Talk:Madonna (entertainer)/Archive 4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] At Michigan

Who is Damian Zikakis? Via google, he appears to be a success full accountant. Is he really notable enough to be mentioned in the article? I'm not going to edit anything myself, but I think the sentence about him should be removed. Mls737 05:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I deleted the reference to him as non-notable (and trivial). Be bold next time!--Vbd | (talk) 09:24, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] STOPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP

STOP it with the horrid biased glorification in the intro! Who the hell put that "Immaculate Collection...highest selling album" bit in the intro? PURE fan glorification. This is NOT necessary to the intro and NOT an important aspect to Madonna's entire career. Keep this stuff OUT! PatrickJ83 01:02, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

That was not me at all, and as you said, not necessary. Israell 14:07, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd say stop with the biased comments altogether. Dollvalley 14:48, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

I'm seeing repeated vandalism from ip address: 75.14.54.140 with the same message as above. --Tbannist 20:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Madonna's mother was Canadian

She was from Quebec which is in Canada, not America. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 154.20.140.231 (talk) 09:16, 11 March 2007 (UTC).

Thanks for pointing out this error. From what I can tell, Madonna's mother was born in the U.S. but was of French-Canadian descent. I have edited the text accordingly.--Vbd (talk) 16:13, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Madonna's mother, part II

Why did I revert User:Israell's phrase, ". . . Madonna Louise Fortin, an American who was of French-Canadian descent" back to "Madonna Louise Fortin, who was of French-Canadian descent"? Because the word "American" is implied and is therefore unnecessary. I don't think it adds any clarity to the sentence. If anything, it makes the sentence awkward.--Vbd (talk) 06:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Would Someone Be Willing To Start A Fashion Section

Madonna has had so many looks over the years and now her own official fashion line. Would someone be up to creating a page? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.82.82.248 (talk) 22:00, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Acting and book bios

Why have the portions on Madonna's acting and book history been relocated to other pages? Both are integral parts of her history as an artist, and certainly have more place in her article than "diet and exercise" and "at the present". — Charity 23:37, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

The page was way too long. As per Wiki standards, it HAD to be cut down. There are already sections dedicated to those topics anyway. Herewego123 05:37, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This article is way too fancrufty

The wording in some sections makes it very evident that it was written by excited fans, who were having the time of their lives. Case in point, the meticulously detailed song descriptions on the audio samples. Very fancrufty. - Jtpop 00:36, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree, especially with the photos. I wouldn't dare touch it myself, since I know an edit war would begin. The page is entirely too long as well, and lacks any sources. If anyone wants to take a crack at it, go ahead! Herewego123 05:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] References

Joni Mitchell once declared, "She has knocked the importance of talent out of the arena. She's manufactured. She's made a lot of money and become the biggest star in the world by hiring the right people".[67] Other popular entertainers like Janet Jackson, Whitney Houston, and Mariah Carey[68] have expressed disapproval of her artistic abilities, disdain, or criticism against her image and work.

These reference numbers refer to nothing.


I agree. This section of the article should either be deleted or given authentic references. --Anzuru 00:44, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] All the stuff about her adoption and Italian heritage needs to go

Madonna's "fat Italian thighs" and adoption flap doesn't warrant so much space! The Italian thighs bit is pure fan fluff and the adoption is no more than a small blip on her career. PatrickJ83 21:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the Italian thighs, but no way about the adoption. That is not a small blip in her career.

[edit] Martha Graham

The article says that Madonna studied dance under the tutelage of Martha Graham, but I don't think that this is true. I know that she studied under Pearl Lang, who had been a protege of Martha Graham, but having studied under someone who studied under someone else does not qualify the statement that Madonna had studied with Martha Graham.

Could someone please close the quotation marks (") after "Gambler" in the Vision Quest soundtrack section? Thanks 152.23.77.38 11:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I did away with these sections:

-Political views. This needed to go because it is purely personal and not essential to her career, which is why she is famous. She isn't famous for who she votes for or against. Nor does she bring her politics into her music (let's NOT start a debate about THAT ploise!) so her political views aren't important enough to warrant their own section. If people want to discuss these, they ought to be sprinkled throughout instead of getting their own unique section.

-Diet & exercise. I've deleted this because it was barely a few sentences long and that doesn't warrant its on section unless it is going to be expanded on greatly. However her exercising could be discussed in an entirely new section - perhaps an "IMAGE" section? PatrickJ83 22:24, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

agree - I think they needed to go. Let's just accept that every celebrity has a political opinion, even if their political opinion is that politics don't interest them, and let's keep it out of their article unless it has some relevance to their career or their public life. Some celebrities have "politicised" their careers - Madonna has not particularly done this, and without demonstrating relevance, it's trivia. Likewise her fitness regime and diet. Lot's of celebrities embark on some kind of program and unless they become Jane Fonda it's not especially noteworthy. Madonna is fit and trim. I'm sure that could be mentioned somewhere, but it doesn't need a section to do it. I think the article still needs a lot of work, but this is a small step in the right direction. Rossrs 12:33, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Politics has ALWAYS been part of Madonna's career, from religious to sexual politics. "American Life" album. Hello? I think you guys have missed a lot of Madonna's career. The Religious Right has been after her for years and she's always been an activist, including her vocal stance of AIDS. It's all political. She also was involved in supporting Wesley Clark. She has support Hillary Clinton and Al Gore, and supported Bill Clinton in the 90s. Did you see her documentary? Totally political. Her tours are political. Confessions incorporated a ton. 68.82.82.248 16:57, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Move arounds: does consensus agree?

I have moved some of the parts about Madonna's rebellion from "Influences" to "Criticism", as it relates to the Pope's criticism of her actions. Also, I moved a small section on Madonna's "praised appearance" in League of Their Own from "Influences" to the 1992 subheading above, where it speaks of her role, also. Mostly, I've made these changes to reduce redundancy, establish more consistency, and improve conciseness. If you have a problem with these changes, please notify me or edit where you see fit, as, from what I see, this page still needs work to regain "Featured" status(especially with "bloat" and missing citations). Perhaps if the "Criticism" can be more concise and brief, that would improve the overall picture.

I've tried to find some citations for information in the "Influences" section, but have yet to find some. It might have to be deleted if no information is found for citations, but I will try my best to fill in the blanks. Remember, most of the world has access to this article if they wish, and the right information is necessary for this site's credibility! Auto-Unsigned -->--EtTuBrute 04:08, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Song/Album

I guess she recently cut a new album or released a song? Guess we could add in some stuff on this. Gautam Discuss 07:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

So be Bold and add it in. Thats what someone told me once.Tourskin 03:02, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vague, a little

I ain't one to talk so i will go easy - some parts of the last few sections about criticism towards her is very vague even though its cited - it keeps going on about how "some people think this and that" and that her lyrics are "dull and boring". Since most of it is well cited, surely the identity of these individuals can be found in the citation, unless of course these citations don't state who gives her criticism. Other wise it should be cut down to a few lines or less. Tourskin 03:01, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Madonna v Jackson

I think there should be something to compare the to. Lets not forget people it was only because Jackson became the King that Madonna became the queen so i Hate to burst the bubble. She cant dance as well as him, she cant sing as well as him, she cant write as well as him, she doesnt make music videos like him and she doesnt have 5 albums that have each sold over 20 million copies. Also he was selling albums before she could read, his career is undisputed. Also no madonna fan can cover this up by simply saying "well Jacko is wierd" because the fact that he is strange and still outsold madonna actually strengthens my argument. On top of that the real queen show down is between Madonna, Diana Ross ,mariah or janet Jackson. In the 90`s she was only the 3 most successful female behind Mariah and Janet. That said I do actually like her especially her songs mid 90`s onwards. I would also like to congratulate her on her latest album Confessionsn it was something different in todays boring music of emo bands that have one album and fall into complete darkness after.Realist2 09:51, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Uh No, they didnt even fight in a national tv and this is an encyclopedia.--SuperHotWiki 12:16, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

This is all subjective and opinion dosen't belong in an encyclopedia article. Especially "she dosen't make music videos like him." Um.. Last time I checked MADONNA has been nominated and won more VMAs than any other artist. She is the most successful artist in MTV history with 74 nominations and 19 wins. She really is the top music video maker.

Let me also add that Madonna has never called herself the "Queen of Pop". It's a name everyone just called her because it's just the obvious. Michael Jackson proclaimed him "King of Pop". No one would have thought to call him that if he hadn't thought of it himself.

  • No, he didn't. Fans started calling him that.

Please please please you dont actually believe that tabloid rubbish that jackson proclaimed his title do you? have you notice its mostly said in the tabloids because they just try to belittle his achievements. The comment below is laughable that is not what it says at all, it says she`s the most successful female nothing more. Why not read the beginning of the main article before you say silly things be cause the first thing it says in most successful FEMALE . the sales he achieved in 5 albums has taken her 10 or more. thats just a fact. I do like her though but im just speaking the truth,Realist2 14:56, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

This is lovely and all (really, it is, you both get cookies ), but it has nothing to do with the article. Regardless of who's a bigger star (I really don't care), the two are not closely related and do not have a public feud (in the vein of Aguilera and Spears, at least). None of this belongs in the article. If you want to discuss who's better, take it elsewhere; talk pages are for discussing articles. ShadowHalo 07:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

That's really great but all I did was correct your statement about Michael Jackson being the biggest music video star. He still can't compare with Madonna's success at the VMAs.

[edit] WRONG again

The book of world records did NOT list Madonna as "one of the most successful female recording artists". It listed her as THE most successful you stupid jealous Mariah Carey fans.

And NOW it says about the Confessions tour in the middle of the article, "it was one of the biggest grossing tours by a female artist." No. It is THE biggest grossing tour by a female artist. It's apparent whoever is editing this article is trying to make Madonna be "one of" the biggest female artists and not THE biggest as the record books suggest.

So Im confused what do you believe, that shes the biggest female (which is what I believe) or have you converted yourself into believeing she is THE biggest and has sold more tham MJ, or Elvis? Realist2 10:36, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

No, I believe she is the biggest female artist. I certainly don't think she's the biggest artist ever. The Beatles are undoubtably the biggest ever followed by Elvis and Michael Jackson (although I think MJ and Madge are very close). I'm saying she is undoubtably the most successful female artist by far. Forbes magazine has her listed as the #4 richest woman in the world!

Good your not one of them crazy fans then. One of the big difference between MJ and the rest of these icons is that he achieves soooooo much and yet hasn`t released that much material. Off the wall(20mil), thriller(104mil depending on if you believe guiness records, which madonna fans will not) , bad(30mil), dangerous(30 mil), history(18mil), blood on the dancefloor(6mil) and invincible(9mil). Thats only 7 albums with 226 million copies , madonna and the rest have had to release a LOT more material to match him. Basically what I am saying is MJ average album sales figure would be 226/7 =32mil. he`s averaged at 32 million copies an album, that is the biggest average ever!!!!!!!! This can be increased further if you take it in terms of UNITS which many do. History was a double album selling 18 mil or 36 mil UNITS. That would make it 244/7 = 35mil units average!!!!!!!!!

Of course I havent mentioned his many greatest hits albums , and havent mentioned his singles sales and havent mentioned his Jackson 5/ Jacksons career of singles and albums. However just looking at the above paragraph he has achieved a lot while doing so little. Realist2 10:54, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

You're correct, and don't forget to mention his U.S. sales which stand very strongly on their own. It's pretty hard to believe Michael hasn't released that many studio records. Just look at the huge gap between album releases!

I no Jackson is bigger than madonna in America if you look at his entire career but im not so sure about his success in america (as a solo artist only), madonna might be bigger than Jacksons solo career in america and im being honest as a fan. His american sales stand as Off the wall 7 mil, Thriller 27 mil, Bad 8 mil, Dangerous 7 mil, HIStory 7 mil, Blood 1.5 mil, Invincible 3.5 mil. Thats slam on 70 million. If you look at the album sales (they are in cronological order) Thriller didn`t help his career that much in the U.S!!! His sales went almost straight back down to the level of "off the wall"!!!!!! Not that thats terribly bad or anything 8/7 million in america is still huge. Despite the fact it brought MTV to life, helped end racism in music, it does make you wounder how much the americas really cared about thriller? obviously many will argue that his singles sales did improve after thriller, and it did boost his international career significantly. But why did his sales go back down to off the walls sales in america straight away???? Maybe it was the negative press I dont no, he had changed sooo much by bad and dangerous. Any thoughts Realist2 09:12, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Abba have sold more than Madonna, as of 2004 they have sold over 370 million worldwide

Realist2, last time I checked Michael Jackson was not a FEMALE. Everything you bring is very subjective and some of it perhaps true, but this is not a Michael Jackon vs. Madonna debate. 70.178.224.5 19:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Picture

I changed the picture but it was reverted, so it's probably best to discuss now. I really don't think Image:Madon1.JPG should be used; she looks like she's smelling her armpit. Her arms are also straight up in the air, making the image very tall. I think Image:Madonnact.JPG would do a much better job. ShadowHalo 17:45, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

the second picture is much better, she looks too man like in the first, she`s an attractive woman, the second is better.Realist2 23:48, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I uploaded and own both pictures. The original one is old and already used on the Tour page. We had that for about a year. The current one is beyond hot and shows Madonna in action. I went out of my way to find free images for this and ShadowHalo, saying that she looks like she looking at her armpit and removing it is not consensus and you should realize that which I hope you now do. Maddyfan 17:32, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

It really doesn't matter if you took the pictures. Content on Wikipedia is not owned. And I never said there was a consensus that the image was bad. However, I don't need a consensus to support every edit I make. Wikipedia is a wiki, meaning that people are supposed to make edits. If you want to have an article which you control, I recommend creating a fork somewhere else. ShadowHalo 21:11, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes, people are suppose to make edits. However, what do you think the TALK page is for? ShadowHalo, removing an image, and image that is hard to find for free because you don't like it, is not really contributing to the betterment of Wikipedia. Get your head out of your backside. One person will like one picture, and another will not. It will result in back and forth edits. A consensus IS needed for such matters so we don't have an edit war. You either like an image or you don't. There isn't a compromise there, a middle ground, which is why discussing it is the best way to deal with that issue. I never said "I" had to review the issue and then make a decision. I said open up the topic on the TALK page and have others discuss it first. Giving your reasoning as "She looks like she's looking at her armpit" is a pretty lame excuse. What would you have done if another person didn't agree with you and just reverted it back, which is exactly what happened? If you would have let it go, fine. But if you really have a problem with the image and want to revert it to some older one, simply discuss it with everyone here so we don't go back and forth. People still fight over her full given name. Look Live Earth is coming up in a week. I'll be getting more free images. The most up to date ones. Why don't I upload about three, and then we can all vote on which one we like best? Maddyfan 06:37, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Nobody here had previously lobbied for the inclusion of that particular image, so ShadowHalo wasn't to know if you disagreed with its removal before it occurred. Maddyfan, you've been told this many times before — you cannot expect that all users should discuss their edits on the talk page to make sure everyone agrees, and you certainly can't have them do that just so you can voice your disapproval and demand that the edits not take place. Though talk page discussion should precede potentially controversial edits, most edits — including ones that replace one free-licensed image with another — are uncontroversial and do not need to pass muster for consensus beforehand. What's quite odd is that ShadowHalo was the user to initiate any kind of discussion here, and now you're emphasising the importance of talk page discussion and consensus, accusing ShadowHalo of not working co-operatively with other editors — this is perhaps even odder given your history of WP:OWN violations. Your thinly veiled attempts to strong-arm out of "your" articles editors with whom you disagree didn't work before, Maddyfan, and they won't work now.
Oh, and if you write another comment like "Get your head out of your backside", you'll be blocked from editing for personal attacks again. Extraordinary Machine 22:13, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm, interesting argument. Of course going nowhere. The "arm-pit-sniffing" snap is actually more representative of Madonna today (or rather until yesterday - anyone seen her 1940s look at Live earth last night?) Achitnis 09:22, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Madonna's musical genres

I think besides Pop-Dance, Synthpop, Electronica, R'n B and Hip Hop we should also include Jazz, Funky and maybe Country genres too, since she has made several such songs.

Jazz, yes. The others, no. Maddyfan 17:34, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Her Erotica album contained many funky elements imo. And as for country, well, she has made several country songs (to be honest, only 3, lol), so you're right, maybe that doesn't count. Also we could mention musical, since that is also a different genre - and she definiately made one ;). (kismoha)

[edit] Sanskrit shlokas

"Madonna's pronunciation, in her recital of Sanskrit shlokas taken from the opening hymn of yoga taravali for her album Ray of Light, had been declared incorrect by Sanskrit pandits of Benares and, the material girl learnt the basics of the correct pronunciation of Sanskrit words from an eminent scholar, Dr B P T Vagish Shastri through telephonic chats arranged by the BBC, London.[16][17]"

This sentence doesn't make sense to me (was her pronunciation actually wrong or not? and also: "the material girl"? "telephonic"?), but I'd rather not edit myself as I don't know anything about the subject. Alessandriana 23:36, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] U of M mention missing

The fourth paragraph of the bio section begins: "She left at the end of her sophomore year in 1978...", but there's no indication of what she left. I haven't looked at this article in several months, but it used to have a sentence or two about attending U of M after high school. The way it reads now though, makes her a high school dropout. - Jdha 04:14, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Madge and Gwen

I discovered on a site that she is a distant cousin of Gwen Stefani. Gwen's great-aunt's mother-in-law shares the same last name with Madonna.I can`t change the page to include this because is semi-protected.Could someone please add this?I think it`s kinda important...

That's not important; that's trivia. 17Drew 16:17, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External Links Request

I would like to request the following link be added for inclusion under the External Links area:

Thank you!

[edit] Deleted (citations needed)

I deleted the citations needed template in the first paragraph because anyone whose even fairly familiar with the artist will know that. Lighthead þ 02:58, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

thats irrelevant if someone doesnt no it for sure then a source is needed, if not it can be deleted. Realist2 06:11, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

But if you look at the contingency within biographical articles; citations are needed for specific facts. It's somewhat awkward citing something you can get off of any other website. It seems somewhat cheesy. Lighthead þ 06:17, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Never mind I guess I see your point. Lighthead þ 06:20, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

it might seem fussy to some but before I became fully aware of her music, when I just liked her main hit singles I was unaware that her work was particuary political, it was only when I bout the albums individually that I noticed her political work. this just needs sourcing to be safe, uncase its simply deleted. Realist2 18:17, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

I am sure there are better sources out there to support this claim. I don't think websites like yuddy.com have enough authority. Aquarius • talk 20:22, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
There are several sources I found which include the information postulated, however yuddy.com is the only one I have found in which the information is gathered into one paragraph. On a related note it has to be said that Citation requests on this page have got out of control ie: one requesting that a source is given to support the claim that the Who's That Girl Tour took place in 1987!

(Apex156 11:47, 29 July 2007 (UTC))

no the tag is for it being her 6th US #1 actually. Realist2 15:40, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Go two sentences below that (next Tag). You appear to have missed it.

(Apex156 17:31, 29 July 2007 (UTC))

Sorry my mistake, didnt look in correct place , I also put the tag in wrong place, I changed it putting it next to the word successful , I think it would be pov to call the tour succesful without a source, the world could easily be removed by anyone seriously opposed to it. Realist2 19:52, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

OK. I will try to find references concerning the Who's That Girl Tour's stats etc. but if none are found in say a week "succsessful" should be edited.

(Apex156 20:38, 29 July 2007 (UTC))

I'm glad to see references were actually put in... Lighthead þ 21:56, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] philanthropist

philanthropist should be added to her main title this has been alot of work for her too!

If you can please add this I would appreciate! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Milla2007 (talk • contribs) 07:51:01, August 2, 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Opening salvo is a mess, AGAIN!

Someone please remove the sales figures. Just fancruft - "highest selling" is good enough. I would remove but all those inside citations make it complicated. THANKS! PatrickJ83 17:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Madonna Years Active

I have noticed that in Madonna's info box that it has listed there that she has been active since 1982. I was under the impression that she was a drummer in a band called "The Breakfast Club" in the late 1970s and early 1980s and also sang and wrote songs since the late 1970s... Jdcrackers 01:14, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I think, for sake of clarity, we're sticking with her solo career. PatrickJ83 22:15, 12 August 2007 (UTC)