Talk:Whitney Houston/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions about Whitney Houston. 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

Archive 5

Sawyer interview

Houston gave an interview with Diane Sawyer (where she discussed drug allegations and marital issues

It would be extremely interesting to know what exactly she said in that interview, since all the other statements in the "controversy" section are just unsubstantiated claims by media outlets of dubious reputation.AxelBoldt 06:23, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I will always sue you

Believe it or not, Whitney sued Saddam Hussein for using "I Will Always Love You" as a campaign song.... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Trekphiler (talk • contribs) 05:49, 6 January 2007 (UTC).

How? It isn't her song it's Dolly Parton's.70.147.145.165 07:47, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think she could sue him for liking a song, but it doesn't matter if it's Dolly Parton's song. It's Whitney's version that he likes, not Dolly's so Whitney could take issue with that. Also, if you went out and re-recorded, say, the entire "My Love Is Your Love" album, singing and pausing in exactly the same moments as Whitney, and using exactly the same instruments, and the same song sequence, not only could the songwriters on each individaul song sue you (that's what the little "c" with the circle around it means on the album), but the record company could sue you (that's what the little "p" with the circle around it means on the album).

Repeated blanking vandalism by 68.113.96.151

User 68.113.96.151 continues to vandalize this article by blanking the same portion over and over again. Could an administrator please step in and block that account to prevent this repeated vandalism? Thank you. 4.232.195.113 06:21, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm Your Baby Tonight Tour

The tour was voted worst tour by Rolling Stone Magazine yet fans of Miss Houston continue to add in that it was hugely successful for which they have no source. Stop putting that because there is no source to it's truth. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.147.145.165 (talk) 07:49, 8 January 2007 (UTC).

The I'm Your Baby Tonight tour was wildly successful and sold-out. Just because one magazine (Rolling Stone) voted it worst tour of the year doesn't mean it wasn't successful. Beside, that magazine mostly catered to rock fans in the 1980's early 90's, not R&B acts, so its no wonder that a very high profile R&B artist, as Houston was, would receive "worst tour" by that magazine. (Today they do cater to more hip-hop and R&B.) There were also plenty of other publications that gave the tour superior marks, considering that she was actually singing live and not lip synching and all. So if those publications are not going to be cited for there good reveiws, it only makes sense to balance her "worst tour" nod with the fact that it was a successful tour. Otherwise you're making the reader come to an incorrect conclusion about the tour's success.

The same magazine issue cites the tour's low attendance and many cancellations. So even though they mention that I left it out. The tour was not that successful and had low attendance in over 50% of the venues according to the magazine. So no, the tour was not a success. That said, I showed my source for the quote yet you show no source for it's success. Therefore it cannot be submitted. Please see Wikipedia standards if you have any further questions concerning this issue. Thank you. 70.147.145.165 10:48, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

But one of Wikipedia's standards is supposedly neutrality. Remember that as you edit.

I have remembered. It is a fact that it was voted the Worst.

By that magazine, not every publication. So just as you went out and found that review, you can also find one with a positive review. But of course, you wouldn't want to do that.

So show a link where a positive review was made for that tour.

Actually you could show a link where a positive review was made because you're the one who posted the negative review, not me.

Perhaps I am being a little hard. It just that I realize the obvious bashing that was going on in her article and thought that something should be there to balance it out, but you are right, that is not your responsibility. My feeling is this: whether someone is a fan or not, the truth should be reported. This is not a place for personal feelings, love or hate, but we obviously know it sinks it's way into nearly all articles.

Voice

I have removed this section since there is no source of her vocal ability. Wikipedia standards mention that there must be a published source so until there is one verified there can be no mention of how many octaves she supposedly has.

Clean up needed

I have submitted a form on the main page. This article is in desperate need of clean up. There is too much fan pov and not enough sources and the article is poorly written. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.147.145.165 (talk) 10:57, 11 January 2007 (UTC).

Trivia

This trivia was moved here for discussion. It should go in the existing text, not it's own section. Trivia sections are inappropriate, see WP:TRIV. John Reaves

'Trivia Houston established an imprint record label called Better Place Records in the 90's that once had distribution deals with Elektra Records as well as Capitol Records.^[1] Among the signees were R&B songtress Shanna, featured on the Waiting To Exhale soundtrack and R&B girl group Sunday who released a single in 2000 entitled "I Know" on the label. ^[2] ^[3] ^[4]

Who edited the page????

Who edited the page and made it sooo short? It is about half the length it was before.(Trent Jones 14:42, 10 January 2007 (UTC))

Ok I checked it..but something is wrong. If you try and edit the page you will see a long listof information that normally is on the page, that is good but when you look at the page the information is not showing and i don't know why....please someone fix it!(Trent Jones 15:25, 10 January 2007 (UTC))

Tobago is misspelled Tabago. What a nightmare this page has become! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.225.212.208 (talk) 17:12, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

POV-pushing in "financial problems" section

I've removed unsourced POV-pushing claims in this section as well as returned the former subhead name, deleting the "Recent news" subhead as it says nothing and, in itself, is POV-pushing. Several users keep trying to delete or dillute this section. It's fully sourced. Every sentence is documented. If you're claiming Houston is allowing all these financial issues voluntarily, you need to source that with documentation. 207.69.136.203 17:16, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

But the only way you can prove she is having financial difficulties is to provide proof of her bank account. So you are no more in the right than someone who believes she has no financial difficulty.

Biased edits

Is there someone we can complain and report the IP addresses of the people who are CONSTANTLY removing information because it isn't Pro-Whitney Houston? This is wikipedia NOT a fan page. EVERYTHING must be documented and quotes such as "profitable" or "successful" must be referenced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.26.117.1 (talk)

Please see the Wikipedia policy Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, which states, "Editors should remove any controversial material about living persons that is either unsourced, relies upon sources that do not meet standards specified in Wikipedia:Reliable sources, or is a conjectural interpretation of a source." If, however, material has been properly sourced per Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources, then it may not be removed without the consensus of the editors working on the page. Cite policies and guidelines in disputes. I have added this article to my watchlist, and will pay attention to inapprpropriate edits. -- Donald Albury 12:50, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Better look harder then. Someone just now added that on the night of a dinner with Clive Davis, Whitney Houston received the most attention and wore millions of dollars worth of jewelry. There was of course no sources.

With more than 2,500 aricles on my watchlist, I probably won't be checking by this article more than once or twice a day, so please hold off on the wise cracks. -- Donald Albury 03:48, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

The one who keeps editing and insisting Whitney is a coloratura soprano clearly is a pro-Whitney because despite hitting high notes, Whitney isn't a coloratura soprano so it would be completely inaccurate and nonsense to label her as such! This article is supposed to give accurate information on Whitney and NOT try to make Whitney something that she is not! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.103.166.65 (talk) 11:24, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Producing role

The article stated, "Houston undertook other producing assignments." This is incorrect. Brownhouse developed these projects internally, notably under the direction of Houston's development executive at the time, Debra Martin Chase. As with many celebrities who have development companies in Hollywood, Houston received a producing fee and a screen credit. However, it's not like she went out seeking "assignments." That is a fundamental misunderstanding of how film development works. Many stars have development companies and overall deals with studios like Houston had. The executives at those companies -- not the stars themselves -- are the ones who develop and produce the projects. The article also gave the impression that Houston was the sole producer on the films for which she received a producing credit; that is not true. On every film, she shared a producing credit with a number of other producers. 209.179.168.56 20:09, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of whether her company went out and undertook the project or she did personally, which we do not know either way because we were not there, she was giving producing credits in the film as the credits roll.

Persistent POV pusher

I don't know what is motivating the user who, through a variety of IPs, has for several months been persistently enforcing a pro-Houston POV onto this article and others. (The IP most recently used by this editor is 66.192.176.7 (talk · contribs), which I have just blocked for a month.) The album Just Whitney was a critical and commercial disappointment; One Wish has not been certified gold in America. These are cited facts, and trying to turn them into something they aren't just looks desperate, as does downplaying Houston's alleged financial problems and media concerns about her health. Extraordinary Machine 23:59, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

THANK YOU Extraordinary Machine! I concur, 100%!

Needs citations for unsourced material

This article needs cleaning up. Wayfarers43 18:02, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

No shit...do something about it. Phoenix2 04:42, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I changed the opening that read her albums since the year 2000 have been less successful. Actually, her Greatest Hits was very successful and that was released in 2000. It wasn't until 2002 that she saw a slide in record sales.

http://www.upto11.net/artistprofile.php?ar=979

it says whitney is a dramatic mezzo soprano

That link appears to be similar to that of a fan site and should therefore be deleted since there is no other proof.

Coloratura Soprano vs. Mezzo

Refering to Houston's incredible voice in terms of soprano or mezzo or coloratura soprano makes very little sense, since these terms apply far more to classical/operatic singing than pop singing. One source cited speaks of the "coloratura" ability of Houston's voice, meaning the agility and flexability of the voice, but it's used to try to say that she's a coloratura soprano, which Houston clearly is not and what the article is definitely not saying. Another editor cites a website which calls Houston's voice a "Dramatic Mezzo", which makes no sense either and cannot be considered an authoratative source. To fit that category she'd need to be able to sing over a 150-piece orchestra and fill a 3,000 seat auditorium without electronic amplification of any kind. Houston's voice was/is an amazing and incredibly beautiful pop instrument and it should be left as that rather than trying to put it into a category where it doesn't belong. RTGreen 04:06, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I see where you are going with this, but pop voices are often classified with classical schemas these days. In fact I have a few books which reel off contemporary answers, so your rationalization is flawed. That said I agree about the distortion and lack of notability regarding the sources.--I'll bring the food (Talk - Contribs - My Watchlist) 04:30, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't think my argument is perfect, but it's not that awfully flawed either. I also have books that speak of Peggy Lee's or Ella Fitzgerald's voices as essentially contralto voices, but none calls Ella a Dramatic Alto or calls Sarah Vaughn a coloratura soprano. They do, however, make reference to the actual range of these voices to prove the point, but none of the sources cited to prove Whitney is a coloratura soprano or dramatic mezzo make such an effort to prove their argument. Hers is a beautiful, agile, powerful voice, and if someone actually cites an article that says something to the effect that "The range of WH's voice is from A to Z, thus making her voice in essence a soprano/mezzo/whatever," then that would be acceptable. What I have seen in this article so far regarding this is distortion and misuse of sources on one hand, and personal POV and opinion of the editors on the other. RTGreen 11:18, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup

I was attempting to cleanup the intro but it's screwed up and I can't seem to revert it. Can somebody please revert it? Thanks. Nukleoptra 20:33, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Coloratura sopranos are ref'd in books I own. Celine Dion is a lyric coloratura soprano, according to one book I own. Coloratura is often used to refer to the ability to use the whistle register. I disagree on a fundamental level with this, but I am not the notable book writer, so I go along with it, you see?--I'll bring the food (Talk - Contribs - My Watchlist) 03:54, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

American Music Awards

Did Whitney win 21 or 23 AMA's? on the Awards page it says 23 but here it says 21, which one's more accurate? --Bakkouz 10:02, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

She currently has won 21 AMA's, a record for a solo artist. By the way, who deleted the picture of her at the top of the page from the "One Of Those Days" video? Was it too flattering, as we know nearly everyone wants to put up something negative.

Major flaws

First off in reading this article what strikes me is she is claimed to be the second most successful female artist in the world, yet her certified sales in the Whitney Houston discography top out at 137.5 million, including the soundtracks in. The Record book does say Madonna is number one, although once again not in certified sales. Ill give you an example of what makes this claim false, in 2003 the WMA awarded to Celine Dion the Diamond award for certified sales of at least 175 million, which because they are certified by recording industry auditors in various countries actually puts her at number one. Such a claim can not be made on this page firstly because we dont know who is number one (Madonna or Celine) and never will. Furthermore Celines 175 million certified (Its closer to 190 million now) doesnt include certified (audited) sales of the Titanic Soundtrack, nor does it include singles. If we count generously like I did to arrive at 137.5 million in sales for Whitney, then Celine has 220 million in certified sales. Basically all Im saying is you have to go with what has been certified, and while both WMA and Guiness have different certification methods the only two female artists who can lay claim to the title are Celine and Madonna. (or even a number two on it.) So this claim needs to be removed because there is nothing to back it up. Actually I would suggest overhauling this page using Celine Dion as the template, that page is rated with a star, indicating it is one of the best pages on English Wikipedia. --Meanie 03:59, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

A true coloratura soprano must hit at least F6, something Whitney Houston has never done! The highest note she has hit so far is a C6 - the highest note for one to be categorised as a soprano! Whitney's voice never fitted the category of "coloratura soprano". However, early in her career, she may have been classified as spinto soprano or coloratura mezzo-soprano but NEVER as a true coloratura soprano! 27th June 2007. fossils12

1- Where is that rule that a coloratura soprano must hit at least F6. Dramatic coloraturas' highest notes are only Eb6, something Whitney has hit loads of times. Go on "Whitney's high notes on youtube and look at all her high notes. She's hit higher before. I have a CD of all her high notes, studio and live, and her highest was E7.

Dramatic coloraturas' highest note is F6 - listen to Mozart's Magic Flute's "Queen of The Night". The dramatic coloratura soprano hit an F6. The highest note I've heard Whitney hit was a C6 - which just qualifies her to be categorised as a soprano! If she did hit an E7, can you please provide the links so we can listen and verify?

Yeah, you've heard her hit C6, but I've heard her hit higher. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.250.190.172 (talk) 16:40, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

Then please provide evidence, which we can all listen to confirming that Whitney can go higher than C6! Anyone can say she can go higher but where's the proof? Whitney needs to have hit at least F6 and/or higher (with relative ease) to even qualify to be a coloratura soprano. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.218.107.58 (talk) 11:02, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

What the ...

Houston was born in Newark, New Jersey to Simon Birch Tanglao and Janice Perocho. <--- Isn't she the daughter of Cissy Houston and caucasian John Houston?

Vandalism edits. Should have been Cissy and John Houston, both whom are African-American. Miranda 17:18, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

sources

this article has just 23 sources, it is terrible, I think anything that is unsourced needs deleteing.Realist2 11:51, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

song-writer? no!

i took away the term "song-writer" (even if i'm a huge fan of her) : i checked all of her cds and it appears she CO-wrote only ONE song! 84.227.17.175 08:00, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

. .. ... Actually she's written 4 songs. If Mariah Carey is an "Actress", if Madonna is an "Author" than I don't see why the title song writer can't be included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shoop85 (talk • contribs) 17:26, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Journalist, for mucking up this article

You screwed with the title headers, and now they don’t make sense. The details of Whitney’s first album (from 1985-1986) are listed under a section that reads “1977-1984.” Also, you’re tagging Whitney’s 90s era as “International success” is beyond skewed. Whitney garnered worldwide acclaim with the release of her debut. Quite frankly, because of you, the article looks tacky and probably should be tagged with a cleanup notice.UnMutedOne 23:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Really. Shouldn't he be someone editing the Mariah Carey article, or creating a futile new article about who the "Best Selling Female Artist" is and poorly arguing MC's defense. Journalist is annoying as all get up. - Marc 23:19, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Seriously. That "International Success" tagging *is* stupid. Houston's global recognition was immediate. He insistence on adding repetitive details about Houston's drug controversy and new album in the header paragraph is frankly stupid, considering it's mentioned (and elaborated upon) later in the article. What the hell would he know about Houston's career anyway. According to his user page, he was born in 1987. Someone born in the late 80s earliest memories of Houston would probably be The Bodyguard era, and their clearest recollection of her would probably start around Waiting to Exhale. Yet he thinks he has some kind of significant insight on when her "international success" began. Meh. It began before you were born, kid. His edits extraneous and clutter some. —The Real One Returns 05:44, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

The titles need to be changed. They should be : Early Career (77-84), Debut(85-86), Continued Success (87-91), Hollywood Success (92-98), My Love Is Your Love (99-2000), Commercial Decline (2001-present).—Shoop85 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 15:37, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Whitney's Signifance

I feel this article only talks about her chart statistics. I think there needs to be more emphaisis on her contribution to music history and pop culture. For example, she is often considered the greatest and most influential singer of this generation. (There are tons of sources for this)

She is the most covered singer on American Idol. Some of her songs are used as the standrd piece of work when trying out for music schools.

She paved the way for black singers crossing over during a white male rock driven period (the 80s).

She has vocally influenced people such as Mariah Carey, Beyonce, Christina Aguilera, and Jennifer Hudson.

Her debut set a template for others to follow. USA Today considerd it one of the most memorable moments in music history.

She is a gay icon. "Its Not Right But Its OK" and "I Wanna Dance With Somebody" are considered gay anthems.

She also impacted hollywood. Her star power drew in large audiences to see Waiting To Exhale (an all black movie) making it a huge success and paving the way for How Stella Got Her Groove Back etc.

I can find sources for all these too. But these are just examples of the kind of stuff that's missing.

Whitney's nickname is "The Voice". It should be stated in this article. People like Babyface and Oprah have referenced her as that title. Also here is documented proof of that title: http://blackvoices.aol.com/black_entertainment/music_videos_songs_radio/black_music_month_2007/transformers-whitney-houston-gallery

Its on page 6. It says "Though her success seemed like a lightening rod, it was always validated by Whitney's polished and powerful vocal abilities -- making her known as "The Voice." I think that needs to be in the article. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shoop85 (talk • contribs) 17:23, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you. Whitney really has accomplished a lot. Everything you said above is true. She is the standard by which most people judge singers. That's why she is the most covered artist on American Idol, and her success in the 80's did lead to doors opening for those artists you named who followed in her wake. She deserves credit for that.

new contract

What hater is adding all these negative comments from Rolling Stone magazine, and stating things like "disastrous Prime Time interview", and "laughing stock"? First of all, Rolling Stone is not the only music magazine out there so stop looking to them to find a negative quote about Whitney. She made a helluva mark during an era when that magazine was focusing mainly on white-male-rock acts so obviously they couldn't related to someone (especially a black female) being as big and outselling what they were used to. Secondly, the Prime Time interview was far from making her a laughing stock. It was the highest rated television interview in history. A feat like that deserves mentioning. Why all these unnecessary negative comments? Beyonce fell down some stairs head first while performing in front of thousands of people and that doesn't even appear in her article. Why do I get the feeling if Whitney or Britney Spears or Jennifer Lopez had fell down stairs while performing it would appear in their article, but the same people are trying to keep it out of Beyonce's article? Can't play favorites, that's not NPOV, especially if you're an administrator. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.192.176.30 (talk) 19:58, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Whitney At BET Award.jpg

Image:Whitney At BET Award.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 (talk) 05:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup still needed

I agree that the article is poorly written. There are numerous grammatical errors. In addition, the section on her chart hits is too long- do we really need to know what hit #1 in Zimbabwe? What would be the proper tag for this? Nelliebellie 00:22, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I've cleaned it up as much as I can without changing facts. - Ruwanshaun 17:31, 17 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.19.35.2 (talk)

Vocal Range

I was wondering why it says that Whitney has a 5 octave range when it is agreed that her lowest note is c3 and agreed that she can't hit a c8 which means this isn't true.Could someone explain or fix it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Calv2k7 (talk • contribs) 17:11, 7 April 2007 (UTC).

Click on the five octaves link and read it

Whitney have 3 octave vocal range and why isn't here a topic about her voice a legend with a voice like this should have a topic about her voice. Mariah Carey, Regine Velasquez, Omarion.....etc have a vocal profile i think there should be a vocal profile for her also.

Whitney Houston Long Notes: <object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/p96eunnudA8"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/p96eunnudA8" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

whitney can hit whistle though not sing in it. http://youtube.com/watch?v=-n7NxJa7DD8&feature=related —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.240.136.137 (talk) 14:06, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

article definitly needs more editing

this article is writeen as if it were a WH fan page. fisrst of all, it is waaay too large - you guys obviously like WH, but that does not mean you have to put each and every interview of the last 20 years in here. the section about her current activities reads like it came directly from her PR - staff; it is highly speculative and frankly does not hold up to wiki standards. also, while i'm at it, no one doubts that she has had a successful crareer, but the claim that she has been one of the most influential singers of all time (i.e. in the recorded history of music) seems to be outlandish. i think we need to be very careful in the use of hyperbole as regards historical facts, especially in living persons. --Nevrdull 21:34, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually this article isn't too long for a singer who has been performing for 22 years. Even longer if you count her late 70's recordings and early 80's acting and modeling work. And Whitney does stand as one of the most influential singers of all time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.192.176.30 (talk) 20:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Whitney Houston does have a 5 octave voice range if you watch her biography they clearly say she has one! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.177.194.153 (talk) 19:27, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Biography assessment rating comment

WikiProject Biography Assessment

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 04:47, 28 May 2007 (UTC)