Talk:Rebecca Black

This article was previously deleted on March 14, 2011. The result of the Deletion Review was allow recreation.

Discussion on LOL

This article states Rebecca is releasing LOL but Rebecca tweeted on http://twitter.com/MsRebeccaBlack she is NOT recording LOL and the more info is on http://www.greatnewmovies.com/2011/03/31/rebecca-black-is-not-recording-new-song-lol/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.124.237.107 (talk) 18:11, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Negative reaction

Shouldn't it be discussed some where in the article that the reason this singer rose to fame was because the song was generally considered horrible? Ignoring negative feedback is just as biased as focusing on it. 75.39.32.138 (talk) 05:55, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't know shouldn't we discuss how many negative anti everything assholes there are on the planet with a voice now because of the internet. All these losers who have never done anything in there life close to what Rebbeca did have to criticize her even though she's only 13 and having fun. We should have a section about how most of the planet is full of pathetic dildos who's brains would be of better use smeared on the side of the road somewhere.24.218.123.138 (talk)

There is clear main stream media coverage of this now being the most disliked video on youtube ever. A google news search of "most disliked video ever" is currently resulting in over 200 sources. To leave this out of the page is more biased than not including it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.6.175.122 (talk) 03:08, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

"The song was generally considered horrible"

It isn't horrible -- just hastily written -- and that's an opinion which is not encyclopedic. The song went viral for a simple reason: she is appealing. Her most important characteristic is that she appeals to the crowd, and that she connects with the camera. Her gravely voice, obviously genuine friendships, and strong intonation and rhythm, and genuine expressions are why she went viral. She is a mark of the success of the Information Society.

What I think is worth discussing is why such a high percentage of web maganzine writers and forum posters moved so quickly to attack her talent. I think she has exposed the root problem that society faces, and more important, the Information Society faces.--John Bessa (talk) 14:31, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Yeah the true problem is the internet is exposing just how much of an asshole everybody is when they have a computer to hide behind. 24.218.123.138 (talk)

Why the redirect?

Why does this page just redirect to one of Black's songs, instead of being an article about her? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.158.224.232 (talk) 16:51, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

• paternalism.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 00:40, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
• Recreation is now permitted, see: Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2011_March_14--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 13:21, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I think it should be a redirect, based on Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#People_notable_for_only_one_event DanielDPeterson (talk) 08:08, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

IMO, we may as well wait for a few weeks or months. If everybody's forgotten about her the page can be merged with Friday (Rebecca Black song) then. But if (God help us) she goes on to have a successful career, then it would be a shame if the page were deleted and it was subsequently decided she deserved a page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.7.168.82 (talk) 13:31, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Page for artist

Why is there not a page on Rebecca Black / why is there a lock on the creation of one?

I agree that having released a record that has 25,000,000 hits on the official video alone at least deserves a page created. This song will more than likely chart in the music charts today, will this be a trigger to allow an article to be created? 88.111.8.178 (talk) 10:59, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I agree that the artist has gained enough notariety from this song alone Timclare ^(talk) _{(sign here)} 11:02, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I know she has lots of views on Youtube and everyone talks about her but is she notable enough? 79.97.127.226 (talk) 18:08, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Someone should mention that the like:dislike ratio on youtube is something like 10 dislikes for every 1 like. While I'm not in favour of bashing people, it certainly can be written in neutral language. I.e. the fact that most people thinks she sucks certainly seems like a relevant point. 67.49.132.19 (talk) 22:02, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Official website

is http://rebeccablackonline.com and her twitter http://twitter.com/MsRebeccaBlack —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.243.3.200 (talk) 07:24, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Year of birth

She's said on her official twitter that her birthday is June 21 (I actually searched through the page of the user she was responding to to see if it was actually "What's your birthday?", and it was), and her profile on Ark says she's 13... so wouldn't that make her year of birth 1997, not 1998? 203.160.126.177 (talk) 15:11, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 203.160.126.177, 23 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} As cited above, date of birth should be changed to 1997. Full DOB is 06/21/1997. References are her official Twitter where she answered a fan asking about her birthday, and for the year, multiple sources (including her official Ark Music page) mention her as being 13, which if her birthday is 06/21, would make her born in 1997.

203.160.126.177 (talk) 15:15, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done by User:Oakshade. — Bility (talk) 17:13, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Biased mention of the song

"As of March 22, 2011, first-week sales of her digital single were estimated to be around 40,000 by Billboard.com, and the video had over 38 million views on YouTube, despite a mediocre critical reception" sounds more fair to me. Can use some of the sources from the song's article as needed. --Rogington (talk) 17:50, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

1997 or 1998?

Which is actually her birth year? 1997 or 1998? The article contradictorily cites both years ("1998 births" category and "1997" on description table). Robfbms (talk) 21:04, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Rebecca Black's birthday

Can somebody update the actual date of birth. I'm almost certain it's April 5th But I might be wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Undisputed4life2020 (talk • contribs) 21:56, 23 March 2011 (UTC) (Edit: Content removed per WP:ATTACK and WP:BLP which applies to talk pages.--Oakshade (talk) 00:52, 24 March 2011 (UTC))

Do you have a source for that? Without a reliable source, we're not going to include the information. We might not include it with a source, either, just in case. Cheers. lifebaka++ 23:12, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Okay, here is the source I have added: http://twitter.com/MsRebeccaBlack/status/50024241491492864. It's her Twitter account. Media stated she is 13 years old, and this says June 21, so doing the math it makes 1997 the year she was born. If anyone disagrees, please feel free to discuss. Tinton5 (talk) 00:48, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Opening paragraph

Pop singer? Really? --94.171.77.82 (talk) 23:06, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Pop does not imply good, nor does singer for that matter. --86.30.248.90 (talk) 00:13, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

"Pop" is an abbreviation of "popular" which at least implies well-liked. Darmot and gilad (talk) 11:45, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

"Pop music" is, as a whole, a specific genre of music of which this artist qualifies for membership. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pop_music OffColfax (talk) 07:17, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 189.61.208.59, 24 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}}

rebecca black only became famous because all the people of a certain site started to make fun of her music, that is the only reason she got so many views on youtube. You should really put this in here, because you guys should tell the truth

189.61.208.59 (talk) 02:02, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Rejecting as requested, you need to make a more specific request; provide some suggested verbiage, and more importantly a really good reference to support it. This is a WP:BLP, so nothing should be added unless it is very clearly supported. Monty₈₄₅ 02:14, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

What, so like a TMZ article or a similarly reputable source? This is why wikipedia goes down the drains. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.49.132.19 (talk) 03:15, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

We don't fight tumblr's wars for them, and we generally don't say a "certain site" made someone famous without proof.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 04:21, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

American teen pop singers

It says American "child" pop singers, but she's not a child, she's a teenager. She should be put in with the other teenagers.--68.186.165.36 (talk) 16:57, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

There is no Category:Teenage entertainers, nor any subcategories of that. Jim Michael (talk) 22:54, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia's American child singers category defines its inclusion criteria as "Child and teenage singers", and Category:Child singers, of which it is a subcategory is defined as everyone "who had notable careers as musicians before the age of 18." The other teenagers are already listed there. Brian the Editor (talk) 01:39, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from me, 25 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} According to some of my researches,I've found out that Rebecca Black is a jew. Trollforlyfe (talk) 04:05, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

• And someone cares? Without a reliable source on it and a valid reason to include it in the article, request should be denied.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 04:09, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Not done. You'll need a reliable source for that information. Provide it and the edit will be made. Given your username, I'm not holding my breath. ICYTIGER'SBLOOD 04:49, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

It's odd that we never see messages like "I have evidence that xxx xxxx is a Methodist." Not only is there no source, I'm not sure why there is concern over this.--Oakshade (talk) 05:26, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

It's usual to include someone's ethnic background or religion. It's a signficant fact about a person. Obviously it woudl have to be properly sourced, she may turn out to be ethnically Jewish but religiously atheist. Darmot and gilad (talk) 11:49, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit

Someone should change the sentence "Rebecca Black (born June 21, 1997) is an American pop singer who rose to fame with her 2011 single "Friday"." to "Rebecca Black (born June 21, 1997) is an American pop singer who rose to infamy with her 2011 single "Friday".". I think the 700,000 dislikes on the music video can attest to that.

No. That's precisely why the article is protected. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:29, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

That being said, we really should not be censoring the song's, ermm, less than great reception. The fact that it became viral from people calling it awful is pretty well sourced; I personally am not going to add it in, but it probably should be mentioned a bit more prominently than it is.--Yaksar (let's chat) 20:00, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I think "garnering mostly negative media coverage," which is already in there, is sufficient for a fairly short biography as this one is currently. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:14, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Alice540, 26 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Rebecca's video "Friday" currently has over 789,204 dislikes, having the most dislikes in Youtube history.

Alice540 (talk) 02:41, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

No it doesn't. Justin Bieber's song "Baby" has over 1,000,000 dislikes. --Our Lady Overkill (talk) 05:34, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

She's getting up there, though. If the current development keeps up, the song will be the most hated video on youtube some time next week. Keep an eye on the situation! --Rogington (talk) 15:38, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

As of April 1, 2011, this song has officially surprassed "Baby" as the most disliked song on YouTube with over 1.3 million dislikes and an abysmal 165,000 likes. That was fast, almost doubling in a mere five days. --Our Lady Overkill (talk) 07:12, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 76.69.63.3, 26 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Rebecca Black's "Friday" now as 52 million views not 44. :)

76.69.63.3 (talk) 13:08, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I've seen it too, but we cannot cite Youtube as a reference. We need a reliable source to cite this. Thanks. Novice7 (talk) 13:12, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

lol how absurd you cannot cite Youtube as a reference about itself when it's the only source on that information —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.179.102.148 (talk) 17:29, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

• ACtually we cite youtube all the time (for viewcounts), but there's no hard rule i know of.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 19:44, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Rebecca's single has debuted on the Australian digital singles chart at #40 - can we get that updated on the discography? Source - Official ARIA charts http://www.ariacharts.com.au/pages/charts_display_digital.asp?chart=1DT40 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.35.230 (talk) 09:23, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for citing your source. Brian the Editor (talk) 02:20, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion?

So uh, who flagged this for deletion without starting a discussion or presenting arguments on the talk page? --Rogington (talk) 22:49, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Most probably it won't be deleted, it was a stupid idea. R.I.P.--Me ne frego (talk) 23:29, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion discussions never take place on talk pages. The discussion is going on at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rebecca Black, which is linked from "this article's entry" in the box atop the article. Brian the Editor (talk) 01:43, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 184.46.18.79, 28 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Wikipedia Staff:

I am sorry for bothering you, and I realize that all of you probably are very busy, but Rebecca Black does not deserve the credit for Bob Dylan's song. Please fix this.

Thank you, A Seeker of the Truth

184.46.18.79 (talk) 23:30, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Not done. No specific request and no source for request. lifebaka++ 23:40, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Just vandalism, presumably based on this parody. — anndelion (talk) 01:01, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Damn good parody, though. :) - Bilby (talk) 01:08, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Ryan Seacrest got her the record deal?

Quoted from the Daily Mail,

"She has also received a mentor in the form of American Idol host Ryan Seacrest, according to celebrity website TMZ. Following an appearance on his radio show last week, Ryan is said to have introduced her to Debra Baum, a manager with DB Entertainment."

Should this be noted? Silverseren^C 04:33, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

No. It's a rumor, albeit a reported one, and probably won't be relevant or covered in any really reliable way any time soon. It wouldn't really improve the article, either. Cheers. lifebaka++ 15:50, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Cinci555, 29 March 2011

The main thing missing from this article, is that while her youtube video has received millions of hits, it also is the MOST DISLIKED video on youtube.

Cinci555 (talk) 15:13, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Bility (talk) 15:42, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD2LRROpph0

The official video page. It has overtaken Justin Bieber's Baby (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kffacxfA7G4) as the most hated/disliked video on youtube with 1.2 million-some dislikes vs 1.1 million-some dislikes. --Rogington (talk) 19:44, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

An ephemeral distinction, I assure you. Besides, that information would be more suited to the actual article on the song. Here, it reads too negative. Cheers. lifebaka++ 00:21, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Already in the article on the song. Dcoetzee 23:54, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

number of views on youtube

The current number is of views is stated as follows:

"The music video uploaded to YouTube has received over 70 million views, as of March 31, 2011" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD2LRROpph0

However the current number of views if over 74 million views, as of April 1, 2011. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ndfrspd8622 (talk • contribs) 00:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

80M on April 3. But there's a note saying not to change the number, and to see discussion. Well there's no discussion on discussion, except one comment that youtube "is not a reliable source." It's good enough for any college paper, any newspaper, and the only source of such information. Plus it's not a policy on wikipedia not to use it. So whoever doesn't want us to update the numbers, can you defend that?--Mrcolj (talk) 21:33, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

An image anyone?

Hi, I think an image of Rebecca would be appropriate. it shouldnt be that hard to find one to upload to commons I think?. If you have one put it on the article ASAP.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

To the contrary, obtaining a freely licensed photo of Rebecca Black is quite difficult. You would either have to take a photo of her yourself or get a release from ARK or her family. Dcoetzee 22:38, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Too bad we cannot use "fair use" or "transformation." --John Bessa (talk) 14:33, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Merge with the song's Wiki page?

At the moment, Black's encyclopedic relevance is entirely based on "Friday". If she releases another single, or especially an album, it would be appropriate to create her own page, but at the moment, she and her song should be covered in a single article. - Drlight11 (talk) 07:35, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

• No. This article has been discussed at considerable length at Articles for Deletion (see discussion here); consensus and guidelines mean that we should keep the article, without merging.Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 09:39, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
• No this article has just went trough an Afd process and it has been established that Black is notable as a person too.--BabbaQ (talk) 09:47, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
• Wait I bet this will be a logical decision within the next few months, but there's no reason to rush it.--Yaksar (let's chat) 21:36, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
• There are similar/additional comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rebecca Black. Airplaneman ✈ 00:48, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
• No. Per the recent AfD. --Joshua Issac (talk) 14:10, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Funny or Die

Did she (Rebecca Black) really team up with them, or is it a fine piece of acting? --91.32.94.203 (talk) 15:02, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't know what you mean about acting, but she teamed up for them for April Fool's day and made a couple of videos with them about car safety and such. See here and here. Silverseren^C 15:36, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

So, from your second link: "[...] because viral video star Rebecca Black has bought out the humor site. (Before you believe that statement, however, kindly check your calendar.)" I'm not sure if I have to add that the whole news is from April 1st, which is traditionally known for, so to say, incorrect statements (April Fools' Day)?! Ms Black herself was so nice to point this out ([1]). I'm pretty sure, however, that the "Rebecca Black" girl in the video is a funny (and somewhat older) actress and not Ms Black, and I really can't take news from April 1st as a proof of the contrary. --91.32.94.203 (talk) 16:35, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

We'll need reliable sources saying otherwise. I think the joke was the fact that Funny or Die was changed to Friday or Die. Not that Black was a fake. I'm fairly certain that's here, but I suppose it might not be. You'll still have to find a reliable source saying that it isn't her however. Silverseren^C 16:55, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I won't be able to, probably, but also "This should cheer up Black, who was dissed by Miley Cyrus" (from your first link) does not make much sense to me if Rebecca Black already proved to stand high above things so coolly – maybe she does, but the author of the first article doesn't actually seem to assume it. --91.32.94.203 (talk) 17:09, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Well if this is notable, then why doesn't Bangs have an article?

Why? SnopakeSnopakeSnopake (talk) 16:04, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I found the page about Bangs. TAKE U TO DA MOVIES WIV DA POPPKORN. SnopakeSnopakeSnopake (talk) 16:08, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Vanity label

I removed this from the description of Ark Music Factory on this page (there may be other pages where it needs to be removed). Ark's being confused for a vanity label (by some media outlets, it seems, in addition to casual observers) because they are taking "vanity label" to be analogous to the publishing world's "vanity press" - a fee-for-service publisher. But that's not what a vanity label is. A vanity record label is a label set up by someone already well-known to release his/her own music or pet projects - something like The Beatles' Apple Records or Fall Out Boy's Decaydance. Those are vanity labels. Ark is a fee-for-service label, whose business model does not appear to be essentially different from, say, Sun Records's in its early days. "Vanity" is a more neutral, definitional description in the music world, and doesn't seem to carry quite the same stigma it does in the publishing world (or at least, if it does, it carries it in a different way). Chubbles (talk) 19:44, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

So, essentially, there needs to be a new word added to the lexicon for the music version of vanity publishers so it has the same negative stigma, as should be applied to ARK Music Factory? :P (I totally agree with what I just said, no sarcasm). Silverseren^C 19:58, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

• I agree that ARK does not fit with the more traditional definition of vanity label found in the WP article, and does more properly fit with the definition at vanity press (also called "subsidy publishers", which is a redirect to vanity press). Since the term "vanity label" is evidently being used in the media to describe what ARK does, we need some sort of clarification there pointing users to the right place. --Arxiloxos (talk) 20:07, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

  I suppose that, in a place like Ark's own page, where such nuance would be appropriate, I'd go with something like a "fee-for-service label, operating similarly to a vanity press book publisher (although it is not a vanity record label)". That's rather a mouthful for this article, though... Chubbles (talk) 20:26, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

  Agreed that it's a bit wordy here. Might be worth including at ARK Music Factory, though. Cheers. lifebaka++ 22:09, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

New info: Nomination and lawsuit

This article from OK! Magazine discusses the nomination of Rebecca Black (and Justin Bieber) for the new internet-based awards show, the O Music Awards. It was apparently created by MTV, so this seems fairly important.

Another article also from OK! Magazine discusses the possibility of Black suing the ARK Music Factory for not upholding their end of the contract, in that she retains all copyright to the song since she paid for it. It also points out that "With some help from Ryan Seacrest, Rebecca has signed a record deal with DB Entertainment.", which I do think should be specified in the article. Silverseren^C 02:16, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Of course, these two are important. We should add them to the article. Novice7 (talk) 15:31, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

There's a more detailed discussion of the possible legal disputes (between Black and ARK, and between the principals of ARK) in Rolling Stone, which I'd think is also a more reliable source than OK!. "Exclusive: Rebecca Black Fighting Ark Music Factory Over 'Friday'", Rolling Stone, April 1, 2011. I wouldn't object if someone wants to put something in the article, but it sounds like this is rather speculative at the moment. --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:01, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

"American teen pop singer"

I am changing the intro to "Rebecca Black is a teen Youtube sensation" as that is all she is at the moment. She only has 1 song out and supposedly has a record deal, this hardly qualifies her as a "pop singer". She may one day truly become one, but she isn't one now. Alek2407 (talk) 17:35, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

• She is confirmed to have a record deal, there is no supposedly about it. Silverseren^C 17:45, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
• What are the criteria to be considered a pop singer? The only one I can think of is, sing a pop song. Which Black has done; it's very nearly the only thing she has done. Chubbles (talk) 17:48, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Red outfit girls?

Any idea what theyre all about? thank you. --Pabloviva22 (talk) 12:33, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from ShadowRobn, 10 April 2011

I'd like to add a picture of Black from her official video. http://img813.imageshack.us/img813/318/rebblack4wiki.png

ShadowRobn (talk) 19:39, 10 April 2011

N Not done and not likely to be done As the picture was taken from a music video, it's copyrighted. OpenInfoForAll (talk) 01:45, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Rebecca Black really a viral marketing campaign?

According to: http://entertainmentnews.instantfreesite.com/stuff.html, Rebecca Black is not a real person, rather she is a character in an upcoming movie for which 'Friday' was just a marketing ploy.

I'm pretty sure that story is fabricated. I can find no other sources for this story that aren't based on this one. It's possible this news site accepts user submissions, or that it was a belated April Fools joke. Dcoetzee 03:50, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh, wow, that's elaborate. I did some digging and that web page is completely fake. Look, the home address links to the same news article. Someone made that page in order to pretend that it was a part of the stuff.co.nz newspaper website, when it isn't. That entire page is a hoax. That's pretty tricky. Silverseren^C 04:45, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

And now it's been taken down. Dcoetzee 23:54, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Wording on opening paragraph

The phrase"propelling Black into the limelight" in the opening paragraph of the article needs to be changed. The use of the word "limelight" is frowned upon, as it's an idiom. A better phrase would be "which caused Black to gain notoriety". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.22.127.15 (talk) 17:59, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Infobox picture

Seeing as how this is a screenshot from a YouTube video it is not free so therefore should be removed I believe. Matt G (talk) 23:42, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Why was my contribution deleted?

So i added the fact that she has 6 toes on each foot and it got deleted, have you seen her foot? no. i have so i know, why dlete it?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Luca Di-Maio (talk • contribs) 22:52, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Where did you get this? We cannot operate off the grounds that you actually saw her foot; there is no proof. For all we know, even if this somehow was true, you are making this up. If you can find a reliable source to indicate that this is true, by all means add it. Otherwise, Wikipedia is not a place for original research and WP:SPECULATION. Please read some of these links for clarification. MobileSnail 22:55, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Yep, as Mobile Snail has said: if you can find a WP:RELIABLE source that mentions her having six toes please add the information to the article, making sure to WP:CITE it properly. DubiousIrony ^yell 07:16, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Rebecca black ethnicity

What is her ethnicity? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.95.191.41 (talk) 10:17, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Quick Google search reveals only speculation and disagreement between three camps (Italian/Mexican/Random Ethnicity vs. she's a white girl who goes tanning vs. "who cares? You're racist!"). That being said, this is not really the place to ask. Talk pages are for improving the article in question, not for discussion of the subject. Try the WP:REFDESK. DubiousIrony ^yell 10:45, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

As with most Americans, I would say that it's probably a mix of multiple ethnicities. Silverseren^C 11:03, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 131.162.159.120, 16 April 2011

The final line in the biography write-up-"he has also stated that she is a fan of Justin Bieber, and expressed interest in performing a duet with him", I was just going to add a reference http://arts.nationalpost.com/2011/03/21/rebecca-black-to-justin-bieber-would-you-do-a-duet-with-me/ to the sentence 131.162.159.120 (talk) 21:31, 16 April 2011 (UTC)