Talk:Karen Carpenter

Context problem?
In the section about her early life it states:

She and Richard made their first recordings in 1965 and 1966. The following year, Karen began dieting. Under a doctor's guidance Karen, who stood 5'5" and weighed 145 pounds, went on the Stillman Diet. She rigorously ate lean foods, drank 8 glasses of water a day, and avoided fatty foods. By September 1975, Karen's weight dropped to 91 pounds.

I have a little problem with this paragraph. Was she dieting on the Stillman Diet from 1967-1975 and lost the 54 lbs over the 8 years? Or did she go on the diet sometime in 1975 to lose the weight? It might be clear to others, but I am a bit confused. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.154.232.44 (talk) 21:43, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Karen went on the Stillman Water Diet in 1966 to 1967. She lost 25 pounds going from 145 to 120. She remained at 120 untill 1974 when she started to diet again and that was the beginning of her slide in to anorexia. Hope that clears that misconception up for you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.198.87.87 (talk) 08:04, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

There's another confusing statement here. Right now, this section contains: "She was 5' 4" (163 cm) in height and before dieting weighed 145 pounds (66 kg; 10 st 5 lb) and afterwards weighed 120 pounds (54 kg; 8 st 8 lb) until 1973, when the Carpenters' career began to take off." The 1973 date might be correct about her dieting, but the band's career took off in 1970. By 1973, they were a well-established, highly successful act.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.170.130.105 (talk) 23:56, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Strange Omission
I think it is odd that this article completely lacks any assessment of her singing by her contemporaries. I mean, isn't that why she was famous to begin with? It was her singing not her anorexia. This article can be summarized as "she was born, sang some songs, made some albums, and died from anorexia". Angry bee (talk) 06:24, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Sounds like it is a fairly good summary then. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.158.61.139 (talk) 14:17, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Sudden introduction of her divorce
I don't know enough about Karen Carpenter to feel comfortable editing this article, but I think her divorce is mentioned too suddenly. We have:
 * After a whirlwind romance, Karen married real estate developer Thomas James Burris on August 31, 1980, in the Crystal Room of the Beverly Hills Hotel.

Then, two paragraphs later, out of the blue, we have her finalizing her divorce!
 * Karen returned to California in November 1982, determined to reinvigorate her career, finalize her divorce and begin a new album with Richard.

No mention of her marriage being in difficulties. No mention of starting divorce proceedings.

Also, the article is inconsistent, calling her Karen sometimes, and Carpenter sometimes. Girlwithgreeneyes (talk) 21:22, 20 August 2011 (UTC)


 * No amount of make-up, big hair and feminine clothes can cover up Ms. Carpenter's acutely masculine body language. She sits and stands with her legs apart always. She slams the drums.  She holds her hands so the palms face toward her.  She rolls her shoulders a little bit. Breedentials (talk) 12:25, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * ...and so? 162.251.16.246 (talk) 04:35, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Marriage and Divorce
in response to another person who mentioned the sudden divorce, I created a new paragraph discussing this. I really hope this does NOT get deleted, I would like to say I spent months reading and researching and studying Karen Carpenter. I am pretty knowledgeable in this topic and every article I've read have said the same story — Preceding unsigned comment added by KarenCarpenterFan (talk • contribs) 02:40, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Your contributions are likely to get deleted because they are not verifiable and because the language used is inclined to contravene Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. Please see Verifiability, Identifying reliable sources and Neutral point of view. If you have read and researched around this subject, then please add your sources when making additions to Wikipedia - you can do this using tags around them. Also please sign your contributions to talk pages using four tildes (~ ), as the Wiki software then automatically inserts your username and time/date. Although I have removed your most recent addition because of the above reasons, if reliable sources can be found, the information can be re-inserted (what you added has not been permanently lost - it is preserved as an old version of the article page, and hence can be retrieved). If you have any questions or need any help, please ask. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 08:45, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Divorce
Karen Carpenter was set to finalize her divorce the day she died. I think the source is here. http://rockstarmartyr.net/february-4-the-death-day-of-karen-carpenter-2/ I am looking for other sites though. Entertainer91 (talk) 08:09, 17 February 2012 (UTC)


 * So: did Thomas Burris get half of her estate (since the divorce hadn't been finalised)? Or did her will prevail? Paul Magnussen (talk) 23:25, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

No, he never inherited any of her money, because Karen revised her will two months prior to their separation to stipulate that in the event of her death, everything would be inherited by Richard and their parents, and according to a 2016 documentary, Tom would only get the house and its contents.203.221.128.210 (talk) 00:38, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Explanation of edit
A recent edit made by myself was reverted by an unregistered editor. The purpose of my edit was to remove hyperbolic language and unreferenced claims. Reverting my edit reinserted these. The following points explain in more detail the rationale behind my edit:
 * "a drummer of exceptional skill" - This is 'peacock language' which goes against Wikipedia policy of adopting a neutral tone (see Wikipedia:Words to watch ), hence I replaced it with "of notable skill", which is supported by the section later in the article.
 * "she is best remembered for her vocal performances of idealistic romantic ballads of true love" - I removed the words "of true love" as they are superfluous ("romantic ballads" conveys their nature sufficiently) and ascribe nothing of meaning (if love needs describing as "true", that implies there must be another kind of love which is "untrue", which is nonsense)
 * "Karen rarely selected the songs she would sing and often felt she had very little control over her life." - I removed this because it is not backed by any reliable source.
 * "The Carpenters signature song is "We've Only Just Begun" which remains a popular wedding ballad." - Again, without a source therefore I removed it.
 * Reference number 14: "Dr. Steven Levenkron who has the pill bottle in his desk at work" - This is not a reliable published source, therefore I removed it.

There are various other amendments I made in a similar vein. The act of reverting my edit resulted in an article which contravenes Wikipedia policies, therefore I have reinstated my changes. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 20:21, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Ancestry
I've removed a repeatedly re-added sentence about Carpenter's ancestry as the source is not a recognised reliable source. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 12:34, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I support this removal. --John (talk) 12:47, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Tribute sites
I corrected the two links to tribute sites which were not working, but I wonder if these sites should be there, since Wiki is not a "link farm", as some people say. Maybe they should be deleted. What about a link to her singing a song on YouTube, ie Ave Maria? Anyone have any views?

Sardaka (talk) 10:27, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

This is for those who are looking for a place to discuss anything related to Karen Carpenter. this group is like a family and the core of the group has been together since 2003 from the old Carpenters Online forum: https://www.facebook.com/groups/321040037161/ rickhenry

"After Death" paragraph
Shouldn't it be more appropriately (and in line with Wikipedia custom) called "Legacy"? "After death" seems macabre, makes it sound like she came back from the dead or something. Kumagoro-42 02:37, 15 March 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kumagoro-42 (talk • contribs)

This new "cause of death" category has to be reconsidered as well. Do we really need two paragraphs on some obscure medical controversy over Ipecac? The cause of death has already been sufficiently established and explained. I move to strike the entire section as irrelevant and off topic. In other words, it adds nothing of value to the biography of Karen Carpenter. SamJohn2013 (talk) 00:37, 5 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Having come back to this article a couple years later (and based on the additions I made by the time of the revision to 'Cause of death', 'Funeral and burial', etc., https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Karen_Carpenter&oldid=665589208 ) I absolutely disagree. There was a reason I put as much time into those sections as I did, and cited it mercilessly. Karen Carpenter was one of *the* first people who had a widely published cause of death amounting to 'anorexia', and the specifics of why she died particular to Ipecac-or-not-ipecac were a national news item - and controversy - for years (this is why all the citations over years, so it didn't simply come across as excessive). Her life as a singer was significant, and so was her death as an anorexic (and the mechanism of how it happened). This article can't open with what she died of, not to mention the cited sentence 'Carpenter's death led to increased visibility and awareness of eating disorders', and then also have the claim made that the cause of death discussion "adds nothing" to the article, IMHO. I think a lot of what was in the article as of the above revision should be re-added. Skybunny (talk) 20:52, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Vocal range
"She had a contralto vocal range" is simply the wrong syntax in terms of professional voice classification. You do not have a "soprano", "alto", or "contralto" range. You ARE a soprano, alto or contralto. Your range is a specific series of notes, irrespective of your voice classification (in this case, contralto, which is still arguable). This needs to be removed. Her voice should speak for itself, especially since classical voice types are never applicable in popular music. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CEB1:9BE0:C124:4254:98E:9C11 (talk) 04:11, 3 November 2015 (UTC)


 * The last statement is debatable. Voice types are used in popular music, whether people think them applicable or not. I have seen Anni-Frid Lyngstad describe herself as mezzo-soprano and Agnetha Fältskog as soprano. I have seen Jimmy Somerville described as alto. With regards to Karen Carpenter, to randomly select a couple of googled articles, this New York Times article describes her voice as "deep contralto", and this Rolling Stone list describes her as having a "chocolate-and-cream alto voice". PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 05:44, 3 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Besides which—-we have absolutely no idea in the world what her operatic range was. Those terms are based purely on operatic singing and cannot be applied to pop or rock or even jazz singing. So to call her a contralto is a merely supposition. More than likely, she was a mezzo soprano with a wider lower range. Listen to Close to You and tell me she was a contralto. Pookerella (talk) 18:17, 4 February 2020 (UTC)


 * The last comment in this thread was four years ago; since then the article has been comprehensively rewritten and improved to good article status. It now says simply "contralto" and cites Randy Schmitz's biography and Modern Drummer. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  18:32, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Guitar?
In the "Music career" section it says that she played "bass guitar" (aka electric bass) but then it says that "her guitar playing is heard on the original album(s)". So which is it bass or guitar or both? ---Dagme (talk) 01:33, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

The section also says that Richard Carpenter substituted Joe Osborne (sic) for Karen in the above referenced "guitar" lines. It appears to me that the reference is to Joe Osborn, a bass player associated with the carpenters. So most likely it should be bass, not guitar, and the "e" should be removed from the end of Osborn's name. I hope that some expert will step forward and make the required corrections. ---Dagme (talk) 01:40, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Here's a link to a photograph of Karen Carpenter playing the electric bass guitar. http://leadsister.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/stewart-6-1024x655.jpg You can see it for yourself. There are probably no other photos, or film, of Karen playing the guitar. 72.224.127.146 (talk) 01:26, 28 September 2016 (UTC) Bennett Turk 72.224.127.146 (talk) 01:26, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Does not appear to be a photograph, seems like created artwork.-- &#9790;Loriendrew&#9789;  &#9743;(ring-ring)  01:33, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Nope, it's doctored artwork. If it was a real photograph, it would be in a studio environment with headphones - I don't believe she ever played bass live. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  20:47, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Karen did not play bass live, however, she did play the bass guitar on two Carpenter's songs featured on the album; Offerings/Ticket to Ride and the two songs were All of My Life and Eve. This is plenty of references that prove she did play the guitar on the songs.2604:6000:E287:E900:4CC0:8D1F:7444:E226 (talk) 22:57, 23 September 2017 (UTC)Bennett Turk

WP:SURNAME
There is no need to specify it was "Karen Carpenter's funeral" at the start of the 5th paragraph of the 'Health and death' section, because the previous line states "She was pronounced dead at a nearby hospital at 9:51 a.m". Thus just "Carpenter's funeral" will suffice. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 00:09, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Your actions are both hasty and inappropriate. One day on the talk page does not indicate a "no response."

The correct response is clearly stated in the Wikipedia: Manual of Style/ Biographies, Section 2.2.2, People with the same surname.

"To distinguish between people with the same surname in the same article or page, use given names or complete names to refer to each of the people upon first mention. For subsequent uses, refer to them by their given names for clarity and brevity."

Examples are given which clearly illustrate the principle, and in this case there is no doubt of the possible confusion of Karen and Richard, being as they are inseparably linked as "The Carpenters." The sentence is given the gravity and importance that it deserves, while just "Carpenter" is crude and disrespectful. And if one were to strictly adhere to editorial policy, the name Karen would be used even more frequently in the text.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Biographies#People_with_the_same_surname

SamJohn2013 (talk) 03:39, 11 October 2017 (UTC)


 * You may view my actions as hasty and inappropriate, but I do not. I waited nearly 48 hours before reverting, and I made sure to wait until you had edited again. You only quote part of the relevant MOS text; the subsequent sentences make it clear that just the use of the surname is preferred: "To distinguish between people with the same surname in the same article or page, use given names or complete names to refer to each of the people upon first mention. For subsequent uses, refer to them by their given names for clarity and brevity. When referring to the person who is the subject of the article, use just the surname unless the reference is part of a list of family members or if use of the surname alone will be confusing. While citations and bibliographies should use full names even in subsequent mentions (if full names are the style for citations and bibliographies in the article), the body of an article should not unless confusion could result." PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 07:48, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

It seems our point of dispute here is whether or not Karen, as one of "The Carpenters" (both band and family) is to be considered a special case. I have expressed my reasons why the given name is better in this particular sentence. "Carpenter" is used almost exclusively throughout the article, her death must be made personal to her: "Karen Carpenter died" sounds so much better than "Carpenter died." Especially when, in the very next sentence, we are faced with such absurdities as "Newton-John, Clark and Warwick."

Editing for style requires so much much more than an eye for bad copy. It requires an ear: for dissonance, for tone, repetition and flow. It should strive to hold the listener's attention and interest as well as the reader's. Let us never forget that the written word is merely the sheet music for our language. It is obvious you disagree, but we must allow other interested editors to examine the context themselves. I know you are trying to maintain the pure encyclopedic tone, but in an article like this, some emotion and human feeling must be allowed. I am certainly not advocating that given names be used frequently in the text. This is a rarely seen combination (and possible confusion) of a family name with an entertainment "brand name." I move that the exception be granted.

Lastly, it would seem to me that at least 2-3 weeks on the talk page would be necessary for discussion until a final change is made. SamJohn2013 (talk) 14:56, 11 October 2017 (UTC)


 * You are correct that my motivation is to adhere to the MOS. The MOS should be adhered to because it provides a means for avoiding dispute; its guidelines have been constructed as a result of lots of discussion on the MOS talkpage. By requesting that the MOS be overturned, you would need to show that the MOS is deficient in this instance. I am unconvinced. I do not consider the statement "Carpenter's funeral..." to be disrespectful; it is just a statement of fact. Incidentally, I agree that the "Newton-John, Clark and Warwick" description is, to me personally, not ideal - principally because I have to pause to remind myself who they are - but I think it is still compliant with the MOS. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 15:24, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Possible cause of her Anorexia Nervosa
New research shows that women who were born in the spring were many times more likely to develop anorexia. As this study shows, the worst month is March, which is when she was born.

Pubmed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3093677/ Psychology Today: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/evolutionary-psychiatry/201107/season-birth-and-anorexia