Jump to content

Talk:Jody Watley/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

This page

Looks a little sloppy compared to the old one. Righetti1057 03:28, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

*snort* DtownG 06:23, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Fixed layout, easier to read OperativePhrase 23:56, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Influence on other artists

"She has had an impact on classic R&B stars like Karyn White and TLC, as well as younger stars like Beyonce, Ciara, Fergie, Mya."

This needs a cite, please. Have any of those artists said that Watley was an influence on them in print? Ckessler 04:00, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Was Jody Watley ever really a superstar?

I'm not sure if there is a precise definition of "superstar," but I think that generally speaking superstars are the ultra-ultra famous, such as Madonna, Michael Jackson, Janet Jackson, Bruce Springsteen, Prince, etc. I don't think Jody Watley was ever in that league. Her career peaked in 1987, and that peaked lasted only about a year. Somehow, I think that this sentence from the article needs some revising:

" Watley's days as an American solo superstar, though, were now clearly past her." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.200.116.199 (talk • contribs) 03:39, 18 March, 2006.
Would it be too much trouble to ask you to get an account so we know what to call you? Or at least to sign your comments? It's a bit hard to take comments left by random I.P. numbers seriously. - Nwdavis 13:20, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree with people at least having a name behind the comments. From what I know, Jody Watley began her career in Shalamar in 1977. Chronologically, her solo debut which came in 1987 - and produced numerous hit singles and videos, etc. To say she peaked in 1987 is uniformed - and incorrect. Subesquent releases - included 'Larger Than Life' 1989-90.. which produced more Top Ten Pop, R&B and Dance Hits - not to mention additonal nominations, and inroads in fashion - unheard of at the time for black artists. If an artist is judged only on hits - I suppose the Rolling Stones peaked in the 60's, but they aren't looked at that way - they're just The Stones - and I'm not saying she's in that league...but a music career is a career. The term ' superstar' - I don't think she has ever been called that. Though Jody may not have sold as many records - one can't discount 'impact' -- in the 80's and 90's -- name another black female artist to have fashion layouts in VOGUE, Harper's Bazaar, Rolling Stone - pose for GAP ,etc.. even Madonna worked with David Fincher - after - seeing the Real Love video.... so - is she a 'superstar' - no - impact - yes - peaked - who is to say - she has a career and at least she tries to make quality music. This seems lost in this.. and even her records that weren't huge hits - still charted - and that's actually when she became more interesting as an artist - to me at least. I would revise it to say something that speaks to that fact that "She continued to evolve with her music, as an artist and songwriter, though not matching the 'commercial success' of her early solo work." gypsygliter

Denials

Where, in print, in a reputable publication, has Jody Watley said that she denies that Michelle is her sister? Citations, please. Ckessler 06:23, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

That's fine. Leave out the reference, but now you have a sentence in the article that states that Watley has publicly denied that Midori is her sister? Got any cites for that? If not, remove it. Ckessler 23:16, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

RancorNV

Has been banned, as a sockpuppet. All this user has done is comment on this talk page, and vandalise the Roseanne article. I'd advice either Ckessler or DtownG to admit to their puppetry, or else I will have no choice to hold both accountable. -- Zanimum 12:33, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm not going to admit to something I didn't do, you're welcome to check my IP address. Ckessler 15:18, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm not behind it either. But interesting that you would think I would be just because it's someone else who confirms Jody's sister. - DtownG 12:31, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
No, I wouldn't care if 50 people all came to this talk page, and said the two were sisters. It's just that the user only registered an account for discussing Jody's article only. I think that its a fair assumption that they're not legit. If an anonymous editor just so happened to come onto this discussion, just a day or two in, I'd not be that suspicious. I'd accept their opinion equal to the opinion of anyone else, registered or not. But when someone comes on brand new to comment on the situation, if just find it highly suspicious. -- Zanimum 20:40, 8 April 2006 (UTC)


Highly suspicious or not, I suggest you handle similar situations differently in the future. I have been involved in some debates on edits I've made, yes, but in the time I've been an editor, I haven't been blocked, or done anything but attempt to make useful edits. Proceed with caution before you accuse and threaten people. Ckessler 23:41, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

VH1 updated

Where's Midori now? [2] -- Zanimum 12:24, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

You still have no sources for the denial. Ckessler 17:53, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Blah blah blah. She has denied it privately, okay. -- Zanimum 00:01, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

No, not blah blah blah. You were harping on us for citations, and now you're inserting information into the article and refusing to provide any? You refuse to unprotect the page so I can add the citation needed tag. You should be held to the same standards as the rest of us. Ckessler 00:04, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Midori remains listed on Jody's MTV.com profile. Whatever. This is the most ridiculous argument I've ever had the misfortune of being part of. You are clearly someone who knows -nothing- about the singer and should not be presiding over her article. At this point, I don't even think you disbelieve it. I think you're just being stubborn about the inclusion of it just to be difficult, and are basically misusing your powers to ensure that your cynicism wins and ultimately save face. Whatever. I'm done. Leave her sister off for all I care, it'll just made Watley's Wikipedia article less thorough than the tons of others on the Internet that cite it. I thought that the purpose of an Encyclopedia was to learn about whatever subject is at hand. Guess that's not the case here. - DtownG 16:05, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Look. Find another admin that knows more about Jody and drag them in. It doesn't matter that I never heard of her before this dispute. I was three when she won her last award, she's old enough to be my mother. However, knowing the topic before hand has no relevance to whether something is true or not. Give me a legitimate source, a source that a university professor would accept. That is what an encyclopedia is about. That is what Wikipedia should be about. -- Zanimum 00:01, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Section for "The Makeover"

It sounds incredibly gushy. I suggest removing "uber-cool" from it to make it more NPOV.70.225.43.28 22:35, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Dancetofitness.JPG

Image:Dancetofitness.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 Wikipedia articles 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 22:33, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Discography

Why does her list of albums not have any actual album titles in it? Bearcat 19:09, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Jody Watley page protection

Per Wikipedia:Protection policy: Admins should not protect pages in which they are involved. Involvement includes making substantive edits to the page (fixing vandalism does not count), or expressing opinions about the article on the talk page before the protection. Admin powers are not editor privileges — admins should only act as servants to the user community at large. If you are an admin and you want a page in an edit war in which you are somehow involved to be protected, you should contact another admin and ask them to protect the page for you. Not only is this the preferable method, it is also considered more ethical to do so as it helps reduce any perceived conflict of interest." Ckessler 23:50, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I was not involved with the page, until you dragged me in. I had never heard of her before, and am simply protecting us from potential libel. Besides, you obviously haven't read about [disputes]. -- Zanimum 23:55, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

No one called you into the discussion, you edited the page without being asked for an opinion. You continued to make unrelated page edits after protecting the page, which is in clear violation of policy.

We have given in to your viewpoint; both the other person and I have agreed on the talk page not to reinsert the information about Midori being Watley's sister. However, you still need to give a citation for the "fact" that Watley is denying Midori is her sister. You don't get to have it both ways. Ckessler 00:01, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Look. I've not got a response on whether I can make this public, but here goes. She emailed Wikipedia, to clarify the point. Any time the subject of an article emails us about something that is the equivilent to libel, and the point cannot be properly verified, it is the Foundation's legal duty to remove the content. If you do not cease, I can bring Jimmy Wales' office assistant Danny in, to issue an WP:OFFICE. But I don't like martial law, and I thought I could make you understand how terribly lacksidasical your sources were. But you don't listen. -- Zanimum 00:06, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
I don't need a clarification. You're not listening: LEAVE OUT THE INFORMATION. Midori is not Jodi Watley's sister as far as Wikipedia is concerned, because we have no credible sources. I get it. What I am asking, is for a print source that Jodi has denied it. I don't know how much more clear I can be. Ckessler 00:08, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
It's gone. If anyone tries to readd such information, they will be banned from Wikipedia a month the first time, two months the second, indef the third. -- Zanimum 00:11, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Ckessler 00:11, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Concerning the recent removal from the Jody Watley and Midori entries regarding their familial relationship, I don't see where the debate stems from. Until I saw the revision was removed I would never have thought it was a point of contention, nor would I have thought that adding such information might be a banworthy offense, considering it's something one would expect to find in an encyclopedic biography of either. Yes, they are indeed sisters. If references are required to underscore that point, a simple Google search would direct you a variety of sources that back it up, one of which is an interview with Jody Watley herself, where she says, and I quote;

"Midori and I are the usual big sister, little sister stuff. My family was initially very upset about her work because she is the baby in the family but I'm always the first person to say you have to live your life, your own way...I love her. We have an older brother who lives in Japan. He appeared in a few of my classic videos. My sister has also been in one as well as our mother, my son and my daughter."

Hopefully this will clear things up. User:MrJoshX 09:10, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Dancetofitness.JPG

Image:Dancetofitness.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 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) 20:04, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Shalamar.jpg

Image:Shalamar.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) 05:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Added Herb Ritts' "Vogue" photography at the artist's request

I added a promotional photo from the recent Vogue Italia (Italian Vogue) at Ms. Watley's request. Mirror Ball(Mirror Ball 23:55, 28 July 2008 (UTC))

If she said it was OK, I'll put it in another part of the article. Just wanted to be sure. Sposato (talk) 23:00, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Minor Edit. Avitone Recordings

Respectfully, having read the guidelines, I'm unsure why my changes are cited as vandalism and reverted. I replaced the very ambiguous 'label owner' in the header, and replaced it with the actual name of her company, which should be notable. I provided the link to the company website as a source. Examples: Sean Combs isn't just a label owner, rather noted owner of Bad Boy. Berry Gordy isn't listed as just a label owner, he is noted as the founder and CEO of Motown, etc.I was simply trying to distinguish the fact, rather than the generic 'label owner'. Avitone has in fact released her music since 1995, Affection, Saturday Night Experience, Midnight Lounge. The Makeover, and numerous singles - including her last three top tens. Please explain why naming her label is seen as vandalism and disruptive? I will start here before dealing with the other other edits.Thank You. User:DiamondsandPearls(talk:Diamondsandpearls)--Diamondsandpearls (talk) --Diamondsandpearls (talk) 00:53, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[1]--Diamondsandpearls (talk) 00:53, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ www.avitone.net

1.1 Shalamar (1977 - 1984)

Reference is made in this section to her sister or alleged sister being a porn star. I don't understand why this information is here. Help. Quote: "She is also said to be related to Michele Watley also known as "Midori" a porn actress and singer who also appeared in mainstream films. " Where is the reference that makes this statement relevant, as it seems to come from left field given the context. Was 'Midori' a porn star during these years in Jody Watley's career? Is there a reference or source? Under the Wiki guidlelines, there should be a 'Midori source in 1977-1984. What is the relevance to this artist musicially? What sources state 'Midori' appeared in 'mainstream films'? If you are including family history, isn't that information contained in the "Personal Life" section? Is there relevance to what was going on with her music during these years 1977-1984? Please explain. Help. It would appear that the sole reason this information is contained in this section is to distract from Jody Watley's music. Especially, since I'm sure there are others like myself who don't know anything about Midori/porn until coming to this page. If no reference can be made to tie this Midori person into these pivotal years in 1977- 1984, toward the in the development and growth of Jody Watley, it seems it should be deleted. Is there an article or source that says during Watley's Shalamar years, or Ms. Watley's subsequent departure Midori was instrumental or pivotal in any way to the point that it is relevant to these years? Please cite a reference source, where Watley or anyone states 'Midori' was somehow crucial or influential during 1977-1984. Otherwise it doesn't seem relevant nor appropriate and outside of Wiki guidelines. Unless this Midori person was somehow involved with Shalamar, Band Aid or anything that occurred for Jody Watley during these years, Midori information should be deleted, this is why I deleted it. Help. Thanks.Diamondsandpearls.--Diamondsandpearls (talk) 08:13, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Soul Train Additional Information.

The addition of more details about her years on Soul Train is important to the content here which is lacking. The Ebony article indicates that Jody Watley in fact had something unique from the start, which has also in my opinion followed her throughout her career to this day. There were hundreds of girls who danced on Soul Train in it's lengthy history, and so I state again to merely leave it at 'she was a dancer on Soul Train' is vague and generic overall. Recently discovered reference material from Ebony Magazine in 1977, clearly distinguishes her from the pack, as innovator and one of the most popular, and therefore seems an intelligent addition to her bio.[3] Thanks. --Diamondsandpearls (talk) 17:41, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Midori In Bio: Shalamar Years 1977-1984

There is no reference or source material that cites Midori in connection to Jody Watley and Shalamar during these years 1977-1984. Why is it here? If this is actually a family member, wouldn't it be included in the 'Personal Life' Section? It really seems to appear in this article without context. It should be deleted according to Wikipedia guidelines, but when I deleted, I was warned of vandalism. Help. Thanks.--Diamondsandpearls (talk) 03:52, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Reverse editing

I realize and respect that someone else created this Jody Watley entry, and may feel 'protective' of it, but I always thought that the spirit of Wikipedia encouraged people to come along and enhance and/or update previous entries with new or more in depth information. Ego or "pride" should be checked at the door when it comes to someone else revising your work, if it's obvious that it isn't vandalism.

Being a long time fan of Watley's, and a webmaster to a fansite, I spoted several inaccurate and/or out of date tidbits about the entry and revise based on what I know. I spent a good hour or two typing and uploading images to make JW's Wikipedia entry look as good as I could. If someone saw an inaccuracy in my writing or wanted to add to my revision, that would have been fine...but it's a bit insulting to come back and find that it's been reversed back to the way it was. DtownG 12:40, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

DtownG, I put in a year-old picture of her back in, to show how she looks today. It says who took it, so the bot will get off my back! Sposato (talk) 16:28, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Midori

This is a load a bullcrap. Midori (Michelle Watley) IS Jody's sister. She was in her "When A Man Loves A Woman" music video for petesake!!!!! She SHOULD be mentioned in the article, since she too has a page @ Wikipedia. This moderator is a ignorant tyrant!64.12.116.8 04:40, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with any 'moderator' (especially since there is no such thing, per se). Watley herself contacted Wikipedia's office and asked for the information to be removed. Zanimum passed this information along, and stated that any editor who puts that statement back will be banned. I don't know the details, but I presume the edict came down from WP:Office, and that's it. No discussion. Ckessler 05:06, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
If I appeared in a Britney Spears music video, would I be related to her? I would have removed it even if she didn't contact us, if instead Joe Q. Public pointed out the fact was wrong. And every fact on Wikipedia should be referenced. Heck, if you say the sky is blue in an article, you need to reference it. -- Zanimum 20:40, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes, this is true, but my point, and the bottom line is that it's not up for discussion, because the decision was already made. I might still be arguing about it, if you hadn't explained why that particular "fact" can't be added to the page. I've reverted the change on each page about 10 times, and it would be less annoying if the people doing it would just read the talk pages. Ckessler 03:26, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I just think its bullshit that Watley (or anyone else for that matter) can rewrite history to suit themselves. This is wikipedia, not a press-release archive! I do however understand Zanimum's reasons, even though I have read in Blender that Watley and Midori ARE sisters. Es-won 23:06, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

From BLENDER 41, October 2005, p58: "Midori ... Jody Watley's porn-star sister ... Clubland diva Jody's kid sister, following a brief role in the 1988 Eddie Murphy movie Coming To America, changed her name from Michele to Midori and took parts in such adult fare as United Colors of Ass and Sex Hungry Butthole Sluts. Dated Kid Rock in 1999, discovered she was pregnant after they'd broken up and decided not to have the baby. "She was a great fucker, but a complete psycho," explained Rock before moving on to reliable girl-next-door type Pamela Anderson. Eagle-eyed fans can spot Midori among a trio of half-naked girls pleasuring Andrew Dice Clay on the cover of the Dice Man's 2000 album, Face Down, Ass Up." Es-won 21:11, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Is Blender a reliable source (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)? And no, the reason I removed the content was not because Jody wanted it removed, rather someone pointed out it was unsourced. That person happened to be Jody, but I would have removed it no matter whom asked for it to be removed. Unless there is any reliable source that back this statement up, it's excluded. Let's face it, people don't buy Blender for the articles, so there's unlike to be an exceeding standard of journalism.
Whom wrote the article? I want to inquire if they indeed found a reliable source. -- Zanimum 15:30, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't know if it's helpful, but once I saw an interview with Midori on Sexcetera, and Jody was mentioned. Midori herself mentioned her. Funk Junkie 00:35, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand what any of this has to do with Jody Watley during her Shalamar years 1977-1984. Was this Midori person during porn while Shalamar was making hits? Is this relevant to this section, as it just appears without context of any relevance to the scope of the section and this era of Watley's career. Is there an interview or reference from 1977-1984 where Watley speaks of Midori? If not, it seems it should be deleted, because there is no source here. The information is useless, and should just be in the section where it speaks of personal life, along with her brother, etc. It has nothing to do with 1977-1984, The Shalamar years. It distracts from the article, rather than improving it. Especially since not everyone watches or even knows about porn stars.--Diamondsandpearls (talk) 22:06, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Let's discuss the article

Why does her entire family life have to be in the intro. Even if Midori were critical to understanding her, is the fact her father is a minister important? Not really. We need to order this properly. And stop removing the citation Dtowng. -- Zanimum 23:00, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't need to be in the intro, it can be later in the article. Biographical information is an important part of articles about people. I'm trying to add a cite, and you won't stop reverting. Give me a chance to add the cite, and move the information, before you revert. Ckessler 23:02, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Okay, that's a reasonable position. It's just Dtowng kept on removing the cite after you or I added it. Dtowng, do you understand why we need citations? -- Zanimum 23:04, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Sources that state Midori being Jody's sister
Jody Watley's bio at IMDB
Jody Watley bio at VH1.com Now can we please let the issue drop, and leave the article as it was?! - DtownG 23:03, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

It's been discussed, now please unprotect the page, and give me 5 minutes to reorder and add citations. This is the most ridiculous dispute I have ever been involved in. Ckessler 23:09, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Anyone can add anything to IMDb. It should not be a source of anything but factual information. How do we know VH1 didn't get the fact from us. I'd feel more comfortable if we had another source, preferably a news or magazine article. -- Zanimum 23:18, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but that's taking it a bit far. VH1 is not going to base their information on a database like IMDB. They are backed by a large corporation, and would not publish information without independently verifiying it. Ckessler 23:22, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
"...know VH1 didn't get the fact from us." I'm currently limited in discussion of this. If this is such a provable fact, then why can't you find backup? -- Zanimum 23:24, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Now you're just being difficult for the sake of being difficult. You asked for sources, I gave your sources. It's public knowledge that Jody and Midori are sisters. It's not my fault that this is foreign to you, nor am I going to try to track down Jody's home phone number so you can call her and ask her yourself. - DtownG 23:23, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Because it's unlikely that Watley has discussed this in interviews. Having a porn star for a sister is not the way to mainstream music success, even nowadays. Ckessler 23:26, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

http://www.allmidori.com/ Midori's bio mentions nothing of the fact. -- Zanimum 23:32, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Do you have proof her brother has a management company? -- Zanimum 23:34, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes. http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1077/is_n11_v51/ai_18664181 Ckessler 23:39, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Very good. I've added the citation. -- Zanimum 23:48, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

First of all, Midori's bio doesn't mention much of anything. No personal information, nothing beyond the usual PR garbage. Second of all, maybe they are estranged. Maybe Watley threatened her with legal action. Maybe Midori doesn't want to ruin her sister's image. There are a whole host of reasons she might not mention it. Ckessler 23:36, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

More sources

http://www.johnrodeo.com/midori.html/ Interview w/Midori
http://www.midorimusic.net/intro.html

So ridiculous. And I'm gonna tell you now, I'm going to revert the edit Midori's article as well. I can't believe we're jumping through hoops to convince one person of what's been public domain. - DtownG 23:45, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

One person? I'm also unofficial acting on behalf of Danny, who rarely edits, as he is Foundation staff. -- Zanimum 23:48, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Zanimum, you now have an interview with Midori that states that Jodi Watley is her sister. Coupled with the other sources, that should be enough. Ckessler 23:49, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I'll gladly say in an interview that my sister is Hillary Duff. Don't mean it's true. We could possibly say that "Porn star Midori claims to be Watley's sister, however Watley denies this." -- Zanimum 00:00, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

She hasn't denied it! Ckessler 00:31, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I've added details that were missing that are of actual relevance to the article. These pieces of information were missing covering her time in England post Shalamar; in addition to her participation in Band Aid. I added her work with Musical Youth, Art of Noise and subsequent short stint with Phonogram Records. Band Aid was such a monumental project, it seemed appropriate to add a bit more information regarding the success 'Do They Know It's Christmas' as a single, and as a charity raising money for famine relief in Ethiopia. I removed the John Taylor of Duran Duran bit because there were no sources or references about them dating, trying to keep the article focused on relevant facts related to her career as it was taking shape during that time. http://www.discogs.com/Jody-Where-The-Boys-Are/release/704462 http://www.discogs.com/Jody-Girls-Night-Out/release/704472 http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=10:wjftxqqgldhe http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=10:fifixqygldfe I also corrected the year she won the Grammy in the upper body. It said 1988, though it was 1987. I'm still trying to figure out how midori relates to 1977- 1984, but i know if i delete it, or move it somehow i will be cited. for the time being i removed porn and replaced it with adult. There is something inherently wrong for irrelevant info to come after reading about famine relief, and I'm still waiting to find out the answer to the relevance to this era. Nevertheless, my other additions I feel help to improve the article. --Diamondsandpearls (talk) 10:05, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

My sources

Okay. I've received no response from my source, on whether my discussion with them can be made public. I'll assume I can. The bios on many commercial music sites are based off promotional text sent around by the record labels. The person who created Watley's bio used Wikipedia, thus picking up on this (possible) misinformation and putting it in. The bio was circulated with the false info, and the representation company has began circulating a replacement. -- Zanimum 23:51, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

For pete's sake, the information was around before Wikipedia. Ckessler 23:53, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
But where. For all I know, you know this because you're classmates told you in grade six. -- Zanimum 23:56, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
I can't believe that after five links, one of which came from VH-1.com (which officially tracks to the music industry that Jody is in), were furnished citing Midori as her sister that you're still playing the cynic. Jeez. - DtownG 19:08, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
You've provided me with a fansite (which has no obligation to higher level journalism), an interview with the one who this claim benefits the most, imdb (who anyone can edit, so it's as reliable as citing ourselves), and VH1. The Ebony article is fantastic for the brother fact, but not Midori. You've given me only source that has "anything to loose", and four that are loosey-goosey. -- Zanimum 00:16, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

How would you propose that I verify this? The Internet Archive only has a limited record of a website's history. I've already stated how unlikely I think it is that Watley has discussed this in print interviews. I don't understand why you are insisting that I jump through hoops, but I am politely requesting that you leave this article alone for the time being. You have protected it, but as an admin, you are still able to edit. I have requested a third opinion, and will move on to mediation, if that doesn't help. Ckessler 00:13, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't have much to add to this discussion. I have no knowledge as to whether Midori is Jody Watley's sister or not. All I can say is that if she is, I don't find it that relevant to Jody Watley's career and therefore don't understand why the reference should be made in the header. To my understanding, headers are intended as summaries of the subject's life and achievements. Reference to the completely unrelated career of a as-of-yet unestablished family member doesn't seem that appropriate. Again, I have no knowledge either way, but at the very least I'd suggest considering moving the reference to some other place on the page. Lastly, if it is true that she is her sister, I still don't see how the reference is important as to my knowledge Midori is not that famous. I'd never heard of her until I read this page. Just my thoughts. Sorry I can't be of more help. Andrew Parodi 03:50, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh You've got to be kidding me. Midori herself appeared on MTV's dating show, Singled Out, and admitted that she was Jody Watley's sister. Google search Midori (or Michelle Watley) and Jody Watley, and you'll be bombarded with a thousand hyperlinks referencing that they ARE indeed siblings. Then take into account that her real name is Michelle WATLEY and that there is a rather *obvious* resemblance between the two, and it is rather transparent.

But here's another source [that I'm sure will be discounted] to back up the claim:

Porn Star Hall of Fame—Midori

As to why it should be included in the article, minor biographical information (such as family, marriage, children) is usually added to give a sense of continuity. This is especially the case when one notable person is related to another notable person, and Midori is a VERY well known in her industry.

I think the person who is making a fuss over this is being unneededly anal and pig headed. RancorNV 00:44, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

The 12.reference for Michelle Watley/Midori is invalid. The linked bio/article makes no mention nor reference to Michelle Watley/Midori and should be removed. [4]--Diamondsandpearls (talk) 18:32, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion

Again, I have no knowledge as to whether Midori is Jody Watley's sister. Frankly, I don't find the topic that interesting. But I am back with a suggestion. If it is found that she is indeed Jody Watley's sister, and if someone is adamant about the inclusion of this information, perhaps Midori could be described by her real given name. Most likely, "Midori" is a monicker and not her real name. If Jody Watley is the sister to this woman, she is not the sister to Midori but to the woman who has taken on the monicker "Midori". If this information is verified and then included, perhaps it could be worded in this vein: "Jody Watley's sister [given name] has a career in the adult film business and performs under the name 'Midori'."

However, my own opinion is that the entire topic is not relevant to her career. For analysis, Madonna has several siblings involved in various careers, and yet these siblings are not given mention on Madonna's page. Christopher Ciccone, Madonna's brother, was the art director for Madonna's most popular concert, one of the most popular concert tours of all time (Blond Ambition Tour), and yet to my knowledge he is not even mentioned on Madonna's page. In that vein, I don't exactly see how referencing Midori is relevant as she to my knowledge has made no contribution to Jody Watley's career. Do the names of Jody Watley's parents appear on this page? I don't think it is standard practice for Wikipedia articles to mention siblings by name on a biographical page when the siblings have not contributed anything notable to the career of the person being profiled. Andrew Parodi 04:56, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I agree that this information does not belong in the first paragraph of the article. I stated this earlier on the talk page. However, a person is not only their career, and many pages on individuals have biographical details. Also, when a sibling, mother, father, or other relative is notable, they are often mentioned on a person's page. For example, look at the page for George W. Bush or any of the Arquette siblings ((Patricia Arquette). This is a petty argument, and frankly, it's one I'm losing patience with, but why should practices apply to some pages, and not others? Ckessler 06:36, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
I think the key word here is "notable." I had never heard of Midori until I had come to this page, and I would wager that most people have not either. There are indeed some "notable" porn stars, that is, porn stars who have crossed into the mainstream and are household names, such as Ron Jeremy, Jenna Jameson, etc. But Midori has not reached this level. I read her page on Wikipedia, and it says that she is probably the most famous African American female porn star. But the thing is, that in itself doesn't make her "notable" to the average person, and as Midori's career is completely in a different realm from Jody Watley's career, I don't see how the reference is justified. With that, think I've said everything I have to say on this topic. I don't think Wikipedia has a hard and fast rule on how to list siblings, family members, etc., so at some level this is all just a difference of opinion that can just round and round and round. Andrew Parodi 10:00, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

She's notable enough to have her own Wikipedia page. Aside from that, how did this become a debate about notability? The issue is whether or not VH1 and the like are credible sources. At this point, I'm not sure I want to continue the endless circles. Either state that she is Watley's sister, or remove the reference entirely. Ckessler 15:40, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Notability is the main reason for inclusion on Wikipedia pages. Midori may be notable enough to warrent her own Wikipedia page with regard to her work in adult films, but the question is we are debating is whether Midori's contributions to Jody Watley's career is notable enough to warrent mention of Midori on Jody Watley's page. And, again, strictly speaking, Jody Watley would not be the sister to "Midori," the adult film persona, but to the woman who has taken on the persona. Andrew Parodi 21:38, 6 April 2006 (UTC)


Yes, I understand, but this is not the standard that is widely applied to biographies here. Many biographies have mention of siblings and links to their Wikpedia pages, regardless of whether they contribute to the person's career. Ckessler 21:46, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

That's because we can prove without a shadow of a doubt that they're related. We can't do that with Ms. Watley. Can you prove, without a shadow of a doubt, that I'm not lying when I say I'm Hillary Duff's brother? No. Because I can say whatever I want. What if when I appeared on TV to promote Wikipedia, I said I was Ms. Duff's sister. Still wouldn't prove it. What if I wrote a letter to the editor of the New York Times, defending Duff, noting she was my sister. Still wouldn't prove it. Unless Duff or her parents said, "yes, they're brother and sister", or we can find government documents linking us, it's not provable. -- Zanimum 20:48, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Switching gears, I had to change the photo because a Vogue Italiana shot isn't acceptable under policy. I put a more recent free image in its place. Sposato (talk) 18:14, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Housecleaning

I've started cleaning up this article, which is in bad shape. References were/are bare URLs, the Reference section is full of "links" to stuff, and the External links section is just full. I'm cleaning.

Your "housecleaning" has removed the details and proper citations for each link and reference as noted here according to Wikipedia, which now says: This article uses bare URLs. Please help improve this article by turning bare URLs into proper citations containing all of the information on the referenced work's title, date, publisher, publication, and author, so that the article remains verifiable in the future. (There are several templates available that can help to make formatting such citations simple.) This page may also be able to help find problematic links.

Susbequently, this reinforces my point that you did not improve the article. --Diamondsandpearls (talk) 04:48, 2 September 2009 (UTC)


Here's the EL section:

I'm going to leave a couple of relevant ones. The rest of 'em can be brought into the article as in-line references--but this linkfarm needed pruning. As for the last four, YouTube videos of a radio interview, the sound quality is terrible. Anyone interested in Watley can use Google to find that. Encyclopedic articles do not have to include ALL possible information. Drmies (talk) 02:27, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Every link included or referenced article is relevant to this article, which was seemingly based on rumor, opinion, sloppy fact checking, or poor journalism overall. Elements key as to the facts, impact or nuance to each phase of Watley's career and subsequent release beyond chart statistic which is key to each era as well. Linkfarm? Piss poor - really? In fact you have removed facts and replaced them with your opinions it seems. I intend to go over and re-do.--Diamondsandpearls (talk) 04:31, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

References

These are the links from the References section. I have the feeling that many of these are already used as in-line references, but those were inserted in the article in such piss-poor fashion that it's not easy to verify and separate the wheat from the chaff. Rather than have an enormous list (a bibliography of sorts) clutter up the article and the reference section, I am removing them and will place them here for future references.

References

  1. ^ [1], Diana Ross A Lifetime To Get Here ISBN 1425971393, 9781425971397, Published by; Author House 2006, Page 267
  2. ^ WireImage Force of Nature Photos 2005
  3. ^ Best New Artist Grammy 1987 http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=11:kifoxqr5ldde~T52
  4. ^ Saks Fifth Avenue, Defining Style Fall Catalog 1996. Pages 81-96
  5. ^ USA Today, Monday July 17, 1995 by James T. Jones IV, USA Today Life Section
  6. ^ Jet Magazine May 30, 1988 Pages-58-61, Stevie Wonder MTV Special with Jody Watley

Reference Housecleaning

The recent 'Housecleaning' removed some key details. All housecleaners are not created equal apparently. How is it that you decide what's relevant, and what's too many I ask. I disagree completely that the article and accompanying references needed 'pruning'. It was an obvious massive dose poor editing. Relevance to whom, and who are you to decide? One man's pruning is an artists career details. One of the statements made under Housecleaning: "Rather than have an enormous list (a bibliography of sorts) clutter up the article and the reference section, I am removing them and will place them here for future references."

This statement is absurd and a giant leap of poor Wiki judgment or lack thereof.

'Housecleaning' seems to want people to guess what the 'Bare URL's are, since they are just numbers now. And then what? Then go on a a bit of a Wiki 'Easter Egg' hunting so to speak looking for full Jody Watley References by placing them 'here' in the discussion box? Really? It's absurd. Piss poor indeed. Clutter up the article he says, this is what I found with regard to just how extensive some articles and their references can be:

Here is a list of the number of References found on other pages, which obviously meet Wiki Guidelines: Beyonce Giselle Knowles 173, Whitney Houston 144, Michael Jackson 238, Rolling Stones 94 Prince (musician) 78, etc. In addition, each of these references contain full info to accompany each source, which should also be consistent for the Jody Watley article.

Currently, Jody Watley has a modest 25, and reviewing the above list would make ridiculous any claim that there are too many and in Watley's case 'clutters' the article. Not so.

The Reference Section will be revised to it's former status with proper cleaning to be to be as comprehensive as possible. Comprehensive is not clutter from my viewpoint, especially when stacked against other articles of notable people in music found on Wikipedia.--68.122.164.30 (talk) 22:26, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Housecleaning: Details

The recent 'Housecleaning' removed some key details. From minor changes such as removing for instance removing the year with regard to her Solo Debut Jody Watley, and removing the name of the solo album in the header, to large omissions. The notation of year to distinguish each section or particular relevance or uniqueness of time should not be removed. Of course the title of an album is standard inclusion in articles for music artists.

Details matter, they are not clutter. Many journalists still use Wikipedia as a resource when researching an article. To suggest if they want more info, they can 'Google' is ridiculous - especially when other articles are comprehensive and full of detail, nuance, quotes from the artist in their own words, etc. I don't understand why these details keep getting deleted in this article.

Countless notable and relevant information was 'pruned', either removed or reverted back to inaccuracies. Two examples of what got removed under 'Housecleaning': The song Friends being the first song to feature the Pop/R&B and Rapper format with a 16 bar verse/bridge, and rather influentially became a formula in the music industry. Beyond the chart status, it's a rather important piece of data to credit to Watley's music career and legacy and Wiki Bio.

Source Info on the song Friends:
Icons of Hip Hip: An Encyclopedia of The Movement, Music and Culture Vol. 1 [13]
To The Break of Dawn: A Freestyle On Hip Hop Aesthetic: [14]
There are other book sources that also note this which have been published in recent years including Billboard Books, which more than justify the factual nature and relevance as they also speak

'Housecleaning' didn't seem to find it 'relevant to keep the fact that 'Dance to Fitness' was one of the first fitness videos featuring an African-American woman to sell a million copies. There are further articles which mention this as well. New York Times Overview: [15]

There are a list of other pertinent details which speak to Watley's career, vision and motivation far beyond her chart stats or sales which are indeed relevant to the article, not hype or revision of history either.

Oddly, where references and sources were provided, the details were removed, and replaced with citation needed. I intend to put them back in. You can also go into 'Sources' at for additional reference and info:
Official Jody Watley Website [16] --Diamondsandpearls (talk) 23:11, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Untitled

See also: Talk:Jody Watley.

Isn't her Playboy nude spread worth mentioning? Or ain't there 'reliable sources' for that? Should be because I have that issue, which is April 1998 (Linda Brava/Lampenius was also in it).85.217.44.76 (talk) 18:13, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

And more: seems to me that Midori claims to be her sister and Jody claims otherwise. This is though based only on what I've read from magazines, around internet and wikipedia.82.141.119.94 (talk) 12:47, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
One more thing: some sources report Midori's real name as Michele Evette Watley, for example Celebrity Sleuth. _If_ it's her real name it's still possible she doesn't belong in the same Watley's as Jody. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.141.126.233 (talk) 20:53, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Record sales

There is NO way she has sold anywhere near 50 million records. Where did she sell these? She's had one platinum album in America and no huge hits anywhere else. 5 million at best. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.173.254.103 (talk) 12:11, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Jody Watley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:06, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Jody Watley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:17, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Jody Watley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:00, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jody_Watley/Archive_1&oldid=1224910146"