Misplaced Pages

Talk:Kylie Minogue: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 00:58, 20 January 2007 editPlek (talk | contribs)2,295 edits →Citations cleanup and re-evaluation: added comment about in-line citations← Previous edit Revision as of 13:56, 20 January 2007 edit undoJonathannew7 (talk | contribs)831 editsm →Category cleanupNext edit →
Line 318: Line 318:
Look in the subsection "Stock, Aitken and Waterman: 1987 – 1992", someone sneaked in the text quoted in this subject line. It does not show up in the edit box of the article. I guess it is some "creative" html or script coding. Can someone knowlegdeable take care of that? Is this type of hack widespread and does it have a name? <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 17:09, 24 December 2006 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned --> Look in the subsection "Stock, Aitken and Waterman: 1987 – 1992", someone sneaked in the text quoted in this subject line. It does not show up in the edit box of the article. I guess it is some "creative" html or script coding. Can someone knowlegdeable take care of that? Is this type of hack widespread and does it have a name? <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 17:09, 24 December 2006 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->


Please Don't write this article of the category Again?
== Category cleanup ==
This article currently has 28 category tags, and I think that's a bit over the top. I've taken a look at the (somewhat rambling) ] guideline, which states: "Categories are for defining characteristics, and should be specific, neutral, inclusive and follow certain conventions." Some other useful quotes from the guideline: "Restraint should be used as categories become less effective the more there are on any given article" and "Categories appear without annotations, so be careful of NPOV when creating or filling categories. Unless it is self-evident and uncontroversial that something belongs in a category, it should not be put into a category."

So, let's take a look at what we've got. I'll list the current categories, some comments, and my recommendation for what to do with them.

* ''1968 births'': factually accurate. '''keep'''
* ''Actor-singers'': yes, she's been an actor who sings or a singer who (tried to) act. '''keep'''
* ''ARIA Award winners'': factually accurate. '''keep'''
* ''Australian child actors'': factually accurate. '''keep'''
* ''Australian dance musicians'': what constitutes a "dance musician"? Isn't it possible to dance on ''all'' types of music? Questionable. '''delete'''
* ''Australian dancers'': is she primarily known for being a dancer? Questionable. '''delete'''
* ''Australian expatriates in the United Kingdom'': yes, she lives in the UK. Is this a notable property of Minogue, though? <s>'''dunno'''</s> '''delete'''
* ''Australian female singers'': factually accurate. '''keep'''
* ''Australian film actors'': factually accurate. Unfortunate but true. '''keep'''
* ''Australian pop musicians''': factually accurate. But, do we need to list her both as a singer ''and'' a musician? '''delete'''
* ''Australian pop singers'': factually accurate. '''keep'''
* ''Australian singer-songwriters'': factually accurate. Good description of (one of the aspects of) her profession. '''keep'''
* ''Australian songwriters'': factually accurate. But likewise, do we need ''both'' the "singer-songwriter" and the "songwriter" tags? '''delete'''
* ''Australian television actors'': factually accurate. '''keep'''
* ''Breast cancer activists'': what constitutes a "breast cancer activist?" Disputable. '''delete'''
* ''Breast cancer patients'': factually accurate. '''keep'''
* ''Brit Award winners'': factually accurate. '''keep'''
* ''Dance musicians'': same comment as for "Australian dance musicians." Also, why do we need both tags? The more inclusive one would be sufficient, no? '''delete'''
* ''Gold Logie winners'': factually accurate. '''keep'''
* ''Grammy Award winners'': factually accurate. '''keep'''
* ''Kath & Kim actors'': factually accurate. But, featuring as a guest star in one episode wouldn't make this a momentous achievement, I'd say. '''delete'''
* ''Living people'': factually accurate. '''keep'''
* ''Neighbours actors'': factually accurate. Significant to her rise to fame. '''keep'''
* ''Parlophone artists'': factually accurate. '''keep'''
* ''People from Melbourne'': factually accurate. Is it important, though? <s>'''dunno'''</s> '''keep'''
* ''Rhythmic contemporary musicians'': what on Earth is "rhythmic contemporary" music? It should be obvious by now that creating arcane labels in a futile attempt to categorise music is one of my pet peeves. The accompanying article doesn't offer much help, either. This tag should die, with extreme prejudice. '''delete'''
* ''The Sullivans actors'': factually accurate. But, as with "Kath & Kim", a short-lived appearance might not be enough reason to tag her for it. '''delete'''
* ''Welsh Australians'': So her mother is from Wales. Does that make her a "Welsh Australian?" Maybe, but is that a notable piece of information? '''delete'''

Comments, suggestions and dissenting opinions are welcome. --] 15:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Twenty-eight categories is a bit excessive! I agree with all the categories that you suggest should be kept, but here are my thoughts on the others:
* ''Australian dancers'': I don't think anyone really considers Minogue to be a dancer. So I agree, the category should be deleted.
* ''Australian expatriates in the United Kingdom'': She does primarily live in the UK, but hasn't she been spending a lot of time living in France the past year or so. I don't really see the point to this category, so yes, delete.
* ''Australian songwriters'': I think that the ''Australian singer-songwriters'' tag fits better.
* ''Australian pop musicians'': I don't usually think of Minogue as a pop musician, but as a pop singer. The ''Australian pop singers'' tag fits better.
* ''Rhythmic contemporary musicians'': Huh? No clue what the point of this tag is. Delete.
* ''Breast cancer activists'': She has done stuff to raise money for breast cancer charities, but nothing really notable, so delete.
* ''Kath & Kim actors'': If her role was bigger than a guest spot then I'd say keep the tag, so delete.
* ''People from Melbourne'': I say keep. She was born and raised in Melbourne.
* ''The Sullivans actors'': Like I wrote for the ''Kath & Kim actors'' tag. Delete.
* ''Welsh Australians'': I don't think that Minogue's mother's background is important. So delete.
* ''Dance musicians'': If were going to keep one of the categories than it should be the ''Australian dance musicians'' one since it's more specific. -- ] 00:34, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

:I'm very much in agreement with ]. I agree with the "keeps" listed by ] so it's really the deletes that need to be mentioned. So:
*''Australian dancers'' - the fact that she happens to dance during her concerts and in her videos does not make her any more a dancer than any pop singer you could name, all of whom move in one way or another to their music, in a manner that could be interpreted as dancing. If she ever makes a video in which she doesn't sing (or speak), then I'll change my mind ;-) Delete.
*''Australian expatriates in the UK'' - barely relevant, delete.
*''Australian songwriters'' - again, it's not what she's particularly known for. These days everyone writes at least some of their own material, and most of Minogue's catalogue was written by others. Delete.
*''Australian pop musicians'' - delete. ''Australian pop singers'' is a better choice.
*''Rhythmic contemporary musicians'' - I too am mystified. Delete.
*''Breast cancer activists'' - I haven't seen anything substantial in the news that warrants her inclusion in this category. Delete.
*''Kath & Kim actors'' - very interesting CfD on Murder She Wrote and X Files actors led to a decision to categorise only the regular or frequently recurring cast members - not guest stars or minor characters. I think this is very sensible, and would allow deletion from ''Kath & Kim actors'' and maybe ''Sullivans actors''. See the ] page - I'd love to see this implemented on a wider scale to remove some of the cruftier entries.
*''Welsh Australians'' - delete, delete, delete !!! This would make some sense if Misplaced Pages was a geneology site. There seems to be a trend to research people down to the 16th Century and then apply a lot of categories to them, but I think it should only be used where someone is born in one country and migrates to another, not for their offspring down through the years. Carol Minogue is a Welsh Australian. Kylie Minogue is an Australian, with some Welsh (and other) ancestry. Not enough to merit categorisation. What if Kylie and Olivier have a baby and it becomes famous? Will he/she be a French-Welsh-Australian or a Welsh-Australian-French? It's nonsense IMO.
*''Dance musicians'' - as above ''Australian dance musicians'' would be better, but she's still a singer rather than a musician. She certainly qualifies for this category better than most, but ''Australian dance acts'' or ''Australian dance performers'' would actually be more accurate. Not sure what to do with this one. I think it's significant that she's been successful as a club performer, and has won awards specifically for dance music, as opposed to the notion (which I agree with) that you can dance to pretty well any sort of music if you try hard enough. This is acknowledging a specific genre, which is more applicable to her than some of the other acts so categorised.
*''People from Melbourne'' - I would keep this one. It's not different to any of the other ''People from xxxx'' categories and I think there is a degree of relevance in it. ] 09:19, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

:: Thanks to you both for your comments! I've updated my initial list to take your wise words into account. It seems we're all in total agreement; I feel warm and fuzzy. The tags will be purged shortly. --] 18:48, 15 January 2007 (UTC)


== Citations cleanup and re-evaluation == == Citations cleanup and re-evaluation ==

Revision as of 13:56, 20 January 2007

Template:Featured article is only for Misplaced Pages:Featured articles. Template:Mainpage date

Kylie Minogue received a peer review by Misplaced Pages editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Template:FAOL

WikiProject iconBiography: Musicians FA‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
FAThis article has been rated as FA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (assessed as High-importance).
WikiProject iconAustralia FA‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconKylie Minogue is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
FAThis article has been rated as FA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Note icon
Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian at the National Library of Australia.
Note icon
The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to help@wikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Template:V0.5

Archive
Archives
  1. Archive01| April 2005 – September 2006

Her religion

Just wondering what religion she is. It says on a CNN website that shhe started treatment at a private Catholic hospital in Malvern.

Gay Icon Project

In my effort to merge the now-deleted list from the article Gay icon to the Gay icons category, I have added this page to the category. I engaged in this effort as a "human script", adding everyone from the list to the category, bypassing the fact-checking stage. That is what I am relying on you to do. Please check the article Gay icon and make a judgment as to whether this person or group fits the category. By distributing this task from the regular editors of one article to the regular editors of several articles, I believe that the task of fact-checking this information can be expedited. Thank you very much. Philwelch 21:43, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

As to your question regarding Kylie Minogue as a gay icon, why don't you let the following sources speak for themselves (If this violates copyright law you can take it down, but I have included the sources for each quote so it should be ok):

"She is one of the great gay icons." -'Princess of Pop' by Fiona Golfar in British Vogue December 2003, p.268

"Elsewhere she has an enthusiastic gay following alongside her pre-teen fans." -'Love Kylie' by Jan Moir in British Elle may 2004, p.83

"Kylie loves coming home and adores being a gay icon. 'I love it. I love it. I don't question why. I'm grateful. Gay audiences are so warm and open in their feelings towards me.'" -'Mega-star, Mega-rich' by Jo Wiles in the Australian Woman's Weekly March 1996, p.13

"Early in her career, Kylie became a gay icon. While part of her appeal lies in her flamboyant costumes, her humour and sense of fun, and her confident sexual posturing, she has also consistently acknowledged the gay community throughout the world, not only by her willingness to perform at gay venues and at gay events, but also her outspoken commitment to raising social awareness." -www.ultrakylie.com/kylie/ (unfortunately not available online anymore, but still makes an important point).

"Kylie is so gay: She is such a gay icon, she doesn’t just appeal to the gays, but the gay gays, the gays that are so gay they make some gays seem almost straight. Which is to say, she is so extravagantly, gaily committed to self-creation, the way she lives out all her hopes, fears, dreams, desires and urges in such splendidly epic, explicit and freely female ways, keeping at bay all the possible hysteria, bathed in special poignancy, constantly performing in order to define who she is." -'Getting to the Bottom of Kylie' by Paul Morley in the Sunday Herald (UK) 13 March 2005. Alternatively, you can read the whole article here at //www.kylie.co.uk/press/00000083.shtml

"I was more or less adopted by my gay audience... I don't like to analyse our relationship too much as it is what it is and it's wonderful, but I think they related to my initial struggle to be accepted as myself, then to survive and later still to my wrestles with contradiction. Not to mention my penchant for all things pink and showgirl..." -Kylie Minogue in 'La La La' by William Baker and Kylie Minogue,p.56 (paperback edition).

And finally, the piece de resistance:

"There were brief, heinous conversations with skinheaded London boys wearing something by Patrick Cox and sleeveless T-shirts. Their sole reaction to the mention of the word 'Kylie' was blanketly, to screech 'Fab!... (loud, camp, indecipherable, nonsense)... Fab!... (more nonsense)... Fab!... (more nonsense)... Fab! Fab! FAB!' Then to totter into the middle distance chimping Step Back In Time with no semblance of the actual melodic structure of that particular gem whatsoever."

"The only possible credential he has for fagdom is his insane love of Ms Minogue (his insane love of Ben hints towards homosexuality, of course, but Michael is much less comfortable with an open discussion about that)."

"Our discussion led us to believe that Kylie Minogue is not only a representative of the last twelve years of British gay culture; all of the last twelve years of British gay culture is actually contained in her."

"Michael said that every time he talked about Kylie he had to play some of her records... The records sounded fantastic, needless to say. They also made us feel like fags. But not especially bothered about it."

"Though gays have a tendancy to gauge themselves on their gayness in terms of whether they like Kylie or not."

-All from 'Is Kylie a Gay Icon?' by Paul Flynn, available in 'Kylie: Evidence'.

So there you have it, IS Kylie a Gay Icon? You tell me! But because of the wealth of sources available on the subject I suggest we mention this in the actual article.

It is mentioned in the article, including a variation of one of the very quotes you have provided :

Minogue is regarded as a gay icon, which she encourages with comments such as "I am not a traditional gay icon. There's been no tragedy in my life, only tragic outfits." While part of her appeal lies in her flamboyant costumes and her confident sexual posturing, she acknowledges the gay community throughout the world by performing at gay venues and events, and by openly supporting AIDS and gay rights causes. She has said that she believes gay fans responded to her apparent distress when the news media began heavily criticising her in 1989, and that those fans have remained loyal, explaining, "My gay audience has been with me from the beginning... they kind of adopted me". Rossrs 13:27, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

God, how embarrassing! I can't believe I missed that! But you've got to admit, the quotes from 'Getting to to bottom of Kylie' and 'Is Kylie a Gay Icon?' were pretty good!

You think that's embarassing? Let me tell you what's embarassing. I didn't even notice ""Early in her career, Kylie became a gay icon. While part of her appeal lies in her flamboyant costumes, her humour and sense of fun, and her confident sexual posturing, she has also consistently acknowledged the gay community throughout the world, not only by her willingness to perform at gay venues and at gay events, but also her outspoken commitment to raising social awareness."-www.ultrakylie.com/kylie/ (unfortunately not available online anymore, but still makes an important point)." Why embarassing? Because I didn't notice it, and I bloody wrote it! That's the great thing about Misplaced Pages - we write free material so that the likes of "ultrakylie.com" can flagrantly steal it. Thank you for describing it as making "an important point". I'm flushed with pride. :-) Some very nice quotes indeed, especially.... no, I won't say especially mine.  ;-) Rossrs 14:55, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Wow, I never would have thought a fan site could sink so low as to steal other peoples words, I feel so betrayed! Maybe that's why it was shut down? Anyway your welcome. Ironic though, isn't it? That I would use a quote to lobby for Misplaced Pages to mention Kylie's gay icon status when unbeknownst to me (my speed-reading skills have failed me again) that quote was stolen from Misplaced Pages in the first place! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.160.206.120 (talk • contribs) .

It's ok. I used the word "steal" with intended good humour. If fansites use our material, which is free after all, that's a compliment. Not very creative or original, and I assume they gave Misplaced Pages no credit, but it is free material. The worst "theft" of Misplaced Pages's Minogue article was by the website of one of the music channels. I can't remember which or I'd link to it, as it's quite interesting to read how they corrupted the article. They used the beginning of our article, and also the end, but completely eliminated the whole middle section which discussed her career. Hilarious. An article about a singer, and nothing about her singing or her songs. It made no sense, and it looked like someone had lifted our article, realized it was too big, and chopped out the middle without even reading it. And someone was being paid to do that - music channel sites tend not to be created by unpaid volunteers ;-) That's the only time I've seen Misplaced Pages's material used in such a blatantly dishonest way and I was quite angry at the time. Rossrs 12:01, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Removal of the Vocal Profile section

Until someone can WP:CITE an official source for the information being listed in the Vocal Profile section, this content has been removed. It appears that a large number of vocalist articles on Misplaced Pages are being plagued by invalid information pertaining to vocal range and other vocal capabilities. By invalid I mean that no sources are cited and the numbers are being tweaked on a day-to-day basis as to what the artists actual range is, with no one ever citing any official external source for such information. How did this article manage to pass by peer review without a source? Hall Monitor 17:19, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

  • There was the source of those vocal profile but that site was down about 3 weeks agos.I think this part should not be removed if there is the sample of the notes that mentioned.If the notes is not that high,music experts could tell what the note reall is. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 61.90.84.225 (talk • contribs) 17:47, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
For the record, the vocal profile was added after both the peer review, and promotion to featured article status. Rossrs 09:36, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

On the discussion page of Britney Spears, Kylie Minogue is described as a Lyric-Mezzo. This was kind of surprising because, while I admittedly I have no background in understanding music, I would have pinned her as a soubrette or somewhere in the soprano range. Now I'm a big fan of Kylie and am interested in identifying what kind of voice she has, though I have no way of working it out. Just to provoke discussion here would be great.

Images

This article has way too many images. 17! 15 of these are "fair use" - this is too many to justify. This is a featured article but if it was up for nomination right now, I'm sure it would fail. Images should be used only to illustrate points raised in the text, and should not be merely for decorative purposes. I think the images need to be culled and I will cull them but I would be interested in opinions.

I suggest the following :

This would leave 8 images (2 of which are free) and for a performer who has depended on her visual image more than most, 8 images are not excessive in the way they might be for a performer who is less visual.

Please comment. Rossrs 13:17, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with all these points. -- getcrunkjuice 19:17, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
I just removed the excess images -- getcrunkjuice 02:09, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Looks very good! thank you Rossrs 07:47, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
I also like the charts added. User:TUF-KAT commented on this at Misplaced Pages:Featured article review so I have added other chart info for Germany, Slovenia, Hong Kong, Israel and South Africa. While some of these charts are obviously obscure my point was to reflect how her records have fared in the Middle East, Asia, Africa, Western and Eastern Europe. By choosing one country as a representative of this it shows trends to show her as a global performer rather than concentrating on just the traditional/profitable markets. Rossrs
Still too many images I think. A lot of the video stills add little to the article IMO. Design 13:12, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Featured Article Review of January 2006

Template:FAF

Canadian peak positions

I'm curious to know why Minogue's Canadian peak positions are being touted as the airplay positions as this is clearly incorrect. Each position is of the sales charts, according to this website. They have to be corrected. —Eternal Equinox | talk 02:55, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

I used the airplay peaks because the majority of song articles on the site use airplay for Canadian charts.. as far as I know, there isn't any "combined" airplay and sales chart for Canada? I will check that out. Feel free to add the Canadian sales charts. -- getcrunkjuice 00:32, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I have just removed the "<sup>" comment regarding the airplay chart for "Can't Get You Out of My Head" in Canada. Is this really necessary considering that none of the other charts on the list have the airplay positions listed?
Also, according to Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style#Acronyms_and_abbreviations, when abbreviating the word "United States", it should be written as "U.S." with periods and not as "US". —Eternal Equinox | talk 22:33, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
You have a lot of questions--Hotwiki 14:43, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
The above is a comment Hotwiki. —Eternal Equinox | talk 23:01, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Songs which mention Kylie

As as indicator of her celebrity status, or perhaps as interesting trivia, I think that songs which mention Kylie should be included.(The KLF's 1989 single "Kylie said to Jason" and The Pretenders song "Popstar". There may be others). Design 10:54, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

There is another: "Do It With Madonna" by The Androids, which features the verses "I'd really like to be with Kylie/I think she's really really hott/I wonder if I could get Kylie". The video clip for the song also features a Kylie impersonator wearing a similar outfit to that of Kylie in her 'comback-hit' of 2000; "Spinning Around". Shayan g 12:35, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Interesting that the lyrics dismiss Madonna's other competition, Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera and P!nk, but the lyricist can't quite bring himself to say something bad about Kylie so instead he wonders if he can get Kylie to "do it with Madonna".  ;-) Seriously, it's the only song that was a hit (top 5 Australia, and I think in the UK it barely missed the top 10, or it might have just scraped in, so it's a legitimate hit) Rossrs 09:17, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
This seems like a really good thing to incorporate into the "Image and celebrity status" section.. I think that section needs some cleanup too, I get tired reading it :( -- getcrunkjuice 00:39, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

I have added it. Design 05:31, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Don't forget 'Kylie's Got A Crush On Us' by the BMX Bandits

And, of course, there's the 1993 KMFDM track "Sucks (single)" which says "We don't like Michael Jackson, we hate Depeche Mode, we don't care for Madonna or Kylie Minogue."Twinstar 13:54, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Billboard dance chart positions

Should the peak positions of the Dance/Club Play chart be included in the "hit singles" table? (per this) I think so, but that might be a little excess. Comments?? -- getcrunkjuice 00:42, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

That's a difficult question. On the one hand I think yes, because in the U.S. she is a big success as a dance genre artist, something that these particular charts illustrate. In that particular segment of the larger music industry she's a major artist, though on the wider stage, in the U.S., she's not. On the other hand it could be seen as excessive detail. Rossrs 09:34, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
I've replied at #Infobox and chart positions. -- getcrunkjuice 18:24, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

What's up with the "Breast cancer" section?

The heading & first paragraph don't show up.. is it just me or is something wrong with the article markup? -- getcrunkjuice 22:01, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

it's not just you. I can't see it either. But last time I looked at the article (a few days ago), I could. Rossrs 08:42, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
I believe it's the result of this edit. -- getcrunkjuice 00:18, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
which makes it even more mysterious. The adding of the other references hasn't caused problems with the rest of the article. I wonder how it can be fixed. Rossrs 09:19, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
I believe, in the link to the edit given above, the problem was the first ref name added was missing a "/". Hyacinth 12:58, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Thank you Detective Hyacinth! It turned out to be the reference to the 80s bands Human League etc that was incorrect. Oh what a problem one little "/" can cause! Looks ok now. Thanks for the tip! Rossrs 13:33, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

i hope she gets better soon! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lilyfan87 (talk • contribs) .

Lead image

Now I know that it isn't particularly simple to locate an image and place it in the article, especially as the lead image, but I am currently a bit taken-off by the current. It isn't that it is a "good" or "bad" screenshot, but it is the fact that Minogue is rather difficult to identify. Perhaps it would be possible to find a different lead image and place this one where appropriate in the article? I am merely providing a suggestion; this doesn't have to follow through. —Eternal Equinox | talk 23:52, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I had/have the same concern with the picture.. I really think there are many better pictures, but this one is a GDFL pic. Maybe another image will be found, but then the article will have eleven images. That and the three sound sample boxes might crowd the article. Anyway, I will try to look for a different picture. -- getcrunkjuice 00:29, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
It may be worth trying. You are right about all of the sound samples and images though, but we'll see what we can do. —Eternal Equinox | talk 12:40, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Please be careful with this. I've recently been embroiled in a long-winded, nasty situation over public domain vs free use images. The argument at Tyrone Power was that because a substitute public domain image was located, a previously uploaded public domain image could be removed from the article. After mediation, and intervention from admins etc, the ruling was that both public domain images had to stay in the article and the fair use images were culled. Similar thing could happen here - if any images get removed from here it will be one or more of the screenshots, but not the GFDL image. As per Tyrone Power, before the GFDL can be removed, every single fair use image will have to go first. Personally I disagree with this, because this is not how I interpret what I've read about fair use and copyright laws, but all you need is for someone with a strong opposite viewpoint to get involved, and it will turn into a mess. If you find another GFDL image, great. But be sure to retain the showgirl image, rather than substitute it, which is what I think you're talking about. Rossrs 13:13, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
The purpose is that a more current image should be featured as the lead image, or so in my opinion. —Eternal Equinox | talk 19:29, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Actually, I think that if a new image was located, the showgirl pic could be placed in "Image and celebrity status" without much crowding (or if needed the image could replace "Kylie's cancer battle") -- getcrunkjuice 01:24, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Infobox and chart positions

I have modified the chart positions (to include Hot Dance Music/Club Play) and the infobox (to use Template:Infobox musical artist 2) of this article at User:Getcrunk/Sandbox. Please comment -- getcrunkjuice 18:24, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

It looks good! —Eternal Equinox | talk 23:43, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Undeniable facts vs. allegued "POV"

Getcrunk, why have you reverted my small edit asserting that Kylie is a world-famous artist? Do you deny such evident truth? Are you perhaps jealous of her undeniable achievements? You argue 'length' and 'POV' issues - I think that is not true. I've NOT added to the article length with my SMALL edit, and the TRUTH (not just my POV) is that she is WORLD-FAMOUS. Period. AVM 22:18, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

WP:NPOV, WP:LEAD. -- getcrunkjuice 23:56, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

She is world famouse!--Homer slips. 07:28, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I Believe in You

I have listed the IBIY article at Misplaced Pages:Peer review. See Misplaced Pages:Peer review/I Believe in You (Kylie Minogue song). Comments? -- getcrunkjuice 23:11, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Number One Singles

Why did you remove the "number one singles"? It's an important piece of information, and if you don't like the formatting you can always change it. Open for suggestions. CG 08:11, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

This is hilarious. The article was put onto FAR several months ago, and I was told it needed a singles discography, so I added it, and it grew and grew to the point where it was too much, then it got reduced and reduced and then it got removed. And now it's just how it was before it went on FAR. ;-) For the record, I would suggest restricting the list to number ones, and using the previous table format for both the albums and singles. Rossrs 09:58, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes we should only keep number one singles or it will get crowded. But I don't agree with the previous table format that I changed. It contains too many information (Do we need to know about South Africa and Iceland charts?) that are all found in Kylie Minogue discography. Please suggest a new format that would be used on all musicians articles. CG 10:20, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Oh, I didn't mean reinstate the United Nations column by column. That's out of control. Just the basic table format, which I think was fine, with either three columns (song title, year and AU/UK/US peaks) or five columns (song title, year, AU peak, UK peak, US peak) - and nothing more. It could do with a wikilink, something like "For a complete listing of Kylie Minogue singles, with selected chart information, see main article Kylie Minogue discography" Rossrs 13:36, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
I wished there is a way other than a table, but you could always give it a try. List only the singles that reached #1 in either AU, UK or US charts. CG 16:36, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
It doesn't have to be a table. That would be my preference, but it was just a suggestion. Rossrs 21:31, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps something like Mariah_Carey#Number-one_singles? -- getcrunkjuice 22:18, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
I've added a number-one singles chart based upon the MC one, with UK, AUS, CAN and USA peaks. -- getcrunkjuice 02:25, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Looks good.Design 06:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Could you try to make the table white? And could you also make the columns in this order: AUS, UK, US, CAN (and if we get rid of CAN it would be better). Thank you. CG 08:33, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
I changed the table. What do you think? CG 19:38, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
I think it looks kind-of strange. Like an HTML/plain text page instead of wiki. But maybe I just spend too much time here.. -- getcrunkjuice 19:46, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Why is it strange? I think that the white background is better than the gray one (it's my opinion at least). I just think that Canadian chart should not be there since it's a "minor" chart, and Kylie's singles have not achieved high canadian rankings. Mayb we could replace it with Eurocharts (even though there is a UK chart). CG 20:17, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Greatest Hits and Ultimate Kylie

Aren't Greatest Hits and Ultimate Kylie compilations? Why are they listed with the albums? CG 11:24, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

I removed them. Either we include all compilation albums or we keep main albums only. CG 19:38, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
I think they should be included because the article talks about them, they are "official" compilations, new songs were recorded for them, and singles were taken -- getcrunkjuice 19:49, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
"official" compilations? I don't know. If you want to include them again I won't oppose. CG 20:17, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Recent Photo

Does anyone have any suitable recent photo for the article? I think it would be useful to show that she hasn't decided to wear a wig or anything. By any means, its useful to have a recent pic in its own right. - хот 20:03, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Charity Event

"During a Melbourne Football Club charity event with other Neighbours cast members..."

What kind of charitable event was this? "Charity" linked to a disambiguation page, so I changed it to "Charitable Organization" as per the Misplaced Pages:Disambiguation_pages_with_links project. Was this actually, a benefit concert? If so, then it should say "During a Melbourne Football Club benefit concert". Anybody know for sure? --Crabbyass 02:25, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I found two sources. One (La La La) calls it a "football fundraiser". The other, which I've cited as a source, calls it a "benefit concert" even naming the beneficiary as a footballer named Alan Hardy. Have amended the text and noted the source. Rossrs 02:37, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Interracial relationship

"After playing the 'girl next door' in her early videos, Minogue began to touch on adult themes—an interracial relationship in 'Better the Devil You Know'..."

This sentence seems to suggest that racial mixing is an adult theme, and therefore innapropriate for children. I don't think this was the intended meaning. I've changed it to 'a mature relationship'. --Kinst 20:50, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Dance Dance Revolution

Love at First Sight was one of the tracks in DDRMAX2: Dance Dance Revolution 7thMIX. Since there's no "Trivia" section, I have no idea where to mention that. Guidance? --Masamage 04:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I would say in the "Love at First Sight" article. It's got nothing to do with Minogue herself. Rossrs 07:41, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, specifically the video is of her dancing very close to the camera. --Masamage 08:28, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Minogue has danced very close to a lot of cameras. I still don't understand the significance. Rossrs 12:59, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Heh, sorry, that was unclear. What I mean is that it's not just the song accompanied by silly animations, which really would have nothing to do with her in particular. But the video accompanying the song is composed entirely of her dancing--so it's not just the song appearing in the game, it's Minogue herself appearing in it. --Masamage 19:23, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
OK, thanks. I understand a bit better now. Well, it sounds to me that it's very peripheral to Minogue's career. I think mentioning it in the song article would be appropriate. I'm very anti the prospect of introducing a "trivia" section because on the whole, Misplaced Pages is moving away from them. Rossrs 08:58, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
I'll go ahead and do that, then. Thanks for your thoughts. ^_^ --Masamage 17:41, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Unsourced statements

there is a huge amount of unsourced statements in this article which must be addressed, many of which seem to be obvious, but as it is a FA, it requires these statements to be sourced. There is also a lot of unsourced POV. --Bob 15:33, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

So you've added 21 points that need citing. I can't help but feel that this is a bad faith action on your part. Looking at your edit history you don't seem to have edited pop culture articles in the recent past, and this comes a few minutes after I'd objected at Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/HIV. I'm not interested in playing games with you. Don't make edits such as this just to make a point Rossrs 15:57, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Actually, I contributed to this article 1 August 2006. I waited a month for changes to be implemented and nothing was done. If you think this is a reflection on yourself, then you hold yourself in too high a regard. --Bob 16:40, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
So you did. You made a few minor changes to the way a few existing references were formatted. If you were waiting for "changes to be implemented" it seems odd that you didn't put a message on the talk page, and the timing of your 21 point "this needs to be cited" plan is still coincidental, coming about 10 minutes after I objected to your FA nomination. Rossrs 23:22, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Exactly, coincidental, the two are unlinked. Stop being paranoid or is it vanity? --Bob 00:01, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm not paranoid or vain but let's not steer this unpleasant exchange into name-calling. You are quite right in many of the things you've requested a cite for, although some of them appear excessive to me. I'll cite what I'm able to, as time permits, and there are other regular editors here who will probably also work on it. Rossrs 00:13, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

For the record:

  1. "dismissed by critics" - removed "cite needed" - this summarises comments that are made and sourced in the article.
  2. "highest ticket sales" - source provided, also in main article.
  3. childhood acting roles - removed POV from sentence which is now supported by her IMDb entry and does not require cite.
  4. high rating for wedding episode of Neighbours, changed "record" audience to "large" audience. cites provided, including one from BBC UK and another website also reproduces Minogue on cover of Time Magazine - headline Australian Soaps Captivate the World.
  5. "Singing Budgie" - source provided.
  6. "Dropped by Geffen Records" - not relevant. removed the text.
  7. "In Australia her popularity of the previous years diminished" - removed "cite needed". Kylie Minogue discography shows chart positions for her records with sources attributed. Pretty clear her records of this time were not hits.
  8. Collaborations with Pet Shop Boys etc - not important. removed the offending text.
  9. second to Madonna in UK. source provided.
  10. "I Believe in You" not played by radio "stateside" - how sad, who cares? Removed offending sentence.
  11. breast cancer diagnosis and postponement of tour - source already provided for both in "Breast cancer" section but have copied the link, which covers both points.
  12. Delinquents film poorly reviewed. - source provided
  13. Delinquents film success. - two sources - one showing box office takings for UK, and one showing it as number one Australian film of 1990 in Australia.
  14. Streetfighter film. Removed "cite needed". Trimmed back sentence so that its point is covered by the existing source cited.
  15. Moulin Rouge film. Removed the text saying it's her most widely seen film. Now it only says that she was in it.
  16. comparisons to Madonna. source provided.
  17. "Lack of talent". Removed "cite needed". Covered by the same source as the sourced quote from Miki Berenyi which follows it. If a paragraph is all sourced from the same material there's no need to provide a cite at the end of each sentence.
  18. Moving away from sex pot image. Removed "cite needed". The whole paragraph is covered by the same source which is stated at the end of the paragraph. Not going to source the paragraph sentence by sentence.
  19. Steve Brack's statement. Removed "cite needed". the entire paragraph is sourced to the two references given at the end of the paragraph. Once again, not going to list a source at the end of every sentence.
  20. media attention subsided. not important. removed sentence. Rossrs 15:35, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Lessons

Should something be mentioned about her upcoming album? I read about it in Google News once. The album was supposed to be titled "Lessons" but I can't source that and even if I could, I wouldn't exactly be sure how to. (Too Much To Ask 23:42, 4 September 2006 (UTC))

Popular?

for the perople in the united states of america, is kylie as popular as britney, christina, janet and madonna or is she more popular like a c-star. cause here in europe she is highly popular FANSTAR 18:52, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

She is hardly even a C-star really. There is noway she is as popular in the united states as Britney Spears, Jlo, Christina, Ashlee Simpson, Kelly Clarkson, Jessica Simpson, Madonna or Hilary Duff. They are all much much bigger here 152.163.100.6

Unsourced

I just noticed that the "return to stage" section is unsourced, I added an unsourced tag to draw attention. I'm pretty sure the section is factually correct, but as a FA it should be sourced. James086 06:16, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

You're right, it should be sourced. It's been fixed. Rossrs 14:21, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Hospital

I get SO ANGRY (up to the point where i'm crying) everytime people accuse her of moving cardiac patients....SO WHAT?! EVEN IF IT HAPPENED! Kylie is way more important then those people, and she did not order the movings! She is I N N O N O G U E you morons! She deserves your credit. Go Australia and GO KYLIE you Queen!! -Danny —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chovain 16:10, December 4 2006 (UTC)

This isn't really the right place to comment about it, and definitely not the right way to go about changing peoples' minds. Indja 09:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Nelly Furtado

Interesting combination. I've reworded the bit about Nelly Furtado and Minogue recording a duet. There are numerous websites speculating that they are planning a duet and these seem to date from about December 1st. Several of them refer back to a music.com site as their source, but reading that source piece, it's completely different. Furtado said 1. she admired Minogue's courage. 2. she would have loved to have had her on her recent album 3. Minogue is the person she would most like to record with and 4. She likes "Can't Get You Out Of My Head". If there is anything more recent that is more than rumour, then please rewrite it again, and provide an updated source. For now it seems to be speculation and it that's the case, we should be clear about it. Thanks Rossrs 07:25, 6 December 2006 (UTC)


New photo for Main page

Is there any chance of updating the main photo for this page to a post-cancer shot, maybe from the Homecoming tour? Peter2012

The main photo can only be changed if another free image can be found. So if you know of anyone who has attened one of Minogue's latest shows and is willing to have their photos displayed on Misplaced Pages then it can be changed. But until then, the current photo cannot be removed. -- Underneath-it-All 01:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Someone sneaked in "I mean, as if anyone cares. She's rich enough! "

Look in the subsection "Stock, Aitken and Waterman: 1987 – 1992", someone sneaked in the text quoted in this subject line. It does not show up in the edit box of the article. I guess it is some "creative" html or script coding. Can someone knowlegdeable take care of that? Is this type of hack widespread and does it have a name? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.72.47.216 (talk) 17:09, 24 December 2006 (UTC).

Please Don't write this article of the category Again?

Citations cleanup and re-evaluation

I noticed that the first half of the article was using in-line free-format citations, whereas the second half was using {{cite}} templates. I have started migrating all in-line citations towards using the {{cite}} templates, and will complete the task tomorrow (ish). My intention is to do a full review of all references soon. I have a nagging feeling that not all of them will stand up to close scrutiny, and that important pieces of information are lacking references altogether. Please share your thoughts on all of this. Thanks! --Plek 00:52, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

For the record: I think that in-line citations (especially when using the cite templates) make for crappy editing as they break up the text flow, but I don't see a viable alternative. Please correct my hapless ignorance if I'm mistaken. --Plek 00:58, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Categories: