wikipedia policy on [[WP:BLP|Biographies of living persons]] == |
|||
=== Criticism and praise=== |
|||
{{see|Wikipedia:Coatrack}} |
|||
Criticism and praise of the subject should be represented if it is relevant to the subject's notability and can be sourced to reliable secondary sources, and so long as the material is written in a manner that does not overwhelm the article or appear to take sides; it needs to be presented responsibly, conservatively, and in a neutral, encyclopedic tone. Be careful not to give a disproportionate amount of space to particular viewpoints, to avoid the effect of [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Undue weight|representing a minority view as if it were the majority one]]. The views of a tiny minority have no place in the article. Care must be taken with [[Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Article_structure|article structure]] to ensure the overall presentation is broadly neutral; in particular, subsection headings should reflect important areas to the subject's notability. |
|||
Content should be sourced to [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable sources]] and should be about the subject of the article specifically. Beware of claims that rely on [[guilt by association]]. Editors should also be on the lookout for biased or malicious content about living persons. If someone appears to be promoting a biased point of view, insist on reliable third-party published sources and a clear demonstration of relevance to the person's notability. |
|||
=== Presumption in favor of privacy === |
|||
Wikipedia articles that present material about living people can affect their subjects' lives. Wikipedia editors who deal with these articles have a responsibility to consider the legal and ethical implications of their actions when doing so. An important rule of thumb when writing biographical material about living persons is "do no harm". It is not Wikipedia's purpose to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives. BLPs must be written conservatively, with regard for the subject's privacy. |
|||
When writing about a person notable only for one or two events, including every detail can lead to problems, even when the material is well-sourced. In the best case, it can lead to an unencyclopedic article. In the worst case, it can be a serious violation of our policies on neutrality. '''When in doubt, biographies should be pared back to a version that is completely sourced, neutral, and on-topic'''. |
|||
=== Basic human dignity === |
|||
Wikipedia articles should respect the basic human dignity of their subjects. Wikipedia aims to be a reputable encyclopedia, not a tabloid. '''Our articles must not serve primarily to mock or disparage their subjects, whether directly or indirectly'''. This is of particularly profound importance when dealing with individuals whose notability stems largely from their being victims of another's actions. Wikipedia editors must not act, intentionally or otherwise, in a way that amounts to participating in or prolonging the victimization. [[User:Bookkeeperoftheoccult|<span style="color:black">'''''The Bookkeeper'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Bookkeeperoftheoccult|<small><span style="color:gray">('''''of the Occult''''')</span></small>]] 23:44, 3 August 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Reminder that this is not a forum per [[WP:FORUM]] == |
|||
# '''Discussion forums.'''<span id="FORUM" /><span id="CHAT" /> Please try to stay on the task of creating an encyclopedia. You can chat with folks about Wikipedia-related topics on their user talk pages, and should resolve problems with articles on the relevant [[Wikipedia:Talk page | talk pages]], but please do not take discussion into articles. Also, bear in mind that talk pages exist for the purpose of discussing how to improve articles; they are not mere general discussion pages about the subject of the article, nor are they a helpdesk for obtaining instructions or technical assistance. If you wish to ask a specific question on a topic, Wikipedia has a [[Wikipedia:Reference Desk|Reference Desk]], and questions should be asked there rather than on talk pages. Wikipedians who wish to hold casual discussions with fellow Wikipedians can use the [[Wikipedia:IRC channels|IRC channels]], such as [irc://chat.freenode.net:8001/wikipedia #wikipedia]. Note that this is an IRC channel, not a message board. There are also a number of early-stage projects that attempt to use a wiki for discussion and debate. |
|||
# '''Journalism.''' Wikipedia should not offer first-hand news reports on breaking stories. Wikipedia is not a [[primary source]]. However, our sister project [[Wikinews]] does exactly that, and ''is'' intended to be a primary source. Wikipedia does have many ''encyclopedia articles'' on topics of historical significance that are currently in the news, and can be updated with recent [[WP:V|verified]] information. [[User:Bookkeeperoftheoccult|<span style="color:black">'''''The Bookkeeper'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Bookkeeperoftheoccult|<small><span style="color:gray">('''''of the Occult''''')</span></small>]] 23:47, 3 August 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Main image == |
|||
Please, everyone - stop focusing on the main image of the article. It is not important. If you want to become a real wikipedian and if you particularly want to do Ms. Spears a service, then focus on improving the '''quality of the text, prose and factual accuracy of her biography'''. This isn't a photo spread in a magazine, its an encyclopedia. Its highly unlikely we're going to receive another free image of Britney Spears anytime soon. And let me repeat '''It Does Not Matter'''. [[User:Bookkeeperoftheoccult|<span style="color:black">'''''The Bookkeeper'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Bookkeeperoftheoccult|<small><span style="color:gray">('''''of the Occult''''')</span></small>]] 23:00, 21 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Here, here! (damn girl, you scary when you do bold writing) :-) — [[User:Realist2|<span style="color:#4173E4">'''''Realist'''''</span>]][[User_talk:Realist2|<span style="color:#D80B0B"><sup>'''''2'''''</sup></span>]] 00:16, 22 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Possessive Proper Nouns ending with 'S' == |
|||
Regarding [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Britney_Spears&diff=239904332&oldid=239901692 this revert,] I'm reasonably sure the grammatically correct thing to do is to omit the extraneous 'S', following the name with only an apostrophe. That's what I was taught in English at school. --[[User:Setanta747|Setanta747]] ([[User talk:Setanta747|talk]]) 16:05, 22 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:See [[Apostrophe#Singular_nouns_ending_with_an_.22s.22_or_.22z.22_sound]]. As [[User:MrMarmite]] has pointed out on several occasions, the rule can differ when the pronoun is someone's actual name with an 's' in it. |
|||
::''This subsection deals with singular nouns pronounced with a [[sibilant]] sound at the end: /s/ or /z/. The spelling of these ends with ''-s'', ''-se'', ''-z'', ''-ze'', or ''-ce''. Traditionally it was more common to require{{dubious}} and many respected sources still do require that practically all singular nouns, including those ending with a sibilant sound, have possessive forms with an extra ''s'' after the apostrophe. Examples include the [[MLA style manual|Modern Language Association]], ''[[The Elements of Style]]'', and ''[[The Economist]]''.<ref>[http://www.economist.com/research/styleGuide/index.cfm?page=841359 The Economist's Style Guide]</ref> Such sources would demand possessive singulars like these: ''Senator Jones's umbrella''; ''Mephistopheles's cat''. However, many modern writers omit the extra ''s''. Some respected style guides such as the Chicago Manual of Style recommend the traditional practice but say that both are correct.<ref>[http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/CMS_FAQ/PossessivesandAttributives/PossessivesandAttributives22.html Possessives and Attributives], The Chicago Manual of Style Online</ref>'' [[User:Bookkeeperoftheoccult|<span style="color:black">'''''The Bookkeeper'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Bookkeeperoftheoccult|<small><span style="color:gray">('''''of the Occult''''')</span></small>]] 21:53, 22 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::: i don't understand exactly what you mean by omitting the 'S' but if your trying to say its because her surnames ends in an S you're wrong. It should be Spears's not Spears' you only use s' when you are talking about a group of people/ plural ownership such as 'the girls' coats were hung neatly' but with names it's just S's [[User:Ogioh|Ogioh]] ([[User talk:Ogioh|talk]]) 21:23, 23 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Comeback == |
|||
I think there should be more mentioned about how blackout was her most critical acclaimed album despite what was going on her life and how her VMA comeback has been hailed as the ''comeback of the century''. I'm not saying we list all about her fall from grace an call her a disgrace but i think it should be touched on a bit more and her comeback should be a good bit more detailed. After all this past year has probably seen the major events in her life for the bad reasons but recently there has been a lot more good ones. [[User:Ogioh|Ogioh]] ([[User talk:Ogioh|talk]]) 18:57, 25 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Smells like [[wp:recentism|recentism]] to me. <b><font color="Indigo">[[User:Queerbubbles|Qb]]</font> | <font color="MidnightBlue" size="1"><sup>[[User talk:Queerbubbles|your 2 cents]]</sup></font></b> 19:18, 25 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Basicly what i'm saying is elaborate a bit more on how she was praised for making a good album (blackout) even though her personal life was in turmoil. This being a year ago hardly recentism and say how she ws praised for her cmeback at this years VMA's [[User:Ogioh|Ogioh]] ([[User talk:Ogioh|talk]]) 19:40, 25 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::I really depends. With any other artist I'd probably say no, but unfortunately, this is Britney Spears and the majority of the public image steams from everything BUT her music. A brief mention, attributed to a reliable source might be fine, but its not important enough to warrant a full paragraph or an independent section. |
|||
::::A few sentences was all i was suggesting a paragraph would be way to much. [[User:Ogioh|Ogioh]] ([[User talk:Ogioh|talk]]) 01:45, 27 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::That's fine then, as long as its phrased in a neutral way. [[User:Bookkeeperoftheoccult|<span style="color:black">'''''The Bookkeeper'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Bookkeeperoftheoccult|<small><span style="color:gray">('''''of the Occult''''')</span></small>]] 07:13, 27 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Maintainted Tag == |
|||
IMHO... I find this ridiculously stupid. There is no need for that when people usually just leave a message ''here'' when they have an issue. They can see, easily, from the talk page and history who the folks are that edit and maintain the page. I've removed it once. I wont do it again. However, I really dont like. <b><font color="Indigo">[[User:Queerbubbles|Qb]]</font> | <font color="MidnightBlue" size="1"><sup>[[User talk:Queerbubbles|your 2 cents]]</sup></font></b> 23:04, 27 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::I don't really mind it being reverted its just handier for new users to know the main people to go to if they're stuck on editing about britney. I've seen them on a good few articles. I think we should wait and see what the consensus is about it. Regular editors your input is wanted. [[User:Ogioh|Ogioh]] ([[User talk:Ogioh|talk]]) 23:55, 27 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::You are entitled to your opinion QB, but by that logic, the tag wouldn't exist on wikipedia at all. I know several editor find the tag useful, especially on certain topics, including FA reviewers and administrators. The tag itself specifically states "this does not imply [[WP:OWN|ownership]]". [[User:Bookkeeperoftheoccult|<span style="color:black">'''''The Bookkeeper'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Bookkeeperoftheoccult|<small><span style="color:gray">('''''of the Occult''''')</span></small>]] 01:20, 28 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::''"By that logic, the tag wouldn't exist on wikipedia at all."'' It's been brought for deletion 3 times. The last two times were no consensus. Thats not a free ride for it to exist. <b><font color="Indigo">[[User:Queerbubbles|Qb]]</font> | <font color="MidnightBlue" size="1"><sup>[[User talk:Queerbubbles|your 2 cents]]</sup></font></b> 13:44, 28 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. [[User:Bookkeeperoftheoccult|<span style="color:black">'''''The Bookkeeper'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Bookkeeperoftheoccult|<small><span style="color:gray">('''''of the Occult''''')</span></small>]] 21:05, 28 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== More detail on Blackout and ALL singles, not just Gimme More == |
|||
''Blackout's lead single, "Gimme More" leaked on the internet on August 30.[116] The song, which was Spears's first produced by Danja, peaked at number three on Billboard's Hot 100 on October 3, making it her most successful single in the U.S. since her debut, "...Baby One More Time".[122][123] Spears's highly-anticipated performance of "Gimme More" at the 2007 MTV Video Music Awards was panned.[124][125][126] The BBC stated that "her performance would go down in the history books as being one of the worst to grace the MTV Awards",[127] and The Times noted that "Spears was out of synch as she lip-synched and at times just stopped singing altogether".[128] Despite the criticism on her performance,[129] the single has achieved worldwide success.[130][131][132]'' - The coverage of this album is really off. It's dominated by info on the lead single with no mention of the others. There isn't any sales info either. — [[User:Realist2|<span style="color:#4173E4">'''''Realist'''''</span>]][[User_talk:Realist2|<span style="color:#D80B0B"><sup>'''''2'''''</sup></span>]] 21:45, 28 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Actually "Piece of Me" is mentioned in the 08 section because it won those MTV awards. I'm quite sure "Piece of Me" outperformed "Gimme More" worldwide. Why so much focus on the latter then? I hope this isn't US talking points? An international perspective is always better. — [[User:Realist2|<span style="color:#4173E4">'''''Realist'''''</span>]][[User_talk:Realist2|<span style="color:#D80B0B"><sup>'''''2'''''</sup></span>]] 21:51, 28 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Page Protection == |
|||
I requested page protection following yesterdays vandalism. i.e the first thing you see ''ALEXANDRA AND DANIELLE WERE HERE BITCHHH!!!!'' or todays ''SHE IS A BIIATCH'' comments and the rest of all the vandalism this article has suffered since its protection expired. With an Article like this i think page protection should be requested as soon as it expires. I have no problem taking responsibilty for that. [[User:Ogioh|Ogioh]] ([[User talk:Ogioh|talk]]) 20:40, 29 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Recent Picture == |
|||
Can anyone please update a recent picture of Britney, like the one at MTV VMA 08? The picture uploaded was too old, so i replaced it with this recent fan-art, untill the day, a recent press cutting is uploaded . --[[User:Legolas2186|"Legolas"]] ([[User talk:Legolas2186|talk]]) 11:32, 30 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== She is totally a contralto == |
|||
She is absolutely a contralto. She cannot be up there in the soprano range as Christina Aguilera. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Waraujo20|Waraujo20]] ([[User talk:Waraujo20|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Waraujo20|contribs]]) 17:40, 30 September 2008 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
== Adnan Ghalib == |
|||
If you search for Adnan Ghalib (paparrazo claiming to have a Britney sex tape) you get redirected here, but there appears to be no mention of the scandal and his name is never mentioned on the page. So why the redirect? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/32.97.110.142|32.97.110.142]] ([[User talk:32.97.110.142|talk]]) 17:11, 1 October 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
== birthday? == |
|||
Why is her birthday listed as December 3rd when it is December 2nd??? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/24.193.215.99|24.193.215.99]] ([[User talk:24.193.215.99|talk]]) 00:49, 4 October 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:Thanks for bring that to our attention and it has been fixed. Someone (by looking through the page history) changed it yesterday and minor but incorrect edits like that tend to go un-noticed very easily. [[User:AngelOfSadness|<span style="background:#000000 ; color: #30D5C8;"> AngelOfSadness </span>]][[User_talk:AngelOfSadness|<span style="background: #000000; color: #FF69B4;"> talk </span>]] 00:54, 4 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== screenshot == |
|||
if we take a screensot from one of her music videos is that a copyrighted image? because if it isnt why dnt we just use one from piece of me as the main picture for the page? or one from womanizer when that gets released. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Toxicbomb2004|Toxicbomb2004]] ([[User talk:Toxicbomb2004|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Toxicbomb2004|contribs]]) 01:07, 5 October 2008 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:A screenshot of a music video is a image taken from copyright material which is owned by Spears's record label. [[User:Bookkeeperoftheoccult|<span style="color:black">'''''The Bookkeeper'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Bookkeeperoftheoccult|<small><span style="color:gray">('''''of the Occult''''')</span></small>]] 06:44, 5 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Make A Seperate Section For 2008 == |
|||
So many positive stuff has hapened in 2008 so to have 2008 and 2007 in the same part is just wrong. |
|||
Britney has closed off 2007 and is doing totally different things now. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/84.25.98.70|84.25.98.70]] ([[User talk:84.25.98.70|talk]]) 14:40, 11 October 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
Revision as of 13:15, 12 October 2008
IT IS ALL WRONG !