Talk:Jeffree Star

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓    Skip to table of contents    ↓

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Jeffree Star article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
Peer review Jeffree Star has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
Articles for deletion
This page was previously nominated for deletion. Please see prior discussion(s) before considering re-nomination:
  • Original AFD - 22 September 2005, speedy delete
  • DRV 1 - 28 July 2006, deletion endorsed
  • DRV 2 - 5 August 2006, deletion review speedily closed
  • DRV 3 - 24 September 2006, deletion endorsed
  • DRV 4 - 29 November 2006, deletion endorsed
  • DRV 5 - 22 February 2006, deletion endorsed
  • DRV 6 - 23 March 2007, deletion endorsed
  • DRV 7 - 4 June 2007, deletion endorsed with recreation allowed
  • 2nd AFD - 25 July 2007, keep
Maintained The following user(s) are actively contributing to this article and may be able to help with questions about verification and sources:
Milk the cows — Benjiboi
This in no way implies article ownership; all editors are encouraged to contribute.
Archive
Archives
  1. August 2007 - present

Contents

[edit] Please verify songwriting and fashion designing claims

Is there any credible information to back these claims up? The only fashion lines involving him were designed on his behalf, and he did not write the majority of his songs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.193.18.66 (talk) 11:46, 29 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Age incorrect

He wasn't born in 1986, he was born in 1985. Who keeps reverting this? You can even find in recent articles that he just turned 22 in November, not 21. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.190.98.31 (talk) 02:28, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, we don't seem to have a reliable source that states his birthdate or age. If you have one either add it or post it here for someone else to. Benjiboi 09:17, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


HE WAS BORN IN 1985.. NOT 86. ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS DO A PUBLIC VITAL RECORD SEARCH FOR CALIFORNIA, AND HE WAS BORN IN L.A COUNTY NOT ORANGE COUNTY —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.30.90.2 (talk) 13:48, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Facebook?

Does he have a Facebook? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.99.199.2 (talk) 16:01, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


JEFFREE WAS BORN NOVEMBER 15.. 1985 NOT 86! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.30.90.2 (talk) 13:46, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What is a reference

This article is/was overly referenced. You do not need to reference EVERYTHING, just things that could be considered unverifiable. The removals of reference tags to myspace are justified and should not be returned. This article has been up for multiple deletions obviously not because of content but rather because of structure and unverifiable content. Myspace is not a reference source. Do not continue to add it as one. CelticGreen 00:48, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi, You are mistaken. Per WP:SELFPUB - "Material from self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources in articles about themselves, so long as:
  • it is relevant to their notability;
  • it is not contentious;
  • it is not unduly self-serving;
  • it does not involve claims about third parties;
  • it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject;
  • there is no reasonable doubt as to who wrote it;
  • the article is not based primarily on such sources." Benjiboi 02:43, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
The reasons an article is put into the AfD process are numerous not the least of which is some wp folks' distaste for internet celebrities. What counts is making a decent article now. The reasons some may feel points are "over-referenced" is because it is subjective - what you feel needs to be referenced and what someone else feels can certainly be wildly different. As an internet celebrity Star attracts a high amount of vandals and detractors and as such many things that on another article probably wouldn't need a ref do have one here. It's also interesting, to me at least, that in one step you state the article is overly referenced and in the next claim that it must have faced AfD so many times because of unverifiable content. Benjiboi 02:43, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Y'all can argue all you want about it, but just a glance shows that the links marked as reference go to pages that have nothing to do with what is referenced. That's the least of the problems I see. Try removing a few of the bad references, as someone tried to, and start from there. Like I said on the other page, I would support this being cleaned up but if it can't be cleaned, deletion would be the next option. Referencing to myspace is considered unverifiable content as it's put up by the person you are trying to reference.IrishLass0128 13:19, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
It's very likely that other well-intentioned editors simply deleted and moved things to also "clean-up" the article thus moving something that was referenced but not the reference itself. I personally have no issue with cleaning up work but I do find sweeping deletions of content and refernces based on the mistaken perception that they don't belong as unencyclopedic - well that's problematic. Perhaps a lighter touch would be more appropriate? I disagree that deletion is the next step if clean-up cannot happen and WP:AfD disagrees with you as well, that's abusing that process. Also MySpace might not be an ideal source but is certainly acceptable as outlined above. Whenever I've utilized it it wasn't to assert anything contentious simply verifying what other reliable sources had asserted. Every article can be improved and this one is no exception. Benjiboi 14:19, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Update. I've added the clean-up tag to article. Also if you can specify which of the references don't support what they are referring to I'm happy to look into them if no one else wants to. Benjiboi 14:23, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Well, the very first reference that is supposed to support his birthdate says "my birthday show, November 2007." That's not a reference. The deletions I saw were bad reference links and links to myspace, the article was actually cleaner by removing these. They were not valdalization or change in content to the article. I disagree that this is not overly self promoting but that's not my call. IrishLass0128 20:46, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I haven't looked at the article to see the latest round of changes but it did occur to me that many of the refs could simply be moved to the end of the phrases or sentences to make the reading a bit less clunky which should be a common goal. In the case of the birthday ref you mention i really don't know (without digging through the massive pile of deletions, reinsertions and changes what that ref was originally for and is more likely that it was moved from what it was asserting. Benjiboi 05:20, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Click on the first [1] next to the DOB and it goes to the reference list. Click on the reference and it doesn't go to the actual supposed reference. There's no need to look at deletions or edits, it is what is on the page currently. That's what I tried to clean up that you reverted. I actually have no "feelings" one way or another about "internet stars" but I do care that visually and accuracy wise articles are encyclopedic and acceptable. Take away preference toward the article and just look at it. Don't read it, look at it. It looks HORRID. That's what I tried to help fix. The list of references is too long, the "see also" section should be incorporated into the article, not be a list at the end. There is also the option of adding catagory links, if there are ones that associate with your "see also" section. No one was trying to kill the page, just clean it. Look at the first link, just the first link, and see I was only trying to help. CelticGreen 23:49, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Done, I removed the ref as it asserted the date was a birthday show, it would have to be combined with another ref to confirm it was on his actual birthday. I do appreciate the concerns you have and generally agree. i think where we differ is perhaps the style in which it's done. I suggest taking each removal of a reference individually rather than mass deleting content and refs altogether. In the past, on this articles and others, that well-intentioned editing has resulted in what an editor thought worked but then had to be reverted partially and cleaned up. I believe in being bold but there is a point where good material is removed with less stellar stuff. This article has a long history of AfD'ing and deletionism and vandalism so I was probably on watch for such activities so apologize if my reaction came off as rude. I don't agree with removing the See Also section although we both see it as a temporary thing, articles that should be incorporated into the main text but haven't been as of yet. To me there is no rush to do so as this article and the subject's career are both in the early stages. Benjiboi 22:48, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
I'll also offer, if you or anyone wishes, to recheck any particular section or references as time allows. It can be tedious but I'm somewhat familiar with most of them so I'm happy to recheck to see that what they originally reffed is where they are at.Benjiboi 22:51, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Indent reset. I've moved refs off the lede into the infobox as appropriate to clean up the problems outlined above. If there are any other sections that need to be addressed fel free to post which sections or paragraph. Benjiboi 13:37, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Friend Trey

And as you all know his Best Friend Trey is now in a program for 15 months —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.172.210.140 (talk) 18:59, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea who that is or if it has any bearing on this article. If so please explain it for those of us who don't know. Benjiboi 19:03, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I think it mean his best friend, Trey, meaning Jeffrees friend. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.161.237.130 (talk) 17:27, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like Trey is in a rehab program, if so I wish them the best but that might not warrant inclusion on Star's article. If a mainstream media outlet covers it and Star's involvement then is certainly possible. Benjiboi 11:02, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


Trey is an amazing person!

We love u! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.43.25.5 (talk) 17:42, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

OMFG TREY IS HOME AND HE IS JEFFREES BEST FRIEND OMG WE LOVE U TREY WELCOME HOME! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.43.25.5 (talk) 18:08, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Heart Surgery Isn't That Bad

Who keeps changing the link back to his MySpace page?

People want to find out about the song, not listen to it

The link should go to the song's page here, which then provides a link to MySpace —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blosk (talk • contribs) 23:51, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I believe this has been resolved now. Benjiboi 09:20, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Queercore???

Why is he listed under Queercore? It says the music he performs is a mix of electronica and hip hop, Queercore is a category for GLBT Punk artists. If it's because of his look...the Club looks of the late 80's and early 90's certainly had things in common with punk, but I wouldn't list Leigh Bowery under Queercore, or Jeffree Star for that matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.63.203.161 (talk) 19:34, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Strongly agreed; I'm deleting this link. A Jeffrey Star AND queercore search brought nothing up. Nothing in the first two pages, anyway. im pissed. jeffree star internet royalty you all want me. we want cunt. --128.119.16.227 (talk) 15:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Or not, the page is protected. --128.119.16.227 (talk) 15:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, that wikilink is in the "See also" section which means some editor, possibly me, I don't remember, thought that it was a related-enough topic that it should be incorporated into the article when appropriate. It doesn't mean Star is queercore simply that there is enough similarities that readers may benefit from also looking at that article, all articles are interelated in this way - linking to each other. I believe the spirit and DIY ethic of queercore is quite similar to Star's so would support it being used in the article. Also I apologize for not responding sooner, I must have missed the above comment. last month. Banjeboi 00:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] laughable

--- This page is pretty ridiculous. Why the hell does this guy need a wikipedia entry? he hasnt done anything worth while besides being a myspace celebrity, if even that; If were gonna give him an entry we might as well give everyone an entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.242.78.247 (talk • contribs) 06:29, 21 April 2008

Hopefully if you read through this article completely you would discover that there is more than just his myspace fame that he is notable for. Though admittedly, this is a somewhat borderline case of notability, at least judging by the number of deletions there were of this article before it was finally allowed to stay. -kotra (talk) 07:54, 21 April 2008 (UTC)