Jump to content

Talk:R. Kelly: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Stanhin (talk | contribs)
Line 134: Line 134:
== Semi-protected edit request on 18 August 2022 ==
== Semi-protected edit request on 18 August 2022 ==


{{edit semi-protected|R. Kelly|answered=no}}
{{edit semi-protected|R. Kelly|answered=yes}}
Opening statements in the current trial began on August 17, 2022. [[User:Stanhin|Stanhin]] ([[User talk:Stanhin|talk]]) 11:14, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
Opening statements in the current trial began on August 17, 2022. [[User:Stanhin|Stanhin]] ([[User talk:Stanhin|talk]]) 11:14, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
:[[User:Stanhin|Stanhin]], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=R._Kelly&type=revision&diff=1105074176&oldid=1105021072 done]. [[User:PrisonerB|PrisonerB]] ([[User talk:PrisonerB|talk]]) 11:21, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 11:21, 18 August 2022

Template:Vital article

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 January 2021 and 14 April 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): A.dewan95. Peer reviewers: Drealynne, Danielsoldan4.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 07:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relationship with mother

The article previously stated that Kelly was close with his mother, although there was no cited source. This USA Today article points towards caution for editors when using Kelly's autobiography as a source of information, especially with regards to the relationship he had with his mother. Cedar777 (talk) 23:11, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Timelines

Useful links to timelines:

There may be others . . . Cedar777 (talk) 20:32, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Photos in early life section

The two photos in the early life section are from formative places (backed by reliable sources) about R. Kelly within that section. 1. Article states Kelly lived at Ida B. Wells housing, during the 1970s. First photo from Commons is of children playing in 1970s outside Ida B. Wells housing. 2. Article states Kelly began busking in the El subway stations after dropping out of high school. It says “ He regularly busked at the "L" stop on the Red Line's Jackson station in the Loop.” The second photo is of the red line Jackson station.

The photos provide relevant images regarding Kelly’s early life and should stay in the article. If anything, the article could use more images in the other sections for Kelly’s career and I support editors adding relevant photos to those sections rather than deleting content from Early life. Cedar777 (talk) 12:19, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 23 February 2022

explain what r kelly did in better detail 73.159.74.235 (talk) 03:48, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 04:52, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Troubling use of the word "Women."

I just noticed that at many points in the article, it says that kelly abused "young women." This is an error, as he abused underaged girls. This type of mistake negatively affects the article ,because it gives the false impression that the people who were abused were adults. specifically, I noticed this in the subsection "Allegations of music industry complicity."

```` Queazyeditor.

Technically, he abused both young women and underage girls per age of consent laws. Of the women who came forward in the WP article, over half were underage per Illinois or in their state of residence (FL) at the time they were involved with Kelly. The phrase young women and underage girls is the most accurate and the article has now been modified in the suggested section. I agree that it is problematic to oversimplify and lump them all into the young women category. Cedar777 (talk) 19:57, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alter?

Hi, in the "Industry Boycott ..." section there is a sentence beginning " On the alter, various people /.../ have all apologized...". What is this alter? T 46.212.185.190 (talk) 10:12, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Use of former

Unless and until the best quality reliable sources start referring to Kelly as a former singer, the article should simply describe him as a singer/songwriter/sex trafficker/sex offender. These things are not mutually exclusive. If someone stops sex trafficking because they are sent to prison, Wikipedia does not generally refer to them as a “former” sex trafficker, likewise if one is notable as a singer. Cedar777 (talk) 15:33, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 29 June 2022

Note the difference protégé (masculine) and protégée (female) where the former has been incorrectly applied. The grammar in the following quoted sentence is incorrect. "In 1994, he illegally married his underage protégé Aaliyah". Protégée is feminine and therefore correct in describing his relation ship with Aaliyah. Protégé is masculine and grammatically incorrect. "In 1994, he illegally married his underage protégée Aaliyah," is the correct usage. 86.167.183.239 (talk) 05:21, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Protégé is also gender neutral in English. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:12, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

wrong information in lead

The phrase in the last paragraph of the lead stating that his sentencing is scheduled for June 29th is in the wrong place.

That was for his first trial. It's placement in the lead implies that the date refers to his second trial. 102.39.44.21 (talk) 19:45, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 30 June 2022

American serial sex offender, singer, songwriter, and record producer. 203.91.238.140 (talk) 05:45, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 09:11, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IQ of 79

Reuters reports Kelly has an IQ of 79. This seems like important information to contextualize the man and his behaviour. 203.171.37.213 (talk) 05:48, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reuters quotes Kelly's lawyer, who is not a certified IQ tester. The lawyer may have a motive for underestimating Kelly's IQ. In any case, it's not reliable enough. Binksternet (talk) 07:20, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Because of his demonstrated music and entrepreneurial skill, his intelligence level is most likely significantly higher than 79. The main problem is that he is nearly illiterate, which means he will score very low on most IQ tests. Some specialized IQ tests allow assessment without reading, but I have not heard about R. Kelly taking such a test. Binksternet (talk) 20:52, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox image

We need a new infobox image for this article. I think the mugshot is a good one to use. 89.243.125.209 (talk) 19:30, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why is sex offender mentioned first?

Why does the article begin with listing 'sex offender' off the bat? The articles on Bill Cosby and Jimmy Saville mention their other 'occupations' first... it's just a bit weird 2A02:A03F:E0F8:1400:CD0D:CF90:BD59:952B (talk) 20:08, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in agreement, this should not be the case. ChicagoWikiEditor (talk) 07:17, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Misc. things I'd like to bring up

A number of things I'd like to bring up, mostly things that only came out after trial/sentencing:

  1. Kelly did not just target girls. At least two young men were recruited into sex acts. So in describing his whole criminal career (not specific to any one victim), it's necessary to use gender-neutral language.
  2. The abuse was not just sexual, but involved repeated acts of violence, threats of violence, and psychological torture. It's why calling Kelly "a sex offender" isn't sufficient to deal with the enormity of what he committed.
  3. I think it's also important to point out: the top charge against Kelly in Eastern District was rackteering, which encompasses almost all of the criminal acts. .

Finally, in dealing with the perpetual "should we list him being an artist before listing him as a criminal of some kind?" –I've come to the position that they can't be separated. His fame was part and parcel of how he recruited victims and kept them in line. So one (musical career) has to be treated as leading into the other (criminal acts). Evackost (talk) 16:57, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Evackost Your attempt to "tighten up" the introductory sentence in fact made it longer. The lede regarding notability should be brief therefore "convicted on sex crimes" (or some variation) is sufficient and accurate. For specifics of those sex crimes, the article body and subsections exist. No other article lede pertaining to notable roles is as drawn out as this. ChicagoWikiEditor (talk) 11:38, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I used "tighten up" and not "shorten" because this is not about the length of the sentence but its consistency/accuracy. And I want to speak to that.
Here was my writing: "who was found guilty in 2021 of recruiting his young fans for acts of sexual exploitation and physical abuse."
I used "recruiting his young fans" because It is a reference to an actual federal offense he was convicted of ("Enticement" under the Mann Act), and it's the essential part of it the crime (if there is no enticement, the rest of the case doesn't happen).
Here's what's there now: "who was found guilty in 2021 on charges of physical and sexual abuse of minors."
The problem of what's there now is that it's simply wrong about the 2021 conviction. In brief:
  • It's wrong about the victims. Not all of the victims were minors when Kelly victimized them. Age was only essential to one Mann Act count.
  • It's misleading about the crimes on the verdict sheet. The convictions were for Mann Act (enticement, coercion, and transportation) and RICO (the repeated law breaking). State level sex crimes had to be proven for both as predicate offenses, but they were not the federal charge that was put before the jury.
  • Finally, it may be TMI for the intro, but it has to be said here: the state-level predicate sex crime Kelly was proven to have committed was having unprotected sex with his victims without disclosing to them his STD infection.
Evackost (talk) 13:09, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The lede sentence is for readers to ascertain the unadorned, most basic facts about a subject. These are the facts repeatedly described by the best quality RS. If the subject has been tried by multiple courts, multiple years, and is still facing additional charges, Wikipedia editors need to keep the content more broad to avoid editorializing. Please review the guidelines at MOS:LEAD. Also the paragraph structuring of the lede is problematic as there should be a maximum of 3-4 paragraphs. For the specific guidelines for length: MOS:LEADLENGTH. I agree with ChicagoWikiEditor's statement that the lede "should be brief therefore "convicted on sex crimes" (or some variation) is sufficient and accurate." The article on Jeffrey Epstein has an unadorned first sentence and a concise and to the point three paragraph lede section - this despite the fact that the Epstein biography has 266,000 bytes and Kelly's biography has 211,000 bytes. - If anything, the lede section for this subject could use further summarization, i.e. more trimming off of excessive details, of the article overall. Cedar777 (talk) 01:06, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with some of this, but it's missing the point.
The nub is this: there's been a long back and forth of edits of the intro. References to Kelly's crimes keep getting removed from the opening sentence, paragraph and lede. Several times, the characterization of the crimes is changed to non-specific "sex crimes"(both disrespectful to Kelly's victims, and also wrong about the nature of federal law). But mainly, the problem seem to have is with mentioning that Kelly is a criminal at all, even though he is convicted.
At this point, I am content with at least bothering to name the exact statutes (RICO and Mann Act) that Kelly was actually convicted for violating in the most bloodless manner possible. There's a degree to which it whitewashes the activities that Kelly did while offering no more "neutrality," but whatever.
But in closing: if anyone wants to be serious about reducing bloat, then let me ask why simple sentences that try to sum up 25 years of crimes are being targeted, while whole paragraphs devoted to puffing up Kelly's achievements hoard space. Do we really need to know every nickname of Robert Sylvester Kelly, complete with citations? Do we need to keep in references to a house album Kelly never actually made before he went to prison? Evackost (talk) 02:37, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 18 August 2022

Opening statements in the current trial began on August 17, 2022. Stanhin (talk) 11:14, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stanhin, done. PrisonerB (talk) 11:21, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]