Talk:Mariah Carey

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mariah Carey article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

Mariah Carey 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. If you can update or improve it, please do.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 13, 2006.

Article Milestones
Date	Process	Result
November 16, 2005	Peer review	Reviewed
December 5, 2005	Good article nominee	Listed
March 12, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
April 14, 2006	Featured article candidate	Promoted
March 3, 2007	Featured article review	Kept
Current Status: Featured article

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.

Biography Portal

This article has been rated as FA-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ]
(If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to musicians and musical groups on Wikipedia.

	To-do list for Mariah Carey:	edit · history · watch · refresh
Find a Recent picture.
Priority 3

This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and the next release version of Wikipedia. This Arts article has been rated FA-Class on the assessment scale.

Archives
Before Jul 2005 Archive 1: Jul 2005 – Jan 2006 Archive 2: Jan 2006 – Aug 2006

1 Ridiculous
2 Main Picture
3 Can't Take That Away
4 Grammy Wins
5 Anticipating vandalism
6 8 Octaves? Impossible
7 Mariah's full name?
8 Vandalism to Mariah's Name
9 Forefront?
10 More vandalism
11 Vandalism
12 The View controversy section
13 Glitter on Sept 11
14 Billboard magazine's "revised methodology"
15 "Act"?
16 Merry Christmas: studio album?
17 Early years....
18 Can mariah play the piano?
19 "Rollcoaster"
20 Age - 1969 or 1970?
21 list of best-selling remix albums worldwide
22 possible stealth vandalism
23 Glamorized
24 Number-one singles
25 Mariah's Numer One Singles....
26 Next 2 Albums
27 measurements
28 Carey mary?
29 Please change that main picture
30 Images as at January 1, 2007
31 About the picture used.....again.
32 To the Response.
33 Soon To Be Released Albums
34 MARIAH'S SUPER HIGH WHISTLE!!
35 Mariah :Return to Prominance
36 Quotes and trivia
37 record producer, music video director and actress.
38 Semi-protected
39 Album Release Date
40 Picture Again
41 Repeated "2005-present" edit
42 Hero was a 1993 #1 single
43 Tessitura
44 Father's correct ethnic background
45 Mariah's boob and nose job.

[edit] Ridiculous

This image is no longer representative of what Mariah Carey looks like - nevermind just HOW fugly she looks there. Many fans have, undoubtedly, taken high-quality photos of her during the Adventures of Mimi tour - soo, such an image (dubbed free-use) is a viable replacement for the current one. Yes? If so, could someone please go about that? Whoever uploaded the standing image is adament that theirs remain - I'm fine with that, so long as it's not at the top. : P

[edit] Main Picture

Why is there a picture from 1999 as her main picture? that should be changed. PrincessOfHearts 14:58, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Because that's the only free image we have. See Wikipedia:Image use policy. Mushroom (Talk) 15:04, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

(216.99.50.80 01:39, 13 September 2006 (UTC))

Actually, the picture dates from December 1998 ;-) Look at the picture details. IMHO she was very very attractive back then .... 88.108.32.242 18:19, 13 September 2006 (UTC)AF

That picture is real ugly of her....she looks WAY better than that picture!! - —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.162.74.108 (talk • contribs).

i agree that isnt a very good picture  PrincessOfHearts 20:00, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

At one point, there was a next picture of Mimi's Concert in this position. Can it or a better picture of her be placed here please.....(Beyonce's picture looks good...why can't Mimi's??)24.162.74.108 03:20, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Blueandgold200

DO NOT DELETE THE IMAGE I HAVE UPLOADED. Is is the Single cover of Mariah Carey's "Love Takes Time." From what I understand we are aloud to uplode album covers and/or singles. Album covers and single covers can be found on just about any musical artist's article even Mariah's. So, pleas do not delete it.

Thank You!

Also, if wikipedia is open for everyone to edit, no one has the right to tell us editors that we are not aloud to upload any other images other than the one on Mariah's article. Don't go looking for what i just said, because i deleted it. It was when you went to go edit the article.

Thank You again!

You understand wrong. Next time try reading the embedded note about fair use images. CovenantD 02:42, 9 November 2006 (—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.72.157.217 (talk • contribs) .

Calm down—the debate over fair use on Wikipedia and on this page in particular has been going on for years; it's not something that can be understood perfectly in five minutes. In any case, an album cover is fair use. We are allowed to use fair use images in certain situations, but not everywhere. Thus, an album cover image can be used to illustrate the article on the album, but it cannot be used to illustrate another article, even this one. In general, the same is true of magazine covers and book covers. --Spangineer^ws (háblame) 16:26, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

In that case, if we are aloud to use fair use images in certain places, then a picture taken of mariah to showcase HER as in artist can be used to illustrate HER on the main page of HER article. And, whoever this person is that keeps deleting all the images to replace them with his, lay off of it. People are tired of seeing your image and your threats about fair use images when we can use them at certain times and certain guidlines. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.72.145.244 (talk • contribs) .

Unfortunately, you're arguing against Wikipedia policy. Please see WP:FU#Policy, point one. We have a perfectly acceptable free-use image; thus, fair use is not permitted. That's just the way it is. Please stop replacing the image; if you continue to break Wikipedia policy, you will be blocked. --Spangineer^ws (háblame) 02:54, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

But, if you said that we are aloud to use an album picture to illustrate and article about the particular album, then we are aloud to use a picture of an artist to illustrate the article of that particular artist. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Violinist1 (talk • contribs) .

No; it's more complicated than that. Part of the rationale of "fair use" is that there's no replacement image available, and that you're not going threaten anyone's livelihood by distributing the image. So with an album, there's no meaningful way to represent the album with any image other than the album cover. Furthermore, you're not making it less likely that people will buy the album (who buys an album for the cover art?). Promotional material is different, because it is created by a professional whose livelihood depends on proceeds from images. And besides, free alternatives are available (like the one produced by the US government in this article). --Spangineer^ws (háblame) 03:33, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay, that makes more sense, thank you for explaining that. Also, i got your message, and I think that maybe the encoded message involving the changing of the image should be deleted because anyone could find an image that fits the guidlines of the policy.

-Thank You

I changed the picture so don't change it unless you have a better picture.

WHAT WAS WRONG WITH THE PICTURE I ADDED??? IT WAS A PICTURE YALL USED FOR HER NOT TO LONG AGO!!!!!!

PLEASE change the current main picture..maybe use one from her tour or a free one from her website..anything...just change it!! (Trent Jones 17:16, 29 December 2006 (UTC))

Ok so I edited this photo of Mariah from her The Adventures Of Mimi tour, I think that this would suit the main page better than the current photo: http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/9907/taom3hf3.jpg Feel free to use that link if you like it. --Cornyperson 22:42, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Can't Take That Away

Can't Take That Away did not charted with Crybaby. I remember seeing the Billboard Chart Rewind about a year ago on billboard.com and Crybaby debuted at 28 without Can't Take That Away.

Charmed36 3 September 2006 (UTC)

we need a RECENT ONE! - —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.210.114.195 (talk • contribs).

[edit] Grammy Wins

I think musicians who win Grammies, especially multiple Grammies, should have that honor mentioned prominently in any biography written about them. It's akin to mentioning the fact that someone in the film industry won an Oscar. The Grammies are considered by most to be the premier award in the music industry, since it is recognition by their peers and not solely on commercial success. A Grammy is a Grammy is a Grammy.

tpetross 17:19, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

The problem is that it's misleading in this case. For a musician of her sales and chart accomplishments, Carey has done poorly at the Grammies. Even "We Belong Together", a super smash and critically praised, lost all the major categories last year (unfairly, in my view). If you're thinking about all the most important things to say about Carey, which is what the intro is doing, the few minor Grammies she's won is not high on the list. Wasted Time R 16:56, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Also, this question has been discussed several times before, look above. Wasted Time R 16:59, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I had already read the posts above and disagree with the arguments made against inclusion. This has nothing to do with NPOV, but rather that it is a standard practice to mention such things in most academic publications. I will concede that perhaps the Grammy wins should not be mentioned in the first sentence. However, I believe some mention of her Grammy wins and nominations should be placed in the introduction section. The fact that she has received 5 wins and 31 nominations, I feel, is pretty significant in the big picture. One of those wins was for Best New Artist in 1991, which is a major category. As I stated before, I can perhaps agree with your assertion of poor placement choice, but I do not agree with outright exclusion.

tpetross 19:48, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Which "academic publications" talk about Mariah Carey, please let me know! Anyway, if you added at the end of the intro, "Carey won the Grammy Award for Best New Artist in 1991; since that time, she has been nominated for Grammies 31 times and won 5", I'd be ok with that. Wasted Time R 19:07, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

First of all, I wasn't specifically referring to Mariah Carey. Obviously, scientific and educational publications would not have information regarding Carey's achievements--I'm not delusional. I was simply meaning respected, "academic" (in the sense that people study, analyze, and discuss in an intelligent, categorical, and historical context) sources of information regarding the entertainment industry will traditionally (not always) mention such accomplishments as a featured achievement of the recipient's career. This is something that seems to be afforded to other artists such as Christina Aguilera, Justin Timberlake, Aretha Franklin, Stevie Wonder, Beyonce, etc. on their respective pages as well as in other biographies.

I think the Timberlake usage is wrong too. For someone like Stevie Wonder, who holds Grammy records and who won the major Album of the Year award three times in four years during his classic period, the usage is very appropriate. Wasted Time R 19:54, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

In the end, I do realize that the Grammy Awards (like any awards program) have their own biases and politics. People are nominated and awarded (or dissed) for varying reasons, and as you pointed out, maybe she has been unfairly treated by the Academy, which is hardly the point. The point is, if it's good enough to mention for any of the aforementioned artists with comparable skills and musical styles, it's good enough for Carey.

The agreed upon changes will be made as you suggested. Please let me know what you think.

tpetross 20:27, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Lead sections "should provide an overview of the main points the article will make" (per Wikipedia:Lead section), and Carey's Grammy Awards history is far from a "main point" in the article. If other articles have similar introductions, then they shouldn't unless their Grammy history is particularly notable in some way (i.e. they have a record number of wins or nominations). There are over a hundred Grammy Award categories (some of which are for entire albums, in which case you have about a dozen people winning in one category), and they're handed out each year. We need to analyse this sort of thing on a case-by-case basis. Extraordinary Machine 20:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia, which is supposed to summarize the primary information. The Grammy history is very notable, because it is the highest honour a musician can receive. How is this not notable? The argument that there are over one-hundred categories is correct, but not significant. Also, a dozen people do not win in a single category. A record number of nominations or wins is peculiar; why does the musician have to be "special" to indicate their Grammy Awards' win? Carey may be very successful in the sales component, but even though her critical reception has never been overwhelming, it doesn't seem like a good reason to ignore this. We wouldn't ignore Alicia Keys nine Grammy Awards, would we? She doesn't hold a record for nominations or wins. This is virtually the same situation. Oh, and no one said that it had to be in the lead section. It could be moved to the position it was before, which was fairly appropriate, in my opinion. 64.231.115.150 22:58, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Keys has won 9 Grammys in a short career, including a major one (Song of the Year), while Carey has won fewer Grammys in a much longer career, including no majors. That's a real difference. Wasted Time R 00:50, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Above IP user is Eternal Equinox (talk • contribs), who recently ran into conflict with me and was banned from the Cool (song) article, over which he attemped to claim ownership, after he caused disruption in violation of the ArbCom ruling on him (see Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Eternal Equinox). The timing of the above comment leads me to suspect it was written more with the intention of antagonising me than anything to do with the article; regardless, I agree with Wasted Time R: it's not just whether she's won any or how many, but in which categories. Extraordinary Machine 21:49, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

That above user has had this discussion with you as far back as April (long before any RFAr). This is not antagonizing you since we've had prolonged conversations regarding the topic. Also, it is nobody's business whether an RFAr was held or not; do you want me to begin adding comments about you in my edits? No. But anyway, Wasted Time R does have a point concerning Keys career, which has been fairly critically-raved even though her commercial success has not. A fair argument, so perhaps the Grammy Award-mention should be added at a later date or if Carey eventually receives more than ten Grammys. I'm not sure, these are just suggestions. We will see later on. 64.231.152.103 19:44, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anticipating vandalism

Seeing that some people don't like to see some topics as the FAOTD (like Bulbasaur, Lindsay Lohan and KaDee Strickland), I think this article should be semi-protected. --Radio gaga 18:09, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

No Raul654 01:18, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

We gotta protect it now! There is Vandalism like ive never seen before!Cameron Nedland 01:57, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I've asked for semi-protection. Many IP vandals! Nfitz 05:05, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay it's much better now, but I'm still worried what will happen.Cameron Nedland 13:25, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Whats the FAOTD? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dappled Sage (talk • contribs) 22:00, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] 8 Octaves? Impossible

No human can have an 8 octave voice.

8 octaves is the full range of a grand piano. meaning Barry White style notes on one side, and Mariah's whistle notes on the other. this is beyong human capacity —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.74.68.235 (talk • contribs) 01:14, 13 September 2006.

I agree. Could someone check that source, please? --Fang Aili ^talk 03:40, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Here is a snopes.com article stating that she doesn't even have a 7 octave voice. http://www.snopes.com/music/artists/carey.htm

--Dudepal ^talk

There aren't even 8 octaves on a piano. --Fang Aili ^talk 13:00, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Although some pianos have 8 octaves. ThisIsMyName 13:51, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

No modern-day pianos do. --Fang Aili ^talk 16:26, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

An 88-key piano has 7 octaves and four semitones (88 keys divided by 12 chromatic notes per octave). -- Malber (talk • contribs) 17:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't see how an erroneous 8-octave assertion is encyclopedic. The fact that somebody thinks that Carey can sing in a range beyond human hearing is not relevant. --Fang Aili ^talk 16:26, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

What we here are claiming about Carey's vocal range, the octaves in a piano etc. is neither here nor there; while conducting research and compiling references for this article, I came across conflicting reports from seemingly reputable sources about the number of octaves in Carey's vocal range. Carey herself has said she doesn't know what her vocal range is. So, because it's a subject of so much discussion, and because so many reliable sources I've read say she has more than five octaves, I think this is worth mentioning, but I've added "erroneously" to the sentence and a citation to the Snopes.com page. Extraordinary Machine 16:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

She barely has a 5 octave range. It's not impossible to have an 8 octave range which is currently the guiness world record for largest vocal range held by Georgia Brown. G2-G10 is her range but I've only heard G2 since her G10 is actually able to be heard and sounds more like a B8 or B9. Nicola Sedda actually has the largest vocal range that I know of which I only remember his highest as A9. The fact is that Mariah has only displayed a range of Bb2-G#7 which is very close to a full 5 octaves. Bb2 has only been displayed in an interview and G#7 has been hit twice in live performances of Emotions and seemed fairly easily done. Besides Bb2 she has hit C3 numerous times. Emotions, My All, You And I(live performance), and other songs have C3 as their lovest. Besides G#7, F#7 is her highest in the studio version of All In Your Mind. Myke 20:31, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

It should be noted that a human being can have an 8 octave voice. Gerogia Brown has an 8 octave voice as stated in the Guiness World Records. However, Mariah does not have such a broad range, rather she has a 7 octave range, this was credited her in the 2003 Wolrd Music Awards, and based on what is taught in the study of her music through classical. This can be heard from her highest notes in 1993 Emotions performance where she hit G#7 and her lowest notes in My All and in All In Your Mind.

I have listed her proper vocal range on her page for everyone to see and discuss, please do not delete my information unless you can provide an even more detailed explaination because it took me a long time to source that content. (Trent Jones 17:18, 29 December 2006 (UTC))

Please, people, we don't need a tuner! If a reliable source says she hit B2 in "My All" or whatever, we can include it, but message board posts and mirrors/forks of Wikipedia aren't either. But who cares about this level of detail in this article anyway? Maybe it could be included in the articles on the songs, but saying most sources state she has a five-octave vocal range should be enough here. Thoughts? Extraordinary Machine 00:19, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I have found a reliable source that provides her proper vocal range with the notes included. It is unbiased and the site has already been verified by wikipedia. IF you choose to edit this info please tell me why. (Trent Jones 16:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC))

http://www.blinkbits.com/bits/viewtopic/mariah_carey_wikipedia?t=274273 is a copy of a previous version of this Wikipedia article; it says so at the top ("Shared by wikipedia on Sep 09, 2005 9:33 am"). This introduces a circular reference, which is unacceptable. Please cite reliable, external sources. Extraordinary Machine 16:30, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Since it seems almost impossible for anyone to edit this pahe and include fresh information, will Extraordinary Machine please insert the necessary statisics relating to Mariah Carey's voice. Many individuals visit this website looking for data relating to her existing vocal range, seeing that it is so rare, and this information has not yet been posted on this site. An encyclopedia should be precise and complete, without loopholes and voids. (Trent Jones 22:56, 31 December 2006 (UTC))

It's not impossible to "include fresh information", but any editor can remove information that isn't referenced or can't be verified. Dozens of editors have been inserting vocal range and highest/lowest note information into this article for ages, and none of them have cited reliable sources; if there are no reliable sources that report these so-called "necessary statisics [sic]", it may tell you something about how notable such statistics are (i.e. not very). An encyclopedia should be comprehensive and "without loopholes and voids", yes, but it should also act as a summary of significant information, not a "complete" repository. I feel that, in it's current state, the article clearly establishes the Carey's vocal ability - and why she is famous for it - without delving into details such as what note she reaches in "My All" or during which performances of "Emotions" she hit G#7. Too much information is a great way of hiding what's actually relevant. Extraordinary Machine 16:57, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mariah's full name?

This edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mariah_Carey&oldid=75425523) has Mariah's middle names as "James". I wasn't sure about this so I did a google search of "Mariah James Carey" and got no matches. Can someone verify if her middle name is indeed "James"? Karma Thief 02:41, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

That isn't her middle name. Mariah has stated in several interviews that she has no middle name. --musicpvm 04:30, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism to Mariah's Name

okay someone changed all of Mariah's last name Carey into Doodlejesus ... i'm trying to fix this but i'm not proficient in it. please bear with me. Axistence 04:12, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Forefront?

The lead states that she "returned to the forefront of popular music in 2005". Isn't this rather POV? The term "popular music" covers a wide range of genres such as punk, prog, jazz, rock, alternative, country, blues &c. If she returned to the forefront of anything, I would suggest it should be chart pop. ~~But I'm not going to edit it without consensus from others.~~

It's also incorrect to state, as the lead does, that she "took full creative control over her image and music". Chart artists never have full control over everything they do, especially if they are signed to a major, as she was. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 07:52, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

OK, so no-one's responded to these points yet, so I'll make a couple of changes and see what the consensus is. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 13:54, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I completely agree with what you said about creative control. I've changed "chart pop" to "pop music", which the article previously said at some point. Extraordinary Machine 16:08, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] More vandalism

Someone also inserted comments about how she's an ugly ass girl next to her birthday. There is also a lot of vandalism to her Biography, among other sections. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 14:16, 13 September 2006 (talk • contribs) 216.148.248.75.

Yes, but I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. It gets picked up and removed quickly. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 14:20, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Someone listed "Mariah Carey: The Fat Cow Lives" as an upcoming 2007 album. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.22.212.110 (talk • contribs) 15:07, 13 September 2006.

It's gone. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Richardrj (talk • contribs) 15:18, 13 September 2006.

HAHAHA!! as much as i love Miss Mariah, i have to say that made me laugh. AND SHES NOT FAT!!! And so what if she gains a few pounds? Is she an alien?

[edit] The View controversy section

This is the first time I've heard about this supposed "controversy", and I don't remember it getting any substantial or sustained press attention (even less than, say, Carey's "wardrobe malfunction" last year). In fact, the linked article ([1]) gives the distinct impression that the incident would be more relevant to mention in a discussion of The View than Carey; the main story here seems to be the "catfight" between Sandra Bernhard and Star Jones, and Carey was just one of several topics Bernhard discussed. So I'm considering removing this section. Thoughts? Extraordinary Machine 18:23, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Support. Seems to be just another one of those media-manufactured "controversies". By the way, wasn't it Janet Jackson that had a "wardrobe malfunction", not Carey? --Richardrj ^talk ^email 18:30, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I already removed it. I didn't see that there was a discussion on the talk page. It really is not notable enough to include in this article and definitely not notable enough to have its own section. Mariah was not even directly involved in the "controversy". It was just Bernhard running her mouth like usual. --musicpvm 18:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Glitter on Sept 11

The last time I looked at this page, it stated that "Glitter" had the unfortunate release date of Sept 11, 2001, (something I already knew, since I bought it that day, lmao), but now it's gone. Does anybody think it's worth mentioning as a possible reason the album failed, or too coincidental to draw a conclusion? Marikology 06:27, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Glitter just sucked, 9/11 had nothing to do with that. - —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.102.147.119 (talk • contribs).

I disagree. Many people ignore critics' reviews and the like. Who bought an album on September 11th 2001 anyway? Although it may still have bombed I think it's worthy of a mention. 88.111.104.195 10:40, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

The movie came out September 21, the record came out September 11. I am a fan but the week it came out bares only little as to why it did poorly - lack of promotion and bad press at the time caused the easily swayed public to look away from her. That week Jay-Z's "Blueprint" debuted at #1. "Glitter" was #7.

[edit] Billboard magazine's "revised methodology"

"tying her with Elvis Presley for the most number-ones by a solo act according to Billboard magazine's revised methodology (their statistician Joel Whitburn still credits Presley with an eighteenth..."

I'd like to know what this is supposed to mean. Billboard has never credited Presly with an eighteenth number one. Joel Whitburn, an employee who does not make the rules, wrote in his book (not an official Billboard publication) that, by his methodology Elvis SHOULD have eighteen. Whitburn's opinion has no bearing on Carey's record, it should be something more along the lines of

"tying her with Elvis Presley for the most number-ones by a solo act on the Billboard Hot 100."

Such Great Heights 16:37, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I thought this had been discussed to death before, back when you were editing from your IP address. To reiterate: Joel Whitburn is Billboard magazine's official statistician and some kind of less reliable outside source. Apparently, the people at Billboard have agreed to disagree (but not completely sweep it under the carpet - they dedicated a whole "Chart Beat" column to it at the time). Whitburn uses one methodology to calculate that Presley has eighteen number-one hits, which he feels is correct; others at Billboard use another metholodology to calculate that he has seventeen number-one hits, which they feel is correct. The one thing that we know for certain is that both parties have good reasons for believing what they do, which is why it's best and safest to simply mention the dispute (with further discussion about it in the Don't Forget About Us article), give no clear answer and let the reader decide what to think. Extraordinary Machine 21:36, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Act"?

Re: use of the term "act" in the first paragraph description. A group is an act, e.g., Gladys Knight and the Pips. The word seems to connote performance rather than being, and a group rather than an individual. Perhaps she could be described as a recording artist, or a musician, or a singer.rich 00:27, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I think "act" is there because The Jackson 5 previously held the record being referred to the first time, and also to avoid repetition in the second instance. Extraordinary Machine 15:33, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merry Christmas: studio album?

It seems that there's a dispute concerning whether Merry Christmas should be listed under the "Studio albums" header in the discography. I think we need a definitive answer here, so I was wondering if anybody had evidence indicating that Christmas albums are/aren't considered studio albums. Thanks. Extraordinary Machine 15:39, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

The International Association of Music Writers (IAMF) has officially ruled that Christmas albums are considered studio albums if the artist involved put a lot of effort and thought into them, while they are not considered studio albums if they were quickie throw-offs designed to make a few bucks at holiday time. You can determine how to apply the IAMF ruling here, but given that one of the songs she wrote has become a standard, you might be inclined to rule for inclusion. Wasted Time R 19:11, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Early years....

In an interview on Youtube.com Mariah mentioins that she used to smoke and drink alcohol and that she used to try and buy these things with a friends fake ID during her high school time. Can i put something on about this, or is it irrelevent? (gulfrazthehunk) 19/nov/06 19:37 Mariah smoked when she was 11 or 12 but she quit when she was 17, because it was ruining her voice.

[edit] Can mariah play the piano?

Well, i saw a video of her playing the piano. Can she?! (gulfrazthehunk) 19th November 06 20:08

I read that she "knows her notes" and can play the rights ones but shes not the best.Blueandgold200 02:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Although it's been some time since I read this, Mariah claims to use the piano during her songwriting. However, she says she cannot play well enough to play it live. In fact, she dinstinctly said that if only she'd learn to play better, she wouldn't lose melodic ideas as she often has.

Yeah she has also mentioned that she can't read sheet music either 67.175.23.73 06:14, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Rollcoaster"

I promise not to long ago it was posted on hear that Mariah's album was going under the working title "Rollcoaster." What happened to that.Blueandgold200 02:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank You

- I read that source that was cited, and nowhere on it does it say that the album had a working title 'Rollercoaster'. Whoever posted that just made that up. It should just go back to TBA because nobody ever announced that her album title was rollercoaster. Thank you - AJB4

[edit] Age - 1969 or 1970?

I just noticed that her birthdate was changed to 1969. Where was this information found? Every place I've been to has said 1970. *edit* Okay, I just clicked on the "history" tab, and found the link. 128.180.211.181 17:23, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

link

It is pretty suspicious that she has a driver's license that says 3-27-1969. Is she rounding up like Jennifer Lopez? Which date is right?

02-15-2007 The source for year 1969 as the birth year is from 1992. The page is of a fansite, and provides no legitimacy for making her a year older on this site. It is the only source, and when weighed against an entire page of search results that report a different birth date, it should be ignored. Someone should change the page back until more conclusive evidence is provided. --- Further, what does the comment below have to do with her age?

ME: LOL! That is hysterical that someone made up Mariah's album titled and got called out on it. Remember when she was making the now-titled "Emancipation of MiMi" album and people were saying it was going to be called "Lollypop" or "Candyland"

[edit] list of best-selling remix albums worldwide

Even though this is kinda off topic can someone help the new list of best-selling remix albums worldwide with its structure.

[edit] possible stealth vandalism

When I came to this page about 10 minutes ago, it listed her age as 79. I reverted to pre previous version of the page but the incorrect material was changed. I then undid my edits and looked at version of the page that was on before my changes and it listed her correct age. There is now no record of the page I originally saw. --Ted-m 02:40, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I just discovered that the 18:22, 1 December 2006 page was the one I saw. I am not sure why I saw this page instead of the latest one --Ted-m 02:47, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Glamorized

I've seen the line marked down quite heavily in Claire's stores recently. Is it cancelled or is it just "last season" now? SKS2K6 04:05, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

It's just last season. They do that with everything after a while, regardless of sales. 212.139.213.42 18:07, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Number-one singles

I suppose it was a good idea to remove the large template including all the number-one positions as to not violate Wikipedia:Article size, but I'm curious to know why the UK positions are listed? The U.S. are very plausible since that's where Carey's from, but I think a different country where she attained more number-ones should replace the UK. For example, she has four New Zealand number-ones (I think?) and six Canadian number-ones. Velten 14:48, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I see that the UK positions have been removed. Yes, I think it'd be best to include the U.S. number-ones only. Velten 23:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mariah's Numer One Singles....

Didn't Mariah Carey have a number one single for every year in the decade (90's)??? because in the 'number one singles' section right at the bottom, she doesn't have a number one single in '94. Sorry if im annoying anyone...

gulfrazthehunk 7th December 2006 16:14 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gulfrazthehunk (talk • contribs) 16:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

Hero was the #1 single in 1994. It stemmed from a 1993 album, Music Box, which may be the source of confusion.

[edit] Next 2 Albums

Her next to albums are entitled: Rollcoaster and Illusions: The Butterfly Within.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Blueandgold200 (talk • contribs).

sources?--Ashadeofgrey^Talk 16:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Mariah is rumoured to have an album called Platinum Diva: The Journey (a compilation of unreleased material) in the works.

[edit] measurements

please. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 90.19.14.20 (talk) 11:20, 23 December 2006 (UTC).

I don't think they're known. I'd guess that she's a size 12, 14 or more. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.139.213.42 (talk) 18:08, 17 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Carey mary?

"Carey mary" appears twice on the page. Very odd. NjtoTX 03:48, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Somebody vandalised the page, and not everything was undone. I've cleaned up the last bits. Extraordinary Machine 00:14, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please change that main picture

That picture is clearly outdated and it is clearly time to update it. Possibly include one from her tour or a television appearance.

[edit] Images as at January 1, 2007

I notice a lot of images have been added today making a total of 20. This is considerably more than we require and it creates the look of a scrapbook, rather than an encyclopedic article. With respect to the people who have worked hard at finding suitable images for this article, supporting them with fair use rationales, and then working to have this article raised to featured status, I am going to revert all of the new edits in order to remove all of the unsuitable images. I would point out that several of the newly added images have been taken from other Wikipedia articles, but here they are not supported by any fair use rationale. Several other images have been uploaded without fair use rationale, and are therefore candidates for speedy deletion. Before such major changes are made to this article by introducing a large number of new images, please ensure that it is discussed here first, and that consensus is reached. Refer :WP:FUC, WP:C, Wikipedia:Image use policy and Wikipedia:Image description page. Thanks Rossrs 11:16, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Apart from the obvious fair use issues, the high number of images make the article look messy and they distract from the text. If every one of them was under a free license, I'd still recommend at least some be removed. Extraordinary Machine 17:01, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About the picture used.....again.

MicP 10:45, 1 January 2007 (GMT)

Yes I Know This has been asked and maybe even a little debated. But, even if the main picture of Mariah carey is not made copyright and is free isn't Wikipedia able to pay for a licesed picture? If we took a screen capture from a recent music video or even a television appearance would that be a violation. I mean....is every randomly taken picture, television show she has been on (even the news shows and celebrity gossip shows) under a paid license.

No is no. Wikipedia can't go paying for every image we use. That's why we want FREE pictures. And be easy on the amount of pictures. TheDJ (talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 02:56, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

There are loads of photos of Mariah. Surely there is at least one recent, good quality, free liscence photo of her somewhere? I don't know how to add images and the article is protected, but can someone search for a picture becuase every time I visit the article it p's me off, big time. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.139.213.42 (talk) 18:14, 17 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] To the Response.

Oh So that's why it's called the free encyclopedia MicP 11:03, 1 January 2007 (GTM)

[edit] Soon To Be Released Albums

Mariah will be releasing 2 new studio albums in 2007. Only One Of these 2 soon to be released albums are mentioned. Why Is That? May I Edit this?

MicP 12:29 a.m., 2 January 2007 (GMT)

Platinum Diva: The Journey

[edit] MARIAH'S SUPER HIGH WHISTLE!!

HOLY GWAKAMOLI GUYS!! listen to the whistle in this video of Emotions from 91... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgJEAFntDUk at 2:55 she does a REALLY HIGH whistle. what number and letter thing was it? (or how high was is?)--Gulfrazthehunk 15:29, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mariah :Return to Prominance

OK first of all wikipedia is not designed to make any particular artist sound better than any other. By saying that you guys are giving her a special place in the music industry. That is NOT what wikipedia is for. Wikipedia is for INFORMATION AND FACTS. the fact that she was prominating the music industry before, or now, does not exist. Along with her where several other singers selling albums and releasing number one singles and albums. I am removing this and noone better put it back cause it is not what this article is for. We are not designing this article to show favortism. Stating she is "returning to prominance" is not supported and is not needed in this article. All the others are very simple and informative as should this one! If someone puts it back i will delete the entire article and we wont have a mariah carey article anymore!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.187.218.213 (talk) 02:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC).

Hello. God Bless You, but, If you only dare vandalise this article (again) you will be blocked from editing or even using WIKIPEDIA. The administrators are the ones who determine what is totally unnessesary and un-called for, NOT YOU civilian who may not evn be a registered user. Even if you were to delete the entire article's contents, it will be back up in a very short time. Administrators have all articles stored on speacial servers.Why is it that you did not sign your commen with a user name? Are yu not a member of Wiki? Are You Just Another Artist who is bitter and jealous of Mariah's success? All Users who agree with MY statements please notify me!!!!!!!!MicP GMT 6:45 p.m Feb 26 2007

[edit] Quotes and trivia

The quotes section should be removed as Wikiquote already has a Mariah Carey page with the quotes on it. Second, to maintain FA status, the Trivia section needs to be cited. Mr.Z-mantalk 18:25, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] record producer, music video director and actress.

$I n s e r t f o r m u l a h e r e$

OK first of all mariah is NOT a record producer! she is an EXECUTIVE record producer. Meaning she assists in the production of her music. She is not known for producing and therefor should not be credited. Music Video Director??!!! COME ON!!! She has not established a career directing videos so this should also not be listed. And i think its even an embarassment to list her as an actress considering she won razzie awards!! so all these need to be removed ASAP!!!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.187.218.213 (talk • contribs).

            I totally agree!! she is not famous for this and should not be cited for it!

[edit] Semi-protected

Somebody went on to violate the archive status by adding stupid phrases such as "Mariah Carey was caught pooping on Britney Spears's Prada bag". I erase them and put the article on semi-protected status. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rodrigogomespaixao (talk • contribs) 20:07, 9 February 2007 (UTC). I snorted coffee on the keyboard when I read the thing about 'Mariah Carey was caught pooping in Britney Spears' Prada bag'. Classic. But I'm glad you deleted it, it was obviously uncited, stupid and irelevant to the article. 212.139.222.62 19:17, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Album Release Date

If Mariah's next album want be released before September 07, then how is she going to release 2 albums this year??Blueandgold200 22:05, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

there's still time left after spetember. Perhaps she'll release both on the same day! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.43.74.145 (talk) 21:09, 23 February 2007 (UTC).

I would probably go insane if she did that. Why does wikipedia only have alittle info on one and not both?Blueandgold200 22:05, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

  That is exactly what I was saying, but, no one paid me any mind.MicP GMT 6:40 p.m Feb 26 2007

[edit] Picture Again

Its 2007 and the best picture yall have of her is in 1998.......Blueandgold200 22:05, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Repeated "2005-present" edit

64.131.199.179 21:39, 3 March 2007 (UTC)Instead of making a series of reversions, perhaps Reidlos could explain why Carey's 17 number one hits in America are notable, while 17 of Carey's international number one hits are not. An edit that deleted the whole topic, including the U.S. chart information, would make more logical sense. But the half-and-half approach is cherrypicking.

1. The two #1Hits in the UK are mentioned:

1993–1996: Worldwide popularity

It yielded her first UK Singles Chart number-one, a cover of Badfinger's "Without You"....

1997–2000: New image and independence

A cover of Phil Collins's "Against All Odds (Take a Look at Me Now)" went to number one in the UK after Carey re-recorded it with boy band Westlife.

OK?

2. Who cares how much number 1 singles she had in Canada or in Australia. A lot of people have two or more #1 hits in Australia and six or more #1 hits in Canada!!!!!! But 17 #1 hits in the USA -> Most #1 hits for a female artist and 2nd after the Beatles!!!Reidlos 21:49, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

64.131.199.179 11:50, 7 March 2007 (UTC)Ignoring the nine exclamation points, it's hard to interpret the edit as anything but a fan's desire to keep the "impressive" data ("2nd after the Beatles!!!") and drop the less eyepopping data (just 15 number one hits behind the Beatles on the British charts). These are number one hits, just like the ones listed on many other artists' Wikipages. Combining them gives a quick thumbnail ratio of Carey's relative popularity in various worldwide markets, information that can also be found on other artists' Wikipages. It's not a factual dispute. And it can't be irrelevance, since Carey's 17 American #1's did not occur from "2005-present." Reidlos' citations of "Without You" and "Against All Odds" does not address the issue, since Carey's ascent to 17 U.S. number ones is similarly annotated, song by song, throughout the article.

Since the half-and-half edit makes the least logical sense, and since certain users have dedicated themselves to deleting the reference to Carey's seven Japanese number ones et al ("Who cares"), I've made what I consider to be the second-most useful edit. I hope it will satisfy the other contributors.

[edit] Hero was a 1993 #1 single

Just to straighten out facts here. Her single "Hero," peaked at No. 1 on December 25, 1993, thus it's regarded a No. 1 of 1993, although it stayed at the top for 3 more weeks. Her highest peaking single of 1994 (at No. 2) was her duet with Luther Vandross entitled "Endless Love."

This alone doesn't make her an artist with number one single for every year in the decade (90's). So stop creating a record that's NOT intended for her. Let's be OBJECTIVE about this as Billboard already came up with a rule that states that any single that peaked at the top spot should be considered a No. 1 hit on that year, even if it stayed a few more weeks the next calendar year. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.4.102.9 (talk) 17:53, 13 March 2007 (UTC).

64.131.199.179 21:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC)Actually, a Billboard "year" runs from December-November, so the magazine can have the time to calculate the stats for the yearend issue. For this reason, there have been many wintertime releases to get short shrift in two "____ of the year" rundowns, instead of having the chart run combined into a single year's database. Even though "Hero" was released in October '93, the fact remains that it was #1 on the first few Hot 100 charts in 1994, and thus it keeps Carey's "streak" intact. Is the streak terribly important? Not really... if Carey had the identical chart performance from 1993-2002, the "in a decade" gimmick wouldn't attract the eye nearly as much. But as a statistical oddity, it's diverting. And since Carey had already had a #1 single in 1993, it's not like "Hero" needs to count twice. Carey's carryover into 1994 is more "legit" than Elton John's similar "consecutive years in the Top 40" streak, which in its later stretch was extended twice by two winter singles that did double duty for "1995-96" and "1997-98."

You're talking about the year-end issue but Joel Whitburn in his Billboard's Top 1000 Singles Book (The 1000 Biggest Hits of the Rock Era) would tell otherwise, still making her NOT eligible for the title to have a No. 1 single in every calendar year in the 1990s. Thus, Mariah's run of No. 1 singles are from 1990-1993 and from 1995-2000 only (her longest consecutive years to hit the top spot). 210.4.102.9 03:24, 14 March 2007 (UTC) Xander

64.131.199.179 14:16, 14 March 2007 (UTC)Billboard statistics are often about semantics (which is why it's shortsighted and silly to take chart numbers much past face value, up to and including Carey's "#1's" album). So Carey's "1990s streak" is gimmicky. It is. We might just as well say that Aaliyah "beat" Abba. But it happened; why fixate on narrow criteria to "prove" it didn't?

The Beatles' "I Want to Hold Your Hand," Billboard's top song of 1964, was released in December 1963. Percy Faith's "Theme from a Summer Place," Billboard's top song of 1960, was released in 1959. Danny and the Juniors' "At the Hop," Billboard's top song of 1958, was released in November 1957. Dionne Warwick's "That's What Friends Are For," Billboard's top song of 1986, was released in October 1985.

But it's hard to argue that a single that was in fact #1 for the first three weeks of 1994 is not a "true" 1994 #1 hit. Or does a carry-over song mean that the following year has fewer than 52 weeks for chart purposes? Many Whitburn books include the list of number one songs in 1993. They only add up to 46 weeks, because Whitney Houston's 1992 song "I Will Always Love You" stayed atop the chart through the end of February. So, was "I Will Always Love You" a 1993 chart-topper, or was 1993 missing two months? A binary outlook means that one of those two premises MUST be true.

I've seen Mariah Carey supporters assert that she "really" has the second-most #1 hits because most of Elvis Presley's #1s predate the 1958 "Hot 100" chart debut, or because double-sided #1s "don't count twice." That's also cherrypicking to achieve one's desired result.

Okay okay...let's just be very 'technical' about the single "Hero." It is a FACT that it peaked at the top spot on December 25, 1993 and that alone proved that it's a 1993 single. Its 3-week run on the top spot in January 1994 is just a "spillover." Can't we just be very objective about that? Year-end issue is different from categorizing a single when it peaked at No. 1. And I would have to agree with you, Carey's "1990s streak" is pure gimmicky, maybe created by some weird fanatic. Again and technically speaking, Mariah never had a No. 1 single in 1994.

Even if Mariah surpasses the record of Elvis Presley, The Beatles, Madonna or Michael Jackson in terms of No. 1 singles in the U.S., she can never be in the same ball park as the they. Her singles apparently are less appealing in the rest of the world. In fact, it's only in the U.S. that Mariah has unprecedented list of top singles. That is in contrast to her only 1 to 3 No. 1 singles she had in the UK, Australia, and other parts of Europe.

64.131.199.179 21:04, 15 March 2007 (UTC)The numbers don't have a larger meaning; they just are. It doesn't take fanaticism to observe that some Mariah Carey single was at #1 on the Billboard Hot 100 at some point in each calendar year from 1990-99. It's not as if one spillover single is being asked to qualify twice, thus covering two years. (Are we not going to know which NFL team is the 2007 champion until the 2008 Super Bowl?)

To keep declaring that this didn't "really" happen is the same as Carey's fans touting particular chart numbers to "prove" her accomplishments surpass all others. Billboard numbers are imperfect statistics in the best of circumstances. They're manipulated, they're highly circumstantial, and the calculating methodology behind them has been changed several times. Comparing Billboard totals throughout the decades is a hopeless errand. If Carey and Presley swapped places, both their Billboard careers would look very different. It's not just that they're not in each other's "ballparks"; they're playing separate sports.

[edit] Tessitura

Im a french writter on the frence wikipedia (so apologize for my bad english) ; I need some help about Mariah's tessitura. If there is no doubt about her highest note (G#7), what about her lowest ? Some say that she hits a F2 in this performance : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSJYXKXPb4w Could somebody tell me whether it is right or not ?

Thank you —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.84.142.16 (talk) 09:41, 21 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Father's correct ethnic background

Just wanted to back up my correction on her dad's ethnic heritage. The following quote is from a fairly recent interview with Mariah in British magazine, Pride. I cited the url of the website's main page (www.pridemagazine.com) as they don't archive their interviews; if someone else can get a date and other specs, please go for it! One way or another, Mariah knows better about her dad's heritage than Shapiro in any case. HUGE difference between an African American w/ some white Hispanic blood and an "Afro-Venezualan," which is what we originally had in the entry. Anyway, here's the quote:

Mariah Carey: Well, my my mum is White, and my father is African-American and part Venezualan--he's not a Black Venezualan, which is what they always wanted to write. His mum lived in Alabama; they migrated to New York. He grew up in the Bronx and later moved to Harmlem. He grew up as a Black man in America, and his father was part Spanish. It's just a typical story of someone of colour in America--everyone's a little mixed with something.

Efrafra 17:57, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I noticed someone tried to refine the sentence, which is great. However, I've changed the wording from "African American and Venezualan parentage" to "African American and Venezualan heritage" as the former implies that one of her father's parents was not African American. I believe that both his parents were self-identified African Americans, one of who had some Venezulan blood. I know this seems nitpicky, but I really want the information to be accurate. Efrafra 09:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mariah's boob and nose job.

Come on.... we all know shes had some work done. lets smach something into the main article about it....--77.97.146.46 12:27, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/a/r/Talk%7EMariah_Carey_ca88.html"