Jump to content

Talk:Selena

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by CorvetteZ51 (talk | contribs) at 12:51, 3 December 2012. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Featured articleSelena is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 21, 2006.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 20, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
June 23, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
July 28, 2006Featured article candidatePromoted
October 13, 2010Featured article reviewKept
October 13, 2011Peer reviewReviewed
Current status: Featured article

FAR discussion

I have opened a discussion on this article at Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_review#Double_checking_before_nominating, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:29, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why if users are improving it and are giving helpful insight on what needs to be done on the talk page? Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 22:44, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted, per that discussion, to the October 13, 2010 version. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:06, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Sandy, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:18, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Recent removal

I think we should discuss in talk the recent removal of some content, including most of the impact section that was the same content since it first became an FA back in 2006. I reverted so we could discuss further in talk. Thanks Secret account 21:03, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, a lot of that crap was allowed to stay in the article when it attained FA! (I've seen enough other Wikipedia FA not to be surprised.) OK, it is not obvious to some editors, but: nitty gritty details of someone's life, the stuff that would properly fill a book or a magazine story, usually do not belong in an encyclopedia. Try the major WP criterion of notability. I've read dozens of entertainer BLP's at WP, dozens of post 1950 musical performer BLP's, and they do not contain crap like what hospital the person was born at. It is absolutely irrelevant that an inappropriate item appeared in the original FA! There's no need for consensus on getting rid of trivia. Half of the disgrace of this article is not that trivia was put in, that literal nonsense was put in, but that other editors allowed these things to stay in, sometimes for years. Agaaain: you're talking about protecting stuff that doesn't appear in just about any comparable BLP.

This encyclopedia article is not supposed to read like a real biography; it's not supposed to read like a fan Website.

Anecdotes can be appropriate to use sparingly to enliven the narration, to advance it, when they would in fact do so. Especially if they're amusing or directly relate to how the subject came to be famous, to be culturally important (e.g., an anecdote about how the members of a great band met). Sparingly, because the person's career is supposed to provide sufficient interest on its own. Use judgement. Of course, the history of this article is that it has been dominated by editors who have no judgement at any level. The hospital Selena was born in — for shame. Again, to people who may be stunned at my vehemence, we're dealing with an article which (1) was deemed a paragon of WP, (2) which is bound to get especially many visits because of who it's about, (3) is, as somebody else wrote in the last few days, is now one of the dregs of WP. Hurmata (talk) 21:52, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from a lot of the trivial details that Hurmata mentioned, the article was also riddled with grammatical errors and sentences that made no sense. It was basically impossible to make heads or tails out of some of the content that was included which is why I supported the rollback to a previous version. I read through the article awhile back thinking I could trim some content and clean it up a bit, but the amount of trivial junk (for lack of a better word) and POV content was just overwhelming. I also think there may have been some issues with sourcing as I found a dubious claim in the article awhile back claiming Selena became a billionaire during the course of her career. Turns out the source that was given (a video from an episode of 20/20) clearly stated she eventually became a millionaire. That's just one thing I caught but I think the archives of the talk page show that others questioned a few of the claims that were made throughout the article too. I don't see a problem with new content being added as long as the article doesn't turn back into the fanfest that it previously was. Content about how friendly, nice and beautiful Selena was shouldn't be included. While I'm sure she was all those things, it has nothing to do with her notability. Pinkadelica♣ 00:25, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes the article that SandyGeorgia reverted was deservedly removed, but I don't see the point of removing most of the legacy section and album details, especially that most other music articles GAs and FAs has them, Aaliyah for example. And I don't consider most of the information to be trivia, (I removed the hospital, and the birth name details as that was way too trivial) and irrelevant. It's ok per WP:MOS#MUSIC. I honestly don't like how this is going. Secret account 08:17, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Secret, I just don't want to do a WP:3RR edit warring here. I think its best to get everyone to understand each others points and see which path is best. The recent removal made by Hurmata was not a very good one, DOY is considered a "Historic day in Latin music history" (Billboard) why remove most of that information for the uninformed reader? We don't need to remove content that passed FA, we need to expand and update with WP:RS. Not everyone in the world knows who Selena is so we can't just say "... Selena was preparing for a crossover album" Why isn't crossover wikilink? and why was she recording a crossover album if she sung songs in Spanish? Just my two cents. Best, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 13:59, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A mass revert to the last good version will inevitably kill some good along with the bad; there is usually some content that may need to be restored. But this time, just do it slowly and based on consensus-- there's no need to edit war again, and there's no hurry. Content can be restored and upgraded the right way this time. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:03, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, that's why I decided to not edit the article at all unless there are consensus for it. Or better yet, allow someone who is better at writing content to add the information on the article so it won't effect the prose and grammar of the article. Best, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 14:08, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
These could help improve the article

I believe these following statements should be in the article, I would like to hear what others think:

  1. Information about Marcella having a tumor and that doctors had wanted to remove it.
  2. That Selena was thought to be a boy and her parents were going for "Marc Antony".
  3. How Selena was discovered by her father.
  4. How Selena learned Spanish (phonetically).
  5. How Selena was discriminated for being a female singer in a male-dominate genre.
  6. That "Oh Mama" had led Selena to appear as musical guests on the Johnny Canales Show.
  7. Domination at the Tejano Music Awards (she won Female Vocalist for eight consecutive years).
  8. Sony Music Latin offered Selena's dad double the amount EMI Latin was offering for signing Selena.
  9. Al Aguilar, president of the Lionel Sosa agency declared Selena as "the next Janet Jackson".
  10. Selena was given $145,000 a year from Coca-Cola USA for three Spanish-language commercials in Mexico, including one in English for the United States.
  11. How Selena's father turned down beer companies from advertising Selena because of her image and had wanted it to be clean.
  12. Jose Behar and Stephen Finfer requested for the crossover in 1989.
  13. EMI didn't believe Selena was "crossover potential".
  14. "Contigo Quiero Estar" became the highest charted (peaked at #8 on the Latin Regional Mexican Airplay chart) for Selena.
  15. "La Bamba" became Selena's first charted single August 1987. (not sure whats the peak per [1])
  16. Pete Astudillo joined the band in 1989 as a back-up dancer. (there's no mention of him at all, he wrote some of Selena's biggest hits and had done several duets with her)
  17. By 1990, Selena became a millionaire
  18. She became a spokesperson for the Texas Prevention Partnership, sponsored by the TCADA.
  19. "Ven Conmigo" became the first Tejano album recorded by a female artist to achieve gold status.
  20. The album remained on Billboard's Regional Mexican Albums for fifty-six weeks, an unprecedented feat for a Tejano act.
  21. Selena's works pave way for the "Tejano music movement" in Texas, wider audiences and record sales began to expand awareness for Tejano music.
  22. Yolanda Saldivar (murderer of Selena) originally dislike the singer but her friends told her to give her a try and that's when she asked to open the fan club.
  23. Entre a Mi Mundo sold 300,000 copies and became the first Tejano album by a female singer to sell that many.
  24. The album reached number one on Billboard's Regional Mexican Albums chart, and earned the accolade as the number-one Regional Mexican Album of The Year.
  25. The success from Entre a Mi Mundo helped EMI Latin to prepare Selena for a press tour, including a high-profile meet-and-greet conference with music media types in Monterrey, Mexico.
  26. "Amor Prohibido" (song) was nominated for a Grammy Award as well as the album itself.
  27. In (or by) December 1994, the album Amor Prohibido sold more than 400,000 copies, which was "unheard of" for a Tejano artist
  28. Selena's image helped her to stay in Coca-Cola after the company fired other celebrities only keeping Selena for Coke, Elton John for Diet Coke and Christopher Cross for Sprite.
  29. The single "Bidi Bidi Bom Bom" was a song that was not originally planned to be recorded, became one of Selena's most famous songs, winning Bertelsmann Music Group's "Song of The Year".
  30. Tejano music has not recovered since the death of Selena whose appeal extended beyond the Tejano genre: Such celebrities as Beyoncé, Myra, Paula DeAnda, 3LW, Christina Aguilera, Shakira, Nadia López, Diana Reyes, Ivy Queen, Fanny Lú, Don Omar, Kat Deluna, Eva Longoria, Wyclef Jean, Daddy Yankee, Aventura, Jennifer Pena, David Archuleta, The Cheetah Girls, Lila Downs, Tito Nieves, Manny Manuel, Girl in a Coma, Malverde, Angel y Khriz, Karen Rodriguez, Sara Tavares, Prince Royce, Bruno Mars, Frankie J, Perez Hilton, Katy Perry, Ashlee Simpson, Q'orianka Kilcher, and Enrique Iglesias have identified themselves as fans of her.
  31. That Selena Gomez was named after Selena.
  32. That Selena's music is liked by LGBT people.
  33. That Selena specials air annually on Spanish-speaking channels.
  34. Selena is regarded as one of the most widely known Mexican-American vocal artists.
  35. Selena was most popular Latin artist in the United States in 1995.
  36. A "Philanthropy" section needs to be written.
  37. The "Discography" section needs to have "Selena albums discography" and "Selena singles discography". Can they also be divided like it once was with {{Col-2}}?

Best, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 21:41, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How Selena Gomez was named by Selena is kinda trivial. Secret account 03:55, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, we can cross that off the list :) What about the others? Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 14:24, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
BTW you think you can add {{main}} template for the "death" section to the Murder of Selena article? Best, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 03:15, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Whether to report on a memorial concert

I deleted the report of a televised memorial concert that was held to commemorate the tenth anniversary of Selena's death. The point of the passage was how popular she still is. Here are two things that in themselves are not worthy of being discussed in detail in a Wikipedia article. (1) The continued popularity of an dead entertainer. (2) That a public gathering was huge and got a lot of publicity. These things are either nonnotable in themselves or they add nothing to an essay about a life and career that was notable.

As for (1), one of the bad judgements exercised over the years by some editors of this article is to make it a masturbatory and fetishistic indulgence in statistics about her accolades, chart positions, and dollar figures. Selena had a record breaking popularity and some editors can't quit detailing it ad nauseam. Selena's like Elvis or the Beatles, she continues to be popular long beyond the end of her final recording. Elvis has a museum too. And Dolly Parton. Nothing to dwell on. One deleted sentence reported that Selena songs were sung at the Selena memorial concert. Hel-lo! I noticed too that the source for the statistic on the popularity of the broadcast was an online report by the broadcaster itself. Although I do trust this source on this particular occasion, the reliance on a source with a conflict of interest is unfortunate. Again, this point should not distract us from the first point, that there is a history with this article of overkill in describing her posthumous popularity.

As for (2), every year worldwide there are tens of thousands of public entertainment events — World Cup matches, Rolling Stones concerts, etc. — which attract 50,000 bodies and gross hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars. Those facts don't make them notable for an encyclopedia. How ridiculous, to have an encyclopedia article dedicated to, say, each Beatles concert ever. Accordingly, the article on the tenth anniversary memorial concert ought to be deleted unless it was significant in some way other than it celebrated Selena. Hurmata (talk) 01:57, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In my final sentence just previous, "it" refers to the concert, of course, not the article about the concert. I should have constructed that sentence differently. Hurmata (talk) 02:04, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with your removal of the content, however, I agree with what you said. The source is a WP:PRIMARY source, however, this and these are WP:RS and could be replaced. Best, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 02:15, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To provide more perspective on the unwelcome edits. They seem to represent a morbid urge to pretend that Selena is still alive, 16 years on. It's like inserting, "every day millions of fans of Selena listen to her recordings at home, on the street, while driving. There was a broadcast X, Y people tuned in, there was a broadcast Q, Z people tuned into that one." Take these edits to a fan site, for goodness' sake. Likewise, the article on Shakespeare should not advise as to the minutiae of Shakespeare festivals. Hurmata (talk) 06:59, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, (1) you don't WP:OWN this article, (2) if consensus by the community wants that information on the article it will be on it weather you like it or not, (3) why are trying to make a WP:POINT by telling us that because X celebrity doesn't have it Selena shouldn't it, (4) I'm not sure why are you arguing about this anyway, I provided you a WP:RS from Billboard and numerous of other online searches on google.news and you still want to say that it shouldn't be included because you're only valid argument is that Selena is dead therefore we shouldn't add anything that talks about her milestones in the history of America pertaining after her murder? All information could be added, just as long as it doesn't fail WP:MEMORIAL. BTW, sorry if this sounds a bit harsh in anyway just trying to reply to your comment about this. Best, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 14:22, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
AJona1992, can you dial it back a bit because you're coming off as defensive and bordering on rude. There's no reason to bring up stuff like WP:OWN and WP:POINT (which you're using in the wrong context anyway) when the editor you're speaking with is not exhibiting those behaviors. Fact of the matter is that a consensus about most of what you're bringing up was already established because the article was mass reverted back to a previous version. As I told you before, just because you can find a source to support something does not always mean it belongs in an article on Wikipedia. If a few of you guys are jonesing to put the "Legacy" section back in, why not copy it from a previous version in the article to a sandbox and work on it sentence by sentence to bring it up to speed. Once an agreed upon version is made, bring it to this talk page and let the community decide if it is worthy of inclusion. Pinkadelica♣ 04:21, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yea I'm sorry, I did said sorry if I was bordering as defensive. Actually the editor is, that's why I had brought those up. User:Secret, User:SandyGeorgia and User:Brianboulton told everyone that consensus should be made before editing/improving the article further. However, since the article was reverted by SandyGerogia, Hurmata removed all information found in "Legacy" that passed at WP:FAC. These examples are WP:OWN, esp when the editor has been warned once, twice, three times, admin tried to talk to the user and the last warning made. Hurmata has been bordering the WP:OWN policy, esp her massive removal of content without a consensus from the community. Furthermore, this argument is not weather or not a statement about a historic event that has a WP:PRIMARY should be added, weather, the argument is about Hurmata removing a historic event that warrants its inclusion in the article per the WP:FAC2 and the statement is sourced. Before I even started editing the Selena article, this statement was there. Again, Hurmata removed the content without a consensus that was clearly stated by three editors for any improvements. Best, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 13:36, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Again, I'm not seeing any ownership issues. What I see is a content dispute about mentioning a memorial concert. That being said, I see no reason not to mention it as it did involve Selena and was evidently a popular event. This source supports that it was highly rated, so much so that it was released on CD and DVD. Since it was also seemingly the first concert memorial regarding Selena, I also don't see a problem with mentioning it. Now if it had been the fifth or twentieth, I could see a notability problem as memorial concerts can become a dime a dozen. As for the main article being deleted...I think if someone has a problem with it, they should nominated it for deletion. Personally, I think it likely meets WP:NALBUMS and WP:TVSERIES (as it was a tv special) and getting it deleted is unlikely to happen. The article currently needs extensive work but I do think it is likely notable. Pinkadelica♣ 21:43, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well its 3 against 1, however, I believe Hurmata's voice shouldn't be left out of this. Although she is against mentioning the concert, I would like to know further on why she thinks that so we can have a better understanding on what we might not get. This can improve on the way we will mention the concert. Best, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 17:35, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would also like to point out that the concert outperformed the Super Bowl and Soy Tu Dueña and was considered the "Most-Watched NFL Season Ever among Hispanics" [2], [3]. Best, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 03:51, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Selena Linda.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Selena Linda.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons 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 upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • 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 Commons Undeletion Request

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Selena Linda.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 08:10, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Early Discography

Why has her early discography been deleted from the articles? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.133.12.13 (talk) 00:07, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because only her studio albums are needed, those were LP records. Best, Jonatalk to me 12:12, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This reference Caller-Times April 16, 1997. is cited in "Early Life" but has no corroborative statements indicating her parents belonged to a denomination. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.190.144.132 (talk) 02:50, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

any chance of a decent pic of what Selena looked like? CorvetteZ51 (talk) 12:51, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Selena&oldid=526164158"