Talk:Kesha/Archive 4
 | This is an archive of past discussions. 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 | Archive 6 |
Remix Album
Currently says "... I Commander You To Dance," but should say Command. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.29.79.55 (talk) 01:23, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Edit request from 24.29.79.55, 7 March 2011
{{edit semi-protected}} under the animal/cannibal section, change "I Commander You To Dance" to Command.
24.29.79.55 (talk) 01:25, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Lead Photo
Whats that gibberish underneith the caption?Jasper420 20:02, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
- The photographer who took the picture. It seems unnecessary to me. Enigmocracy (talk) 22:50, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
- It's part of the terms of license, it's in the file page. Fixer23 (talk) 23:40, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
- Do NOT remove the attribution. I am sick of re-adding it. It must remain there under the terms of the photo's license. Either get over it or find another image. Adabow (talk · contribs) 03:20, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
- Total lamesauce. Ohwell. Another freely liscensed one will surely show up in the Commons soon enough. I hate photographer who insist on their name being on the page like that, crying out for attention.Jasper420 01:08, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
- Do NOT remove the attribution. I am sick of re-adding it. It must remain there under the terms of the photo's license. Either get over it or find another image. Adabow (talk · contribs) 03:20, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
- It's part of the terms of license, it's in the file page. Fixer23 (talk) 23:40, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Name pronunciation
I know the Wikipedia standard for the written phonetic pronunciation of names is to use Wikipedia:Pronunciation_respelling_key, but for information sake, in People (magazine), April 11, 2011, page 32, Time, Inc., "Say What??: Scoop's handy pronunciation guide to today's tricky celebrity names" it is written out as "KEH-shuh." 5Q5 (talk) 16:03, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
Ke$ha's remix with Nicki Minaj on Britney Spears song "Till the World Ends"
Can someone please add that Ke$ha collorbarated with Nicki Minaj on Britney Spears remix of the song Till the World Ends? For more information talk to me on my page or click on the song.
Qafreeman23 (talk) 04:10, 26 April 2011 (UTC) Qafreeman23 Qafreeman23 (talk) 04:10, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Associated Acts
Due to the fact 3oh!3 have collaborated with Ke$ha on two occasions, I have added them to her associated acts, thought on Taio Cruz being added to associated acts? Jewls1993 (talk) 22:26, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Name?
Uh shouldn't the title be Ke$ha? I won't change it; it's just a suggestion. ~Angel (talk) 21:40, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
- Talk:Kesha/Archive_1#Ke.24ha_or_Kesha. Please remember to check archives before posting a question as this has been discussed dozens of times. "WP:MOSTM we should avoid "using special characters that are not pronounced, are included purely for decoration". Do we say her name as Kesha or Ke-dollar-ha? The "$" is purely for decoration and does not need to be maintained" - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 21:45, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Bisexual
The specific quote is "I wouldn't say if I'm gay or straight. I like people." Seems rather ambiguous. Advocate just took it a step further and made the headline "Kesha: I'm Bi." Fixer23 (talk) 09:43, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
Her stage name originates from a Hungarian word for "duck"
Interview: [1]
Since I'm not an editor here, I would like to kindly ask someone to add this piece of information to the article. The interview that I shared as a source for my claim is in English. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.97.20.177 (talk) 16:14, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
- I need someone to confirm that this is an official source. Fixer23 (talk) 03:12, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
- Its not reliable. And her stage name doesn't originate from it it just means that in one language her name translate to duck. Unrelibale source anywho. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 03:20, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
- Haha, no worries. I wasn't planning on referencing the duck thing. This video is the same as the copyvio youtube video below, so it can be used for her Hungarian heritage if it's official. I was only wondering because I obviously can't read Hungarian, so I was wondering if "origo" is a television network where the interview was conducted. Fixer23 (talk) 03:22, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
- Its not reliable. And her stage name doesn't originate from it it just means that in one language her name translate to duck. Unrelibale source anywho. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 03:20, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Discography
Everyone, Cannibal is part of Ke$ha's discography. just because it is an EP doesnt mean it's not part of her discography. Lady GaGa's The Fame Monster is an EP but it is under discography — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.217.23.90 (talk) 04:53, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
- WP:WAX, Gaga's article is a rare exception to this consensus. Only Studio album go under this section, EP's, Remixes, Complication ect ect do not. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 04:59, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Ancestry
Her great-grandparents were from Hungary. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS5JAuYZCIY&feature=related — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.106.151.193 (talk) 18:53, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry but Youtube is not a reliable source. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 19:35, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, but if she personally admits and recognize it in this video than you should pay attention not to write orbital nonsense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.0.151.121 (talk) 18:58, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
- And if you haven't read our policy on reliable source you should do so, and not waste other's time, kapish? — Legolas (talk2me) 05:58, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
- The problem is you (two) don't get it, but waste your and other's time as well about unnecessary and needless provocation. The most reliable source is Kesha herself, as she, and everybody else in the world knows about his origin and openly admits it, however all certificates, documents about her great-grand parents are accessible and researchable. That's all, and your so-called ,,policy" won't change facts or anything else (however I've read the policy, and it's the same category like the French capital is Paris). It has no connection to Youtube's reliability. Please stop this farisse behavior. Facts are facts. Bye-Bye — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.0.171.203 (talk) 17:07, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
- Thats nice, its still not being added tho. Find a reliable source and it will be added; until then have a nice day (: - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 22:27, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
- You're funny men. So Kesha, her family etc. is NOT a reliable source for you...that's why sometimes wikipedia and some of it's editors are RI-DI-COU-LOUS. However no one asked the information to be added, just protested against discrediting facts even if the subject acknowledging it. Her maternal great-grandparents immigrated from Szentes, Hungary in 1913. Their family name was Kecse-Nagy. Pebe Sebert chosen the first name as a given name to be altered ,,Kesha". They were interviewed and openly admitted these facts in the T-mobile concert in Budapest, 25. June 2011. More than 10000 people were there, but as we know these eyewitnesses or official video records are ,,unreliable source" :D (however, in the court and the police these are the most important evidence) Funny and incredible! Poor! — Preceding unsigned comment added by KIENGIR (talk • contribs) 10:08, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- Thats nice, its still not being added tho. Find a reliable source and it will be added; until then have a nice day (: - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 22:27, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
- The problem is you (two) don't get it, but waste your and other's time as well about unnecessary and needless provocation. The most reliable source is Kesha herself, as she, and everybody else in the world knows about his origin and openly admits it, however all certificates, documents about her great-grand parents are accessible and researchable. That's all, and your so-called ,,policy" won't change facts or anything else (however I've read the policy, and it's the same category like the French capital is Paris). It has no connection to Youtube's reliability. Please stop this farisse behavior. Facts are facts. Bye-Bye — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.0.171.203 (talk) 17:07, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
- And if you haven't read our policy on reliable source you should do so, and not waste other's time, kapish? — Legolas (talk2me) 05:58, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, but if she personally admits and recognize it in this video than you should pay attention not to write orbital nonsense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.0.151.121 (talk) 18:58, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
Hold up, before this gets out of hand. Kesha's mouth/YouTube is not unreliable. I don't think there's a rule against YouTube, but in this case, the video is definitely not useable because it's a copyright violation (copyrighted material uploaded by non-copyright holders). Fixer23 (talk) 10:12, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
- Dear Fixer23, I can't stop laughing...:D:D:D So the facts are not important, but some considered ,,copyright laws" can change someones origin :D Don't care about youtube, more 10000 spectators, more official videos in the television, and it's offical (legal) web sites, etc. This behavior rememberes me the old dictatorships common custom, or some funny trials, where facts are not important, if you have a chance to prove that something is blue, although everybody know and can see with his own eyes that it is red :D I help you my friend: a content of a video is INDEPENDENT of copyright laws or if the uploaders are copyright holders or not, because in all cases the video's content WILL REMAIN THE SAME! Should we return to the Kindergarten? Please stop this total NONSENSE, or better see the doctor.
- Thanks for your concern,hook me up with your doctor. (He's doing a great job with you, I can see you are very well adjusted after years of living under dictator rule.) I actually was speaking up for you and independently added what you were trying to add to the article, without a source as you said and I said it was not contentious. You're welcome by the way. Fixer23 (talk) 11:27, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Move to Kesha Sebert
Like Beyonce Knowles and Tupac Shakur, which keep their last names in the article title, would it be best to move Kesha to Kesha Sebert? WIKIPEDIAN PENGUIN (♫♫) 19:43, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- No, we go by stage name (EG:Lady Gaga), she is known as Kesha not Kesha Sebert. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 19:46, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- Okay, understood. --WIKIPEDIAN PENGUIN (♫♫) 21:19, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
Change The Picture!
Can someone please chnage the picture! That one is getting sooooooooooo old :( — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShawtyHellaDumb (talk • contribs) 18:53, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
- ✗ Not done Sorry no, this is the highest quality free picture that we have available of her, so this is what will be used. So it will not be changed. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 19:49, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
How about this one: http://www.keshasparty.com/sites/kesha6/files/imagecache/preview/camiseta-kesha-pixies.jpg It's from her official site. If someone just sends the webmaster an email requesting permission stating its for her wiki-page, and I'm sure they won't reject (will they?). The picture in the link suits her so much more then the picture presently used (which seems odd coloured as well). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jyggalag (talk • contribs) 17:07, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
- If you can get her label/people to release the picture that would be great! 155.69.2.13 (talk) 23:31, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Possible 3rd Album Songs
I don't understand why songs like "Shots On The Hood Of My Car" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sgzxhruDW8 and "31 Seconds Alone" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akfic0oJM6w are not included in the article. Even if they are not included in the album, I do think they should be mentioned as possible new material? Please correct me if i'm wrong, but i'm just trying to expand the article. --Jakeriederer (talk) 03:28, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
- Cause both are leaked left over songs from her first album and first ep, not from her second album. Per WP:RS + WP:COPYRIGHT youtube cannot be used as a source. WP:LEAK, songs leak daily its not something to be included. Hope that clears everything up. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 03:31, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
Thank you! Yes it clears everything up.--Jakeriederer (talk) 23:01, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
Requested move
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:52, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Kesha → Ke$ha – I'm aware that this has been discussed many times, with the article title remaining the same per MOS:TM, which advises against "special characters that are not pronounced, are included purely for decoration, or simply substitute for English words" (the dollar sign standing in for the letter s). And I was one of the first people arguing that it should be Kesha over Ke$ha back in 2009, but I've had a change of heart.
MOS:TM applies to trademarks, which I don't believe stage names/band names are, but that's a different discussion entirely. If you believe that the name "Ke$ha" falls under that guideline, we can just IAR it per the common practice that we use a subject's most common name (compare 47.5 million ghits for "Kesha" — which, may I note, does include some results not related to the singer — to 70.1 million for "Ke$ha"; most of these results are going to pertain to the singer). Even MOS:TM says at the top of the page, "Use common sense in applying it; it will have occasional exceptions." –Chase (talk / contribs) 20:50, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
- Forgot to add that this request may also affect the following articles:
- –Chase (talk / contribs) 20:56, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
- Strong oppose - We do not pronounce her name Ke-dollarsigh-ha its Kesha, her legal name is Kesha Rose Sebert. $ is purely decorative. Its the same as P!nk which is Pink (singer), Lady Gaga as opposed to GaGa. So if we change this were going to change every Kesha to Ke$ha if every article? Absolutely not that is in direct violation of an WP:FL MOS rule (Kesha discography). I oppose this. $ is not a "trademark" you cannot legally own an $ or no one else in the world would be able to use it. Does Pink own "!"? does 3OH!3 own "!"? no. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 21:05, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
- The difference between this and Pink and Lady Gaga is that most reliable sources use Pink as opposed to P!nk, and Gaga as opposed to GaGa (Lady Gaga isn't even a special-character issue like this one, it's capitalization). Most reliable sources use Ke$ha and not Kesha. And as I said (and as you just said), I don't believe "Ke$ha" is a trademark which is why MOS:TM would not apply here, thus there would not be an MOS violation. –Chase (talk / contribs) 21:10, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
- "Kesha Rose Sebert (born March 1, 1987), better known mononymously as Kesha (pronunciation: /ˈkɛʃə/ kesh-ə, stylized Ke$ha)" completely suffices, this is an encyclopedia, not a decoration farm. Further, who knows if she will keep the $ forever? Could easily drop it if she so chooses. Besides this she is legally credited on her work as either Kesha or Kesha Rose Sebert. Kesha and Kesha Rose Sebert in all album booklets where all legal, trademark copyright credits are found. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 21:15, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
- And one of our policies on this encyclopedia is to use the name that is most well-known and most popular in third-party sources which is not "Kesha" in this case. Very few reliable publications refer to her as Kesha without the dollar sign unless they are noting her birth name. She could drop the dollar sign later, yes, but we can also change the article title later if that happens. Moving the page does not set this in stone forever. –Chase (talk / contribs) 21:21, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
- And if you read further in that "When there are several names for a subject, all of them fairly common, and the most common has problems, it is perfectly reasonable to choose one of the others". Kesha not Ke- dollarsign- ha, are you really going to get confused when googling "Kesha" as opposed to "Ke$ha"? No. My original argument still stands, the $ is purely decorative and is not encyclopedic so my oppose to this still stands. Now let others weigh in now please. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 21:36, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not asking you to change your stance, I'm just responding to your points. I'd appreciate it if you didn't try to silence me. Regardless of how the name is pronounced, Ke$ha is still more prevalent in third-party sources and is the most common name, and MOS:TM's guidelines about not using decorative characters are guidelines, not policies, meaning that there can often be exceptions. –Chase (talk / contribs) 21:50, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
- And "Kesha" is not as common as "Ke$ha" when referring to the singer, as you implied in your last comment. –Chase (talk / contribs) 21:58, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
- And i believe readers have enough common sense to figure out Kesha is Ke$ha without having to use pure decoration. Considering that different languages have different symbols for the money-sign, where here its being pronounced as "S" in English, this is confusing to readers as they may not know to do this. I agree with your original point that we sure IAR and use common sense, and the most logical thing to do here would be to use Kesha in my opinion - which was my original point. Just my view, I wont comment further. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 22:28, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
- Support. She is "Ke$ha" to the New York Times, to the Washington Post and to Billboard. Amazon calls her "Ke$ha", and selling music is what she's all about. Kauffner (talk) 03:02, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose; this is not a rabbit hole we should be going down. Today it's an artist with a dollar sign in her name, tomorrow it's one with a middot, and next year it's one with a character from the Klingon alphabet. Powers T 00:13, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose Unpronounceable vanity stylisation. --Ohconfucius ¡digame! 15:33, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
- It's not unpronounceable, it's pronounced the same as "Kesha". Perhaps vanity stylization, yes, but it's recognized by most reliable sources. –Chase (talk / contribs) 01:48, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose One of the guidelines for naming articles in Wikipedia, is for people to have the ability to find them as quickly as possible. So on that note, wouldn't people be more likely to type in "kesha" over "ke$ha"? Its kinda the same thing for Beyonce, where you would search using "beyonce" over "beyoncé" but unlike Kesha, the "é" is actually appart of her real name. Finally, the only reason many websites display her name using the Doller sign is cause they have caught onto the fact that she displays it that way. AnimatedZebra (talk) 14:03, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Alice Cooper
Should something be added about her doing work with Alice Cooper on one of his albums? 75.42.239.88 (talk) 01:56, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
- I think so, but sometimes some editors would be against it because of 'lack of significance' etc. 155.69.2.13 (talk) 08:49, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
- I agree that it should be mentioned, as it is the only worthwhile part of her "career". The fact that working with Alice Cooper is what inspired her to make a 'cock rock' album, as she states in the magazine that accompanied the limited editon of Alice's album, should also be mentioned. 86.174.165.138 (talk) 15:29, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Caption in "2009-2011: Animal and Cannibal"
"Kesha performing live on tour in 2010. Her aesthetic on stage was deliberatley unsophisticated."
'Deliberately' is misspelled.
Also, "Her aesthetic on stage was deliberately unsophisticated." seems vague, and is not neutrally toned; actually, it seems to be a bit defensive. Perhaps it should reference specific 'aesthetics' mentioned in the article, or be removed altogether? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.85.174.167 (talk) 22:19, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
- It seems to be a paraphrase of a similar sentence in in the paragraph beside it? Fixer23 (talk) 23:55, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Discography section
Who made the executive decision that the discography section is only for studio albums? I think that Cannibal is just as important as Animal in terms of Kesha's discography. It's not like it was a 3-track EP with a couple of B-sides or an exclusive release that was sold in a few stores. It spawned two singles and was supported by its own tour. Just because it has fewer songs and is labeled as an "EP" doesn't mean it shouldn't be listed. –Dream out loud (talk) 20:20, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
- Its a MOS thing. From editing mostly music articles I think its just a standard --Guerillero | My Talk 20:23, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
- I edit mostly music articles too and EPs usually aren't included because they aren't significant enough to an artist's discography the same way that full albums are. But this EP is pretty significant in the sense that it spawned two singles (one of which topped several charts) and launched the artist's first headlining tour. I think it is just as important as her first album and should be included. The fact that is includes a few less songs and is labeled "EP" shouldn't call for an exclusion. –Dream out loud (talk) 07:03, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
- Add it if you think it would make the article better --Guerillero | My Talk 17:19, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
- Done. Just wanted to avoid a potential edit war, that's all. –Dream out loud (talk) 20:13, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
- Add it if you think it would make the article better --Guerillero | My Talk 17:19, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
- I edit mostly music articles too and EPs usually aren't included because they aren't significant enough to an artist's discography the same way that full albums are. But this EP is pretty significant in the sense that it spawned two singles (one of which topped several charts) and launched the artist's first headlining tour. I think it is just as important as her first album and should be included. The fact that is includes a few less songs and is labeled "EP" shouldn't call for an exclusion. –Dream out loud (talk) 07:03, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
Removing crunkcore as one of her genres
Crunkcore? Why is crunkcore there? Ian Streeter (talk) 11:46, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
- Check out the crunkcore page. It seems impossible to remove her from it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.183.38.120 (talk) 13:58, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
- And IP 76.183.38.120 has completely sidestepped any attempt to gain or challenge the consensus and instead repeatedly make disruptive edits to the crunkcore page. If anyone has a reliable source that casts doubt on her being crunkcore (not just a source for her being some other genre), than maybe the wording can be changed.--¿3family6 contribs 15:01, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
- A few things (I)Only one source has called her crunkcore and it only labeled her as the "crunkcore queen" in passing. (II)We need several sources to back up challenged statements like genres (III) Please read BRD. The fact that you want kesha to be listed there does not mean that it should. --Guerillero | My Talk 20:25, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
- I really don't care what happens on this page, if crunkcore is taken down I have no problem, as I personally think that the RS is vague. However, the crunkcore page underwent exhaustive discussion and numerous edit wars, and the consensus that eventually emerged is to have the mention of Kesha be simply that she is considered crunkcore.--¿3family6 contribs 21:18, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
- I agree with Guerillero. We need more sources that say she's a crunkcore artist. Most sources say dance-pop and electropop. Ian Streeter (talk) 21:25, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
- As someone who watched the whole thing unfold I wouldn't call it a consensus. It was more like two very loud editors. also consensus can change. But thats not a discussion for this talk page. --Guerillero | My Talk 21:44, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
- I agree with Guerillero. We need more sources that say she's a crunkcore artist. Most sources say dance-pop and electropop. Ian Streeter (talk) 21:25, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
- I really don't care what happens on this page, if crunkcore is taken down I have no problem, as I personally think that the RS is vague. However, the crunkcore page underwent exhaustive discussion and numerous edit wars, and the consensus that eventually emerged is to have the mention of Kesha be simply that she is considered crunkcore.--¿3family6 contribs 21:18, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
- A few things (I)Only one source has called her crunkcore and it only labeled her as the "crunkcore queen" in passing. (II)We need several sources to back up challenged statements like genres (III) Please read BRD. The fact that you want kesha to be listed there does not mean that it should. --Guerillero | My Talk 20:25, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
- And IP 76.183.38.120 has completely sidestepped any attempt to gain or challenge the consensus and instead repeatedly make disruptive edits to the crunkcore page. If anyone has a reliable source that casts doubt on her being crunkcore (not just a source for her being some other genre), than maybe the wording can be changed.--¿3family6 contribs 15:01, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Occupation
On the article, it basically says (in the main description):
Kesha Rose Sebert (and all the basic information) is an American singer-songwriter and rapper.
Would you really think that she's a rapper? Ian Streeter (talk) 01:32, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
Requested move
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:55, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Kesha → Ke$ha – This is a perennial request, I know, but policies have changed in the various times that this request was put forth. "Ke$ha" is the form Ms. Sebert's name takes in all reliable sources. This includes the New York Times, the Washington Post, the BBC, this Japanese website I use for Japanese music news, Billboard, MTV, the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences, etc. And one of the points that is continually brought up is WP:MOSTM. The trademarks manual of style does not apply to the names taken by individual people, as is evident at the articles on William James Adams, Jr., Joel Thomas Zimmerman, and Kathryn Dawn Lang. As "Ke$ha" is Ms. Sebert's stage name, it should be the name we use to refer to her on Wikipedia.—Ryulong (竜龙) 23:10, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose - Talk:Kesha/Archive_4#Requested_move Consensus has been established 4 times over. We do not pronounce her name "Ke-dollarsigh-ha", we pronounce it Kesha. Wikipedia is not a place for vanity stylization. Time to drop this redundant discussion. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 23:55, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
- Consensus can change, and previous arguments did not include the information I have discovered. It does not matter if we do not pronounce it as "Ke-dollarsign-ha". The fact is that the spelling/formatting here does not match what appears in the majority of reliable sources, and WP:MOSTM is not applicable for a person's given or professional name. And either way, this discussion could result in a consensus to ignore whatever applicable manuals of style or policies you may wish to say this page should not be moved. Requested moves are either done to conform with policies and guidelines or to set up an exception to those policies or guidelines with a consensus behind it.—Ryulong (竜龙) 01:32, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- ""When there are several names for a subject, all of them fairly common, and the most common has problems, it is perfectly reasonable to choose one of the others" - The most common has problems, we use Kesha, not Ke$ha (which btw, Kesha or Kesha Sebert is her legal credited name under which all her music is legally registered.) Consensus from the last discussion established that it is simply an "Unpronounceable vanity stylisation" and we are going to IAR. In short, consensus hasn't changed. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 01:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- The "problems" you encounter are only because you are misapplying WP:MOSTM to a person's name (be it stage name or otherwise). And there was no consensus in the past discussion. That's why it closed as "no consensus". The fact is that the most common name for Ms. Sebert in reliable sources (ignoring her liner notes) is "Ke$ha" with the $ (be it representative of the dollar, the peso, the BASIC string, the real, etc. And as I discovered in various other discussions with one entirely obstinate editor, the phrasing of "stylized as..." is confusing (at least to him) or effectively WP:OR because we are coming up with our own terminology to define what "Ke$ha" is to Ms. Sebert's name.—Ryulong (竜龙) 01:51, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Well if you gain consensus, great. To quote you: "Yeah, good luck with that." - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 02:10, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- The "problems" you encounter are only because you are misapplying WP:MOSTM to a person's name (be it stage name or otherwise). And there was no consensus in the past discussion. That's why it closed as "no consensus". The fact is that the most common name for Ms. Sebert in reliable sources (ignoring her liner notes) is "Ke$ha" with the $ (be it representative of the dollar, the peso, the BASIC string, the real, etc. And as I discovered in various other discussions with one entirely obstinate editor, the phrasing of "stylized as..." is confusing (at least to him) or effectively WP:OR because we are coming up with our own terminology to define what "Ke$ha" is to Ms. Sebert's name.—Ryulong (竜龙) 01:51, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- ""When there are several names for a subject, all of them fairly common, and the most common has problems, it is perfectly reasonable to choose one of the others" - The most common has problems, we use Kesha, not Ke$ha (which btw, Kesha or Kesha Sebert is her legal credited name under which all her music is legally registered.) Consensus from the last discussion established that it is simply an "Unpronounceable vanity stylisation" and we are going to IAR. In short, consensus hasn't changed. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 01:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Consensus can change, and previous arguments did not include the information I have discovered. It does not matter if we do not pronounce it as "Ke-dollarsign-ha". The fact is that the spelling/formatting here does not match what appears in the majority of reliable sources, and WP:MOSTM is not applicable for a person's given or professional name. And either way, this discussion could result in a consensus to ignore whatever applicable manuals of style or policies you may wish to say this page should not be moved. Requested moves are either done to conform with policies and guidelines or to set up an exception to those policies or guidelines with a consensus behind it.—Ryulong (竜龙) 01:32, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose per previous consensii. And deadmau5 should be moved to deadmaus per this page's consensii. 76.65.128.132 (talk) 00:18, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Immediate close. There is nothing new here. Move along already. Let's shut this trollfest down. ΚαμΦΦνετ (talk) 07:39, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- What trollfest? I opened this up in good faith to form a new consensus based on reliable sources and the proper interpretation of the internal style guides. You should not accuse others of being trolls, particularly editors who have been on this site as long as you have.—Ryulong (竜龙) 09:15, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Article titles are not the place for clownish punctuation created to promote the work of a hussy notable only for singing about her animal-like urges, her tawdry sleaziness, and her drunken debauchery. Kauffner (talk) 08:35, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
- I would redact that statement of yours as it is most definitely a WP:BLP violation.—Ryulong (竜龙) 22:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
- You are disputing my description of Kesha as "sleazy"? Perhaps you should look at her Web site. I was not interested in purchasing the "Sleazy Remix 2.0 - Get Sleazier" offered on this site, and I also averted my eyes to avoid learning in detail how "The New York Post Gets Sleazy!". However, judging from the "Blah Blah Blah" video, I would say that she is not kidding. Anyone who has seen "Tik Tok" knows it is about drunken debauchery. As for animal urges, "Take It Off" describes how "the animal" inspires her and her friends to go downtown, overturn trash cans, and commit other acts of mindless vandalism. Kesha does not need enablers. What Kesha needs to know is that we all feel sad when we see her brush her teeth with a bottle of Jack. Kauffner (talk) 05:05, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
- I would redact that statement of yours as it is most definitely a WP:BLP violation.—Ryulong (竜龙) 22:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
- Article titles are not the place for clownish punctuation created to promote the work of a hussy notable only for singing about her animal-like urges, her tawdry sleaziness, and her drunken debauchery. Kauffner (talk) 08:35, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
- What trollfest? I opened this up in good faith to form a new consensus based on reliable sources and the proper interpretation of the internal style guides. You should not accuse others of being trolls, particularly editors who have been on this site as long as you have.—Ryulong (竜龙) 09:15, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose. The last move request was decisively opposed only in September. It's pretty obvious that consensus doesn't change that rapidly, bearing in mind this is the fourth such request. Give it a rest; come back in 12 months if you still think it needs to be moved. --Ohconfucius ¡digame! 12:38, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose -- Her name appears to be Kesha, with Ke$ha being a stage name. As a redirect exists from this "trade mark", no users are likely to be inconvenienced by the article's present location. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:18, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose. Whether MOS:TM explicitly applies or not, the basic principle is the same. Using the dollar sign is a vanity personalization that we need not adhere to, as we have our own house style. Powers T 01:45, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- But if MOS:TM does not apply, then there is no house style to be imposed on this, or rather nothing to base the house style on.—Ryulong (竜龙) 10:14, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- Our guidelines are not straightjackets, and they reflect consensus rather than determining it. As such, it's perfectly reasonable to note that the same principles that inform the explicit rules listed at MOS:TM can also be used to inform our decision in this case. Powers T 15:55, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- If our guidelines are not straightjackets, why is it so hard to suggest that exceptions be made to them when they are constantly being referred to as the rules set in stone? If a name appears in the majority of reliable sources and MOS:TM does not apply to the names of individual people, then there should be no policy or guideline bound reason for this page to be kept at "Kesha" over "Ke$ha" and any consensus founded here is in stark contrast to the expected site-wide consensus.—Ryulong (竜龙) 20:44, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- Not at all. "Site-wide consensus" is that we avoid using non-alphabetic characters in titles where reasonable alternatives exist. The dollar-sign-for-S is a typographic conceit that we need not use so long as the standard English formatting is in use in a significant proportion of sources. (Even Kesha's Facebook page and Myspace page avoid the dollar sign.) Powers T 21:41, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- But that "site-wide consensus" is based on the current interpretation that does not exclude individuals' names from MOS:TM.—Ryulong (竜龙) 22:15, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- Precisely. Powers T 16:31, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
- So you're basing the consensus on a false pretense.—Ryulong (竜龙) 17:41, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
- Precisely. Powers T 16:31, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
- But that "site-wide consensus" is based on the current interpretation that does not exclude individuals' names from MOS:TM.—Ryulong (竜龙) 22:15, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- Not at all. "Site-wide consensus" is that we avoid using non-alphabetic characters in titles where reasonable alternatives exist. The dollar-sign-for-S is a typographic conceit that we need not use so long as the standard English formatting is in use in a significant proportion of sources. (Even Kesha's Facebook page and Myspace page avoid the dollar sign.) Powers T 21:41, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- If our guidelines are not straightjackets, why is it so hard to suggest that exceptions be made to them when they are constantly being referred to as the rules set in stone? If a name appears in the majority of reliable sources and MOS:TM does not apply to the names of individual people, then there should be no policy or guideline bound reason for this page to be kept at "Kesha" over "Ke$ha" and any consensus founded here is in stark contrast to the expected site-wide consensus.—Ryulong (竜龙) 20:44, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- Our guidelines are not straightjackets, and they reflect consensus rather than determining it. As such, it's perfectly reasonable to note that the same principles that inform the explicit rules listed at MOS:TM can also be used to inform our decision in this case. Powers T 15:55, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- But if MOS:TM does not apply, then there is no house style to be imposed on this, or rather nothing to base the house style on.—Ryulong (竜龙) 10:14, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose - There just aren't many examples like Ke$ha, which is why this makes for a good discussion. You have made some convincing arguments as well. The problem for me is that individual names for artists are often trademarked - John Mayer, Adele, and Snoop Dogg just to name a few. It is reasonable to assume that the dollar sign in Ke$ha is a distinctive sign and/or indicator being used by the performer as a distinguishable attribute for the purpose of being readily identified - an acceptable definition of trademark. Ke$ha may not be registered (yet), but to me that fact alone doesn't disqualify the guidelines outlined in MOS:TM. The subject's common name appears to reflect the same characteristics of trademarks. Per MOS:TM, giving that trademark a phonetic English spelling should be justified. Also, two of the articles you cited as examples do not really support the move. For example, k.d. lang is phonetically correct. Ke$ha, on the other hand, is not. I would argue that deadmau5 is still a work-in-progress article and title that warrants a similar discussion. That's the problem with using other Wiki articles as examples, especially when the number of articles that can be cited for support is relatively low. GoneIn60 (talk) 09:46, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
- It does not really matter if "John Mayer" or "Adele" are trademarked. And you would be going after a needle in a haystack to suggest that "Deadmau5" be moved to "Deadmaus", as that would most definitely violate WP:COMMONNAME. The fact of the matter is that for this page, one form is more common on its own than the other, and if anything the music recording community seems to favor this "trademark" or "non-standard stylized form" than the other.—Ryulong (竜龙) 10:03, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
- Perhaps I'm on a different wavelength here, but I thought you were trying to show how guidelines for trademarks on WP do not apply. I simply beg to differ. How are the examples I've given irrelevant then? Secondly, WP:COMMONNAME does not necessarily override the use of standard English text formatting for article titles. Under the trademark guidelines which adhere to the common name rule, "Avoid using special characters that are not pronounced" is suggested. Whether or not you agree Ke$ha is a trademark, I find it hard to believe you would think this advice ONLY applies to trademarks. What makes a trademark so special that it cannot have special characters while other non-trademark titles can? That just doesn't make sense. GoneIn60 (talk) 13:59, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
- The fact that any performer's name is trademarked is irrelevant, as WP:MOSTM does not apply to the names of individuals. The fact is the majority of sources refer to the subject of this page with the dollar sign in her name, and that dollar sign just happens to be pronounced with the h that follows it as "sh".—Ryulong (竜龙) 21:34, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
- Powers' makes a great point. WP:MOSTM may not include stage names, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're excluded either. Policies and guidelines strive for "brief and simple". Listing every possible scenario and requirement can lead to instruction creep. —GoneIn60 (talk) 03:45, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
- The fact that any performer's name is trademarked is irrelevant, as WP:MOSTM does not apply to the names of individuals. The fact is the majority of sources refer to the subject of this page with the dollar sign in her name, and that dollar sign just happens to be pronounced with the h that follows it as "sh".—Ryulong (竜龙) 21:34, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
- Perhaps I'm on a different wavelength here, but I thought you were trying to show how guidelines for trademarks on WP do not apply. I simply beg to differ. How are the examples I've given irrelevant then? Secondly, WP:COMMONNAME does not necessarily override the use of standard English text formatting for article titles. Under the trademark guidelines which adhere to the common name rule, "Avoid using special characters that are not pronounced" is suggested. Whether or not you agree Ke$ha is a trademark, I find it hard to believe you would think this advice ONLY applies to trademarks. What makes a trademark so special that it cannot have special characters while other non-trademark titles can? That just doesn't make sense. GoneIn60 (talk) 13:59, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
- It does not really matter if "John Mayer" or "Adele" are trademarked. And you would be going after a needle in a haystack to suggest that "Deadmau5" be moved to "Deadmaus", as that would most definitely violate WP:COMMONNAME. The fact of the matter is that for this page, one form is more common on its own than the other, and if anything the music recording community seems to favor this "trademark" or "non-standard stylized form" than the other.—Ryulong (竜龙) 10:03, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose - Per WP:MOSTM, and past consensus on this. It's just a stylization, not how the name is actually pronounced, etc etc. Sergecross73 msg me 21:54, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
- Support. I'm just going to copy and paste my comment from the last discussion as it's still relevant:
- MOS:TM applies to trademarks, which I don't believe stage names/band names are, but that's a different discussion entirely. If you believe that the name "Ke$ha" falls under that guideline, we can just IAR it per the common practice that we use a subject's most common name (compare 47.5 million ghits for "Kesha" — which, may I note, does include some results not related to the singer — to 70.1 million for "Ke$ha"; most of these results are going to pertain to the singer). Even MOS:TM says at the top of the page, "Use common sense in applying it; it will have occasional exceptions."
–Chase (talk / contribs) 03:56, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
- The "common name" rule applies only to choosing among different names, not for deciding how to render a name once chosen. We all agree that "Kesha" (or "Ke$ha", either way) is the name this article should use, the only question is how to render it. The dollar sign is a minor embellishment that even she doesn't use consistently; it is perfectly in line with our style guidelines to render her name as standard English orthography would suggest. Powers T 04:06, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
- I agree. An example of common name would be using Snoop Dogg over Calvin Cordozar Broadus, Jr. since that name is used more than his birth name. However, if he were to use SnoOp Dogg* we would not use the * and simply use SnoOp Dogg.--70.24.206.51 (talk) 18:29, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
- The underlying question is if trademarks aren't able to use special characters or symbols on Wikipedia, then why would any article be allowed? To me it's silly to deny the one topic most likely to contain special characters, but then allow that to exist in all other topics. That lack of consistency would prompt an overturning of the MOS:TM guideline. —GoneIn60 (talk) 15:03, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- The "common name" rule applies only to choosing among different names, not for deciding how to render a name once chosen. We all agree that "Kesha" (or "Ke$ha", either way) is the name this article should use, the only question is how to render it. The dollar sign is a minor embellishment that even she doesn't use consistently; it is perfectly in line with our style guidelines to render her name as standard English orthography would suggest. Powers T 04:06, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.