Talk:Little Mix/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2

Orphaned references in Little Mix

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Little Mix's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Australia":

  • From Shout Out to My Ex: "ARIA Australian Top 50 Singles". Australian Recording Industry Association. 31 October 2016. Retrieved 29 October 2016.
  • From About You Now: "The ARIA Report: Week Commencing: 29th October 2007 Issue No: 921" (PDF). Australian Recording Industry Association. 29 October 2007. Retrieved 25 April 2013.
  • From Firework (song): "Single Top 50 – 05/12/2010". Australian Recording Industry Association. Retrieved 2011-02-27.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 17:59, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Citation needed

The article's intro states: "The group's 2016 fourth studio album Glory Days became their first number one album in the UK and also had the highest first week sales for a UK girl group since the Spice Girls in 1997 and is the fastest-selling album by any girl group in 20 years.[6]"

However, these "facts" are not stated anywhere in the reference. The reference states that "Little Mix's Glory Days is the longest reigning girl group Number 1 since Spice Girls' debut 20 years ago". That isn't necessarily equivalent to "highest first week sales" or "fastest-selling". Either change the reference or change the statement to:

"The group's 2016 fourth studio album Glory Days became their first number one album in the UK and also the longest reigning girl group Number 1 since the Spice Girls' debut album 20 years ago.[6]" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.190.204.201 (talk) 08:46, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

more facts

More facts should be mentioned by member on the Wikipedia page, eg: jade's political views and the fact she is a Newcastle United supporter.31.49.61.212 (talk) 18:39, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

None of that is relevant to the band, it's trivia about the individual members. And to add it Wikipedia would need reliable sources (not blogs or fan pages) that explicitly state those details. Richard3120 (talk) 19:19, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
Maybe this fact can be added to her individual Wikipedia page if it isn't already there Alanna.davis (talk) 16:39, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
None of the members have standalone wiki pages. Even if they did, those trivia "facts" sound like they belong on a Little Mix fansite and not an encyclopedia. Bennv3771 (talk) 16:50, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Citation help

Ok so I was looking through the article and I noticed that a citation was needed for Leigh-Anne's ancestry. I found an article already cited for Jade (citation note 139) and read the article. It was stated by Jade that Leigh-Anne was half-Jamaican and half-Bajan. Would this be an acceptable source even though Leigh-Anne herself did not make this claim? Alanna.davis (talk) 16:35, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Perhaps you can ask that at WP:RSN. It's a page for "posting questions regarding whether particular sources are reliable in context." Bennv3771 (talk) 03:08, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Little Mix. 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 14:09, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Members: Jade Thirlwall

"She revealed in the group's book, Our World, that she struggled with anorexia nervosa after experiencing bullying at school, and the death of her grandfather."

More than bullying, what she experienced was racial abuse. She was called P*** (most likely Paki), bleach powder was thrown at her face and she was being held down by girls while they drew a bindi on her forehead. This was the first time she experienced racism or prejudice.

The source is their book Our World

Those are Jade's own words, not from an impartial, third-party source, which is what would be needed to include this information in the article. Richard3120 (talk) 18:44, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

File:Little Mix 2011.jpg Nominated for speedy deletion

An image used in this article, File:Little Mix 2011.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

Kelly Rowland

Isn't it worth to mention that Kelly Rowland put them together? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LittleMixer (talk • contribs) 19:38, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

If you can find a reliable independent source that explicitly states that it was Rowland's idea to put the four girls together, then yes. Richard3120 (talk) 22:04, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Little Mix. 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 17:43, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

 Done Richard3120 (talk) 20:34, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Records sold

This was in the lead:

The group has worldwide sales of over 39 million units, making them one of the best-selling girl groups of all time.[1]

  1. ^ "Little Mix have sold more than 39 million records globally: Pressparty". Pressparty. Retrieved 21 February 2018.

PressParty is an unreliable source, it posts press releases by record labels.. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 18:28, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

The problem is that in this digital era nobody distinguishes between "records sold" and "equivalent units from streaming", and of course the record labels are very keen not to make this distinction because it's good publicity for their artists. In terms of actual sales, I suspect Little Mix's worldwide record sales are well under 10 million. But once you take streaming into account, they've "sold" the equivalent of 39 million units... in fact it's now 45 million, according to some reports. I don't know how this is going to be handled going forward, in articles like "List of best-selling xxxx" – we are very probably going to see the day when some artist "sells" more "records" than the Beatles or Elvis Presley without actually having sold very many records at all. Richard3120 (talk) 20:36, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
Even adding all their certifications (sales+streams) up, the total can't reach half of that number. The problem is the unreliable source. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 16:16, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
This is why I don't like "best-selling" lists like this article, in general – even if the figure is from a reliable source like a music magazine or newspaper, it's still going to have been fed to that source by the record company, so it's no better than a press release directly from the record label. Look at the Supremes' sales... anywhere from 20 million to 100 million, depending on which source you believe, and nobody (apart from maybe Berry Gordy) has any idea of the true number. Richard3120 (talk) 17:51, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
I agree claimed sales are already difficult to deal with, surelly several times those magazines take the information from the label and don't say it, but the least we can do is avoid the obvious press releases by record labels and non-reliable websites. If a notable newspaper says LM sold that it will surelly go here. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 05:50, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
Cornerstonepicker: There have been edits from four different editors over the weekend changing the sales figure for Little Mix on List of best-selling girl groups to 45 million, and they keep getting reverted – the last one has posted this YouTube clip as "proof" of the 45 million sales. But it shows you just how media people will accept anything the record company tells them as gospel – the voiceover announcer says the group has sold over 45 million "albums", rather than "records" (albums and singles combined). Richard3120 (talk) 22:07, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
45 million albums...that just shows how unreliable that announcer is. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 03:12, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Yall are here quibble over a little mistake i mean, it's OBVIOUS the announcer made mistake we all guessed it. It doesn't mean Little Mix didn't sell 45 Million RECORDS. BTW stop saying this isn't a reliable source because "labels" inflate numbers. I mean, if we think this way we can't believe in anything written here since wikipedia is about putting all different informations about a subject coming from ""reliable"" sources on a same website. Every Medias are doing this, inflating numbers just to make the artist look better. I heard someone saying LM sold less than 10 Millions, honestly what kind of mess is that? We, Mixers, are trying to calculate sales & streams with sources like kworb & digital music sales that only show us sales (updated everyday), streames, views & radio impact in USA, & all this independently of what medias controlled by labels are saying. & Guess what, It's coordinating, we don't know the exact numbers of sales but the rough size is 40-45 Millions records. I think some people here don't know them (since they are not famous in USA) so they are suspicious of these FACTS, well, the world is composed of severals countries you know. At the end of the day MTV UK said it one more time : Little Mix sold 45 Millions RECORDS, so there is no reason why they should be TOTALLY DELETED from the list of best selling girlgroup every when we know they are the current best selling girlgroup of this decade. I will reinsert them in the list, thank you not to DELETE them & do researches before saying such absurd things based on nothing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.144.232.13 (talk)

Sources like kworb.. which is listed among unreliable sources for WP? The number in the source given is extremely inflated. Reliable sources says One Direction has sold 50 million records, for example, and it's included here. Even adding up all the certifications of Little Mix (that include streaming) it doesn't give 30% of that number 45 million. It gives a total of 13.1 million units. For claimed sales figures, the list of best-selling music artists requires to have the number supported by at least 75% in certified units-and this isn't the case at all. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 01:07, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
So are you going to go through all the girl groups and count up their sales? Or are you just focusing on Little Mix? I find it funny how none of the other groups on the list have to worry about their sales being questioned. It’s sad how Little Mix have a plaque that states they sold 30 million albums & singles world wide, yet you’re ignoring that all together and claiming they haven’t even sold 10 million. I also find it funny how One Direction can be at 50 million records world wide when they too are apart of the streaming era, but haven’t seen them deleted from their list. The music industry is changing! People unfortunately don’t buy music as often anymore. And it’s because now you have FREE streaming options to use instead. That’s why a certain number of streams now equals an equivalent album or single sale unit so that the artist can make their money. If Little Mix were formed in the 90s, all 45 million records would be completely pure. Don’t punish just cause they’re in the wrong era. If you’re going to question their record sales, question all the other girl groups record sales too. They are not exempt from the same scrutiny you’re showing Little Mix right now.

barbiegirlyforever21 (talk)

Streaming is counted on the certifications, not only pure sales. All the units combined gives 13.1. One Direction's certifications covers 75% of their claimed sales. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 03:28, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Since when is just adding up certifications a valid way of determine what their total sales are? There’s almost 200 countries in the world, little sales here and there, plus people constantly streaming, add up units fast. Whether you like it or not, Little Mix have a confirmed 45 million records sold (albums & single unit equivalents) by Global, by MTV and by their label and it’s wrong for you to deny that and start changing the rules when it comes to them. Also, Little Mix is not the only to have their numbers reported as records sold. Some of the other girl groups’ on the list use those same words, but for some reason you’re not double checking theirs. Also, the Bananarama’s article said they sold 40 million albums, not records, just albums. You just believe that too or are you going to double check like you’re attempting to double check Little Mix? You’re showing immense bias right now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barbiegirlyforever21 (talk • contribs) 05:11, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

For Wikipedia it is, check the rules of List of best-selling music artists. Banarama's records are pre-digital era. For their sales figure use the BBC source. If we talk about the "little sales here and there", over 30 million records sold here and there? after counting the biggest music markets' certified units?.. Record labels as source for sales are avoided here. As mentioned before, artist of this era at least 75% of certified units to support claimed sales. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 06:50, 13 March

No it’s not. May I remind you that Wikipedia is edited by people, and not everything is always updated. Little Mix have over 100 world wide confirmed and eligible certifications that are not on Wikipedia. And again, there’s close to 200 countries in world, Little Mix music is still on iTunes and other streaming surfaces years later. I don’t understand why you are punishing Little Mix for being formed in the streaming era or why that’s a valid reason to not put them on the list. Times change. The music industry of today is largely based on streams, like it or not, because people don’t buy music as much as they used to. Why would they when you have free options like Spotify to listen to any music you want. And now you’re saying that the label, the one who handles the artist, the one who keeps track of sales and purchases the official plaques, is all of a sudden not a valid source. Little Mix have Global, MTV, and their label backing up their record sales, even the Brit Awards 2018 said they Little Mix sold 4.3 million pure albums world wide (a few millions more with streams), but all of sudden these aren’t valid sources anymore when it comes to this list? But it seems like the Daily Mail UK, a gossip newspaper, is more valid when they stating a group’s sales. Wow. You’re being so biased towards Little Mix and making up rules for no reason. Their record sales (pure and stream units) have been confirmed at 45 million and they rightfully deserve to be on the list. Times change.


Also, the Pussycat Dolls sales are from LA Weekly, a tabloid magazine which I don't believe is a reliable source but their name is still up there. So if you're gonna remove Little Mix from that list, you better remove the Pussycat Dolls too especially considering that MTV and the Global Awards are much more reliable than LA Weekly. Jebblo (talk) 12:40, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

I double checked and they were updated. Keep in mind all certifications include streaming: yes, it is counted in the total 13.1M. These other sources will be changed, of course. I'm not making up anything; as I said, check List of best-selling music artists#Definitions. I quote it also here just in case:

...The more recent the artist, the higher the required percentage of certified units, so artists such as Rihanna, Chris Brown, Taylor Swift, Flo Rida, Katy Perry, Justin Bieber, Adele, Lady Gaga, Bruno Mars, Nicki Minaj and Ed Sheeran are expected to have their claimed figures supported by over 75% in certified units. The certified units are sourced from available online databases of local music industry associations. All certified units are converted from Gold/Platinum/Diamond certification awards based on criteria provided by certifying bodies. The certified units percentage varies according to the first year that an artist appeared in the charts.[a] The requirements of certified units are designed to avoid inflated sales figures, which are frequently practiced by record companies for promotional purposes...

— List of best-selling music artists#Definitions
Cornerstonepicker (talk) 18:17, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
References were fixed there. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 19:20, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't VEVO certifications (where 100 views/streams = 1 download) also go towards a certified unit meaning Little Mix have sold over 75% of claimed figures in certified units?
Jebblo (talk) 02:09, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

No, but some of the certifications listed do include Youtube views. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 17:10, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Why don't they count? Jebblo (talk) 09:15, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Only certifications that count are given by music agencies RIAA, BPI, ARIA, Music Canada, among others. They verify those sales/equivalent-units and grant a certification. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 17:57, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
"All artists included on this list, which have begun charting on official albums or singles charts have their available claimed figures supported by at least 20% (or 75% in this case) in certified units."
A certified unit according to Wikipedia = RIAA (or equivalent), digital media (which includes VEVO), IFPI, and IMPALA.
Jebblo (talk) 23:50, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I'm aware. Section says a number of countries include digital media (digital downloads and on-demand streaming) to their certifications. It also says that the US and Germany are the only countries where YouTube views are counted as part of equivalent-units.
Only the US and Germany verify the number of domestic views and include it on the music certification. Their formula is not universal, however, because no other country does it. Then, the certified units from those countries that you see on their articles already include the views, can you imagine counting those equivalent-units twice? or even making up formulas to other countries? Cornerstonepicker (talk) 01:05, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity, if Official Charts, Billboard or any other equivalent/credible source states the official record sales for Little Mix, will they be able to go back on the list?
Jebblo (talk) 11:57, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Only You Music Video.

Any update about Music Video of Only You? has release date announced? generally asking. CK (talk) 21:52, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Why would Wikipedia know ahead of any gossip or celebrity website? Any addition to this article regarding the music video would only be included once it has been reported by a reliable source. Richard3120 (talk) 22:17, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
@Richard3120: I'm asking because I'm a fan of this band, and I listen their songs especially having music videos, so I'm asking about release of video of Only You. I even checked on YouTube but only lyric video available on their YouTube Channel and have no update about official music video, personally if you or anybody get any update even outside Wikipedia about their music video, please ping me, Thanks. CK (talk) 06:16, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, but this is an encyclopedia, not a gossip website – it's not the job of any editor on Wikipedia to go and search for information about whether a video exists, or to personally notify you when a video has been made. If you want that information, you should go and check news websites yourself. Richard3120 (talk) 15:44, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 August 2019

LM6 and Wasabi and Bounce back and LM5 The Tour 80.225.79.54 (talk) 04:16, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

That doesn't make any sense. Richard3120 (talk) 13:37, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 13:58, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 November 2018

Bold text

  • Please follow the instructions in the template. If you're having trouble with the template please ask for help. Tiderolls 14:05, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

I don’t understand this but you can ask one of our specialists Paige Nikki Surtees (talk) 11:23, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Jesy Nelson

In the ‘members’ section it clearly states jesy was born in Wast London when that’s a lie she was actually born in Essex. Paige Nikki Surtees (talk) 11:26, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

It doesn't say anywhere that she was born in West London. Richard3120 (talk) 13:56, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 April 2020

I would like to add the picture of Little Mix to a picture from their old tour to their current tour. thumb|Little Mix LM5 Tour Scash123 (talk) 21:36, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

 Question: ​Where do you want this picture to be added? {{replyto}} Can I Log In's (talk) page 22:29, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 Not done as a blatant copyvio. Will request deletion of the image on Commons momentarily. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 22:47, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Image

Follwing Jesy's announcement that she's leaving the group, should we update the image to an image of just Perrie, Jade and Leigh-Anne LaVozSA (talk) 17:22, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

There would need to be a free image that we can use. Considering news broke yesterday, and that Little Mix as a trio have only made a couple appearances without Jesy, it would be really tricky to find an image that quick. I suggest we keep the image that is currently in the article for now (I also added a note saying that Jesy had left the group) until we can find a free image that just shows the three remaining members. D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 18:00, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
This is correct. And also, why the rush to show them as a trio? Literally everything they've done in nine years is as a quartet, including the current single and album... we should probably wait until they've actually made a record as a trio before writing Jesy out of their visual history. Richard3120 (talk) 19:13, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Ok, thats fine. I was only suggesting it so the wiki could be as up to date as possible. But i do agree that we should wait for a single release or even an album LaVozSA (talk) 16:37, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Basically, as Doggy54321 says, we will have to wait until a free image that doesn't violate WP:NFCC becomes available, whenever that is... it may not be up to any of us to make the decision when that will be. Richard3120 (talk) 16:57, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

"highest-grossing tour for a girl group of all time"

To further explain this edit I made, whereby I removed the statement that the "Glory Days Tour and Get Weird Tour are the fifth and eighth highest-grossing tour for a girl group of all time, respectively." The cited source is not comprehensive at all, hence Wikipedia should not outright state with certainty that these are not only the highest grossing tours of all time, but also in the right order. For example, the cited source says the 1998 Spiceworld Tour is number 4 with $60 million... but as the source itself says, this $60 million is only how much the American leg of the tour grossed, which accounts for less than half of the whole tour. Which means this list is only correct if the rest of that tour somehow made no money at all, which is of course ridiculous. That's just one example off the top of my head. There may be other major girl group tours that this source has failed to account for. Regardless, it is clearly not comprehensive and no definitive claims should be made using this list. Bennv3771 (talk) 19:30, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs has an RFC

Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs has an RFC for the use of radio station/networks' playlists being cited in articles. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Heartfox (talk) 00:12, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Infobox links

Should the member names in the infobox not link to Perrie Edwards, Leigh-Anne Pinnock, Jade Thirlwall and Jesy Nelson? 2A02:C7F:8ECF:9900:565:B20:2741:A047 (talk) 15:02, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi – on Wikipedia, we have a guideline called MOS:OVERLINK; the clue is in the name – we don't want to overlink things. Since they are linked under the image in the infobox, this linking is enough. – DarkGlow • 15:30, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 May 2021

Please link the members' names to their individual pages Amorelia (talk) 04:48, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

No – on Wikipedia, we have a guideline called MOS:OVERLINK; the clue is in the name – we don't want to overlink things. Since they are linked under the image in the infobox, this linking is enough. – DarkGlow • 08:53, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 May 2021

I would like to update their picture due to them becoming a trio now and Jesy isn’t in the group anymore. Dioreflame (talk) 17:04, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Dioreflame (talk) 17:05, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Not done: Vague requests to add, update, modify, or improve an image are generally not honored unless you can point to a specific image already uploaded to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons that you would like included on this article. Please note that any image used on any Wikipedia article must comply with the Wikipedia image use policy, particularly where copyright is concerned. Thanks, ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 17:10, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 May 2021

little mix consist of 3 members now not 4 so i would like to change the picture to the 3 remaining members Needyleigh (talk) 15:12, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

 Question: Which picture? ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 15:23, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
Needyleigh, please bear in mind that you cannot use any picture of the group that you find on Google or Pinterest or anything like that... the photo has to be in the public domain and free for use. Just because you can find a picture on Google doesn't mean that you or Wikipedia has the right to use it - it probably belongs to the photographer or to an organisation. You will need to find a photo in the public domain, or get permission from the owner of the photo, or take a picture yourself. Richard3120 (talk) 15:31, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 Not done: as per above. Run n Fly (talk) 15:36, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

First group to win The X Factor

Just a note, while it is well known that Little Mix were the first group to win "The X Factor" in the UK, strictly speaking, they weren't the first to win it worldwide.

An Australian group called "Random" were the first group worldwide to win the franchise, ref here:[1]

Quote: "...while Dunbar and Price will be trying to become the first group to win since [Random in] 2005."

Hopefully that clears the confusion as to whether Little Mix were the first group worldwide to win The X Factor, which they weren't.MasterMind5991 (talk) 06:35, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Teen, duo, country mum battle for X Factor". The West Australian. Australian Associated Press. 24 November 2015. Retrieved 15 February 2017.

Good Article Nomination

Hi! Just wondering if this article is eligible to be nominated for a good article? As I've read the good article criteria, I think this article satisfies them. I just want to know other editor's opinions about this before submitting the nomination. It would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! GabbyManahan01 (talk) 06:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

I think it's got a good chance – it would be good if you could find better sources to replace the group's Twitter ones first. CelebMix and The Daily Mirror aren't great either, it would be nice to replace these as well – otherwise, it's in fairly good shape. But be prepared to have to wait a while (possibly months) for someone to review it, and to be ready to deal with requests for rewording and corrections if necessary. Richard3120 (talk) 14:04, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
@GabbyManahan01: I concur with Richard3120: the article has a good chance, but some sources should be replaced. Other than that, I think the article is in good condition. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 23:52, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Great! In my opinion tho, I think CelebMix is a fairly good source, but I will be replacing it if I find a better one, same goes with the twitter ones. I will also find replacements for The Daily Mirror sources, if no good sources are found, I would just simply remove the info. After that, I will be submitting the nomination. Thank you so much for your response! GabbyManahan01 (talk) 12:52, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Update, I've replaced all the possible replacable sources from The Daily Mirror, CelebMix, and Twitter. I've kept some twitter references as a representation for announcements and the like. I've already tagged the article for good article nomination. Hopefully it will get accepted anytime soon. Thank you again guys! GabbyManahan01 (talk) 16:14, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Claims about highest grossing tours

To clarify my edit, in which I removed the claims that:

  • The Get Weird Tour is the highest grossing UK arena tour of 2016
  • The Glory Days Tour is the highest grossing girl group tour of the 2010s

The origin of the first claim is a May 2016 Digital Spy article which says the group has the biggest UK arena tour of the year thus far. It doesn't say they have the biggest UK arena tour of the entire year, just until May 2016. Somehow, this source was used to make the claim that Little Mix had the highest-grossing UK arena tour of 2016 in an older version of this Wikipedia page, which in turn was parroted by websites that get their information off Wikipedia.

The second claim is also a result of an editor misinterpreting the cited ref. The MTV source says it is the highest-grossing girl group tour from 2009 to 2018 (which in itself is a very arbitrary timeframe that I don't think warrants mention here). Again, this source doesn't claim it the biggest girl group tour of the entire 2010s (which includes more successful 2019 tours like Spice World – 2019 Tour).

Before re-adding such claims in the future, please consider the above points. Bennv123 (talk) 20:42, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Good points.
Also, if there's a source that says Little Mix was the most or highest or biggest something, and other source about other groups contradict it, then we should not give the contradicted source much weight. The applicable policy is WP:CONTEXTMATTERS, in which an obviously wrong "fact" from an otherwise reliable source should not be counted as reliable. Binksternet (talk) 22:38, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Repeated information

Hello, due to the different changes made this week in the biography, I have noticed that information in the description is repeated in the "Awards and achievements" section, such as the ww sales, record of th most weeks spent in the top 40, etc. That said, I think we should reach a consensus on where it is more appropriate for this information to be found to avoid repeat the same info and references.--JudithJunkers (talk) 20:01, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes, this is due to an editor who is repeatedly adding whatever information they can find about the band, regardless of whether the source is good or bad. Personally I am not in favour of filling the lead with lots and lots of statistics... I think this is off-putting to the casual reader to immediately start the article with a wall of stats, and I think only the most important ones should be mentioned here, like the Brit Award win for Best Group and overall sales figures. The lead is supposed to be a summary of the whole article, so the detail should go in the "Awards and achievements" section. Richard3120 (talk) 14:27, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Little Mix/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ArnabSaha (talk · contribs) 18:43, 10 July 2021 (UTC)


  • Article has grammatical issues
  • Many MoS issues. Like WP:ALLCAPS in citations
  • Many portions unsourced like in 3rd para in "History" section, 1st para's last part in "2013–2014" section, in "2013–2014" and other sections. Each and every thing needs to be cited
  • Some contents in Filmography is also unsourced.
  • There is a citation needed tag too
  • Some info mentioned in the lead, not mentioned in body. Lead is the summary of everything in the boady. Also, no need to add citations in lead as per WP:CITELEAD

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far.  Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe  19:33, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:08, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:26, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 August 2021

The image has to be changed Jibin Mathew Biji (talk) 06:48, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. —Sirdog9002 (talk) 06:54, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
The image can only be changed if there is a free image that complies with WP:NFCC. An image that you find on Google or anywhere else online is not free, it belongs to the person who took the photo. If you want to change the image, you will have to get permission from the person who owns the photo, or take one yourself and give Wikipedia the permission to use it freely. Richard3120 (talk) 18:17, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

2021 Brit Award Images are *not* license free photos

Just noticed this while checking the images on Wikimedia Commons. The Brit Award image currently used in the lead is not actually free licensed; the flickr account that it comes from, "Calvin", doesn't seem to actually be the owner of said photo, seemingly taking it from this site which I just found from a reverse image search. There's several copies of this Brit Awards image on commons; can anyone nominate them for deletion? Thanks. shanghai.talk to me 10:19, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

EXTREMELY overcomplicated lead

In all my amateur editing on Wikipedia, I've never seen such a huge unnecessary lead with six paragraphs. Simply, this is too much, you can summarize their achievements without turning it into a lead that is six paragraphs long! Holy crap! Someone please for the love of christ summarize that lead, it is simply too ridiculous. "Pop pills now we Shanghai!"(talk to me!~) 15:31, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Agree 100%, and I said so in a recent edit summary. Basically, there is one editor who seems to think that everything Little Mix have ever done needs to be noted in the lead, however trivial. I think at least a third of it needs to go – MOS:LEAD and MOS:LEADLENGTH state that the lead should be a maximum of four paragraphs. Richard3120 (talk) 16:05, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Also agree. I just had a look at Spice Girls and Destiny's Child as a non-scientific comparison. They are 550 and 370 words each. This article is 993! They can't be more than Spice Girls, that really doesn't make sense. I'm going to be brave and slowly give it a bit of a hair cut.Seaweed (talk) 16:29, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
@Seaweed and Richard3120:, I trimmed the lead significantly, reducing it to four paragraphs instead of the previous lead's six, removing unreliable sources and toning down the amount of puffy adjectives such as "broken numerous records" and "most rich girl group", What are your thoughts? Thanks! shanghai.talk to me 10:09, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
@RogueShanghai: Thank you so much for summarizing the lead. I've been thinking of doing that for a very long time now but never had the time to do it, so thank you so much for doing so. I did a little copy editing and added some information from the article's lead around the time its still stable. The lead is looking better now and less painful to look at 😂. Hoping that the editor who started it would understand. ɢᴀʙʙʏᴍɪx01 10:58, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
I hope so, I'm an editor at Nicki Minaj and it is perfectly possible to summarize your fav's notable achievements while still following MOS, WP, and keeping the lead short and simple. I still think that as of right now, the lead suffers from "List of achievement" issues; where the lead mostly summarizes Little Mix's achievements over summarizing what their music is actually about, (i.e, did this album mark a shift from genre, or sound, or thematic lyrics?) rather than the current wording, like "This album sold xyz, etc."
@GabbyMix01: Also, is a Debrett list really notable enough for addition to the lead? It doesn't seem to be a reliable publication; Forbes and Sunday Times definitely is but I've never heard of Debrett. Would love to hear from you on this, thanks. shanghai.talk to me 11:54, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
@RogueShanghai: Debrett's Peerage is extremely famous, a "who's who" book that has been published for 250 years now, along with other publications on manners and etiquette. However, as the role of the peerage and upper classes in British society has waned, it has moved more into celebrity territory, with lists of the richest/most famous celebs. I'm not sure that these lists carry quite the same weight as the original book. But as for being a reliable publication, absolutely. Richard3120 (talk) 16:53, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi. I didn't know that adding so much information in the leads could be overwhelming for users to read. I read through what I have been doing and I agree it is over overwhelming. I did make some changes to some of your previous edits but i only brought back some achievements because official charts is a reliable source. I remove some of their achievements from the main paragraphs into the "awards and achievements" section because they was already listed there and didn't need to be included twice Rustyleigh (talk) 14:52, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

You seem to be a fan of Little Mix judging from your edit history; that isn't necessarily a bad thing and I think Wikipedia should be edited by all, including fans. However, please do keep in mind our policies on neutrality (WP:NPOV) and verifiability (WP:OR) and try to contribute to the article following these policies. One suggestion I'll make is to change the lead to be less about Little Mix's achievements and more about what they as a girl group is. Take a look at Katy Perry, a featured article. Notice how in the second paragraph in addition to Perry's achievements, the article also talks about *what* her music is about? Such as themes of love and relationships, etc. So try to tone down the achievements, and add to the lead what Little Mix's *music* is about. i.e, did this album talk about mental health or feminism? Since you are a fan of Little Mix you'd surely know what their albums are about. shanghai.talk to me 05:03, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Paragraph Four Rules

Hi can anyone let me know if it's true that on wikipedia you can only use a minimal of four paragraphs in the leads. If so why is that? Rustyleigh (talk) 13:02, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

I said so in the thread above, and I think you mean "maximum" – MOS:LEADLENGTH. The lead is supposed to be a summary of the whole of the text below, it's not supposed to have endless lists of statistics and trivial details which are likely to be of no interest to the casual reader, who will likely be put off if they are faced with a long introduction to the article. Richard3120 (talk) 13:16, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:53, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:08, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:23, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Temporary infobox image

I uploaded a photo of Little Mix as a trio under a non-free use license, for temporary depiction of the group as a trio. Jesy Nelson leaving the band is a notable topic for this article, therefore the infobox image needs to depict the group as a trio, without Nelson. The image is under a non-free use license, hence, it can be used for this article only. This photo is only for the time being since there is no properly licensed photo of the group as a three. Once a properly licensed photo of them as a trio is uploaded, this photo shall be replaced with that one. ɢᴀʙʙʏᴍɪx01 12:49, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Use of non-free content must meet all of the non-free content criteria, and in this particular case, WP:NFCC#1 is not met. The group is an existing one so there is no reason why a free image cannot be created even if one doesn't currently exist. Furthermore, this is an encyclopedia article and not simply current events. As such, the article covers all the lineup iterations of a musical group so the use of a freely licensed photo of the group prior to becoming a trio is perfectly valid for the infobox. -- Whpq (talk) 15:24, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
@Whpq: Hi! I've already added a short explanation of why I believe the file is not replaceable on the file description page, and a full explanation on the file discussion page. Thank you for informing me regarding this matter. ɢᴀʙʙʏᴍɪx01 00:44, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

The image has been deleted. I have restored the previous image. Whpq (talk) 00:29, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

I suppose one possible solution might be to crop Jesy Nelson out of the current photo. Richard3120 (talk) 01:19, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
I think that would be a little misleading. And as I stated above, this is an encyclopedia article and not current events, and so an image of all four is perfectly valid. In fact, considering that the lineup of four is the form of the group for most of their existence, I'd argue that the current image is the best representation for an encyclopedia article. Whpq (talk) 01:46, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Alanna.davis.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:07, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

"Perrie Edwards (British singer)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Perrie Edwards (British singer) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 3#Perrie Edwards (British singer) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. – DarkGlow • 17:20, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 May 2022

Little mix hiatus (for now) 103.162.148.110 (talk) 02:06, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —Sirdog (talk) 02:22, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 May 2022 (2)

change years active from 2011-2020 to 2011-forever 2.25.247.19 (talk) 15:11, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. MadGuy7023 (talk) 15:17, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

July 2022

Typo in the first paragraph but sure make it protected — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.164.135.6 (talk) 01:42, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

What is the typo? Richard3120 (talk) 01:49, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

hello

it says their accolades include 2 brit awards but it’s 3 84.64.216.150 (talk) 04:09, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

It just hadn't been updated in the lead. Richard3120 (talk) 18:05, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Does LM have technically 6 or 5 number one singles?

In 2011 Little Mix was part of a charity single for x factor that went to number one in the UK. Shouldn't that also be included in how many uk number ones the group have had making it a total of six instead of five. Or is there a reason as to why it's not included? Rustyleigh (talk) 10:29, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

The UK Official Charts Company considers Little Mix to have five UK number one singles. Example: [1] and [2]. Bennv123 (talk) 12:53, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

I think it's just five then since Oficial Charts confirm. Kyleselina (talk) 13:56, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Correct - I don't think no. 1 singles by all-star supergroups have ever counted towards the count for individual acts in that supergroup. The Band Aid singles have never counted towards the no. 1s tallies for the individual artists involved in those recordings. Richard3120 (talk) 16:20, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 January 2023

The header picture with the description at the top of the page has the name order incorrect. Included is the example:

Little Mix performing in Leeds during the Confetti Tour in April 2022. From left to right: Jade Thirlwall, Perrie Edwards, and Leigh-Anne Pinnock

It should read - From left to right: Jade Thirlwall, Leigh-Anne Pinnock, and Perrie Edwards

Perrie is on the far right, not in the middle. 208.175.138.96 (talk) 08:52, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Done. --Mvqr (talk) 12:14, 15 January 2023 (UTC)


Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha> tags or {{efn}} templates on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} template or {{notelist}} template (see the help page).

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Little_Mix/Archive_2&oldid=1221517745"