Talk:Britney Spears/Archive 10

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

→

Archive 15

maybe you should cut cultural references

i'm sure that there have been far more references to britney spears in pop culture than that and i don't think you should act like you've listed all of them. it's impossible to actually complete that so maybe it should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.127.193.43 (talk) 00:35, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree. It should probably be restructured into a "Legacy" section- Similar to Michael Jackson, Madonna or Janet Jackson. The current section is nothing more than a list of trivia, which is really below GA quality. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 01:27, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Main Picture

The picture is very dated and not very flattering. I believe a more recent picture such as britney's public appearence to Jim Carrey's charity event would be better suited. She has been highly praised for her look at this event, and is said to be "glowing" and "back to her old self." (86.158.15.95 (talk) 00:22, 11 August 2008 (UTC))

I'm sure that image is owed by someone which means we can't use it. All image on wikipedia must either be free content (public domain), or the copyright holder must upload the image themselves giving wikipedia permission to use it. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 00:25, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I see the problem at hand but could you not ask wire image or something, as the people at wikipedia are the only people who can do something about it. I have found the page with the images on incase anyone doesnt know what i mean. http://www.wireimage.com/SearchResults.aspx?igi=326381&s=britney%20spears&sfld=C&vwmd=e

Wire image is a pay-for service. They won't respond to requests for fair use...trust me, I've tried. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 01:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Recent Spear's

I feel more should be mentioned about blackout and how well "piece of me" did world wide, and her recent nominations at the 08 vma's for best music video "piece of me" and best female video also."piece of me". besides from this, there is also the fact that nothing is mentioned about her recent "recovery" and how she has kept out of the limelight and has got her looks back. sorry for being a pain but i feel more should be mentioned on the present front. (86.158.15.95 (talk) 01:46, 11 August 2008 (UTC))

In order to avoid WP:RECENTISM lets wait until the VMAs are over, then add the results. Also most worldwide info should be left to the album's article. To get it promoted to Featured Article, it can't be filled with every detail about her albums, their singles and every aspect of their chart positions- thats what all the other articles are for. Her main biography is supposed to be a broad overview. Also, remember to be bold, if you have a reliable source discussing improvements to her personal life, show the link here or add the information yourself. The talk page is meant for discussion of improving the quality of the article, not simply making requests. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 01:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Album Coming out Mid december

I think the article should be amended to include her new album that is coming out in just a few months (source: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,387021,00.html) under Discography instead of "personal life and struggles" 68.4.85.79 (talk) 07:27, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

There is no indication of a title or an actual release date. It will not be added to the discography section until both are set in place. Wikipedia is not a dumping ground for breaking news. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 08:16, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Backmasking

Should we put in the fact that Britney was accused of backmasking hit me baby one more time? Vitual aelita (talk) 13:31, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I, personally, dont know what that is, and have never heard anything about it. But... I'm not a litmus test. My quick answer? No. But thats the great thing about consensus; I dont even come close to a final say.  ;) Qb | ^{your 2 cents} 13:39, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Backmasking. No. I've never heard such a rumor and we'd need an exceptional source. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 20:31, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

The only allegations I've heard about that song and backmasking was in multiple fan made youtube videos where fans play the song backwards and tell their interpretation of what the reversed vocals are allegedly singing. But other than that nothing has been reported by reliable sources so it wouldn't be very appropriate to put that in the article linking to fan-made youtube videos. AngelOfSadness talk 17:52, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

This is that whole "Sleep with me Im not too young" thing on the track "Baby One More Time."[1]. Its oviously not an example of backmasking, but merely wishful thinking! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.167.184.2 (talk) 18:36, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

voice type

Is Britney really mezzo-soprano? I don't have musical education but IMHO she sounds higher thaN Christina Aguilera who is soprano —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.131.137.50 (talk) 09:02, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Higher than Christina? Ha. No. Britney Spears has a mezzo-soprano voice type. Her vocal range in alto. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 09:15, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Are You sure? This is weird... means that Whitney Houston (soprano) sings higher than Britney... I'm not an expert though —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.131.137.50 (talk) 19:10, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah... Xtina can do the high E. I can sing along with Brit and I'm a tenor... mm. That was fun in choir. The only girl tenor. Qb | ^{your 2 cents} 19:38, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Mezzo-soprano is lower than soprano... she's in a range between mezzo-soprano and contralto. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyanide7 (talk • contribs) 18:08, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Just a couple of things!

I think maybe "Toxic" should be put in with the audio samples. Its the centre point of her current albums and demonstrates a new sound which she explored. I know it had too many audio samples before but I do think "Toxic" should be included.

• About the main image - I think the image from the Onyx Hotel Tour page should be used. I know its already on an article, but it shows Spears in a style she was in much longer than the NFL "Spikey-haired" phase!
• Oh and the VMA snake and Rolling Stone magazine pictures arent working at present!Mc8755 (talk) 23:02, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you regarding the main image I have always hated the photo that is currently being used, When you say the Vma and the Rolling Stone pictures are not working, do you mean they are not loading? cause' they appear perfectly fine on my computer.--Theoneintraining (talk) 23:14, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I guess it was just not workin' last night, they're there now! Yeah Ive seacrched everywhere and cant find another free image so I think the one from the Ony Hotel tour page is the best option.Mc8755 (talk) 11:12, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

The Onyx Hotel tour image is fair use, not public domain. It can't be used for the main image or anywhere on this article, since it offers no relevance to text within the article. Also, I know none of the current audio sample have critical analysis, but to include yet another audio sample, we need serious critical analysis of Britney's voice, the songs, rhythmic arrangements and production techniques. Gimmie more should be easy to write one since its main article has all of that info. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 18:07, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

new free image found (it think)

I believe I have found a better free picture to use to replace the current main image it can be found here[2]. The source is from the Romanian Wikipedia site, Can this image be used?--Theoneintraining (talk) 11:29, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

unlikely as the source of the image is listed as "(imagine gasita pe www.google.com)" :) MrMarmite (talk) 12:01, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

My computer is a little... well, censored, right now. So I cant let google search do justice to the file name... but odds are that the dude who got the image just pulled it from the net. He's got a copyright vio notice on his talk page for a Madonna picture. I think this one just slipped through the cracks on the Romanian wiki. Qb | ^{your 2 cents} 12:22, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

The image obviously if from a photo shoot, taken by a professional photographer. This is not a public domain image. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 18:08, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Was that directed towards me, BK? Qb | ^{your 2 cents} 19:44, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Not a specific reply to you, just a reply to the thread in general - there is no way that image is public domain and I higly doubt the user owns it. In addition, I don't think promotional images are allowed to be used as the main image, even if the copyright holder uploaded it. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 02:12, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Ooo... no promo images for main? If you could find that, that would be awesome, because then I have a few to remove on lesser known articles. Qb | ^{your 2 cents} 09:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Found it! Wikipedia:NONFREE#Images_2 criteria #12. Basically, if the person is still alive, copyright images almost always fail fair use, since, it is entirely possible (however unlikely) that someone can take a picture of them and release it into public domain. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 03:10, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

True, but there isn't an explicit prohibition against promotional photos. If the copyright owner released the picture under the GFDL or CC-SA licenses, no one cares what the original purpose of the image was ... just that it is free now. If the promotional image is protected by copyright, you have pointed at exactly the reason we can't use it.Kww (talk) 03:16, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Newer picture

Well now the main image has changed again, well she looks hot so lets hope it stays lol. — Realist² 11:11, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree, finally a decent picture of her!.--Theoneintraining (talk) 11:39, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Non-free usage. It can't stay. The image has to be self-made. This person lied. It's from a public photo agency. Maddyfan (talk) 11:59, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Legacy

Isn't this section a tad "fan made"? It sounds really subjective. Maddyfan (talk) 11:59, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Not really, it's a bunch of opinions and facts backed up by reliable sources. All opinions are attributed to a publication and/or writer in the text. No original research or fan sites. The material is good. I would argue that it could be expanded however. — Realist² 12:16, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Considering I wrote the section, and have stated repeatedly I am not a fan of Spears: no. Give credit where credit is due. Spears's accomplishments are quite astonishing, especially considering her age. To date she is to only best-selling teenage artist. The section could be cleaned up/improved, granted, but its not subjective. As Realist pointed out, all opinions and facts are attributed to a source. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 18:42, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

2008 VMA picture

Check the licence for the picture its perfectly acceptable, reliable, allowed and ther is no reason it should be taken off Ogioh (talk) 17:49, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Only free images are allowed, first you lied saying your uncle took it, now you say you got it from the TV. Either way its not free. — Realist² 17:51, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Well Someone Needs to get one of her there because that picture on there now is so outdated. There are more current free ones, the picture does not suit the article because it is outdated. Get a current one. --Moairguard (talk) 23:48, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

YOU find a new one. There are no free images. Qb | ^{your 2 cents} 00:17, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

It don't have to be from vma 2008 but seriously that is the worst picture of her, and it is so old, it just ruins the whole page. And i dont even know how to make an image on here, I'm new to that. --70.130.203.51 (talk) 03:04, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

To editors of this article (pictures)

Could editors take extra caution with pictures uploaded by Ogioh. A few moments ago Ogioh uploaded an image which he claimed his Uncle took. His uncle did not take the photo, the AP copyright symbol was still visible in the corner of the picture. After I pointed this out, he trimmed the copyright symbol off and claimed the picture was taken from his TV screen. I'm not bothering with links as the image and his edit history to it will be deleted soon. But that is what I saw. — Realist² 18:34, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

ok...for starters slamming me and telling everyone to watch out for my posts is a bit rude and overeacting sane as i've made a lot of useful contribution to wikipedia and spent a lot of time researching information to make up pages. I found a picture of the 2008 vma's its off the la times site so i don't know if newspaper picture are copyright infringement or not, http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/music/la-et-env-vma-britney-performance,0,3710712.photo there are no copyright markings or warnings about the picture so i'm going to upload it on that basis but will have no problems with anyone taking it down solong as there is a valid reason or they found a copyright warning. Ogioh (talk) 17:32, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

You should be happy you've not been blocked. Shush. Qb | ^{your 2 cents} 19:13, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

You seems to be missing the point. We can only use free images. ANYTHING you find online (esp. from a source like the LA TIMES) is owned by someone - that's just common sense. Pulling a random image from online is a fair use copyright image - something we can't use for the main image of the biography. Fair use images can only be used to illustrate a specific event or concept which needs visual aid. Whatever image you upload from the LA Times is going to be deleted because you're trying to use it as a public domain image, and if you continue to do this, you will eventually be blocked from editing. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 20:13, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Ogioh, you deliberately tried to hide the fact that someone else owned the picture. You outright lied in your upload claim that your uncle was the owner as well. I have no faith in your ability to upload images in a truthful manner. Users have had there commons accounts blocked for less. I'm looking out for wikipedia, not you. I don't want to see wikipedia sued or whatnot. — Realist² 01:57, 12 September 2008 (UTC)that is on the pade noe is free

I'm lost now if the image thats on the page now is free why's it all over the web? Ogioh (talk) 17:18, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't mean to be rude but I can't understand your question, there is no punctuation in it. — Realist² 17:44, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

If the main picture on the britney spears article is free, then why is it on many sites on the web? Ogioh (talk) 17:48, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

It's free so lot's of sites us it. I think you answered your own question. — Realist² 18:18, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

What i meant is it could be copyrighted to a certain site but someone put it up saying they owned it...but it probably isn'tOgioh (talk) 18:37, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I got this new picture of a bebo fanpage, i asked the owner did they have any free images that they were the copyright owner of and they only said one (out of hundreds on the page) so i think its genuine and plus its not photographer like quality so i think its good to say its o.k. to be put up... Ogioh (talk) 19:19, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Quoting

Is it just me, or is the entire middle section of the article comprised almost exclusively by quotes and has very little original writing? There are barely any sentences that don't contain some sort of quote.. "XXX said ___".. "XXX commented ___"... I mean.. a moderate amount of quoting is fine, but it's kind of gotten out of hand by whoever wrote the newer sections (Musical style and performance, Choreography, Live performances, Public image, etc.).

This is Wikipedia, not Wikiquote. 156.34.152.108 (talk) 21:25, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Its in the process of expanding. When I work on article, I typically put full quotes in place before I summarize them; that way I have something to work off of and the reader - at least - has a clear interpretation of the subject without being subjected to POV. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 07:49, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Deleted..

I deleted the old picture because it's not really that good of a picture. I think we should wait to find one of Britney at least in 2007 or 2008. The 2003 picture was unflatting,it Needed to be removed —Preceding unsigned comment added by Npurplegirl (talk • contribs) 23:39, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Please stop deleting the picture ... it's the best we've got, and isn't particularly unflattering.Kww (talk) 15:59, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I dont have a problem with the current picture. Qb | ^{your 2 cents} 21:22, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

NEW PICTURE

Image:Britney Spears 2008.jpg has been permited for use by the copyright owner and and an email has been forwarded to the OTRS i think it is..

Finlly, a new picture thats alowd —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ogioh (talk • contribs) 22:50, 13 September 2008 (UTC) Ogioh (talk) 00:02, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

OTRS needs to add a tag to the picture for it to be "ok". You are putting the cart before the horse. Qb | ^{your 2 cents} 03:07, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Update on Blackout details needed

We also need more info on the sales of blackout and details on some of the other singles released. — Realist² 14:49, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Most Searched Celebrity

Its on her awards page that she's been the internets most saerched celebrity for the last 6 or so years runing...and today sky news reported that she's been added to the latest guinnes book of world records for being the most searched celebrity. I think this should be on the main article somewhere, a short sentence in the opening paragrph would probably be best.

By the way, just out of curiousity. Who changed the whole format of this article? Now its all chunky and hard to understand, it was much better when the page was split into career and personal life Ogioh (talk) 21:31, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

It's best NOT to have "Personal Life" sections in articles about a living person. It creates undue emphasis on the subject's personal life rather than focusing on what actually makes them notable - their career. See John Frusciante, Michael Jackson and Janet Jackson as examples. Currently the article has A LOT of unnecessary info, in addition to beinging poorly organized, which is why its so jumbled, but over time, with proper trimming, it'll reach FA. I just haven't been able to work on it recently because of school. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 21:36, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

If you have the proper source you can add a sentence about the Guinnes record to the last paragraph of the LEAD and to the Legacy section. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 21:36, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

will do, i haven't got a chance yet to read through the whole article sinse it was reformatted but i'm sure i can give what looks like a much neede hand when it comes to tidying it up =) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ogioh (talk

Tidy Up

I agree bookkeeper it is time this article has a major clean-up. I am going to start by getting it reviewed. Then we can create a list of things to improve.--Theoneintraining (talk) 16:18, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

It just had a recent review. The link at the very top of the page is only a week or two old. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 20:14, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree, this article needs to be improved asap, before the new wave of info comes with the new album and publicity. I still feel more details on blackout and it's singles need including. — Realist² 21:01, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

== New Picture!! ==--71.125.102.156 (talk) 22:08, 21 September 2008 (UTC) Found One!!:). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Npurplegirl (talk • contribs) 20:38, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

where is it? Ogioh (talk) 09:36, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I have uploaded and added a new image that is freely licensed. TheLeftorium 16:36, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind. Turns out it wasn't. TheLeftorium 16:48, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia Deleted It :(..--71.125.102.156 (talk) 21:19, 21 September 2008 (UTC) It's Free.--LilMissNicole+++.;+= (talk) 21:25, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

No, it wasn't. When I examined the rights and history on Flickr, it turned out that the uploader there didn't have the right to upload it. Since he didn't have the right to upload it, he doesn't have the right to give it away for free, either.Kww (talk) 21:27, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll Keep Looking --LilMissNicole+++.;+= (talk) 21:29, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I honestly don't understand the urgency ... the picture in the article is from near the peak of her attractiveness and career. When I think of "Britney Spears", that era is still what I think of.Kww (talk) 21:36, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

If it's not free,then why is it still there?And I Did find another.--71.125.102.156 (talk) 22:08, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Tidy Up??

I thought we'd all agreed a major tidy up was needed but when i cut out half of the introduction (still leaving in a lot of what doesn't need to be there just to not overly annoy the person that put it in) but it was reverted back. The introduction really doesn't need to be that long it just needs to say her occupation birth, birthplace and major awards and/or significances like being the world's most powerful celebrity a couple of years ago and her grammy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ogioh (talk • contribs) 12:00, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Everything in the lead at the moment is necessary. The lead is meant to be an overview of her entire biography. You removed the overview of her albums (we still need to add blackout and circus) and you removed the details about her becoming a sex symbol. Spears's media image has been critical aspect of her entire career and can't be avoided in the lead. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 12:21, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I am not trying to offend you in any way its just that it seems to be that only the pages you work a lot on or have told me to look at as an example have those big long intros, i'm not entirely saying we cut everything out but i could rearrange the info that is and make it much neater and better read. Ogioh (talk) 12:25, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

The appropriate length of the lead section depends on the total length of the article. As a general guideline, the lead should be no longer than four paragraphs. The following suggestion may be useful:

< 15,000 characters	around 32 kilobytes	> 30,000 characters
one or two paragraphs	two or three paragraphs	three or four paragraphs

Considering the size of the total article (over 80 kilos), this article actually should be a full four paragraphs. We can always rewrite/reword it to make the text flow better, but you can't cut critical aspects of her biography out of the lead. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 12:31, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

kk, the introduction is the least of the problems on this article. Most of it is very good and is getting tidied up slowly but surely. I really think the 2002-2003 section is far too long but i am impressed with how you managed to maintain her dignity while still including all those, well you know, events that happened in the past year or so Ogioh (talk) 12:44, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I came to this article pretty recently actually. What I've worked on personally is the lead, 1998-2000 and the Musical Style and Performance, public image and Legacy section. I thought I'd be closer to FA by now, but I'm overwhelmed with college at the moment. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 12:49, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I can understand that lol. The people who used to work on this article non-stop seemed to have ditched it. There is really only me you and about 3 other people who edit this article often. When i first came on to wikipedia there was something different about it every half an hour. I've been working on this one sinse i came on to wikipedia and its a hard one to be on with all the stuff that goes on in her life. The amount of recentism is unreal. Ogioh (talk) 19:31, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

→

Archive 15

About the "relationship" between Britney and Jason

The article says: "In June 2009, it was confirmed that Spears is dating her agent Jason Trawick". But that relationship hasn't been confirmed. In some magazines, Britney said that those rumors are funny for her. It's just a rumor, and curiously, the first magazine that began with those rumors was "Star", a sensationalist tabloid.--Charles.mx (talk) 23:14, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Removed. Blog and tabloids aren't reliable sources. Unless is a direct quote or something like NY, LA Times or CNN its usually BS. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 23:20, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Lead expansion

I removed the "Lead too short" template from this article, as there is no discussion here about it. Although not perfect, the coverage in the lead is not so egregiously little as to need templating. If anyone has concerns about the lead being too short, or even better, suggestions as to which parts of the article should be included in the lead summary, please post them here.YobMod 18:29, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

I think that the lead could be longer. Maybe a sentence or two on her musical style and performance. Cliff smith ^talk 16:37, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Musical style

I found a very interesting article about Britney and her music that might fit into the wikipage. I think we could add this to the page to show that there are some reviewers who don't just think of her as a manufactured pop star. This critic acknowledges that it is Britney who is the defining factor of the Britney empire not just an add along to the machine. Here are some choice excepts I think could be added.

During her world-conquering peak, she was just about as cutting edge as you could get in the world of global pop superstardom. Spears didn’t just work with big names, she gave big names their names, and maintained her high currency in the world’s most fickle industry for years, when most aspiring starlets are lucky to manage months.

She may not have had the moves of Beyonce or the vocal chops of Christina Aguilera, but she made up for it with a flair for theatrics and a willingness to go places most teenage pop stars wouldn’t dare. Her shock flesh-toned body suit at the MTV Awards in 2000 predates Lady Gaga by almost a decade, while Spears was tumbling through the air on bungee ropes years before Pink even staged her first concert tour.

There is also an excerpt that I think could be added into her vocal style in the page:

The thing about Spears, though, is that her biggest songs, no matter how committee-created or impossibly polished, have always been convincing because of her delivery, her commitment and her presence...Spears expresses perfectly the conflicting urges of adolescence, the tension between chastity and sexual experience, between hedonism and responsibility, between confidence and vulnerability. And unlike the somewhat aloof Beyonce, Spears’ trials and tribulations just make her seem all the more human and believable.

Net-worth:

In addition to her music sales, Spears has earned a reported $370 million from ads and endorsement deals. Some of the products to carry her name include a series of perfumes from Elizabeth Arden, a video game called Britney’s Dance Beat and a singing Britney Spears doll.

Source: http://www.theage.com.au/news/entertainment/music/2009/10/24/1256147928875.html

Skinwalker03 (talk) 00:03, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

I added a few passages. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 11:24, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

album sales

Hey can somebody change the album sales back to 85 million cause it said on her " Britney Spears discography " that she sold over 85 million! --TotalBlackout —Preceding undated comment added 04:34, 18 March 2010 (UTC).

I know that this has been disputed a lot, but I am not complaining about the number. I just think you should change the wording from records (which means singles and albums combined), to just 83 million albums sold; because her total albums sales are estimated at more than 83 million, so that is the way it should be stated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.91.218.24 (talk) 20:38, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Back in 2004, Sony/Zomba/Jive announced that the 84 million stated to album sales, but they reverted it recently on press releases that she sold nearly 66 million albums worldwide, and near 60 million prior to the 84 million stated, so it would make 24 million singles sold until the 84 million data was released. It's expected that by now she has passed the 100 million mark (counting singles and albums) just see> 84 million + 6 million (Blackout + Circus) = 90 million + 5 million (Womanizer, Circus, If U Seek Amy sales in the US only) = 95 million + 1 million (Gimme More) = 96 million + Worldwide sales of GH:MP (released in 2004, when the 84 number came out), it's expected to have sold 5 million, so it's already 101 million. I don't know when, and if they ever will, correct this number, but since there is no reliable source stating she has passed 100 million records sold (albums and singles) we can't post it based on our calculations, that besides being true, it's expectation and not 100% accurate! --Zefron12 (talk) 00:08, 29 October 2009 (UTC)85 million is totally wrong! According to britney's record label, Jive, she has sold over 172 million records worldwide.

she sold 92 mill albums . in 2007 before blackout she sold 85 mill blackout sold 3 mill and circus sold 4 mill togther its 92 mill . you need you need to check your source and to update the details

Don't know if this helps but in 2004 the My Prerogative album booklet states she had sold 44 million albums worldwide then from memory in 2004 just so disagree with the comment above saying she had sold 84 million then.

The article has recently been updated mentioning Britney's record sales, that is said to be in the excess of 100 million worldwide. I counted the total ALBUM sales mentioned here on Wikipedia and got about 85-88 million ALBUMS sold worldwide. When talking about RECORDS you usually mean both ALBUM and SINGLES sales. Therefore I think that considering Britney's singles sales, which are estimated at between 30-70 million worldwide (probably not less than 40 million, cosidering that she has released about 30 singles, including big sellers such as "...Baby One More Time"(9 million worldwide according to Wikipedia), "Piece of Me" (at least 1 million in US according to Wikipedia), "Womanizer" (3 million (US only!) according to Wikipedia), "Circus" (5.5 million worldwide according to Wikipedia), "3" (1.6 million (US only!) according to Wikipedia) ); the total worldwide record sales for Britney Spears should be adjusted from "more than 100 million" to "more than 120 million", taking in account the singles sales. It is hard to find any exact figures for each and every one of the singles. Though it is not unrealistic to assume, after doing some research on the Internet and on Wikipedia that each single on average has sold about a million copies worldwide (some more, some less), giving Britney at least 30 million in singles sales. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.156.178.129 (talk) 10:24, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

We just report what the sources say. Anything else would constitute as original research. Thanks. Nymf _hideliho! 11:06, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

About the article

I think the article became highly negative since Bookkeeper began writing about it. Also, there's fake information about the Australian shows. It says that her fans were disappointed. They weren't her fans! Her fans knew that she was going to be lip-syncing. And, I guess no one left the show.

Britney can sing, but almost all the reviews about her in the article are negative. That's so bad. --Charles.mx (talk) 06:33, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

I replaced that particular quote since it comes from a tabloid and not a reliable source. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 10:01, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Who the hell started with those stupid comparisons with Madonna and Janet Jackson? We're not comparing Britney, everything's just about her. It was too way better before, but someone, who seems to be a hater, began citing comparisons. And, of course, it's not neutral. why? Because, all comparisons are nergative! I hate this article since then. --Charles.mx (talk) 20:27, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Spears herself is the one who named Jackson and Madonna as her inspirations, all comparisons from critics stem from that fact. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 18:01, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Just a quick note to say it was widely covered in the Australian media that many of the Brittany Spears fans did walk out of her first few concerts when it was first discovered that she was lip syncing. It's a practice that isn't accepted by Australians, especially in the live music states such as Victoria. Please see the following News.com.au article - http://www.couriermail.com.au/entertainment/confidential/fuming-fans-ditch-britney-tickets/story-e6freq7o-1225797239986 --58.168.233.134 (talk) 13:52, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

What happened to the "Products & Endorsements"-section??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.100.49.241 (talk) 21:12, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Born In Mississippi??

{{editsemiprotected}}

It says she born in Mississippi, but the citation site says born in Kentwood, LA. This doesn't make sense. Can someone clear this up and/or edit it? Also numerous other site's say she was born in Kentwood, LA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kinojroy (talk • contribs) 00:51, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Not sure where the issue is here. The citation points to her birth certificate. There, it clearly states she was born in Mississippi but lived in Kentwood, Louisiana. Everything seems to check out. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 05:34, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

No, the citation points here http://www.billboard.com/artist/britney-spears/bio/290150#/artist/britney-spears/bio/290150 it's the first citation. --Kino (talk) 04:38, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

And by the way, that's a marriage certificate, not a birth certificate. --Kino (talk) 04:41, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Perfumes

Under the "Products and Endorsements" the article says: Her latest Elizabeth Arden fragrance "Believe", was released in September 2007.[231] In January, 2008, Spears released "Curious Heart".[232][233] Spears released a new fragrance entitled "Hidden Fantasy" in January 2009.[228] The "Her latest Elizabeth Arden fragrance" part should be updated to reflect that it is no longer her latest (as Curious Heart is a new variation of previous Arden/Britney Heart, and likewise Hidden Fantasy of Fantasy; you can check the wiki pages on Heart and Fantasy for proof). If you wish to count Curious Heart and Hidden Fantasy as the same thing as the earlier Heart and Fantasy fragrances, I'd recommend changing the word "latest" to "next" to circumvent the confusion and seemingly sloppy wording while retaining accuracy. 24.181.233.0 (talk) 03:05, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

New perfume "Radiance" to be released 2010. This has been officially confirmed and there is already an article on Wikipedia about it. Is it worth mentioning in the main article? http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Radiance_(fragrance) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.156.178.129 (talk) 06:53, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

7th Studio Album

I was wondering is there enough information to produce a page on her next studio album? We know sum of the songs, the writers, the approximate date. It would just seem logical even if it was just a small page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.7.242.82 (talk) 10:31, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

It does not appear to pass WP:NALBUMS at this time. You generally require a track listing, officially announced release date and sources for all of this. See WP:HAMMERTIME. kiac. (talk-contrib) 12:09, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

I think you should take of May 2010 for the predicted release date. Here's a new article which says a summer release instead of a spring one. http://www.nypost.com/p/blogs/popwrap/new_britney_spears_album_is_epic_SAOzmGyFUNIVRm77GWG1vN

Britney.com confirms a album is being recorded. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.14.131.176 (talk) 05:57, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

New INFO!!! http://www.britney.com/us/blog/new-music-questions-answered —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.7.242.82 (talk) 17:38, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

NEW INFO!! 

Hi, Britney Spears stated on her official website that the rumours about a seventh studio album wwere bullsh*t http://www.britneyspears.com added by Jordan Voase —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.190.15.199 (talk) 17:35, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

I added that Perez Hilton gave information about supposedly listening to new Britney tracks and giving a positive response to them, I in no way said he was telling the truth, but referenced him as reliable, and I even gave a source link of a video of him physically telling us what he claims to have heard as well, so why was it deleted?

JULY 13, 2010
I'm adding a paragraph to the "2008-present" about the new album since we have confirmation from her label and People.com. Producers Max Martin, Danja, Darkchild, Tiësto, and Rusko are all being added with the paragraph since all have either rumored or confirmed work with Britney.

Breast implants rumours not mentioned?

There was only a brief period when I was aware of Britney Spears. It was just after "baby one more time" was released. For months, every mention of her included a comment about her having gotten breast implants. When sources said she spent some time in hospital, her spokesperson said this was for a knee operation.

I remember Marilyn Manson commenting on how she accepted a video award: a teenager with breast implants thanked god for her video's success. How come this article has no mention? A quick web search turned up ample sources:

• http://britney_spears.utopiax.org/britney-breast-implants.html
• http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/06/britney-breast-implants-_n_85367.html

Is it because these comments were never proven? Does that make this topic contrary to the BLP policy? I'd have to think about whether or not that would make sense... Gronky (talk) 04:39, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Every incident in a public figure's life is not automatically notable enough to be recorded in an encyclopedia. Not to say this particular rumor isn't noteable, but there needs to be careful consideration on what information, over the course of the subject's entire life, needs to be recorded to give the reader a comprehensive and neutral critical analysis. I'd rather see more exceptional sources on how deeply the rumor impacted her career or pop culture than simply addressing the rumor itself. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 04:59, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Proven or not? Have you heard Britney Spears herself actually say the album is to be released in May of 2010? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.96.28 (talk) 01:07, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Candies re-signs Britney for 2010 campaign

Source : [3] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smolu (talk • contribs) 14:10, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Album Sales

I am so confused i mean go to 8notes.com then click on artist and find Britney Spears. 
 Go to biograpy and scroll down to where it shows album sales and it said
     
   Baby One More Time sold over 25 million copies
   Oops.. I Did It Again sold over 20 million copies
   Britney  sold over 16 million copies
   In the Zone sold over 10 million copies

It said that the article was taken from Wikipedia back in 2005 and how could Britney Spears' album sales decrease 

if it was taken back nearly 5 years ago from wikipedia??????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Notagirlnotyetawoman (talk • contribs) 02:18, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Lady Gaga

Recently at the grammys the sun and many other papers and web sites have said Lady Gaga and Britney talked and have said they will soon collaborate. I believe this should be mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.7.242.82 (talk) 18:22, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

it was mentioned but, someone took the info out. can someone restore it?~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.81.117.155 (talk) 03:20, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

This isn't in writing anywhere so it shouldn't be added just because it "sounds cool" to have them collaborating.125.238.96.198 (talk) 14:31, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Actually it was mentioed in many news papers including the sun etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.7.242.82 (talk) 16:27, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Religious beliefs

Does anyone think Britney Spears' religious beliefs/worldviews should be mentioned? Is he religious? Wandering Courier (talk) 23:55, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

She doesn't strike me as an obviously religious person, though I admit I am no expert on her work. --John (talk) 04:31, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

She has said in 2009 interviews that she still believes in God when she looks at her kids so... --212.187.45.107 (talk) 23:38, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Learn to spell

It's awesome that Wikipedia doesn't need anonymous contributions anymore, but someone should either change the spelling of perfromed [sic] or update the corresponding entry in Wiktionary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.22.241.88 (talk) 04:54, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done thanks. I can recommend getting an account, it is beneficial and only takes a minute. Off2riorob (talk) 13:24, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Unusual You

Hi, At the time, i thought the re-direct was a good idea as discogs was the only source we could find. I always knew it was real as i own a copy of the CD Single. But now, there are reliable sources confirming the singles release. The Music Charting Industry confirms that the CD Single was released worldwide on 15 September 2009.[4] Also, it states that it was released worldwide, not just in Australia. If you look at "3" on that site, it states the pacific countries where it was released. It tells you where the CD Single was released and the EP was released. However, on the Unusual You CD single, it doesn't give a pacific area, which means it was released worldwide. I think that giving one for the most reliable sources on the net, that Unusual You can be a single on Wikipedia. Is it possible to put it back up? Thank - You--Apeaboutsims (talk) 02:25, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

For the single to have a standalone article, you'll have to find evidence that it charted somewhere ( preferably on one of the charts listed at WP:GOODCHARTS), won an award, or was covered by multiple notable artists.—Kww(talk) 02:43, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Unusual You charted on the Billboard 100. Does that count as a chart?--59.101.183.5 (talk) 08:22, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Show me a source. Billboard indicates that it has not charted.—Kww(talk) 15:06, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

It charted on the Pop 100 chart: [5].--Apeaboutsims (talk) 01:33, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

This is troublesome. That Pop 100 listing makes it squeak past WP:NSONGS. However, when I look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unusual You, the focus was not on the charting, it was on the lack of release data. You are misreading http://australian-charts.com/showitem.asp?interpret=Britney+Spears&titel=Unusual+You&cat=s . The way it is listed there shows it as an Australia-only release, but that is a release. That means that in the only country it was released as a single, it did not chart; and in the only country that it charted, it was not released as a single, but only got on a chart due to album-track airplay. My advice: create a really great article in your sandbox, and start a discussion here to look at it and get consensus about restoring it to the main article space. If you need help creating a sandbox article, put a message on my talk page.—Kww(talk) 04:30, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Add husbands to Infobox?

I would like to suggest that Britney's two husbands get added to the infobox. I tried, but it would not stick. Due to the protections?

Jason Alexander (June 2004: annulled)
Kevin Federline (Sept 2004 - July 2007: divorced)

Nutster (talk) 22:42, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Suggest you incorporate a decent reliable source  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:44, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

That should be added. As for a " decent reliable source", that would only take about 30 seconds using the Internet, since it is common knowledge that she was married to these 2 men.--BeckiGreen (talk) 02:17, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

New Picture?

That one has been up for a while, I think you should change it to;

http://cdn.buzznet.com/media/jj1//2009/08/britney-tcas/britney-spears-teen-choice-awards-2009-02.jpg

or

http://cdn.buzznet.com/media/jj1//2009/08/britney-tcas/britney-spears-teen-choice-awards-2009-04.jpg

or

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_U2o-3lgs4t0/SmYTEInnvgI/AAAAAAAABOk/c2FmyWrb508/s400/britney-spears-candies-ad-campaign-fall-winter-2009-2010-photo.jpg (This one is more recent!)

Those are copyrighted, so they cannot be added.—Kww(talk) 05:57, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Relationship Between Brit and Jason Confirmed

Britney's rep released a statement to People Magazine that Jason and Britney are an item and that therefor he quit working with her professionally.

I wanted to put this in the article but I don't know where since they don't say how long they've been dating. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ikkomuitnederland (talk • contribs) 08:59, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

overly positive bias in the musical style section

basically every criticism is knocked back with the help of about 5 different quotes in her favour. it seems way too overly positive for someone who is so frequently criticised - Drthatguy (talk) 10:40, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

I have to agree with you their. I think we need to have 50/50 to display equal opinions so readers are given the chance to have all the facts before using them...125.238.96.175 (talk) 10:29, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

I would like for both of you to see other GA or FA pages from similar artists (MJ, Madonna or Gaga) and see if you find the same amount of negative criticism that there's in Britney' page. Xwomanizerx (talk) 22:16, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Bar17, 25 May 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} to change britney spears sales. there's a mistake in her albums sales. she didnt sold 85 millions , she sold 92 millions albums. according to Nielsen she sold 85 mill in 2007 before blackout.

85 mill[2007] + blackout - 3 mil + circus - 4 mil = 92 mill

you need you need to check your source and to update the details

Bar17 (talk) 10:13, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.(this means a hyperlink)Spitfire19 (Talk) 11:43, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

A few things that need to be fixed

I don't have an account at the moment, so I have to make these suggestions this way. Sorry.

Second paragraph of intro says "...her first four albums debut at number one." Up 'til then, only one album's sales has been mentioned. It may be accurate, but in context it seems painfully awkward. Next sentence should read "on hiatus" and not "under." Next sentence "to peak" and not "to peaked" and the sentence seems run-on.

Next paragraph, "as the eighth best selling" and "of her albums as certified."

In the bio the "Spears is of English heritage" sentence is a twisted mess. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.98.193.99 (talk) 19:52, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

7th studio album information

Her seventh studio album is expected for release around October 26th, 2010 and is either titled "Halloween" or has some kind of halloween theme to it. My friend found this and has a source so I will have to check with him again.125.238.96.198 (talk) 10:36, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Death Hoax

She's is not dead http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/1388131.stm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnny pt (talk • contribs) 19:05, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

This hoax probably merits inclusion in the article, as http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/1388131.stm is a verifiable reference from reliable source.   — Jeff G. ツ 19:42, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Forbes 2010

Britney bumped her rank from #13 to #6, I think it should be mentioned. Celeb 100 FAQ: Yes, Britney Spears Really Made $64 Million Last Year. Here's How. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.130.139.70 (talk) 13:49, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

2010 Album Page

We may not have a release date or even an album title, but we do have TONS of confirmed demos posted on her website, her record's site, and YouTube, even though the latter is absolutely NOT a reliable source. (Cprice1000 17:55, 14 July 2010 (UTC)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cprice1000 (talk • contribs)

The Original Doll Ther

Do you think maybe we should include a section on it? There has been substantial information of a unreleased album recorded in the past. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cprice1000 (talk • contribs) 14:51, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Cheek Mic

I think something should be added under Musical style and performance about Britney's Cheek microphone which she almost never preforms without. It's something that has been seen on Britney whilst performing since she first burst onto the seen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.7.242.82 (talk) 16:30, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Agreed.Cprice1000 16:31, 29 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cprice1000 (talk • contribs)

Glee

An episode has been confirmed, it'll be the second episode of the second season, I think it should be mentioned.

UPDATE She's going to appear, according to "Glee" creator, Ryan Murphy —Preceding unsigned comment added by ColdAsFire Baby (talk • contribs) 15:52, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Blackout Sales

Hey guys great work on the page and all BUT I was wondering where's the evidence to back up the fact that Blackout has sold 3+ million? The only link used to substantiate it is an article from the guardian where Alexis is reviewing Circus. See it here http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2008/nov/28/britney-spears-circus is this enough "evidence" to warrant it being added to the page?

Thanks Ryonslaught (talk) 19:05, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Questionable Art

Britney Spears pop music has a very questionable artistic value, but what's more important, how she can be clamed an musical artist, musician (someone who inspires, creates peace), since doesn't write own songs, but American producers do all her music, lyrics, and using her as an instrument of entertainment and nothing more. Do not confuse musicians with some quasi-singers.

Therefore, its first must sentence change from "recording artist and entertainer" to "singer and entertainer" and wherever similar.--89.164.15.123 (talk) 17:42, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

You really are being quite dim to say that. Britney has written many of her songs and co-written close to all of them. She even has an entire unreleased album full of songs written by her and her only. Examples: "All That She Wants", "Baby Boy", "Rebellion." It goes on and on. Please no haters. User:Cprice1000 User:Cprice1000 () 19:22, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

These statements are against the five pillars of Wikipedia, so no. Xwomanizerx (talk) 00:59, 22 August 2010 (UTC)