Talk:Alesha Dixon

This Week

Someone has claimed on the main page that Alesha is a "regular" guest on BBC's This Week. I know of two appearances (Oct 06 and Dec 07), which is nothing like "regular" in my book. Does anyone have any references? 82.26.30.62 (talk) 20:06, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't, but those appearances should be in the list of "Modelling and television appearances". That claims it's "comprehensive" - without the This Week appearances it's no such thing. 81.153.111.37 (talk) 21:28, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Trivia

I've taken the liberty of removing some of the "Smash Hits" style fawning, and trivia such as who she's allegedly friends with. Akpcep (talk) 07:42, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Dancer?

Alesha is currently listed as having been a dancer as an occupation at one time. I would suggest this is removed as there is little information in the article that supports this statement. Dancing is mentioned only twice in the article - that she learnt street dancing and that she was a contestant on SCD. To my mind, neither is enough to say that she was a dancer as an occupation. I have no problems with the info being re-added if more vertification is found though. Govworker (talk) 11:36, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Although it isn't her main occupation now and wasn't ever her main occupation (singing has been) she has been hired as a professional solely to for the purpose of dancing, for example her appearance in the N.E.R.D. music video 'she wants to move' where her only purpose was to dance as she never lent her voice to the song. Also, when being a contestant on 'Strictly Come Dancing' she was paid a substantial amount so I guess you could see that as a job... --Patyo1994 (talk) 22:18, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Strictly Come Dancing

I have split the strictly come dancing sub-section into two; "Series 5: contestant" and "Series 7: judge", looks better and that way the info box isnt in the wrong place and stuff. Also, her template box says "Strictly Come Dancing (series 5)", shouldnt this be changed to just Strictly Come Dancing now that she is a judge? 79.72.214.169 (talk) 19:09, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I'll change it now. --Patyo1994 (talk) 21:56, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Alesha Dixon/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. ::In the section about Products and endorsements, there's a line about instruments being used which is as quotes "Door harp, the Clutch guitar and the Hatchback kick drum". There is no need to have the first letter of each instrument being capitalised. Small case letters are sufficient.
3. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

4. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

5. :: The infobox giving brief details about Alesha Dixon shows all the record labels she's been associated with. However, they do not show the dates during which she was contracted with them. Please include the dates, as readers looking at this may see it as Alesha Dixon is still contracted to all 3 labels. If you need an example on how to do this, then view Celine Dion, and there you will the dates the artist has been with each record label.

   Include brief information about the Alesha Dixon being contracted to the new record label, in the lead paragraph. This seems to be missing.

   The a section in the lead paragraph also reads as though it was Alesha who left Polydor on her own accord, yet further down in the article you've included a quote, which states Polydor dropped Alesha from their label. Please clarify which is correct, and modify accordingly.

6. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

7. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

8. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

9. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

—Pr3st0n (talk) 22:48, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I'm just sorting out the manual of style details now, thanks for the advice --Patyo1994 (talk) 16:04, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Main image

Is there another other free image that can be used? She looks like shes been punched in the stomach in the one thats being used now (Alesha Dixon 3.jpg). 79.72.153.88 (talk) 17:39, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Mother's name

There seems to be a contradiction on the article:

"Alesha was born in Welwyn Garden City, one of seven children born to a British mother, Beverly Allner and Jamaican father, Melvin Dixon."'

"Dixon cut all contact with her older brother, Mark Harris, after he sold his story of their 'terrible' childhood, claiming that they 'often went to bed hungry' and that her mother, Beverley neglected them in favour of sometimes violent boyfriends, he also accused Dixon of turning her back on her family in the pursuit of fame and fortune."

Is it Beverly or Beverley? Not to mention I don't even think Allner is her second name, as it says on her fansite Bev Harris... --Patyo1994 (talk) 20:59, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Modelling and television appearances

Isn't the title "television appearances" a bit vague; it infers that it's just some incomprehensive list of tv shows she's been on. Shouldn't it be something more appropriate like "television work" or "television presenting"? 79.78.40.208 (talk) 20:30, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Certifications

Please continue to leave as platinum, as it says on her official website (she was obviously informed of this and did not jump to some brash conclusion). Furthermore, various news sources state it as platinum as well. See these articles for verification from the news sources stated below

• The Times
• The Times
• The Telegraph
• Virgin Media

Additionally, the BPI website is obselete and out-of-date as it doesn't even recognise established acts like Lady Gaga. 79.78.19.239 (talk) 17:07, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Judge

This section appears to be largely about Arlene Phillips, not Alesha Dixon. It is also out of date. I would suggest it is shortened to:

It was revealed in July 2009 that Alesha would be joining the Strictly Come Dancing judging panel in September 2009,, replacing Arlene Phillips as a judge. The decision to replace Phillips, 66, led to the BBC being accused of ageism by the media, the BBC receiving a large number of complaints and Dixon herself facing criticism by newspaper columnists such as Amanda Platell and Janet Street-Porter.

I'd be grateful for opinions - thanks... David T Tokyo (talk) 10:58, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't say it focuses too much on Arlene, I think it's a fair description of the situation as a whole. I think removing the other paragraph would make the section less comprehensive, as sections about Harriet Harman etc are removed. I believe that with such information missing a reader would fail to grasp the magnitude of the debate. If anything I think it may need an extra paragraph, focusing on what has happened since the new series first broadcast, e.g. intial complaints and the subsequent criticism levels dying down. 79.78.32.168 (talk) 14:03, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

This is the meat of the section I'm proposing to remove.

In a statement Jay Hunt, the BBC1 controller said, "Is it about ageism? Absolutely not, I'm committed to reaching out to the broadest possible audience." Bosses at the BBC have also been accused of sexism, as none of the male judges on the show have been replaced. The debate became so heated that it was even discussed by Harriet Harman, Minister for Women and Equality and Deputy Leader of the Labour Party in the House of Commons, who voiced her opinion that she suspected age discrimination and called on the BBC to reinstate Phillips.

I can't see anything - not a single thing - in there that refers to Alesha. It's all about Arlene Phillips. The fact that Alesha subsequently replaced Arlene and there were complaints is fully covered in the revised comment I submitted above. Obviously this information is necessary on the Arlene Phillips page, but it has no business being here. David T Tokyo (talk) 15:49, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

As I mentioned before, it neither focuses on Dixon or Phillips, but more on the situation as a whole, discussing the huge ageism row which commenced. The paragraph mentions Arlene once, but predominatly focuses upon the controversy of the issue itself, which the revised edition you created, in my opinion, fails to grasp in as much detail. I would not say the paragraph is " necessary on the Arlene Phillips page" as the information concludes the entire Strictly Judging topic from a rather detatched point of view, neither focusing weightily on Alesha nor Arlene, but more the topic in general.

However, perhaps the present paragraph could be shortened to a version which excludes this sentence:

"The debate became so heated that it was even discussed by Harriet Harman, Minister for Women and Equality and Deputy Leader of the Labour Party in the House of Commons, who voiced her opinion that she suspected age discrimination and called on the BBC to reinstate Phillips."

This is probably the least relevant of the information. However as the information regrading Jay Hunt is in reference to the programme itself, not Arlene, and the BBC's defence of their decision, I believe that the Jay Hunt quote sentence should be retained. 79.78.32.168 (talk) 17:31, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm not getting this. The accusations of ageism were raised when the BBC chose not to renew Arlene Phillips' contract. But exactly what does the ageism row have to do with Alesha Dixon? Is she responsible for it? Is she implicated in it? If so - where are references that support this? If not - why are we talking about it here, other than to refer to it briefly as one of those things that happened when she took over from Arlene? David T Tokyo (talk) 21:54, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

She may not be responsible for it but she is entangled in it, therefore, it holds relevance, as, after all, the controversy and criticism was surrounding her, not just the BBC 79.78.32.168 (talk) 23:41, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

That's personal opinion, not fact. If you disagree, provide the necessary references. To the extent that she was the judge that followed Arlene, she's indirectly associated with it - that's all.

The really odd thing here is that of the three main protagonists involved in the "ageism" row - the BBC, Arlene Phillips and Jay Hunt, you will only find this story covered on the Arlene Phillips page. It's not even mentioned on Harriet Harman's page. It IS mentioned on the Strictly Come Dancing page - but no mention of Alesha is included within the ageism row. There is a spurious, uncited statement at the end about Alesha's subsequent performance as a judge - that's it.

As to the "controversy and criticism" - I'm focusing specifically on the ageism row here. I get the feeling you're widening this to an overall view regarding Alesha's performance as a judge. David T Tokyo (talk) 05:39, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Nothing at all is mentioned on her judging performance, it entirely focuses on the events surrounding her, you will not find one comment that implies or infers in that paragraph that her judging is bad. Secondly "That's personal opinion, not fact", no, it is solid fact, as thousands complained. The job of Wikipedia is to represent someone in factual and unbiased manner, thus meaning that there is a place for that information there. Additionally, your comment of "provide the necessary references" is nonsensical, as there are plenty of references backing up the comments made. Perhaps you had better read the citations first? 79.78.32.168 (talk) 16:02, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

OK - thanks for your view. I won't change anything until there are other opinions. In the meantime, I realise that you are new to editing Wikipedia but please don't edit someone else's comments on a talk page in future. David T Tokyo (talk) 22:17, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, what?? I'm failing to grasp what was meant by what you said. Perhaps you could reiterate? 79.78.32.168 (talk) 22:58, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry if I was vague. The general rule is not to edit other people's comments without their approval as you did with this edit.. I appreciate that you're a very recent editor on Wikipedia so I've replied with more information on your talk page. Thanks. David T Tokyo (talk) 06:57, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

I've been using Wikipedia for 4 years! Secondly, that was obviously accidental, why would I want to removed half a sentence? It was simply because I accidentally clicked 'cut' instead of 'copy' when I copied that quote you made to use it in my statement to you. 79.78.78.92 (talk) 13:46, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

This Wikipedia article is not about Arlene Phillips or the British Minister for Women and Equality. It's not about sexism or ageism accusations at the BBC; it's not even about Strictly Come Dancing. It's about Alesha Dixon, what she's done in her life and what people have said about her (about her, not about events that she's been involved in). There is a section on Wikipedia for the ageism row, that's at Strictly Come Dancing (series 7)#Production, or some such. Since that section doesn't exist, it should be created... the exact wording from this section would be appropriate. Then that fuller detail can be linked to from this article, that's why we have links.

Once that is in place, the sentences irrelevant to Dixon herself can and should be removed from this article. "Bosses at the BBC have also been accused of sexism, as none of the male judges on the show have been replaced." is irrelevant to Dixon: it says nothing about her or what people say of her. Almost all the second paragraph is irrelevant to Dixon, the only fact that is not so is the point about cancelling her tour dates. On the other hand, there is probably more than can be said about Dixon's involvement, critical commentary of her as a judge from after the start of the series. Talk about Dixon, not about the BBC, sexism, or some politician talking in the Commons. So yes, the section does need pruning, it needs it badly. The material on the controversy itself belongs in the article on SCD7, not here. Happy‑melon 00:01, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

I propose that this should be cut out:

It was revealed in July 2009 that Alesha would be joining the Strictly Come Dancing judging panel in September 2009, she replaced Arlene Phillips, 66, which led to the BBC being accused of ageism by the media, and Dixon herself faced criticism by newspaper columnists such as Amanda Platell and Janet Street-Porter. In a statement Jay Hunt, the BBC1 controller said, "Is it about ageism? Absolutely not, I'm committed to reaching out to the broadest possible audience." Bosses at the BBC have also been accused of sexism, as none of the male judges on the show have been replaced.

The debate became so heated that it was even discussed by Harriet Harman, Minister for Women and Equality and Deputy Leader of the Labour Party in the House of Commons, who voiced her opinion that she suspected age discrimination and called on the BBC to reinstate Phillips. The BBC received a number of complaints from the public, angry about the changes to the judges line-up, with many feeling that Phillips has been axed for no good reason. Dixon, having a conflicting schedule also had to rearrange three dates on her upcoming tour, The Alesha Show in order to do the show, which is broadcast live on Saturday nights.

Therefore, that would shorten it to:

It was revealed in July 2009 that Alesha would be joining the Strictly Come Dancing judging panel in September 2009, she replaced Arlene Phillips, 66, which led to the BBC being accused of ageism by the media, and Dixon herself faced criticism by newspaper columnists such as Amanda Platell and Janet Street-Porter. Dixon, having a conflicting schedule also had to rearrange three dates on her upcoming tour, The Alesha Show in order to do the show, which is broadcast live on Saturday nights.

I think some criticism should be made, but if so, it should be in reference to the complaints made about her judging skills, as mentioned in the article's lead paragraphs. There is only need for one sentence maximum to be made about the BBC and sexism debate, for a reader to understand the issue of the angry viewers. The information that is currently on the article deviates from the point and loses some relevance. Patyo1994 (talk) 18:06, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

I was brought to this page while following an editor's vandalism path. For that reason, I can give a completely neutral view of this subject because it is new to me. After having read through the article and the comments here, I must agree with David Toykyo, Happy Melon and Payto1994 regarding the section in question. It definitely needs to be shortened to keep the focus on Alesha Dixon, and not the conflict. A minor mention, in one sentence, would be completely adequate. Currently the section overly focuses on the BBC and the sexism issue, which Dixon is only indirectly involved--she was brought into this. The discussion is irrelevant here, in an article about Dixon, NOT the show. I think the shortened paragraph above by Payto1994 is an excellent solution. --Logical Fuzz (talk) 01:24, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

I have now removed the unnecessary information on the Judge section, however, can be agreed the it is now in grave need of expansion? After all, the whole section amounts to all of four lines. Patyo1994 (talk) 19:56, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Payto - what did you have in mind regarding the expansion? I ask because Len Goodman, the Head Judge on SCD for 7 seasons, has just the basic information reported on his page. David T Tokyo (talk) 06:25, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

For the expansion I am referring to the actual complaints made towards her, not the irrelevant ones we deleted. The expansion could include information on the 250 (approx.) complaints made against her judging skills on Strictly's opening night. I don't believe it requires major expanding, just the extra few lines of information that seems to be missing. There's information here [1][2]. Additionally, there could be some information on a reported judging skill increase throughout the series from media sources, see here [3]. Patyo1994 (talk) 22:28, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

No problems with that Payto, but let's make sure it's balanced. For example, the judges were quick to rubbish the response from the fans [4], [5]. David T Tokyo (talk) 06:47, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Eurovision Template?

I've just noticed a Eurovision template has appeared on the article. I propose that this be removed as she is listed once only, in a "former judges" section, and holds little relevance, as the links between her and Eurovision are tenuous at best. Furthermore, I can find no references to her being a judge, and it certainly wasn't any time recently. Secondly, most people included in the "former judge" sections do not have the template on their articles. I believe so, but if anyone had any comments, do you think the template should be removed? 79.78.102.124 (talk) 23:12, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

It does seem pretty irrelevant, especially as the article mentions nothing about it. The only thing I can find the relates to both Alesha and Eurovision is that she performed "Breate Slow" live on Your Country Needs You once. I'll Remove it. 79.78.122.136 (talk) 17:52, 15 March 2010 (UTC)