Misplaced Pages

Latest revision as of 18:14, 22 December 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Katy Perry article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 3 months

	Katy Perry is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Misplaced Pages community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
	This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 25, 2014, and on October 26, 2024.
Article milestones Date Process Result March 3, 2009 Good article nominee Not listed March 25, 2009 Good article nominee Listed October 5, 2012 Good article reassessment Delisted February 1, 2014 Peer review Reviewed June 4, 2014 Good article nominee Listed July 14, 2014 Peer review Reviewed July 25, 2014 Peer review Reviewed August 22, 2014 Featured article candidate Promoted March 4, 2016 Featured topic candidate Promoted April 21, 2024 Featured topic removal candidate Demoted A fact from this article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 22, 2014.The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Katy Perry is the first artist to spend 69 consecutive weeks in the top ten of the Billboard Hot 100? Facts from this article were featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on October 25, 2018, and October 25, 2024. Current status: Featured article

This  level-5 vital article is rated FA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Katy Perry Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Katy Perry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Katy Perry on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Katy PerryWikipedia:WikiProject Katy PerryTemplate:WikiProject Katy PerryKaty Perry Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Biography: Actors and Filmmakers / Musicians This 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 This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (assessed as High-importance). Pop music High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Rock music Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. United States: Music Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject American music (assessed as High-importance). LGBTQ+ studies This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Misplaced Pages. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion. Explanation for inclusion in WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies: Perry is famous for her LGBT-themed songs and is an LGBT rights activistLGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies California: Southern California Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Southern California task force (assessed as Mid-importance). Feminism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Business Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Women This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women Women in Music Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Women in Business Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles about women in business on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject Women in BusinessTemplate:WikiProject Women in BusinessWomen in Business Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been viewed enough times to make it onto the all-time Top 100 list. It has had 75 million views since December 2007.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2011.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 4 times. The weeks in which this happened: February 1 to 7, 2015 September 18 to 24, 2016 March 1 to 7, 2020 May 7 to 13, 2023

Who ever put the picture was wrong to put that picture!

There’s many other pictures to pick but yet you choose the main picture that look awful. Change the picture! 2601:85:8201:AE50:3CFB:1BD:C691:634B (talk) 07:27, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

This ^

If was any other person, that picture would never be picked. Teutonkahmun (talk) 16:54, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

@2601:85:8201:AE50:3CFB:1BD:C691:634B I don't think this really matters, I think this only matters for fans. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 00:25, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Lol what? 136.47.184.99 (talk) 13:52, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

@136.47.184.99 I mean-yeah, I don't think anybody else cares about the featured picture except fans. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 13:55, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

hahahahaha 136.47.184.99 (talk) 23:08, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Now, I’m not a Katy Perry fan myself, but your assertion tickles me. If that’s your guiding philosophy, why not just delete the whole article and save some time? No one would care but the “fans”. 136.47.184.99 (talk) 23:13, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

@136.47.184.99 Researchers and readers would need the article, but they mostly won't care about the picture. You have a good point though. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 23:35, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Concerns about hagiographical balance of content

In a cursory examination after being reverted of a content addition, I find out that this article is plainly speaking, non-neutral. It seems that the subject's public image section shuns the lacklustre reception of Perry's single "Woman's World", or her heavily critisised collaboration with producer Dr. Luke, which for some reason do not conform to Perry's public image, preferring instead to exclusively pander to the subject's reputation with positive cruft.--Asqueladd (talk) 14:58, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't say one song's reviews are fit for a "public image" section. If anywhere, this would be better for "Life and career" which discusses when the song came out. Same goes for investigation over a music video for "Lifetimes" (which is what you added), but I'm not sure how much on that would be worth adding here vs. the song's own page when there so far haven't been any legal charges. For what it's worth, other parts of page do discuss things like controversy over the lyrical themes of "I Kissed A Girl", having her Sesame Street segment pulled from broadcast, and some negative commentary on vocals. That being said, it's not like the article as a whole only focuses on "positive cruft". SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 15:21, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

New main picture.

There are hundreds of thousands of pictures of Katy Perry on the internet. Why have we chosen a low resolution video screenshot to represent her? Teutonkahmun (talk) 16:56, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, it was the most recent non-copyrighted picture available at the time of insertion, but either way this is far from the lowest quality existing one. Feel free to list any suggestions you might have for a replacement that isn't copyrighted per WP:Image use policy. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 17:16, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Recent isn't necessarily better... substituting a video screenshot for high-quality photography isn't great unless there more recent image shows a substantial change in appearance.Proposing replacing the current infobox image with a crop of the following image (a featured picture on Commons); it's a few years old but the subject's looks haven't change drastically between then and now and the way she looks in the photo isn't a departure from her common and recognizable styling.

RachelTensions (talk) 09:22, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

I believe at least one crop of that already exists somewhere, and "a few years old" is an understatement for something from 2016. While you do make a valid point on newer not always meaning better, do you have any other ideas in mind before swapping out the current image? SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 13:04, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

The current crop on commons is of an unretouched version so it's a little grainy, if we were to go with this one I'd make a fresh crop of the retouched version.Like I said, a high quality image like this should easily take precedent over a grainy screenshot with an awkward facial expression from 2023, especially given there have been no substantial changes in her appearance since then, and the styling in the photo represents a very "general" Katy Perry look. The image also shows her performing, which is her whole claim to fame.Unretouched crop:

Other higher quality, more recent images are the blonde one from 2019 that is currently used further down in the article (and I believe was the lead image for a while), but I'd avoid this one as the lead at this point... it would've been fine back in 2019, but to re-use it now would do readers a disservice, IMO, because the way she's styled in it was a very specific (and short lived) phase of her career and not representative of how she "generally" looks:

There's this one from 2021 that could be cropped. Not the best photo, but it could work as a candid shot if cropped properly:

Anything newer is either a blurry mess (mostly from the Play residency) or more video screenshots. RachelTensions (talk) 13:27, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

You are correct that the linked blonde image was once used in her infobox. If going with the 2021 photo (which I would prefer to over the former to avoid duplication), then definitely crop it to focus more on Katy's face. Feel free to be bold and crop yourself as you see fit. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 13:36, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and replaced the lead image with the one from 2021, cropped and retouched to remove the people in the background. It's not my first choice, but it's better than what was there.

RachelTensions (talk) 16:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

No objections to that. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 20:11, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

• I’ve returned it to the long-standing status quo as the image on Commons has been challenged. As this article is TFA tomorrow, it’s best this is stable until it passes off the MP. - SchroCat (talk) 00:18, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

• Bad, bad idea. These are two of the worst photos of Katy Perry I've ever seen. Why do people do this? I've literally never seen photos of her so bad. Yet one appears on the main page and the other in the infobox. Why? This is madness. Viriditas (talk) 00:42, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

  Given the possible copyright issues with the 2021 photo I reiterate my proposal for the 2016 photo for the reasons previously given – it seems there are currently no newer photos available of comparable quality and encyclopedic value.

  Wont happen until after it falls off the main page, though – I was surprised to find out that this was appearing on the MP with that photo (didn’t realize it was scheduled for main page until just now), but it is what it is. RachelTensions (talk) 02:37, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

• Question for Viriditas and TheNuggeteer: do either of you oppose the 2016 idea that RachelTensions gave here? SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 15:02, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

  Here's a crop of the retouch in case we need it:

RachelTensions (talk) 16:39, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Jumping in to support the use of this photo. It is much higher quality than the one used in the article currently, both technically and as a representation of the subject. The recency argument is not compelling in this case, given the available options. Her appearance today is not substantially changed such that this 2016 photo would mislead readers. A suitable caption can include the date (at least year) to avoid any possible misrepresentation. This high quality image shows the subject doing what she is most notable for. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 16:50, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Support. Viriditas (talk) 19:01, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

I'll add another voice in endorsement of this line of reasoning. Recency is not the only (or even necessarily one of the top) criteria when picking an encyclopedically representative and high quality image form among available free options. The image of Perry performing immediately above feels the most in line, of the options discussed here, with her standard image as a performer, which is the core element of her encyclopedic notability. SnowRise 23:55, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

It would be better if there wasn't a microphone and hand covering most of her face, however. The editors at Madonna complained of a similar issue- her most prominent photo that was used for several years, had her microphone on stage covering half of her face. This was changed after new photos were released during The Celebration Tour. While Madonna is more recognizable than Katy Perry was then, I do not think this photo is good enough to warrant the solid 30% of her face being covered. PHShanghai | they/them (talk) 12:41, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

@SNUGGUMS Sure, the cropped one. I'm not that experienced in image copyright, though I think this picture isn't that wrong and the image is officially from the Voice of America (given from the credit in the original, uncropped photo). 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 22:36, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Given what seems like wide support I’ve gone ahead and made the change. RachelTensions (talk) 01:18, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

OK it looks like that resolves all image qualms for now. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 01:22, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Nice work. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 03:38, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Photo age issue

As someone who's been involved in the past two lead image changes of this article, I'm surprised that it was changed so quickly and I wish that I was pinged in the discussion to contribute to it,. My primary issue is I think the 2016 photo is very inferior; the mic is prominently covering half of her face and it is an 8 year old photo, when professional photography of Perry post 2020 has already been mentioned up above as a very suitable lead image. Personally, I suggest to find an image that's within the past 4 years? She has multiple interviews with Vogue Taiwan- I don't think video screenshots are inherently bad, I think the quality of the video needs to be set to it's highest and then a screenshot would suffice. Many high quality articles with Vogue Taiwan lead images exist, such as Billie Eilish or Kylie Jenner. I think recognizability is more important than recency, and in my personal opinion post-pregnancy Perry's face looks more defined than it did in 2016. Just my two cents. Thank you. PHShanghai | they/them (talk) 12:34, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Expanding my thoughts- this may be an unnecessary edit for this timeframe anyway. Perry is set to embark on The Lifetimes Tour for 143 soon next year. As with many female artists on Misplaced Pages tend to do, there will be a huge influx of images from said Lifetimes Tour that we may be able to use for the lead image. But for now, I think the 2021 image is far more superior and shows 100% of her face. After the commons deletion discussion hopefully ends with a Keep, may we re-discuss about using that image for this article instead? Thank you. PHShanghai | they/them (talk) 12:43, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Sorry for neglecting to ping you earlier for input. I don't know what you mean by a "more defined" face, but assuming the 2021 pic does get kept, I doubt it would be easy to persuade any of the users above who opposed implementing this. We either way definitely should wait for the deletion thread to close before going any further with image changes or proposals to do so. As for new tour photos, we'll cross that bridge when we get to it. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 21:55, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Let's just say that historically, free photography from Katy Perry concert performances has been not great, so let's not get our hopes up there.Obviously a more recent image would be better but until we have a suitable high-quality image to replace it with I'm not sure there are any better options than the 2016 one. RachelTensions (talk) 16:23, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

The Play tour's only other photographer was seated far away from the main stage- otherwise I actually think several of the Witness Tour photos are pretty good and high quality. But I think the 2021 image is both high quality, doesn't partially hide her face, and doesn't suffer from being a really old photo. PHShanghai | they/them (talk) 17:25, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Well, I think your opinion on that has been registered, but there is pretty clear consensus above that the 2016 image is more suitable, all factors considered, than the 2021 photo. Recency is not trumps-all factor, and a face being slightly obscured by a musician holding a muc to their mouth to sing into is a pretty unavoidable quality of an image which shows one singing into a microphone: which context is actually part of value added observed in a number of the !votes above. The 2021 image is not the worst, but I wouldn't call it optimal either, and if it is presently up for deletion, that is all the more reason not to rely on it at present. As to any forthcoming images, those are obviously speculative possibilities and I don't see what influence they can possibly have on the discussion until any such exist. SnowRise 08:26, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

I don't see anyone opposing the 2021 photo for reasons other than the copyright status. If it's kept at Commons it should be a valid option. --2001:FB1:3A:D6B9:1139:6E04:C0CC:5849 (talk) 19:52, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Kamala Harris endorsement

Can someone please add information about Katy Perry endorsing Kamala Harris in the 2024 election? Дмитро Чугай (talk) 14:15, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

 Done I just did so here. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 03:15, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Source Timestamp Issue

In a section of the article, theres a timestamp of a source that doesn't lead to whats being spoken about. Specifically "Transitioning from gospel music to secular music, Perry started working with producer Glen Ballard". An additional timestamp off 28:19 is probably much needed since it talks about what the second part of the sentence states

https://en.wikipedia.org/Katy_Perry?useskin=vector#2000%E2%80%932006:_Career_beginnings,_Katy_Hudson,_and_Fingerprints BrandysSon (talk) 00:54, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

I went ahead and added this. If anybody thinks it's repetitive to have two different timestamps in quick succession and knows a way to merge them into one citation, then that would be nice to learn about because I couldn't think of how. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 01:53, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages featured articles
• Featured articles that have appeared on the main page
• Featured articles that have appeared on the main page twice
• Old requests for peer review
• Misplaced Pages Did you know articles that are featured articles
• Biography articles of living people
• FA-Class level-5 vital articles
• Misplaced Pages level-5 vital articles in People
• FA-Class vital articles in People
• FA-Class Katy Perry articles
• Top-importance Katy Perry articles
• WikiProject Katy Perry articles
• FA-Class biography articles
• FA-Class biography (actors and filmmakers) articles
• Low-importance biography (actors and filmmakers) articles
• Actors and filmmakers work group articles
• FA-Class biography (musicians) articles
• High-importance biography (musicians) articles
• Musicians work group articles
• WikiProject Biography articles
• FA-Class Pop music articles
• High-importance Pop music articles
• Pop music articles
• FA-Class Rock music articles
• Low-importance Rock music articles
• WikiProject Rock music articles
• FA-Class United States articles
• Mid-importance United States articles
• FA-Class United States articles of Mid-importance
• FA-Class American music articles
• High-importance American music articles
• WikiProject American music articles
• WikiProject United States articles
• FA-Class LGBTQ+ studies articles
• WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies articles
• FA-Class California articles
• Mid-importance California articles
• FA-Class Southern California articles
• Mid-importance Southern California articles
• Southern California task force articles
• WikiProject California articles
• FA-Class Feminism articles
• Low-importance Feminism articles
• WikiProject Feminism articles
• FA-Class WikiProject Business articles
• Low-importance WikiProject Business articles
• WikiProject Business articles
• FA-Class WikiProject Women articles
• All WikiProject Women-related pages
• WikiProject Women articles
• FA-Class Women in music articles
• Mid-importance Women in music articles
• WikiProject Women in Music articles
• FA-Class Women in Business articles
• Low-importance Women in Business articles
• WikiProject Women in Business articles
• Pages in the Misplaced Pages Top 25 Report