Talk:Britney Spears/Archive 14

New Photo

Found a better photo of Britney from 2011. Its focused on her face, and its a sharp image. She's also smiling, and its a very flattering picture. Gaga690 (talk) 21:33, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

"Flattering" is subjective. And she's looking to the left and away from the article. There's nothing wrong with the Gimme More picture, if you get consensus you can change it. Xwomanizerx (talk) 22:24, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

New Photo

Found two pictures from the Argentina show of FFT: this from Gimme More and this from How I Roll. They are both better than the one used on the article, and I want to know if we can change it to one of them. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 18:44, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

South Park episode

If the Legacy section is going to practically advertise the songs that obscure artists have written about Britney Spears, it seems appropriate to include mention of 'Britney's New Look', the 169th episode of South Park that revolves entirely around a fictionalized Britney Spears. That episode is certainly far more 'present' in the public sphere than 'Britney' by Bebo Norman (28000 total listens on last.fm; a rather small number) and 'Britney' by Busted (which has roughly 90000, which is more substantial, but still relatively obscure).

24.35.102.180 (talk) 02:40, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Fair Deletions

I do not object to deleting properly sourced language that I have inserted in an article, but a minimal reason for deletion should be included by ShadowRanger or whoever is editing. Thanks. Pr4ever (talk) 00:40, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

This article is pretty crufty and need lots of deletions. Compare to the Albert Einstein article, which has half as many citations. There is too much mixing of professional and personal information. It does not follow the standard Wikipedia format for biographical entries. 69.123.239.158 (talk) 21:12, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Britney+Spears+2011+Photos+5.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Britney+Spears+2011+Photos+5.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:07, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

External links

Please read the policies you link others to. WP:ELOFFICIAL: "Wikipedia does not attempt to document or provide links to every part of the subject's web presence or provide readers with a handy list of all social networking sites. Complete directories lead to clutter and to placing undue emphasis on what the subject says. /--/ For example, if the main page of the official website for an author contains a link to the author's blog and Twitter feed, then it is not appropriate to provide links to all three."

Spears' official website links to her various profiles on the first page. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 21:12, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

The policy document you mention starts with:

An official link is a link to a website or other Internet service that meets both of the following:

1. The linked content is controlled by the subject (organization or individual person) of the Wikipedia article.
2. The linked content primarily covers the area for which the subject of the article is notable.

So the links are fine by the first and most important part of the wording.

No one is trying to "provide links to every part of the subject's web presence"—just the important ones, and I'm assuming that you'll agree that sites like Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, Google+ (and obviously a few others) are pretty important these days? Well, they certainly are to the readers and editors of articles such as this one (who have tolerated such links for ages and ages). The listing of those links at the very end of the article has nothing to do with clutter (and the use of templates makes the links very compact). The removal of such links confirms only one thing: how far out of touch policy is with the desires of editors who wish to improve the experience for all of WP's readers.

Could you please stop removing the links (on this, and other articles) until discussion has a chance to reach some sort of consensus?

GFHandel ♬  21:58, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

The policy itself reflects the already existent general consensus about external links on all articles. Please read the two paragraphs under the bolded line "Minimize the number of links" in the ELOFFICIAL section. If you have a problem with the policy, discuss it on the policy's talk page. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 22:12, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

So you read one part of the policy and infer one thing, and I (and many others) read the more prominent part of the policy and infer another thing? Well, one conclusion is inescapable: the policy is out of touch with what is happening in the real WP world. For example: as of the December 2011 WP database dump, there were 10,535 articles that contain the string "twitter.com", and there are currently 4,041 articles containing the template {{Twitter}}. I'm confident that most of the usage of those Twitter references are in "External links" sections, and further more I'm confident that most of those articles have some sort of "Official website" information. Based on these facts, I'm confident that there are well over 10,000 articles that are currently at odds with the policy. Are you sure that there is no way you can approach a middle-ground so that we can push for a policy that better reflects the desires and actions of our readers and editors? GFHandel ♬  22:30, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Yworo (talk) 22:33, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

WP:DOSPAGWYA. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 23:19, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

We can't push for a policy on a Britney Spears talk page. Again, if you have a problem, take it up in the appropriate venue.

It's not "more prominent", by the way, just happens to come first in the text. What follows that is still very equally part of the policy, and very explicitly and clearly covers this issue we seem to have here. Repeating: "Wikipedia does not attempt to document or provide links to every part of the subject's web presence or provide readers with a handy list of all social networking sites. Complete directories lead to clutter and to placing undue emphasis on what the subject says. /--/ For example, if the main page of the official website for an author contains a link to the author's blog and Twitter feed, then it is not appropriate to provide links to all three."

As said above, other stuff exists and it's not a valid argument; it's safe to say that most articles on Wikipedia are in some or several ways flawed and out of accordance with policy. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 23:15, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not pushing here, I'm asking and testing the waters. You raised the issue of policy, and I'm responding to it on an article that could well turn out to be important part of the debate. I'm also keen to hear the response of a larger number of editors who are bound to be in these real-world parts (as opposed to just the views of those who like policy pages).

Clutter is irrelevant at the end of an article, and I can't believe you are mentioning it when the reader has to scroll past a lengthy, and frankly overwhelming, References section to get to the "External links" section (which is positively cute in comparison—even without the links now deleted).

Repeating: this is not about "links to every part of the subject's web presence" (which is a strawman here). I'm now venturing the idea that this could be about links that an average reader might expect to find in an External links section (and WP certainly is set up to help readers there).

Lastly, it's not appropriate to mention how "most articles on Wikipedia are in some or several ways flawed" because we are talking about how tens of thousands of articles are now deviating from the writings in a policy/essay. In case you think I've inflated the numbers, I just checked: as of the December 2011 dump, there were 19,122 articles containing the string "facebook.com", and there are currently 1,542 articles using the template {{Facebook}} (so I think we are well out of the realms now of "stuff existing").

Are any of these reasonable points helping to move you even a little bit away from one end of the policy spectrum? I'm not asking you to start breaking policy/essays, just perhaps to be a little more sympathetic and tolerant to the tens-of-thousands of editors who have felt the need to do so (and will continue to do so). No, I take part of that back: all those editors don't even realise they are breaking policies/essays; they are just trying to do their best to provide the best experience they can for their readers. If we are going to throw acronyms around, perhaps they are comfortable with: WP:IAR to deliver that experience?

GFHandel ♬  23:46, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

(1) "just the views of those who like policy pages" -- that's a completely inappropriate and ignorant thing to say. Yes, we're all supposed to abide by policy. I'm not sorry if that bothers you.

(2) "/--/ are now deviating from the writings in a policy/essay" -- policies and essays are completely different things. WP:EL is a policy, not an essay. I'm not interested in changing the policy since I'm perfectly fine with it the way it is, and this is not the place to discuss the policy nor make decisions about it. Maybe people at the policy's talk page would be more willing to humor you. I'm not.

(3) IAR doesn't apply here. If it does, explain how. Why is the Spears article a special case? It's not, is it? If your intent is to change what the policy says (about all articles and not just this one), then IAR is irrelevant, discussing changes to policies happens all the time. But before any change happens, the policy reflects the general consensus, which can't be overridden quite as easily as you're trying here.

For the last time, take your concern to the proper place, you can still refer to this article as an example. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 00:11, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

No one said the Spears article is a special case, but I did explain why I would like to hear other opinions here. That is something we should both now do.

I was talking about the tens of thousands of editors who have fallen into the IAR category because they have actually felt the need to present these links to WP's readers. At some point the exception will probably have to become the rule (and trust me that the numbers I presented are growing).

I do understand your points about the rules, but despite the strict line, I'm hoping that you now realise that this issue (as practised in the real wiki-world) is not as cut-and-dried as the rules and essays would have us believe.

Cheers. GFHandel ♬  00:33, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

The guidelines are prescriptive rather than descriptive. That is, we don't usually change the rules to allow the violations. If situations get out of hand, we create a bot to remedy, or at least tag, the violations. The numbers or extent of the violations aren't therefore very important, except as indicating the need for automated rather than manual solutions. Yworo (talk) 00:35, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 January 2012

Please replace the following paragraph:

At age eight, Spears and her mother Lynne traveled to Atlanta for an audition in the 1990s revival of The Mickey Mouse Club. Casting director Matt Cassella rejected her for being too young to join the series at the time, but introduced her to Nancy Carson, a New York City talent agent. Carson was impressed with Spears's vocals and suggested enrolling her at the Professional Performing Arts School; shortly after, Lynne and her daughters moved to a sublet apartment in New York. Spears was hired for her first professional role as the understudy for the lead role of Tina Denmark in the Off-Broadway musical Ruthless!. She also appeared as a contestant on the popular television show Star Search, as well as being cast in a number of commercials.[13][14] In December 1992, she was finally cast in The Mickey Mouse Club, but returned to Kentwood after the show was canceled.

WITH THIS PARAGRAPH: (Note correct spelling of Matt Casella's name): At age eight, Spears and her mother Lynne traveled to an Open Call in Atlanta to audition for the 1990’s revival of The Mickey Mouse Club. Although she was too young for the series at the time, casting director Matt Casella promised to bring her back in two years and put her on the show. Casella also introduced Britney and her mother to Nancy Carson, a New York City talent agent. Carson was impressed with Spear’s vocals and suggested enrolling her at the Professional Performing Arts School; shortly after, Lynne and her daughters moved to a sublet apartment in New York. Spears was hired for her first professional role as the understudy for the lead role of Tina Denmark in the Off-Broadway musical Ruthless! She also appeared as a contestant on the popular television show Star Search, as well as being cast in a number of commercials. In 1992, casting director Casella kept his word and finally cast her on The Mickey Mouse Club, along with other new members Ryan Gosling, Justin Timberlake and Christina Aguilera. She returned to Kentwood several years later when the show ended.

Jeanne Troy (talk) 20:33, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Re: Request made 1/10/12 (Casella spelling and edits) - please see Lynne Spears' book "Through The Storm" page 74 to verify source. (I am currently working with Matt - as I did on "The All New Mickey Mouse Club (MMC)" in the 90's - and he would appreciate the correction). Thanks! Jeanne Troy (talk) 16:58, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Partly done: spelling correction made. The paragraph you wish to be added will need to be re-written slightly. There are some NPOV issues ("Casella kept his word" isn't needed) which are apparent even without you confirming that you work with Matt Casella. Also the additional information will need to be verified by someone if possible. Mato (talk) 17:48, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Profile picture

The picture is awful! Please change it back to the ringleader one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.208.154.236 (talk) 17:27, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Please change it to a more flattering picture. That picture doesn't really show a good face and it is not HQ as well — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanaeon (talk • contribs) 06:36, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

A recent pic is needed. This one shows her face and body, and it is need to be a front picture, not side. I suggest one of these: this from Gimme More or this from How I Roll. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 22:33, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

I agree. I Like the 2 pictures above. Kalestorm (talk) 22:44, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Personal opinion doesn't really have any relevance to this. The point of the picture is to show the subject, which is does. As for being recent, the picture is taken from LAST YEAR's Femme Fatale Tour, just like those other two pictures. The black and white one shouldn't even be an option. A color picture is better. The second picture is better, but the current picture shows a better close up view. --Shadow (talk) 05:56, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Vocal info (yet again)

Hey peoples sorry to go down this road (I'm sure its been discussed a zillion times here before) but I was wondering if anyone thinks that this link, http://uk.music.ign.com/articles/829/829550p1.html, is a reliable source in regards to stating her being a 'soprano' and if so could it go into the article?? I didn't want to just put it on there as I know this is a debatable issue for a lot of people! Anyways let me know what you guys think! Thanks BrotherDarksoul (talk) 16:20, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

IGN is a reliable source. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 18:24, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

I kind of wondered as I have seen it (IGN) used on other random pages. My main concern was the fact that the source did not have any name to it. I am happy to add a little section to the article stating her said range. If anyone disagrees with the reliablity of the source they can revert until we find more citations. BrotherDarksoul (talk) 20:46, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Great! By the way, IGN reviews are used on the wikipages for Blackout, Do Somethin' and B In the Mix, all good articles. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 20:49, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Awesome! Shall need to check em out! Britters rocks! :) BrotherDarksoul (talk) 20:59, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit Request on February 1st, 2012

I believe that it should be noted under "Occupations" that Britney is a film producer, as she was an Executive Producer on the film Brave New Girl which was an adaption of her book A Mother's Gift. Please take this into consideration. 67.204.151.13 (talk) 03:21, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 4 February 2012

I want to change the picture to a better one that shows her looking much better... and yes, I will show her face. Thanks!

IAmSVD (talk) 16:02, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

What is the image you want to add? --Ceradon ^talk_contribs 17:37, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Not done: Welcome. The {{edit semi-protected}} template is used to have another editor make a specific change on your behalf. If you want to edit the article yourself, you need to become autoconfirmed. Since you made a few edits last year, just make three more edits around Wikipedia and you will become autoconfirmed. (The policy is four days and ten edits. Talk page edits count.) Thanks, Celestra (talk) 19:25, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

MMC

The article currently gives extremely short shrift to her MMC casting, implying that the show was canceled before she even appeared on it, which is clearly not the case. ("In December 1992, she was finally cast in The Mickey Mouse Club, but returned to Kentwood after the show was canceled.") I'm willing to take a stab at rectifying this, but I don't have time right now. If someone gets to it first, so much the better. =) Powers ^T 15:28, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit Request: Please change the profile picture

The picture is unflattering, her face is frowning and blurry if you have a look on Beyonce and Keanu Reeves pages, they have very good profile picture of themselves so why can't Britney? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beyonc%C3%A9_Knowles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keanu_Reeves — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanaeon (talk • contribs) 05:10, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

I already gave two pictures as options, but we have to discuss the profile picture change always, keep that in mind. I think these ones are great for the profile: Gimme More or Hold It Against Me. I personally like GM more, and I don't think that Black and White pictures are a problem since several artists wiki pages have B&W profile pictures. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 15:09, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

I think that black and white one looks horrible personally. It's dull and she looks weird in it. All for the Hold It Against Me one though. --Shadow (talk) 15:38, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok. I'll go for the Hold It Against Me one too then. :) - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 00:13, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

That outfit is hideous. Could we crop the pic to just her face? =) Powers ^T 13:53, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Full body shots are better to identify the artist. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 21:07, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't see how. Powers ^T 21:47, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

What happened to the one of her performing circus, that was probably one of her best, or from the 2011 video music awards? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.112.17.27 (talk) 19:07, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

The picture is old, we need recent pictures. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 21:07, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Thats not her best. What about a picture of her in the 2011 vma? Either her at the actual vma, or the commercial? Like, either this: http://models-hq.net/britney-spears-mtv-video-music-awards-2011-1802/14-britney-spears-mtv-vma-2011/ , or this: http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&biw=1366&bih=646&gbv=2&tbm=isch&tbnid=xgi1L2CpBfAXfM:&imgrefurl=http://www.weheartpop.com/tag/britney-spears-2011-vma-promo&docid=vAlMFi7yhoVZaM&imgurl=http://www.weheartpop.com/wp-content/uploads/britney-spears-vma-ad__oPt.jpg&w=450&h=612&ei=7fJHT-yNEK-L0QGPt4SQDg&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=744&vpy=121&dur=377&hovh=262&hovw=192&tx=84&ty=116&sig=116952786204009155823&page=1&tbnh=149&tbnw=110&start=0&ndsp=22&ved=1t:429,r:4,s:0 ? Kalestorm (talk) 20:28, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Those pictures are copyrighted. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 21:33, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Legacy section?

I thought this was only for dead (or at least retired) people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.87.19.214 (talk) 01:25, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

No. See Beyoncé Knowles for an example, she also has. You don't have to be dead to have a legacy. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 01:44, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Britney Spears Arabic Drawing

This picture cannot be of a drawing on the street in Arabian Peninsula for several reasons: 1) The text in the picture is in Farsi, not Arabic. People in Arabian Peninsula, do not speak Farsi. 2) Pictures of women, particularly pop star singers are prohibited in public in the Arabian Peninsula 3) You can see the paper clip holding the picture, therefore it's just a photograph and not a painting on the wall in the street.

Please change the description/caption of the picture to accommodate the information above. Thank you. (Alitan1 (talk) 04:46, 9 April 2012 (UTC))

Thanks for the information. Going to update the description. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 12:01, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

The wiki page for "Farsi" redirects to "Persian language". Fixed descripton. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 12:11, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

"Hosting" to "Judging"

I just want you to change the bit where it says "hosting The X factor" to "judging The X Factor", becuase she is not hosting the X factor, she is too famous to do that, she is judging on it, but she has to first sign the $15m contract.

Bogey-master (talk) 13:10, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Note: hosting The X factor can no longer be found in the article. An editor may have already changed or removed it. Honette 01:56, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 26 April 2012

Original: "That same year she released a chart-topping single, "3" in October 2009, this gave Spears her third single that reached number one on the Billboard Hot 100."

Edited: "In October of the same year, she released a chart-topping single, "3", which became her third single to reach number one on the Billboard Hot 100."

Reason: Original sentence is grammatically incorrect and poorly structured.

Lbp2488 (talk) 13:25, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Done, thanks. --Tyrannus Mundi (talk) 13:39, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

New picture

Is it possible to use this as the new profile picture? - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 19:14, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

At all. It is copyrighted. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:25, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Date format?

Since the article contains {{Use mdy dates}}, should the article use mdy dates, or should the template be changed? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 14:52, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

According to WP:DATERET, retain the existing format. The predominant format of the references was clearly yyyy-mm-dd, and of items using a different format, most were added very recently (within the last 24 hours, mostly). "mdy" is the format for the article text, not the references. Gimmetoo (talk) 14:56, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

New page type alert

Be advised of the existence of Lady Gaga on Twitter, Justin Bieber on Twitter, Rihanna on Twitter and Ashton Kutcher on Twitter‎.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:21, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 11 June 2012

Please add Britney's signature on her page. I've seen multiple celebs with their signatures on their pages, Britney's needs to be on hers :) http://tinypic.com/r/t8xett/6 96.28.94.199 (talk) 13:34, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Not done: external URL's for pictures can't be added. Mdann52 (talk) 16:57, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Support. If you can get the image from a public domain into Wikimedia Commons' without violating copyright rules, you have a better chance at getting the signature in her infobox. --70.120.83.126 (talk) 10:17, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

That's not her signature, that's her autograph. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 17:45, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

missing "Personal life" section

I wish it were easier to read about her personal life, without having to dig through so much text. I have to read everything about her music career - the whole Biography chapter - to find out what has happened in her personal life over the years. This is a biographical article with a quite unique layout: it's not helping me as a reader. To give an example, it's not easy to find out how many kids she currently has and from whom. --82.170.113.123 (talk) 18:22, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

I have tried several times to put in a complete Personal Life section & someone keeps taking it out & putting it all back in so you have to read everything. This needs fixed bad! Stoopsklan (talk) 01:37, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

It's not missing, it's there in the Biography/Life and career section. This is the same as Mariah Carey, Michael Jackson and others. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 20:57, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

You're answering someone who replied to my original comment. Read my comment and you may understand better what Stoopsklan and I mean. --82.170.113.123 (talk) 02:50, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

I did, and it's not hard. If you actually read the the Contents, you will see: "2004-2007: Compilation albums, motherhood, personal struggles, and Blackout" - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 04:14, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

No, you still don't understand it. My remark about her kids was just an example. My point was that I wish it were easier to read about her personal life, without having to dig through so much text. What if I just want to read everything that's in the article about her personal life? I have to read everything about her music career - the whole Biography chapter - to find out what has happened in her personal life over the years. --82.170.113.123 (talk) 10:53, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, because in Britney's case, her personal life is directly connected to her career. Her personal strugles were the reason of her bad performance during the VMA 2007 and the release of Blackout, both mentioned in the article; her break-up with Justin Timberlake resulted in a song titled "Everytime", which is also mentioned on the article; etc. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 01:05, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

In general, I consider the presence of a "Personal life" section to be a sign of a poorly thought out article, and it is usually a good sign that some original research is going on. With most people, there really isn't a clear, bright line dividing a personal life from a career.—Kww(talk) 01:25, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Occupations.

Should "X Factor Judge" be added to her list of occupations? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.28.153.69 (talk) 15:37, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Not in my opinion, Nicole Scherzinger, Paula Abdul, Cheryl Cole were also judges and they don't have it on their articles as well. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 01:03, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Legacy

Add Britney as gay icon, she does supports gay community and they even gave her an award. And you really need to update some pictures and also the fact she has the full custody of her kids. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.228.195.253 (talk) 18:00, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

^ I don't mean any disrespect but I don't think so. Perhaps the gay community believes this but most people out don't there think "gay icon" when they hear her mentioned. Seems like it would be adding undue weight to something not very relevant to the subject. How has she supported the gay community? What award was she presented? Perhaps if the award itself is notable enough to have it's own article it should be added(with a source). Custody of her kids, on the other hand, would be relevant because almost everyone knows of her family life. As far as pictures go, I'm sure everyone would be delighted if you uploaded some pictures for this article that are within Wikipedia guidelines. UselessToRemain (talk) 21:33, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Britney won Always Next, Forever Now Award I don't know anything about her personal life other than what tabloids write about her, but the fact is Britney and her sons live together in LA while K-Fed lives in Australia. Britney's life is more private now than it ever been, so no, almost everyone doesn't know the life of her family. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.228.195.253 (talk) 06:02, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

^ That award is certainly notable but doesn't make her a gay icon or indicate that she has supported the gay community, unless I'm missing something. You are correct about not everyone knowing her personal life. I should have said almost everyone of the generations of her targeted fanbase know of her personal life. Just because she is more private now does not mean that her relationships and 2007 drama are not fairly common knowledge. Ask anyone between ages 25-35 if you don't believe me, her media exploits were a major deal for a while. It was yourself that advocated for inclusion of her child custody to begin with so I don't know what position you are taking here. If you think her family life is that uncommon of knowledge, maybe it shouldn't be included after all. I'd say it's notable though. UselessToRemain (talk) 22:36, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Length

I request that the entire article be shortened. The article, especially the lede, is excessively long and detailed. teammathi 22:02, 7 August 2012 (CET)

I disagree. The article needs tightening, but in general, seems to be a good size. And the lead? Its three paragraphs long... stop wasting our time.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 22:16, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

The lead is almost 600 words long. That is not normal. Obama's lead isn't even 400 words long. teammathi 0:30, 8 August 2012 (CET)

You asked my opinion and I told you. I don't think its an issue. If you would like to trim it down a bit feel free, but it doesn't look to problematic.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 02:14, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Associated acts

why in Associated acts has The New Mickey Mouse Club, and still has the names of Justin Timberlake, Christina Aguilera??? They don't have her on their pages, why would she have them on her page?? same thing with Madonna? And when did she acted with Skye Sweetnam, and Janet Jackson? How important are they to her???? Can you leave it only "Associated acts: The New Mickey Mouse Club" because that actually makes sense and it was important part of her career.

You don't know why she is associated with JT? Give their articles a quick second look. Same with Madonna, there was a major hit together and controversy as well. Also, you may not recall, but in the early years of her career the Mickey Mouse Club was frequently cited as an important part of her rise to fame. Also, it's not "her page" but a page created by editors. It's not up to the artist to determine consensus on who is associated and who is not, in fact they are not allowed to change it. The article clearly indicates via quotes why Janet Jackson is important to her. Do you really believe that she has had no associated acts since the Mickey Mouse club? The only change I would make is maybe add K-Fed to the associated acts as well, since they had a show together and marriage and all. Aguilera can maybe go since their collaborations were minor and limited. UselessToRemain (talk) 22:05, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Wow finally someone replied to me, but with stupid and nonsense sh!t! Read what I said pretty well first, *Can you leave it only "Associated acts: The New Mickey Mouse Club" because that actually makes sense and it was important part of her career.* Britney Spears is bigger star than both Christina and Justin Timberlake and she never worked with them other than that New Mickey Mouse Club, at least Madonna made a single with her and even performed with her on stage, so I can understand that, but Justin Timberlake? Yes, they had a relationship but that doesn't mean he was part of her career, or important part of her career, Britney was way too big star before she even started dating him, so he is there for no fcking reason. If anything, he was the one who used her look alike in his first solo album plus he is the one who actually still talks about that relationship whenever he is doing promotion for his movies, songs and even shades her(on SNL most of the time) whenever he gets a chance, he is the one actually benefited that relationship not her. He so unimportant to her, that's my point. Furthermore, I understand it's not "her page" but a page created by editors that's why I asked to corrected what's written there. And wow! I wished I knew how to become part of these "editors". LOL — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.228.195.253 (talk) 05:27, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

^ Dear Anonymous - My response was in good faith trying to improve the article and I didn't mean for it to come off as stupid or nonsense. The first post you made was filled with grammatical errors, but I'm not here to call names or educate. What did I say that was stupid or nonsense? When you typed "why would she have them on her page?" you indicated that Britney Spears herself or someone on her behalf decided who is on the list and who is not. The comment made it seem as if you didn't understand the policy. Also, your last sentence is very confusing but I think you are saying you wish you could know(in the present) how to become an editor. Or did you actually mean you wished you knew how become an editor in the past, but now know and therefore no longer wished you knew? In either event, all you have to do is register on this site and you can edit this article. Do whatever you like, but the fact is most people associate Britney with said acts and will probably revert it. Do keep in mind that associated acts are not about who is important TO the subject of the article, but who is associated WITH the subject of the article. UselessToRemain (talk) 22:36, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

@UselessToRemain, Britney only acted with the cast of The New Mickey Mouse Club--Justin and Christina. Since it already has "Associated acts: The New Mickey Mouse Club" there is no point in putting their names there. Did she worked with them other than in The New Mickey Mouse Club? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.228.195.253 (talk) 22:43, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Sarah Leanne Cyrus

She is an American Actress Singer and Ex Site Model. she was Born in Nashville Tennesse (Feruary 10 1996), She have a twin sister named Stefani Joan Cyrus. Cyrus Moved To Tunisia in Earliar age cause of problems in her family and Now she live with arabian Family. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarah Leanne Cyrus (talk • contribs) 21:05, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Please add the fact she shares custody of her sons with ex Kevin

In this 2010 People's article, it says she shares custody of her sons with ex Kevin Federline People magazine is a reliable source and proves her regaining custody of her sons in Sept, 2009 is true, so please add. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.40.100.32 (talk) 04:04, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Infobox image

Hi. The current infobox image (File:Britney Europe.jpg) seems a bit provocative. Does anyone have any thoughts on using an alternative? --MZMcBride (talk) 15:27, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

What do you think of these two images:

• 
  Picture (1)
• 
  Picture (2)

It is best to put one of these two pictures in Infobox. I thought that I put a picture (1) in Infobox. What is everyone's opinion? --M.Sunshine (talk) 17:06, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

You did put one of those in the infobox. It was removed because infobox picture changes have to be discussed. If that user is worried about the current picture being too provocative, then those images aren't going to make it any better. --Shadow (talk) 17:19, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm. I looked at commons:Category:Britney Spears. The options aren't great. When I look at the infobox images for Madonna (entertainer) or Mariah Carey, I find them much more appropriate than the current infobox image for Ms. Spears. It does appear difficult to find a free picture of Ms. Spears that isn't so... y'know. --MZMcBride (talk) 17:41, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

It seems the Commoners don't put all the Britney Spears images in commons:Category:Britney Spears. There are sub-categories such as commons:Category:The Circus Starring: Britney Spears. So perhaps there is a decent free photo somewhere, it'll just require some digging. --MZMcBride (talk) 17:51, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

I think the current image is fine. The suggested ones aren't as good of quality. How exactly are the ones above any less "provocative"? You can see more of her stomach. Statυs (talk) 18:07, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Do you think the current image is professional?

Other options: File:Womanizer Tulsa.jpg, File:If you seek amy.jpg, File:If you Seek Amy.jpg, File:Britney-Spears Boys.jpg, File:Britney TTWE.jpg, File:Britney Spears - Femme Fatale Tour November 5th 01.jpg, and maybe File:Britney HIAM Cleveland.jpg. She has weird facial expressions in most of these, though.

If File:Britney Spears - Madame Tussauds London.jpg weren't made of wax, it'd be perfect. It's respectable. It may be that the current image (File:Britney Europe.jpg) is the best available for now, but we shouldn't kid ourselves into believing that it's ideal. (A number of other Wikipedias currently use File:Britney Europe.jpg in the infobox as well, for what it's worth.) --MZMcBride (talk) 18:27, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

There is a new image of Britney Spears in the X Factor US in June 2012:

• 
  Picture (3)

What do you think of this picture, give me your opinion, in order to replace it in the Infobox. --M.Sunshine (talk) 15:04, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Since they are both fairly recent, I would say stick to the one with highest quality. Let's keep the current one.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 23:11, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Having one from the The X Factor would be nice since that is what she is currently doing. However, the current one is higher quality so I say stick with the current one. --Shadow (talk) 05:43, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

CAN'T YOU USE A BETTER PICTURE FOR Gimme More?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.228.195.18 (talk) 01:40, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Britney Spears is 8th Best-Selling Female Artists

She is 8th Best-Selling Female Artists not 7th, correction needed there http://www.riaa.com/goldandplatinum.php?content_selector=top-selling-artists She is also the youngest artist on Riaa's All-Time 50 Best-Selling Artists List. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.228.195.18 (talk) 21:52, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 October 2012

Change link from Dara to Sandara Park. 192.12.88.131 (talk) 02:23, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Done, except that I used a piped link. The link still displays "Dara", but clicking on it takes the user to Sandara Park. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 15:12, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Britney was born in McComb, Mississippi

Edit her background information. Britney was born in McComb, Mississippi, and raised in Kentwood, Louisiana. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.228.195.18 (talk) 21:30, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Major editing request

Britney was named one of 100 Hottest Women of All-Time, ranking her at number 4 http://www.menshealth.com/sex-women/hottest-women-all-time and she also has several wax figures of herself at Madame Tussauds Wax Museums in major cities around the world including New York, London, Las Vegas and Washinton D.C. PEOPLE Magazine also named her one of most beautiful people in 1999 and 2002 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.228.195.18 (talk) 22:25, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

The Life and Career section is not organized for use as reference material

This section should be divided into two distinct sections: one devoted to significant landmarks in her personal life, and one outlining the progress of her career. As it is currently configured, a person seeking information regarding to whom and when she was married, and about the birth of her children and subsequent custody battles, must plow through a lot of material about her merchandising and recording activities which occurred concurrently. And those interested in a concise outline of her career in the entertainment industry must sift through extensive material about her struggles with mental health issues and substance abuse, along with a notation about a personal relationship with a paparazzo.

While it's clear that the author was attempting to offer a comprehensive chronological outline of her life and career, the end result is inefficient and ungainly. As a reference source, a Wikipedia article should make accessing the information sought quick and easy. This section of this article does not achieve that. Lunarmovements (talk) 00:16, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Missing "Personal life" section (cont.)

I have read many Feedback complaints saying that they couldn't find info on Spears' divorce or child situation. So then I see the article and can certainly understand why. There is no good reason for not having a Personal life section. It is clearly in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians/Article guidelines#Page_layout. Most people know that if they want that information to just go to the Table of Contents for that section -- or look in the infobox at least. But, of course, the infobox for musical artists doesn't allow for spouses or children -- which is another problem/issue. --Musdan77 (talk) 05:10, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm too lazy to get an account but

there's one sentence where sam lutfi's last name is spelled "lufti." in case anyone wants to correct that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.103.182.253 (talk) 00:38, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Getting an account takes about as long as it did to write that comment. UselessToRemain (talk) 00:05, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

The Life and Career section is not organized for use as reference material

This section should be divided into two distinct sections: one devoted to significant landmarks in her personal life, and one outlining the progress of her career. As it is currently configured, a person seeking information regarding to whom and when she was married, and about the birth of her children and subsequent custody battles, must plow through a lot of material about her merchandising and recording activities which occurred concurrently. And those interested in a concise outline of her career in the entertainment industry must sift through extensive material about her struggles with mental health issues and substance abuse, along with a notation about a personal relationship with a paparazzo.

While it's clear that the author was attempting to offer a comprehensive chronological outline of her life and career, the end result is inefficient and ungainly. As a reference source, a Wikipedia article should make accessing the information sought quick and easy. This section of this article does not achieve that. Lunarmovements (talk) 00:16, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

No need to start a new section

There's no need to start the 2012: The X Factor section..yet. I think 2011-2012 should stay in the same section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.42.120.238 (talk) 06:48, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Intro incorrect statement

Britney is not the seventh best selling female artist she is 8th after Reba McEntire! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.61.249 (talk) 13:35, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

You are correct. It has been corrected. Thanks for notifying. --Musdan77 (talk) 19:38, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Rearranged career subheads?

I was looking at the article recently, and I noticed that after around 2004, the sections in the article get a bit long and messy. I was thinking of some possible reorganizations that may keep the article up to its good-article standards, and I came up with a slight reorganization:

• 1981–97: Early life and career beginnings (No change)
• 1998–00: ...Baby One More Time and Oops!... I Did It Again (No change)
• 2001–03: Britney, Crossroads, and In the Zone (No change)
• 2004-06: Marriages and motherhood (Would cover the years of her marriage to Federline and both her children's birth years)
• 2007-08: Personal struggles and Blackout (Around here is when her personal life became even more widely-publicized, and of course the release of the album)
• 2008–10: Conservatorship and Circus (No change)
• 2011–present: Femme Fatale and The X Factor (Just removing her eighth album from subhead because not much info is available at the time)

Not a huge change, but I think my proposal may help to organize the "eras" of Britney's career into smaller, more manageable sections than what we currently have right now. Given that this is a good article, I didn't want to make any major changes before a decision is made, and perhaps additional changes and revisions can be added to it. Thanks, 68DANNY2 (talk) 21:49, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Adding Perfume info & recent voted award

Added this info - hope it gets kept! - "Britney has multitude of fragrances including: Fantasy, Hidden Fantasy, Believe, Curious, Circus Fantasy, Midnight Fantasy and Fantasy. Midnight Fantasy was voted the third best-selling celebrity perfume by bosses of British chain, The Fragrance Shop." Rosiehannah (talk) 15:06, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Britney on Xfactor

She signed only for one season and simon says he would like to see her return, but Britney revealed that she's focused on her music.He said: ”I haven’t had the conversation with her whether she’d want to, what other commitments she’s got." So basically she had to make the decision to return or not. http://www.thenational.ae/arts-culture/television/britney-rumoured-to-be-out-of-the-x-factor A spokesperson for "The X Factor" told HuffPost TV the reports are merely speculation. "No one has discussed next years judging panel yet - any reports otherwise are complete speculation," the spokesperson said in an email statement. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/27/britney-spears-fired-the-x-factor_n_2370172.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.58.105.177 (talk) 02:39, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Femme Fatale Sales Over 1 million in the US

billboard have confirmed in two articles that Femme Fatale has over 1 million units sold in the unites states! sources: http://www.billboard.com/column/reality-check/britney-spears-confirms-x-factor-exit-1008086772.story#/column/reality-check/britney-spears-confirms-x-factor-exit-1008086772.story http://www.billboard.com/column/reality-check/britney-spears-confirms-x-factor-exit-1008086772.story#/column/reality-check/britney-spears-confirms-x-factor-exit-1008086772.story So someone should change the 2011-present with the new sales! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.184.7.204 (talk) 18:27, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

"Pimping out"??

Under the section "2007: Personal struggles and Blackout" is the statement "Spears was also sued by Louis Vuitton over her 2005 music video "Do Somethin'" for pimping out her Hummer interior in counterfeit Louis Vuitton cherry blossom fabric, which resulted in her video being banned on European TV stations."

I understand the phrase "pimping out" from context, but I imagine others might have trouble sussing out the meaning. I don't know the situation, but this needs to be re-worded without the slang phrase. — Preceding unsigned comment added by History Lunatic (talk • contribs) 20:02, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

What are her total record sales???

Can somebody put together all her recod sales. People are confusing her 100 million sold albums with her over all total record sold and that's not the case. If she sold 28.6 million digital singles as of January 2012, it sure means that her albums are 100 million + 28.6 million in the U.S, add to that pre-digita sales and her worldwide single sales. Someone needs to put those up because I couldn't do it myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.58.105.177 (talk) 02:06, 3 January 2013 (UTC) yep her total record sell is around 150 million including singles — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.193.98.83 (talk) 12:34, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

There have to be an article pointing out her total record sales. RIAA last certified Britney singles was 2007. They have to update her records in the US. Yes her total record sales are about 150 million.Jasica1122 (talk) 00:30, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Reviving WikiProject:Britney Spears

Recently, activity has appeared to be slow for WikiProject Britney Spears. I am trying to revive the project so we can continue to improve articles and bring them up to GA status. (I have also reorganized the project page to make it more user-friendly, as it was quite cluttered before.) The project only has 11 members, several of whom are semi- or completely retired, so if anyone is interested in joining, please do! Everyone is welcome and all contributions are appreciated! Thanks, WikiRedactor (talk) 22:51, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

100 million albums according to YAHOO

This is more clear and better source for her 100 millom album sales. http://uk.omg.yahoo.com/news/top-10-popstars-disney-roots-justin-timberlake-selena-124700527.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.40.106.186 (talk) 06:01, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Legacy

She is not on xfactor anymore, is the saying of "fellow X-Factor judge Demi Lovato" necessary?Jasica1122 (talk) 00:25, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Philanthropy

I think we need a section for Britney's philanthropy, politics, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.68.59.170 (talk) 04:06, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Page image

Seriously? Can we really not display something more decent? (86.128.30.98 (talk) 21:05, 6 April 2013 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.128.30.98 (talk) 20:57, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Do you have one, which is free and with her face visible? Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 21:00, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately not, sorry. I don't have a wikipedia account, so I can't make any changes to the main page. I'm just putting this out there for anyone who does. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.128.30.98 (talk) 21:23, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

I don't know how wikipedia works, but I think these are pretty good pictures. Little editing maybe will work more? http://i46.tinypic.com/2daa88k.jpg http://i46.tinypic.com/2lcybzt.jpg http://i46.tinypic.com/29wpj50.jpg http://i50.tinypic.com/98t400.jpg

Use one of these for the femme fatale tour http://i46.tinypic.com/219qmwx.jpg http://i50.tinypic.com/nco7if.jpg http://i45.tinypic.com/20pua1l.jpg 71.219.58.186 (talk) 04:17, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted images of living people. You need the permision of the respective authors to upload them here. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 17:48, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 May 2013

I would like to edit her picture to something more accurate and recent. Also something more flattering not that this picture is not flattering. Perhaps her new Shape magazine photoshoot, or some candids or something else but I do believe this needs updating since this is from more than 2 years ago. Nels64 (talk) 07:56, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Not done: Find a better, free image first and then we can discuss changing it. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 13:35, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 8 June 2013

Hi will you please please edit that picture off of her and choose a better one this one makes her look very old and stuff.So please change it thank you

Not done: Vague requests to add, update, modify, or improve an image are generally not honored unless you can point to a specific image already uploaded to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons that you would like included on this article. Please note that any image used on any Wikipedia article must comply with the Wikipedia image use policy, particularly where copyright is concerned. --ElHef (Meep?) 18:02, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Project?

I don't understand why the article starts by saying that Britney Spears is an 'entertainment project'. What's that about? I think it should start the same way EVERY other article about a pop musician starts on Wikipedia - something like 'Britney Spears is an American singer and entertainer'.

This way is just weird. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.85.148.32 (talk) 17:04, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

The edit was reverted and the user has been warned (again). Normally, disruptive edits like that are usually caught in less than the 17 hours this one took. ;) Also, please remember to always sign your comments on talk pages and other discussion pages. Thanks. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 18:16, 10 June 2013 (UTC)