Talk:Brooke White

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

October Concert[edit]

I noticed under the Post-Idol category a reference to a concert to be performed in October '09. This has come and gone, and instead of changing it to present tense, I need to know if she ever actually performed there. Cannot find source, anyone else would care to look it up so we can clean up the tense?

Referring specifically to this: She will appear solo at a concert in Washington, DC on October 10, 2009. --On3moresoul (talk) 23:59, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please[edit]

Please do not add unfree images to the infobox or anywhere else within the article if possible. Also, no links within the article to YouTube or other video sites per our policies. Thanks. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 11:59, 7 March 2008 (U

her birthday[edit]

When is her birthday? I can't find it anywhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Epicatsea (talk • contribs) 03:59, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just added a birthdate I found from a Yahoo! TV biography [1]. It is probably not the most reliable source but I think it will work until we find something better. Aspects (talk) 04:12, june 2 2008 (UTC)

Official site link[edit]

Section Order[edit]

I disagree that it makes more sense to put Brooke's music career pre-Idol near the end of the article. Chronologically, it would be better to have everything pre-Idol, then everything from Idol, and then anything post-Idol or miscellaneous last. Why talk about her "early life" immediately but exclude talk of her music career? Andrea (talk) 14:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox picture[edit]

(copied from my talk page since it is more appropriate to discuss this here) Hi Aspects!

I'm just writing to explain an edit to Brooke White's page. Both pictures are fine but I prefer the one that has been on the page for months and months. I put that picture back. I'm not trying to mess w/ you or vandalize White's page. I think the previous picture is better and the acknowledgement of her new album seems very appropriate.

Thank you for participating on Wikipedia. You're clearly more experienced than me and obviously do a lot of good on here.

Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.188.48.202 (talk) 03:13, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Both pictures are acceptable free use images. Of equally good quality free use images, you should use the most recent one. I am confused by your statement of "...the acknowledgement of her new album seems very appropriate." I do not see how either image acknowledges the new album. Because of this I have added back the most recent image. Aspects (talk) 17:40, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Since people say they "prefer" one image or "a better picture of her" without explaining why here in the discussion, I am going to place the newer image back in the infobox and move the older image to a different part of the article. Aspects (talk) 01:39, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So once again, anon user 206.x says it is "a better picture of her" in an edit summary on their fifth time reverting back to the older image with no edit summaries on the first four. I also asked on all of the 206.x talk pages to discuss the image on here. Seeing how this user has failed to try and discuss this image, I am going back to the most recent fair use image. Also, the other image is already being used in the article and there is no reason to have the same image used twice in one article. Aspects (talk) 14:41, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Songs from the Attic link[edit]

I feel that "Songs from the Attic" should be a wikilink to Songs from the Attic, though 76.175.161.106 (talk · contribs) feels it should be a link to http://www.brookewhite.com/. We've gone back and forth on this about 10 times now. An internal link is more useful in this context. Additionally, Songs from the Attic links to http://www.brookewhite.com/ in the normal External Links section. Could we get a third opinion here? Thanks.—C45207 | Talk 23:57, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think a third opinion is pointless since three editors, you, me and Icseaturtles, have reverted the external link in favor of the internal link while one editor, 76.175.161.106, keeps adding the external link back so that people can buy the CD. Aspects (talk) 04:45, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Now both of us have asked 76.175.161.106, so I guess he never will but he will continue to revert the consensus. Aspects (talk) 02:11, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would appear that 76.175.161.106 (talk · contribs) isn't going to discuss this here. I'm relatively new, so I don't know what the next steps are.—C45207 | Talk 03:39, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, first off I'm a she not a he, user|76.175.161.106. The link to Songs from the Attic has been up and active on Wiki since Brooke was on Idol and now you want to remove it. Why? The link is valid and is run by Brooke's former label for the last 5 years even before she went on Idol. Please stop removing the external link. Why do you want fans to have to Google Songs From the Attic instead of just clicking?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.175.161.106 (talk) 03:57, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for taking the time to discuss this here. I feel that linking to Songs from the Attic, an article with lots of information about the album—including a link to the album's site—is more valuable here than a direct link to the album's site as you propose. Such a link fits with the linking style present on other pages here, leads readers to more information related to the subject, and doesn't come off as an advertisement. We also don't lose the http://www.brookewhite.com/ link; we just more closely associate it with Songs from the Attic, the primary subject of the site. Thus, I feel the http://www.brookewhite.com/ link is more appropriate on the Songs from the Attic page. Are fans not also interested in the article about Songs from the Attic?—C45207 | Talk 04:28, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(to 76.175.161.106) A singer's Wikipedia article is not meant to increase sales of albums/singles, which still seems to be your own justification of having the external link instead of the internal link. Having an internal link to the album's article and then having the album's article having the external link makes a lot more sense. And with this edit, [2], you added back iTunes charts that are unofficial charts and per Wikipedia:Record charts should not be included in articles. Also you reverted having the albums linked in the section heading which is common practice on Wikipedia, reverted the de-capitalization of from against WP:MOSCAPS and added back external links for the record label and the producer that are not needed for this article. Aspects (talk) 03:48, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent)Without any response from 76.151.161.106 in over five days in regards to our concerns here, I take it that the user is either unwilling or unable to help us form a consensus here. The current consensus here is that the album is more appropriately linked to the album page and the purpose of the artist's Wikipedia article is to provide information about the artist, not to increase sales of their albums/singles. Aspects (talk) 15:59, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to remove the information again since both myself and C45207 have asked the anon user, 76.175.161.106, to continue discussions to gain a consensus and that has not happened. Aspects (talk) 15:17, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

High Hopes & Heartbreak title[edit]

I am starting a discussion here since another editor and I are having a difference in opinion on the title. The album's article is "High Hopes & Heartbreak" and it is written with the ampersand on the album cover. There was an edit summary of "If one were to look at the album, one would see that the title is: High Hopes and Heartbreak." This is clearly incorrect, so I am going to change it back with a edit summary to see this discussion. Aspects (talk) 19:00, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Album cover in infobox[edit]

The album cover should not be used in the infobox per Wikipedia:Non-free content to see how non-free images cannot be used in a living person's infobox, "Cover art from various items, for identification only in the context of critical commentary of that item (not for identification without critical commentary)." This means the album cover can only be used to identify the album with critical commentary and cannot be used to identify the artist. We already have a free picture of Brooke White that should be used in the infobox instead. Aspects (talk) 17:01, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image[edit]

Brooke White attempted to change the image on her Wikipedia page via User:Realbrookewhite because she didn't like the picture in itself. However, it had copyright issues as it's not exactly sure that Realbrookewhite was Brooke White herself. However, via Twitter, she confirmed that Realbrookewhite was her account, and has only recently released the image she wanted under a free license. Per WP:BLP, since there's no copyright issues now, I think it's fitting to let the subject choose which free image to represent their aforementioned biographic article. Tutelary (talk) 19:31, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Brooke White. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:24, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Brooke White. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 08:33, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brooke White. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 14:59, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brooke White. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 11:38, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Brooke_White&oldid=1210956145"