Jump to content

Talk:Mariah Carey

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Get2nomey (talk | contribs) at 21:06, 20 March 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Todo priority Template:Past AID

Because of their length, previous discussions have been archived. If the size of the talk page reaches 32KB, cut and paste inactive discussions into a new archive page and add it to the list below. For more information, see Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.

Joel Whitburn

'It should also be noted that venerable Billboard Magazine statistician Joel Whitburn officially credits Elvis Presley with an 18th #1 single, owing to the double-sided "Don't Be Cruel"/"Hound Dog" chart-topper. However, this 45 is officially considered a single entry by the magazine.'

-- This descibes exactly what happened on the controversial DFAU argument and I have changed it to be part of the page. I know some morons who don't understand what Wikipedia is about will simply change it back without reading this or listening to anybody else, but I hope that for as long as people care for what actually happened, not the revised version of events Presly fans love so, then it will be changed back to the above.

PS, it should be noted that Carey's 13th number one single "My All"/"Breakdown" was also a double A side, so if anyone wants to go for the wrong methodology, then at least mention that too.

64.131.199.5I received the following messages: Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Thank you. --lightdarkness (talk) 06:16, 4 March 2006 (UTC) 2. Please stop removing content from Wikipedia; it is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --Shanel 06:22, 4 March 2006 (UTC) 3. This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --lightdarkness (talk) 06:22, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

64.131.199.5 06:38, 4 March 2006 (UTC)First, my IP address changes every couple of days, so your "last warning" is an empty threat. You'll notice that my "user contributions" list is 3 items long, all from the last 15-20 minutes. I've edited this page a hell of a lot more than 3 times. Second, the valid reason has been specified several times on this page as well as the archived Talk page. Moving the Billboard/Whitburn debate from the 7th section to the introduction, deliberately overlooking the controversy, then gang-reverting the changes, indicates a lack of seriousness. It also serves to double up information even as various editors have been trying to shorten the article. Extraordinary Machine, who takes an extraordinary interest in this page, wrote on the edit history page, "restore mention of Billboard controversy, this has been discussed extensively on talk." He/she seems to understand this issue better than you, and you might like to take a cue from his/her oversight, even if it's not as much fun as calling contributors "morons" and "petty and stupid" and "sad Madonna/Elvis fans." I shall wait for some of the more responsible editors to weigh in, and then I shall restore my edit.[reply]

I too would take 'an extraordinary interest in this page' if anyone apart from Extraordinary Machine could edit it without being reverted. This is Wikipedia, not Extraordinary Machine-pedia. And for your information I got what I put onto the page from another Wiki page. Why does he understand it better than me?
To 64.xxx...:I apologise for not editing the lead to remove the mention of Presley; I've just done that now. I don't think that you would intentionally vandalise the article, so I believe that it may have been some sort of accident. To 195.xxx....: firstly, that slab of text is (in my opinion) too long and detailed; secondly, I'm not the only one reverting. Also, the edit you keep restoring deletes the footnote that is being used to support the sentence. Carey's "My All"/"Breakdown" single doesn't count as two number-one hits in the same way that Presley's "Don't Be Cruel"/"Hound Dog" does. From what I can surmise, if "Breakdown" reached number one on the Hot 100 Airplay chart then it may play a factor in the debate, but it didn't. "Don't Be Cruel" and "Hound Dog" both reached number one on the jukebox-play chart (equivalent to an airplay chart in those days); they are counted as one because Billboard uses the sales chart only for its pre-Hot 100 data. Extraordinary Machine 22:31, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

64.131.199.5I would still drop the "Since her debut..." clause since we can safely assume Mariah Carey didn't have very many #1 singles BEFORE her debut. Saves you 3 words, anyway. Ex-Machine's thumbnail description of the Presley single's chart history is correct. He is also right about "Breakdown" never qualifying as a #1 song, despite being promoted as an A-side. Presley's single came out during a period where four relevant charts were being compiled by Billboard Magazine. "Don't Be Cruel" and "Hound Dog" each topped the Juke Box and Best Sellers charts. "Don't Be Cruel" also topped the Most Played by Jockeys and Top 100 charts. The Top 100 chart is considered somewhat lesser in clout to the other three, even though its Hot 100 descendant replaced them all. However, in 1955-58 the Jukebox, Sellers, and Jockeys charts were of roughly equal importance. The magazine's retroactive emphasis on one of them, to the exclusion of the other two, continues to spark debate. Billboard's official statistician Joel Whitburn rejects such backdated methodologies, and the magazine has apparently agreed to disagree. There was no such uncertainty in the autumn of 1956, as top billing on the Presley single switched back and forth during its 3-month run at the top, depending on which side had received more radio airplay or jukebox dimes that week. A stronger retroactive case can be made for breaking up the single's then-record 11-week run at the top between the two chart-topping sides, rather than eliminating one of them entirely. Interestingly, Joel Whitburn's 1978 edition of his "Top Pop Singles" reference book credited "Don't Be Cruel" as being #1 for 9 weeks, and "Hound Dog" at #1 for 7 weeks, due to place-switching and overlap. His books currently credit each song with 11 weeks at the top. None of this was at issue for Carey's "My All"/"Breakdown" single, as "Breakdown" never received enough airplay to challenge for the #1 slot. The current revision seems reasonable, since there is far less argument about whether Elvis or the Beatles were solo females.


ANOTHER LIE

Is this supposed to be an encyclopedia? Accurate in a lot of ways, but the new intro is just ludicrous. The iFPI never said that. Again there is no link, plus the IFPI do not count single artits' sales. Can Mariah fans stop posting lies please? Just trying to post tham Mariah is the best-selling female artist without the numbers is ridiculous, first she should sell the records, then claim. She's about 230 by the highest estimates, including mad claims of 25 million for records that scarcely sold 17, and despite all this, she still needs to sell another 70m before she can claim the title. Sure if we really counted more realistic sales she would slip beneath Celine and Whitney, so, just stop this nonsense.

Actually yeah there is a link for that -- getcrunkjuicecontribs 00:34, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Do we check links at all? Yes, there is a link, to a Fox News article that does not mention the IFPI nor sales at all. The link has nothing to do with the claim at all. The IFPI DOES NOT monitor individual artists' sales, but markets, and they would never come up with an absurd claim like that anyway.
Now, here's the article from the link, if anyone can put any link and then claim it says something different, then the whole 'reliability standard' has no meaning:
•Mariah's Sister Arrested for Prostitution•Carey Has 16th No. 1 Hit With Ballad •Mariah Prepares for 'Emancipation of Mimi'

NEW YORK — Sultry songbird Mariah Carey (search), who's back on top with chart-busting hits, is now confronting a heart-wrenching new worry: whether she's become an enabler to her HIV-positive, prostitute sister.

Last month's arrest of the curvy crooner's older sister, Alison Carey Scott (search), on charges she solicited an undercover cop for sex on a boat at Huntington, L.I.'s West Shore Marina, hardly shocked the Carey family.

It was Alison's second prostitution bust in 10 weeks.

And the 44-year-old mother of four — who's been HIV-infected for at least 15 years — has been turning tricks off and on since the early 1980s, largely, friends said, to fund her longtime drug addiction.

While Mariah has repeatedly paid for her sister's efforts at rehab, at this point, "she's looking for Alison to want to help herself," a spokesperson for the singer said.

"Mariah can be there with love and support — but at what point do you not enable someone any longer?"

For a heartsick Mariah, 35, Alison's arrests made painfully public the illicit lifestyle from which she has tried to save her sister after a hardscrabble Long Island childhood.

It took years to realise that the famous WMA link was actually to the Monte Carlo Tourist Information Office, not the WMA, on this very page... This one is Fox News, not the IFPI, and mentions Mariah's breakdown, not her sales.... I think it's just a silly response to the infamous IFPI list above. Only, this link has absolutely nothing to do with the claim, at least the other was honestly taken from a website. Now, unless we can say that her prostitute sister makes her the best-selling female artist in history (absurd, isn't it?) There is NO LINK.


As a general rule of thumb, I woudvise Mariah carey's fans to avoid trying to state the unsttable, and, for their own benefit, stop trying to find out how many records Mariah Carey has really sold (not how many her husband says), because they would be rather disappointed. Let's stick to what her record company says, as we should for all artists (ievenif Columbia have been 'quite generous' with Mariah), that would place her in second position, at 160Million albums sold. if we sytart investigating, you'll find it counter-productive for Mariah Carey, as she would slip down the chart quite considerably. Not a surprise, as she's sold the same albums (fewer singles though) than Madonna in the US, and many, many less in all other countries.

Actually, Ive replaced the source and the claim. Watch the video, this links to the actual programme and not any Monte Carlo site. World Music Awards claim that she is the best-selling female of all time (and third best selling overall behind Elvis and the Beatles). Also, 1)Mariah has outsold Madonna in the US (both albums and singles), and two, isnt it funny how Madonn has sold 250 (supposedly) and she has never won a WMA (even though everyone else who sells a lot has received: Celine Dion, Whitney Houston, MJ. MC). The thing is, Madonna isn't anywhere near 200 or 250. In 2000, Guinness reported 120. There is no way she could have doubled since then, especially with todays sales drag. End of story. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 19:04, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How incorrect is all this!!! First, the video clearly states 'Diamond Award', and it also states 100Million albums. Second, the World Music Award are a charity, like many others, they are not an official music industry organisation, and don't pretend to be. Third, they are not at all related to the IFPI, while in your introduction it says 'the IFPI'. Fourth, you see the 'contact us' link on the WMA website? ask them, and you will get their legal officer dissuading you from stating that they ever awarded that prize. Again, the usual mess, Diamond award turned into something else, etc... Fourth, the World Music award only give prizes to people that can attend the show, and as I said above they have been trying to award the 'Best Selling female artist in history' prize (one off) to, you guessed, Madonna. Ask their legal officer for confirmation. They have tried to get her to go to the show for the last few years, but Madonna's never mamanaged. If she gets it, would it make her any more the best selling? NO, because the WMA are just a charity, they have no authority to decide who is or sin't really the best selling. Also, when it comes to how Mariah is introduced, that does not account for factual data. We all know artists have a say on how they want to be introduced, and Mariah has alays insisted on being introduced as 'the Best-selling bla bla' (not anymore I've noticed, she's now being introduced as 'one of the best selling...') Madonna never gets introduced with numbers, that does not make a difference to her sales. It just shows more class. Finally, Madonna's 64plat in the US, Mariah's 63 (so, less than Madonna at this very moment, anyway not far), only difference is that Madonna's sales are 1/3 in the US (1/6th now) and the rest around the world, while Mariah's are more than 60% in the US (75 at this very moment). Island declared 160M albums for Mariah last week. I'll trust them, even if I know that the numbers are hugely inflated (daydream sold 17M not 25, just an example, plus, if she's sold 2)+M in the US, she's very likely sold less than twice as many worldwide). Warner Bros declare in excess of 200M albums for Madonna(that was before COAD which is aleady about to outsell TEOM), much closer to the truth than any Mariah count, and there are about 100M singles to add (Island say Mariah's sold 50M singles, again, where?)Look at TEOM, 5+M in the US, 1M in Europe, lucky if it's sold another million and a half worldwide. this is Mariah's international success. It has not changed much, apart from her losing ground (which she had for a couple of albums) in Japan. Her best selling album in the EU is 2Xplat (2million), the main question is WHERE does she want us to believe she's sold all those records? Even if if believe her, she is still 90M behind Madonna. Now, to be honest, the problem with Mariah's numbers is not Island, nor was it Virgin, but her husband- sorry- Columbia: Island seem to be quite reliable and add onto what they received from Columbia and Virgin, in fact, they declared shoipments of 8 million for TEOM, which makes sense with 1m shipped in the EU, 5+ in the uS (or 6) and about 1.something M in the rest of the world. Not so for Columbia, who can add 7.5 and 2 and come up with 20 something... There have always been doubts about Columbia's honesty, but, as we know, they can say what they want. However, this spells the end of Mariah's inflated numbers. Her great comeback will maybe settle under or around 10 million. World Music Awards (a charity) or no World Music Awards. The pathetic thing is that all these lambs are trying to make out something which is not true. Using a Fox News Article, the Monte Carlo Tourist information Centre, a WMA vid that states 100M to change it into who knows what and then give it creditation from the IFPI (they are consulted by the WMA, but even the IFPI do not know how many recods artists sell, plus they do not endorse the WMA, as they do not endorse any prize giving. Set your heart at peace with the WMA, email them. As to Mariah's real sales? I think they are far below Whitney's in the end Whitney was A list worldwide, Mariah's B list in 2/3 of the world market, her albums just creep into the top 10, sort of thing. Check the Discography discussion, someone's pointed out how her numbers are humongously inflated and don't add up... For what I care, I can trust Islad, which still places Mariah tie with Celine 90 Million behind Madonna. If you aske anywhere in the world apart from the uS, people wopuld actually be surprised to find her so high (Celine is far more famous outside the US than Mariah, in fact she's got about 3 times as many Europlats as Mariah's, Madonna gets the same Europlats with an album as Mariah has in her whole career,a nd we're talking 6/7 m at a go) so, all your questions answered. Yes, Madonna Has shipped 200M records, just add up breakdowns of her platinums worldwide, and you'll actually find out it's well past 210, so sales can't be that far behind. Forgetting, The Guinness Book of Records, juts ask them. The entry is 2000. Since then, Madonna's sold 40M albums, Mariah's sold about 12M albums in the same time, so che could bnot by any means have caught up (3.5+3+7.5? maybe 1 or 2 more COAD alone ahould outsell Mariah's whole sales since 2000) however the data was collected from WB as per 1996. Anyway, ask the Guinness, they are now in the process of collecting information to update the entry, which, as a draft at the moment reads 'Madonna is the most bla bla bla, with albums sales in excess of 200M and 100 m singles sold), it should be in next year, if WB don't delay it any longer.
After reading the first few sentences, I can find a million things wrong with your stance.
1) World Music Awards are directly related to IFPI, unless I've been seeing double. read this: IFPI statement See the little black logo in the top right hand corner? and world music awards.
2) Where on earth did you hear that WMAs only award people who attend their show? Legal officer? Dont make me laugh. You think you can throw down these names and I will automatically believe? Mariah Carey received a total of 7 awards (yes 7) between 1995 and 97 , but the first time she attended the show was in 1998:source go to Mariah At The World Music Awards: Complete History. If "Madge" won anything, she would have gotten it.
3)Madonna US: 64 albums, 20 singles. Carey: 64 albums, 22+ million singles. Confessions on a dancefloor isnt anywhere near TEOM sales or music wise. State your source!
4) Most of you content (especially the last part) was speculative, unsupported, fan gush, which I wount even pay any attention to. IFPI says Carey. Period. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 00:12, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You have a point: the WMA consult the IFPI with their queries about year sales, the IFPUI report what record companies declare (shipments). That is about it. May I point out that the Legend Award has nothing to do with sales, though?
The fact that the 'best-selling female artist bla bla' has never been awarded is another thing altogether. The fact that the link given is 1- to a Fox article about Mariah's sister, 2- of a video for 100M albums sold, not best selling ever.
2) The WMA stated that they've been trying to contact Madonna for years trying to award her the 'best-selling female artist of all time' but haven't given it 'because she has not been present to the show, but hope to award it snext year' (WMA legal office's email- you can get one yourself).
TEOM has shipped 8million (Island 2/3 weeks ago), that is in a year. Confessions on a Dancefloor has shipped 7.4M (WB last week), that is in 4 months. US numbers are different, but that follows the trend whereby Madonna's a huge hit worldwide whereas Mariah is a mainly American phenomenon (TEOM = 5+M in the USA (6 shipped?) and about 2 in the rest of the world, TEOM 1.6 (Shipped) USA, 5.6 rest of the world, 3M in the EU alone). When you talk about sales, you seem to include the US only. COAD has by far outsold TEOM in its first 4 months, as the two albums sales are now rather close, but COAD is 8 months younger than TEOM. This ,again is WORLDWIDE. We are talking about best-sellers in the world. In teh US, I think the best seller is Barbara Streisand...
Even in the US, you should remind you that they have both 64 plats, but that one of Mariah's diamonds is actually for 7.5M sold, not 10. Anyway, as I said, the two artists' sales in the US are about equal at this moment, but there is no comparison betwen Madonna's sales in the rest of the world and Mariah's. Mariah's best-seller in the EU is 3plat, Madonna (we are not sure as True Blue and LaV were before the times, but TB has sold 10M in the EU) has had in the last 10 years a several albums at 7, and 6plats. As I said, the salesa ratio for Madonna is about 20(US) 80(Rest of the world, now, though if her early career is included, it ends up being 30/70. for Mariah it is now 80 (US) 20(RotW), none of its album as EVER sold as many copies in the whole rest of the world as it has in the USA, therefore, if she's sold 64M in the USA, she can't have sold more than another 60 in the rest of the world. On the other hand, the 30/70 ratio for Madonna means that if she's sold 64M albums in the uS, she should have sold the 200M+ (I think it's about 210+ at the mom, but WB are not prompt to declare sales quickly, the next time may be in a few years) as declared by WB. Just to give an example, Daydreams is 10Plat in the uS, but only 3 in the EU (in fact there's no way it's sold 25M, even allowing 2.5 extra in the US on the 7.5 sold according to Soundscan).#1s sold about the same as Music in the US (3.5M) but Music has sold 6.5 in the EU, #1s 1million.... And so forth for all the albums... as I said, COAD alone may collect as many Europlats as Mariah has in her career (2plat in two weeks to start with, going 4 plats very soon, and still a year of good sales to go) I've noticed that even inventing sales from China (which did not literally HAVE a market till very recently) and enormous slaes (given what the market is now) there are about 30/40% of all her albums with Columbia's sales unaccounted for (and only about 10% of the world market, where by the way, it's not like Mariah has a huge string of #1s, unlike Madonna...) It's quite simple, the two artists have sold about the same in the US, but Madonna's sold incomparably much more in the rest of the world, so there is no doubt as to whose sales are higher, and their record companies' data is along the same lines (210M tot for Mariah, 300M plus for Madonna), this even considering Mariah's super-bloated numbers.
Finally, whatever people say and go on about, as I said, I am ready to accept Columbia's over-bloated numbers for Mariah, but they still are far behind Madonna's. Mariah 160M albums, 60M singles (Columbia0, Madonna, 200+M albums and 75M singles (in 1988, the singles, 100M now) according to WB (NB< WB Brazil declared 95M singles last year, which adds up exactly with singles breakdowns, as the 200M albums match with album breakedowns, thing which we can't say for Mariah). THere is NO WAY Mariah has any claim to the #1 spot, she's still almost 100M behind (and the divide is growing, as COAD is selling better than TEOM, and it will keep on like this, for many reasons).
Anyway, I'm pleased to see that silly claim has been removed from the introduction, someone must have checked both links (Fox Article, and Video for 100M, not best-selling ever). Whatever you want, just email the WMA as to them, they'll confirm every word I've said, then ask if you can publish the email, if you want. Coming from the legal officer, I think I should feel free to publish it...

Major rewrite of 12th March 2006

Okay, I've been developing the article in a sandbox page recently, and I've now just transferred my edits to the "live" article. Basically, I've tried to insert more reliable and print-based references, expand the information on Carey's musical style and influences, balance the critical appraisal with quotes and paraphrasing from Carey herself, and generally improve the prose. It's somewhat more detailed than previously, but I think that the new material is worth including. Extraordinary Machine 23:48, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very Good. My only problem is the intro: its not very consistent. For example, you mentioned her voice in the second paragraph, moved on to something else, then rementioned it in the last paragraph. Also I think you should include her albums instead of singles when talking about her being one of Columbia's biggest acts (just personal preference here). Last thing; "return of the Voice" was more appropriate: it was her slogan/catch phrase or whatever. I think it should be included, but in quotation. However, I'm absolutely impressed with everywhere else. GREAT WORK!! Oran e (t) (c) (e) 00:20, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, just a few things:
  1. I made some edits to the lead section again. From all I've read she's perceived as more of a pop musician than R&B, so I mentioned pop first. Also, I think we should only mention the World Music Awards once, otherwise it's both name-dropping and repetitive. And the record she attained for the highest number of number-one singles at the start of her career is probably one of her most famous commercial accomplishments (again, from what I personally have read) so I added it back in.
  2. "Born in Huntington, New York, Carey is the third and youngest child of Patricia Hickey, a former opera singer and voice coach of Irish American Roman Catholic extraction, and Alfred Roy Carey (born Núñez), an aeronautical engineer of Afro-Venezuelan descent." - this is a run-on, so I split it.
  3. "Critics rated Carey's debut highly; in 1991 she won Grammy Awards for Best New Artist and Best Female Pop Vocal Performance for her debut single "Vision of Love"." - I'd prefer that the "and" was used to join the two sections here, as do critics vote on the Grammy Awards? Also, it implies that we are using the Grammy Awards as proof that critics rated the album highly, when the references are different for each.
  4. I couldn't really find references to "return of the voice" from any reliable sources (or ones that aren't press release-esque material). From my research, it seems to be used more by fans than anyone.
  5. Splitting the Emotions paragraph into two seemed odd to me as all of it refers to the album (except the last sentence, which is related to the sentence before that anyway), and I don't think it's big enough to be split into two.
Thanks for the kind words! Extraordinary Machine 17:42, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
First off, GREAT WORK to all the editors (Extraordinary Machine, Journalist, Eternal Equinox, and anyone else I unintentionally forgot to mention) who contributed on the recent overhaul of a page in need of tidying up! Not only am I grateful, but very impressed and inspired; its deserving of much attention. On a side note, I do think that information on her MonarC label attempt (?!?) and her ventures and plans for Automatic Princess, which can be verified if a reference is necessary, should have at least a brief mention. Particularly, the former should be included because it was that label that affected certain releases from Charmbracelet ("Boy (I Need You)", "Miss You", etc.) and the careers of her contemporaries Trey Lorenz, Dat Baby, and Belle & Nae Nae. In addition it provides a look at some of her ventures that may have "failed" or atleast have been postponed. In any case, GREAT, nay, AMAZING WORK yet again, but do consider some of my points. Thanks. Grey Pursuit 21:45, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I don't think that her Automatic Princess line is that notable as it appears to have been cancelled, but I've added a mention of her MonarC imprint. Unfortunately, the MonarC article doesn't say whether it's still active or not. Extraordinary Machine 22:02, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Criticality in lead

I inserted the sentence "However, her voice and lyrics are the subjects of frequent criticism" into the lead section less than twenty-four hours ago, and already it's being repeatedly removed without explanation. I don't see why it should be, since the article has entire paragraphs dedicated to discussing criticisms of Carey's work (as well as numerous negative appraisals of specific albums). Extraordinary Machine 22:02, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've used up my three reverts for the day, and anons are still assiduously removing the above sentence (and in the latest instance, replacing it with a mention of the number of Grammy Awards Carey has won, despite previous discussions about it in relation to WP:NPOV). This is an encyclopedia article, not a fanzine or hagiography. Extraordinary Machine 23:06, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images too similar

This may simply be a matter of taste, but I just find the image of Carey performing under the 'Style & Influence' section too similar to the image that heads the page. Of course, both are free domain pictures, but the performance picture could always be replace with a photo of her performing on tour, which is also free domain. Anywho, I'm just pointing it out for the sake of variation, but it doesn't necessarily have to be such a big dispute (I have no problem with the image that currently heads the page, just the one that's featured later because of its similarity). So, if I provide possible 'appropriate' images of tour performances of what not or maybe replace, please discuss if you disagree with my choices (by 'appropriate', I'm not particularly referring to photos of her tastefully dressed as she is known for her provocative wardrobe, but instead, photos that are high quality, of free use, or pertinent to the section 'Style & Influence'.) Grey Pursuit 04:01, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was a little worried about that, but I inserted it anyway as it seemed to fit with the section because it shows her singing, whereas the other one is just a general candid shot. Also, Wikipedia:Fair use criteria says that we should use free use images wherever possible (except if there are so many of them available that they would end up turning the article into an image gallery). But if you know where to find other free-licensed pictures of Carey, then by all means insert them. Extraordinary Machine 22:03, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leave the Page Alone

Can we please leave any innappropiate and opinionated comments, such as Maiah Carey has a great set of boobies, off the artists page. The Page Is fine the way it is leave it alone. It is not opinionated or biases for the most part and I believe it's the best we'll get. —This unsigned comment is by 69.217.120.94 (talk • contribs) 14:34, 14 March 2006.

Extraordinary Machine Is A Vandal

This person is a vandal. He is committed to disrupting the Mariah Carey website and uses his knowledge of the Wikipedia rules to disturb other users who have just as much right to make edits as he does.

Saying that Billboard does not credit Mariah as being tied with Elvis is patently false. Billboard is the final arbiter of their charts and their charts are widely recognized as the offical U.S. pop charts. To suggest that Elvis and Mariah are not tied because Billboard is not really the only chart out there is just dishonest and stupid. We would not even be talking about a record if we did not see Billboard as the official chart. When Carey scores 4 more number 1 singles on Billboard's Hot 100 to surpass the Beatles will you then say Billboard is not the only chart out there and the record is not really official. That is just a preposterous argument. Billboard is the final arbiter of their own charts. This is silly. If they say tomorrow that they are taking away 5 of Elvis's number 1 singles well guess what, he will have 12. People might not respect it, but that would be the official total. Whitburn's statistics are no more credible than Fred Bronson's. Bronson has published numerous books for Billboard and works for them currently and has direct contact with the chart department on a regular basis. How can you argue with what Billboard publishes in their own magazine, which is that Carey is tied. That is absurd.

I am going to refer to you to the Island Def Jam legal department for continuing to vandalise Mariah Carey's website. You will face legal action for distorting her record.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Get2nomey (talk • contribs)

Please see Wikipedia:Civility and Wikipedia:No personal attacks, and please do not call other users "vandals". The situation should be discussed since edit warring will not progress the article. In addition, I'd suggest a look at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. —Eternal Equinox | talk 23:33, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please, no legal threats. I'm glad that you share my enthusiasm for the subject of this article but this is not "Mariah Carey's website", it is an encyclopedia article. If by "[using] his knowledge of the Wikipedia rules to disturb other users", you mean directing them to appropriate policy and guideline pages, then I apologise if this caused you distress in some way, but I'm hardly going to let you add and take away material just to bring the article in line with your own personal opinion of the issue. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines that all users are expected to abide by, and enforcing such policies is not "vandalism". Vandalism would be if I deliberately added misinformation to the article, which I haven't; this controversy is supported by evidence and has received substantial press coverage. The fact that the magazine's own official statician doesn't even agree with this indicates how controversial (and often inaccurate) retroactively applying current metholodies to earlier chart listings is. See [1], [2] and [3].
I'm sure you may be thinking "What does this have to do with Wikipedia? Billboard is official, they have the last word". Well, this is a clearly legitimate discrepancy, and it has been discussed at length by sources such as the Associated Press, The Washington Post and Billboard magazine itself (in its "Chart Beat" column written by none other than Fred Bronson, who cites Joel Whitburn's Top Pop Singles book as an "indispensable tome" and cautions that people shouldn't throw statistics like this around without providing any context for how those statistics were compiled). It is best to defer to the neutral point of view in cases such as this, as implying that one party is correct (by saying that Carey is tied with Presley) and not the other, when they both have valid points, is POV.
Read the text that remains again: "she has the highest number of U.S. number-one singles by a female artist". Isn't this a highly notable accomplishment for Carey in itself (in addition to it being undisputed)? Extraordinary Machine 18:48, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

64.131.196.46 09:38, 16 March 2006 (UTC)Extraordinary Machine is pretty calm, you know, considering that he's headed to "Def Jail."[reply]

Please, don't make me laugh. No one can arrest anyone here. This site does not belong to Mariah Carey or IDJ, nor is it affiliated with them in any way. You know what? I won't even respond to any more posts of legal threats. The entire matter is just plain silly. If you want a site that worships Mariah Carey, I suggest going to mariahdaily.com. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 16:24, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

64.131.196.46 19:11, 16 March 2006 (UTC)You'll all soon be breaking rocks in Wikiprison! The Wiki entry for the U.S. Constitution has recently been edited to add "failure to properly adore Mariah" as a federal crime. Officer Get2nomey has spoken![reply]

Yeah whatever. And "Officer Get2nomey", if you continue this silly "game", you might find yourself being blocked for a longer period of time. And don't be fooled, that IP address you are using can also be blocked, as well as every address you might threaten from. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 03:28, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

64.131.196.46 05:10, 17 March 2006 (UTC)(Psst. Orane. I'm making FUN of the nonsensical threatening posts, not leaving them. It'll be our little secret.) I'm also the guy whose IP address switches every 3-to-10 days, making all talk of blocking moot. Yours is the 5th such toothless "warning" I've received regarding this page alone. I'll never understand the impulse on Wikipedia to zoom straight to the "I'll ban you!" gambit. But it comes from an astonishing number of users, it's always precipitous, and it certainly reinforces my decision NOT to sign up for a steady Wiki account.[reply]

Edit Wars

There would not be any edit wars if people would stop behaving as though they own a particular site. Some posters put lines into articles that they know will cause controversy and upset other posters. There is not reason to insist on lines of text that were never in an article before that upset everyone. Furthermore some posters believe that what they post is gospel and what others post needs to be revised. It is wrong. This is a free encyclopedia to be edited by anyone and other people's edits count too. Some posters cite the rules as though that gives them authority to interpret those rules any way they please. It is wrong and unfair to other posters to appeal to authority in that way. Legal action seems to be the only way this will be resolved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Get2nomey (talk • contribs) 23:51, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please sign your comments by placing four tildes after each posts like this: ~~~~ . Thank you. Also, while this is a free encyclopedia that anyone can edit, we have certain policies and guidelines that you have to follow if we are to be productive here. (Please familiarise yourself with NPOV, Wikipedia:Civility and Wikipedia:policies and guidelines) If you break these guidelines and procedures, then ofcourse others will try to correct them. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 23:51, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't insert that sentence to cause controversy, I inserted it because it represents a point that is discussed extensively in the article. I do not believe I "own" this article or that what I write is "gospel"; you are free to edit it, provided that (as Journalist said) your contributions conform to Wikipedia's policies, guidelines and the manual of style. However, it becomes a problem when such contributions compromise Wikipedia's aim to maintain a neutral point of view. As I wrote on your talk page: I did the research on Carey, negative critical appraisals of her work came up very frequently, and I have reflected this in the article. From everything I have read, criticisms directed at her voice and lyrics do indeed have "great importance in the grand scheme of things", enough importance to mention in the lead anyway. Extraordinary Machine 19:01, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Protection

I have protected the page, and will not release it until you guys have come to a concesus on the talk page. Please behave yourselves, and familiarise yourselves with the applicable policies and guidelines before asserting any point; it would make it a whole lot easier for you guys. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 23:43, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signing posts

People should worry less about this and worry more about the outragious vandalism that goes on here. Get2nomey 00:00, 15 March 2006 (UTC)get2nomey[reply]

New Sales Figures?

If anyone has noticed, in her Official sites newsletter it lists her Album sales as only over 160 Million records world wide. So, I'm thinking the number is somewhere close to 162 or so ?

Shouldn't the charts on here be changed then ?

I think that maybe you are looking for Talk:Mariah Carey albums discography, since there aren't any sales figures in this article. Also, please do not insert copyrighted material, or material unrelated to the discussion of Wikipedia or its articles, onto talk pages. Extraordinary Machine 22:17, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Album Content

This point has been discussed by me and probably numerous other editors many times and is probably going to make everyone FED UP of reading it again, but don't the album sections seem WEIRD in this article. In every other biographical article on a singer, it never has so many quotes from reviews on their albums (they belong in the album's respective articles) and also, there is still too much emphasis on chart performance. Let me review on what I think should be said:-

Chart records worthy of note in this biographical article:-

  1. Mariah Carey spanned 4 #1 singles in the U.S.
  2. "Emotions" made her first artist in U.S. chart history to have first 5 singles hit #1. No-one has repeated the feat since.
  3. "Without You" was her first U.K. #1 single
  4. "All I Want For Christmas Is You" = first #1 in Japan
  5. "Fantasy" became second single (first by female artist) to debut at #1
  6. "One Sweet Day is still the longest running #1 single on Billboard Hot 100 at 16 consecutive weeks
  7. "Honey" made her only act to have 3 singles debut at #1 (was her last)
  8. "My All" gave her 13 #1 singles - more than any other female artists
  9. "Heartbreaker" made her only act to have a #1 every year of the 1990s
  10. "Thank God I Found You" made her only act to have a #1 every year for 11 years (1990-2000)
  11. "We Belong Together" was her first #1 for 5 years

I don't think anything else is really worthy of note, and to be fair some of these could be cut out, but they are pretty impressive accomplishment as almost all of them have never been accomplished by anyone else, making them specific and unique to her, therefore relevant to her biography.

As for her albums-little more than one or two sentences should be used to explain their critical success. Fair enough, a word or a short sentence can be quoted from a review, but don't waste two or three sentences quoting from various reviews. Saying that Daydream was her most critically-acclaimed effort yet, really is enough. Readers who are interested in more can link through to the album's article where they can find out more about its critical response.

What are your thoughts? I won't make any changes to the main article until I obtain some response, as its edited enough as it is. Ultimate Star Wars Freak 17:59, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the chart records you listed are already mentioned, 9 and 10 are kind of the same anyway, and 11 is implied. Also, I think that there is about as much emphasis on chart performance as there is on everything else. I also believe that critical appraisal is very important; saying "The main criticism of [this album] was [this]" and nothing more doesn't really stand up on its own unless the statement is corroborated by quotes from actual people (see WP:NPOV#A_simple_formulation). Kylie Minogue, a featured article, has a similar approach to summarising the critical reception of each of her albums. Extraordinary Machine 18:23, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One Sweet Day

The caption needed to be changed, because it is impossible to have a "duet" with four other people.


I Hate It

I dont like the current Head Picture. Its too UGLY. can somone upload a better picture that represtents her in a 'Beautiful' way? thay way she should be represented? Coojah 00:36, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The current one is under a free license, and any new image must also be under a PD/free license. As for finding a new image, to quote Mahatma Gandhi, "be the change you wish to see in the world."--Fallout boy 07:32, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
who put a sign on it

Clean up required; March 2006

The size of the article currently stands at 57k - almost twice as long as the maximum allowed limit of 32k and therefore needs to be edited down.
A lot of the information on the article is too long and needs to be either cut down or removed completely to comply with Wiki regulations. Rimmers 18:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The size of the article isn't necessarily due to the amount of text in the main body of the article. Footnotes and references, sound samples, images and categories are also contributing factors (as is the discography section). The word count is actually lower than some of Wikipedia's featured articles about musicians, such as Kylie Minogue.
The article is currently undergoing a peer review (see Wikipedia:Peer review/Mariah Carey); no concerns have been raised about the size of the article there.
Wikipedia's 32kb article size is a recommendation, not a "maximum allowed limit" or hard and fast rule.
Nonetheless, I'll try and see if I can trim it down a little over the next few days. Extraordinary Machine 18:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My Recent Edits

I recently reorganized the lead but Journalist changed the lead and said it made the discussion incoherent. I do not see how that is the case. I did not insert the line about the World Music Awards. That has been there. I think it makes more sense to end the lead with Mariah returning to the forefront of music in 2005. In the first Paragraph we end with a discussion of Mariah as being named the biggest selling artist of the 1990s by Billboard. Why do you think it is incoherent to begin the next paragraph discussing Mariah being named the world's best selling female artist. Doesn't that come next logically? By the way I did not insert that text point. It has been there for some time. You left all of my edits in place except for the order of the paragraphs. I think it is incoherent to jump back to the world's best selling artist in paragraph 3 of the lead. The middle paragraph belongs at the end of the lead because it sums up what has happened in her career the last 10 years and brings us to the present.Get2nomey 21:06, 20 March 2006 (UTC)get2nomey[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mariah_Carey&oldid=44710104"