Talk:Celebrity

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians, Oh yeah, it a party! WHOOP WHOOP! Raise the roof! Yay! 🦄⭐🍦😎😊 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.219.188.221 (talk) 06:47, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

I have just modified 7 external links on Celebrity. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.news1130.com/news/local/article/304123--western-world-kids-want-to-grow-up-to-be-famous
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.divinecaroline.com/50616/110803-odds-becoming-youtube-celebrity
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cumberlandminorhockey.ca/to_the_nhl/chances.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://archives.citypaper.net/articles/2009/06/18/what-does-it-take-to-make-the-nba
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2007906/From-model-mogul-Martha-Stewarts-1956-Unilever-ad-resurfaces-domestic-diva-remembers-kick-starting-career-vogue.html%3D
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131104035133/http://weird.answers.com/facts/interesting-facts-about-retired-basketball-player-earvin-magic-johnson-jr to http://weird.answers.com/facts/interesting-facts-about-retired-basketball-player-earvin-magic-johnson-jr
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.forbes.com/2008/07/22/stars-biz-successful-forbeslife-cx_dp_0722style_2.html%3D

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:12, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Superstar into Celebrity
These terms describe the same topic. Therefore they should be covered in the same article. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  06:06, 28 May 2021 (UTC)


 * I agree, though there's some content at Superstar that should go elsewhere. e.g. the section on "Superstar" art museums should probably be merged into art museum (assuming it's considered sufficiently noteworthy and reasonably well-sourced). Overall, I think Superstar has a major WP:NAD problem, which causes it to spread itself thin over a number of topics that are only superficially related (including major celebrities, people who are exceptionally successful in any field, art museums, CEO compensation, and superstar as a word). Colin M (talk) 17:42, 28 May 2021 (UTC)


 * I disagree. I know this debate has stalled, but i think it is good to separate a true "star" from a mere celebrity (to where star (person) redirects. I suggest that a person may have celebrity within a limited field, but a "star" will have more widespread and lasting appeal. Likewise, a Michael Jackson or a Robin Williams is a bigger "star", say, than a Johnny Carson. So let's keep Superstar, and perhaps create a category for Star (person) as well. Verne Equinox (talk) 23:56, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree that there are shades of difference in meaning between star and celebrity, but that doesn't necessarily mean they need to be treated in separate articles. There are differences in meaning of nude and naked, but they redirect to the same article. I think it ultimately comes down to sources. Do sources consistently distinguish between "star" and "celebrity"? Are there many sources that exclusively deal with one concept and not the other? I would say the answer is "no". Colin M (talk) 18:36, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose, on the grounds that Superstar is an independently notable subset of Celebrity, and readers are best served by covering the topics separately. My view is that the current structure works. Klbrain (talk) 11:18, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. A superstar has a much higher status than a run-of-the-mill celebrity. Michael Jordan is the former, Sasha Vujačić the latter. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:05, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi there
It's ok to be a good morning and good morning and good morning I am not able to do it and you are not able to do it and I am not able to do it and you are not able to do it 🤣 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4073:4D84:EAB6:90A9:566A:3791:A94E (talk) 18:35, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Jannat zubair rahmani
How are you didi — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.225.76.57 (talk) 11:24, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

レイチェル・クルーズ純資産
レイチェル・クルーズ純資産   レイチェル・クルーズ（純資産） レイチェル・クルーズは、金融トピックの作家および講師としてよく知られており、業界で有名になりました. 彼女は、2021 年にはベストセラー作家のリストに入るだろうと述べた. 1988 年 4 月 4 日、米国テネシー州で、レイチェル・クルーズがこの世界に登場しました. 彼女は愛情深い両親と2人の兄妹によって育てられた3人の子供のうちの1人でした. クルーズ氏は、個人金融に関する講演者および著者として名を馳せています. 彼女は現在、配偶者とともにテネシー州フランクリンに住んでいます.

彼もチェックしてください ハリー・コニック・ジュニア純資産 IanScott11122 (talk) 06:14, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 June 2023
{{subst:trim|1=

I am requesting an edit to this page.


 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg 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. M.Bitton (talk) 17:25, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Needs link to celebrity culture article
There is not even one mention of the celebrity culture article on this page. Which rightfully should be worked in (at least) at the very top of the lead (to lay out and define the term)...ideally as early as the 2nd sentence.

Which term embraces the proliferation of celebrity and the obsession with it that has galloped with new technologies (the Internet, the smartphone (and its amateur-generated pictures and videos wildly outpacing the output of the professional paparazzi), social media (as itself, as a platform for advancing celebrity, and as a source datamined every day for reposting pictures, video, sightings, etc., from it in mainstream media), and celebrity-based media itself (such a "E!", "TMZ", "Page 6" "POPSUGAR", and countless others), in the new millennium.

Which introduction could use a more alive and "depictive" definition than the prosaic "Celebrity culture is a high-volume exposure to celebrities' personal lives on a global scale" the celebrity culture article begins with (which scarcely captures what it is).

I can't introduce the content here: the page is blocked to unregistered users. But the need for it obviously begs. Who can step up to make this improvement? 2601:196:180:DC0:9C7F:40DD:5C45:641C (talk) 15:54, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Needs link to cult of celebrity article
Per the above, there is not even one mention of the cult of celebrity article on this page. Which likewise rightfully should be worked in (at least) in the lead (to lay out and define the term, which is a subset of celebrity culture, the latter an important subset of "celebrity").

The "cult of celebrity" is both a function  of and response  to "celebrity culture". And indeed is a very important dynamic in 21st century media and culture (not so nearly narrow as someone attaining their "15 seconds of fame" as it is overly proscribed at that page).

It is (well, of course should be) impossible for an article on "celebrity" not to even once mention the "cult of celebrity" (however defined). The closest the current content gets is a brief (unlinked, even) mention of the concept of the "cult of personality" tracing to "the Romantics of the 18th century".

That's it. Zip.

For something that has (again) both spawned, fueled, and expanded (via boomerang back to itself) reality TV...("The Kardashians"? "Real Housewives of New Jersey".  "Dancing With the Stars".  "Top Chef"...), and is absolutely an exploding aspect of the culture of celebrity which is coming to evermore drive 21st century life, media, "culture".

I can't introduce the content here: the page is blocked to unregistered users. But the need for it obviously begs. Who can step up to make this improvement? 2601:196:180:DC0:9C7F:40DD:5C45:641C (talk) 15:54, 24 January 2024 (UTC)