Talk:Mariah Carey/Archive 4

PICTURE
Will someone PLEASE for Christ's sake post a recent and RELEVANT picture of Mariah Carey already? She is a current artist so there is utterly no need to have a 10 year old picture of her. It's like having a 10 year old picture of the World Trade Center Towers saying "This is what they look like"... whoops? It needs to be changed.--The Knowledge (talk) 10:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Um... I agree, but you might want to actually look at the World Trade Center article before you make that kind of argument again. Gorman (talk) 02:52, 11 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.56.68.37 (talk)

Voice section
I know you people want all perspectives, but including that she doesn't portray emotion has nothing to do with her voice. A voice section would discuss her vocal abilities, not "emotion" of songs. Her songs are not her voice.Wcwnwo20 (talk)

Picture change AGAIN?
What was wrong with the picture that was published 10 minutes ago from Mariah's pent-house? It depicted what she looks like(she saly wheres less). The current picture doesn't even depict what she did look like, let alone what she does now.

Glitter CD
In this articles it states that Glitter (the CD) "... generated Carey's worst showing on the U.S. chart." Although this is true, it fails to mention that this was just a soundtrack, and was not a "Mariah Carey" album, as Carey made clear in an interview with John Norris on MTV's Shining Through the Rain special in 2002. As a soundtrack, the album did fairly well on the charts. Wcwnwo20 (talk)

MC and Tommy Split in 97, not in 96
Although Mariah did began secretly seeing Jeter in 96, her and Tommy did not split up until 97, followed by their divorce in 98. This is reported on every website I've ever seen. Here is one of many sources proving that: http://www.people.com/people/mariah_carey/biography Wcwnwo20 (talk) 07:58, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Rumored Death
Has anybody heard a rumor about Mariah Carey dying in a airplane accident?? It was on the radio this morning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.107.65.243 (talk) 22:01, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Wcwnwo20 (talk)No, and this is not true. She was photographed and video recorded at a New Year's Eve party, and was recently photographed in St. Barths with her new dog. —Preceding comment was added at 11:44, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Pls change DOB back 2 27 mar 69
some1 changed her birthyear. She was born in 69.

No she was not. AOL mistankily reported that in 2003, and it spread to some other sites, but she was in fact born in 70.

Illusions: The Butterfly Within
A source is from www.hmv.com

STOP inserting this fake album title in Mariah Carey's discography.

Comment by NotGonnaTellYouMyName
What the HELL? That's a terrible picture of her! The people who run Wikipedia should really get their panties straight with changing articles because the users know what their doing.


 * The users *are* the people who run Wikipedia. Get the facts right! Do you really think that some mysterious cabal edits/creates all these articles? :) Achitnis 08:32, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I changed the picture to a picture taken of her at the MTV Awards. Lets see how long it takes for some evil spirit to change it back to that 1998 image.75.66.21.108 23:43, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

It never fails, that picture is back. Looks like I'm going to have to fight the person who keeps putting that picture up.75.66.21.108 23:43, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

uh okay Mariah's still the bomb —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.228.114.251 (talk) 06:14, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

-I really like the new photo from her penthouse :)

RE: Range
Theres a source on youtube aswell as other places thats claims mariah has 4 octaves —Preceding unsigned comment added by Judous (talk • contribs) 10:34, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Range
Shouldn't her vocal range be listed as 4.5 octaves instead of just 4? i say this because her range 9that we know of thus far) goes from Eb3 (aka D3 sharp) to A7 flat (aka G7 sharp). That is 5.5 octaves of range. I think that we could be a little more accurate. Does anyone agree with me? Or should we just leave it as is?

---AGREED ... we have both her highest and lowest notes recorded. Mariah has only sung 4 octaves on her CDs, but has sung both higher and lower in live performances.

C8?
There have been rumors that Mariah has hit a C8 in one of her recordings. I've never heard it and it seems a little far-fetched. Could someone verify whether this is true or not? Also, I've heard Mariah sing as low as E2 but not D#2 (though in Emotions, she could've hit that note). Tell when she hit a D#2 and I'll check it out.

Human voices may be classified according to their vocal range — the highest and lowest pitches that they can produce. For this reason, it is important to clearly define what is meant when discussing a vocal range. For example, one might say of a man that he has a two and one-half octave range in full voice and an additional one half octave in falsetto. Similarly, when discussing the range of a woman one might say that she has a "useful" two octave range with an additional major third on the bottom that is only audible with amplification.

Unfortunately, THERE IS NO STANDARDIZATION in this nomenclature outside of classical unamplified singing. Thus, Mariah's 5/7/8 octave range is not systematically justified! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ewan20s (talk • contribs) 20:35, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

COME ON, NOW!
This image is no longer representative of what Mariah Carey looks like - nevermind just HOW fugly she looks there. Many fans have, undoubtedly, taken high-quality photos of her during the Adventures of Mimi tour - soo, such an image (dubbed free-use) is a viable replacement for the current one. Yes? If so, could someone please go about that? Whoever uploaded the standing image is adament that theirs remain - I'm fine with that, so long as it's not at the top. : P

Okay, and still no such change - there are tons of clear, hi-res photos taken this past summer by concertgoers. An image conceived under those circumstances constitutes a description of "free-use, can replace the reigning (and fugly) photo." So, um - someone do it! 67.85.178.227 17:29, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Main Picture
Why is there a picture from 1999 as her main picture? that should be changed. PrincessOfHearts 14:58, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Because that's the only free image we have. See Image use policy. Mushroom (Talk) 15:04, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


 * (216.99.50.80 01:39, 13 September 2006 (UTC))

Actually, the picture dates from December 1998 ;-) Look at the picture details.  IMHO she was very very attractive back then .... 88.108.32.242 18:19, 13 September 2006 (UTC)AF

That picture is real ugly of her....she looks WAY better than that picture!! - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.162.74.108 (talk • contribs) i agree that isnt a very good picture PrincessOfHearts 20:00, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

At one point, there was a next picture of Mimi's Concert in this position. Can it or a better picture of her be placed here please.....(Beyonce's picture looks good...why can't Mimi's??)24.162.74.108 03:20, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Blueandgold200

DO NOT DELETE THE IMAGE I HAVE UPLOADED. Is is the Single cover of Mariah Carey's "Love Takes Time." From what I understand we are aloud to uplode album covers and/or singles. Album covers and single covers can be found on just about any musical artist's article even Mariah's. So, pleas do not delete it.

Thank You!

Also, if wikipedia is open for everyone to edit, no one has the right to tell us editors that we are not aloud to upload any other images other than the one on Mariah's article. Don't go looking for what i just said, because i deleted it. It was when you went to go edit the article.

Thank You again!


 * You understand wrong. Next time try reading the embedded note about fair use images. CovenantD 02:42, 9 November 2006 ( —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.72.157.217 (talk • contribs).
 * Calm down&mdash;the debate over fair use on Wikipedia and on this page in particular has been going on for years; it's not something that can be understood perfectly in five minutes. In any case, an album cover is fair use.  We are allowed to use fair use images in certain situations, but not everywhere.  Thus, an album cover image can be used to illustrate the article on the album, but it cannot be used to illustrate another article, even this one.  In general, the same is true of magazine covers and book covers. --Spangineerws  (háblame)  16:26, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

In that case, if we are aloud to use fair use images in certain places, then a picture taken of mariah to showcase HER as in artist can be used to illustrate HER on the main page of HER article. And, whoever this person is that keeps deleting all the images to replace them with his, lay off of it. People are tired of seeing your image and your threats about fair use images when we can use them at certain times and certain guidlines. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.72.145.244 (talk • contribs).


 * Unfortunately, you're arguing against Wikipedia policy. Please see WP:FU, point one.  We have a perfectly acceptable free-use image; thus, fair use is not permitted.  That's just the way it is.  Please stop replacing the image; if you continue to break Wikipedia policy, you will be blocked. --Spangineerws  (háblame)  02:54, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

But, if you said that we are aloud to use an album picture to illustrate and article about the particular album, then we are aloud to use a picture of an artist to illustrate the article of that particular artist. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Violinist1 (talk • contribs).


 * No; it's more complicated than that. Part of the rationale of "fair use" is that there's no replacement image available, and that you're not going threaten anyone's livelihood by distributing the image.  So with an album, there's no meaningful way to represent the album with any image other than the album cover.  Furthermore, you're not making it less likely that people will buy the album (who buys an album for the cover art?).  Promotional material is different, because it is created by a professional whose livelihood depends on proceeds from images.  And besides, free alternatives are available (like the one produced by the US government in this article).  --Spangineerws  (háblame)  03:33, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay, that makes more sense, thank you for explaining that. Also, i got your message, and I think that maybe the encoded message involving the changing of the image should be deleted because anyone could find an image that fits the guidlines of the policy.

-Thank You

I changed the picture so don't change it unless you have a better picture.

WHAT WAS WRONG WITH THE PICTURE I ADDED??? IT WAS A PICTURE YALL USED FOR HER NOT TO LONG AGO!!!!!!

PLEASE change the current main picture..maybe use one from her tour or a free one from her website..anything...just change it!! (Trent Jones 17:16, 29 December 2006 (UTC))

Ok so I edited this photo of Mariah from her The Adventures Of Mimi tour, I think that this would suit the main page better than the current photo: http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/9907/taom3hf3.jpg Feel free to use that link if you like it. --Cornyperson 22:42, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Can't Take That Away
Can't Take That Away did not charted with Crybaby. I remember seeing the Billboard Chart Rewind about a year ago on billboard.com and Crybaby debuted at 28 without Can't Take That Away.

Charmed36 3 September 2006   (UTC)

we need a RECENT ONE! - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.210.114.195 (talk • contribs)

Grammy Wins
I think musicians who win Grammies, especially multiple Grammies, should have that honor mentioned prominently in any biography written about them. It's akin to mentioning the fact that someone in the film industry won an Oscar. The Grammies are considered by most to be the premier award in the music industry, since it is recognition by their peers and not solely on commercial success. A Grammy is a Grammy is a Grammy.

tpetross 17:19, 5 September 2006   (UTC)


 * The problem is that it's misleading in this case. For a musician of her sales and chart accomplishments, Carey has done poorly at the Grammies. Even "We Belong Together", a super smash and critically praised, lost all the major categories last year (unfairly, in my view).  If you're thinking about all the most important things to say about Carey, which is what the intro is doing, the few minor Grammies she's won is not high on the list.   Wasted Time R 16:56, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Also, this question has been discussed several times before, look above. Wasted Time R 16:59, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I had already read the posts above and disagree with the arguments made against inclusion. This has nothing to do with NPOV, but rather that it is a standard practice to mention such things in most academic publications. I will concede that perhaps the Grammy wins should not be mentioned in the first sentence. However, I believe some mention of her Grammy wins and nominations should be placed in the introduction section. The fact that she has received 5 wins and 31 nominations, I feel, is pretty significant in the big picture. One of those wins was for Best New Artist in 1991, which is a major category. As I stated before, I can perhaps agree with your assertion of poor placement choice, but I do not agree with outright exclusion.

tpetross 19:48, 5 September 2006  (UTC)


 * Which "academic publications" talk about Mariah Carey, please let me know! Anyway, if you added at the end of the intro, "Carey won the Grammy Award for Best New Artist in 1991; since that time, she has been nominated for Grammies 31 times and won 5", I'd be ok with that.   Wasted Time R 19:07, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

First of all, I wasn't specifically referring to Mariah Carey. Obviously, scientific and educational publications would not have information regarding Carey's achievements--I'm not delusional. I was simply meaning respected, "academic" (in the sense that people study, analyze, and discuss in an intelligent, categorical, and historical context) sources of information regarding the entertainment industry will traditionally (not always) mention such accomplishments as a featured achievement of the recipient's career. This is something that seems to be afforded to other artists such as Christina Aguilera, Justin Timberlake, Aretha Franklin, Stevie Wonder, Beyonce, etc. on their respective pages as well as in other biographies.


 * I think the Timberlake usage is wrong too. For someone like Stevie Wonder, who holds Grammy records and who won the major Album of the Year award three times in four years during his classic period, the usage is very appropriate.  Wasted Time R 19:54, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

In the end, I do realize that the Grammy Awards (like any awards program) have their own biases and politics. People are nominated and awarded (or dissed) for varying reasons, and as you pointed out, maybe she has been unfairly treated by the Academy, which is hardly the point. The point is, if it's good enough to mention for any of the aforementioned artists with comparable skills and musical styles, it's good enough for Carey.

The agreed upon changes will be made as you suggested. Please let me know what you think.

tpetross 20:27, 5 September 2006  (UTC)


 * Lead sections "should provide an overview of the main points the article will make" (per Lead section), and Carey's Grammy Awards history is far from a "main point" in the article. If other articles have similar introductions, then they shouldn't unless their Grammy history is particularly notable in some way (i.e. they have a record number of wins or nominations). There are over a hundred Grammy Award categories (some of which are for entire albums, in which case you have about a dozen people winning in one category), and they're handed out each year. We need to analyse this sort of thing on a case-by-case basis. Extraordinary Machine 20:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * This is an encyclopedia, which is supposed to summarize the primary information. The Grammy history is very notable, because it is the highest honour a musician can receive. How is this not notable? The argument that there are over one-hundred categories is correct, but not significant. Also, a dozen people do not win in a single category. A record number of nominations or wins is peculiar; why does the musician have to be "special" to indicate their Grammy Awards' win? Carey may be very successful in the sales component, but even though her critical reception has never been overwhelming, it doesn't seem like a good reason to ignore this. We wouldn't ignore Alicia Keys nine Grammy Awards, would we? She doesn't hold a record for nominations or wins. This is virtually the same situation. Oh, and no one said that it had to be in the lead section. It could be moved to the position it was before, which was fairly appropriate, in my opinion. 64.231.115.150 22:58, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Keys has won 9 Grammys in a short career, including a major one (Song of the Year), while Carey has won fewer Grammys in a much longer career, including no majors. That's a real difference.   Wasted Time R 00:50, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Above IP user is, who recently ran into conflict with me and was banned from the Cool (song) article, over which he attemped to claim ownership, after he caused disruption in violation of the ArbCom ruling on him (see Requests for arbitration/Eternal Equinox). The timing of the above comment leads me to suspect it was written more with the intention of antagonising me than anything to do with the article; regardless, I agree with Wasted Time R: it's not just whether she's won any or how many, but in which categories. Extraordinary Machine 21:49, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
 * That above user has had this discussion with you as far back as April (long before any RFAr). This is not antagonizing you since we've had prolonged conversations regarding the topic. Also, it is nobody's business whether an RFAr was held or not; do you want me to begin adding comments about you in my edits? No. But anyway, Wasted Time R does have a point concerning Keys career, which has been fairly critically-raved even though her commercial success has not. A fair argument, so perhaps the Grammy Award-mention should be added at a later date or if Carey eventually receives more than ten Grammys. I'm not sure, these are just suggestions. We will see later on. 64.231.152.103 19:44, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I say her Grammy wins should be mentioned in the beginning, as with any artist, because that is the highest honor given in music. The fact that Carey hasn't won that many Grammies compared to her nominations, should not mean they will not be mentioned in the early stages of the article. The fact she won ANY is a major accomplishment. So it should be mentioned early because its still a Grammy, whether she won one or sixteen. You can't downplay the award just because you feel she should have won more.

Anticipating vandalism
Seeing that some people don't like to see some topics as the FAOTD (like Bulbasaur, Lindsay Lohan and KaDee Strickland), I think this article should be semi-protected. --Radio gaga 18:09, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
 * No Raul654 01:18, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * We gotta protect it now! There is Vandalism like ive never seen before!Cameron Nedland 01:57, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I've asked for semi-protection. Many IP vandals! Nfitz 05:05, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay it's much better now, but I'm still worried what will happen.Cameron Nedland 13:25, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Whats the FAOTD? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dappled Sage (talk • contribs) 22:00, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

8 Octaves? Impossible
No human can have an 8 octave voice.

8 octaves is the full range of a grand piano. meaning Barry White style notes on one side, and Mariah's whistle notes on the other. this is beyong human capacity —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.74.68.235 (talk • contribs) 01:14, 13 September 2006.


 * I agree. Could someone check that source, please? --Fang Aili talk 03:40, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Here is a snopes.com article stating that she doesn't even have a 7 octave voice. http://www.snopes.com/music/artists/carey.htm

--Dudepal talk


 * There aren't even 8 octaves on a piano. --Fang Aili talk 13:00, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Although some pianos have 8 octaves. ThisIsMyName 13:51, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * No modern-day pianos do. --Fang Aili talk 16:26, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * An 88-key piano has 7 octaves and four semitones (88 keys divided by 12 chromatic notes per octave). -- User:Malber (talk • contribs) 17:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't see how an erroneous 8-octave assertion is encyclopedic. The fact that somebody thinks that Carey can sing in a range beyond human hearing is not relevant. --Fang Aili talk 16:26, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * What we here are claiming about Carey's vocal range, the octaves in a piano etc. is neither here nor there; while conducting research and compiling references for this article, I came across conflicting reports from seemingly reputable sources about the number of octaves in Carey's vocal range. Carey herself has said she doesn't know what her vocal range is. So, because it's a subject of so much discussion, and because so many reliable sources I've read say she has more than five octaves, I think this is worth mentioning, but I've added "erroneously" to the sentence and a citation to the Snopes.com page. Extraordinary Machine 16:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * She barely has a 5 octave range. It's not impossible to have an 8 octave range which is currently the guiness world record for largest vocal range held by Georgia Brown. G2-G10 is her range but I've only heard G2 since her G10 is actually able to be heard and sounds more like a B8 or B9. Nicola Sedda actually has the largest vocal range that I know of which I only remember his highest as A9. The fact is that Mariah has only displayed a range of Bb2-G#7 which is very close to a full 5 octaves. Bb2 has only been displayed in an interview and G#7 has been hit twice in live performances of Emotions and seemed fairly easily done. Besides Bb2 she has hit C3 numerous times. Emotions, My All, You And I(live performance), and other songs have C3 as their lovest. Besides G#7, F#7 is her highest in the studio version of All In Your Mind. Myke 20:31, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

It should be noted that a human being can have an 8 octave voice. Gerogia Brown has an 8 octave voice as stated in the Guiness World Records. However, Mariah does not have such a broad range, rather she has a 7 octave range, this was credited her in the 2003 Wolrd Music Awards, and based on what is taught in the study of her music through classical. This can be heard from her highest notes in 1993 Emotions performance where she hit G#7 and her lowest notes in My All and in All In Your Mind.

I have listed her proper vocal range on her page for everyone to see and discuss, please do not delete my information unless you can provide an even more detailed explaination because it took me a long time to source that content. (Trent Jones 17:18, 29 December 2006 (UTC))


 * Please, people, we don't need a tuner! If a reliable source says she hit B2 in "My All" or whatever, we can include it, but message board posts and mirrors/forks of Wikipedia aren't either. But who cares about this level of detail in this article anyway? Maybe it could be included in the articles on the songs, but saying most sources state she has a five-octave vocal range should be enough here. Thoughts? Extraordinary Machine 00:19, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I have found a reliable source that provides her proper vocal range with the notes included. It is unbiased and the site has already been verified by wikipedia. IF you choose to edit this info please tell me why. (Trent Jones 16:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC))


 * http://www.blinkbits.com/bits/viewtopic/mariah_carey_wikipedia?t=274273 is a copy of a previous version of this Wikipedia article; it says so at the top ("Shared by wikipedia on Sep 09, 2005 9:33 am"). This introduces a circular reference, which is unacceptable. Please cite reliable, external sources. Extraordinary Machine 16:30, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Since it seems almost impossible for anyone to edit this pahe and include fresh information, will Extraordinary Machine please insert the necessary statisics relating to Mariah Carey's voice. Many individuals visit this website looking for data relating to her existing vocal range, seeing that it is so rare, and this information has not yet been posted on this site. An encyclopedia should be precise and complete, without loopholes and voids. (Trent Jones 22:56, 31 December 2006 (UTC))


 * It's not impossible to "include fresh information", but any editor can remove information that isn't referenced or can't be verified. Dozens of editors have been inserting vocal range and highest/lowest note information into this article for ages, and none of them have cited reliable sources; if there are no reliable sources that report these so-called "necessary statisics [sic]", it may tell you something about how notable such statistics are (i.e. not very). An encyclopedia should be comprehensive and "without loopholes and voids", yes, but it should also act as a summary of significant information, not a "complete" repository. I feel that, in it's current state, the article clearly establishes the Carey's vocal ability - and why she is famous for it - without delving into details such as what note she reaches in "My All" or during which performances of "Emotions" she hit G#7. Too much information is a great way of hiding what's actually relevant. Extraordinary Machine 16:57, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Human voices may be classified according to their vocal range — the highest and lowest pitches that they can produce. For this reason, it is important to clearly define what is meant when discussing a vocal range. For example, one might say of a man that he has a two and one-half octave range in full voice and an additional one half octave in falsetto. Similarly, when discussing the range of a woman one might say that she has a "useful" two octave range with an additional major third on the bottom that is only audible with amplification. Unfortunately, THERE IS NO STANDARDIZATION in this nomenclature outside of classical unamplified singing. Thus, Mariah's 5/6/7/8- octave range is not systematically justified! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ewan20s (talk • contribs) 20:38, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Mariah's full name?
This edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mariah_Carey&oldid=75425523) has Mariah's middle names as "James". I wasn't sure about this so I did a google search of "Mariah James Carey" and got no matches. Can someone verify if her middle name is indeed "James"? Karma Thief 02:41, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * That isn't her middle name. Mariah has stated in several interviews that she has no middle name.  --musicpvm 04:30, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism to Mariah's Name
okay someone changed all of Mariah's last name Carey into Doodlejesus ... i'm trying to fix this but i'm not proficient in it. please bear with me. Axistence 04:12, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Forefront?
The lead states that she "returned to the forefront of popular music in 2005". Isn't this rather POV? The term "popular music" covers a wide range of genres such as punk, prog, jazz, rock, alternative, country, blues &c. If she returned to the forefront of anything, I would suggest it should be chart pop. But I'm not going to edit it without consensus from others.

It's also incorrect to state, as the lead does, that she "took full creative control over her image and music". Chart artists never have full control over everything they do, especially if they are signed to a major, as she was. --Richardrj talkemail 07:52, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, so no-one's responded to these points yet, so I'll make a couple of changes and see what the consensus is. --Richardrj talkemail 13:54, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I completely agree with what you said about creative control. I've changed "chart pop" to "pop music", which the article previously said at some point. Extraordinary Machine 16:08, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

More vandalism
Someone also inserted comments about how she's an ugly ass girl next to her birthday. There is also a lot of vandalism to her Biography, among other sections. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 14:16, 13 September 2006 (talk • contribs) 216.148.248.75.
 * Yes, but I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. It gets picked up and removed quickly. --Richardrj talkemail 14:20, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism
Someone listed "Mariah Carey: The Fat Cow Lives" as an upcoming 2007 album. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.22.212.110 (talk • contribs) 15:07, 13 September 2006.
 * It's gone. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Richardrj (talk • contribs) 15:18, 13 September 2006.

HAHAHA!! as much as i love Miss Mariah, i have to say that made me laugh. AND SHES NOT FAT!!! And so what if she gains a few pounds? Is she an alien?

The View controversy section
This is the first time I've heard about this supposed "controversy", and I don't remember it getting any substantial or sustained press attention (even less than, say, Carey's "wardrobe malfunction" last year). In fact, the linked article gives the distinct impression that the incident would be more relevant to mention in a discussion of The View than Carey; the main story here seems to be the "catfight" between Sandra Bernhard and Star Jones, and Carey was just one of several topics Bernhard discussed. So I'm considering removing this section. Thoughts? Extraordinary Machine 18:23, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. Seems to be just another one of those media-manufactured "controversies".  By the way, wasn't it Janet Jackson that had a "wardrobe malfunction", not Carey? --Richardrj talkemail 18:30, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I already removed it. I didn't see that there was a discussion on the talk page.  It really is not notable enough to include in this article and definitely not notable enough to have its own section.  Mariah was not even directly involved in the "controversy".  It was just Bernhard running her mouth like usual.  --musicpvm 18:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Glitter on Sept 11
The last time I looked at this page, it stated that "Glitter" had the unfortunate release date of Sept 11, 2001, (something I already knew, since I bought it that day, lmao), but now it's gone. Does anybody think it's worth mentioning as a possible reason the album failed, or too coincidental to draw a conclusion? Marikology 06:27, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Glitter just sucked, 9/11 had nothing to do with that. - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.102.147.119 (talk • contribs)


 * I disagree. Many people ignore critics' reviews and the like. Who bought an album on September 11th 2001 anyway? Although it may still have bombed I think it's worthy of a mention. 88.111.104.195 10:40, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

The movie came out September 21, the record came out September 11. I am a fan but the week it came out bares only little as to why it did poorly - lack of promotion and bad press at the time caused the easily swayed public to look away from her. That week Jay-Z's "Blueprint" debuted at #1. "Glitter" was #7.

"Glitter" just wasn't good. Record sales did not come to a complete stop on or after 9/11. Even if sales did slow down somewhat, all albums still are ranked #1-200 based on what they sold for the week, so Mariah was at no more a disadvantage than anyone else. The album just wasn't very good to stick around longer.

Recently in an interview, she blamed the events of Sept. 11 as the reason for her career slump, as well as the poor performance for the movie Glitter. I think this is wiki-worthy info, and it should be included in the article, but I can't find the details of the interview. Anyone want to tackle this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Odie1344 (talk • contribs) 14:55, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Billboard magazine's "revised methodology"
"tying her with Elvis Presley for the most number-ones by a solo act according to Billboard magazine's revised methodology (their statistician Joel Whitburn still credits Presley with an eighteenth..."

I'd like to know what this is supposed to mean. Billboard has never credited Presly with an eighteenth number one. Joel Whitburn, an employee who does not make the rules, wrote in his book (not an official Billboard publication) that, by his methodology Elvis SHOULD have eighteen. Whitburn's opinion has no bearing on Carey's record, it should be something more along the lines of

"tying her with Elvis Presley for the most number-ones by a solo act on the Billboard Hot 100."

Such Great Heights 16:37, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I thought this had been discussed to death before, back when you were editing from your IP address. To reiterate: Joel Whitburn is Billboard magazine's official statistician and some kind of less reliable outside source. Apparently, the people at Billboard have agreed to disagree (but not completely sweep it under the carpet - they dedicated a whole "Chart Beat" column to it at the time). Whitburn uses one methodology to calculate that Presley has eighteen number-one hits, which he feels is correct; others at Billboard use another metholodology to calculate that he has seventeen number-one hits, which they feel is correct. The one thing that we know for certain is that both parties have good reasons for believing what they do, which is why it's best and safest to simply mention the dispute (with further discussion about it in the Don't Forget About Us article), give no clear answer and let the reader decide what to think. Extraordinary Machine 21:36, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't really matter what someone thinks. The truth of the matter is that the 2 songs that went #1 are only counted as 2 by some people because Elvis had 2 songs on the single. However, it is impossible for 2 songs to be number 1 in the same week. The dispute doesn't need to be mentioned, because it is not even accurate, and forthermore, is an Elvis controversy. Talk about the dispute on his page, not on Mariah's. Billboard's official site says she tied him, and that's that. No dispute, Billboard.com is official.

"Act"?
Re: use of the term "act" in the first paragraph description. A group is an act, e.g., Gladys Knight and the Pips. The word seems to connote performance rather than being, and a group rather than an individual. Perhaps she could be described as a recording artist, or a musician, or a singer.rich 00:27, 15 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I think "act" is there because The Jackson 5 previously held the record being referred to the first time, and also to avoid repetition in the second instance. Extraordinary Machine 15:33, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Merry Christmas: studio album?
It seems that there's a dispute concerning whether Merry Christmas should be listed under the "Studio albums" header in the discography. I think we need a definitive answer here, so I was wondering if anybody had evidence indicating that Christmas albums are/aren't considered studio albums. Thanks. Extraordinary Machine 15:39, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The International Association of Music Writers (IAMF) has officially ruled that Christmas albums are considered studio albums if the artist involved put a lot of effort and thought into them, while they are not considered studio albums if they were quickie throw-offs designed to make a few bucks at holiday time. You can determine how to apply the IAMF ruling here, but given that one of the songs she wrote has become a standard, you might be inclined to rule for inclusion. Wasted Time R 19:11, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Early years....
In an interview on Youtube.com Mariah mentioins that she used to smoke and drink alcohol and that she used to try and buy these things with a friends fake ID during her high school time. Can i put something on about this, or is it irrelevent? (gulfrazthehunk) 19/nov/06 19:37 Mariah smoked when she was 11 or 12 but she quit when she was 17, because it was ruining her voice.

Can mariah play the piano?
Well, i saw a video of her playing the piano. Can she?! (gulfrazthehunk) 19th November 06 20:08

I read that she "knows her notes" and can play the rights ones but shes not the best.Blueandgold200 02:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Although it's been some time since I read this, Mariah claims to use the piano during her songwriting. However, she says she cannot play well enough to play it live. In fact, she dinstinctly said that if only she'd learn to play better, she wouldn't lose melodic ideas as she often has.

Yeah she has also mentioned that she can't read sheet music either 67.175.23.73 06:14, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

She probably plays by ear. Lots of people don't read sheet music but can play piano-- many, very well, even. 209.77.246.203 09:28, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


 * She cannot play the piano. Someone else does the piano during the songwriting, not her. She writes the lyrics, someone else composes the music. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.228.197.229 (talk) 04:18, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

"Rollcoaster"
I promise not to long ago it was posted on hear that Mariah's album was going under the working title "Rollcoaster." What happened to that.Blueandgold200 02:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank You

- I read that source that was cited, and nowhere on it does it say that the album had a working title 'Rollercoaster'. Whoever posted that just made that up. It should just go back to TBA because nobody ever announced that her album title was rollercoaster. Thank you - AJB4

Age - 1969 or 1970?
I just noticed that her birthdate was changed to 1969. Where was this information found? Every place I've been to has said 1970. *edit* Okay, I just clicked on the "history" tab, and found the link. 128.180.211.181 17:23, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

link

It is pretty suspicious that she has a driver's license that says 3-27-1969. Is she rounding up like Jennifer Lopez? Which date is right?

02-15-2007 The source for year 1969 as the birth year is from 1992. The page is of a fansite, and provides no legitimacy for making her a year older on this site. It is the only source, and when weighed against an entire page of search results that report a different birth date, it should be ignored. Someone should change the page back until more conclusive evidence is provided. --- Further, what does the comment below have to do with her age?


 * According to People magazine, they contacted her high school and it said she was born in 1969. This is also confirmed by her driver's liscence and even her own management confirmed it back in 1992.71.175.78.209 (talk) 03:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC) 20:49, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

ME: LOL! That is hysterical that someone made up Mariah's album titled and got called out on it. Remember when she was making the now-titled "Emancipation of MiMi" album and people were saying it was going to be called "Lollypop" or "Candyland"

I looked up the copyrights on her music here  and the earlier music lists 1969 as her birth year, while the older stuff (PRIOR to her professional debut) says 1970. also says 1969 --7swans 19:19, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Do you think this might have to do anything with that in 1990 (year of professional debut), if her birth year was listed 1969, she would be 21 years old and in full legal control of herself?Doctorqui 02:42, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

list of best-selling remix albums worldwide
Even though this is kinda off topic can someone help the new list of best-selling remix albums worldwide with its structure.

possible stealth vandalism
When I came to this page about 10 minutes ago, it listed her age as 79. I reverted to pre previous version of the page but the incorrect material was changed. I then undid my edits and looked at version of the page that was on before my changes and it listed her correct age. There is now no record of the page I originally saw. --Ted-m 02:40, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I just discovered that the 18:22, 1 December 2006  page was the one I saw. I am not sure why I saw this page instead of the latest one --Ted-m 02:47, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Glamorized
I've seen the line marked down quite heavily in Claire's stores recently. Is it cancelled or is it just "last season" now? SKS2K6 04:05, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It's just last season. They do that with everything after a while, regardless of sales. 212.139.213.42 18:07, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Number-one singles
I suppose it was a good idea to remove the large template including all the number-one positions as to not violate Article size, but I'm curious to know why the UK positions are listed? The U.S. are very plausible since that's where Carey's from, but I think a different country where she attained more number-ones should replace the UK. For example, she has four New Zealand number-ones (I think?) and six Canadian number-ones. Velten 14:48, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I see that the UK positions have been removed. Yes, I think it'd be best to include the U.S. number-ones only. Velten 23:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

TheBFunk: You might prefer to see the chart positions for another country as opposed to the UK, in order to show a more favourable chart history for Mariah, but the UK is one of the top three music markets in the world, hence its importance. Quite obviously, one can't simply cherry pick the statistics based on whichever gives a better view of performance. I personally am a huge Mariah fan, but even I have to admit that she has only had one solo number one in Great Britain, sadly. - TheBFunk

Mariah's Numer One Singles....
Didn't Mariah Carey have a number one single for every year in the decade (90's)??? because in the 'number one singles' section right at the bottom, she doesn't have a number one single in '94. Sorry if im annoying anyone...

gulfrazthehunk   7th December 2006   16:14 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gulfrazthehunk (talk • contribs) 16:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

Hero was the #1 single in 1994. It stemmed from a 1993 album, Music Box, which may be the source of confusion.

Next 2 Albums
Her next to albums are entitled: Rollcoaster and Illusions: The Butterfly Within. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blueandgold200 (talk • contribs)
 * sources?--AshadeofgreyTalk 16:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Mariah is rumoured to have an album called Platinum Diva: The Journey (a compilation of unreleased material) in the works.

measurements
please. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 90.19.14.20 (talk) 11:20, 23 December 2006 (UTC).
 * I don't think they're known. I'd guess that she's a size 12, 14 or more. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.139.213.42 (talk) 18:08, 17 February 2007 (UTC).

Carey mary?
"Carey mary" appears twice on the page. Very odd. NjtoTX 03:48, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Somebody vandalised the page, and not everything was undone. I've cleaned up the last bits. Extraordinary Machine 00:14, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Please change that main picture
That picture is clearly outdated and it is clearly time to update it. Possibly include one from her tour or a television appearance.

Images as at January 1, 2007
I notice a lot of images have been added today making a total of 20. This is considerably more than we require and it creates the look of a scrapbook, rather than an encyclopedic article. With respect to the people who have worked hard at finding suitable images for this article, supporting them with fair use rationales, and then working to have this article raised to featured status, I am going to revert all of the new edits in order to remove all of the unsuitable images. I would point out that several of the newly added images have been taken from other Wikipedia articles, but here they are not supported by any fair use rationale. Several other images have been uploaded without fair use rationale, and are therefore candidates for speedy deletion. Before such major changes are made to this article by introducing a large number of new images, please ensure that it is discussed here first, and that consensus is reached. Refer :WP:FUC, WP:C, Image use policy and Image description page. Thanks Rossrs 11:16, 1 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Agreed. Apart from the obvious fair use issues, the high number of images make the article look messy and they distract from the text. If every one of them was under a free license, I'd still recommend at least some be removed. Extraordinary Machine 17:01, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

About the picture used.....again.
MicP 10:45, 1 January 2007 (GMT)

Yes I Know This has been asked and maybe even a little debated. But, even if the main picture of Mariah carey is not made copyright and is free isn't Wikipedia able to pay for a licesed picture? If we took a screen capture from a recent music video or even a television appearance would that be a violation. I mean....is every randomly taken picture, television show she has been on (even the news shows and celebrity gossip shows) under a paid license.


 * No is no. Wikipedia can't go paying for every image we use. That's why we want FREE pictures. And be easy on the amount of pictures. TheDJ (talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 02:56, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * There are loads of photos of Mariah. Surely there is at least one recent, good quality, free liscence photo of her somewhere? I don't know how to add images and the article is protected, but can someone search for a picture becuase every time I visit the article it p's me off, big time. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.139.213.42 (talk) 18:14, 17 February 2007 (UTC).

To the Response.
Oh So that's why it's called the free encyclopedia MicP 11:03, 1 January 2007 (GTM)

Soon To Be Released Albums
Mariah will be releasing 2 new studio albums in 2007. Only One Of these 2 soon to be released albums are mentioned. Why Is That? May I Edit this?

MicP 12:29 a.m., 2 January 2007 (GMT)

Platinum Diva: The Journey

MARIAH'S SUPER HIGH WHISTLE!!
HOLY GWAKAMOLI GUYS!! listen to the whistle in this video of Emotions from 91... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgJEAFntDUk at 2:55 she does a REALLY HIGH whistle. what number and letter thing was it? (or how high was is?)--Gulfrazthehunk 15:29, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Mariah :Return to Prominance
OK first of all wikipedia is not designed to make any particular artist sound better than any other. By saying that you guys are giving her a special place in the music industry. That is NOT what wikipedia is for. Wikipedia is for INFORMATION AND FACTS. the fact that she was prominating the music industry before, or now, does not exist. Along with her where several other singers selling albums and releasing number one singles and albums. I am removing this and noone better put it back cause it is not what this article is for. We are not designing this article to show favortism. Stating she is "returning to prominance" is not supported and is not needed in this article. All the others are very simple and informative as should this one! If someone puts it back i will delete the entire article and we wont have a mariah carey article anymore!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.187.218.213 (talk) 02:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC).


 * Hello. God Bless You, but, If you only dare vandalize this article (again) you will be blocked from editing or even using WIKIPEDIA. The administrators are the ones who determine what is totally unnecessary and un-called for, NOT YOU civilian who may not even be a registered user. Even if you were to delete the entire article's contents, it will be back up in a very short time. Administrators have all articles stored on special servers.Why is it that you did not sign your comment with a user name? Are you not a member of Wiki? Are You Just Another Artist who is bitter and jealous of Mariah's success? All Users who agree with MY statements please notify me!!!!!!!!MicP GMT 6:45 p.m Feb 26 2007

Quotes and trivia
The quotes section should be removed as Wikiquote already has a Mariah Carey page with the quotes on it. Second, to maintain FA status, the Trivia section needs to be cited. Mr.Z-man  talk  18:25, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

record producer, music video director and actress.
$$Insert formula here$$

OK first of all mariah is NOT a record producer! she is an EXECUTIVE record producer. Meaning she assists in the production of her music. She is not known for producing and therefor should not be credited. Music Video Director??!!! COME ON!!! She has not established a career directing videos so this should also not be listed. And i think its even an embarassment to list her as an actress considering she won razzie awards!! so all these need to be removed ASAP!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.187.218.213 (talk • contribs)

EXECUSE ME,, but she did direct some of her music video "including the smash hit 'fantasy' ", and HELL YA, she's a record producer, she is credited by record labels for producing most of her songs and some songs by other artist( e.g. lil L.O.V.E and some songs for her backup singer Trey something ), so we can't just uncredit her because you don't feel like crediting her. and regardless if she's a bad or a good actress, she did act (and still acting), and that's enough to credit her as an actress. xoxo (86.108.43.15 17:28, 31 October 2007 (UTC))

She has produced for other artists; so I agree she should be listed as a Producer; but she's not recognized as a music video director (she hasn't directed music videos for any other artists, has she?). I'm taking it off. Nathan86 (talk) 08:22, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Nathan, your point is not valid. Mariah has in fact directed some of her own music videos. She doesn't have to direct other people's to have that status. That would be like suggesting that because she has only written songs for herself (which isn't true) she isn't a writer.Wcwnwo20 (talk)
 * That's like saying an artist is a "fashion designer" if they design a couple of their own outfits. Nathan86 (talk) 06:41, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected
Somebody went on to violate the archive status by adding stupid phrases such as "Mariah Carey was caught pooping on Britney Spears's Prada bag". I erase them and put the article on semi-protected status. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rodrigogomespaixao (talk • contribs) 20:07, 9 February 2007 (UTC). I snorted coffee on the keyboard when I read the thing about 'Mariah Carey was caught pooping in Britney Spears' Prada bag'. Classic. But I'm glad you deleted it, it was obviously uncited, stupid and irelevant to the article. 212.139.222.62 19:17, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Album Release Date
If Mariah's next album want be released before September 07, then how is she going to release 2 albums this year??Blueandgold200 22:05, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * there's still time left after spetember. Perhaps she'll release both on the same day! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.43.74.145 (talk) 21:09, 23 February 2007 (UTC).

I would probably go insane if she did that. Why does wikipedia only have alittle info on one and not both?Blueandgold200 22:05, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * That is exactly what I was saying, but, no one paid me any mind.MicP GMT 6:40 p.m Feb 26 2007

Picture Again
Its 2007 and the best picture yall have of her is in 1998.......Blueandgold200 22:05, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Repeated "2005-present" edit
64.131.199.179 21:39, 3 March 2007 (UTC)Instead of making a series of reversions, perhaps Reidlos could explain why Carey's 17 number one hits in America are notable, while 17 of Carey's international number one hits are not. An edit that deleted the whole topic, including the U.S. chart information, would make more logical sense. But the half-and-half approach is cherrypicking.
 * 1. The two #1Hits in the UK are mentioned:


 * 1993–1996: Worldwide popularity
 * It yielded her first UK Singles Chart number-one, a cover of Badfinger's "Without You"....


 * 1997–2000: New image and independence
 * A cover of Phil Collins's "Against All Odds (Take a Look at Me Now)" went to number one in the UK after Carey re-recorded it with boy band Westlife.
 * OK?


 * 2. Who cares how much number 1 singles she had in Canada or in Australia. A lot of people have two or more #1 hits in Australia and six or more #1 hits in Canada!!!!!! But 17 #1 hits in the USA -> Most #1 hits for a female artist and 2nd after the Beatles!!!Reidlos 21:49, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Even Nana Moukouri out sold alot more than Mariah! Therefore Japanese, Canada and Australia Charts are not necessary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ewan20s (talk • contribs) 20:45, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

64.131.199.179 11:50, 7 March 2007 (UTC)Ignoring the nine exclamation points, it's hard to interpret the edit as anything but a fan's desire to keep the "impressive" data ("2nd after the Beatles!!!") and drop the less eyepopping data (just 15 number one hits behind the Beatles on the British charts). These are number one hits, just like the ones listed on many other artists' Wikipages. Combining them gives a quick thumbnail ratio of Carey's relative popularity in various worldwide markets, information that can also be found on other artists' Wikipages. It's not a factual dispute. And it can't be irrelevance, since Carey's 17 American #1's did not occur from "2005-present." Reidlos' citations of "Without You" and "Against All Odds" does not address the issue, since Carey's ascent to 17 U.S. number ones is similarly annotated, song by song, throughout the article.

Since the half-and-half edit makes the least logical sense, and since certain users have dedicated themselves to deleting the reference to Carey's seven Japanese number ones et al ("Who cares"), I've made what I consider to be the second-most useful edit. I hope it will satisfy the other contributors.

Hero was a 1993 #1 single
Just to straighten out facts here. Her single "Hero," peaked at No. 1 on December 25, 1993, thus it's regarded a No. 1 of 1993, although it stayed at the top for 3 more weeks. Her highest peaking single of 1994 (at No. 2) was her duet with Luther Vandross entitled "Endless Love."
 * "Hero" is listed as a 1994 entry as its trajectory was split between 1993 and 1994, the majority of its weight being in 1994 and being dominated by the technical 'Billboard-Year' of 1994. "Hero" also entered the recurrent Billboard charts for the year 1994 and was listed as 1994 Year-End single. The song was also nominated for a Grammy as being released for the year 1994. There is no confusion surrounding this. Billboard and NARAS both have acknowledged "Hero" as a 1994 single. Disgruntled fans arguing otherwise is irrelevant and extraneous.

This alone doesn't make her an artist with number one single for every year in the decade (90's). So stop creating a record that's NOT intended for her. Let's be OBJECTIVE about this as Billboard already came up with a rule that states that any single that peaked at the top spot should be considered a No. 1 hit on that year, even if it stayed a few more weeks the next calendar year. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.4.102.9 (talk) 17:53, 13 March 2007 (UTC).

64.131.199.179 21:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC)Actually, a Billboard "year" runs from December-November, so the magazine can have the time to calculate the stats for the yearend issue. For this reason, there have been many wintertime releases to get short shrift in two "____ of the year" rundowns, instead of having the chart run combined into a single year's database. Even though "Hero" was released in October '93, the fact remains that it was #1 on the first few Hot 100 charts in 1994, and thus it keeps Carey's "streak" intact. Is the streak terribly important? Not really... if Carey had the identical chart performance from 1993-2002, the "in a decade" gimmick wouldn't attract the eye nearly as much. But as a statistical oddity, it's diverting. And since Carey had already had a #1 single in 1993, it's not like "Hero" needs to count twice. Carey's carryover into 1994 is more "legit" than Elton John's similar "consecutive years in the Top 40" streak, which in its later stretch was extended twice by two winter singles that did double duty for "1995-96" and "1997-98."

You're talking about the year-end issue but Joel Whitburn in his Billboard's Top 1000 Singles Book (The 1000 Biggest Hits of the Rock Era) would tell otherwise, still making her NOT eligible for the title to have a No. 1 single in every calendar year in the 1990s. Thus, Mariah's run of No. 1 singles are from 1990-1993 and from 1995-2000 only (her longest consecutive years to hit the top spot). 210.4.102.9 03:24, 14 March 2007 (UTC) Xander

64.131.199.179 14:16, 14 March 2007 (UTC)Billboard statistics are often about semantics (which is why it's shortsighted and silly to take chart numbers much past face value, up to and including Carey's "#1's" album). So Carey's "1990s streak" is gimmicky. It is. We might just as well say that Aaliyah "beat" Abba. But it happened; why fixate on narrow criteria to "prove" it didn't?

The Beatles' "I Want to Hold Your Hand," Billboard's top song of 1964, was released in December 1963. Percy Faith's "Theme from a Summer Place," Billboard's top song of 1960, was released in 1959. Danny and the Juniors' "At the Hop," Billboard's top song of 1958, was released in November 1957. Dionne Warwick's "That's What Friends Are For," Billboard's top song of 1986, was released in October 1985.

But it's hard to argue that a single that was in fact #1 for the first three weeks of 1994 is not a "true" 1994 #1 hit. Or does a carry-over song mean that the following year has fewer than 52 weeks for chart purposes? Many Whitburn books include the list of number one songs in 1993. They only add up to 46 weeks, because Whitney Houston's 1992 song "I Will Always Love You" stayed atop the chart through the end of February. So, was "I Will Always Love You" a 1993 chart-topper, or was 1993 missing two months? A binary outlook means that one of those two premises MUST be true.

I've seen Mariah Carey supporters assert that she "really" has the second-most #1 hits because most of Elvis Presley's #1s predate the 1958 "Hot 100" chart debut, or because double-sided #1s "don't count twice." That's also cherrypicking to achieve one's desired result.

Okay okay...let's just be very 'technical' about the single "Hero." It is a FACT that it peaked at the top spot on December 25, 1993 and that alone proved that it's a 1993 single. Its 3-week run on the top spot in January 1994 is just a "spillover." Can't we just be very objective about that? Year-end issue is different from categorizing a single when it peaked at No. 1. And I would have to agree with you, Carey's "1990s streak" is pure gimmicky, maybe created by some weird fanatic. Again and technically speaking, Mariah never had a No. 1 single in 1994.

Even if Mariah surpasses the record of Elvis Presley, The Beatles, Madonna or Michael Jackson in terms of No. 1 singles in the U.S., she can never be in the same ball park as the they. Her singles apparently are less appealing in the rest of the world. In fact, it's only in the U.S. that Mariah has unprecedented list of top singles. That is in contrast to her only 1 to 3 No. 1 singles she had in the UK, Australia, and other parts of Europe.

64.131.199.179 21:04, 15 March 2007 (UTC)The numbers don't have a larger meaning; they just are. It doesn't take fanaticism to observe that some Mariah Carey single was at #1 on the Billboard Hot 100 at some point in each calendar year from 1990-99. It's not as if one spillover single is being asked to qualify twice, thus covering two years. (Are we not going to know which NFL team is the 2007 champion until the 2008 Super Bowl?)

To keep declaring that this didn't "really" happen is the same as Carey's fans touting particular chart numbers to "prove" her accomplishments surpass all others. Billboard numbers are imperfect statistics in the best of circumstances. They're manipulated, they're highly circumstantial, and the calculating methodology behind them has been changed several times. Comparing Billboard totals throughout the decades is a hopeless errand. If Carey and Presley swapped places, both their Billboard careers would look very different. It's not just that they're not in each other's "ballparks"; they're playing separate sports.


 * Are we seriously pouting over some little accomplishment? Please, either way you word it Mariah had a #1 single EVERY YEAR OF THE 90's, basically meaning every chart year Mariah was #1 on it at some point. You could argue that Mariah didn't release a single that exact year that went #1 that exact year, but come on. I think you guys would STILL be complaining if Hero was released in 1994 but went to #1 in 1995. I'm rewording the statement so that it is true and kept in the article. Also, whoever mentioned the Elvis stuff and Mariah never being better than him that is very irrelvent and only hurting you arguement. Don't be biased. Her songs being "less appealing" is an opinion, not a fact. Ayumi4u 07:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Tessitura
Im a french writter on the frence wikipedia (so apologize for my bad english) ; I need some help about Mariah's tessitura. If there is no doubt about her highest note (G#7), what about her lowest ? Some say that she hits a F2 in this performance : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSJYXKXPb4w Could somebody tell me whether it is right or not ?

Thank you —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.84.142.16 (talk) 09:41, 21 March 2007 (UTC).

Father's correct ethnic background
Just wanted to back up my correction on her dad's ethnic heritage. The following quote is from a fairly recent interview with Mariah in British magazine, Pride. I cited the url of the website's main page (www.pridemagazine.com) as they don't archive their interviews; if someone else can get a date and other specs, please go for it! One way or another, Mariah knows better about her dad's heritage than Shapiro in any case. HUGE difference between an African American w/ some white Hispanic blood and an "Afro-Venezualan," which is what we originally had in the entry. Anyway, here's the quote:


 * Mariah Carey: Well, my my mum is White, and my father is African-American and part Venezualan--he's not a Black Venezualan, which is what they always wanted to write. His mum lived in Alabama; they migrated to New York. He grew up in the Bronx and later moved to Harmlem. He grew up as a Black man in America, and his father was part Spanish. It's just a typical story of someone of colour in America--everyone's a little mixed with something.

Efrafra 17:57, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I noticed someone tried to refine the sentence, which is great. However, I've changed the wording from "African American and Venezualan parentage" to "African American and Venezualan heritage" as the former implies that one of her father's parents was not African American. I believe that both his parents were self-identified African Americans, one of who had some Venezulan blood. I know this seems nitpicky, but I really want the information to be accurate. Efrafra 09:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Mariah's boob and nose job.
Come on.... we all know shes had some work done. lets smach something into the main article about it....--77.97.146.46 12:27, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * STop Lying!!!!--MicP 13:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * We can't add that to the article unless we get a good source. Not awfulplasticsurgery.com, for example, which has practically every celebrity whose appearance has changed slightly over the years on it. I agree though. Nukleoptra 14:57, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree. I think it would be impossible to stick it in there unless it's proven like Tera Ried before she announced it. I do agree that I think she got a boob job but I don't think she got a nose job...but boob job it's pretty easy to see the difference. I wish she would've stayed the way she was but hey her life. Ayumi4u 07:14, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Everyone knows she's had breast implants; but come on, a nose job? I do suspect her of having something done to her cheeks post-Charmbracelet, pre-Mimi; they're now huge and puffy and make her look like a chipmunk - not a good look. (maybe she had collagen or something to fill out lines on her face but they injected too much?). But I agree we can't put anything about it (her surgery) in the article unless we get a good source -- or she admits it (which will never happen). Nathan86 08:25, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

That Picture
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by MRGQ (talk • contribs) 03:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC).
 * it's god awful! can't someone get a better pic it barely looks like how she looks now.

Vocal Profile.
Okay so I've realised that a lot of singers, e.g Omarion, have vocal profiles — and im not talking about like when your write a paragraph about someone's voice because we already have but I mean we could add this as well.But, she can't sing like the Asia's songbird live. Even if regine's voice is not well, she can reach and sustain high notes live not like mariah carey who just always whistle and lipsynch.

Voice type: Full Dramatic Coloratura Soprano.

Highest note: (Head voice/whistle) G#7 (Live:Emotions) F#7 (Recorded: All in your mind)

Highest note: (Belting/Chest) G5 (Loverboy)

Lowest note: B2 (Recorded: My all) C3 (Live :You and I preformance)

Vocal range: 3.1 octaves and ?? dont know how to work it out.

Longest note: 18 seconds (Recorded: Lead the way)

And I think stuff like that will be kinda cool, and easier to understand because its laid out and maybe we could put in sample's because I have the songs for all of those so people can hear it for themselves. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lil charm (talk • contribs) 13:37, 11 April 2007 (UTC).

In the song, "My All," the lowest note is actually G3. Mariah Carey is definitely not a "Full Dramatic Coloratura Soprano." And in live recording of "emotions" the highest note is F7. 77.101.31.209 09:52, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

--Lil charm 14:50, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


 * well Mariah's vocal range is 5 Octaves, its written in her website . but u need to put a good source for the vocal profile.

Well what I can do is add in sound clips and then Ill give you the link of which I got this information which is:, but the problem is since no-one is ever really 100% positive because Mariah's voice change's it might be a problem but we could always use sound clips which I have plenty of as proof.


 * then u should add it in the article and add the sources with it.

Who put the humorous tag on the article? Funny but shouldn't be there?
 * Removed the tag Achitnis 07:59, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Shoudln't her highest chest note be A5 which would be more believeable because its almost impossible to go to A6 in chest?
 * fixed to G#5 Loverboy


 * I've removed the information about Carey's vocal abilities/profile that wasn't supported by reliable sources. Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought - you cannot listen to YouTube videos and concert mp3s and add to Wikipedia what you or anybody you discuss them with think the highest notes are. 80.0.72.76 18:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)


 * LOL. I dont think i know what the notes are. I know I know what the notes are. She sings a G2 on the second "say" of this song: . and she reaches G#7 on the emotions performances. Myke 04:32, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

cmon', just sing live or a live showdown with velasquez to know who's better!

The internet is rife with Velasquez's fans' DESPERATE mania. In spite of this, Velasquez remains largely anonymous. Velasquez is NOT world-famous, and she has never done as much as Carey ever did, both talent- and achievement-wise. Velasquez is NOT now-- and there is very little chance that she ever will be-- in Carey's league.Doctorqui 03:00, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Pronunciation of Mariah
How is "Mariah" supposed to be pronounced? Ma-rai-ah or Ma-rai? Patiwat 06:08, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Ma-rai-ah.

Mariah is working in a short film (Lovers & Haters)

 * A mini movie spoof of the life of Mariah Carey, with the Lovers and Haters that she encounters along the way, and how she overcomes those haters and obstacles to still be one of the most talented and loved musical sensations in history.
 * Check it in IMDB HERE

-I suggest her not to do one. cmon lets be honest. mariah is really not into acting. and Her songs by the way are unfortunately impressive, not expressive. Dont you agree??

New Picture
This Picture is even less recent than the one of MARIAH making the video for "I Still Believe". Please replace it with the other. It Doesn't Show forth Mariah "NOW" Image.--MikeyT 22:07, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Mariah-Yulia 13:48, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't think the picture necessarily has to be "now". It has to be of her during her most popular years. Having said that, I don't like this picture either, She looks too white, you can't tell she's mix. Thats not her most notable hair style either. She is best known with long blond hair, and her skin color is yellowish/tan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shoop85 (talk • contribs) 16:14, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I actually like the current image - her "Mimi"-era fake tan/peroxide look isn't very flattering. And I disagree re: her hairstyle, I think her most notable one was the curly one she had until the mid-90s. Nathan86 08:04, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Mariah chart topping
In the subject of #1 singles. Mariah is behind the Beatles. They have 20, while she has 17.

However, her singles put together have topped the charts for 77 weeks, while The Beatles have spent 59 weeks collectively atop the HOT 100. That means she has been on the top for longer than they have, although she has less #1 hit singles.

I thought the information was relevant (since it is a remarkable accomplishment by Mariah Carey), so I added it to the article.

P.S. Elvis is still ahead of her with 79 weeks total, once you combine the Hot 100 with those pre-Hot 100 charts. I put on this information, too.

Lila, on June 27th, 2007.

Reidlos removed the info, but he/she didn't comment back here. Anyway, don't you guys consider it a relevant information about Mariah's sucess track history in the US to point out that she has topped the singles charts for more collective weeks than any other female artist or any other artist since Elvis?

This was my addition:

"[Following the information that Mariah has 17 #1 hits, behind The Beatles, with 21]. However, Mariah Carey's singles have, collectively, topped the charts for a grand total of 77 weeks, which places her ahead of The Beatles (59 weeks). She still remains, for that matter, behind Elvis Presley, who topped the charts for 79 weeks collectively (once the Rock 'n' Roll and the Hot 100 Charts are combined)."

The problem is in the writing, in the info or in where it has been placed? Comments, anyone?

Lila, on June 28th, 2007


 * Hey, Lila! You're right it's remarkable that she has the most weeks on #1 behind Elvis P., but try to avoid the word "However" and don't forget to cite your sources (I'm sure you know how to do it, right? Citing sources)! I'm sorry that I removed it without really thinking about it. Reidlos 13:53, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * All right, Reidlos. I have added the information once again, minus the word "however". The online source for the information has been added as a note, but I have also included among the references the books in which chart information regarding Mariah, Elvis and The Beatles can be verified. Just to rid the information of any doubt I even took the time to verify it manually (meaning I actually counted the weeks), and it is a match! Lila, on June 30th, 2007


 * I removed the footnote, because it's never good to cite Wikipedia as a source, but I think/hope the books in the references list will make it too. ;-P Reidlos 21:07, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I dont see the point. It is pure glorification by fans. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ewan20s (talk • contribs) 23:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Date of birth
Can we get a link? IMDb says she was born in 1969. (I can't believe how old she is.) --thedemonhog talk • edits 18:46, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Voice Section
The voice section seems rather negative (POV), reminding the reader more so of how Mariah is criticized for her voice rather than balancing the section out with positive statements.

Billboard, MTV, allmusic, About.com, Legacy Recordings and Yahoo! all says she was born in 1970. --F9o0oly 14:39, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I looked up the copyrights on her music here  and the earlier music lists 1969 as her birth year, while the older stuff says 1970. This is strange. --7swans 05:47, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

[] also says 1969 --7swans 05:14, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I would rather believe People Magazine stating that Mariah was born in 1969. Well, everyone knows the reason why she and her company would like to make her appear younger by saying she was born in 1970, right? And it shows she's 38 years old already and that's pretty obvious!

I agree, People is a more reliable source than the others which say that she was born in 1970. Also, the COPYRIGHTS on her songs prior to her professional debut also say 1969, which leads me to believe that this is the correct year. --7swans 14:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Mariah looks like either RuPaul or Boy Shakira!
I wonder if anyone noticed this. No offense meant but the pic of Mariah in this article looks like the drag queen RuPaul and the current finalist of America's Got Talent, Boy Shakira. It isn't hard to notice the similarity though we know the fact that Mariah is really a she, right? Can anyone please change her pic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.132.173.157 (talk • contribs)

ok first of all i cannot not believe that u just said that...hahah its funny how people thin she looks like a boy "which i have seen boy shakira" and hes more hideous then a monster in a nightmare...and i would second guess that rupaul looks more like beyonce....it isnt hard to notice the similarity hahah what a imbecal.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.18.129.62 (talk) 11:38, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Age
I changed the year of her birth to 1969,I have a good source. The reason she would lie about her age is to appear younger(she even doesnt have birthdays she has "anniversaries", and its now her 17). Her school says she was born 1969, her drivers license, even her management back in 1992. So please do not change it back to the old 1970.--The Blizzard King 21:15, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * IMDb is not a reliable source because, much like Wikipedia, it relies on contributions from users that often aren't properly checked for their accuracy before they appear on the site. I'm not saying you're lying or that the claims about Carey being born in 1969 aren't true, but we can't rely on questionable sources (such as IMDb or the NNDB) for potentially libellous or otherwise damaging information about living people &mdash; see WP:BLP. Extraordinary Machine 21:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I looked up the copyrights on her music here  and the earlier music lists 1969 as her birth year, while the older stuff says 1970. This is strange. --7swans 05:47, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

[] also says 1969--7swans 05:14, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

People is a more reliable source than the others which say that she was born in 1970. Also, the COPYRIGHTS on her songs prior to her professional debut also say 1969, which leads me to believe that this is the correct year.7swans 01:30, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * SO how come the page still says 70? pls correct it to 69, Thx.

This article no longer merits "Featured Article" designation
This page is poorly written. For instance, I see grammatical errors already in the opening paragraphs. As an example, the article says in the third paragraph, "... greatest artist of all-time." The dash does not belong there. At another point it says, "best selling singer." A dash IS needed here. Come on people, this is the opening section! How in the world did an article with such bad grammar end up with FA status?

Overall, I would characterize the writing as weak. For instance, the second sentence says: "Her debut was in 1990 under the guidance of Columbia Records executive Tommy Mottola, and she became the first recording artist to have her first five singles top the U.S. Billboard Hot 100 chart." Sorry, but that sounds pretty awkward. Try this: “Under the guidance of Columbia Records executive Tommy Mottola, Carey became the first recording artist to have all five of the singles from her first album top the U.S. Billboard Hot 100 Chart in 1990.”

I am just a scientist, and not a scholar of the English language. However, if these sentences sound strange to me, they probably sound a lot worse to people who can actually write. If I can find this number of bad sentences in the lead section alone, then I cannot image the state of decay that must exist toward the end. I further find it hard to believe that this article constitutes the "best that Wikipedia has to offer."

Yet another issue involves the sloppy citation method used. In many cases, no information on the source of the article is given whatsoever. Where are the names of dates, authors, etc. for so many of the references? Because so few of the sources are available as internet links, it is further difficult to get a feel for whether the sources are being cited accurately. Citation #4 also does not link properly. I clicked on it only to find an article about Al Gore winning the Nobel Peace Prize! Sloppy!

Although I love Mariah Carey, this article is not written in a professional manner. In fact, the issue is so bad that I do not know how anyone is expected to take this article seriously. For instance, it is quite apparent that the page is not willing to honestly discuss any sort of criticism pertaining to the singer. Although the lead section alludes to issues that critics have had with her, the documentation is buried in a location that is nearly impossible to find in this disorganized article.

Another thing that would really benefit this article is an entire section devoted to "Criticism." In this section, people should be allowed to add negative reviews without any fear that the citations will be erased.

Here are some examples of criticism that I found right away with a quick Google:

1) Carey was voted by "The World" as the "worst singer of all time: http://www.contactmusic.com/news.nsf/article/carey%20named%20worst%20singer%20of%20all%20time_1034254

2) Carey also voted as one of the worst of all time by "Q." Here is the link:http://www.contactmusic.com/news.nsf/article/osbourne%20carey%20and%20dion%20named%20worst%20singers%20ever_1023934.

My point here is that there is plenty of material for an entire criticism section. Furthermore, it would make the article more believable.

---I'm sorry, but any musician or vocal coach would tell you that Mariah is in no way the worst singer of all time! Although you could debate if she were great or not, there's no way she is the worst... I mean, there's Avril Lavign, Britney Spears... ??? This isn't an opinion, it's just stupidity to say she is the worst voice of all time in a criticism section! She was only voted that on that crappy tabloid site because of people's current opinion on her image and music. It has nothing to do with her actual voice.Wcwnwo20 (talk)

By the way, there is no reason to be ashamed of bad reviews. Everyone knows that a lot of critics are jealous morons. There is also a lot of sexism inherent in rock criticism. However, when you fail to incorporate these types of things into an encyclopedia article, the effect is generally to lose any readers who do not happen to be fans. This is especially true when you go out of your way to lavishly illustrate accomplishments and awards.

By the way, another way to look at this article is to compare it with a similar one that is much better. For instance, check out the Freddie Mercury page, which is only listed as a "B" article at the moment. However, note how easy it is to read, how clearly the references are cited and how honest it is with regard to criticism. Furthermore, although the Freddie Mercury page ranks around #300 in terms of the number of edits, we have never had any problems with vandalism nor have we ever had to lock the site up. The reason for this involves the large "Criticism and Controversy" section to which everyone is allowed to freely add. At no point has any attempt been made to get rid of it or edit it. However, it is my understanding that such an open policy is not practiced on this site.

By the way, if the Freddie Mercury page is a mere "B," then I give this one a "D"! 138.67.44.75 04:00, 11 October 2007 (UTC) Boab 20:12, 12 October 2007 (UTC) 138.67.44.77 21:00, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree re:Criticism section. But maybe have it titled "Criticism & Controversy" or something; and then we could also include something about the accusations of plagiarism (which I don't think she's guilty of, but this should still be included in the article). Nathan86 07:50, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Nathan, You are absolutely correct that accusations of plagiarism belong here, especially if she has been taken to court over this. Even a Good Article should be willing to address these types of issues. 138.67.44.40 23:36, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Genres
Am I the only one who thinks it's ridiculous to have Hip Hop listed as one of her genres? Yes, her music has elements of Hip Hop, but so does pretty much all Pop music these days... And shouldn't the fact that she's a singer and not a rapper automatically exclude her from being labeled as a Hip Hop musician? And I know she classifies herself as "Hip Hop" on her myspace page; but just because someone says they're something, it doesn't necessarily mean they are. Nathan86 08:00, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Although I love Mariah Carey, I would agree that she is more Pop than Hip Hop. Her songs are fun but fluffy, making them Pop. By the way, there is nothing shameful about this.138.67.44.40 23:41, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

That's correct. Mariah Carey is Pop/R&B, not a hip-hop artist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.192.176.30 (talk) 23:45, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

the freaking picture
the image displayed for Miss Carey is just disgusting and don't represent her current state. why can't anyone just use any album cover of Miss Carey's. album covers will not cause any copyright issues. i suggest the cover of Greatest hits album. simple and represent Miss Carey perfectly. (86.108.43.15 17:11, 31 October 2007 (UTC))

OK !!! I DID IT !!! (Taksam 17:55, 31 October 2007 (UTC))

Mariah Carey pic
This issue has been beaten to death, but let me repeat it here. Album covers are copyrighted images, and as such should not be used as the display picture. They should only be used to display the album in question, along with critical commentary on said album. The picture of Mariah Carey in the "I still believe" video is what we call a free image, and according to our fair use policies, we should not use copyrighted images (like album covers) when free images (like the "I Still Believe") are available. In such a case, concerns about representing Carey well is not very important. We have copyrighted problems to deal with. With this said, I'll revert the image and replace it with the proper image. Oran e  (talk)  20:15, 2 November 2007 (UTC)


 * thank u 4 explaining, do u know how we can get a free image ? (Taksam 06:31, 3 November 2007 (UTC))

Could you have that old 1998 pic removed? She has way better pics than that one but in this pic, she looks a lot like RuPaul. No doubt, it looks disgusting!


 * Subjective opinions aside, she does in fact look 100% like Mariah Carey, making it more than suitable for the page's primary illustration of her. --Jayunderscorezero 18:18, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

But some people see that old pic ugly as Mariah looks like Ru Paul in his "Supermodel (You Better Work)" music video. Just check out the single cover of the said song and you'll agree...


 * Whether she was ugly or not in the picture is irrelevant the fact that she is the one in the picture and not a fat pig is enough. As long as that person is Mariah Carey then it is a valid enough picture.  Aesthetics is not important here. 202.4.4.26 (talk) 06:32, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Birth Date
dahling believe me, i know mariah better than i know myself and she was so not born at 69. she was born in 1970! DON'T DOUBT IT!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.68.117.183 (talk) 01:59, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Even at the Oprah Winfrey Show interview in 1999 Mariah's mom said that Mariah was born in 1970, saying "and in 1969 we where in that neighborhood and in 1970 when she was born (meaning Mariah) we moved out of the neighborhood". --F9o0oly 19:50, 13 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by F9o0oly (talk • contribs) 19:47, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Lambs
Shouldn't the fact that Mariah calls het fans "Lambs" be mentioned in the article? She still does that right? Mariah-Yulia 22:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't think its that important, Plus, what section would it go under? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dswhite85 (talk • contribs) 17:59, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Too negative
I know the article should rest on facts, but I'll say it anyway-- I, for one, think Carey does a good job conveying emotions. It's not her fault that the critics mentioned in this article are those that have focused on the technicalities of her singing rather than the emotions she did put across. Cmon people, like 'Miss You Most (At Christmastime)' and her version of 'Without You' aren't among the most affecting sad songs there are??

The article is too negative. This lady is top shelf in music, and all the voice section does is present criticisms about oversinging and lack of emotion. There must be sources out there that say something about her merits. We need good balance here. This article is poorly-written.Doctorqui (talk) 06:56, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the critics that Mariah isnt that good conveying emotions. It is painfully to watch her singing. I dont feel connected.

I AGREE That the article is too critical of her. I personally feel attached when she sings, and it gives me goosebumps. It's ok to list a quote that SOME people feel no emotion from her, but it's also important to include that OTHER people do feel a connection with Mariah. Wcwnwo20 (talk)

You guys feel "emotion" or "attached" because you're fans, DUH! Critics look at it from an objective view. I don't feel anyhting from her, she's known to oversing with all that noisy melisma and dog whistles and pig squeals. I've never heard any critic praise her for emotion or soul. She lacks that ability. Only Celine Dion sings with less emotion than her. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dswhite85 (talk • contribs) 17:51, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, Mariah isnt that good singing with emotions. Often very distracting. She may have good range ..but lack of emotions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ewan20s (talk • contribs) 15:49, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Stop hiding facts
What I don't get is, how come Mariah's article doesn't mention the fact she was sued by both her mother and her sister, but in Whitney's article there's this big paragraph when her father tried to sue her? How come so much is made about Mariah writing her own songs but there's not a word about the fact she has been sued a few times for stealing songs, yet she settles out of court? Not one word. If this happened to other singers, surely it would be in their article, so if this Wikipedia is so NPOV, then these subjects should be in Mariah's article... even if you are a fan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.192.176.30 (talk) 04:37, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

This is not People;s Magazine or tabloids. Nobody knows. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ewan20s (talk • contribs) 23:19, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Poster, Whitney's dad trying to sue her is factual, and a large part of her personal struggles. I have been following Mariah's career for over 15 years now, and have never heard of her mother or sister trying to sue her. Her sister has asked for money, feeling like it's Mariah's sisterly obligation to help her out, but nothing went to lawyers or court! Additionally, it would be loudricous to suggest that because out of all of her songs, a person or two claim they'd written one or two. This is all just tabloid nonsense. Factual information, not "guesses" are included in this article.Wcwnwo20 (talk)

Mariah has been sued numerous times over stealing songs. This is a fact, not fiction. She usually makes a big payoff to the accuser and settles out of court without admission of wrongdoing. -She has been sued by Christopher Selletti who accused her of plagiarizing his song, which ended up becoming "Hero". -Seth Swirsky sued her for plagiarizing one of his songs and accused Carey as re-writing it as "Thank God I Found You". -Singer/dancer Rachele Chafir sued her in Manhattan charging her with plagiarizing Chafir's song, which became "It's Like That". Mariah is given much credit throughout this article for writing her songs but I think it would only be fair to mention the numerous lawsuits against her for plagiarizing. Whether she did it or not is not the issue and not for us to decide. The point is she has been sued over it many times. That deserves mentioning in the article. That is NPOV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.192.176.30 (talk) 23:56, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

This article has jokingly become a fan site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.192.176.30 (talk) 22:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

References and Cites
Looking through this article, the references are not according to WP:CITE. Also, I see some CN templates. Might want to address these issues if this article is continuing to hold FA status.  m ir a nd a   22:25, 30 December 2007 (UTC)