Talk:Ariana Grande/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

This page is lacking proper information of the artist

Once again, it's so important to have a nice biography where all you do and your achievements are properly recognized, every other artist has it in their wikipedia page but why does ariana not? There plenty of reliable sources, I had to fight with the administrators of this page for them to change or improve the information like were they said she was a soprano but she is a light lyric soprano instead, and now they removed she's a songwriter too where i can provide sources that ariana writes her music Moonlight Entm (talk) 01:32, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

https://info.umkc.edu/unews/album-review-positions-by-ariana-grande/

Singer-Songwriter

https://www.crunchbase.com/person/ariana-grande

Moonlight Entm (talk) 01:49, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

https://www.google.com/s/www.rollingstone.com/music/music-features/ariana-grande-thank-u-next-savan-kotecha-interview-791280/ here is songwriter legend savan kotecha admiring ariana's songwriting skills

“I’ve been around some of the greatest singers of all time. I’ve never seen anything like this.” As Ariana’s grown as a writer, she’s become more and more involved, to the point where she’s now the driving force. “Break Up With Your Girlfriend, I’m Bored” — she called us with that idea. We’re like, “OK!” She’s on her way over to the studio. We were playing around with melodies before she got there, and it coincidentally worked with the hook melody we were already working with.

She’s now at the peak of her powers as a tastemaker, a songwriter. All the success she’s had, she’s learned from it all: What her voice is, what works for her. And she’s learned how to go and write a hit song. She’s really good. Moonlight Entm (talk) 01:51, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

WP:CAKE, baking a cake doesn't make you a baker. While I do agree that she knows how to write a song, I do not thing anything needs to be changed. The article details her singing and acting careers, so the lead sentence/short description says that. In the Infobox, you can see that songwriter and vocal producer have been added, as those are occupations that she does a lot, but she is not known for them. If she was known for them, the article would have detailed sections about her songwriting and vocal production abilities. D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 02:23, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

I don't want to involve myself in this topic of discussion. But I came across this and I wanna comment that when you edit/work on Wikipedia, you gotta keep your WP:BIAS aside and follow WP:NPOV. The subject of your argument is fair, but the tone of your argument screams WP:FANCRUFT. You cannot let your "fanatic emotions" overpower you. It feels like a passionate fan letter rather than a topic of talk discussion. Relax. Breathe. BawinV (talk) 04:32, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Just because an artist is filled with talent and does a lot of things doesnt mean that the people who appreciates it are biased or are blinded by fanaticism, you were asking for sources to apply that she's a songwriter, you guys said that there's no source to put she's a songwriter and now that we gave you sources is still forbidden? There's no point, is this sort of like negative vibe/standard that people have towards pop artists specially females artists,it's like they can't stand pop artists being involved in their creative proccess, i still haven't seen the vocal producer and songwriter part, i might have to check it now i guess, and just because you don't have popularity as a songwriter doesn't mean you are not, ariana has been writing her music since 2016 mostly all by her, always leading and some of them alone

Moonlight Entm (talk) 21:45, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

And as far i know, ariana's certifications are up to more than 120M units cause she's sold 85M only in the usa and counting all her other global certifications could even reach 150M units, so the 85M units that she sold were only in the usa not worlwide Moonlight Entm (talk) 21:51, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

At this point, I honestly have no fight left in me. This talk page has been nothing but fighting for the past seven months. Do whatever you want. Add whatever sales/professions/associated acts you want, I'm done. I'm pulling a Bawin. I've had more pits in my stomach due to this talk page than all the other things I've done on Wikipedia combined, and it's not worth the stress to keep fighting and pushing when nothing is going to change. Please keep in mind that this is not directed at Moonlight Entm, it's a general statement that I'm just done. I don't need to make a separate section, so I'm just going to go with the discussion that served as my tipping point. D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 03:21, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

You don't have to be stressed don't worry i understand you, i also feel like that in every other page i'm trying to improve but can't due to their respective owners, all i want you to understand is that the changes we want to make doesn't affect or disrespect the wikipedia's strict rules, we are all trying to follow them to pay justice for the artist but of course we won't advocate for disruptive editing or vandalism, as editors in wikipedia it's important to support each other and see others opinion instead of doing what we only want to without paying attention to what others think and their opinions, have a nice day, blessings! Moonlight Entm (talk) 18:24, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

You don't have to be stressed, i totally understand you i feel the same when i want to improve other pages but can't due to their respective signed editors, all i want you to understand is that just because we want to add/edit some things doesn't mean that this affects or disrespects wikipedia's strict rules, we are all editors and we do not advocate for disruptive editions or vandalism we just want to pay the artist's justice, as wikipedia editors we have to support each other and see others opinions without editing the things as we want and not considering others point of views or opinions, it's not correct as wikipedia editors, have a nice day, blessings! Moonlight Entm (talk) 18:33, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

And i can't add or edit this page anymore cause only the signed editors of this page can do it, so don't worry, i agree with you is worthless to keep trying, things are going to stay as you guys want sadly Moonlight Entm (talk) 18:35, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

I am still waiting for your response, we wikipedia editors can't work if we left for our convienence Moonlight Entm (talk) 23:36, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Doja Cat

@Mirrored7: Instead of making irresponsible edits, discuss here your problem. As per Template:Infobox musical artist, Doja Cat is easily an associated act, more than Bieber. BawinV (talk) 20:53, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

@Mirrored7: "She still has no significance to her career whatsoever" based on what? You can't just say that. You're nothing but a liability to this article. versacespace 05:37, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@VersaceSpace: That user won't discuss on talk pages, but rather simply revert edits because they don't agree with it personally. I wish admins would look into this. BawinV (talk) 08:41, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@Mirrored7, VersaceSpace, and BawinV: per the criteria at Template:Infobox musical artist#associated_acts, the associated acts field is for professional relationships with other musicians or bands that are significant and notable to this artist's career. Then, it proceeds to give examples as to what is appropriate. One of the bullet points is Acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions, or on an album, or toured with as a single collaboration act playing together. I think the thing that’s holding us all up is "multiple". According to Google dictionary, multiple means several, and several means "more than two but not many". Therefore, Cat ("Motive"/"34+35 Remix") nor Bieber ("What Do You Mean? Remix"/"Stuck with U") nor the Weeknd ("Love Me Harder"/"Off the Table") nor Miller ("The Way"/"My Favorite Part") nor Monét ("Monopoly"/"Got Her Own") should be in this field, even though Grande and Miller dated and even though Monet has written dozens of Grande's songs. Minaj (6) and Big Sean (3) are fine to stay in this field. D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 14:00, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Category:Songs written by Victoria Monét shows clearly as all hell her contributions on every Ariana Grande project. Trillfendi (talk) 15:02, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Writing songs is not in the criteria for associated acts, so if you cancel that out, she's just as incapable of meeting the criteria that @Mirrored7: thinks should be imposed as the rest of the artists in the box, specifically Bieber. @Trillfendi: versacespace 04:40, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

@Trillfendi: that page doesn’t prove anything. Songwriting isn’t a factoring being an associated act. Monet has featured with Grande on two songs (Got Her Own and Monopoly), so whatever happens to Bieber, Cat, Miller and the Weeknd happens to Monet. As well, I don’t think calling my understanding of the documentation "bullshit", as I consider swearing directed at me a personal attack. There's no need for curse words in a discussion. D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 04:53, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

@Doggy54321: You claimed they only worked on two songs yet that’s literally categorically false. It’s not even logical. And it’s exactly why this article will never prosper, because people with only a "stan" mentality are limiting its encyclopedic values. If your only perception of an associated act is vocal performance, then stop editing. Trillfendi (talk) 12:34, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

@Doggy54321: Honestly it's very simple; @Mirrored7: engages in fancruft for Grande (nearly to the point of COI), and @Trillfendi: is the same way for Monet. There's no way this discussion will end nicely, but you didn't hear it from me. versacespace 05:03, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

@VersaceSpace: I could give a damn about Monét, I’ve never even edited her article. So to claim I have a "conflict of interest", which is a serious allegation, for someone I've only spoken of in regards to another person's infobox is disingenuous and unscrupulous. But maybe you're just projecting. Trillfendi (talk) 12:34, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

@Trillfendi: Projecting...according to whom? You? I could give less of a fuck about what you have to say about me. Anyway, that's irrelevant. According to the criteria for "associated acts, Monet would not qualify for this area if Doja did not, that's not to say Monet does not fit the criteria, we're simply saying that Doja is just as capable of fitting the criteria as she is. Regards, versace space 16:08, 1 February 2021 (UTC).

@VersaceSpace: Yet someone who calls themselves a sockpuppet is trying to tell me that I have a conflict of interest. How does that work. In what world does 1 (one, single, solitary, by itself) mean or indicate "multiple" of anything? Writing songs, for which a person receives royalties from, is in fact a musical collaboration. Next. Trillfendi (talk) 17:17, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

@Trillfendi: If you can't take a userbox joke just say that. Nobody is saying Monet and Grande are not associated, but you still need to fit the criteria to get into that category. And nobody is saying that she doesn't, what we're saying is that if Doja doesn't deserve inclusion, neither does Monet. This is not going by anyone's perception of "association", this is going by the criteria of inclusion. versacespace 17:38, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

@VersaceSpace: I was going to call it facetious, but I had changed my mind because then people would have to find out what that means. I just find it a bit ironic that someone who has never edited this article wants to accuse me of having a so-called conflict of interest for another article I’ve never edited. Make that make sense. Trillfendi (talk) 18:11, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

@Trillfendi: what the hell are you even talking about lmaoo??? I can't seem to figure out whether you're talking about this article or my userbox? If you're reffering to the former, I'm not treating anything here with humor, and if you're referring to the latter, it's not that serious. You've littered this discussion with personal attacks for no reason. Take a chill pill. Simply discuss the topic at hand...VersaceSpace is wondering why you would request an article when you could just make it yourself... 18:22, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

@VersaceSpace: I don't know where you got this goofy theory that I'm so-called fired up over anything to do with you but there's better things to do on this website (articles to create, articles to upgrade, articles to delete, etc.) than go back and forth with someone who doesn't even know what they're talking about. If your feelings were hurt by something said, oh well, no harm no foul. If you considered anything a personal attack, then report it and an administrator will handle it if there's a problem. But what you won't do is say I have a conflict of interest with no evidence. Trillfendi (talk) 13:58, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

@Trillfendi and VersaceSpace: Let’s try to de-escalate this. I agree with Versace when they say that Cat and Monét have the same chance, as songwriting is not a factor in association. If that was not the case, I think everyone’s associated acts lists would be filled to the brim and then some. D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 16:25, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

@Doggy54321: And this is according to you and your myopic perception of association, only. To say songwriting isn’t an association is lunacy. Michael Jackson would be out of a Grammy if Rod Temperton didn’t write Thriller. Trillfendi (talk) 17:17, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

@Trillfendi: But he's not included in the "associated acts" section of that page, a featured article. versacespace 17:38, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

@VersaceSpace: It’s almost as if there’s a hidden note about associated acts being sourced elsewhere. Two of the top editors decided even his most famous and prominent collaborators, including his own sister Janet, Quincy Jones, and Paul McCartney for crying out loud, were not worthy of inclusion in the infobox. Trillfendi (talk) 18:11, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

@Trillfendi: That would be incorrect. It is not my perception, rather it is what is stated in the documentation of the template. If you look at Template:Infobox musical artist#associated_acts, you will see that, under the header of The following uses of this field should be avoided:, there is the bullet point of Association of producers, managers, etc. (who are themselves acts) with other acts [...]. Monet is a separate act from Grande, so that applies to her. If you feel so passionately about this, you can start an RfC at Template talk:Infobox musical artist (for a consensus that affects multiple pages) or here at Talk:Ariana Grande (for a consensus that only affects this page). As well, please stop with the personal attacks (your myopic perception of association). D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 17:36, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

@Doggy54321: I suggest we do a rfc. Neither User:Trillfendi nor User:Mirrored7 are willing to discuss this, although they'll happily delete any edits made as a result claiming there's no consensus for them (or something of the sort). versacespace 16:40, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

@VersaceSpace: Let’s give both of them the benefit of the doubt here. Neither of them have been edit warring on the page (so we should probably assume a bit of good faith), and Trillfendi is being kind enough to take time out of her day to converse with us. I don’t necessarily agree with the RfC for right now, as we are trying to form a consensus with this discussion. But, if we find that we’re not getting anywhere in the next couple of days, I will definitely support an RfC being started. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 16:52, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

@Doggy54321: Just last year Mirrored7 deduced that Max Martin, who produced multiple songs on an album is an associated act, but Pharrell Williams who produced multiple songs an album isn’t. When the goal posts stop moving, people will stop "arguing" about this minutiae. Trillfendi (talk) 18:11, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

@Trillfendi: Whaaaaat? How? At least Pharrell sang on a song with Grande, so he’s more of an associated act than Martin, who has done nothing but production/songwriting. I agree with your goalpost statement. D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 18:15, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

@Doggy54321: I think you mean the legendary Max Martin (as said by @Mirrored7: themself.) Or is that too facetious? @Trillfendi: ;) VersaceSpace is wondering why you would request an article when you could just make it yourself... 18:26, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

• If there's any more edit warring on this, I'm fully protecting the article for a couple days. Don't tweak this any more until there is a consensus. (I have no stance in the matter, so just figure it out amongst yourselves or start up an WP:RFC if that's what it takes.) Sergecross73 msg me 17:37, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
  • @Sergecross73: I completely agree. If you don’t get to it, I’ll happily request full protection at WP:RFPP if anyone edit wars pasts this point. D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 04:53, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
    • As well, I wouldn’t be opposed to indefinite (or at least a year) pending changes protection, auto-accept to sysop only, as there have been four or five edit wars in the past four or five months, which is obviously a huge problem. D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 04:59, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

• Should such a situation arise, an individual month-long block for all editors involved would be more feasible than full-protection. With regard to the topic at hand, the associated acts field is for the select few artists who are literally known for their association to the subject. It isn't the venue to force feed other artists to people. See: The Jackson 5 being the only listed associated act on Michael Jackson even though some may think Janet Jackson, Paul McCartney, etc. fit the bill. For Ariana, that would be Nicki Minaj, and maybe Big Sean and Mac Miller. Doja Cat shouldn't even be in consideration.--NØ 15:36, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

• @Sergecross73 and MaranoFan: So... Versace edited the page after two days of discussion and then Mirrored reverted back. I don’t know if this constitutes page protection, both editors being blocked temporarily, only one of them being blocked temporarily, or anything else, but I thought I’d notify y’all as it started again. D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 22:19, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

@BawinV: @Trillfendi: @Mirrored7: @Doggy54321: @Sergecross73: @MaranoFan: Hello. Thank you for all your contributions to this discussion (except Mirrored7, who has not contributed at all to the discussion but continues to revert all edits). I didn't see MaranoFan's objection to Doja Cat's addition, so I'll reply to it here.

MaranoFan I don't quite understand your point? The criteria for inclusion states that "acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions" qualify to be added. So, Doja Cat has collaborated with Ariana Grande twice, and it seems there's more coming as Ariana has teased through her Twitter account. versacespace (talk) 20:19, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

The first line of the criteria states that the field is "for professional relationships with other musicians or bands that are significant and notable to this artist's career". Followed by that statement are possibilities that can indicate credible associated acts. It’s not a one-size-fits-all directive that obligates every multi-time collaborator be included. In Doja Cat's case, one of the collaborations is "Motive", which is a non-notable song insignificant to either artist's career, and the other is a remix of a song that was already notable without it. Point being Doja Cat is insignificant to the notability of either of these works, let alone Grande herself. Kindly go over some featured articles (solely for your understanding) and none of them have a cesspool of irrelevant artists in this field.—NØ 20:47, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

But if this were the case Motive would not have a Wikipedia article...notable songs do warrant articles, isn't that so? And as for 34+35, Doja Cat's verse was vital to the song's chart success. versacespace (talk) 21:11, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

All 14 tracks from its parent album charted, so Motive's charting can't logically be attributed solely to Doja Cat's appearance. So the point stands, really. And 34+35 had peaked in the top 10 before Cat became associated with it. These collaborations do not demonstrate Doja Cat having a significant impact on Ariana Grande's notability, and no long-term working relationship like Grande-Minaj exists between them yet. I’m not interested in discussing this topic at length so I will leave it to the judgement of those who have already extensively participated here. Have a good day.—NØ 21:28, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. I still disagree with you, but at your request, I'll end it here as well (with you at least, I'll still talk among the others). versacespace (talk) 21:37, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Why you think that Doja Cat should be listed as a associated act? Only because she did two Songs with Grande? Is that really the only reason she should be included? Is it really comparable with the others who are on this list? Do you really think people would associate Ariana Grande with Doja Cat, or vice versa? On top of that, Billboard has credited her for only one week on 34+35. It's now charting as a solo credit at number four. The original is more popular than the remix, it seems. Mirrored7 (talk) 22:28, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

@Mirrored7: Doja Cat, Justin Bieber, Mac Miller, the Weeknd and Victoria Monét are all in the same boat. They have all collaborated with Grande on two songs. So if you remove one, you remove all. D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 22:36, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

@Doggy54321: Bieber has one song with Grande. versacespace (talk) 22:42, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

@VersaceSpace: Stuck with U and What Do You Mean?#Remix. D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 22:52, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

My apologies, forgot about that one. versacespace (talk) 22:55, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Mirrored7:, and thank you for adding to the discussion. When an artist is credited on a remix they stay credited for their weeks on the chart, even after the remix passes the original. As I've stated many times, the guidelines for inclusion in this section state that "acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions" merit inclusion. As you know, Doja Cat has multiple songs with Grande, so she should be included. People aren't added to this section because "someone might associate them with her", there's actually a criteria for this which needs to be followed. Thank you, versacespace (talk) 22:40, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

@VersaceSpace:, just want to state one last thing. the guidelines for inclusion in this section state that "acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions" merit inclusion, this isn't true. And: people aren't added to this section because "someone might associate them with her", there's actually a criteria for this which needs to be followed., this isn't true either. People can be added here if they have collaborated with the artist on multiple occasions and would be considered significant in the other artist's career. This is a subjective thing and should not be misrepresented to users who do not know this. Likewise, there is no obligation that everyone who has collaborated with the artist twice be treated with the same importance. I'm really not sure where people are reading this nonsense. No, Cat, Bieber, Miller, Weeknd and Monét do not all hold equal significance in Grande's career, Miller was featured on her debut single and noteworthily namechecked on her first #1 hit. That clearly offers him significance the others do not have.--NØ 03:03, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

But that's not the only reason, why they are associated with Grande. For example, Mac Miller was also her boyfriend, and she mentioned him in of her most popular songs, and half of the 'Thank U, Next' album was about him. 'The Way' was Grande's first top ten single, which featured Miller. They performed together multiple times, and so on. Mirrored7 (talk) 22:46, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

I think you should read this: Template:Infobox musical artist#associated_acts. The criteria makes no mention of personal life, however, Mac Miller merits inclusion because he has two songs with Grande, as Doja does. Both meet the criteria. Thank you, versacespace (talk) 22:52, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

That's why I mentioned the album and the song. "This field is for professional relationships with other musicians or bands that are significant and notable to this artist's career". Doja wasn't either significant or notable in her career, so yeah. Mirrored7 (talk) 22:58, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

By what standard is she not? How does that work? Is that your opinion or is that actually factual? versacespace (talk) 23:06, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

I told you the requirement. Do you know how long this list would be, if we just went after number of collaborations? This has nothing to do with my own opinion. Mirrored7 (talk) 23:31, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Any artist who's made a song with Ariana Grande and is credited as such has a professional relationship with Grande and is notable to Grande's career. That is not part of the criteria, that simply explains what the section is. The bulleted portions are the criteria. Doja meets the second bullet point of the criteria. versacespace (talk) 23:56, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

This is completely false. See both my comments above. Michael Jackson collaborated with 3T, Janet Jackson, Diana Ross and Paul McCartney three times each and none are included in the associated acts column of his featured article. "This field is for professional relationships with other musicians or bands that are significant and notable to this artist's career" is the criteria, the part below it are hypothetical cases which may or may not constitute such sigificant and notable relationships.--NØ 03:10, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

But there's no need to give examples since other stuff exists. And the hypothetical cases in question illustrate my point on how Doja Cat merits inclusion. versacespace (talk) 04:09, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

As the very description page states: Featured articles are considered to be some of the best articles Wikipedia has to offer, as determined by Wikipedia's editors. They are used by editors as examples for writing other articles. OSE does not apply as the Jackson article is only being referred to you for your personal understanding. This is the third and last time this is being explained to you, Template:Infobox musical artist does not mandate that anyone who has collaborated twice with an artist be included as an associated act. On merits of commercially successful collaborations, Minaj should be included. On the basis of that + media coverage, Big Sean and Mac Miller might be included. Doja Cat, The Weeknd, Victoria Monét, and Justin Bieber should all be removed as there is no media association or long-term work relationship between them. This field is for very rare, significant and long-term associations.--NØ

@VersaceSpace: I don't know where you got this goofy theory that I'm so-called fired up over anything to do with you but there's better things to do on this website (articles to create, articles to upgrade, articles to delete, etc.) than go back and forth with someone who doesn't even know what they're talking about. If your feelings were hurt by something said, oh well, no harm no foul. If you considered anything a personal attack, then report it and an administrator will handle it if there's a problem. But what you won't do is say I have a conflict of interest with no evidence. Trillfendi (talk) 13:58, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

@Trillfendi: Where did I say you were fired up over anything I do? I said that my edits would be reverted citing no consensus when none of the editors were interested in reaching it, which is true (and I think we can all guess who did it). I also said that either you would do it or Mirrored7 would, which was also true because the latter did it. But if you wanna go there, what was the reason for scouting through my userbox and mentioning one you had a problem with? If anything you are, but it's got nothing to do with this page. versacespace (talk) 14:12, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

• Page fully protected for three days. Will unprotect earlier if a consensus is demonstrated. Will block anyone who reverts again after the protection expires. Sergecross73 msg me 16:12, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
• Remove all except Nicki Minaj, Big Sean and Victoria Monét: Doggy54321 and MaranoFan seem to be the only users focused on providing fact-based opinions, rather than trading insults. Everyone involved needs to take a step back, and understand that it's not the end of the world if an artist is or is not mentioned in the infobox—the base information of the collaborations are not being removed from the body of the article or associated articles. Template:Infobox musical artist#associated acts is indeed the place to be looking and I think the clearest text is for professional relationships with other musicians or bands that are significant and notable to this artist's career. I think Minaj, Sean and Monét fall into this category for significant numbers of voice or writing collaborations, while the others are just not so significant that they need to be highlighted in this way. Less is more. The reader gets a lot more information if we highlight just the most important names, rather than maintain an ever-increasing list. (There'll be no point pinging me as I won't respond to ad hominem or bludgeoning.) — Bilorv (talk) 17:45, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

So I presume this is the version we're going with? I agree to it, Bilorv. versacespace (talk) 04:40, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

@VersaceSpace: NO!!! If edit warring breaks out again, people will get blocked, as stated below. As well, the editors of this page need to learn that edit warring isn’t the answer. I say to wait for more people to comment. D💘ggy54321 ^(xoxo😘) 04:51, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

That's what I was asking. Nobody has said anything here for a few days so I think we shuld try to reach consensus now. versacespace (talk) 04:55, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Pinging @Doggy54321, VersaceSpace, Mirrored7, BawinV, and MaranoFan: It's been over a month since this discussion took place, however, the userbox has not been updated. Do we agree to Bilorv's proposal or should we discuss this further? dylxtalk 15:30, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@Dylxpedia: Wow, I completely forgot this thread existed. I definitely agree to Bilorv's proposal, it is a reasonable, fact-based compromise. D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 15:38, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@Doggy54321: I second this. versacespacetalk to me 15:40, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@Dylxpedia: Yes, I agree with Bilorv's proposal. BawinV (talk) 17:01, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

At long last, people have finally figured out that someone who has almost 40 co-writing credits yet for Ariana Grande is in fact an associated act. Case closed. Trillfendi (talk) 18:28, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

The Weeknd, Justin Bieber, and Mac Miller should still be included.

The Weeknd: They did two songs together, one even last year. They performed multiple times together, and he admitted that Grande was for him "the foot in the door" for his rise in pop music.

Mac Miller: I really think this is a no brainer. They both have multiple songs together (one of them was her first hit, some of them are unreleased or are on platforms like SoundCloud).

Justin Bieber: They released two songs together (one of them is a number one song). They also have performed multiple times together, and are managed by the same manager. Mirrored7 (talk) 00:25, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

The moment I glanced at this on my watchlist I just knew everything had gone to hell. versacespacetalk to me 00:29, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@Mirrored7: The Weeknd's quote was taken out of context. The original quote reads, "Ariana was kinda my foot in the door with Max [Martin], my chance to show him 'I can play this game,' y'know?" He wasn't talking about his "rise in pop music", he was talking about working with producer Max Martin. Also, Mac Miller and Ariana Grande only have one collaboration, and I don't think unreleased songs fit the criteria for the associated acts field. And to quote Bilorv, I think Minaj, Sean and Monét fall into this category for significant numbers of voice or writing collaborations, while the others are just not so significant that they need to be highlighted in this way. Less is more. The reader gets a lot more information if we highlight just the most important names, rather than maintain an ever-increasing list. We don't need to name every single artist that meets one bullet point on that list. The three that are included in the proposed compromise are objectively the most associated. dylxtalk 12:54, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Shes collabed with Justin Bieber on a song, remix and theve performed live together multiple times. She's also collaborated with the Weekend twice and theve performed live together. They both fit into the associat acts category and should be included even though artists like Minaj and Monet have more significance Randomperson7893457 (talk) 16:29, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@Dylxpedia: Wrong. Grande and Miller collaborated on three songs including on one remix. They also were in a relationship, and performed multiple times together. After his dead, Grande wrote two songs about him, and she mentioned him in one of her most popular songs. To get to The Weeknd, I know what I wrote. He had his first major commercial success with Max Martin, a pop producer. But it happened because of his work with Grande. Mirrored7 (talk) 20:11, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@Mirrored7: Valid point. I agree that Miller should be included. However, I'm not convinced about The Weeknd and Bieber. (P.S.: I'm aware that I had the Miller information incorrect, that's why I struck it 6 hours before your reply.) dylxtalk 22:53, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Mirrored, please stop bringing Miller and Grande's relationship into this. Their relationship is a personal thing, associated acts are a professional thing. As well, Miller's death and Grande's songs about him are irrelevant. Taylor Swift and Calvin Harris dated, they wrote a Billboard-chart topping hit together, and Swift has written multiple songs about Harris, but that doesn't make them associated. D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 00:00, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Mirrored, Bieber and Grande have performed together multiple times but Cat and Grande have not performed together therefore you can't say Cat deserves to be mentioned more than him Randomperson7893457 (talk) 10:34, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Can we at least include Mac Miller? They both collaborated on THREE songs together. Mirrored7 (talk) 10:13, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello? Is this still open? Because of The Weeknd remix, that probably will come out this friday, it's safe to say that he should be included as well. Mirrored7 (talk) 15:19, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Yep The Weekend having 3 collabs (Love Me Harder, Off the table, save your tears remix) and Justin Bieber 3 collabs (Stuck With You, What Do You Mean, Earth with Lil Dicky) they should both be included at this point especially because of the live performances Randomperson7893457 (talk) 19:01, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@Mirrored7 and Randomperson7893457: No. I think MaranoFan explains it best here: Michael Jackson collaborated with 3T, Janet Jackson, Diana Ross and Paul McCartney three times each and none are included in the associated acts column of his featured article. "This field is for professional relationships with other musicians or bands that are significant and notable to this artist's career" the criteria, the part below it are hypothetical cases which or constitute such sigificant and notable relationships. -- dylx ^{(t | c)} 14:57, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

I still don't understand how The Weeknd, Mac Miller, and Justin Bieber aren't notable to Grande. I listed all the reasons in here, they are played a significant part in her career. They all should be added. Period. Mirrored7 (talk) 08:52, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Just because they hit a bullet point (3 collaborations) doesn't mean they automatically deserve a spot in this box. -- dylx ^{(t | c)} 12:49, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

But Bieber is significant, hes always Grandes go to person when it comes to live performances. He was even part of her one love manchester show or something like that. Hes gotten Grande to perform with him so many times and she was his opening act for his Believe World Tour. They obviously good friends so i dont understand why you dont consider him notable especially since theve got vocals on 3 songs together. The Weeknd should also be included and Mac Miller was her ex so he was definetly apart of her life and career Randomperson7893457 (talk) 11:40, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Biebier's singing and musicianship isn't relevant. Jgwikid (talk) 20:39, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

OK, if no one replies within 24 hours, I'll add Justin Bieber, The Weeknd, and Mac Miller. How is Big Sean more notable to her career than Mac Miller and Bieber and Weeknd, with whom she shares a number 1 song? I will also consider adding Cashmere Cat. He has three songs with her. Mirrored7 (talk) 14:09, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

I would strongly advise against that. It is clear from the discussion above that there is no consensus for your proposed action. Aoi (青い) (talk) 21:05, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Agreed, giving an ultimatum (OK, if no one replies within 24 hours, I'll add...) is not a good way to approach this, especially when the discussion above clearly proves that there is no consensus, like Aoi said. This page has been subjected to a ton of edit wars, so planning to make a controversial edit that will 100% get reverted due to lack of consensus is not the route you (or any other Grande editors, for that matter) want to take. D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 21:17, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Well, it seems like this discussion will never end. If there is no consensus, I would submit to remove "Associated acts" from the infobox. If Big Sean, Nicki, and Monèt are included, then the others should be included as well. All these people emerge a lot in her career. It doesn't make any sense. Mirrored7 (talk) 15:20, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

I am now convinced of the idea of ​​including Doja Cat. But Justin Bieber and Mac Miller should be there too. Mirrored7 (talk) 06:50, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 June 2021

I wanna change of Ariana Grande she turned 28 Raysqray (talk) 22:01, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

I wanna change Ariana Grande's age she turned 28 Raysqray (talk) 22:03, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: The infobox will update Grande's age by itself so it cannot be done manually. Mediafanatic17 (talk) 22:05, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 July 2021

84.65.162.189 (talk) 20:04, 9 July 2021 (UTC) plzz can i change stuff that are wrong

 Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aoi (talk • contribs) 20:12, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

A thought on the main page

I've been thinking and I think the main page is way too focused on commercial performance. The entirety of the second & third paragraphs basically only talk about performance. I think it should equally reflect/discuss where she was in her life at the time or each of the album's inspirations/sonic directions/concepts or maybe even the impact/influence she's left on fashion/pop culture. This page is just one long "Commercial performance" section. Not everything has to be about accolades or success. Ofcourse I'm not saying to completely all signs of her achievements, but a balance between the two. Blowscalls (talk) 01:18, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Check out the guideline WP:LEAD which tells us that the lead section must be a summary of cited article text. Right now the article is largely composed of chart peaks and sales performance. So in this case the guideline is being followed.

To get where you want to go, the first thing you need to do is to write about "where she was at" based on reliable sources, putting that kind of text into the article body. Only after it is in the article body can you summarize such text for the lead section. Binksternet (talk) 05:12, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

ariana grande life

ariana grande was born in june 26 1993 ariana starred in victorious then she started to be a singer in 2012 then ariana got marries dalton grande in may,15 2021 she got married in her home — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2D80:E689:4800:B98B:7006:B0C1:FD87 (talk) 22:51, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 July 2021

Justin Bieber should be added on Associate Acts cause they collaborated on Stuck With You and What Do You Mean Remix plus performed live with him multiple times and they have opened for each other's tours. Please add him to associate acts 77.246.53.180 (talk) 12:17, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Not done for now: Associated acts have already been discussed earlier and seem to be a somewhat contentious issue for this article. I'm not against reopening the discussion, but I don't think this edit should be made without consensus. Bizarre Bizarre^{Talk modern to me} 18:19, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 July 2021

47.200.15.105 (talk) 00:36, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Guitar and piano

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:46, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 August 2021

name: Ariana Grande Butera Gomez Crsvie (talk) 05:00, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:21, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

To be clear: we cannot assume a name change. We need reliable sources that she's changed her name. —C.Fred (talk) 17:59, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 August 2021

47.200.26.123 (talk) 18:06, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Guitar. Piano. Mimu Gloves?

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:18, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 August 2021

- 76.89.124.220 (talk) 22:54, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —Sirdog9002 (talk) 23:13, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 August 2021

186.143.133.159 (talk) 14:39, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

singer, songwriter and actress

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:48, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 August 2021

Songwriter should be in her description, she has written multiple songs not just for herself but for other artists too. Some sources are https://amp.popbuzz.com/music/artists/ariana-grande/news/songwriter-breathin-break-up-unreleased-demos/ https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-features/ariana-grande-thank-u-next-savan-kohttp://www.thejakartapost.com/life/2020/08/23/ariana-grande-reveals-she-worked-on-blackpink-and-selena-gomez-song-ice-cream.htmltecha-interview-791280/amp/ https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/demi-lovato-ariana-grande-met-him-last-night-interview-1150415/amp/ https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/ariana-grande-wrote-met-him-last-night-demi-lovato.html/ Mighty45 (talk) 21:06, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. This is a highly controversial topic that has been discussed in the past, so a consensus will be needed before the description is changed. D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 02:48, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 October 2021

Surname pronunciation is currently listed as /ˈɡrændiː/ but this is incorrect. This would cause the name to rhyme with brandy, which is not the case. The pronunciation should be /ˈɡrɑːndeɪ/ for most American English dialects. Ctymoszek (talk) 17:48, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 02:11, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Introduction

I think it is very faceless and meaningless to just have Grande's awards at the top. Grande's voice and its streaming should be illuminated more intensely at the top. It should also be noted that her life on which her music is based has drawn a lot of media attention, especially in recent years, see Manchester. I've been planning to change that for a long time. Mirrored7 (talk) 21:28, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Hey @Aoi, I'm waiting! Mirrored7 (talk) 08:28, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:There is no deadline. It's been less than 12 hours since you opened this thread so stop being a jerk. Some of us have jobs to attend to. By the way, despite this, I did open a discussion here before you left that comment. You might also want to read up on how to properly ping someone. Aoi (青い) (talk) 08:35, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

I re-added the sentence about her music being the subject of widespread media attention and added that her music is also critically acclaimed. I read through the body of the article and think that the sources generally support the statement that her music is critically acclaimed. I did not re-add the statement about Grande having a 5-octave range because that statement was not supported by the article body (according to the body, she has a 4-octave range).

I also believe that, from an organizational standpoint, the statement about Grande being the "most streamed artist of all time" probably fits better in the paragraph that discusses her Spotify and Apple Music ranking. I'm not wedded to this so if there's consensus that this statement should be moved to the first paragraph, then that is fine with me. However, I think the existing structure works better both in terms of organization and comprehensibility. Aoi (青い) (talk) 08:55, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Great! I changed four-octave to five-octave on my last edit that you reverted. It would be cool, if you could re-add it. I would agree to you on the streaming one. Mirrored7 (talk) 09:33, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Mirrored7, I am honestly not convinced that it's noteworthy enough to include in the second sentence of the article but I can live with it. I re-added it. By the way, I would greatly appreciate it if you could please take a look at WP:THREAD and familiarize yourself with how to use indentation to make talk page discussions more readable for other users. Aoi (青い) (talk) 09:56, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Aoi, got it! Mirrored7 (talk) 10:02, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

I hope someone else is amused by the irony of this reply. Aoi (青い) (talk) 10:03, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

The IPA pronunciation of the last name is wrong. Her last name should not be pronounced "grand dee." The correct pronunciation should be "ˈɡrɑːndeɪː/;" MeumInfernum (talk) 4:55, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Visual Capitalist

Just noting that in this edit here, I moved a statement and source describing Grande as the world's top female influencer from the lead to the body. I was looking into the source used and I'm not sure if we should give it so much weight that it appears in the lead. The source isn't listed on Wikipedia's perennial sources list, nor has it ever been discussed at the reliable sources noticeboard. The source doesn't even have its own Wikipedia article. This isn't disqualifying by any means, but for such a high profile BLP, I don't think we should give a source with undemonstrated reliability and notability so much weight as to appear in the lead. (In addition, the statement's inclusion wasn't in line with MOS:LEADNOTUNIQUE since it wasn't mentioned anywhere in the body.) Aoi (青い) (talk) 20:37, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

I was wondering too. I just added it, because I saw another article using it as a source. Maybe it has it's own article, but with an other name? Mirrored7 (talk) 21:16, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

It had an article but was deleted because it did not meet notability guidelines. I do not oppose including this in the article but I believe including it is undue for the lead. Aoi (青い) (talk) 08:29, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Okay! Mirrored7 (talk) 09:34, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Can I add it back with another source, but also taken by Visual Capitalist? Mirrored7 (talk) 11:59, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

If the statement is still relying on the Visual Capitalist, then I still have the same concerns for the same reasons I noted above. Aoi (青い) (talk) 18:22, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Music Sales

Since it says she has sold 85 million units doesn't that make her one of the best selling artists of all time and shouldn't that be States? Mighty45 (talk) 14:51, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Stated* Mighty45 (talk) 14:52, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Recent changes to lead

@Ronherry and Mirrored7: Fwiw, I agree with Ronherry's edits here. The lead already states Personal struggles influenced her trap-infused fourth and fifth studio albums, Sweetener (2018) and Thank U, Next (2019), both of which were critical and commercial successes. The "media attention" bit is implied in "critical and commercial success." Having basically the same thing stated twice in the lead is redundant. Aoi (青い) (talk) 14:14, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

I agree. Also, the lead in its current state (someone just changed it) is very pretentious and borderline cringeworthy. I have no words, nor I wish to edit-war, especially with a fan-motivated editor. Ronherry (talk) 14:35, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Media attention and commercial success is something very different too, however, I have no problem with changes. But It would be great, if you could follow my yesterday's request on the Taylor Swift article too. Mirrored7 (talk) 18:05, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 November 2021

Ariana is launching her new beauty line REM Beauty on November 12th. This should be added under the career page. Nottthatkidagain123 (talk) 16:45, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:51, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 November 2021

Ariana is now listed as one of the best selling music artists for her over 85 million sales. This could be listed in her page Nottthatkidagain123 (talk) 05:52, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:26, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 November 2021

This article says that Ariana is often regarded as a pop icon, allegedly according to Yahoo and Guinness Records. However, these are the only sources that call her that. Isn't that misleading? That should be removed, as well as the 85 million records sales statement according to Epic Media Labs???? Whats that source.. 132.251.0.179 (talk) 23:08, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. Simple web searches turn up additional reliable sources supporting both claims. Here's one for digital single sales, for example. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:32, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Concern

Her sweetener page has NO song samples 41.115.114.48 (talk) 12:32, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Song samples

Please add song samples for God is women No tears left to cry Touch out Breathing Last Christmas cover Into you 7 rings Break up with your girlfriend Don't call me Angel. These are songs she is known for and it does not even have samples 41.115.114.48 (talk) 12:39, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Songs are copyrighted and are not used for decorative pueproses. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 19:19, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

REM/R.E.M Beauty

In the other ventures part, there are products. But it seems like R.E.M Beauty (released 12 Nov 2021) is not mentioned, although it is her beauty line — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.77.115.125 (talk) 05:13, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 December 2021

171.240.121.117 (talk) 05:59, 1 December 2021 (UTC)Ariana is now a businesswoman

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.  melecie  t - 06:04, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 December 2021

Crazygames2009 (talk) 17:20, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello can I have an edit

@Crazygames2009: You have to put the change in your request, along with the reliable sources, so other editors can review it. —C.Fred (talk) 17:24, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

"Widespread media attention"

@Mirrored7: For clarity, what discussion are you referring to in this diff? I recall having a discussion with you on the topic a while back, but it was superseded by the one here, which is the most recent one I could find. Aoi (青い) (talk) 05:32, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

@Ronherry: Pinging as a courtesy. Aoi (青い) (talk) 05:32, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

@Aoi: There you have it. I even discussed the changes with you. Mirrored7 (talk) 05:50, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

The discussion you pointed out was superseded by the more recent discussion I pointed out above wherein both I and another editor disagreed with your edit. By the way, please do not forget about WP:INDENT. People using screen readers and other accessibility tools will thank you for doing it properly. Aoi (青い) (talk) 05:55, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

@Aoi: Yes, I saw it. I still don't see the problem. Having commercial and critical success, and having media attention are two different things too me. Also, Ronherry didn't care for the article, until my edits on the Taylor Swift article, so I doesn't seem objective to me at all. I stated, that I'm open for changes, if you guys would be open to disscuss my changes too. I'm still waiting.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirrored7 (talk • contribs)

I'm discussing the issue here, and I discussed it with you in Talk:Ariana Grande/Archive 7, so I am not sure what you're talking about. Aoi (青い) (talk) 06:34, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Mirrored's entire existence on Wikipedia is based on puffing up Grande articles and sabotaging Swift's article with his point behavior when there is actually no comparison/similarity. I don't wish to have any business with this editor, because myself and a dozen other editors have tried to educate them, but they wouldn't listen. Anyways, the point is, the current lead is not even close to being encyclopedic and reads like a fandom wikia, and a bad attempt at recreating the lead of Swift's article. This has to stop. Every article needs to be written independently. In its current state, for a popular star like Ariana Grande, her Wikipedia article is not even close to being a good article, which is sad—all because of a fan editor who has no sense of neutrality and what's due and undue, and wouldn't let others work on it as well. Ronherry (talk) 12:13, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

@Aoi: Sorry, I didn't realize, that you have nothing to do with the Taylor Swift page. Ronherry always criticizes my edits on the Ariana Grande page, right after my edits on Taylor Swift's. He literally has a long history of edit wars and disruptive edits on her page, that's why I find his comments that he's making hypocritical. Mirrored7 (talk) 15:31, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

@Ronherry: So, you want it that way? You know what, do what you gonna do. Later or sooner, you will be warned about your disruptive edits, as always. If I don't, other observant users will. The fact is, I still find, that the top of Taylor Swift's article is unnecessarily too long. You have to tell me something about fan fiction? You're editing everyday on all of Taylor Swift's various Wiki pages, while I edit Ariana Grande's occasionally. It's kinda hypocritical, that you want to tell me something about, “a good article”. Don't you really think that I know that you get reprimanded about editing wars as often as I do? I can see it on the history of your talk page, there are a lot of users that don't agree with your edits, warned you about them multiple times. Before you came no one had anything negative to say about this article. The only reason you're here, is because you're offended that I disagree with your unnecessary and excessive edits. It would be great, if we could continue our conversation on the talk page on Taylor Swift's article, that I created, but you, for a whatever reason (probably because you can't have any opinions other than yours), ignored, and as always, used the undo button. Mirrored7 (talk) 16:06, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Cuba Libre

Should Cuba Libre be removed from her stage credits? It was a planned musical which never made it to Broadway, and she only "played" the role in a table reading.--Coconutyou3 (talk) 12:19, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

References

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 December 2021

in the last sentence of the header paragraph, “She became the most followed female on Instagram in 2019 and has also ventured into the cosmetics and fashion industries.” should read “most followed *woman* on Instagram.”

in reference to humans, female is used as an adjective (female musician, female artist), woman is used as a noun. Griffindaly (talk) 07:02, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done Aoi (青い) (talk) 07:12, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Record vs surpass

@Mirrored7: Regarding this revert: The version you reverted to reads, "She became the most followed woman on Instagram in 2019," with an accompanying note that reads, "The record was surpassed by Kylie Jenner in 2021." The statement is in reference to the number of followers. There is nothing in the sentence, or the entire article for that matter, that acknowledges this as a world record and there is no way for a reader to be aware that a record is exists or for them to make such a connection logically. I am reverting this back because it doesn't make sense. Aoi (青い) (talk) 23:19, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

OK. But it's still a record too. It has a source (which is also in the lead) and is included in her awards article. Mirrored7 (talk) 23:31, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 January 2022

she is friends with Silindokuhle Myolwa 🙊. Sli mode M (talk) 15:49, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

I listed some couple of friends. Sli mode M (talk) 15:50, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Eerr Sli mode M (talk) 15:50, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: Even if reliable sources were provided, a list of her friends is too trivial for inclusion in the article. —C.Fred (talk) 15:56, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 January 2022

Cuba Libre should be removed from the stage credits section - it was a planned musical which never made it to Broadway, and she only "played" the role in a table reading.

References

Coconutyou3 (talk) 17:00, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

 Done Search for other sources confirms this. Looks like a completely separate musical named Cuba Libre was made in 2015[1]. SpinningCeres (talk) 04:46, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs § TopHit

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs § TopHit. The matter seeking consensus is the use of TopHit.ru as a source for song release dates. Thank you, Heartfox (talk) 04:48, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 February 2022

I need to add one thing 2ofthe22ofthe2022 (talk) 22:44, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:50, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 February 2022

In the first section it says she is often regarded as a pop cultural icon and triple threat entertainer, yet there's only two sources calling her pop icon (not cultural, and one of them being Yahoo!) And the other only has one source. Those aren't strong enough to justify such strong statement. It should be placed elsewhere. 132.191.1.86 (talk) 23:17, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Yahoo is reliable in this context, not sure waht the issue is. Further, the Yahoo article is actually from Elle, so I'd say that's good enough. CUPIDICAE💕 23:18, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:49, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Suggesting changes

1) She's no longer on Twitter, that should be mentioned. 2) In "Public Image" it's stated that she has 255 million followers on Instagram, she has 302 millions. 3) I don't understand why the Philanthropy and activism part is so full of past things and empty of recent stuff when she's been much more active recently? It's mentioned that "in the same month, Grande surprised kids, who spend the holiday at children's hospitals in L.A. and the UK, with gifts from wish lists at the UCLA Mattel Children's Hospital and the Royal Manchester Children's Hospital." She did the same thing again this year [2] She also launched a fund for Trans Youth pledging to match every donation up until 1,5 million dollars. 4) It was confirmed that CLOUD, her perfume, is the best selling fragrance at ULTA, and it sells 1 bottle every 11 minutes. https://www.thezoereport.com/beauty/ariana-grande-cloud-perfume, there's no mention of the success of this fragrance on the page. 5) There should be more about her IMPACT, her fashion impact, her ponytail impact, her stylistic choices in music, her being a feminist in the industry (read Rolling Stone's article about Ariana being the only credited female producer/writer/engineer to score a hit last year. https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/music-industry-study-women-diversity-1330009/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:B07:6461:E9F3:D13D:C0BC:4B28:7622 (talk) 19:43, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

—————-

Ariana Grande's impact

Ariana has made an impact in the music industry, inspiring many artists such as Madison Beer, Zara Larsson, Jungkook of BTS and more; also, she is one of the most influencial people of our generation, so, can anyone make a subject in her wikipedia page called "Impact"?

Here is an article that credits Ariana Grande for re-define pop music: https://junkee.com/ariana-grande-positions-era/275792

There are many artist that have mentioned Ariana Grande as influence on their music career, here is cited truthfully:

1) Madison Beer: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madison_Beer

2) Sufjan Stevens: https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/09/sufjan-stevens-the-ascension-interview

3) Melanie Martinez: https://www.billboard.com/media/videos/melanie-martinez-cry-baby-role-model-the-voice-6685879/

4) Meghan Trainor: https://www.out.com/entertainment/music/2014/09/10/meghan-trainor-all-about-bass-t-pain-drunk-texting

5) Troye Sivan: https://www.teenvogue.com/story/troye-sivan-ariana-grande-essay-time-100

6) Jungkook from BTS: https://www.nme.com/news/music/bts-jungkook-ariana-grande-inspired-him-to-grow-2942958

7) Zara Larsson: https://nation.com.pk/26-Mar-2017/zara-larsson-inspired-by-beyonce

8) Maria Becerra: https://www.clarin.com/zonales/chica-40-millones-streams-khea-danny-ocean-futuro_0_yaoBjLWY7.html

9) Billie Eilish: https://www.zeit.de/news/2019-08/19/ariana-sei-dank-billie-eilish-hat-wieder-lust-auf-musik?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fen.m.wikipedia.org%2F

2800:BF0:60:DDF:2C35:9193:5F3D:2459 (talk) 23:56, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 April 2022

As a major Ariana fan, I would like to add information (if need be) that is credible and up-to-date and positively reinforces her life and career. Jaclmart (talk) 00:43, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:50, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Potential changes to Public image section

1) There are quite a few articles calling Ariana a feminist icon/hero and detailing the sexism that she has faced, and her subsequent responses - perhaps that can be added to the public image section, as done in the page for Taylor Swift . - E.g. https://www.globalcitizen.org/fr/content/ariana-grande-quotes-feminism/

https://gulfnews.com/amp/entertainment/music/ariana-grande-is-the-face-of-feminism-for-teens-today-1.63289843

https://www.flare.com/celebrity/ariana-grande-feminism/

2) Also, following the paragraph starting with “ Although Grande drew criticism for alleged impolite interactions with reporters and fans in 2014”, maybe information should be added about her *alleged* black-fishing/ racial baiting, as there have been numerous reputable articles about that since 2016/2017. Or that can be added to a controversy section, similar to the page for Justin Bieber.

E.g. - https://thetab.com/uk/2019/02/08/ariana-grande-is-a-blackfish-and-these-are-the-receipts-91714

https://metro.co.uk/2021/12/08/ariana-grande-fans-defend-star-as-shes-accused-of-asian-fishing-15737105/amp/

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/leave-jesy-nelson-alone-little-mix-blackfishing-row-nicki-minaj-dnptgrv3g

https://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2020/08/13/what-is-blackfishing-ariana-grande-rita-ora/?amp

3) Lastly perhaps the information about how “Grande was later sued by Minder Music for copying the line "What we gotta do right here is go back, back in time" from the 1972 song "Troglodyte (Cave Man)" by The Jimmy Castor Bunch” can be added to a separate section called Legal Issues (& controversies), as done for Ed Sheeran and Justin Bieber, and more info can be added about other legal disputes she has had regarding 7 Rings, or when Forever21 used her likeness - E.g.

https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN2B82SG

https://completemusicupdate.com/article/ariana-grande-settles-7-rings-song-theft-lawsuit/

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/01/17/entertainment/ariana-grande-7-rings-suit/index.html

https://pitchfork.com/thepitch/ariana-grande-sued-forever-21-for-using-her-likeness-what-exactly-does-that-mean/amp/

https://news.artnet.com/art-world/ariana-grande-lawsuit-dropped-vladimir-kush-1631758/amp-page

http://www.lac.qmul.ac.uk/our-legal-blog/items/copy-and-paste-ariana-grande-sues-forever-21-for-10m-in-copyright-storm-.html

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49572758.amp

Kaneambrosios (talk) 18:18, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Update her Twitter account

Ariana has deleted her Twitter account. Shouldn't we mention that under "Public image"? Like "her now-deleted Twitter account had...." or something similar. ThisIsMemeboi (talk) 00:10, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

 Done Mirrored7 (talk) 05:49, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 May 2022

Moonlight Entm (talk) 00:49, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Please add : section of artists she has influenced, Sabrina Carpenter, Billie Eillish, Yeri from Red Velvet, BTS, Blackpink, Danna Paola and more kpop artists have said she has inspired them.

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Aoi (青い) (talk) 00:52, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

External links information

Hello Wikipedians and fellow Arianators. I wonder whether her social media and music accounts should be added to the "External links" topic. I'm talking specifically for Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, Spotify etc. I think that they should be provided because:

1) social media are places where people can find her and follow her

2) music accounts for listening to her music

3) it's at the bottom of the page so there won't be a lot of people getting till the end but if they do so, it might help them "connect" to her music and learn more about her via her real life

This was an unexpected thought I had as a fan and that's my opinion in general for artists. Thanks to all the people who contribute to that page and make it so amazing. --Fisforfenia (talk) 12:59, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Per WP:ELMIN, if the article subject's official website is already linked and the official site contains links to the subject's social media, then the external links section should not also link to the social media sites. Aoi (青い) (talk) 18:03, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Pronunciation

It’s not “Gran-dee”, that’s the Americanised pronunciation her grandpa and his parents used, it needs to be changed back to the actual pronunciation. Modern184 (talk) 20:20, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:55, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Common knowledge does not require sources. Modern184 (talk) 14:42, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

WP:The truth. Further, will you go and ask places like San Francisco, Florida, Montana or Amarillo to "use the actual pronunciation"? (CC) Tbhotch^™ 18:34, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

The only time she ever publicly pronounced her surname the incorrect "Americanized" way was in the context of her late grandfather, as that's how he evidently chose to pronounce it. Any other time, she has pronounced it the commonly known, Italian way. Starting this article with inaccurate BLP fiction only sets it up for more lies to be inserted in the future and mislead the readers. Trillfendi (talk) 19:22, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Please, provide sources for your changes. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 19:27, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

It’s still wrong, it’s missing the “-ay”. Modern184 (talk) 20:49, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

@Tbhotch: For that matter, what's the source for the current pronunciations with a silent e? —C.Fred (talk) 23:48, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

I don't know, but apparently she is now /Ariana Grand/ according to us. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 02:46, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Also pinging Rodw, since it looks like he made the change about a day ago. —C.Fred (talk) 23:49, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

I only sorted disambiguation links to Yeri & influence so have no comment on pronounciation.— Rod ^talk 07:28, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 June 2022

I'd like to ask if I could change Ariana Grande's main photo to one from 2022, as the current one is from 2019.[3]

Pageisloadingusername (talk) 03:08, 26 June 2022 (UTC) Pageisloadingusername (talk) 03:08, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: @Pageisloadingusername: There's nothing on that page to indicate that the image is under a (legitimate) free license. —C.Fred (talk) 03:10, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

How would I go about uploading the image with a legitimate free license? wiki was telling me that my file name wasn't allowed, even after renaming it several times Pageisloadingusername (talk) 08:13, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

We would need some kind of confirmation from whoever owns or originally took the image that the image is either available under a free license or was released into the public domain. See WP:IUPC. Sometimes it's clear from the source, but in this case the image is posted on a social media site so its licensing status is unclear.

(Also, the photo caption implies that the image was released to promote her line of beauty products. This makes me think it's very unlikely that the photo is available under a free license or in the public domain.) Aoi (青い) (talk) 09:07, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 July 2022

==External links== {{IMDB}} 103.81.92.141 (talk) 12:05, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: There is already a link to her IMDB page in the article. —C.Fred (talk) 14:33, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

Facts around Spotify and most-steamed etc are incorrect

Facts around Spotify and most-steamed etc are incorrect 95.39.188.183 (talk) 14:58, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

(CC) Tbhotch^™ 21:06, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Impact of Ariana Grande

As a major fan of Ariana, I would like to create a subject on her wikipedia page called "Impact'. Ariana has made an impact in the music industry, inspiring many artists because of her music and advocacy.

Here is an article that credits Ariana Grande for re-define pop music: https://junkee.com/ariana-grande-positions-era/275792

There are many artist that have mentioned Ariana Grande as influence on their music career, here is cited truthfully:

1) Madison Beer: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madison_Beer

2) Sufjan Stevens: https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/09/sufjan-stevens-the-ascension-interview

3) Melanie Martinez: https://www.billboard.com/media/videos/melanie-martinez-cry-baby-role-model-the-voice-6685879/

4) Meghan Trainor: https://www.out.com/entertainment/music/2014/09/10/meghan-trainor-all-about-bass-t-pain-drunk-texting

5) Troye Sivan: https://www.teenvogue.com/story/troye-sivan-ariana-grande-essay-time-100

6) Jungkook from BTS: https://www.nme.com/news/music/bts-jungkook-ariana-grande-inspired-him-to-grow-2942958

7) Zara Larsson: https://nation.com.pk/26-Mar-2017/zara-larsson-inspired-by-beyonce

8) Maria Becerra: https://www.clarin.com/zonales/chica-40-millones-streams-khea-danny-ocean-futuro_0_yaoBjLWY7.html

9) Billie Eilish: https://www.zeit.de/news/2019-08/19/ariana-sei-dank-billie-eilish-hat-wieder-lust-auf-musik?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fen.m.wikipedia.org%2F

10) Yeri from Red Velvet https://www.allkpop.com/article/2020/01/red-velvet-yeris-idol-ariana-grande-replies-to-her-on-instagram

11) Sabrina Carpenter

https://metro.co.uk/2018/11/21/what-sabrina-carpenter-learnt-from-ariana-grande-after-touring-with-the-dangerous-woman-8163660/

https://tigerbeat.com/2018/11/sabrina-ariana-taught-about-music/

2800:BF0:60:DDF:E0E2:F824:FB8E:7DC1 (talk) 00:14, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi IP user. First of all, it is a really good idea. However, I have to mention that about Yeri from Red Velvet that AllKpop is not considered a reliable source as written to Wikipedia:WikiProject Korea/Reliable sources. Also, Metro UK is also considered unreliable considering Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. Furthermore, it's preferred to use the original source and not a Wikipedia page as a source (talking about Madison Beer). For other sources such as Junkee, Out, Clarin, Zeit and TigerBeat, I'm not quit sure if they are reliable because I'm not familiar with them.

Let me clarify that the reason I'm replying to you is that because it is a really good idea but it won't be done if there aren't trustworthy sources, so I write to you for a good reason and I want to help another person that has something in common with me, the love for the queen Ariana Grande. Hope those notices help! - Fisforfenia (talk) 13:13, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Fisforfenia has reason so that's why i edited it and put reliable sources and now is totally okay, you can check it out. Moonlight Entm (talk) 21:18, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

A user has deleted the contribution that you made although it was correct. Maybe you can add it again, please? But this time, in another section. It's not fair that some artists have the section "impact" with such short things when it's clearly that Ariana has the right to have one because she has many more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2800:BF0:60:DDF:E0E2:F824:FB8E:7DC1 (talk) 11:10, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

I definitely think Grande deserves a “Impact/Legacy” section. I thought about pointing that out next year because it would have been the ten years since the release of her first album, but we can add it this year as well. Furthermore, I've picked out a few articles that point to her influence on the music industry. It would just take someone who has been making changes here for a while to turn the existing sources into a good section.

Sources:

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/music-industry-study-women-diversity-1330009

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ariana-grande-the-superstar-who-graduated-from-children-s-tv-to-a-global-stage-nxvks2t2l

https://www.udiscovermusic.com/stories/ariana-grande-redefined-pop-sweetener-thank-u/?amp

https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/6/20852568/streaming-revenue-growth-spotify-apple-music-industry-ariana-grande-drake-taylor-swift

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-features/ariana-grande-breathin-thank-u-next-pop-charts-754240

https://www.vulture.com/2020/12/taylor-swift-evermore-folklore-surprise-explained.html

https://www.vulture.com/2019/04/a-guide-to-ariana-grande-pop-stardom.html

https://www.popbuzz.com/music/artists/ariana-grande/features/thank-u-next-album-review/

https://junkee.com/ariana-grande-positions-era/275792

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2019/feb/07/thank-u-next-why-pop-stars-fell-out-of-love-with-albums-ariana-grande

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2018/08/ariana-grande-rocketed-to-the-top-sweetener-pete-davidson

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/the-spry-confessions-of-ariana-grandes-thank-u-next/

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna969316

https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/taylor-swifts-new-album-evermore-embraces-more-is-more-release-strategy-11607621727

https://www.her.ie/amp/celeb/ariana-grande-opens-up-about-the-impact-of-thank-u-next-one-year-on-487668

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/10/arts/music/popcast-ariana-grande-positions.amp.html

https://www.metro.co.uk/2021/05/18/bts-jungkook-on-how-ariana-grande-inspired-him-as-a-pop-star-14600261/

Mirrored7 (talk) 20:44, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Oh, I see, thank you so much for your contribution. Also, I've picked out a few articles that names her various nicknames, recognizing her impact in music industry. I really hope that someone creates a “Impact/Legacy” section this year or the next one, it would be a dream come true.

"Princess of Christmas": https://www.billboard.com/music/latin/camila-cabello-white-house-christmas-performance-1235013252/amp/

"Princess of Pop": https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/news/2021/2/ariana-grande-shatters-20th-guinness-world-records-title-following-success-of-hit-647433

"Pop Diva Supreme": https://m.hitsdailydouble.com/news&id=313154&title=ARIANA:-POP-DIVA-SUPREME — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2800:BF0:60:DDF:CC2F:97EC:EDE7:3A20 (talk) 00:26, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi everybody, I want to suggest to put "record producer" and "businesswoman" on occupation section, here we have sources that suport those occupations:

Record producer: - About "Save your tears" Remix: https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/music-industry-study-women-diversity-1330009/

- About "Stuck with U", in which she has record production credits: https://tidal.com/browse/album/140594423

Businesswoman: - About R.E.M Beauty brand https://theindustry.beauty/ariana-grandes-r-e-m-beauty-to-launch-in-uk/

https://wwd.com/fashion-news/fashion-scoops/ariana-grande-rem-beauty-brand-details-what-to-know-1234992233/

- About fragrances: https://www.luxebrands.com/ariana-grande-fragrances

https://www.thelist.com/905462/these-are-all-the-fragrances-ariana-grande-has-released/

https://fashionista.com/2022/07/gen-z-influencers-celebrities-fragrance-perfume — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.100.200.253 (talk) 14:04, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 July 2022

It was confirmed that ariana has changed her last name to ariana grande-Gomez and Dalton has changed his to Dalton Gomez-grande

174.252.130.24 (talk) 13:16, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:18, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi everybody, I want to suggest to put "record producer" and "businesswoman" on occupation section, here we have sources that suport those occupations:

Record producer: - About "Save your tears" Remix: https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/music-industry-study-women-diversity-1330009/

- About "Stuck with U", in which she has record production credits: https://tidal.com/browse/album/140594423

Businesswoman: - About R.E.M Beauty brand https://theindustry.beauty/ariana-grandes-r-e-m-beauty-to-launch-in-uk/

https://wwd.com/fashion-news/fashion-scoops/ariana-grande-rem-beauty-brand-details-what-to-know-1234992233/

- About fragrances: https://www.luxebrands.com/ariana-grande-fragrances

https://www.thelist.com/905462/these-are-all-the-fragrances-ariana-grande-has-released/

https://fashionista.com/2022/07/gen-z-influencers-celebrities-fragrance-perfume 157.100.200.253 (talk) 03:17, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Official website

The arianagrande.com website should be removed per WP:ELNO which states, Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a featured article. In other words, the site should not merely repeat information that is already or should be in the article, and also per WP:ELOFFICIAL which states, Official links (if any) are provided to give the reader the opportunity to see what the subject says about itself.

The website does not provide any additional information that can't be found in the article and it doesn't give the reader the opportunity to see what the subject says about itself.

We don't include links simply because they're "official". They need to be of use. And per WP:ELMIN, Wikipedia does not provide a comprehensive web directory to every official website. Wikipedia does not attempt to document or provide links to every part of the subject's web presence. Are there any compelling reasons (PAGs) to go against the above guidelines? – ².O.^Boxing 08:33, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

This doesn't make any sense at all. A website is mostly their to promote a tour or merchandise anyway. Almost most any musical artist has has an url on their article, so I don't why it's only here a problem. Mirrored7 (talk) 05:29, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

@Mirrored7: It makes perfect sense, that's why they're long-established Wikipedia guidelines. Do you have any policy-or-guideline-based reason to go against the guidelines quoted above? As of yet, all I'm seeing is a textbook WP:OTHERCONTENT reply. What happens at other articles is irrelevant to this discussion. – ².O.^Boxing 08:38, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

It can't be that much against guidelines, when almost every musical artist has their website included on the top. Mirrored7 (talk) 11:42, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

I take it you didn't read WP:OTHERCONTENT. I'll say again, what happens at other articles is irrelevant to this discussion. I've provided you with the relevant guideline to support my position. Do you have any reasoning based on policy or guidelines to go against? "I don't agree" and WP:OTHERCONTENT are not valid arguments. – ².O.^Boxing 12:07, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

The quote from WP:ELMIN addresses when a subject has more than one official website. If we remove the arianagrande.com link, we open the Pandora's box of social media links. If nothing else, that website points to her social media presences and can keep them out of the EL section. That's a win for having the link. —C.Fred (talk) 13:39, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

I don't see that as an issue, WP:NOSOCIAL is already there to stop that. I think the kind of official links the guideline references are ones like Sylvester Stalone's. It has a bio section, news section, photo gallery, and yes, a shop. But it's an undeniably useful resource. Grande's website has a page with links to her music, a page with a few music videos, a page for her merchandise and a page where you can subscribe to receive emails from Universal Music. That's completely useless as a resource and only serves to promote. – ².O.^Boxing 15:21, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

I think you are misreading WP:ELNO. The top of the guideline states: Except for a link to an official page of the article's subject, one should generally avoid providing external links to: Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a featured article. In other words, the site should not merely repeat information that is already or should be in the article. [...] The bolded text (which is bolded in the guideline) makes it clear that a link to an official website is exempt from the criteria listed at WP:ELNO. In fact, if you scroll down the page to WP:ELOFFICIAL, the guideline also says Official links (if any) are provided to give the reader the opportunity to see what the subject says about itself. These links are normally exempt from the links normally to be avoided, but they are not exempt from the restrictions on linking (emphasis mine). This guideline makes an official link's exemption from WP:ELNO explicit. (For the record, none of the restrictions at WP:ELNEVER appear to apply here.) Aoi (青い) (talk) 18:11, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Ariana-Grande-Feet-1451490.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:07, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Sweetener Tour Ariana Grande O2 Arena.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:37, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Ancestry

Someone has cited a claim that Grande had Greek and North African ancestry because of a 2014 Facebook post[4], but I don't think it should be taken so seriously? It appears to have been from a DNA test because I've found archived discussions on her official Twitter account that same year[5] which mentions a "chart" with sections for "Greece/Italy" and a "North African" one. Grande in the Tweet even states that she "thought it was funny". And it's not some secret that genetic testing can vary widely in breaking down someone's ethnic heritage. Different company tests have shown to give largely different results.[6][7]

Although these genetic results wouldn't be out of place given the genetic history of Italy, I've removed the mention. Especially since many other third-party sources simply state that Grande is of Italian descent. Like the BBC article cited.[8] Clear Looking Glass (talk) 23:46, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Religion: Kabbalah?

Grande has stated that she, at least at some point, "followed Kabbalah", which is stated in the article. However, this is not presented neutrally. See Gray, Helen T. "Celebrity Kabbalah: No Strings Attached, Except to the Wrist", The Washington Post, July 25, 2004 -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:50, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 September 2022

I wanted to make a request because of a mistake that has been made. Ariana Grande released her 1st album Yours Truly, on September 3rd, 2013 not August 30th, 2013. I just wanted to make 1 quick edit then, I will be done. KJuNioR 24 (talk) 23:40, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Aoi (青い) (talk) 01:20, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

iTunes seems to disagree with you. [9] General Ization ^Talk 01:47, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 October 2022 (2)

I was wondering if i could edit this page, because, on the Yours Truly and My Everything part of the page, it says that her album Yours Truly was released on August 30, 2013, when it was actually released on September 3rd, 2013. If i could just make one edit, that's just fine with me. KardariousJackson (talk) 22:52, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

 Not done. It was "actually released on September 3rd, 2013" in the United States. It was "actually released on August 30", 2013 in Europe. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 23:27, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 October 2022

Impact and influence: Many recording artists have cited Grande as an influence, including ... Gabi DeMartino. SOURCE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUTguWVZnIg Gabriella Grande (talk) 22:30, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

WP:INDISCRIMINATE. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 23:28, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 October 2022

The edits made on October 18th detailing her wax sculptures are promotional and should be removed. 24.80.128.77 (talk) 20:39, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: I believe the prose is neutral enough, appears to be relevant for the section it was inserted, and is not prominently displayed. Thus, I am not of the mind that removal is necessary. —Sirdog (talk) 03:44, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 November 2022

Change "Ariana Grande-Butera is a singer, songerwriter, and actress" to just "Ariana Grande Butera is a singer and actress" or "singer, cowriter and actress."

Unlike mentioned in her lyrics (7 rings), I don't think she ever wrote a song by herself, at best merely provided some lyrics or themes to other people who write for her. She might have written said portion of the song by herself, but I don't think she ever sat in a room alone in isolation and did it by herself (like Taylor Swift did. She wrote her third album Speak Now entirely by herself) because it sounds misleading. I feel like this should apply to everyone in these circumstances, and not just in bias . It's very common for artists in the corporate mainstream business to have people write for them or alongside them. I think it's more accurate if you say that she's a "cowriter." The entire work did not only come from her. Writing really isn't her forte. Her singing is, and that is completely fine.

Writing a song is not changing one to a few words {like she did with Jason's Song (Gave it Away)} or simply saying to other people who write for you that you would like to make an album with about anything, and all you have to do is hear the songs and pick them. You can still get "songwriting" credits that way without doing much to it. Like Rihanna, she cowrote her new material, especially on ANTI, but she never fully wrote those by herself. Thank U, Next and Positions were the ones that Ariana co-wrote for every track on the album, but I don't think she wrote any of those completely by herself. Ariana co-wrote her tracks, but I don't think she's a "songwriter." Ashahli edwards (talk) 18:14, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. "In June, Grande featured on the song "I Don't Do Drugs" from Doja Cat's third studio album Planet Her.[231] Her contribution as a songwriter and featured artist on the song earned Grande a nomination for Album of the Year at the 64th Annual Grammy Awards."

She's credited as a songwriter here, I think that's enough to justify calling her a songwriter. Actualcpscm (talk) 17:41, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 November 2022

I noticed that an appearance of Ariana Grande in the game "Fortnite - Battle Royale" Chapter 2, season 7 was not included in her wiki page.

Not sure where this would fall, as it is kind of different things but here is the basic info with some details added:

She was featured in a virtual concert called "Rift Tour" with 9 songs in a game progression side journey, that occurred Aug 6-8, of 2021, and is featured as playable skins in the "icon series" of skins that are primarily real life celebrities and game streamers. She has 2 skins (4 total versions - Ariana, Rift Goddess Ariana, Spacefarer Ariana, and Starfire - last one does not have her face visible, but iconic ponytail - and Spacefarer has 2 color variation options) and has 2 bundle packs with accessories in the game. The Spacefarer Ariana Grande was the final "Icon Series" skin to be released in Chapter 2 of the game progression. Ariana, Rift Goddess Ariana were released on Aug 5th, 2021. Spacefarer Ariana, and Starfire were released October 22, 2021.

links: https://fortnite.fandom.com/wiki/Rift_Tour https://fortnite.fandom.com/wiki/Ariana_Grande https://fortnite.fandom.com/wiki/Ariana_Grande_Bundle https://fortnite.fandom.com/wiki/Spacefarer_Ariana_Grande Diptenkrom (talk) 13:08, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

 Already done See section Ariana Grande#2020–present: Positions and Wicked, near the end of that section. Doesn't go into detail re: the skins but I think that that stuff would not fit this article anyway Cannolis (talk) 16:29, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Edit request: Triple threat link to wiktionary

The current link goes to a dead page with a link to the wiktionary page for definition of triple threat, can that please be linked to the wiktionary page directly? Xwedodah (talk) 07:10, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Ariana grande is now quitting her singing career. She will be back in 2024 December!

Ari has gone 84.69.98.23 (talk) 16:52, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Not useful without a reliable source for this claim. General Ization ^Talk 16:53, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 December 2022

Put Discography above Filmography. Jaidenhere (talk) 13:57, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: No improvement after this change. Lemonaka (talk) 16:17, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 January 2023

In the "Other ventures - Products and endorsements" section, change the typo of "ten" to "then" in the sentence discussing the fragrance duo collection (Mod Vanilla and Mod Blush). Astrapomancy (talk) 22:27, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done @Astrapomancy: Thank you for catching this and clearly pointing me to where the error was. —C.Fred (talk) 22:32, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 February 2023

In the 'Achievements' section, change "Her songs and albums are one of the of the most streamed of all time" to "Her songs and albums are some of the most streamed of all time". One of the "of the"s is a typo, and plural "some" makes sense in the sentence where "one" does not. twotwos (talk) 10:20, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done ––FormalDude (talk) 18:08, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

R.E.M. Beauty

Would it be possible to create an article for the singer's cosmetic company? — JuanGLP (talk) 23:56, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

@JuanGLP Is there significant coverage of the company? Is the company separately notable? —C.Fred (talk) 03:20, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

@C.Fred, here is an example I was heading for. They received two awards from Allure and the founder appears to acquire the assets of the cosmetic company. — JuanGLP (talk) 13:49, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

The draft page is available here if anyone wants to help create this page. — JuanGLP (talk) 15:33, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Other names

| other_names = Ariana Grande Gomez She is a married woman Wandavisionvixen101 (talk) 07:58, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Other names

Ariana Grande-Gomez is her other name. She is a married woman, if she wasn’t married then this part wouldn’t exist. The reason I feel like the name Ariana Grande-Gomez should be on the other names section is because, once you get married, there is a marriage license for a married couple. I wish M. Button can stop hiding the truth about this. Wandavisionvixen101 (talk) 16:40, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 March 2023

Her name is pronounced grand dee not day 72.207.155.145 (talk) 06:29, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Cannolis (talk) 08:27, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Ariana Grande Performs God Is A Woman MTV VMA Live Performance (Filtered Vocals) (UVR).ogg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:08, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 March 2023

Delete ‘signature use of the whistle register’, Mariah Carey is known for this, not her 174.99.120.217 (talk) 21:45, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. MadGuy7023 (talk) 22:49, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 April 2023

She is not the most streamed female artist of all time on Spotify, Taylor Swift is. So please remove that. Source: https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/433027-most-streamed-act-on-spotify-female Bhkkbey250 (talk) 14:52, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

 Partly done: The article does not list "most streamed female artist of all time on Spotify". However, since the other related claims lack a citation, I have added a CN tag. Actualcpscm (talk) 17:08, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

from where are you getting the info that she is the most streamed female artist? Its clearly a false claim and should be removed. Its literally misinformation. Bhkkbey250 (talk) 04:41, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

The article says, the most streamed female artist on Spotify (2010s decade) (emphasis mine). The source for this is found in the Achievements section, and puts Grande at #1 for Most-Streamed Female Artists of the Decade (Global).[10] – ².O.^Boxing 11:35, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 April 2023

Article states that Ariana Grande is most streamed female artist of all time, however this is false. Taylor Swift now holds the record as of April 6, 2023 according to Republic Records and Universal Music. R.alvdo (talk) 05:15, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

 Question: Could you provide a link to that source? Actualcpscm (talk) 14:20, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Ariana Grande Wikipedia article Career section needs update re: The Voice coach season 21

Reference The Voice (American season 21) 2601:240:E380:4330:F4A8:5FC4:A8ED:F4ED (talk) 05:33, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

In Ariana Grande#2015–2017: Dangerous Woman it reads: "In March 2021, she returned to the show as a coach of the twenty-first season of The Voice" WikiVirusC^(talk) 18:34, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

I've shifted this information down to a more appropriate chronological position. It made little sense being where it was before. Prefall 18:47, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Lack of neutral POV, reliable/verified sources and various other issues

@Mirrored7: You have constantly and unreasonably reverted edits by myself, Aoi, Samil, Rorylufc, David Gerard, Ollie, Prefall, ItsMarkWbu etc, on this article. Your edits, as highlighted in both the edit summaries of this article and on your user talk page, have violated and ignored Wikipedia guidelines such as WP:NPOV, WP:V, WP:ATTRIBUTION, WP:RS, WP:LEAD, WP:EDITWAR, WP:OWN, WP:POINT, WP:PUFF, WP:SYNTH, and WP:UNDUE. The entire article, especially the lead section, is riddled with puffery, undue/unverified data, and extremely bloated in size. A large majority of the citations you added to the article are either outdated or do not explicitly support the adjacent factoid in the prose of the article body. This article failed WP:GA once, and you refuse any measures to improve this article. The lead of this article is neither concise nor readable. It reads like a Twitter thread written by a Grande fan rather than being encyclopedic. Any attempts from me and any other editors to fix this article (on the basis of the issues highlighted) have been met with biased disapproval from you. Either you should trim, tweak and clean-up this article yourself or let others contribute; you don't let either of these things happen. Before you reply to these concerns, I implore you to make your response only about the issues raised here and avoid whataboutism and irrelevant arguments. ℛonherry☘ 11:48, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

@Mirrored7: Please respond. ℛonherry☘ 15:15, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Repetitive talk about Ariana Grande's voice

The first paragraph says "she is noted for her four-octave vocal range and whistle register, which have garnered her critical acclaim by media and critics." Then the second paragraph says "Grande's voice and whistle register on the album drew immediate comparisons to Mariah Carey."

It's just a suggestion but wouldn't it be better to combine these two and simply say "she is noted for her four-octave vocal range and whistle register, which have garnered her critical acclaim and drew comparisons to Mariah Carey"? Or maybe even write it similarly to the article about Chris Brown and instead say "she has gained a large cult following and drew comparisons to Mariah Carey for her four-octave vocal range and whistle register"? Marinette2356 (talk) 18:51, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Thank you for noting that redundancy. Aoi (青い) (talk) 19:01, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Disagree with change. Grande was only compared to Mariah Carey early in her career. Her voice and music have changed drastically since then, and the comparisons to Carey have diminished with each passing year. Therefore, the comparison should only be mentioned in the period of her first album. Mirrored7 (talk) 10:45, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Two editors have disagreed you, so I do not understand why you have reverted yet again, instead of proposing your changes here. In addition, your last edit has added additional puffery to the lead. Aoi (青い) (talk) 13:44, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 June 2023

Ariana has said that at age 15 she started her acting career on broadway and not her music career. Ariana’s music career didn’t start until after she had left Nickelodeon. 2A00:23C6:EC02:5401:D14E:626C:CBB6:529 (talk) 16:11, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 04:07, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Good Article Renomination request on 26 June 2023

I feel that the article is good enough to be renominated for good article status. It ranks B-Class, and furthermore, it is a level 5 vital article, so it is best to push it to good article status. Brachy08 (Talk)(Contribs) 03:01, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 July 2023

I think it's important to add that Ariana and Pete broke up after Mac Miller's suicide. Chikamso.a (talk) 17:54, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. 𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 ^{𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜} 18:12, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

"Beliefs" section – misquoted source

The Beliefs section states: She has said that she and Frankie have followed the teachings of Kabbalah, a branch of Jewish mysticism, since she was 12, quoting MTV News (https://web.archive.org/web/20220209002618/http://www.mtv.com/news/1972089/ariana-grande-questions-religion/). The article cited only says she's checked out a Kabbalah center in Florida and really had a connection with it, which is far from the same thing. 2A02:A319:C146:7800:41:D350:B8A2:CE8C (talk) 22:33, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

You are correct. I've removed that statement and rewritten other parts of the paragraph to reflect what the sources say. Aoi (青い) (talk) 22:56, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Cherrell410 (talk · contribs) 14:45, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

This is the second GA nom, following an auto fail from 8 years ago. The article seems to be more stable now, and I am ready to help make this a GA article. I am going on holiday from 27 July to 3 August so I may not be able to respond swiftly. Cherrell410^{(t · c)} 15:01, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):

   b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a. (reference section):

   b. (citations to reliable sources):

   c. (OR):

   d. (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a. (major aspects):

   b. (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):

   b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/fail:

Leaving my suggestions for improvement below:

• Early life: final sentance of first paragrahph: this needs to be clarified on when it was last updated.
• 2008–2012: citation needed tag needs to be dealt with
• 2008-2012: much of the last paragraph occurs in the 2013, and should be moved into the section below
• 2013-2015: first sentance of second paragraph needs a citation
• 2013-2015: another citation needed tag
• 2013-2015: the beginning of the final paragraph should talk more about this tour, as it was pretty notable as her first world tour
• 2015-2017: first para: her and meghan trainor: replace the pronoun her with something else
• 2015-2017: to promote the related album --> to promote the album
• 2015-2017: funk wav bounces vol 1 should be italicized
• The following ref numbers aren't reliable and need to be replaced or removed (not in any order): 282, 289, 74 (i'm seeing gossip), 77 (same), 342, 429, 432, 441
• Ref 464 is missing parameters

I dealt with most of the problems alr Brachy08 _(Talk) 00:57, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

• Drive-by comment: the article cites a few unreliable sources per WP:RSP, like IBTimes and Inquisitr. Sources like PopSugar are also questionable, especially for a BLP. Pamzeis (talk) 11:40, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
• Cherrell410 are you gonna finish the review or have you just abandoned it in its entirely? — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 23:15, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

  Brachy0008 I should advise you to change the page number from 2 to 3, since the reviewer has been inactive since 24 September, as he only made one edit after making one edit since 6 September. — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 06:23, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 August 2023

Change personal life status Stuart McKing (talk) 14:03, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. WikiVirusC^(talk) 14:09, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 August 2023

Ariana Grande and her husband, Dalton Gomez, are separated, TODAY.com can confirm. 2600:1011:B059:E15A:0:44:5EEE:A901 (talk) 06:14, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Xan747 ✈️ 🧑‍✈️ 13:45, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

References

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 November 2023

Ariana grande also plays the piano underneath the image it says instrument : vocals but she also plays the piano i hope i can change that Thank you! Suuuuueerr (talk) 14:57, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Aoi (青い) (talk) 15:24, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 November 2023 (2)

Joan Grande , Ariana Grande's mother is currently 66 years old and was born on June 10th 1957 ,Suuuuueerr (talk) 15:12, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: This is an article about Ariana Grande, not her mother. Unless there is a specific reason to include such info, detailed biographical details about her parents, such as their birth dates, probably isn't relevant enough for inclusion in this article. Aoi (青い) (talk) 15:21, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Lead changes

@Mirrored7: your comment in the edit summary here was not appropriate. Comment on the content, not on the contributor. If you have a problem, take it to ANI or another forum.

Mirrored7 and Ronherry, it's probably best to discuss substantive changes to the lead since there is an ongoing GAN above. While I would not have made all of the changes that Ronherry did, I do agree that the lead is a bit long and all those specific numbers would be better presented in the article body (and does not necessarily merit repeating in the lead). MOS:LEADLENGTH says that most featured articles have a lead that's about 300 words long. The current lead of this article is almost 700 words long. Some additional conciseness and brevity may be desirable. Aoi (青い) (talk) 22:33, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

As a person who rarely edits this page, I think the lead section looks annoyingly bloated. It really needs to be trimmed. This is an encyclopedia, not a fan page. Bluesatellite (talk) 06:23, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

I feel that this statement on the fourth paragraph, "Grande is one of the world's best-selling music artists,.." is opinion based and trivial. I would like to help trim down on the lead but don't want to do the wrong thing. Cwater1 (talk) 14:40, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

It's worth noting the long history of discord between these two editors; this seems to have escalated to personal attacks and bias coming from both respective parties. It is worth noting that Ronherry (formerly known as BawinV) has been long alleged of adding negative, unsourced content about other music artists articles such as BTS. PHShanghai | they/them (talk) 09:14, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Image change

Was changing the image even necessary? The old image of the 2020 GRAMMYs was fine by itself, it did not need changing. Asknaffffwiki (talk) 08:11, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

My fault, I see the original image was deleted. Asknaffffwiki (talk) 08:15, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 December 2023

I need to edit ariana’s new album ag7 infos 103.232.219.111 (talk) 14:38, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone may add them for you. Shadow311 (talk) 18:08, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Ariana Grande; yes and?

A single was just announced via her Instagram. https://www.instagram.com/p/C1zaRoXMB9u/?igsh=MTRhZmU1ODE2NA== Asknaffffwiki (talk) 15:24, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Instagram is not a reliable source. Have patience and I'm sure reliable sources will cover it. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{blaze__wolf} 15:25, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Also a blurry photo of her face does not mean she's releasing a new single. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{blaze__wolf} 15:26, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf Okay. It was just announced via her Instagram so if a reliable source comes up, I can post it here. Asknaffffwiki (talk) 15:26, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Source via Pitchfork

https://pitchfork.com/news/ariana-grande-announces-new-music-coming-this-week/ Asknaffffwiki (talk) 15:27, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on changing her to being the second most female followed artist on Spotify. 10 January 2024

Jade24560"^ (talk) 06:59, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 22:29, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Ariana you are my fan

2600:1700:3B3B:E000:A83C:285:5FBD:A577 (talk) 13:29, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Spanish

Speaking different languages 2600:1700:3B3B:E000:A83C:285:5FBD:A577 (talk) 13:30, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 January 2024

197.36.38.8 (talk) 05:33, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

 Not done, It's unclear what you mean. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 05:47, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 January 2024 (2)

Add ‘producer’ to occupation 2A00:23C6:3713:7E01:DD92:5AE7:65E1:4CD7 (talk) 14:38, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. M.Bitton (talk) 15:26, 14 January 2024 (UTC)