Talk:Kylie Minogue

Best-selling artists

In the introduction to Kylie's page, it mentions how she has sold over 80 million records worldwide. And yet, whenever I go to the page "List of best-selling music artists", which lists the artists who ahve sold 75 million or more, Kylie's name never appears. It might be because enough references can't be found to back up the claim for a biography page, but I think both pages need to be updated for Kylie's inclusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GillettD (talk • contribs) 20:02, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

There's a real problem with the Locomotion sales bit as well - I took it out and added it back in, but not 100% sure Locomotion WAS the biggest 'selling' single of the 80's in Australia - definitely wasn't elsewhere (hence adding the clarification), but the ARIA charts weren't collated before 1988 - the top 50 was the 'Kent Music Report' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_top_40_singles_for_1980%E2%80%931989_in_Australia

Yet these figures don't put Locomotion anywhere near the top seller of the 1980's, or combined AMR/Kent and ARIA, e.g. https://www.top100singles.net/2011/12/amr-top-singles-of-1980s.html#show - who to believe? Timbearcub (talk) 00:26, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Cancer

According to this article as it stands, Kylie still has cancer as of 2019.... She was diagnosed with it in 2005, and apart from getting treatment, no further pronouncements have been made... according to this article 81.153.82.140 (talk) 18:45, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Kylie Step back in time album 2019

Hi guys could someone please add to Kylie discography her UK number 1 greatest hits 2019 album step back in time

Name

"Kylie" is the singer's mononym. It's not a pseudonym, nickname, stage name or pen name; hence in the lede it should be mentioned by known simply as or known mononymously as not Aka. Bionic (talk) 10:53, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 December 2019

Please consider adding Kylie Minogue to the category 'Australian Emigrants to England' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Australian_emigrants_to_England 77.101.240.188 (talk) 19:38, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Article is currently in Category:Australian_emigrants_to_the_United_Kingdom, and it is not clear whether it should be in the suggested category also (or instead). RudolfRed (talk) 23:42, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

DOB unwise

I think it's quite unwise for us to include the full DOB of Kylie Minogue, especially when the reference is Hello Magazine. It's also a violation of WP:DOB, which is a part of WP:BLP and inviolable. - Chris.sherlock (talk) 05:49, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

• What is wrong with the reference? Which part of WP:DOB says to removed DOBs from articles? DOB has been on this article since 2003, how come it out of sudden became a BLP violation? It says, Wikipedia includes full names and dates of birth that have been widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object to the details being made public. Mymis (talk) 05:57, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
  • You should read the policy, which can be found here. And it doesn't infer anything of the sort. - Chris.sherlock (talk) 06:05, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
    • I did and I referenced it already in my previous reply. It says, per WP:DOB: "Wikipedia includes full names and dates of birth that have been widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object to the details being made public." It then says it could be removed if the person specifically objects to it or if the person is borderline notable which is NOT the case here. Mymis (talk)
      • So if you read it then why didn’t you provide a reliable source? - Chris.sherlock (talk) 08:02, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

The sourcing is agreed that her DOB is 28 May 1968, and there isn't much point in hiding something that an average person can find out within 30 seconds in a web search. There is also a problem with making an exception for Kylie, as it isn't usually a problem to give the full DOB of pop stars. How is someone going to misuse this information? Or will Kylie be upset if we point out that she is 51-52 years old?--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:15, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

I added a number of sources. Complete non issue.Rain the 1 20:24, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

I agree, complete non-issue, and so I've removed the sources. We don't need five sources for the DOB (especially in the lead), as it's not controversial. Chris, with all due respect, you are WP:CRYBLPing here. Levivich ^{[dubious – discuss]} 23:14, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

I see your WP:CRYBLP and raise you a WP:CRYCRYBLP. I cannot consider you have given me any due respect. - Chris.sherlock (talk) 07:59, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. I did attempt to do the same thing to other articles. Then I noticed the editor made mass changes to Australian females from a category and opted for ANI instead.Rain the 1 23:20, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

There is nothing wrong with the mass changes, they are quite correct. I've even discussed this on WP:AWNB. - Chris.sherlock (talk) 06:24, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm not actually. It's quite clear that a tabloid magazine like Hello is not in any way a reliable source. You both need to stop violating BLP and reread WP:DOB. - Chris.sherlock (talk) 06:23, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

+1 on Hello magazine not being an ideal source; it should be better in a WP:FA. However, I'm not in any way seeing a BLP violation when countless articles about pop stars give their full DOB without this type of complaint. There has to be consistency here. Madonna (entertainer) says that she was born on August 16, 1958. Is this a BLP violation?--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:29, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

I can’t speak for the reliability of the reference for that article - I don’t know if AllMusic is a reliable source. If they quoted a tabloid or gossip magazine, then the answer would be the same. I removed BLP violations as I saw them, I didn’t go out of my way to find them. - Chris.sherlock (talk) 07:56, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

It's a WP:SOFIXIT problem, as other people have pointed out CNN agrees that Madonna's DOB is August 16, 1958, so this could be used instead. BLP is being used as a red herring here.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 09:20, 20 April 2020 (UTC)@

Dear god, you brought up that article, not me. Fix it yourself! - Chris.sherlock (talk) 09:26, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

This thread came about because you started removing the full DOB from various Australian BLP articles, eg Ada Nicodemou in this edit, claiming that it was a BLP issue. As a general rule, it isn't a good idea to make the same edit to multiple articles without getting a WP:CONSENSUS first. As I said at WP:ANI, I'm not an expert on Australian privacy law, but a DOB in reliable mainstream sources is unlikely to be removed.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 09:34, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Which I fully stand by. If there is unreliable sourcing around the DOB, then it clearly violates WP:DOB. The BLP policy is such that anything found violating BLP must be removed. If someone wants to come along later with a reliable source and fix this, fine. This, however, is one of the few cases where the responsibility to do so is not on the editor removing the violation. It is literally not my responsibility in terms of the BLP for me to add material but to remove violations when and where I see them. I have done so, and will continue to do do. I have taken it to the talk page, however, as there are cases where consensus is to keep the DOB. But consensus doesn't trump the policy. If the source is not reliable, then the material will be removed if it violates the BLP. I will not be adding in a full DOB myself, but then I don't have to. If editors want the full DOB and consensus is to include it due to the person being sufficiently famous or a public person, then they still have to use a reliable source. So - go do so!

One more thing - I won't be discussing other articles here. There is an AN/I thread on this issue already. I'm not going to clutter this talk page up with debates about other articles. If you wish to discuss my wider conduct, do so in the appropriate forum. This talk page is not such a place. - Chris.sherlock (talk) 09:54, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

In which case, Kylie's full DOB can be restored in this article, as there is a consensus that it is available in reliable sources.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 10:54, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

If a reliable source is used. - Chris.sherlock (talk) 20:32, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Which I see has now been provided. - Chris.sherlock (talk) 20:35, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Too early for Disco album

In its current format, Disco is not notable for its own article. Aside from WP:CRYSTAL, this is a future topic. The full track listing isn't known yet. There is no purpose to having the article as the information from the "background" section has already been succinctly added to the relevant section on the Kylie main article. Additionally, as the track listing isn't known yet and could change it serves no purpose. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 08:58, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

We have a release date given and a title, which do help per WP:FUTUREALBUMS, but only one confirmed song title (at the time of this writing) isn't very promising. I suppose we could incubate at draft space until more track names are given. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 13:33, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

I say just let the current article snowball. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 13:42, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Looks like a lot of verifiable information, not violating CRYSTAL, even if some of it may change in the future. Develop in place. Binksternet (talk) 14:33, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

I do agree the track listing looks weird and could be removed. But there is concrete information about the title, the release date and the recording... given the artist's profile I think redirecting this could be a waste of time as it is likely to be recreated very quickly unless some protection is put in place, and I'm not sure it's worth the while. This is certainly less WP:CRYSTAL than some articles for future albums. Richard3120 (talk) 14:54, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

The interesting thing is this information is already included on the Kylie Minogue page. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 15:36, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

I know, you have a valid point. But I just think this is one of those cases where the artist is a major worldwide star and you'll be battling against repeated recreations for the next three months unless you get some protection against recreation, and I don't know if personally this is a battle I would spend my time fighting... she may not be so popular in North America but this is clearly going to be a top ten album in numerous other countries around the world and every chance of reaching number one in the UK and Ireland, there's no doubt about its eventual notability. Richard3120 (talk) 14:25, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

I’m generally supportive of an article as long as you’ve got a few RS’s, and an actual name, and enough to write a paragraph or two. This squeaks by. I’d hide the track list until a real one is announced though (unless the songs are all actually called things like “Track 9”). Sergecross73 msg me 15:41, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose to merge. The article should remain, though I agree that the song section should be removed. Subtropical-man (✉ | en-2) 17:43, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose to merge as well. An artwork, release date, lead single, partial track listing (credits, but not titles) is more than enough to have its own article. — Tom^(T2ME) 09:37, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 November 2020

Change ‘the murdered woman’: 3] The music video for their song was inspired by John Everett Millais's painting Ophelia (1851–1852), and showed Minogue as the murdered woman, floating in a pond as a serpent swam over her body. To: ‘The dead woman’. She was NOT murdered (unless you call Hamlet’s treatment of her ‘murder’ as he was the cause of her madness, but I don’t think that would stand up in court!). Ophelia went mad, climbed onto a willow branch which broke, and she drowned ‘singing all the while’. The sexton suggests that she committed suicide but this is not definite. 2A00:23C7:3112:FB01:B4DE:3ABD:89D1:18EE (talk) 19:22, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 19:28, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

years active

According to IMDB she on-screen debuted in 1976, which'd mean that when it should say she's been active since.

IMDB is not entirely reliable per Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_201#IMDB_for_some_things,_but_not_for_others?. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 17:35, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Mononymous?

I’m not convinced that Kylie Minogue is truly a mononymous person. She is credited as Kyle Minogue (her full name) and although she’s often referred to by her first name, she has never formally dropped her last name and it’s as known as her first name. I would also argue that most people these days would associate the name Kylie with Kylie Jenner than Kylie Minogue. I think that “often known simply as Kylie” is more accurate.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.186.201 (talk) 01:40, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Disagree. Fortunately, Wikipedia articles rely on building consensus. This change should have been discussed in the talk page before being made. I'm reverting back to use of mononymously. Shoestringnomad (talk) 02:54, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

@Shoestringnomad: If you type “Kylie” into Google then Kylie Jenner comes up first and then Minogue which I think is based on Jenner becoming known worldwide in the last 10-15 years. Despite that, I still think mostly older people will assume someone first means Minogue if he/she says “Kylie”. Kylie was a common name and is still a fairly common name in Australia, America and elsewhere, but in recent times it was Minogue who popularised it. However, it’s arguable whether or not Kylie Minogue is a truly mononymous person, her last name is as well known as her first name and she never formally dropped it.--SNOODLES4 (talk) 13:52, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Formally dropping a last name is not a requirement for someone to be known mononymously. That would be quite rare. Regarding Minogue's last name being well known, Elvis Presley is another mononymous person, and his last name is also very well known. Finally, if I perform a Google search of 'Kim' from the U.S., Kim Kardashian appears first in results, but that hardly supports the assertion that Kardashian is a mononymous person. Google search results are not a placeholder for consensus. Shoestringnomad (talk) 23:37, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Minogue has been using both 'Kylie Minogue' and 'Kylie' throughout her career, meaning yes, she is a 'mononymous person' as well. And as Shoestringnomad already commented, that has been built based on reliable sources and Wikipedia consensus. — Tom^(T2ME) 14:57, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

I mean, my friends ad coworkers call me by my first name, and in fact I usually introduce myself just by that first name — I would say "I have used that throughout my career". But that doesn't make me "mononymous". I'm not saying it's not true for Kylie Minogue, but if this is actually "reliable sources and Wikipedia consensus", it shouldn't be hard to actually source the claim. And in line with Wikipedia standards, something more than just "that's what she uses on her own websites", but actual reportage. I mean, ideally by a big mainstream source, but, even, like, some listicles from well-known websites. Compare with e.g. https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/31244/full-names-26-one-name-celebrities or https://www.ranker.com/list/full-names-of-mononymous-people-v2/celebrity-lists. As it is, it feels like this is more "some super-fans feel like it's really important that this be recognized, for some reason" than actually real. --Matthew Miller (talk) 16:13, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

While your friends call you by your first name, something tells me headlines written about you wouldn't use only your first name, but I could be wrong. I started reviewing media by watching videos, enjoyed them, and then felt satisfied with the list of video footage alone. But then I threw in articles for good measure. How's 19 for a start?

• BBC interview where she's introduced as Kylie[1]
• Performance on The Voice UK where she's introduced as Kylie[2]
• Performance on The Paul O'Grady Show where she's introduced as Kylie[3]
• Interview by Molly Meldrum, who intros her and then only refers to her as Kylie[4]
• Interview on The One Show where she's introduced as Kylie[5]
• Interview on The Jonathan Ross Show where she's introduced as Kylie[6]
• Performance on The X Factor UK where she's introduced as Kylie (twice)[7]
• Appearance on The BRIT Awards for an award where her title card just reads Kylie (while Alicia Keys' full name is used), and she's referred to as Ms. Kylie[8]
• Video segment (that admittedly isn't the greatest) shows headlines that exclusively use her first name, a common sight in tabloids especially[9]
• Article in The Brag Media's Tone Deaf about her concert, never once using her surname[10]
• Article in The Guardian that uses only her first name[11]
• Article in Cambridge Independent using only her first name[12]

Then there are articles that refer to her being known as just Kylie or monomously as Kylie.

• The BBC wrote, "Since the 1980s, Kylie Minogue has never had to go by any other name but Kylie".[13]
• Billboard wrote that she "has been performing as 'Kylie' since before Jenner was born".[14]
• Paper Mag wrote that she is "unusually unpretentious for a mononymous pop star".[15]
• i-D wrote that she is "known mononymously as Kylie".[16]
• i-D later wrote, "she has earned herself a mononym: KYLIE."[17]
• Some Fashion Journal refers to her as "the first mononomous Kylie".[18]
• A page by Glastonbury Festival about her performance there highlights her first name, even headlining the page Kylie.[19]

Shoestringnomad (talk) 03:34, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Just so I can close these tabs, here's:

• A page by Live Nation Entertainment with reference only to her first name[20]
• An odd article by The New Statesman that references Kylie 5 times and never with her surname[21]
• A stock photo on Alamy that doesn't mention her last name.[22]
• Another intro, this time from The Voice Kids, using only her first name.[23]

Shoestringnomad (talk) 04:47, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Yes. Some of those (like where the title has her full name but the video itself is more informal) are dubious, but others are clear.

Please put one or two of those references (particularly the ones that specifically mention mononyms) as references — I think ideally right in the place in the article where I requested a citation?

If something keeps getting discussed, the answer shouldn't be to complain about that — put the references where people like me will see them and go "huh, today I learned!" Matthew Miller (talk) 06:53, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

I don't recall ever seeing such a fact cited in a lede, so I don't understand why it's needed here. But I wouldn't want to get the sourcing wrong. Since you find some of these dubious, despite asking for dubious sources, please choose your favorite. Then add where you feel it's appropriate. Shoestringnomad (talk) 05:54, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 April 2021

Add nick cave to associated acts - she sang on nick cave’s “murder ballads” lp 2603:7080:A341:C200:1D02:8ADE:B587:511E (talk) 04:41, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: See here. Associated acts are not for one time collaborations.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:51, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Artists who've Influenced Kylie

Kylie has had a very successful career and on multiple occasions across it, she has cited many people who've influenced her over the years from ABBA to Prince. But none more so than Madonna. Why is this fact blatantly ignored? It was at one time on here, but it has oddly been removed. I appreciate there are some on planet Kylie who refuse to admit this, but facts are facts. Without Madonna, Kylie would not exist. She is integral to who Kylie is today. Madonna's page acknowledges Chrissie Hind & Nina Simone as an influence, i think Kylie's page should reflect how her idol Madonna, has influenced her. Youtube, the media is littered with examples and interviews where Kylie herself acknowledges the impact Madonna has had on her, and how she continues to be a fan. From music choices, touring styles, writers, producers, Kylie has used many people from Madonna's inner circle in a bid to elevate her career and give it greater credibility Amacth (talk) 06:35, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

The article already references Madonna's influence and impact on Kylie. Was there a specific change you wished to make? Shoestringnomad (talk) 07:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Also known simply as Kylie

Is there any real need to add this sentence? It’s a very clunky opening sentence and doesn’t add any useful information. “Kylie Minogue” is her WP:COMMONNAME. The extra sentence is absolutely useless.--Caleb M. 21 (talk) 21:10, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

WP:COMMONNAME is a policy about article titles. Shoestringnomad (talk) 03:38, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Past Relationships in Infobox

I've removed the one relationship that was listed in the Partner(s) field of the infobox, as well as all the others I'd previously added. Which relationships were most publicly commented on, and should be added to the infobox? Ex: she had a four-year relationship with actor Olivier Martinez in the early 2000s, and I think people were interested in her early relationship with Jason Donovan, before she left him for Michael Hutchence. Dog Starkiller (talk) 22:23, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 October 2021

Change '70 million records' sold to 'over 80 million records sold' 82.132.217.26 (talk) 12:55, 24 October 2021 (UTC) 82.132.217.26 (talk) 12:55, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:21, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Kylie Minogue singles discography says 80 million with cites, but these figures should always be taken with a pinch of salt.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 13:46, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

The 70-million figure was quite dated. The number of albums and reissues she's sold in nearly a decade surely must count for something. Shoestringnomad (talk) 04:03, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done 70 million was a figure from 8 years ago at this point. There were several reputable sources to go with here to support 80 million, including Reuters most recently at the end of 2020. Entertainment Weekly cited the same figure in 2018. The National Film and Sound Archive of Australia also says over 80 million have been sold, in a piece published in 2020 or 2021. Shoestringnomad (talk) 04:03, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Kylie Minogue Editor Request

Hi. I was reading the Kylie Minogue Wikipedia entry as research for something and feel the personal life section needs to be edited. In the section it is broken down into segments dealing with specific areas of her personal life, specifically Philanthropy and Health.

It begins with the Philanthropy segment, however the very first sentence of it does not deal with anything even remotely relating to Philanthropy, instead it reads as follows "Minogue has never married and has no children".

Even if we're going by the broadest of definitions available you would have to agree that this sentence does not belong in this segment. I feel that either creating an additional segment or removing it entirely would be appropriate. 2A02:C7E:163E:C600:3415:6050:C214:492F (talk) 15:24, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

I agree. I removed the random sentence and moved it to the top of the section, but I also added a template requesting more information. That sentence alone is a sad excuse of an intro for the personal life section. Something about it also just feels wrong. Shoestringnomad (talk) 23:40, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Shoestringnomad, you need to chill out. I'm not sure what "it [...] just feels wrong" is supposed to mean; but at any rate, nothing about that blurb was inaccurate because among other things, it was well-sourced. What is inaccurate is your claim that other editors removed it; in fact, the only other editor who seemed to have a problem with it was an IP whose only edit was at the beginning of this very talk page section. Erpert ^{blah, blah, blah...} 13:02, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Erpert, Rhodes00 is another editor that reverted your edit, not an anonymous IP address. Shoestringnomad (talk) 17:49, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

I didn't see that at first; but frankly, edit summaries like that don't even deserve a response. Anyway, are you going to honestly say that you have never seen another BLP on here that mentions marital status? More than that, your main issue seems to be that that didn't fall under philanthropy; that's debatable, but it certainly falls under her personal life. If you think it doesn't, please explain how. Erpert ^{blah, blah, blah...} 18:45, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Rhodes00's edit summary pretty much gets to the point. Shoestringnomad (talk) 22:12, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

People who search at Wikipedia look for facts and things that DO happened. Being childless and unmarried says absolutely nothing about her. Marriage and motherhood aren't innate goals of a woman, of anyone, really. However, I think it's worth mentioning her past desire to have children and how she learnt to cope with it after her breast cancer diagnose. Rhodes00 (talk) 22:57, 23 December 2021 (UTC)