Talk:Kesha

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:55, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Kesha → Ke$ha – This is a perennial request, I know, but policies have changed in the various times that this request was put forth. "Ke$ha" is the form Ms. Sebert's name takes in all reliable sources. This includes the New York Times, the Washington Post, the BBC, this Japanese website I use for Japanese music news, Billboard, MTV, the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences, etc. And one of the points that is continually brought up is WP:MOSTM. The trademarks manual of style does not apply to the names taken by individual people, as is evident at the articles on William James Adams, Jr., Joel Thomas Zimmerman, and Kathryn Dawn Lang. As "Ke$ha" is Ms. Sebert's stage name, it should be the name we use to refer to her on Wikipedia.—Ryulong (竜龙) 23:10, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose - Talk:Kesha/Archive_4#Requested_move Consensus has been established 4 times over. We do not pronounce her name "Ke-dollarsigh-ha", we pronounce it Kesha. Wikipedia is not a place for vanity stylization. Time to drop this redundant discussion. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 23:55, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Consensus can change, and previous arguments did not include the information I have discovered. It does not matter if we do not pronounce it as "Ke-dollarsign-ha". The fact is that the spelling/formatting here does not match what appears in the majority of reliable sources, and WP:MOSTM is not applicable for a person's given or professional name. And either way, this discussion could result in a consensus to ignore whatever applicable manuals of style or policies you may wish to say this page should not be moved. Requested moves are either done to conform with policies and guidelines or to set up an exception to those policies or guidelines with a consensus behind it.—Ryulong (竜龙) 01:32, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
    • ""When there are several names for a subject, all of them fairly common, and the most common has problems, it is perfectly reasonable to choose one of the others" - The most common has problems, we use Kesha, not Ke$ha (which btw, Kesha or Kesha Sebert is her legal credited name under which all her music is legally registered.) Consensus from the last discussion established that it is simply an "Unpronounceable vanity stylisation" and we are going to IAR. In short, consensus hasn't changed. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 01:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
      • The "problems" you encounter are only because you are misapplying WP:MOSTM to a person's name (be it stage name or otherwise). And there was no consensus in the past discussion. That's why it closed as "no consensus". The fact is that the most common name for Ms. Sebert in reliable sources (ignoring her liner notes) is "Ke$ha" with the $ (be it representative of the dollar, the peso, the BASIC string, the real, etc. And as I discovered in various other discussions with one entirely obstinate editor, the phrasing of "stylized as..." is confusing (at least to him) or effectively WP:OR because we are coming up with our own terminology to define what "Ke$ha" is to Ms. Sebert's name.—Ryulong (竜龙) 01:51, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
        • Well if you gain consensus, great. To quote you: "Yeah, good luck with that." - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 02:10, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
          • That was my commentary on his belief that deadmau5 should be moved to "deadmaus" based on the consensuses formed here in the past. I apologize if that was not clear.—Ryulong (竜龙) 02:16, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose per previous consensii. And deadmau5 should be moved to deadmaus per this page's consensii. 76.65.128.132 (talk) 00:18, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Yeah, good luck with that.—Ryulong (竜龙) 01:32, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
• Immediate close. There is nothing new here. Move along already. Let's shut this trollfest down. ΚαμΦΦνετ (talk) 07:39, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

  What trollfest? I opened this up in good faith to form a new consensus based on reliable sources and the proper interpretation of the internal style guides. You should not accuse others of being trolls, particularly editors who have been on this site as long as you have.—Ryulong (竜龙) 09:15, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

  Article titles are not the place for clownish punctuation created to promote the work of a hussy notable only for singing about her animal-like urges, her tawdry sleaziness, and her drunken debauchery. Kauffner (talk) 08:35, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

  I would redact that statement of yours as it is most definitely a WP:BLP violation.—Ryulong (竜龙) 22:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

  You are disputing my description of Kesha as "sleazy"? Perhaps you should look at her Web site. I was not interested in purchasing the "Sleazy Remix 2.0 - Get Sleazier" offered on this site, and I also averted my eyes to avoid learning in detail how "The New York Post Gets Sleazy!". However, judging from the "Blah Blah Blah" video, I would say that she is not kidding. Anyone who has seen "Tik Tok" knows it is about drunken debauchery. As for animal urges, "Take It Off" describes how "the animal" inspires her and her friends to go downtown, overturn trash cans, and commit other acts of mindless vandalism. Kesha does not need enablers. What Kesha needs to know is that we all feel sad when we see her brush her teeth with a bottle of Jack. Kauffner (talk) 05:05, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

  Just because you can cite random songs to support your opinion does not mean you are necessarily allowed to use all of what you did in a row to describe a real person.—Ryulong (竜龙) 09:56, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose. The last move request was decisively opposed only in September. It's pretty obvious that consensus doesn't change that rapidly, bearing in mind this is the fourth such request. Give it a rest; come back in 12 months if you still think it needs to be moved. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 12:38, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
  • I have been unable to find these three other requests in the page history. As far as I can tell this is only the second formal requested move discussion. Could you show me in the archives where these other 3 RMs are?—Ryulong (竜龙) 20:16, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose -- Her name appears to be Kesha, with Ke$ha being a stage name. As a redirect exists from this "trade mark", no users are likely to be inconvenienced by the article's present location. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:18, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose. Whether MOS:TM explicitly applies or not, the basic principle is the same. Using the dollar sign is a vanity personalization that we need not adhere to, as we have our own house style. Powers ^T 01:45, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
  • But if MOS:TM does not apply, then there is no house style to be imposed on this, or rather nothing to base the house style on.—Ryulong (竜龙) 10:14, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
    • Our guidelines are not straightjackets, and they reflect consensus rather than determining it. As such, it's perfectly reasonable to note that the same principles that inform the explicit rules listed at MOS:TM can also be used to inform our decision in this case. Powers ^T 15:55, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
      • If our guidelines are not straightjackets, why is it so hard to suggest that exceptions be made to them when they are constantly being referred to as the rules set in stone? If a name appears in the majority of reliable sources and MOS:TM does not apply to the names of individual people, then there should be no policy or guideline bound reason for this page to be kept at "Kesha" over "Ke$ha" and any consensus founded here is in stark contrast to the expected site-wide consensus.—Ryulong (竜龙) 20:44, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
        • Not at all. "Site-wide consensus" is that we avoid using non-alphabetic characters in titles where reasonable alternatives exist. The dollar-sign-for-S is a typographic conceit that we need not use so long as the standard English formatting is in use in a significant proportion of sources. (Even Kesha's Facebook page and Myspace page avoid the dollar sign.) Powers ^T 21:41, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
          • But that "site-wide consensus" is based on the current interpretation that does not exclude individuals' names from MOS:TM.—Ryulong (竜龙) 22:15, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
            • Precisely. Powers ^T 16:31, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
              • So you're basing the consensus on a false pretense.—Ryulong (竜龙) 17:41, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
                • What? No! What false pretense? Powers ^T 22:13, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
                  • Maybe I used the wrong phrase. If MOS:TM does not apply here, then there is nothing in policy or guidelines that states that "Ke$ha" is not a valid title.—Ryulong (竜龙) 22:20, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
                    • Not in so many words, but as I said before, the same principle applies. There's no reason to carve out an exception for stage names just because they aren't specifically called out in a document. Certainly in practice we often avoid gratuitous embellishments. Powers ^T 03:23, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose - There just aren't many examples like Ke$ha, which is why this makes for a good discussion. You have made some convincing arguments as well. The problem for me is that individual names for artists are often trademarked - John Mayer, Adele, and Snoop Dogg just to name a few. It is reasonable to assume that the dollar sign in Ke$ha is a distinctive sign and/or indicator being used by the performer as a distinguishable attribute for the purpose of being readily identified - an acceptable definition of trademark. Ke$ha may not be registered (yet), but to me that fact alone doesn't disqualify the guidelines outlined in MOS:TM. The subject's common name appears to reflect the same characteristics of trademarks. Per MOS:TM, giving that trademark a phonetic English spelling should be justified. Also, two of the articles you cited as examples do not really support the move. For example, k.d. lang is phonetically correct. Ke$ha, on the other hand, is not. I would argue that deadmau5 is still a work-in-progress article and title that warrants a similar discussion. That's the problem with using other Wiki articles as examples, especially when the number of articles that can be cited for support is relatively low. GoneIn60 (talk) 09:46, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
  • It does not really matter if "John Mayer" or "Adele" are trademarked. And you would be going after a needle in a haystack to suggest that "Deadmau5" be moved to "Deadmaus", as that would most definitely violate WP:COMMONNAME. The fact of the matter is that for this page, one form is more common on its own than the other, and if anything the music recording community seems to favor this "trademark" or "non-standard stylized form" than the other.—Ryulong (竜龙) 10:03, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
    • Perhaps I'm on a different wavelength here, but I thought you were trying to show how guidelines for trademarks on WP do not apply. I simply beg to differ. How are the examples I've given irrelevant then? Secondly, WP:COMMONNAME does not necessarily override the use of standard English text formatting for article titles. Under the trademark guidelines which adhere to the common name rule, "Avoid using special characters that are not pronounced" is suggested. Whether or not you agree Ke$ha is a trademark, I find it hard to believe you would think this advice ONLY applies to trademarks. What makes a trademark so special that it cannot have special characters while other non-trademark titles can? That just doesn't make sense. GoneIn60 (talk) 13:59, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
      • The fact that any performer's name is trademarked is irrelevant, as WP:MOSTM does not apply to the names of individuals. The fact is the majority of sources refer to the subject of this page with the dollar sign in her name, and that dollar sign just happens to be pronounced with the h that follows it as "sh".—Ryulong (竜龙) 21:34, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
        • Powers' makes a great point. WP:MOSTM may not include stage names, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're excluded either. Policies and guidelines strive for "brief and simple". Listing every possible scenario and requirement can lead to instruction creep. —GoneIn60 (talk) 03:45, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose - Per WP:MOSTM, and past consensus on this. It's just a stylization, not how the name is actually pronounced, etc etc. Sergecross73 msg me 21:54, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

• Support. I'm just going to copy and paste my comment from the last discussion as it's still relevant:

MOS:TM applies to trademarks, which I don't believe stage names/band names are, but that's a different discussion entirely. If you believe that the name "Ke$ha" falls under that guideline, we can just IAR it per the common practice that we use a subject's most common name (compare 47.5 million ghits for "Kesha" — which, may I note, does include some results not related to the singer — to 70.1 million for "Ke$ha"; most of these results are going to pertain to the singer). Even MOS:TM says at the top of the page, "Use common sense in applying it; it will have occasional exceptions."

–Chase (talk / contribs) 03:56, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

The "common name" rule applies only to choosing among different names, not for deciding how to render a name once chosen. We all agree that "Kesha" (or "Ke$ha", either way) is the name this article should use, the only question is how to render it. The dollar sign is a minor embellishment that even she doesn't use consistently; it is perfectly in line with our style guidelines to render her name as standard English orthography would suggest. Powers ^T 04:06, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

I agree. An example of common name would be using Snoop Dogg over Calvin Cordozar Broadus, Jr. since that name is used more than his birth name. However, if he were to use SnoOp Dogg* we would not use the * and simply use SnoOp Dogg.--70.24.206.51 (talk) 18:29, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Well why shouldn't these things apply to stylizations? It's clear that "Ke$ha" is in use much more than "Kesha". Why should Wikipedia opt for the less common form just to set up an internal style?—Ryulong (竜龙) 20:19, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

The underlying question is if trademarks aren't able to use special characters or symbols on Wikipedia, then why would any article be allowed? To me it's silly to deny the one topic most likely to contain special characters, but then allow that to exist in all other topics. That lack of consistency would prompt an overturning of the MOS:TM guideline. —GoneIn60 (talk) 15:03, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Spandex On the Distant Horizon

I think it's time that Spandex on the distant horizon should get an article. We know its coming in May of 2012, and i have the picture and 3 confirmed songs of the album. Picture: http://www.flickr.com/photos/andyroo279/5535465183/lightbox/ Songs: Tease me, 31 seconds alone, Shots on the hood of my car. Idk how to do this myself anyway :( Kalestorm (talk) 02:07, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

That looks like a fanmade cover. If there are no reliable source to state that it's going to exist, then it's not notable and will very likely to be deleted.—Ryulong (竜龙) 02:31, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Deleted the page. WP:CHRYSTAL, recording doesn't start for 2 weeks. Album isnt out till May. That cover is way fake, that's not the title of the album, and she has not recorded a single song for the album she's just finishing up writing. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 03:04, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Aren't there more songs you didn't mention?-ActerionX (talk) 17:29, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

First, this isn't a forum. Second, all those songs are leftovers from Animal. She did not record a single song from this album until 2 weeks ago. Not a single name title is known. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 20:17, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

This is a false rumour, The album is not called Spandex on the Distant Horizon and the only possible song that is known to be on it is the stuff she is working with Wayne Coyne, hinted to be called "2012" and a confirmed track called Sex Toy (not confirmed to be on an album), and a rare demo known as "WooHoo" which samples Blur's Song 2.

Source? WP:NOR. Here's my source “The title of my next record will be Spandex on the Distant Horizon.” "2012" is a song for the Lips' album, not Kesha's, this has already been confirmed. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 22:49, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

More album details

http://www.billboard.com/news/ke-ha-new-album-will-resurrect-rock-and-1005782752.story#/news/ke-ha-new-album-will-resurrect-rock-and-1005782752.story don't know if it will be that useful, but it was just published today. To summarize it her new album will be a rock album, and will show a new side of vulnerability that she doesnt show to often. As well as that she will start recording this month.--Jakeriederer (talk) 21:02, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

I've already added it to the album page (in my sandbox) that will be published in the near future. Thank you. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 21:07, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 12 February 2012

I would like to edit the main picture of Kesha above her biography.

TeamCreed (talk) 18:10, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

 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. This isn't for requesting to edit to the page, it's requesting edits to be made to it. In a few days after you've had experience, you'll be autoconfirmed and then you can edit the page. -andy4789 ★ · (talk? contribs?) 19:47, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Which album?

The article says: "with Animal debuting as the US's number-one album and producing two number-one singles, "Tik Tok" and "We R Who We R", and a string of top ten hits as well."

If I'm not mistaken, We R Who We R is not on Animal, but Cannibal. Right? 216.114.232.234 (talk) 11:06, 14 April 2012 (UTC)