Talk:Janet Jackson/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Janet Jackson. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Do Not Delete!

Janet IS most likely switching to Island Def Jam Records. Here's the link: http://www.mtv.com/overdrive/?vid=147855

Janet is a pop icon. if this continues to be removed from her page because, as you say, this is a "fannish description", then "queen of pop" needs to be removed from madonna's page as well, for that is also a "fannish description". (dayg715)

FAT

I think there should be a reference to Janets awful weight gain.

No, there musn't. Haven't you seen the promo-picture ?!

Gay icon

What the hell? I'm so sick of people deleting the gay icon category. Janet Jackson is and HAS been a gay icon for quite a long time. Which is part of the reason they had her do a guest appearance on Will & Grace like they did Cher and Matt Damon and Kevin Bacon and Rudy Galindo and Sandra Bernhard and many others. Janet has spoken out against homophobia since forever...ever heard..."Rhythm Nation"? And she has been a longtime advocate of gay rights.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!! People need to stop deleting the "gay icon" group from this page. Janet has been an advocate for gay rights for a very long time; the song "Free Xone" was all about homosexuality and being yourself, and Janet has performed at NYC Gay Pride. STOP DELETING "GAY ICON."Scharles 13:23, 15 April 2006 (UTC)scharles

Well I think the issue of her being an Icon to Gays, Bi's or Hetero's is neither here nor there. Obviously her music appeals to everyone due to her large fan base and the fact she is one of the most successful artist of all time?!

Dear People Who Think You Decide Who Is A Gay Icon: What the hell, indeed? You are not the arbiter of what is a gay icon - nor am I. Why not put what everyone would agree on: "Janet has a large number of gay fans"? Or, "Janet is an icon to many in the gay community"? Sorry - there are very few people who countYESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 as "gay icons" in my book. Maybe Cher, Bette Midler, Diana Ross, Barbra Steisand. Also, many gay people don't count Janet as a gay icon because she's been friends with a few homophobes like that Beanie Man character.rich 02:59, 16 May 2007 (UTC) Also, please sign your posts.rich 02:59, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I have seen web articles in which Janet has received awards from Human Rights Campaign The proper thing to do for any celebrity who is thought to be a gay icon is to add them to the actual gay icon page AND cite a legitimate reference indicating she is one by a statement in her own words or by GLBT organization. No Gay icon I've seen so far has a "gay icon" segment under their own article- only on the gay icon page. Bookkeeperoftheoccult 04:53, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

What is the connection between Janet and Tsunamis

The only thing missing is her Playboy cover! First to show breasts with a man touching them.

That was Rolling Stone. —tregoweth 00:13, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)

Actually, this is pretty warm stuff. Only two of the Jackson siblings are "incredible", at best, but even so that isn't a word I'd expect to see in an encyclopedia article. This article could be toned down a bit. Ortolan88

Actually, it was a copyright violation. Removed completely (after I spent 20 minutes copyediting it--devil's in the details). --KQ

This article needs some heavy NPOV editing; I'd personally like to see the extensive discussion of where each of her singles hit in the charts removed from the body and placed into perhaps a "singles/chart listing" list at the bottom. Also, grammatical errors galore.

"Janet was exposed to the entertainment industry from an early age." Maybe not the best terminology for Ms. Jackson, but I'm leaving it for the irony. --cuiusquemodi 01:37, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Not to get political… but does it amaze anyone else that the world can throw itself into an uproar of Janet Jackson's breast at the Superbowl, yet we get subjected to Billy Crystal's ass on the 76th Annual Academy Awards?

The media blows it up if you ask me. Everyone has seen a nipple once, because all human beings have them. but no stressin' 20 Years and My Girl is still standing. JANET I LOVE YA !!! CyberAnti

This page has INFLATED world wide album sales listed as US sales!!!!! MadonnaFan 05:10, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Janet has sold no more than 90million records world wide, 60 million albums and 30 million singles, here is an article saying that after the Velvet Rope album she had sold 60 million records world wide. (she has only released like 2 albums since then and there is no way she increased her total by 50% since then) http://www.soundclick.com/bands/8/janetjackson.htm

And about world wide single sales, www.riaa.com --- searchable database is a good way to find Janet's US single sales, and then double them (which is generous in itself) to get the WW total.

So 90 million... MadonnaFan 00:50, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Sales

YOU ARE A MADONNA FAN, SHO WHY ARE YOU POST THERE... YOU JUST SIMPLY DONT LIKE JANET....DONT YOU? In regards to Jackson's sales, a lot of her albums have sold more than RIAA certifications, as of last week her 93 album 'janet.' has scanned 7 million copies (RIAA has it for 6m), her 01' album 'All For You' has scanned 3.3 million (RIAA has it for 2 million), her singles also deserve correct certifications much like 'Together Again' reportedly scanned 1.33 million (RIAA has it at Gold), and her worldwide single & album sales are reported over 100 million, with the success of 'Damita Jo' I thought it was safe to add 3 million copies + a few extra for singles, and other albums sold since her last report.

Remember 'The Velvet Rope' bought her career sales to 60 million, add 7 million for 'All For You' and 3 million (shipment) for 'Damita Jo' that's 70 million in albums worldwide, plus she has sold about 15 million singles (or more in the US based on RIAA), that totals to 85 million, not including singles sales outside of the US, that would mean she has only sold 5 million singles outside of the US, 'Together Again' and 'Scream' sold over 3 million each out of the states.

Her worldwide total for albums and singles is easily over 100 million.

I know the SS totals and I have the wildest WW sales estimates for her albums and singles from her record label AND obsessed fans, she has not sold 100 million records, her only strong territory overseas is Japan, and South Africa is a smaller market than Finland and Poland. And Damita Jo would be lucky to have sold 3 million ww, it only shipped one million in the US, debuted at a dissapointing #10 in Japan, and didn't make the Top 20 of any album chart in any country in Europe. When Janet won her MTV ICON show she was awarded for having sold 50 million albums world wide, she has not sold 25 million since then, in her wildest dreams. She has sold no more than 60 million albums and 30 million singles world wide... MadonnaFan 00:01, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Jackson's Virgin records bio states as of The Velvet Rope (1999), she sold over 60 million albums.

Control 14m Rhythm Nation 14m Janet 17m Design Of A Decade 8m The Velvet Rope 7m = 60 million albums

All For You 6m Damita Jo 3m (not in sales, but worldwide shipments should easily be 3 million for a Janet Jackson title).

But more so, if we take Jackson's 60-70 million albums sold, and add her 15-20 million singles in the US, that will total 75-90 million albums and singles, without adding her single sales from the US, Jackson has released at least 30 singles, and I'm sure those 30 singles have sold at least 15 million outside of the US. Easily giving Jackson over 100 million albums and singles. Here, are hard facts, you have not supplied any. From what I understand Jackson has had 3 singles sell 3m+ worldwide "That's The Way Love Goes," "Scream," and "Together Again", out sales for those 3 singles alone might equal about 6-7 million copies. "Together Again," sold over 3 million copies alone between the US, UK, Germany and France. Timebaftertimecl 22:13, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

She has not sold 100 million records, and Janet has sold no more than 15 million copies world wide, post YOUR sources. MadonnaFan 00:01, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

WHat are you talking about MadonnaFan, The "Janet album has sold 17 millino copies. Why are MAdonna Fans always disputiing ove Janets Record sales. Madonna has surpassed her, thats obvious, but I find mor Madonna fans obsessed over Janets sales than Janet fans. Given the true figures above, including WW sales of albums and singles, Janet has passed the 100 million mark. Thats that!!

CDFU! Janet has sold about 125 million albums and singles (about 70 million of them albums) worldwide. -Control: 14 million -Janet Jackson's Rhythm Nation 1814: 14 million (confirmed by A&M in 2003) -janet: 17 million -Design Of A Decade: 1986/1996: 7 million -The Velvet Rope: 8.25 million (7 million was confirmed by Virgin on November 4, 1998) -All For You: 6.5 million -Damita Jo: 2 million

And I haven't counted her first two LP's, which combined would total about 2 million worldwide.

Images

All of the images currently illustrating this article are "unverified", lacking any information about source and copyright status. (See Wikipedia:Images and linked pages for information on Wikipedia image use policy.) If anyone can identify the source and copyright status of any of these images, please add that information to the image pages. Thanks, -- 02:07, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) Plus, that portrait is awful. I am sure nobody would be sad to see it go.--Adoniscik 1 July 2005 23:02 (UTC)

Someone recently removed the image of "wardrobe malfunction"---that shows the exposure of Janet Jackson's right breast---from the article's section. I did see that it has presently been used in a Super Bowl article which may have reference to this background. Adnghiem501

I dont think that the picture of Janet's wardrobe malfunction should be able to download

Bisexual?

Years ago, the Advocate stated that her ex-husband accused her of sleeping with men and women during their marriage. "Velvet Rope" has many pro-bisexual statements in it. Is Ms. Janet bisexual? Well, isn't she?

Ms. Jackson said in a MuchMusic television interview promoting All For You that she would never confirm or deny any part of her sexuality, because she feels it does not matter. 68.43.152.39 22:32, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup

Just to say I cleaned up the language, but I make to claim to knowing anything about the accuracy of figures. DJ Clayworth 20:17, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I also cleaned up the grammer, and some spelling errors that remained after mr. Clayworth's vetting. It is nonetheless an interesting and descriptive story. J Westman 13:30, 23 October, 2006

Neutrality of this page

There are a few instances where the neutrality of bias is questionable.

In particular, I cite the following sentence near the beginning of the article:

From a late-'70s and early-'80s teen idol to a mid-'80s pop phenomenon to a critically-acclaimed singer and songwriter throughout the '90s and now, Janet Jackson has had one of the longest and most enduring careers of any entertainer in the history of the galaxy.

It is pretty bold to state that Janet Jackson is the most enduring entertainer in the entire galaxy!

Other examples include inflated facts and figures (see above for examples) and all the photograph captions reading "Pop Queen" Janet Jackson.

This article has needed serious work for awhile. I'm going to work on it for the next day or so and submit a clean, revised, neutral version. Pacian 12:24, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Why did The Velvet Rope part from the article disappear?

Cleanup needed

This article needs a thorough going over. I don't have time to do it justice but these are some of my concerns: Encyclopaedias don't make judgments about people -- they don't say they are icons or legends; they quote others doing so. Let's find quotes. Jackson pere may well have been "stern" and "gregarious" (not really complementary adjectives actually -- the structure would imply they go together but they don't) but this is a POV about him not a description. Ditto the "angelic" mother. Too much stuff about the Jacksons. Just link them and stick to talking about the subject. "However, her father would not have it, as he saw her potential early on." Does he say so ever so that we can quote him? The general tone is too folksy. Yes, I know we don't have to be stern but we need to steer clear of fanboyism.Grace Note 04:13, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I LOVE JANET.....

Few celebrity siblings can emerge from the shadows of their already famous relations to become superstars in their own right and with their own distinct personalities. That's exactly what Janet Jackson did in becoming one of the biggest female pop and R&B stars of the '80s and '90s. Since her breakthrough in 1986 with the album Control, Jackson's career as a hitmaker has been a model of consistency, rivaling Madonna and Whitney Houston in terms of pop-chart success over the long haul. A big part of the reason was that Jackson kept her level of quality control very high; her singles were always expertly crafted, with indelible pop hooks and state-of-the-art production that kept up with contemporary trends in urban R&B. Once established, her broad-based appeal never really dipped all that much; she was able to avoid significant career missteps, musical and otherwise, and successfully shifted her image from a strong, independent young woman to a sexy, mature adult. With a string of multi-platinum albums under her belt, she showed no signs of slowing down in the new millennium. Janet Damita Jo Jackson was born May 16, 1966, in Gary, IN. She was the youngest of nine children in the Jackson family, and her older brothers had already begun performing together as the Jackson 5 by the time she was born. Bitten by the performing bug at a young age, she first appeared on-stage with the Jackson 5 at age seven, and began a sitcom acting career at the age of ten in 1977, when producer Norman Lear selected her to join the cast of Good Times. She remained there until 1979, and subsequently appeared on Diff'rent Strokes (1981-1982) and A New Kind of Family. In 1982, pushed by her father into trying a singing career, Jackson released her self-titled first album on A&M; a couple of singles scraped the lower reaches of the charts, but on the whole, it made very little noise. She was cast in the musical series Fame in 1983; the following year, she issued her second album, Dream Street, which sold even more poorly than its predecessor. Upon turning 18, Jackson rebelled against her parents' close supervision, eloping with a member of another musical family, singer James DeBarge. However, the relationship quickly hit the rocks and Jackson wound up moving back into her parents' home and having the marriage annulled.

Jackson took some time to rethink her musical career and her father hired her a new manager, John McClain, who isolated his young charge to train her as a dancer (and make her lose weight). McClain hooked Jackson up with producers/writers Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis, whom she'd seen perform as members of the Minneapolis funk outfit the Time. Jackson collaborated with Jam and Lewis on most of the tracks for her next album, Control, which presented her as a confident, tough-minded young woman (with a soft side and a sense of humor) taking charge of her life for the first time. In support of Jackson's new persona, Jam and Lewis crafted a set of polished, computerized backing tracks with slamming beats that owed more to hard, hip-hop-tinged funk and urban R&B than Janet's older brother Michael's music. Control became an out-of-the-box hit, and eventually spun off six singles, the first five of which -- "What Have You Done for Me Lately," the catch phrase-inspiring "Nasty," the number one "When I Think of You," the title track, and the ballad "Let's Wait Awhile" -- hit the Top Five on the pop charts. Jackson was hailed as a role model for young women and Control eventually sold over five million copies, establishing Jackson as not just a star, but her own woman. It also made Jam and Lewis a monstrously in-demand production team.

For the hotly anticipated follow-up, John McClain wanted to push Jackson toward more overtly sexual territory, to which she objected strenuously. Instead, she began collaborating with Jam and Lewis on more socially conscious material, which formed the backbone of 1989's Rhythm Nation 1814 (the "1814" purportedly stood for either the letters "R" and "N" or the year "The Star-Spangled Banner" was written). Actually, save for the title track, most of the record's singles were bright and romantically themed; four of them -- "Miss You Much," "Escapade," "Black Cat," and "Love Will Never Do (Without You)" -- hit number one, and three more -- "Rhythm Nation," "Alright," and "Come Back to Me" -- reached the Top Five, making Jackson the first artist ever to produce seven Top Five hits off of one album (something not even her brother Michael had accomplished). Aside from a greater use of outside samples, Rhythm Nation's sound largely resembled that of Control, but was just as well-crafted, and listeners embraced it enthusiastically, buying over six million copies. Jackson undertook her first real tour (she'd appeared at high schools around the country in 1982) in support of the album and it was predictably a smashing success. In 1991, Jackson capitalized on her success by jumping from A&M to Virgin for a reported $32 million, and also secretly married choreographer and longtime boyfriend René Elizondo.

Once on Virgin, Jackson set about revamping her sound and image. Her 1992 duet with Luther Vandross from the Mo' Money soundtrack, "The Best Things in Life Are Free," was a major R&B hit, also reaching the pop Top Ten. The following year, she also resumed her acting career, co-starring in acclaimed director (and former junior high classmate) John Singleton's Poetic Justice, along with rapper Tupac Shakur. But neither really hinted at the sexy, seductive, fully adult persona she unveiled with 1993's janet., her Virgin debut. Jackson trumpeted her new image with a notorious Rolling Stone cover photo, in which her topless form was covered by a pair of hands belonging to an unseen "friend." Musically, Jam and Lewis set aside the synthesized funk of their first two albums with Jackson in favor of warm, inviting, gently undulating grooves. The album's lead single, the slinky "That's the Way Love Goes," became Jackson's biggest hit ever, spending eight weeks at number one. It was followed by a predictably long parade of Top Ten hits -- "If," the number one ballad "Again," "Because of You," "Any Time, Any Place," "You Want This." janet.'s debut showing at number one made it her third straight chart-topping album, and it went on to sell nearly seven million copies.

In 1995, Janet and Michael teamed up for the single "Scream," which was supported by an elaborate, award-winning, space-age video that, upon completion, ranked as the most expensive music video ever made. The single debuted at number five on the pop charts, but gradually slid down from there. In 1996, A&M issued a retrospective of her years at the label, Design of a Decade 1986-1996; it featured the Virgin hit "That's the Way Love Goes" and a few new tracks, one of which, "Runaway," became a Top Five hit. Jackson also signed a new contract with Virgin for a reported $80 million. Yet while working on her next album, Jackson reportedly suffered an emotional breakdown, or at least a severe bout with depression; she later raised eyebrows when she talked in several interviews about the cleansing value of coffee enemas as part of her treatment. Her next album, The Velvet Rope, appeared in 1997, and was touted as her most personal and intimate work to date. The Velvet Rope sought to combine the sensuality of janet. with the more socially conscious parts of Rhythm Nation, mixing songs about issues like domestic abuse, AIDS, and homophobia with her most sexually explicit songs ever. Critical opinion on the album was divided; some applauded her ambition, while others found the record too bloated. The lead American single "Together Again," an elegy for AIDS victims, was a number one hit; also popular on the radio was "Got 'Til It's Gone," which featured rapper Q-Tip and a sample of Joni Mitchell over a reggae beat. "I Get Lonely," featuring Blackstreet, was another big hit; but on the whole, The Velvet Rope didn't prove to be the blockbuster singles bonanza that its predecessors were, which was probably why its sales stalled at around three million copies.

Jackson toured the world again, and stayed on the charts in 1999 with the Top Five Busta Rhymes duet "What's It Gonna Be?!"; her appearance in the video remade her as a glitzy, artificially costumed, single-name diva. In 2000, she appeared in the Eddie Murphy comedy Nutty Professor II: The Klumps, and her soundtrack contribution, "Doesn't Really Matter," became a number one single. Unfortunately, Jackson's marriage to Elizondo had become strained and the couple divorced in 2000, sparking a court battle over her musical income. Jackson returned with a new album, All for You, in 2001, which largely continued the sensual tone of janet. and The Velvet Rope; it debuted at number one, selling over 600,000 copies in its first week alone. The title track was issued as the album's first single and quickly topped the charts, followed by another sizable hit in "Someone to Call My Lover."

While Jackson spent much of 2001 and 02 on the road supporting All For You, she also found time for some guest appearances, most notably with Beenie Man on his Tropical Storm LP and Justin Timberlake on Justified, his solo debut. By 2003 she was back in the studio, working once again with Jam and Lewis on tracks for a new album; additional producers included Dallas Austin and Kayne West. Later that year, it was revealed Jackson would take part in an MTV-produced extravaganza during halftime at the Super Bowl. 2004 began with an Internet leak of the upbeat Austin production "Just a Little While". The singer's camp rolled with the punches, offering the track to radio as an authorized digital download, but the buzz this business caused was minuscule in comparison to the nightmare union of free exposure and bad publicity that Jackson's next adventure caused. Appearing at halftime of Super Bowl XXXVIII as scheduled, Jackson performed "All For You" and "Rhythm Nation" before bringing out surprise guest Timberlake for a duet on his hit "Rock Your Body". But the real surprise came at song's end, when a gesture from Timberlake caused Jackson's costume to tear, exposing her right, pierced breast on live television to hundreds of millions of viewers. The incident caused furious backpedaling and apologizing from Timberlake, Jackson, the NFL, CBS, and MTV, which swore no previous knowledge of the so-called "wardrobe malfunction", and led to speculation over how Damita Jo - Jackson's upcoming album and her first in three years - would be received. But while the controversy gave Jackson both grief and a bit of free advertising, it was also the impetus for a national debate on public indecency. A federal commission was set up to investigate prurience, the FCC enacted tougher crackdowns on TV and radio programs broadcasting questionable content, and suddenly everyone from pundits to politicians to the man in the street had an opinion on Janet Jackson's chest. Later that March, the singer quietly started making the talk show rounds. She was still apologizing for the incident, but she was also promoting Damita Jo, which Virgin issued at the end of the month.

Screwing around

"than 100 million people. During this live performance, her top was torn open by Timberlake, exposing Jackson's luscious right breast;"

"Despite all of that, Jackson has managed to survive the incident and that of the troubles her older brother Michael is facing due to his child molestation case by showing the perserverance that has made her a superstar."

" The album became a huge success worldwide, reaching #1 in 22 countries, selling nearly 17 million copies. "janet." was awarded Grammy, MTV Video Music, and Soul Train Award's. Your smooth and shiny feels so good against my lips sugar..Janet is moist in the pooty tang."

Someone is vandalizing and POVing this article. Cleanup by a nonfanboy who knows a bit about Janet requested.

Jarwulf 09:23, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

October 6, 2005

This yo boy Jerome.

THIS IS THE REAL DEAL

I Love Madonna but, How the hell Janet come in at #2 after Madonna in the best dancers Madonna don't dance she sit there and look pretty there is nothing wrong with that but don't hate on Janet Jackson. This is the real deal and me and you both know this is the truth,(#5 Madonna #4 Aaliyha #3 Paula Abdul #2 Janet Jackson #1 Micheal Jackson) Now lets keep it real!!

This Jerome The #1 Janet Jackson Fan!!

oh tru dat jerome getcrunk 23:17, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

POV/secret child

I am going to do what will probably be my THIRD major POV sweep up of this article, including the new section about Jackson's alleged teenage daughter. It's hardly truthful to say Jackson is secretive about her personal life considering how much she spoke out about her divorce, not to mention her penchant for body piercings and sadomasochistic sex (during "The Velvet Rope" promotions.) Pacian 04:07, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

I started doing this and quit after a few paragraphs. This article is a disaster. Just some comments for the next person who wants to put in the TIME and EFFORT to really clean up this article:

Detailed comments about Jackson's family do not belong in this article, they belong in articles about her family members.

Detailed comments about Jackson's albums and singles do not belong in this article, they belong in articles about those albums and singles.

Trivia sections do NOT belong on wikipedia. If it is important enough to be in an encylopedia article it needs to be incorperated into the text of the entry. Otherwise it should be removed.

Pacian 04:15, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Whoever put that Young DeBarge alleged the "secret daughter" is 21 is wrong. He said the child is 18. You can check that here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9818640/. And Yes Jackson has been intensey secretive. The fact of the matter is no one was even really sure she was married to Elizondo until after they divorced, what, a decade later? If that's not being secretive, I don't know what is. Furthermore, this is an encyclopedia, not a Janet Jackson fansite, so we don't need to devote a paragraph to some interview she did in SPIN over 10 years ago and give her every benefit of doubt. In light of recent events, her comments look more and more dishonest. This allegation has been around too long and Janet could easily disprove it. Most likely it's true that she has a daughter and it's only a matter of time before all the facts come out.

This is ridiculous. That SPIN quote provided her original 1987 comment on the rumor, in the year her child was apparently born (according to Young DeBarge, at any rate). Of course she refused to comment on it now - why should she? Anyone who knows the details of Janet's career knows the claims are blatantly false. The onus is not on her to disprove it, the onus is on Young DeBarge to PROVE it. And so far, he hasn't produced a body. Apparently, while Young DeBarge knows the child's name is Renee, she lives with Rebbie, she's a great singer, blah blah blah, Mother DeBarge claims she's never met the child and doesn't even know if she exists. This is obviously another Jackson-family urban legend being revived by someone who needs to sell an album. People are editing this section to include idiotic lies such as "Janet and her publicity machine planned this". Furthermore, when LaToya was shooting off at the mouth about the entire family in the early 90's, she exposed Janet's marriage - but not the secret child.

Do we really need more nude pics?

Delete the stupid sunbathing pic. I fail to see how this is relevant to anything--Ewok Slayer 06:34, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree. Done. Pacian 00:04, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
- I don't see what's wrong with including an illustrative picture from the paparazzi video, but if this is so controversial, then go ahead and remove it. Firebug 00:54, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
  - It is policy of Wikipedia to avoid including sexually or violently graphic photos unless they are inherantly important to the article. For instance, an article about the human vagina would inherantly qualify for inclusion of a photograph of a vagina. This article is not called "History of Janet Jackon's Public Nudity" or some such. If this instance of public nudity had somehow been a defining moment for Jackson inclusion would be appropriate; that's why the "nipple out" photo is still in the article. There is a distinction. Pacian 04:52, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Single missing?

Well, there *might* be a single missing in the list. Look at the The Pleasure Principle article. Do you see the mentioning of "Funny How Time Flies ... " on the bottom right? Well, I think that's one of CONTROL's singles that are missing here. -andy 80.129.118.123 23:47, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

There are quite a few singles that are missing: "FHTM(WYHF)", "Start Anew", "Everytime"....

Whistle Register

Is the high D6 in "He Doesn't Even Know I'm Alive" the only high note she ever sang thats close to the whistle register?

I agree with the above user. I love Janet. I have owned many of her albums. I don't recall any whistle register notes. I will certainly concede if someone can give specific examples of whistle register notes from Janet. Walkerb4 21:35, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

I am removing her categorization as a whistle register singer. If you restore the whistle register link, please provide proof—specifically, which notes she hits in which recordings—where she uses it. --C-squared 04:27, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

I think it has to be at least an E6 in order for it to count as a whistle register note. I've only heard her sing a D6 a "He Doesn't Know I'm Alive." I love Janet, but she's not known for being a whistle register singer. - anonymous 04:27, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Changes by 69.142.124.250

Reverted all changes by User:69.142.124.250. Removing the 'official website' entry from the infobox seemed to be counterproductive. Isn't this a "standard" other infoboxes still use? Also, moving the reference to being #1 search in google away from other google information seemed silly. Sorry. -- Ch'marr 07:49, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

SEX ICON

IF YOU GYS ARE GONNA PUT HER AS AN ICON FOR THE GAYS THEN WHAT ABOUT SEX ICON FOR US? I'MEAN SHE IS A SEX ICON/SYMBOL AND JAN IS PRETTY SEXY RUSER:MRGQ

Fair enough. I wouldn't dispute either...

what does "sex icon" mean? to me seka, the female porn star, is a sex icon. madonna maybe. maybe what you want to say is "janet jackson, in her albums The Velvet Rope, Janet, and (whichever others) freely written about sex in her songs". just a suggestion. on the subject of "gay icon", i don't think she's of the same "rank" as madonna, cher, diana ross, bette midler, barbra streisand, but that's just me - i'm 50ish and white. i adore janet and her work, but i don't know if you sampled 100 gay people, 50 or 75 would say "yes" when asked if she's a gay icon.rich 19:13, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

20 years old

this article is on billboard.com 31-04-2006:

The first single from Janet Jackson's as-yet-untitled new album is expected to hit U.S. radio outlets in May, Virgin Urban president Jermaine Dupri tells Billboard. The album will likely follow at the end of September. As previously reported, longtime Jackson collaborators Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis have contributed to the new album.

"It's a milestone year for us and for the collaboration," Jam previously told Billboard.com. "It'll be 20 years since the release of [Jackson's 1986 album] 'Control,' so there's definitely a little bit of a nod to that on the new album."

Will Dupri be a featured guest on any of the new tracks? "You'll hear my voice on some songs," he says. "But I don't know if Jermaine Dupri the artist exists anymore. I'm not into that right now. It's far on the back burner. It's probably in the cards somewhere down the road. But it's the last thing I'm thinking about right now."

The album has no title yet. The Janet wiki article contradicts majorly:

'the new album will be titled "Twenty Years Old", giving a nod to the 20th anniversary of Janet's 3rd LP release, "Control" which was her first career mega-hit. '

'The album's title, however, has not been officially confirmed yet. [1] The new album is due in September 2006.[1]'

Um... someone sort this out...!

I've attempted to fix the information. Thanks for bringing this to our attention; by the way, you can fix errors like this yourself! -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 18:32, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

The first single isn't "Speed It Up"... that's just another title for "Put it on Me," and Janet herself confirmed that the tracks done with Rich Harrison aren't going to be on the album: http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002344424 Further, the "citation" placed there next to that rumour has NOTHING to do with that particular song being selected as the single Scharles 13:21, 15 April 2006 (UTC)scharles

Also, Janet Jackson is a Gay Icon. Unquestionably. So stop deleting it.

Janet is more than just a gay icon as more than just the gay community supports her music. So lets not get into all that stuff.

As far as corrections go Got Til Its Gone never touched the Billboard Hot 100 as it didn't have a single release. I Get Lonely debuted at #3 on the Billboard Hot 100 therefore its peak couldn't possibly be #4.

Not that I want to get involved in this but:

*"Got 'Til it's Gone" most certainally DID have a single release, in a variety of formats including 12" vinyl and CD single.

*Whether or not Janet Jackson is supported by more than just the gay community is irrelevant to her status as a gay icon.

*You need to sign up for a free account here in wikipedia and start signing your posts with four tildas (~) - if you don't do so, all of your comments here on the talk page will be removed. Pacian 07:03, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm glad you did get involved in this.

First, "Got 'Til It's Gone" had a single release, internationally. In the US, no physical single was released, a necessity for inclusion on the Billboard Hot 100 at the time. This is why it never charted there.

On the gay icon bit... yeah. Exactly. Thank you. And everything else you said. Scharles 01:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)scharles

The "gay icon" category was deleted through WP:CFD, thus this article cannot include that category.

I would appreciate it if User:68.46.186.126 could actually tell us his reasons for reverting my edits which comply with Wikipedia policy? -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 18:53, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm really sorry that got deleted. Please add it but keep the current info that is there, there. Design of A Decade, and the janet. era, deserve to be kept together. Janet is without a doubt, a gay icon. I tried looking back for that mention about was unable to find it. Add the category. 68.46.186.126 06:33, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

The category cannot be added; it was deleted. -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 20:54, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Please I've searched, where is this category going? Where would you like it to go? It's an important section, and it would be a nice addition. Janet is certainly a gay icon, but we need to know where it will be. Maddyfan 21:43, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

The category was deleted according to policy. See this. If you wish, you can bring it up on Wikipedia:Deletion review, where the delete decision will be reconsidered. If the category is recreated after a deletion review, then it can be added to this page. -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 00:28, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Surely the main text of 20 Y.0 should be structured better? The words are fine but it just looks messy to me =D

In line with other artist wiki pages, updated headings

Just as Mariah Carey, Madonna, and Kylie Minogue have done, we have now updated the headings to give more description to each time period, without having a lot of POV.

We're also completely updating each section. It's a work in progress. If you wish to add additional content, go right ahead. DO NOT DELETE. A lot of time and effort has gone into adding crucial information that before was missing, AND screencaptions direct from the videos have been made. Maddyfan 21:40, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

After you have finished adding your content, I think we need to discuss what needs to go. 13 fair-use images is way too much for this page. Kylie Minogue, a featured article, only has ten images, two of which are under free licenses. Also, I think the page should have an image of Janet during her childhood acting career. By the way, please read WP:NPOV, a guideline on Wikipedia. Thanks. -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 00:28, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

There is one screen capture per album, except for Rythmn Nation. The screen captures illustrate, Janet's use of video imagery. They work in the context of the content. For instance, Love Would Never Do, is there, along with a capture from Rhythm Nation because of Janet's image transformation. Janet has had a very long career, and one capture per album, I wouldn't say is bad at all. Look at Madonna's. They are both visual artists who started what we know know as the modern-day music video for MTV. Her magazine cover was added by another user long ago, and that's an iconic image, as well as her most controversial. The bottom line is, I feel each of the images are warranted along with the text. Maddyfan 00:44, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I just checked, Madonna's page has 12 just as Janet's does, and this includes the photo from the Film section. Janet Jackson is NOT Kylie Minogue, and I'm not knocking her. Janet is a far bigger visual artist like Madonna, and has had many transformations. Maddyfan 00:50, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

By the way, you need to cite the actual source for the Madonna infobox pic or it will be deleted.

I don't think that the Madonna article should be used as a model for this one because it's not very good. Kylie Minogue and Mariah Carey are featured articles, meaning they are the best of Wikipedia. Both those artists have changed their image many times, but the articles have less than ten images. There is no way we can establish the need for thirteen fair use images. If possible, we need some free use images, such as one of her in concert, etc. Also, the fair use images that will remain in the article will need a fair use rationale, saying why we need the image. -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 00:52, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry but NO. Mariah Carey, and Kylie Minogue, are NOT visual artists, who made their career out of using the video medium. The images here have been used very sparingly. Believe it or not, there are very few images out there that are fair use. The screencaptures were actually made, and are not promotional material. The Madonna page is the BEST model to use. The page has every top Wiki contributor on there, and they will allow very little. It has gone through many changes. Maddyfan 01:04, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately the Madonna page isn't a featured article, nor does it have "every top Wiki contributor" (lol =D). All the images in this article right now are fair use. It does not matter who made the screen captures, they are captures of a music video which is copyright. Thus we have to claim fair use, which is hard to do with 13 images in the article. -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:09, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I think Image:Tpp vid.jpg and Image:Runaway vid.jpg are good candidates to go beacuse there are already images that convey the same messages, and Jackson cannot be clearly seen in the first one. -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:15, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Did you just type that after you saw what I had done, because if not, that is totally freaky, lol. I took those two images out, and the ICON image. Maddyfan 01:17, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

WHOA. weird. Anyway, I think the article needs an image from her teen years. Then the Control cover can be removed. And now, we need an image for the All for You section. Perhaps a Klumps? I will try and find one. -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't know, I think the Control cover needs to be there, or something for Control. That was a big time for her, and to go straight into Rhythm Nation would be strange. 01:27, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, I found a Klumps image. It's Image:Janetklumps.jpg. -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:28, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

You did a terrific job. I had to move some of the images at the bottom from left to right, because my head felt like it was tilting, lol. But you do a great job. Thanks! Anything else you want to add, since it in major editing? lol. Maddyfan 01:39, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I think it's beter to have a pattern, but okay. I think the Poetic Justice image should be replaced with the Klumps image, but I will think about more tomorrow. I'm going to watch ER! -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:43, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Don't you DARE touch my Poetic Jutice! LMAO! It's great the way it is now. Maddyfan 01:47, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

You are overdoing the linking

Hey Maddyfan, I unlinked several dates/years from this article last night and I see they have been restored, and/or there are lots of new ones. The 'Manual Of Style' makes it clear where it says - "Not every year listed in an article needs to be wikilinked. Ask yourself: will clicking on the year bring any useful information to the reader?". I will go through the article this afternoon and get rid of unecessary links. If you see the {{inuse}} sign displayed, please hold off for a few minutes to give me time to go through the whole article, to avoid edit conflict. Moriori 04:02, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Another manual of style issue: WP:MOS#Quotation_marks says that we use double quotations for song titles. -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 21:23, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Everything has been fixed, thank you Moriori, for that. Makes a whole lot of sense! Maddyfan 23:28, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

By the way, this artice has a serious WP:CITE problem. There are no references, which we need. -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 23:43, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Currently working on citations

If anyone wants to go through the text and add some citations, go ahead. I'm currently referencing a bunch of content. Maddyfan 02:23, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Audio samples

A really great addition to this article would be some sound samples. See Wikipedia:Media help (Ogg). I'll see if I can get some samples up today. -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 15:34, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I've added a sample for "Nasty". I also have samples for "Rhythm Nation", "Together Again", "All for You", "Just a Little While" and "All Nite (Don't Stop)" coming up. If anyone can find some other samples, please do. -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 16:42, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

nice job--LooseTheHotButtonS 03:15, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I was just going to start working on that. Just great! We also should have a sample for "If". This is great! It's coming along! Maddyfan 04:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Image:Janet Jackson - Rhythm Nation.ogg and Image:Janet Jackson - Together Again.ogg are now up. Unfortunately I don't have "If". -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 19:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

getcrunk, what are you using to edit the audio to make samples? Is there a program that you could recommend that works well? Maddyfan 21:08, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

I am using Blaze Media Pro. It's free for fifteen days. -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 21:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Are you ripping direct from the CDs? Maddyfan 00:52, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

No, I am converting my audio files to .ogg and then cropping them. -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 20:31, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

How are the new audio files working on everyone else's end? Maddyfan 18:40, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Working well; an issue though: you need to add the fair use rationale (as seen here) to the sound pages, or they can be deleted per WP:FU policy. -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 18:59, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I'll get on it! Maddyfan 20:41, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Better Opening

The artists: Mariah Carey, Kylie Minogue, and Madonna, have better opening introductions to their pages. The openings are suppose to summarize what's in the content of the entire page. Can we create a better opening? Buzzed1 22:28, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

yeah, I was just thinking about that. WP:LEAD gives some good guidelines. I think it should be ~3 paragraphs and should mention the key points in her career from each section. -- getcrunk ? 22:36, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I tried to put one together. I hope you like it. I think it touches on the main points. Buzzed1 16:17, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Good intro; I trimmed it a bit so it looks more like those of Featured Articles Kylie Minogue and Mariah Carey, but the main points are still there. — getcrunk what?! 16:46, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

It's funny, I was trimming it down even more as you were editing. Sorry about that. I think it sounds really good. Buzzed1 04:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Picture in 20 Years Old

Isn't a picture where Janet is trying to loose weight a little, I don't know, out of place? In that section, nothing talks about her gaining weight for a movie role, and really it isn't part of that era, musically. I guess it's okay for now. Any thoughts? Buzzed1 04:39, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Image:Janet Jackson in January 2006.jpg is a free-licensed image, and we shouldn't replace it with something that is copyrighted and "fair use" (such as a promo photo). Per Wikipedia:Fair use criteria, "Always use a more free alternative if one is available. Such images can often be used more readily outside the U.S. If you see a fair use image and know of an alternative more free equivalent, please replace it, so the Wikipedia can become as free as possible." See also Wikipedia:Fair use. Extraordinary Machine 18:08, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

How exactly is it a free-licensed picture? It from a professional photographer and the image is from US Magazine along with a dozen others. It's not free. The image I uploaded is from the new photographer Janet just worked with, and we can use. It's exclusive. Also, the image of Janet packing on the pounds isn't even in that article. It's a bit confusing. Again, the image you posted is not free, it is copyrighted. I'm going to revert back to my image since we have the exclusive, and the image you provided does not validate the text, nor is it free. I hope you understand. Buzzed1 18:26, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Image use policy and Wikipedia:Fair use. Also see Wikipedia:Copyrights#Celebrity_photographs and Wikipedia:Publicity photos. I've tagged the image you uploaded to commons for deletion because copyrighted content isn't accepted there. If you think that image is useful, a fair use rationale needs to be provided here, on the en-wiki. — getcrunk what?! 23:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Got it! That other image though is also copyrighted and owned by professional photographers. It's in the Wiki commons and should also then be deleted. Buzzed1 01:04, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Are you sure that the other image is copyrighted? If so, then you are right that it should be deleted. Also, the images currently in the article need fair use rationales. I'll see if I can add them today. One more thing: if anyone can find some free-licensed pictures (such as Janet in concert), those would be preferred. — getcrunk what?! 16:51, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm positive. They're professional paparazzi pictures that were sold to magazines. They were on many blogs and tabloids when they were originally taken in early 2006. They're not fan pics. Finding licensed free pictures of Janet is a bit of a problem. Most of the pictures out there, taken from tours, are press photographs. I'll of course, keep my eye out. What the rules on screen captures? Buzzed1 07:07, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Needs more references

This article needs more refs, particularly in the first half of the article and in the acting career section. Preferably they could be from print sources or high-profile trusted websites (eg CNN, Billboard). I'll work on it, but don't expect much – I am busy until the end of July. — getcrunk what?! 17:23, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I noticed this. Print sources? Is that magazines or articles not on the web too? I'll try to find some sources. The Tennessee part of the acting section, I should be able to find sources for. Buzzed1 07:09, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, printed sources like books, something like Kylie_Minogue#Notes_and_references. Sadly, I found few authoritative books on Janet Jackson when I looked on Amazon. :( — getcrunk what?! 00:04, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Janet and Michael

I'm just wondering about how Janet feels about Michael Jackson. Does she support him, like did she support him through the trial vocally? Or does she distance herself from him? None of the siblings really show that much interest in Michael. Only his loving mother Katherine was there each day of the trial supporting him. I just wanted to know how Janet feels about him. --Paaerduag 04:26, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Janet has always been very supportive of Michael and attended as much of the trial dates as she could. She was also there for his vindication, of course, as were the rest of his family. As for the family members 'not showing that much interest in Michael'... if you mean they don't mention him enough, well, they have their own lives as he does his. So far I've seen LaToya, Jermaine and Michael's parents support him vocally. I don't remember seeing Janet defend him vocally although I'm sure she must have at some stage. She definitely turned up at the trial to support him in person, you can find pictures anywhere. Dark Artist 10:49, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

That's right, but Janet has said in numerous interviews that the accusations were completely dumb. Janet loves her brother and looks up to him today as she always have as a kid. And she is sick of in interviews about her 5 of the questions would be about her the other 15 are about Michael the whole family is sick of it but that dosnt mean they dont love him. Because they all do.

Links

Okay, I'm NOT going to even think about contributing to the mumbo jumbo that lies above this heading. However, I will indicate that I've added an external link on this page. The link is for the All For You Song Experience, which is an interactive music component and once part of Janet Jackson's official website during the album All for You. At this site, fans can create their own mix of songs from the album, all For You. When I was searching Google for info regarding Janet's recent album, I was shocked to discover that this "Song Experience" database was still up and running on the web, even after Janet's newer albums. I'm sure, that the site WON'T last much longer however. Wslupecki 01:54, 27 July 2006 (UTC).

The address link for the "Song Experience" is [1]. Wslupecki 01:55, 27 July 2006 (UTC).

The Superbowl incident was planned!

MTV UK website has the news that Janet Jackson has admitted earlier this month, that the incident with Justin Timberlake was intentional, or rather planned.

“

Janet Jackson has admitted that the boob exposing incident during the Super Bowl half time show was in fact planned.

”

MTV themselves were shocked of such announcement. Would somebody please read the news link and be able to integrate such information within the article? Thanks in advance. -- Omernos~

That was an old news story that got it wrong.

Yeah, she showed her breast to 50 million americans and ruined her career as a singer incidentally. Very smart of her...

Look idiots, she clearly said in many interviews that when she issued the appology on T.V that they edited where she said that the malfunction wasnt planned. And lets be honest of 2 things. If it was planned she would have done it more classy or trashy, I mean lets face it she's a super sex star so it could've been better if it were planned. And Janet Jackson is smart enough to know trouble and how close minded the people in the U.S are, surely she was smart enough to know that if she did that it would definately be a big deal.

Mis quote

"I'm 'bout to change my vibe. Today the sun's gon' shine. 'Cause I made up my mind that today will be the start of better days. Leavin' old sh.. behind and move on with my life. The blindfold's off my eyes and now all I see for me is better days."

So did she actually say "sh.." or did she say "shit"? Bihal 04:44, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

She says "shit." In the censored version of the album, she probably says "sh..." 12.135.58.53 18:54, 2 February 2007 (UTC)scharles

Photo Change

THis is a promotional photo for 20 y.o and i think it looks much better than what was previously placed

Jermaine Dupri Leaving

"Due to the album's low sales, Jermaine Dupri, who also headed the Urban division at Virgin Records, was asked to leave, or quit on his own. Rumors ran rampant about the departure weeks before an official annoucement was made by Dupri, confirming the reports."

No where in the article does it say that due to low album sales he left. It says amid disappointing sales not due to low sales he left.

Asked to leave or quit on his own......this is not a definite statement. The article says he quit.

Others say he was pushed out. That's what the sentence is trying to convey. Herewego123 04:53, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

The Jackson girl group

In 1981, Jackson and her two older sisters LaToya and Rebbieand her little sister Hollie wanted to start their own musical group, but disagreements between the older sisters forced the group to disband before making a record. Instead, Janet was featured on LaToya's 1981 album called My Special Love in the song Camp Kuchi Kaiai.

Where is the source of this information? Hollie Jackson does not exist.

I don't think "imapedophilis woowooo" is a real disease. I checked some of the last revisions and it's there in all of them. Somebody should find out what the real disease is and change that.

Well all that is said is true, but there is no Hollie Jackson, there is JohVonnie Jackson who is real with the proof of 2 pictures, one of which she's wearing a Rhythum Nation jacket. but She was never going to be in the group because the mother wanted absolutely nothing to do with Joh Vonnie. And if any of you dont belive me click this link to see what she looks like<a href="http://photobucket.com/" target="_blank"><img src="http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k277/jarrylf/jj0n.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting"></a>

copy editing

i have just fixed the opening and i will be doing the rest shortly MRGQ

==un authorized editing

Whoever keeps editing this article , needs to sign up and become a member. things like picture changes should be discussed in the article discussion section before it takes place. MRGQ

Editing Wikipedia does not require authorization from anyone, unless a user has been blocked. Please do not try and suggest otherwise, nobody has been placed in charge of any article. However, it is indeed a good idea to discuss any major or controversial change, or anything that is reverted, here in the talk page. Such decisions are supposed to be taken by consensus, and if a consensus cannot be reached there are ways to resolve disputes. Notinasnaid 12:45, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Reference numbers 18 & 19=

The sentence that connects to reference number 18 appears nowhere in the article. "The low sales however caused a rift with Janet and Virgin Records."

Reference number 19 is not availible for viewing. "The album, which was to be her last on her contract, caused executive producer and boyfriend, Jermaine Dupri to exit his position within the company (head of the Urban division)."

Parts of T.Vs and movies Janet said no to

Here are a few parts in T.V and Movies that Janet admited that she turned down for various reasons but she was interested in coming in playing all of these parts. .The Cosby Show-Denise Huxtable

.School Daze- Jane Trousant,Dina

.A Different World- Whitley

.The Jacksons An American Dream- Katherine

.Living Single- Synclaire

.Waiting to Exhale- Robin

.X-men- Storm

.Girlfriends- Joan

.Cat Women- Cat Women

.Lena Horne- Lena Horne

Sorry, need citations for that info, please. And Janet never turned down the role from that Lena Horne movie--I believe she was out of contention after the Super Bowl incident. THE evil fluffyface (talk) 19:12, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

New movie

1st and foremost I'dlike to say how happy I am that Janet is finaly going to be on the big screen again after 7 years.

WHO came up with these lame article titles?!

"New Image and Popularity," "Career Development"....what????! — The Real One Returns 00:02, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

That's the way it works. Look at any page. Perhaps if you researched, you would have already realized this. If the titles were not this way, a fight would ensue.

Someone messed it up again!

Somebody fix it again..... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.146.15.229 (talk) 12:19, 21 March 2007 (UTC).

Probably a temporal contradiction?

The article states that Janet Jackson and René Elizondo sucessfully hid their marriage for almost a decade. The marriage took place in 1991. A few sentences later it' said:

"In September 1993, Janet appeared topless on the cover of Rolling Stone magazine. The cover became one of the most celebrated photos ever taken of a rock artist, and Rolling Stone named it their 'Most Popular Cover Ever' in 2000. In a precursor to her Super Bowl controversy, Janet was criticized for the explicitness of the photograph. She insisted that the male handbra covering her breasts belonged to her husband, René Elizondo."

This sounds like like she talked about her husband only two years after the marriage. Unless the controversy about her photograph on Rolling Stone happened to happen like maybe eight years later...somehow unlikely, IMHO.

Could someone clarify and/or correct this? --Klaws 22:15, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

No, a few years before the Superbowl. She never revealed who the hands were until after they divorced. Herewego123 04:51, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

"entertainer"

entertainer to me is a term that one uses for the likes of john davidson. it has almost a pejorative feel to it. it also is a term chiefly used to describe singers from the 1950's and 1960's. i think it would be more accurate to describe janet jackson as a singer, dancer, lyricist and music producer. rich 19:08, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Header titles

The header titles on this article need serious revamping. "1986–1991: In Control & Livin' in a Rhythm Nation" <-- What the hell is that?! "Career development," what? They sound corny. Also, some of the content needs a reworking as well, as the tone in several parts makes it obvious that this article was edited by a bunch of sentimental fans. - Incognito9810 08:10, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Those labels are cheesy and misplaced. How the hell was can you call 1992-1995 "Career Development"? If anything, her career "developed" in '86 with the Control album. "2000-2003: Return To Prominence" is also off, since it implied that the period before it was some kind of downslope and that All for You was some kind of a "comeback", which isn't true. In fact, The Velvet Rope sold a little bit more than All for You! All of these headings are off, and need to be changed. But a SWAT team of editors would probably come out of the woodwork and revert any changes made. Avenger2G 18:56, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Rather than start on the header titles, i'm working on cleaning up the composition, and punctuation. I think header titles are hard. I wonder if those of you who have stated your opinions would suggest some alternative titles. Re: sentimental fans, yes, it does sound like it's written by a few, but - it's a good start.rich 06:22, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I just changed the titles to:

1982-1985: The fledgling years 1986-1991: Recording success 1992-1995: Janet's arrival at Virgin 1996-1999: Personal introspection 2000-2003: Into the millenium 2004-2005: Wardrobe malfunction… 2006-present: The end of the Virgin era

If anyone wants to rearrange any of them, that's fine. These were just what I came up with off the top of my head. -Incognito9810 04:26, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

I saw this complaint the other night, and spent a good two hours cleaning up the article. It did read a bit fancrufty. I ended up subracting something 3,000+ characters from the article, but maybe there needs to be further edits done… —The Real One Returns 07:19, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

===Citations===

If anyone is going to place tags such as {{Inappropiatetone}} etc. please place in the discussion section why you believe they were justly placed...until then the tags should be removed MRGQ 23:30, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Janetonthecoverofrollingstone.jpg

Image:Janetonthecoverofrollingstone.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:36, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

To many titles

Love Janet but isn`t all the titles like dancer,record producer,song writter, activist etc etc etc a little 2 long in the intro? Are all of them nessasary? Its a little fan crafty to me? Ideas ? Realist2 18:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I understand what you mean, but no, its not. Every entertainer/celebrity on wikipedia who has multiple occupations has that type of list. It would be one thing if it weren't true, but she legitimately holds these titles. It doesn't appear fan-fanatic at all, just descriptive. Bookkeeperoftheoccult 08:58, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Album sales

Why are the album sales of control and rythem nation only given american certificates, the world sales need to be mentioned instead.Realist2 18:57, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Because 'world sales' are largely unsubstantiated and speculative. RIAA certifications are at least official. —The Real One Returns 02:42, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

So far control, rythem nation, all for you, dont have world sales yet janet,velvet rope, and damita jo do. I wont get into 20 YO yet because it hasn`t been out very long. You need consistancy, you cant have worldwide for some and america only for others. The album sales worldwide dont have to be exact but something is better than nothing and this inconsistancy is confusing to some. People will for get the worldwide part or american part and only remember the figure. This needs resolving soon. Unless you read it very carefully you can easily get the wrong impression. Furthermore the figure needs to be clear at the very beginning of the paragraph like in Michael Jacksons to make it more accesable to those who want to quickly tally up album sales. It harder to pick out the figures amoungst the writting. Realist2 16:24, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

It says Janet is the second best selling female of the 1990s. First Mariah Carey, then Janet. What about Whitney? Are they just counting her "I'm Your Baby Tonight", and "My Love Is Your Love" albums, but not "The Bodyguard" and "Preacher's Wife"? Seems "The Bodyguard" alone would top all of Janets albums put together. And adding all those albums together by Whitney, seems like she would be higher. And what about Madonna?: "I'm Breathless", "Immaculate Collection", "Bedtime Stories", "Something To Remember", "Evita", and "Ray Of Light". Seems all those sales added together worldwide would place her above Janet too. I'm just wondering. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.192.176.30 (talk) 03:27, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

SSSSSSSSSTTTTTTTTOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

there are currently 51 achievements listed on this page!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! its toooooooooooooooooooooooo many!!!!!!!!!!!!! this needed to be edited, we only need the important ones, and not all of them are sourced or even in cronological order. its awful, I think this article needed a review. I might get one, its getting rediculose.Realist2 12:34, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

There is no need to shout. Put forth your opinion calmly and logically if you want to be taken seriously. Thanks. --Ezeu 16:12, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

well that great , any how I think it needs sorting, its messy and painful to look at. There doesn`t need to be more than 15 achievements, 20 at the most.Realist2 13:15, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Usweeklyjanet.jpg

Image:Usweeklyjanet.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 14:51, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Hits

janet jackson has had hits from 1986 to the present day. her most recent was on the u.s. billboard hot dance club play chart, which was "so excited" on the week of january 13, 2007. so, in the introduction, please stop changing the hit dates from 2007 to 2006. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.79.181.245 (talk) 19:03, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Janet Jackson's 10th studio album

An article that you have been involved in editing, Janet Jackson's 10th studio album, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Janet Jackson's 10th studio album. Thank you. –Dream out loud (talk) 13:30, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

GA

GA: There are a lot of paragraphs with references missing, and the references need to be properly formatted. --andreasegde 12:04, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Where have ALL the pictures gone??!

uum there are NO PICTURES in this page. Just a week ago this page was full of images something that made it was giving it a more sophisticated and beautiful look. Now this page is completely coloureless.

ps. you could write way more stuff about janet. i mean see latya's jackson's page. people are trying hard there for a completely unsiccesful artist. Shouldn't we try even harder for janet?? i mean she is of the most succesful artists of all time!!!

anyway...

--Mysterious Spy 15:46, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

GA status

On hold: beef up the lead to make it more of a summary of the key points of the article vice an ad for all the music achievements and fix the refs. The ref formatting is highly inconsistent, the web refs need to look like what is currently number 25, other refs should be similary formatted. Sumoeagle179 17:23, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

GA failed, issues not fixed.Sumoeagle179 23:21, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

personal life and ^{[citation needed]} tags

I have added several ^{[citation needed]} tags to the personal life section. If you say something is controversial, please cite it. Also, it says something about her interview with oprah. Did someone miss the part about her putting on weight for a movie role? The weight had nothing to do with her personal life, it was for a role, the movie was moved forward and she had to decline the role because she was due to finish work on 20 Y.O. Whoever is a part of this project, please get a transcript of that interview and get some facts straight. Marnifrances (talk) 05:46, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I've also added some tags to the article as well--if they get deleted, I will keep adding them until the problems get fixed. THE evil fluffyface (talk) 19:31, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

ETA: I do like the citation of the Rene Elizondo items, but everything else needs to be cited, especially the Oprah interview. THE evil fluffyface (talk) 19:40, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Best Selling Artist

She is not the third nor the second best selling female artist according to RIAA. The order follows (1st to last) Barbra Streisand, Madonna, Mariah Carey, Whitney Houston, Celine Dion, Shania Twain, Reba, Britney Spears, Linda Ronstadt, Enya, and then Janet Jackson. So that makes her the 11th best selling artist in the United States —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrmartinez 91 (talk • contribs) 10:12, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

The RIAA and Billboard are different sources. There is no reason to deleted the entire intro's first paragraph. Bookkeeperoftheoccult (talk) 11:10, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Janet's record sales are at 100 million, whereas britney spears' sales are at 83 million. So Janet can't possibly be 11th. (dayg715)

Sorry... But Janet Jackson has not sold 100 million records, taking in consideration that her biggest selling albums are Rythm Nation and janet. certified six times platinum each, it's impossible to reach the 100 million records status.In career, Janet has sold a maximum of 78 millions records. For Britney, it's the same thing. 83 millions records sold is impossible, because she has sold a maximum of 31 million albums in US, according to RIAA. Britney Spears has sold a maximum of 70 million albums since 1999. And Janet is effectively not the second biggest selling female in USA history. The firts is Barbra Streisand with 71 million records sales, the second is Mariah Carey since 2006 with 62 million, just before Madonna with 61... Then, we have Celine, Shania, Britney... Please be clear in the articles... Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.200.11.176 (talk) 23:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

There needs to be citations on JJ being the ninth most successful act in rock and roll history, and the second most successful female artist in pop music history. Also, JJ is not the "second musician" with the most top hot club hits: it doesn't even make sense (Madonna has more than TWICE the #1s than anyone else!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.103.13.167 (talk) 09:48, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Record sales vary not only from the RIAA and Billboard but from fans as well. Keep that in mind.THE evil fluffyface (talk) 23:05, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Citations still needed

I added a citations tag to the article because there are so many things that need to be cited still, especially those quoting sources such as Billboard, Rolling Stone and Oprah. You just can't say that Janet received this accomplishment from a magazine without sourcing it and I'm having a hard time trying to source the award for the 1993 Rolling Stone cover already.THE evil fluffyface (talk) 23:02, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Using the word 'era'

Is 'era' really the right word to be used here? It sounds kind of stange to refer to each album as an 'era'. Maybe it is fine for Picasso,but it just sounds weird here.Girl80 (talk) 20:04, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I think 'era' is not a bad choice, but I think that the eras are a little longer than just one per album. I would combine the following:

2.1 1982–1985: Janet Jackson & Dream Street era

2.2 1986–1991: Control & Rhythm Nation 1814 era

2.3 1993–1995: janet. era

2.4 1997–1999: The Velvet Rope era

2.5 2000–2007: All for You, Damita Jo, and 20 Y.O. era

2.6 2007–2008: Discipline era

Maybe combining some of those periods and trimming down any unnecessary/unimportant information would make the entire article a lot better. StarIV (talk) 03:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Discipline 400x334.jpg

Image:Discipline 400x334.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:19, 13 February 2008 (UTC)