Talk:Britney Spears

Reminder on wikipedia policy on Biographies of living persons

Criticism and praise

Further information: Wikipedia:Coatrack

Criticism and praise of the subject should be represented if it is relevant to the subject's notability and can be sourced to reliable secondary sources, and so long as the material is written in a manner that does not overwhelm the article or appear to take sides; it needs to be presented responsibly, conservatively, and in a neutral, encyclopedic tone. Be careful not to give a disproportionate amount of space to particular viewpoints, to avoid the effect of representing a minority view as if it were the majority one. The views of a tiny minority have no place in the article. Care must be taken with article structure to ensure the overall presentation is broadly neutral; in particular, subsection headings should reflect important areas to the subject's notability.

Content should be sourced to reliable sources and should be about the subject of the article specifically. Beware of claims that rely on guilt by association. Editors should also be on the lookout for biased or malicious content about living persons. If someone appears to be promoting a biased point of view, insist on reliable third-party published sources and a clear demonstration of relevance to the person's notability.

Presumption in favor of privacy

Wikipedia articles that present material about living people can affect their subjects' lives. Wikipedia editors who deal with these articles have a responsibility to consider the legal and ethical implications of their actions when doing so. An important rule of thumb when writing biographical material about living persons is "do no harm". It is not Wikipedia's purpose to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives. BLPs must be written conservatively, with regard for the subject's privacy.

When writing about a person notable only for one or two events, including every detail can lead to problems, even when the material is well-sourced. In the best case, it can lead to an unencyclopedic article. In the worst case, it can be a serious violation of our policies on neutrality. When in doubt, biographies should be pared back to a version that is completely sourced, neutral, and on-topic.

Basic human dignity

Wikipedia articles should respect the basic human dignity of their subjects. Wikipedia aims to be a reputable encyclopedia, not a tabloid. Our articles must not serve primarily to mock or disparage their subjects, whether directly or indirectly. This is of particularly profound importance when dealing with individuals whose notability stems largely from their being victims of another's actions. Wikipedia editors must not act, intentionally or otherwise, in a way that amounts to participating in or prolonging the victimization. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 23:44, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Reminder that this is not a forum per WP:FORUM

1. Discussion forums. Please try to stay on the task of creating an encyclopedia. You can chat with folks about Wikipedia-related topics on their user talk pages, and should resolve problems with articles on the relevant talk pages, but please do not take discussion into articles. Also, bear in mind that talk pages exist for the purpose of discussing how to improve articles; they are not mere general discussion pages about the subject of the article, nor are they a helpdesk for obtaining instructions or technical assistance. If you wish to ask a specific question on a topic, Wikipedia has a Reference Desk, and questions should be asked there rather than on talk pages. Wikipedians who wish to hold casual discussions with fellow Wikipedians can use the IRC channels, such as #wikipedia. Note that this is an IRC channel, not a message board. There are also a number of early-stage projects that attempt to use a wiki for discussion and debate.
2. Journalism. Wikipedia should not offer first-hand news reports on breaking stories. Wikipedia is not a primary source. However, our sister project Wikinews does exactly that, and is intended to be a primary source. Wikipedia does have many encyclopedia articles on topics of historical significance that are currently in the news, and can be updated with recent verified information. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 23:47, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

--RE: Discussion forum If this is 'not a discussion forum' why post such irrelevant information such as Ms Spears' brothers marriage. 03/28/09 19.00 gmt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.228.90.137 (talk) 18:58, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Picture

Someone please edit the name above the picture - whoever put in the offensive phrase should be banned. thanks <jcooper> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.13.0.118 (talk) 23:30, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

PICTURE: Horrible picture of Britney right now! She is snarling! Wikipedia can do better than that. I think the other picture from the Circus tour is a better candidate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Urbanboston (talk • contribs) 04:16, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, it's a recent one and it's showing her face. That's better than anything we had before, IIRC (disregarding the copyright violations of course). Which one from commons:Category:Britney Spears would you prefer? --Amalthea 09:50, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Yall need to use this one:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Circus_Live_Boston.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.25.117.15 (talk) 15:29, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Introduction

Why does the intro go from 1999 and skip ten years later to 2009 pretending like nothing ever happened in between? Come on?! Will anyone ever forget bald Britney beating up on a car with an umbrella. It really should be mentioned in the intro. It's rather misleading. 173.3.67.138 (talk) 20:00, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

"Instruments: vocals, piano?!?!!?

She was reported to have played the piano on her song Everytime, but adding the piano as an instrument makes it look like she plays it often enough on her music to mark it as something she officially plays. She's only played it once on a song as I mentioned above, should that be qualification enough to list it in the instrument section of the infobox? Unlike Tori Amos and Alicia Keys, Spears does not make the piano an integral part of her music, so putting it as an instrument she plays is misleading to some readers, me being one of them. I'm not touting that what's good for an article is good for another, but see Talk:Dave Grohl/Archive 1#Piano as an instrument as a similar example. --Whip it! ^{Now whip it good!} 04:33, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Some of your information is incorrect. She actually played the piano in her 2005 song "Someday(I Will Understand)" And just because she doesn't play the piano in every song doesn't mean she isn't a notable pianist. I also believe she plays the piano in her song "Unusual You" that is on her Circus album. Not sure if that is true tho. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.197.245.129 (talk) 01:48, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Songwriter and Actress...

I was thinking that we need to add songwriter and actress to the intro of Britney's wikipage...

For all the album's she has released so far she has written about 15-20 ( Circus: 4, Blackout: 2, In The Zone: 9, Britney: 6)tracks on her albums...and she wrote the track 'Look Whos Talking' for BoA's english debut album..

And actress because she acted in the MMC..she starred as the lead in Crossroads and has done multiple tv stints.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.25.117.15 (talk) 15:28, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

According the singer-songwriter article, not all singers who write some of their songs are automatically considered singer-songwriters, especially the fact that she mainly co-writes her songs, while singer-songwriters practically write all or most of their material, and second, the fact she's acted in one movie, appeared on a children's show as a kid and made a couple of appearances as a character on a show (the rest of the TV appearances throughout her career were just guest appearances) is not significant enough to add actress in the lead section of the article, as she is not as well known for her acting as she is for her music, unlike Barbra Streisand. Whip it! ^{Now whip it good!} 06:56, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

And if you don't add either of those, it's like saying she hasn't written or co-written any of her songs, and saying that she never appeared in any movies or t.v shows. She was on The New Mickey Mouse Club for 3 years, and had the leading role in Cross roads. And has had numerous guest appearances on t.v shows. So how would that not make her an actress? And she is obviously a song writer. Most songs are co-written anyway. And I don't even know why you are mentioninf Barbra Streisand, I've never even heard of her or any of her movies. Plus, this is about Britney Spears, not Barbra Streisand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.197.111.132 (talk) 08:31, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Decline in popularity

I think it should be mentioned. 79.132.31.212 (talk) 12:29, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Find some reliable sources supporting that claim. Whip it! ^{Now whip it good!} 02:21, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

She is not declining in popularity whatsoever. Songs from both Circus and Blackout recieved huge reception. Tarheelz123 (talk) 19:18, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Her album sales are down because everyone's album sales are down. The music industry is a mess. — R² 18:07, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

The only problem with the primary post in this section is that it's simply not true. Her popularity is on an upswing.

97.124.171.58 (talk) 02:39, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I meant to sign the post directly above (forgot to log in). Here: Sean7phil (talk) 02:42, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Family

I think it should be noted that Britney has Maltese blood running through her veins . --93.122.135.1 (talk) 19:18, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Wrong song on Circus tour image it should be If you seak amy.

| Img_capt = Spears performing "If You Seak Amy" during her tour: "The Circus Starring: Britney Spears" in 2009

it's actually If U Seek Amy. And I don't see any pictures in there of her performing If U Seek Amy. The pic at the top is Circus, and the ones in her police woman outfit are Womanizer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.197.111.132 (talk) 08:33, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Girls Are Always Right

Should this be included. Its all over the net even on reliable sources like mtv, play.com, and vhi but some sites say this is an album slated for June release while others say its an unauthorised DVD charting her career with very rare footage on it. Either way should it be included? OgiBear (talk) 20:22, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Vocal ranges

Please do not post her vocal range (s) without a reliable source. And please do not engage in an edit war over this. Tribal44 (talk) 17:03, 5 May 2009 (UTC)Tribal44

I doubt she is an alto, CHANGE IT —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.172.170 (talk) 13:31, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Ahe`s definitely NOT an alto - she`s a soubrette: source: http://en.allexperts.com/e/s/so/soubrette.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.218.238.2 (talk) 15:46, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Britney Spears is certainly not an alto. - I say this as a musician. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.144.113.87 (talk) 14:23, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

New picture

I like the new picture! Tarheelz123 (talk) 02:18, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Totally agree! Do not change it back to the snarling one! Ryaneon (talk) 16:00, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Why does her picture seem to be changing every day now? Tarheelz123 (talk) 20:27, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Can talk pages be protected

look at my comment a few topics above, IM on my iPod touch so it's a lil difficult for me to find out who put AIDS in there and give them a warning. Will someone else see to it? This talk page appears to have suffered a lot of vandalism recently so I suggest someone get it protected if it can be. OgiBear (talk) 17:47, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

• Vandalism removed. --DAJF (talk) 23:09, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Plans to write an autobiography: worth mentioning?

There have been reports that Britney plans to write an autobiography after the Circus tour. Is this worth mentioning? Akcvtt (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:26, 12 May 2009 (UTC).

There is no inclusion of charity work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Batzmcgee (talk • contribs) 19:23, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Question...

On the little sidebar thingy...it says he was born in McComb, Mississippi. However, in the first sentence in the first paragraph it states she was born in Kentwood, Louisiana...which is correct? Shouldn't this be changed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.222.111.87 (talk) 20:06, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Britney was born in McComb, Mississippi. Kentwood is located 30 minutes away and everyone there goes to Southwest Regional hospital (where Jaime lynn had her baby) there all the time. Kentwood DOES NOT HAVE A HOSPITAL and Britney has family in McComb. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.202.207.135 (talk) 02:13, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Link: Discogs.

Adding Discogs as it is a major website for music collectors and fans alike. Strangely missing from her links section. It is not a junk fan site and gives unique as well as clear breakdown of her full discography with accurate, exact information according to what each release has printed on it, so is therefore a resource of benefit to users of wikipedia. A reverse link has also been administered from Discogs to wiki. Jimthing (talk) 03:32, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

To add associated acts Christina Aguilera,Justin Timberlake,Nsync,Madonna also you should add to her occupations she has a fregrance,dolls,a video game,and she has produced music before. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Special:Contributions/loczekness (User talk:loczekness) 23:17, 28 May 2009 (UTC) Also Britney has been active since 1991 as accordance to star search

Native American Heritage

I have read elsewhere that Britney is part Native American. Is that true?

70.219.142.132 (talk) 15:50, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

its very unlikey could you provide a source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MonsterRoco (talk • contribs) 20:28, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

She refers to it herself. Too busy right now but I'll try to find it later.

Sean7phil (talk) 02:41, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

#1 best selling female (official figures)

Britney Spears is #1 best selling female artist in this decade(2000s)! And 5th artist over all! http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart_watch/34074/chart-watch-extra-the-top-20-album-sellers-of-the-2000s/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.119.163.21 (talk) 21:04, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it's fair to mention these figures. They only refer to the US. But funnily enough the artists coming before her didn't sell as much as she did internationally. In fact, when you mention that she sold 83 million records, you seem to forget that nobody, not even Eminem, sold that much WORLDWIDE. Eminem sold some 75 globally. I know that worldwide figures are controversial because it's hard, if not impossible, to find reliable sources stating them, but if Michael Jackson's fans and record label can candidly declare out of nowhere that he sold 750 million records worldwide in 40 years without being able to mention a reliable source and we all have to take those figures for granted, I can't see why we can't safely state that she's the best-selling artist of the decade in the world.Dreamboy81 (talk) 15:46, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

i agree, also at the teen choice awards miley cyrus did refere to her as the best selling female of the decade —Preceding unsigned comment added by MonsterRoco (talk • contribs) 20:30, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

#13 Most Influential Celeb According To Forbes

PLease add that Forbes released a new list and that Britney made 35 million last year...( making her the 13th Most Powerful Celebrity)

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/53/celebrity-09_Britney-Spears_PREW.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.25.117.15 (talk) 06:20, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Custodial Time

http://www.tmz.com/2009/06/11/britney-spears-kevin-federline-kids/ She has 50/50 again —Preceding unsigned comment added by CircusClown09 (talk • contribs) 13:37, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

"Musical style and performance" section update

I do believe that the section mentioned in the title should be updated to include recent information. The most recent reference is 7 years old for god's sake! Sylfi (talk) 05:28, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I also wonder whether the "Choreography" section should be merged with "Musical Style". Any thoughts? --Luke Warmwater101 (talk) 05:01, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I have a few links here that could be useful:

Rolling Stone article:

http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2009/03/04/britney-spears-sexy-circus-pop-star-returns-to-the-stage-in-new-orleans/

Controversy upon lip-syncing:

http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2008/12/01/2008-12-01_britney_spears_performance_on_simon_cowe.html

Washington Post Article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/24/AR2009032403927.html

References to odd exclamations:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/24/AR2009032403927.html

Blender Article on Onyx Hotel (negative):

http://www.blender.com/guide/live/52155/onyx-hotel-tour-live-concert.html

Entertainment Weekly Article on Onyx Hotel (positive):

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,602388,00.html

I feel like we could just take reviews from her tour pages and just use that in the "live performances" section. I think that would be the easiest thing to do. We don't need to take any current information out so much as just update the section with more recent information. I think if we just added that her performances have become bigger in terms of spectacle and that her performances have become more sexual that will be accurate enough. I also think that we use album reviews of her most recent albums to talk about her musical direction and how she has taken a more dance like approach to her music.

Skinwalker03 (talk) 22:16, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

her achievments

you should also include her forbes ranking in 2002 that she was top rank. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.144.123.216 (talk) 07:25, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

The "main" image

The current photo is really not clear, it doesn't show her face and it's not good for such article. I suggest this photo for the time being until finding really good photo. (i.e. asking Flickr people for permission).--OsamaK 13:54, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Born and raised in Louisana?

The infobox says Britney Spears was born in Mississippi but raised in Louisiana, while the "Early life" section of this article says she was born and raised in Louisiana. Which one is it? ★Dasani★ 23:32, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

For the record (I changed it a few days ago), the source (her marriage license) says born in Mississippi.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 04:47, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

2008 onward achievement

Someone should change this cuz is irrelevant and is a little wrong. In the 2008 onward section at the end says this:

• On July 11, 2009 Britney Spears hit a milestone in both her career and The Circus Starring: Britney Spears by attracting almost 45,000 fans at a concert at Parken in Copenhagen, Denmark, thus being one of her largest concerts ever.

I cant understand why says "hit a milestone in her carrer" if 45000 fans are less than 50000 fans which is the amount of fans that she attracted in her Mexico concert in 2002. Here is the source: <http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/esearch/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1566837>. Someone should correct this or remove it. Please. 189.181.232.92 (talk) 05:56, 15 July 2009 (UTC)Fortunato luigi

Innosense notability

Even though she was briefly part of Innosense, I don't feel that including "sony" as a 1997 only signing is necessary in the infobox. This band never released anything with sony, and their debut album was with RCA three years later. Moreover, it is also an issue because we don't even know which sony label they were associated with...Columbia? Epic?...and its probably virtually impossible to find out....obviously this is so not notable for Britney Spears' infobox. Imperatore (talk) 17:03, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

(UPDATE TO ARTICLE) Some Controversy on the Circus Tour

Something new to add:

Britney has been using a section of a song called FantasMic by Nightwish, but Nightwish have apparently recieved no royalties from these shows nor credit for their song. Nightwish's lable, Nuclear Blast, is apparently too scared to take on Britney's lawyers.

Read the full story here http://metalfromfinland.com/news/2009-07-20_22:26/nightwish_potential_copyrights_violation_by_britney_spears

It's from a supposedly reliable source and there is a video to back it up.

Max5892 (talk) 02:36, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

If you click that link now, it says that the information as actually FALSE. & that Nightwish's song was actually a cover of a Britney song. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.197.245.129 (talk) 01:54, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Need to add another compilation album..

its been confirmed that she is releasing a compilation album in september/october 2009 called "The Singles Collection" with all of her singles on it including 6 new songs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.0.95.132 (talk) 18:39, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

New info has surfaced that she is supposedly working on her next studio album so now it is unclear weather or not she's releasing a new GH album or if she will just release her new album which is reportedly due out spring of next year.

timberlake's full name

in the article, the second reference of justin timberlake is a little away from the first reference. therefore, in the second reference of timberlake, i've expanded his name to justin timberlake. though i'm still in two minds about it. guess i'm being bold. but advise please.. Wireless Fidelity Class One 12:24, 2 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wifione (talk • contribs)

Pics in this article

It's great that we got more pics for this article but I feel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Womanizer2.jpg is not needed considering a very similar picture is just below it. Seems a bit superfluous.Mc8755 (talk) 21:39, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree. I think the other pictures of her performing different songs that were previously on her page should be put up instead, rather than having both pictures showing her during "Womanizer". Le David (talk) 01:13, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

The Singles Collection

It's deff ok to add it now because amazon.com has confirmed it, they've also confirmed the US release date for October 27th

http://www.amazon.com/Singles-Collection-Britney-Spears/dp/B002IC1BNS/ref

also Russ Castella tweeted that the new track he's working on for her comes out this year so it's obviously for the new collection —Preceding unsigned comment added by M430 (talk • contribs) 14:48, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

• Amazon is not a definitive source, they had often advertised products which never make it to market. Either her record label or her own site are the only reliable source for this type of information. This has been discussed many times. Thanks. MrMarmite (talk) 13:06, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Not to mention Amazon has changed the name at least 4 times, meaning it is really unreliable when it comes to this album. ---Shadow (talk) 01:45, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Amazon isn't a definitive source. But Billboard.com has posted it in their site. Mtv.com has too. I think a page should be started of this album. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stphnbogert (talk • contribs) 18:15, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Age

Someone who has the power to edit this article, check out the birthday in the first paragraph and in the box at the right Ftc08 (talk) 01:05, 10 August 2009 (UTC)... Now it's fixed.

Womanizer Promotion Picture as main pic.

Leave this one up; it shows a good image of Britney, and the Circus photo: she doesn't usually dress up in crazy costumes. --Flashflash; 13:01, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

The picture has no copyright status and thus will be removed. I know you think it's a nice picture, but unless it's in the public domain or another similar license it can't be on wiki. MrMarmite (talk) 08:36, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

U.S Sales As of 2009 (UPDATE)

Britney's album sales in the U.S clearly needs to be updated, I added and edited it according to Nielsen SoundScan as of July 2009!

"U.S Sales As of July 2009 according to Neilsen SoundScan"

• Baby One More Time (1999)- 10,534,000 copies (certified 14x platinum)
• Oops!...I Did It Again (2000)- 9,184,000 copies(certified 10x platinum)
• Britney (2001)- 4,336,000 copies (certified 4x platinum)
• In The Zone (2003)- 2,970,000 copies (certified 2x platinum)
• Greatest Hits: My Prerogative (2004)- 1,347,000 copies (certified platinum)
• B in the Mix: The Remixes (2005)- 100,000 copies (no certifications since it didn't achieved the gold status, which means 500,000 copies sold)
• Blackout (2007)- 967,000 copies (no certifications yet, although RIAA can certify an album platinum,which can range from 900,000 to 1,000,000 copies of sales level)
• Circus (2008)- 1,575,000 copies (certified platinum)

this is an update of Spears album sales only in the "United States" as of 2009! I hope this helps —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adelbutt123 (talk • contribs) 08:35, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Britney on David letterman

Britney appeard on the David letterman on a top ten special "Britney's top-10 things that would be diffrent if she was president" is this notable enought th add ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MonsterRoco (talk • contribs) 16:02, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

No. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 18:54, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

2007 MTV movie awards

The wording of this part is very confusing. It starts off by saying that her performance exceeded expectations and goes on to imply that she did well, but then all of a sudden says that she did a terrible job. Ophois (talk) 22:13, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

New Page on New album

I know we don't have a lot of information. But we have enough information to start an article on it. We know for a fact she's coming out with a singles collection. And its going to be released in the US on October 27th, 2009. Billboard, MTV and Amazon have it on their site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.114.135.117 (talk) 00:47, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Very wrong. The Article has already been deleted twice because of lack of information and reliable sources. Amazon has changed the title so much that it is no longer a reliable source, and until more info comes out, there is no need for an article. ---Shadow (talk) 18:00, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Then name the title "TBA". We know for a fact that this album is coming out. Why not make a page for it? Billboard, Amazon, and MTV have the album on their site. Regardless how many times the titled has been changed its still coming out October 27th, 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.56.97.26 (talk) 19:33, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

If this album was actually coming out next month, it would already be announced. Not to mention there is not enough information to have its own page. ---Shadow (talk) 04:20, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Just like B in the Mix? That album wasn't announced or even promoted. She said it was strictly for her fans. We know for a FACT that the album is coming out and yet y'all are just being rude about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stphnbogert (talk • contribs) 18:43, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

No one is being rude about it. There is not enough information to create the article. That was the result of the deleteion discussion not even a month ago. Not to mention there are no conflicting reports about the release date. I just found two articles last night saying it was pushed back to November. ---Shadow (talk) 18:07, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

So why not put in a SHORT article about it? We know the album is being released. Just make an short article about it. And when November comes and we dont hear anything about it than delete the article. I don't understand why everyone is making this so diffcult. We know an album is coming out. But because we dont have a tracklisting or verified title you don't want to post it. We know an album is coming out. So start the article now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.56.97.26 (talk) 18:10, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not being difficult, all of you are. Your just being ignorant now. We have had at least 6 short articles already and they were deleted through deleteion discussions. I've said that twice now. We deceided via discussion that there is no need for the article at this point in time. Have you even checked Wikipedia's policy on album pages, because it clearly states what is needed to create a page. ---Shadow (talk) 06:44, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry? Just 'cause your a senior editor doesn't mean you can be so insulting! The talk page is so EVERYONE can post their opinions about a subject. We have a serious issue here and everyone should be allowed so say their opinion without you bagging them out. -- The Rogue Leader 07:16, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay here's a point that I think will help. Alright, look at Kylie Minogue discography#Compilation Albums and Kylie Minogue discography#Remix Albums, she's released loads of minor unannounced and unpromoted compilations but there all official and real. Perhaps this could be one of those sort of albums? --The Rogue Leader 07:20, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I said you guys are being ignorant, that is not insulting you. Your still missing the point here. We have already had this discussion and the result of that discussion was to delete the album page until more information surfaces. It's not that big of a deal, so stop making it one. The article will be created when we have more information. ---Shadow (talk) 17:17, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I wasn't disagreeing with you. I just think you weren't respecting people's opinions. But I do agree with you about the page. By the way, I seroiusly think you should look at my evidence.--124.149.58.113 (talk) 13:33, 18 September 2009 (UTC)