Talk:Christina Aguilera/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

New LP

Christina said on the Today Show this morning about how what has happened to her recently will contribute towards what her next LP will contain. The only source I have is the video from the Today Show, which I doubt will be allowed? calvin999 (talk) 18:23, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Artisticguy99, 9 July 2011

Christina aguilera has sold 96 million records worldwide http://www.mediatraffic.de/singles-2003.htm check #8, #25, #30

http://www.unitedworldchart.de/countdown2001.htm check #2 and #17

http://www.unitedworldchart.de/countdown2000.htm check #9 and #30

http://www.mediatraffic.de/countdown1999.htm check # 4

http://www.mediatraffic.de/tracks-2006.htm check #12

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurt_(Christina_Aguilera_song)

Candyman has sold over 3 million copies

Artisticguy99 (talk) 05:42, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

• Declined Mediatraffic.de, unitedworldchart.de do not seem to qualify as RS to me. Correct me if I am wrong. Wifione _....... ^{Leave a message} 23:32, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Noting Bionic's poor sales in the opening article

I have an issue with the sentence that says, "was released to poor sales and acclaim" was removed from the article. We need to realize that we should point out successes and dissapointments. So it's ok to rave about her #1's and sales for her previous albums but not for Bionic? I think we should include it back in the article, it makes it look biased otherwise. DeadSend4 (talk) 03:18, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree. calvin999 (talk) 18:23, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Disagree. Most people would be pleased to have an album like Bionic debut at Number 3 on the Billboard 200. Its not poor sales. Poor sales is when the album doesn't chart. I don't see why this needs to be mentioned? You just don't call it a success. I think "poor sales" is the wrong phase, maybe "underwhelming low sales compared to previous albums"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.89.138.180 (talk) 04:31, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree that it should be acknowledged that it had lower sales than her previous albums, but as the previous user stated, it debuted at #3 (with over 100,000) and that is not poor sales. It should be something like 'Bionic debuted to moderate success, however was comparibly low to her other studio albums and did not remain consistant' or something, but obviously better worded. ~ Anonymous 20:43, 12 August 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.216.53.151 (talk)

If it is meaningful that the sales were lower than a given number or "poor", there will be reliable sources saying exactly that. To add it otherwise is POV. Without reliable sources interpreting the number, all we should give is the number. Otherwise, we can compare it to anything we choose: Was it the bestselling album released that day? Was it the lowest selling album by a platinum artist released that month? Maybe it was the slowest selling new album to later reach the top 20? We could cook up thousands of "interpretations". Why would we? - SummerPhD (talk) 02:40, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

The album did debut at #3, many would be happy with that. If I remember correctly it did slide in the weeks following its release. To determine if the sales were "poor" we would need to know the exact numbers. How many copies has it sold in the US & how many were sold worldwide? --MusicGeek101 (talk) 15:35, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

This source says 295,000 sold in the US: http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart_watch/74423/week-ending-oct-9-2011-songs-someone-like-adele/

To say "poor Sales" is subjective. I think that saying "Low sales" might be the best course of action. --MusicGeek101 (talk) 19:12, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

4 studio albums

I dont care what is technically and isn't technically a studio album. Christina, her label, all her fans and the general public have known her to have 4 studio albums! Stripped was her 2nd, Back to Basics her 3rd, and Bionic her 4th... And then last year someone decided to change this to be all correct or something. Someone said "there are studio albums, and studio albums", well then why isn't Just Be Free considered a studio album!? Don't go changing all the facts its bloody irritating.

Not to mention it goes against all sources, not one website has referred to Stripped as her 4th studio album but indeed her second. Doesn't wikipedia need sources? Not to mention the sources call it her SECOND studio album.219.89.138.180 (talk) 04:28, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I totally agree, I think Christina Aguilera's Studio albums should be fixed like Garth Brooks discography. He released two Christmas albums and they weren't accounted for as regular Studio albums. Just look at his discography page and see what I mean. It's nicely put and organized. (talk) 21:40, 26, September 2011 (UTC)

Vocal Ability

In reality, Xtina goes 5 octaves range of G#2-F7 to studio and C3-G7 live.

That thus depends on songs heard, taken into account because she can lower more low that what what you says and in live At Last she goes until C3. And at the beginning of her career, on her first albums in particular, she makes low notes indeed below G3, she came down until C3!!!

• C3: album Christina Aguilera (1999)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUzNCZAcK_4

• Eb3: album Mi Reflejo (2000)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZ5kIT6dxoc

• C3: album My Kind Of Christmas (2000)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmlgYdVedV0

• C*3: album Stripped (2002)

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

• Eb3: album Back to Basics (2006)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qAZpEBNul8

• G#2: Bionic album (2010)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LdYwWWadso G#2 Elastic Love, A2 Morning Dessert, Bb2 I Am...

• Eb3: Burlesque album (2010)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6b1KO9LaTx0

• C3: Unreleased, Featured Tracks, B-Sides...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8ByMRaJZ3g

And Xtina can even sing everything to see a whole song in low register: Falling In Love Again (D3), live I Love You Porgy, Walk Away (C3-E3), Oh Mother (Eb3-F3), Bionic (song) and Prima Donna (F3).

I am going to stop and not to bring quite his low notes lives I have not that ca has to make. Know that Xtina uses its voice and of his numerous octaves, always intelligently and often as of an instrument.

The scientist it is to deceive in the notation or it is to stop simply tuned to the songs the most known (Hurt G3, Ain't No Other Man G#3) and was not to look farther.

For betls she goes until G*5 live Lady Marmalade (Grammy Awards on 2002) and to studio song Christmas Time !!!

Exclamation notes: F7 Car Wash (2:28), G7 Dirrty (live)

Other key point of its voice, the contrast enters are soul and strong stamp of its chest voice; Tell Me, Ain't No Other Man, Slow Down Baby, Something's Got a Hold On Me... while it is a white/South American singer and also its flat voice sung which is beautiful, what gives songs really stunning vocally as in Save Me From Myself, Castle Walls, Dynamite, Vanity, Elastic Love, Morning Dessert, Monday Morning, Im A Good Girl, All I Need, Genie in a Bottle as well as in the first verse of Dirrty and Not Myself Tonight and sung there falsetto song; Lovin Me 4 Me, Miracle, Get Mine Get Yours as well as over the first two minutes of Glam and You Lost Me and over the third verse of Fighter and Soar... She rap on third Come On Over Baby's verse, in the The Beautiful People's first verse and in all the song Bobblehead.--Angel310 (talk) 08:16, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a reliable source for this? As it stands, this is original research that we cannot use. - SummerPhD (talk) 21:34, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Source: Youtube

On the other hand I know not too much which has source G3 in the main page but it is false, it would be preferable to remove him, because it is very controversial. According to the source, the scientist says that she is feels at ease from G3 to B4. He does not say that G3 is notes the lowest, as it is marked you marked him! Similar for C*7, it is not its highest note.--Angel310 (talk) 20:07, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

I gather you have been listening to her songs and noting the highest and lowest notes you believe she is singing. This is original research and is not allowed in Wikipedia's articles. We need a reliable source (such as a major magazine or newspaper) that says, "Aguilera's range is whatever." Unless you can provide that, there is nothing to discuss here. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 23:32, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Soprano Information

The first sentence that was present before deletion stating Aguilera was 'said' to have a Soprano vocal range has been removed. This is due to the citations being totally and utterly unreliable. One such reference came from a blogging site and another from what appeared to be a ready made site of personal opinion. These sources are not acceptable and online you will find varying opinions on what Aguileras range may or may not be. Until a trusted and reliable source can be found the information cannot be justified and will therefor be removed if it so happens to re-appear. However please also note that I will also try to find verifiable information in regards to this issue and give confirmation if possible in regards to her voice type. BrotherDarksoul (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:26, 4 October 2011 (UTC).

Please note

I have now re-added this information with new citations that are far more reliable than the blogging refs from before. Thanks. BrotherDarksoul (talk) 01:31, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

pics

im just wondering if we could add a picture form 2002-2003, the stripped area into this page!?, beacuse we only have one foto from thar area. --Mathiassandell (talk) 18:14, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Needs an actual BIOGRAPHY/Personal Life section, not mixed in with her albums

It's really hard for the average reader who wants to see some quick information about her to cull it from this article the way it's currently construed. Most BLP have Personal Life sections, apart from their professional work chronologies. JesseRafe (talk) 16:39, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Christina-aguilera.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Christina-aguilera.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:14, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 2 December 2011

{{edit semi-protected}}

On the 'Christina Aguilera' page it says the 'Burlesque' movie has grossed over $90 dollars worldwide but on the 'Burlesque' film page it says the film has made $112,086,072 ChristinaFan12 (talk) 19:00, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

This page says $90M (not $90!) with what looks like a good ref of [1]. I cannot comment on the other article. Nor can I change anything here, without a good reference.  Chzz  ►  07:27, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

New Single - Love Your Body

As of right now, the release of her supposed new single is unconfirmed and should not be listed until it has been confirmed. As of right now, this rumor is based on the threat of a leak on YouTube. Jpagan09 (talk) 19:13, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

2012-present era

It seems that Status finds the edit to end the latest era at 2011. There should be no reason to continue into 2012 with that header since it would make the entire section longer than it already is. 2012 should be the beginning of this new era, a new album, possible tour along with whatever else goes on this year will need its own new section. I don't see why this is an issue to begin with. DeadSend4 (talk) 19:50, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 18 January 2012

24.206.138.204 (talk) 01:33, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, your edit request did not include any text. If you have a request, please re-enter it. Consider clicking 'Show preview' (next to 'Save page', below), to ensure that your request looks the way you want it to. Please include a link to a reference if the information cannot be confirmed merely by looking at the page, such as a typo or swapping word order. Thanks. Dru of Id (talk) 02:56, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Hollywood Walk of Fame Star mention in third paragraph

I was wondering if it is necessary to mention in the third paragraph that she has a star on the walk of fame. Thousands of people have stars on the walk of fame and those other people don't have it mentioned in the opening paragraphs of their wikipedia page. --MusicGeek101 (talk) 03:41, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

three commercially successful singles from Back to Basics?

It take issue with the sentence in the second paragraph that states:

".....The album had three commercially successful singles: "Ain't No Other Man", "Hurt" and "Candyman".

It says there that a citation is needed and no citation has been put in since January when the "citation needed" statement was inserted. If no proof is put in there then that statement should be removed. "Ain't No Other man" did go to number six on the Billboard 200 which is considered "Successful". It went to #5 in Germany and #2 in the UK. It was number 3 in Europe. I'm Okay with that statement.

However "Candyman" surely was not "commercially successful". It went to #25 in the US, 17 in the UK, 12 in Germany, 15 in Europe. The US, Japan, Germany and the UK are the top four music markets in order. Basing success on these markets would be logical.

As for "Hurt", it seems a little more debatable. In the US it went to #19, #2 in Germany, #11 in UK and #1 in Europe.

Thoughts? --MusicGeek101 (talk) 19:26, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry but its not really about the charts.. its about how well it sold! Aint No Other Man is defintly one, Hurt reached top 5 in 11 countries and certified Gold in: Australia, Austria, Canada, Germany, Switzerland and THE USA. While Candyman has been certified Platinum in Australia and Gold in: Canada, New Zeeland and THE USA. Just because it hasnt reached as good in the charts doesnt mean its not a commercial succesful, Hurt reached 19 in the usa, while candyman 25 while both certified GOLD, What a girl wants and come on over reched both 1 and also certified GOLD. One singel maybe hit the top 5 and the other one the top 20 but both selling 500,000. And a single being certified in so many countries is a commercial succesful single. Hurt was defintly a commercial succesful single.

As for Stripped, Dirrty is also a commercial succesful single, just because it failed in the US doesnt mean its not succesful, it has been certified in 8 countries, reached top 5 in 15 countries inc two 1 ones.

--91.154.101.121 (talk) 08:49, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Now i have changed it to: The album produced three chart topping singels, aint not other man, hurt and candyman. all these singles were chart toppers, but in different regions. aint no other man was worldwide hit, while hurt was topping the chart in europe, candyman was topping in australia and zew zeeland.

--Mathiassandell (talk) 12:28, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps information on success of the singles should be in the section on Back to Basics and it should also be properly sources. The largest music markets in order are the US, Japan, Germany, UK and france. As I see it chart topping is going to number one or at least within the top ten. If the songs are in the top ten in four out of those five countries then I can see how one could consider it "chart topping". --MusicGeek101 (talk) 16:30, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

New picture for Christina Aguilera

    Is it me or has the same picture been on the  Christina aguilera page for a long time, I think that it is time to update this photo.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.94.33.47 (talk) 21:27, 22 March 2012 (UTC) 

Casa de mi Padre

Christina (or rather her lips) make a cameo in the introduction of the movie Casa de mi Padre. I'm not able to edit the filmography, could someone add it in there as a cameo? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.216.16.123 (talk) 00:07, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 18 April 2012

Marshall Middle and Elementary schools are and were at the time of her attendance part of the North Allegheny School District, not Rochester Area. I am a North Allegheny, Marshall Middle, and Marshall Elementary alum, I graduated from the district in 2010 and also had some of the same teachers as her.

75.187.55.124 (talk) 01:47, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

With regret, Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Personal experience does not count as a reliable source per se. --Tyrannus Mundi (talk) 20:15, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 20 April 2012

Please change the first line within the paragraph 1980–98: Early life and career beginnings

Please change...."Aguilera was born in Staten Island, New York'

Please change to "Aguilera was born on Staten Island, New York".

I'm a lifelong native of Staten Island, and all Staten Islanders know that no one is born, resides, works, etc. IN Staten Island...but ON Staten Island.

It is the only borough of NYC that people live "ON' not "IN". For example: In NYC a person lives... in Manhattan, or in Brooklyn, or in Queens, or in the Bronx, but ON Staten Island (not IN Staten Island!)

Thanks for correcting!

Ed Caiazzo who lives ON Staten Island

Edward Caiazzo (talk) 19:36, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Not done: The Staten Island article uses both terms, e.g., "At the 2010 Census, there were 468,730 people living in Staten Island." Using in makes it clear to a reader who isn't familiar with Staten Island that it's a borough/municipality rather than a geogrpahic feature. —C.Fred (talk) 19:44, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Total album sales in the US

Billboard stated here that Aguilera has sold over 17.2 million albums in the US according to Nielsen SoundScan. Someone should add it to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lazy610 (talk • contribs) 05:03, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 29 April 2012

I just wanna put that she has sold over 100 million records worldwide.

Goodbye1015 (talk) 17:15, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

 Not done Please provide a reliable source for that statement. Erick (talk) 18:03, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Vocal abilities

I am a relatively new editor, and this is my first post in a talk page. I made a recent edit taking some things out of the Vocal abilities section, and I gave a really brief explanation in a comment along with the actual edit. I don't know how long that bit about Philippe Jaroussky has been up there, or why no one has read the Scientific American article that was cited, which I uploaded. It's an interesting article...but there is nothing about Aguilera or Jaroussky in it. The page number that was cited was not within the range of the article either. So the quotation was fabricated. I am also a little worried about the book that is cited from which there are laudatory quotations. It is a French book...I wonder if anyone knows it or has access to it. I suspect original research. No one who knows about music, particularly singing, would use the word trill (music) when they mean vibrato, unless this is some kind of translation error. The latter term is clearly the one that applies to singing, as one can see from the entry on it. Thanks, comments appreciated. Eflatmajor7th (talk) 03:56, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 2 June 2012

I would like to request the changing of Christina's documented voice type from soprano to mezzo-soprano. The reason for this request is to, from my observation as I am a vocalist myself, that, from what I have heard of her material (which is quite a lot) her voice core seems too low to be a true soprano; she sounds quite uncomfortable in the upper-middle register and more comfortable in her middle to middle-low register. Also adding to this is that the timbre of her voice is richer than that of a soprano. Indie140 (talk) 13:43, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Mdann52 (talk) 15:24, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Vocal abilities cont.

Those quotations from Phyllis Fulford and Michael Mailler keep getting deleted and re-added. Rather than making unfounded claims, we should abide by normal wiki standards about non-English sources. If someone thinks this is really from this book, they need to provide the entire quotation in the original French, the translation and who translated it, and preferably a scan or picture of the page(s) of the book where it is written. But we at least need the original French. Until this is provided, the quote will continue to be deleted. Eflatmajor7th (talk) 22:01, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

The Beautiful Music Video

I was thinking we could include a quick sentence about the scandal around the Beautiful music video as well as how it was LGBT forward which was still new in the early 2000s. There is only information concerning the Dirrty video, nothing about the Beautiful video. Trenton Davis 23:04, 12 July 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trentond (talk • contribs)

This is a good idea. TurningTables98 (talk) 06:17, 19 July 2012 (UTC)TurningTables98TurningTables98 (talk) 06:17, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. I can't find any sources about controversy at "Beautiful". --w^{L<speak·check>}

Sales

Aguilera only has 33,500,000 certified sales (24,600,000 in the US alone), not 50,000,000. The source is from Wikipedia itself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_music_artists — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.5.190.156 (talk) 08:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

 Not done - We can't use Wikipedia as a reference. But you can use the source the list uses. --w^{L<speak·check>} 08:50, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Doesn't Make Sense

This article doesnt really make sense to me. I believe that it should be set out differently. Like maybe having her Personal Life in a different section. Because it was really confusing. Thanks TurningTables98 (talk) 06:15, 19 July 2012 (UTC)TurningTable98TurningTables98 (talk) 06:15, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. What is it that makes the article not make sense? --w^{L<speak·check>} 08:54, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Madres name

Hey, there's a bit of confusion in the article as to her Madres (mother for the uncultured) maiden name, this is from the article

"Aguilera was born in Staten Island, New York, to Fausto Wagner Xavier Aguilera, a sergeant in the US Army at the time, and Shelly Loraine (née Fidler), a Spanish teacher. Aguilera's father was born in Guayaquil, Ecuador"

If her maiden name was Fidler then how did it change to Loraine after she married Fausto Aguilera? I know she remarried but that was to a paramedic named Jim Kearns... could someone fix this up? I would do it but appareantly I am not fit to edit pages... תודה אוי ויי 124.176.222.19 (talk) 12:59, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Loraine is a middle (second given) name, not a surname. Randee15 (talk) 06:37, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Cameo in Casa de mi Padre

In the following article, Will Ferrell says that the lips in the beginning of the movie Casa de mi Padre when Christina's song is played is actually Christina's. This could be noted as a cameo. http://gothamist.com/2012/03/12/will_ferrell.php

I would edit it in myself, but for some reason even when I'm logged in I can't edit anything :/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shikaidou (talk • contribs) 00:03, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Image alignment

Can we have some discussion about the image alignments please? DeadSend4 left a note on Mathiassandell's talk page but the only response so far has been to continue reverting and shout in edit summaries. DeadSend4's edits appear to be aligning the images so that they're left-right-left-right-etc., rather than something like left-left-right-right. Mathiassandell, why do you have a problem with that? Acalamari 11:48, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure how else I can explain it Acalamari, at this point, if the revert is done one more time I'm just going to remove the image in the early life section since it shouldn't really be there. I have no major issue with it but I agree with you, I'm not sure what the problem is either. My issue is that the pictures are being aligned incorrectly, I don't why this user cannot understand that. I'm assumption is that they're ignoring the comments and going on about it on their own. DeadSend4 (talk) 03:26, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

It's okay, the main reason I started this thread was to try to get Mathiassandell to explain their reverts, as you did at least explain yourself on their talk page. They are currently blocked but when they come off that block I hope they will post here rather than revert you again. Acalamari 07:50, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

ALMA Awards Tribute

Can someone add that the ALMA Awards will be making a tribute to Christina? There are many articles talking about it and I saw a TV Spot in which they announced it, I'm sure it can easily be found. I can't edit anything on here for some reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shikaidou (talk • contribs) 19:08, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Wrong categories

Her father is Ecuadorian and her mother is Irish, so I don't know where the Dutch, German and Welsh is coming from. Numerous sources for Ecuadorian and Irish roots, none provided for the others, apart from a dead link (typical) from an "unauthorized" source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.0.40 (talk) 22:49, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Perfumes

The Perfume released in 2007 was named "Christina Aguilera," not "Simply Christina." A new perfume has been released called "Red Sin." The "Xpose" perfume collection consisted of 4 varieties: Glamour, Desire, Passion, and Stardust. "Xpose" was also available in a body spray. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SarahRishelle (talk • contribs) 05:29, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

LOTUS

Because it is not yet created page 'Lotus'?? There are already a lot of information to create it as well as the first single and song names!

--81.203.183.29 (talk) 21:21, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Maybe because there is one. --w^{L<speak·check>} 10:40, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

New Images in October 2012

There's a new images of Christina Aguilera in 3 October 2012:

• 
  picture 1
• 
  picture 2
• 
  picture 3

I think you could replace the picture in infobox with the picture number 1 or 2. Thanks. --77.30.64.171 (talk) 10:06, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Occupations

Under occupations, it says Singer-songwriter, record producer, dancer, television personality and actress but in the article it only says recording artist and actress. I know singer-songwriter used to be disputed because she's never wrote a song completely herself however on her new album Lotus, she is the sole writer for "Army of Me" which should be enough to be labeled as a "singer-songwriter". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shikaidou (talk • contribs) 02:24, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Creation of "Personal life" section?

The life/career subheads are quite large and can be difficult to navigate through. Might it make sense to make a separate "Personal life" section with a subhead for her public image to bring all of these sections back down a a manageable size? 75.130.102.69 (talk) 16:43, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Current content in 'Life and Career' is probably insufficient. A personal life section would require some expansion with her relationships etc, it may take a while and some research (non-original) Maine12329 (talk) 06:36, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

There WAS a personal life section that was on the article I'd say two years ago. Something I tried to keep but apparently it has to be included in her career and life section so it has been that way. Did the policy change yet again? Because if so, it's going to just be a back and forth type of deal so it'd be better to leave it as is. DeadSend4 (talk) 00:45, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Christina Aguilera/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ritchie333 (talk · contribs) 13:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

I'll give this a go. Please bear in mind I have a bit of a busy life, and the reason I want to GA review this is because I'd like to learn more about the article's subject as I go. So the review may take a while. Generally, I will list issues as I find them, and let you know when I've swept the whole article.

• I see this is the second GA review, but the first was over four years ago and was failed due to the problems not being fixed in time, so I don't see that as being an issue for this one.
• The article is very long. I see you've done some cleanup and removing things, but even so there's an awful lot to get through. While for a popular culture topic, I think large articles are less of an issue, I want to make sure that we're not just staring at a lot of unnecessary puffery.
• There are a lot of references in the lead. Generally, the lead should summarise what else is in the article, so if you have information here that has to be backed up by references, it probably wants reworking.

 Done

As you probably noticed, DeadSend4 (talk · contribs) has disagreed with this and reverted the edits, so I have invited him on here to expand on his reasons. There's no firm policy one way or the other about what sources need to go in the lead, but anything that's not really contentious and is mentioned again with sources in the main article is acceptable not to be cited again in the lead. I think just citing sales figures in the lead is probably okay, but I'm going to come back to this.

• From my experience with Talk:Madonna (entertainer)/GA1, getting a neutral point of view in the article is really important, because there are enough fans and critics out there to call out anything that swings too much in one direction or the other.

More later! --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

• The reference to domestic violence is a dead link. Per WP:BLP this must be resourced or removed immediately. I cannot pass an article as GA with outstanding BLP issues.

 Done

• "Since then, her mother has married a paramedic named Jim Kearns" - the reference for this is insufficient, it should be either a web link or have an ISBN number so verification is unambiguous. I'm not sure this sentence is particularly relevant - best leave it out, I think.

 Done

• Can you confirm that the Yahoo Movies reference is a reliable source?

 Done

It has been used in several articles I've seen so not sure why it's not reliable in this article. DeadSend4 (talk) 02:26, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

• The information about which schools she attended is not sourced. The nearest source is the Pittsburgh Tribune Review which mentions her appearance at sports events, but nothing else.

• The Yahoo Movies biography can be used to cite this.

• The incident about slashing tires is cited to a gossip magazine. WP:BLPSOURCES states that "Material should not be added to an article when the only sourcing is tabloid journalism.". Contentious information (which this is) should be cited to multiple sources where possible.

This shouldn't be in issue, yes US Magazine does have some type of tabloid stories but I don't see how this is any different than People magazine. Christina herself has been on the cover and has given numerous interviews with this magazine. Nothing here should be changed. DeadSend4 (talk) 02:29, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

• There is an Ananova reference which appears to be a dead link, and is not formatted correctly per the {{cite news}} template guidelines.

 Done

This has since been removed DeadSend4 (talk) 02:42, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

So far, I'm afraid this doesn't look good - there are a number of BLP issues that need to resolved quickly. I'll keep going with the rest of the article, though. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:13, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

• There appear to be 22 dead links according to the checklist tool. These will all need fixing and correcting. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:37, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

• Reference to "I'm OK" and "Oh Mother" being about her childhood needs to be sourced, otherwise it's original research

 Done

• The Golden Stag Festival reference also says "she did not get the audience or the jury's attention". This might be worth including as a quote.

Why would that be neccessary?

• The Pittsburgh Tribune reference is a dead link (see note above)

This has since been removed

 Done

• This Pittsburgh Post Gazette article states Aguilera performed at the Lilith Fair in 1999, which puts this event out of sequence with the next sentence.

Removed link about Lilith Fair

 Done

• The chart position of "Reflection" needs a source

 Done

• Take out "It [her debut album] was well received by critics" - this is original research as the article only has a single review after it. Better to just leave what the review said.

 Done

• The assertion that her debut album sold eight million copies in the US is not stated in the Christina Aguilera timeline reference that the fact is associated with.

 Done

• The Coca-Coladome press release doesn't seem to work, which is required for verifying the debut album sold 17 million copies.

 Done

• The RIAA reference, used to verify the debut album's appearance in their "Top 100 Albums of All Time" list, doesn't appear to work

 Done

• Her debut single, "Genie in a Bottle", topped the Billboard Hot 100 and several countries worldwide. The chart position in the US only implicitly referenced in the nearby Billboard reference, and there is no citation given for any chart positions anywhere else.

Shouldn't this be a given that the single was succesful, if so then we're going to have to source every country? Wouldn't the wikilink provide all that additional information? Not sure why this is necessary. DeadSend4 (talk) 03:06, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

• None of "She made a cameo appearance on an episode of Beverly Hills, 90210" through "accompanied only by a piano" is sourced.

 Done

--Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:50, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

I'll fix the other issues tomorrow... check if everything is ok. 11Jorn ^{Time goes by so slowly} 22:37, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. I'm taking a break until tomorrow evening (had enough trawling through people.com references for one evening!) As long as somebody's on top of these issues, we'll hopefully make progress and improve the article. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:47, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Alright. I'm also looking for what I could do for the cleanup. 11Jorn ^{Time goes by so slowly} 22:55, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Made a couple additional corrections. 68DANNY2 (talk) 20:56, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

I've had a quick chat with DeadSend4 here and he's under the impression you've just been deleting information from the article where I've identified problems. I personally haven't had a chance to check yet, but the trouble is, if you do that, you'll remove vital information that keeps the balance, whereas you might just need to find an alternative source or reword stuff instead. Let me know if that's an issue. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:05, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

4th December

Issues for today.

• The Yahoo Music story about the 2000 grammys doesn't mention anything about her being nominated for Best Female Pop Vocal Performance, only for winning Best New Artist. Easiest thing to do here I think is to remove the reference to that nomination and focus on the win, also mentioning (which the source does) at her surprise at receiving it.

 Done

• There was some debate about whether or not Mi Reflejo could generally be considered her second studio album. Has this been resolved?

 Done

This is her second studio album and from what I've been told (since I consider Stripped a sophmore album) it's her second album no matter if it's English or Spanish. Again this is what I was told years ago and have been specifically told it should not be changed.DeadSend4 (talk) 00:57, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

• The two MTV references citing Mi Reflejo both date from when it was a work in progress. Therefore they cannot verify its chart positions and sales figures

Those MTV links were before the sentence that lists her sales and figures so that wouldn't be relevant. Regardless, I found multiple sources and added them into the article

 Done

• The People Source, that attempts to cite information about her Christmas album in 2000, only goes back to 2002.

 Done

Someone else has done it.

• This Chart history source is used to cite The Christmas Song reaching platinum, but only contains sales figures instead.

 Done removed.

• [RIAA RIAA Gold and Platinum certifications This RIAA source] is used to cite My Reflection going gold, but doesn't appear to contain any data. The dates for the tour also need a citation.

 Done

• The paragraph about Aguilera's relationships and feud with Eminem can probably move to a "Personal life" section elsewhere

 Done removed

• This source cites Aguilera dating Carson Daley but is a dead link. In my opinion, this is a contentious statement, which violates WP:BLP and must therefore be fixed ASAP.

 Done removed

• "[Nobody Wants To Be Lonely] reached number one on the World Chart and top ten in several countries" is not cited

 Done

• Hurrah - something I recognise (my non-notable covers band plays this) - This source is used to cite the chart position of Lady Marmalade but only seems to confirm its existence on the Moulin Rouge soundtrack

 Done removed

• The comparison to Dee Snider I suspect is mildly disparaging. Not being American, I don't know if USA Today counts as a tabloid source and fails WP:BLPSOURCES. I'd leave this out.

 Done removed

• Regarding to Aguilera saying ""I guess the big hair paid off." - the source mentions this was in jest. Don't know if that's worth mentioning though.

 Done removed

• I don't suppose we could find a link for the Toronto Sun reference that cites the damage settlement from Warlock Records regarding Just Be Free

 Done

--Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:10, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

5 December

• I'm not sure where exactly in this source is citing the intention for Stripped to have more musical and lyrical depth

 Done

• The October 2000 fiduciary duty lawsuit is not cited

 Done

• This source doesn't cite the chart position and sales figures of Stripped

 Done

• This source, covering her change of image for Stripped and Rolling Stone appearance states that responses to this change were mixed

 Done

The second paragraph to this paragraph clearly states Aguilera recieved negative press for her image change, so it is already noted. DeadSend4 (talk) 07:39, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

• This source is supposed to cite the quote "I'm also at the forefront. I'm in the power position, in complete command of everything around me", but doesn't

Actually it does, you just didn't bother to read the entire article. So no changes will be made here DeadSend4 (talk) 05:47, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

 Done

• The chart positions for Dirrty and Beautiful are not cited

 Done

• This reference seems to be a dead link

 Done removed

• The overhead lighting grid incident is not sighted

 Done

• Which source is citing the quote "we had fun working with certain clothes, or the lack thereof."?

 Done It's there, corrected the link to make the quote accesible, but it is in this article DeadSend4 (talk) 08:14, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

• The mid 2004 tour is not cited to any source

 Done

• "The change [to a Marilyn Monroe influenced image] was met with a positive response" is only cited to a single source - Elle magazine. To cite a trend, you probably want multiple sources; for a single source, refer it to the specific publication

 Done removed

• Too much stuff in the paragraph containing the above line is unsourced --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:49, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Potential quickfail due to stability

Guys,

This article is changing all the time, people are reverting stuff back and forth, and there's no real consensus on content. I don't think this is ready for GA, to be honest. I'm going to request a second opinion on the GA noticeboard, but for now can everyone just hold off changing things until I've finished running down the article. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:09, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Okay. I really think it was nominated by a user who didn't know the criteria. And I agree it is changing, people reverting edits, etc. I hope it meets the criteria in the future for a new GA nomination. 11Jorn ^{Time goes by so slowly} 23:32, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes, following this discussion I concur. It certainly has the potential to be a good article in the long term future, but I think there's just too much going on the article for it to settle down into a stable state. Hopefully once all the dead links and sourcing has been checked over, we can revisit this in the new year. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:11, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Since you had come,why not to show you forwardly.You a fool,I was bleed in heart every moment throughout the year.No other ways for me 124.192.80.32 (talk) 07:58, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

I rather want to be a rocket than a moon,I am striving.......... I had travelled a long way to seek something inherent and innate existed permanantly.Yes,something stands there isolated,deep beauty.

I mean there is no significance in life when you reach it. 124.192.80.32 (talk) 08:23, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Including in the philanthropy section

• El Último Adiós (The Last Goodbye)- 9/11 Benefiting the American Red Cross United Way
• Target House (Elephant Picture=
• Montblanc Education Initiative
• Lacma Resnick Pavilion Opening Gala
• Mary J Blige Honors
• Justin Timberlake and Friends
• Michael Jackson Tribute Concert
• Kate Winslet - The Golden Hat (Book)
• The Voice Performance in honor of the victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting

--189.172.210.59 (talk) 00:21, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Pictures of Christina Aguilera

I don't know how to use this but i hope someone can edit for me. Thank you.

THE ALMA RED CARPET EVENT

• Can anyone at least choose a better picture? out of so many pictures is this the best you can choose? Here are the links I suggest

Picture link: http://cdn-premiere.ladmedia.fr/var/premiere/storage/images/public/photos-people/photos-christina-aguilera-entre-prise-de-poids-et-look-improbable-elle-est-meconnaissable-3492410/christina-aguilera-lors-des-nclr-alma-awards-2012-a-pasadena-le-16-septembre-20126/63474686-1-fre-FR/Christina-Aguilera-lors-des-NCLR-ALMA-Awards-2012-a-Pasadena-le-16-septembre-2012_portrait_w858.jpg

Caption: Christina Aguilera during ALMA 2012 red carpet event

Picture is from URL website link below: http://people.premiere.fr/Photos-people/PHOTOS-Christina-Aguilera-entre-prise-de-poids-et-look-improbable-elle-est-meconnaissable-3492410

PICTURE FOR THE VOICE

Picture link: http://static.wetpaint.me/thevoice/ROOT/photos/310/1333546318christinaaguilera467-71812346744805688.jpg

Caption: Christina Aguilera during The Voice Season 2

Picture is from URL website link below: http://www.wetpaint.com/the-voice/articles/christina-aguileras-cleavage-happy-orange-elimination-dress-hot-or-not

CHRISTINA AGUILERA DEBUT PHOTOS Why is there no debut photo for christina?

Picture link: http://thelavalihttp://thelavalizard.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Christina-Aguilera1.jpgzard.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Christina-Aguilera1.jpg

Caption: Christina Aguilera won her first Grammy Awards

Website URL link: http://thelavalizard.com/2011/12/music-minute-169/

Another picture:

Picture link: http://image.pollstar.com/WeblogFiles/pollstar/0811090447373134230_338_v1.jpg

Caption: Aguilera performing on her Genie Gets Her Wish in 2000

Website URL link: http://www.pollstar.com/photo_details.aspx?ID=481601

I really hope people can take this serious and change her pictures. Sorry for my poor english.=) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanchu88 (talk • contribs) 19:08, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Net worth and sales worldwide is wrong!

I think that source is reliable, net worth of Christina Aguilera: http://www.therichest.com/celebnetworth/celeb/christina-aguilera-net-worth/

Sales worldwide, according to his discography, which is a featured article on wikipedia: http://variety.com/2011/music/news/can-the-voice-be-heard-1118035166/ GabrielDirrty (talk) 02:32, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Photo

This photo can be uploaded to Commons http://www.flickr.com/photos/disneyabc/11040648194/ ? 187.75.111.66 (talk) 18:55, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Can we please find a recent pic of Christina? Chronisgr (talk) 11:39, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 December 2013

Christina Aguilera lived in Wexford, Pennsylvania. On her page it says Rochester, Pennsylvania. Maelynne (talk) 22:43, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Not done: Wexford and Rochester are both mentioned in the article. A quick Google search reveals references to both towns in her youth. If you think a specific reference within the article needs to change feel free to suggest a specific edit, but for now I see no reason to completely remove the reference to Rochester. --ElHef (Meep?) 23:53, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 January 2014

Please change her net worth of this article, as of 2013, her net worth is 245 million dlls.

| net_worth = US $245 million Beautifulmorning13 (talk) 21:50, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

 Not done, for now. I'm not sure if that's a reliable source, and I'm not seeing anything about her net-worth in the article as it is. Please attempt to obtain a consensus for this proposal. Joefromrandb (talk) 17:28, 29 January 2014 (UTC)