Talk:Rebecca Black/Archive 1

Archive 1

Official website

is http://rebeccablackonline.com and her twitter http://twitter.com/MsRebeccaBlack —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.243.3.200 (talk) 07:24, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Year of birth

She's said on her official twitter that her birthday is June 21 (I actually searched through the page of the user she was responding to to see if it was actually "What's your birthday?", and it was), and her profile on Ark says she's 13... so wouldn't that make her year of birth 1997, not 1998? 203.160.126.177 (talk) 15:11, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 203.160.126.177, 23 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} As cited above, date of birth should be changed to 1997. Full DOB is 06/21/1997. References are her official Twitter where she answered a fan asking about her birthday, and for the year, multiple sources (including her official Ark Music page) mention her as being 13, which if her birthday is 06/21, would make her born in 1997.

203.160.126.177 (talk) 15:15, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Done by User:Oakshade. — Bility (talk) 17:13, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Biased mention of the song

"As of March 22, 2011, first-week sales of her digital single were estimated to be around 40,000 by Billboard.com, and the video had over 38 million views on YouTube, despite a mediocre critical reception" sounds more fair to me. Can use some of the sources from the song's article as needed. --Rogington (talk) 17:50, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

1997 or 1998?

Which is actually her birth year? 1997 or 1998? The article contradictorily cites both years ("1998 births" category and "1997" on description table). Robfbms (talk) 21:04, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Page for artist

Why is there not a page on Rebecca Black / why is there a lock on the creation of one?

I agree that having released a record that has 25,000,000 hits on the official video alone at least deserves a page created. This song will more than likely chart in the music charts today, will this be a trigger to allow an article to be created? 88.111.8.178 (talk) 10:59, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I agree that the artist has gained enough notariety from this song alone Timclare ^(talk) _{(sign here)} 11:02, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I know she has lots of views on Youtube and everyone talks about her but is she notable enough? 79.97.127.226 (talk) 18:08, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Someone should mention that the like:dislike ratio on youtube is something like 10 dislikes for every 1 like. While I'm not in favour of bashing people, it certainly can be written in neutral language. I.e. the fact that most people thinks she sucks certainly seems like a relevant point. 67.49.132.19 (talk) 22:02, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Rebecca Black's birthday

Can somebody update the actual date of birth. I'm almost certain it's April 5th But I might be wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Undisputed4life2020 (talk • contribs) 21:56, 23 March 2011 (UTC) (Edit: Content removed per WP:ATTACK and WP:BLP which applies to talk pages.--Oakshade (talk) 00:52, 24 March 2011 (UTC))

Do you have a source for that? Without a reliable source, we're not going to include the information. We might not include it with a source, either, just in case. Cheers. lifebaka++ 23:12, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Okay, here is the source I have added: http://twitter.com/MsRebeccaBlack/status/50024241491492864. It's her Twitter account. Media stated she is 13 years old, and this says June 21, so doing the math it makes 1997 the year she was born. If anyone disagrees, please feel free to discuss. Tinton5 (talk) 00:48, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 189.61.208.59, 24 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}}

rebecca black only became famous because all the people of a certain site started to make fun of her music, that is the only reason she got so many views on youtube. You should really put this in here, because you guys should tell the truth

189.61.208.59 (talk) 02:02, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Rejecting as requested, you need to make a more specific request; provide some suggested verbiage, and more importantly a really good reference to support it. This is a WP:BLP, so nothing should be added unless it is very clearly supported. Monty₈₄₅ 02:14, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

What, so like a TMZ article or a similarly reputable source? This is why wikipedia goes down the drains. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.49.132.19 (talk) 03:15, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

We don't fight tumblr's wars for them, and we generally don't say a "certain site" made someone famous without proof.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 04:21, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from me, 25 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} According to some of my researches,I've found out that Rebecca Black is a jew. Trollforlyfe (talk) 04:05, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

• And someone cares? Without a reliable source on it and a valid reason to include it in the article, request should be denied.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 04:09, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Not done. You'll need a reliable source for that information. Provide it and the edit will be made. Given your username, I'm not holding my breath. ICYTIGER'SBLOOD 04:49, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

It's odd that we never see messages like "I have evidence that xxx xxxx is a Methodist." Not only is there no source, I'm not sure why there is concern over this.--Oakshade (talk) 05:26, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

It's usual to include someone's ethnic background or religion. It's a signficant fact about a person. Obviously it woudl have to be properly sourced, she may turn out to be ethnically Jewish but religiously atheist. Darmot and gilad (talk) 11:49, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Opening paragraph

Pop singer? Really? --94.171.77.82 (talk) 23:06, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Pop does not imply good, nor does singer for that matter. --86.30.248.90 (talk) 00:13, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

"Pop" is an abbreviation of "popular" which at least implies well-liked. Darmot and gilad (talk) 11:45, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

"Pop music" is, as a whole, a specific genre of music of which this artist qualifies for membership. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pop_music OffColfax (talk) 07:17, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

American teen pop singers

It says American "child" pop singers, but she's not a child, she's a teenager. She should be put in with the other teenagers.--68.186.165.36 (talk) 16:57, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

There is no Category:Teenage entertainers, nor any subcategories of that. Jim Michael (talk) 22:54, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia's American child singers category defines its inclusion criteria as "Child and teenage singers", and Category:Child singers, of which it is a subcategory is defined as everyone "who had notable careers as musicians before the age of 18." The other teenagers are already listed there. Brian the Editor (talk) 01:39, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit

Someone should change the sentence "Rebecca Black (born June 21, 1997) is an American pop singer who rose to fame with her 2011 single "Friday"." to "Rebecca Black (born June 21, 1997) is an American pop singer who rose to infamy with her 2011 single "Friday".". I think the 700,000 dislikes on the music video can attest to that.

No. That's precisely why the article is protected. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:29, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

That being said, we really should not be censoring the song's, ermm, less than great reception. The fact that it became viral from people calling it awful is pretty well sourced; I personally am not going to add it in, but it probably should be mentioned a bit more prominently than it is.--Yaksar (let's chat) 20:00, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I think "garnering mostly negative media coverage," which is already in there, is sufficient for a fairly short biography as this one is currently. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:14, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 76.69.63.3, 26 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Rebecca Black's "Friday" now as 52 million views not 44. :)

76.69.63.3 (talk) 13:08, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I've seen it too, but we cannot cite Youtube as a reference. We need a reliable source to cite this. Thanks. Novice7 (talk) 13:12, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

lol how absurd you cannot cite Youtube as a reference about itself when it's the only source on that information —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.179.102.148 (talk) 17:29, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

• ACtually we cite youtube all the time (for viewcounts), but there's no hard rule i know of.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 19:44, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Rebecca's single has debuted on the Australian digital singles chart at #40 - can we get that updated on the discography? Source - Official ARIA charts http://www.ariacharts.com.au/pages/charts_display_digital.asp?chart=1DT40 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.35.230 (talk) 09:23, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for citing your source. Brian the Editor (talk) 02:20, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion?

So uh, who flagged this for deletion without starting a discussion or presenting arguments on the talk page? --Rogington (talk) 22:49, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Most probably it won't be deleted, it was a stupid idea. R.I.P.--Me ne frego (talk) 23:29, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion discussions never take place on talk pages. The discussion is going on at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rebecca Black, which is linked from "this article's entry" in the box atop the article. Brian the Editor (talk) 01:43, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 184.46.18.79, 28 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Wikipedia Staff:

I am sorry for bothering you, and I realize that all of you probably are very busy, but Rebecca Black does not deserve the credit for Bob Dylan's song. Please fix this.

Thank you, A Seeker of the Truth

184.46.18.79 (talk) 23:30, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Not done. No specific request and no source for request. lifebaka++ 23:40, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Just vandalism, presumably based on this parody. — anndelion (talk) 01:01, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Damn good parody, though. :) - Bilby (talk) 01:08, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Ryan Seacrest got her the record deal?

Quoted from the Daily Mail,

"She has also received a mentor in the form of American Idol host Ryan Seacrest, according to celebrity website TMZ. Following an appearance on his radio show last week, Ryan is said to have introduced her to Debra Baum, a manager with DB Entertainment."

Should this be noted? Silverseren^C 04:33, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

No. It's a rumor, albeit a reported one, and probably won't be relevant or covered in any really reliable way any time soon. It wouldn't really improve the article, either. Cheers. lifebaka++ 15:50, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Why the redirect?

Why does this page just redirect to one of Black's songs, instead of being an article about her? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.158.224.232 (talk) 16:51, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

• paternalism.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 00:40, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
• Recreation is now permitted, see: Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2011_March_14--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 13:21, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I think it should be a redirect, based on Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#People_notable_for_only_one_event DanielDPeterson (talk) 08:08, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

IMO, we may as well wait for a few weeks or months. If everybody's forgotten about her the page can be merged with Friday (Rebecca Black song) then. But if (God help us) she goes on to have a successful career, then it would be a shame if the page were deleted and it was subsequently decided she deserved a page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.7.168.82 (talk) 13:31, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Alice540, 26 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Rebecca's video "Friday" currently has over 789,204 dislikes, having the most dislikes in Youtube history.

Alice540 (talk) 02:41, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

No it doesn't. Justin Bieber's song "Baby" has over 1,000,000 dislikes. --Our Lady Overkill (talk) 05:34, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

She's getting up there, though. If the current development keeps up, the song will be the most hated video on youtube some time next week. Keep an eye on the situation! --Rogington (talk) 15:38, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

As of April 1, 2011, this song has officially surprassed "Baby" as the most disliked song on YouTube with over 1.3 million dislikes and an abysmal 165,000 likes. That was fast, almost doubling in a mere five days. --Our Lady Overkill (talk) 07:12, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Cinci555, 29 March 2011

The main thing missing from this article, is that while her youtube video has received millions of hits, it also is the MOST DISLIKED video on youtube.

Cinci555 (talk) 15:13, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Bility (talk) 15:42, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD2LRROpph0

The official video page. It has overtaken Justin Bieber's Baby (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kffacxfA7G4) as the most hated/disliked video on youtube with 1.2 million-some dislikes vs 1.1 million-some dislikes. --Rogington (talk) 19:44, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

An ephemeral distinction, I assure you. Besides, that information would be more suited to the actual article on the song. Here, it reads too negative. Cheers. lifebaka++ 00:21, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Already in the article on the song. Dcoetzee 23:54, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

number of views on youtube

The current number is of views is stated as follows:

"The music video uploaded to YouTube has received over 70 million views, as of March 31, 2011" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD2LRROpph0

However the current number of views if over 74 million views, as of April 1, 2011. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ndfrspd8622 (talk • contribs) 00:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

80M on April 3. But there's a note saying not to change the number, and to see discussion. Well there's no discussion on discussion, except one comment that youtube "is not a reliable source." It's good enough for any college paper, any newspaper, and the only source of such information. Plus it's not a policy on wikipedia not to use it. So whoever doesn't want us to update the numbers, can you defend that?--Mrcolj (talk) 21:33, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

An image anyone?

Hi, I think an image of Rebecca would be appropriate. it shouldnt be that hard to find one to upload to commons I think?. If you have one put it on the article ASAP.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

To the contrary, obtaining a freely licensed photo of Rebecca Black is quite difficult. You would either have to take a photo of her yourself or get a release from ARK or her family. Dcoetzee 22:38, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Too bad we cannot use "fair use" or "transformation." --John Bessa (talk) 14:33, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Merge with the song's Wiki page?

At the moment, Black's encyclopedic relevance is entirely based on "Friday". If she releases another single, or especially an album, it would be appropriate to create her own page, but at the moment, she and her song should be covered in a single article. - Drlight11 (talk) 07:35, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

• No. This article has been discussed at considerable length at Articles for Deletion (see discussion here); consensus and guidelines mean that we should keep the article, without merging.Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 09:39, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
• No this article has just went trough an Afd process and it has been established that Black is notable as a person too.--BabbaQ (talk) 09:47, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
• Wait I bet this will be a logical decision within the next few months, but there's no reason to rush it.--Yaksar (let's chat) 21:36, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
• There are similar/additional comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rebecca Black. Airplaneman ✈ 00:48, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
• No. Per the recent AfD. --Joshua Issac (talk) 14:10, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Funny or Die

Did she (Rebecca Black) really team up with them, or is it a fine piece of acting? --91.32.94.203 (talk) 15:02, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't know what you mean about acting, but she teamed up for them for April Fool's day and made a couple of videos with them about car safety and such. See here and here. Silverseren^C 15:36, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

So, from your second link: "[...] because viral video star Rebecca Black has bought out the humor site. (Before you believe that statement, however, kindly check your calendar.)" I'm not sure if I have to add that the whole news is from April 1st, which is traditionally known for, so to say, incorrect statements (April Fools' Day)?! Ms Black herself was so nice to point this out ([1]). I'm pretty sure, however, that the "Rebecca Black" girl in the video is a funny (and somewhat older) actress and not Ms Black, and I really can't take news from April 1st as a proof of the contrary. --91.32.94.203 (talk) 16:35, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

We'll need reliable sources saying otherwise. I think the joke was the fact that Funny or Die was changed to Friday or Die. Not that Black was a fake. I'm fairly certain that's here, but I suppose it might not be. You'll still have to find a reliable source saying that it isn't her however. Silverseren^C 16:55, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I won't be able to, probably, but also "This should cheer up Black, who was dissed by Miley Cyrus" (from your first link) does not make much sense to me if Rebecca Black already proved to stand high above things so coolly – maybe she does, but the author of the first article doesn't actually seem to assume it. --91.32.94.203 (talk) 17:09, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Well if this is notable, then why doesn't Bangs have an article?

Why? SnopakeSnopakeSnopake (talk) 16:04, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I found the page about Bangs. TAKE U TO DA MOVIES WIV DA POPPKORN. SnopakeSnopakeSnopake (talk) 16:08, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Vanity label

I removed this from the description of Ark Music Factory on this page (there may be other pages where it needs to be removed). Ark's being confused for a vanity label (by some media outlets, it seems, in addition to casual observers) because they are taking "vanity label" to be analogous to the publishing world's "vanity press" - a fee-for-service publisher. But that's not what a vanity label is. A vanity record label is a label set up by someone already well-known to release his/her own music or pet projects - something like The Beatles' Apple Records or Fall Out Boy's Decaydance. Those are vanity labels. Ark is a fee-for-service label, whose business model does not appear to be essentially different from, say, Sun Records's in its early days. "Vanity" is a more neutral, definitional description in the music world, and doesn't seem to carry quite the same stigma it does in the publishing world (or at least, if it does, it carries it in a different way). Chubbles (talk) 19:44, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

So, essentially, there needs to be a new word added to the lexicon for the music version of vanity publishers so it has the same negative stigma, as should be applied to ARK Music Factory? :P (I totally agree with what I just said, no sarcasm). Silverseren^C 19:58, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

• I agree that ARK does not fit with the more traditional definition of vanity label found in the WP article, and does more properly fit with the definition at vanity press (also called "subsidy publishers", which is a redirect to vanity press). Since the term "vanity label" is evidently being used in the media to describe what ARK does, we need some sort of clarification there pointing users to the right place. --Arxiloxos (talk) 20:07, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

  I suppose that, in a place like Ark's own page, where such nuance would be appropriate, I'd go with something like a "fee-for-service label, operating similarly to a vanity press book publisher (although it is not a vanity record label)". That's rather a mouthful for this article, though... Chubbles (talk) 20:26, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

  Agreed that it's a bit wordy here. Might be worth including at ARK Music Factory, though. Cheers. lifebaka++ 22:09, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

New info: Nomination and lawsuit

This article from OK! Magazine discusses the nomination of Rebecca Black (and Justin Bieber) for the new internet-based awards show, the O Music Awards. It was apparently created by MTV, so this seems fairly important.

Another article also from OK! Magazine discusses the possibility of Black suing the ARK Music Factory for not upholding their end of the contract, in that she retains all copyright to the song since she paid for it. It also points out that "With some help from Ryan Seacrest, Rebecca has signed a record deal with DB Entertainment.", which I do think should be specified in the article. Silverseren^C 02:16, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Of course, these two are important. We should add them to the article. Novice7 (talk) 15:31, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

There's a more detailed discussion of the possible legal disputes (between Black and ARK, and between the principals of ARK) in Rolling Stone, which I'd think is also a more reliable source than OK!. "Exclusive: Rebecca Black Fighting Ark Music Factory Over 'Friday'", Rolling Stone, April 1, 2011. I wouldn't object if someone wants to put something in the article, but it sounds like this is rather speculative at the moment. --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:01, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

"American teen pop singer"

I am changing the intro to "Rebecca Black is a teen Youtube sensation" as that is all she is at the moment. She only has 1 song out and supposedly has a record deal, this hardly qualifies her as a "pop singer". She may one day truly become one, but she isn't one now. Alek2407 (talk) 17:35, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

• She is confirmed to have a record deal, there is no supposedly about it. Silverseren^C 17:45, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
• What are the criteria to be considered a pop singer? The only one I can think of is, sing a pop song. Which Black has done; it's very nearly the only thing she has done. Chubbles (talk) 17:48, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Discussion on LOL

This article states Rebecca is releasing LOL but Rebecca tweeted on http://twitter.com/MsRebeccaBlack she is NOT recording LOL and the more info is on http://www.greatnewmovies.com/2011/03/31/rebecca-black-is-not-recording-new-song-lol/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.124.237.107 (talk) 18:11, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Red outfit girls?

Any idea what theyre all about? thank you. --Pabloviva22 (talk) 12:33, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from ShadowRobn, 10 April 2011

I'd like to add a picture of Black from her official video. http://img813.imageshack.us/img813/318/rebblack4wiki.png

ShadowRobn (talk) 19:39, 10 April 2011

N Not done and not likely to be done As the picture was taken from a music video, it's copyrighted. OpenInfoForAll (talk) 01:45, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Wording on opening paragraph

The phrase"propelling Black into the limelight" in the opening paragraph of the article needs to be changed. The use of the word "limelight" is frowned upon, as it's an idiom. A better phrase would be "which caused Black to gain notoriety". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.22.127.15 (talk) 17:59, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Rebecca Black really a viral marketing campaign?

According to: http://entertainmentnews.instantfreesite.com/stuff.html, Rebecca Black is not a real person, rather she is a character in an upcoming movie for which 'Friday' was just a marketing ploy.

I'm pretty sure that story is fabricated. I can find no other sources for this story that aren't based on this one. It's possible this news site accepts user submissions, or that it was a belated April Fools joke. Dcoetzee 03:50, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh, wow, that's elaborate. I did some digging and that web page is completely fake. Look, the home address links to the same news article. Someone made that page in order to pretend that it was a part of the stuff.co.nz newspaper website, when it isn't. That entire page is a hoax. That's pretty tricky. Silverseren^C 04:45, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

And now it's been taken down. Dcoetzee 23:54, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Infobox picture

Seeing as how this is a screenshot from a YouTube video it is not free so therefore should be removed I believe. Matt G (talk) 23:42, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Why was my contribution deleted?

So i added the fact that she has 6 toes on each foot and it got deleted, have you seen her foot? no. i have so i know, why dlete it?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Luca Di-Maio (talk • contribs) 22:52, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Where did you get this? We cannot operate off the grounds that you actually saw her foot; there is no proof. For all we know, even if this somehow was true, you are making this up. If you can find a reliable source to indicate that this is true, by all means add it. Otherwise, Wikipedia is not a place for original research and WP:SPECULATION. Please read some of these links for clarification. MobileSnail 22:55, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Yep, as Mobile Snail has said: if you can find a WP:RELIABLE source that mentions her having six toes please add the information to the article, making sure to WP:CITE it properly. DubiousIrony ^yell 07:16, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 131.162.159.120, 16 April 2011

The final line in the biography write-up-"he has also stated that she is a fan of Justin Bieber, and expressed interest in performing a duet with him", I was just going to add a reference http://arts.nationalpost.com/2011/03/21/rebecca-black-to-justin-bieber-would-you-do-a-duet-with-me/ to the sentence 131.162.159.120 (talk) 21:31, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

• Done. Good find :-) Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 22:17, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Rapper?

That's probably the most offensive thing I've ever read! Seriously though, if that's rap then Paris Hilton's metal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.77.173.236 (talk) 01:01, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Image, if anyone else is in favor

I hereby suggest that the Article should include a photograph of Miss Black just above her InfoBox. We do this here on Wikipedia for most other individuals on whom we have Articles. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 05:58, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a free, non-copyrighted image we can use? Silverseren^C 04:05, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Memurrayjr, 24 April 2011

Rebecca black sucks so much!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11 eww Memurrayjr (talk) 14:33, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

This assessment of Rebecca Black is an opinion and so does not adhere to Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Dcoetzee 14:43, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Rebecca black ethnicity

What is her ethnicity? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.95.191.41 (talk) 10:17, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Quick Google search reveals only speculation and disagreement between three camps (Italian/Mexican/Random Ethnicity vs. she's a white girl who goes tanning vs. "who cares? You're racist!"). That being said, this is not really the place to ask. Talk pages are for improving the article in question, not for discussion of the subject. Try the WP:REFDESK. DubiousIrony ^yell 10:45, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

As with most Americans, I would say that it's probably a mix of multiple ethnicities. Silverseren^C 11:03, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

The ABC interview has video of her mom being interviewed as well. Her mother has the last name "Marquez" and also is relatively dark complected, it seems likely she is Mexican. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.169.204.122 (talk) 18:00, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Joseph.p.wood, 1 May 2011

{{edit semi-protected}}

The youtube video has recieved over 2.5 million dislikes not 2.4. I suggest this should be changed [7] > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD2LRROpph0

Joseph.p.wood (talk) 18:53, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Not done: What you can is not important and not needed. Also youtube is not a WP:RSHardy Heck (talk) 19:58, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

"Many Music Critics"? "Worst Song Ever"?

There is a claim in the lede that "many" music critics negatively reviewed the song (in spite of the fact this was a vanity release by an unknown singer.) The three cites attached to that claim were not reviews per se. One cited article does, however, refer to four reviews including (ironically) a positive one from Rolling Stone. All four of those reviews turned out to be ironic commentary on Rebecca Black as a viral phenomenon more than assessments of the actual musical merits of her single. (The song is, in any case, an inane but listenable pop song which is by any objective standard far from the worst single ever released.) Timothy Horrigan (talk) 01:16, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Hoax posting with false claim Rebecca Black is pregnant

Rebecca Black is reported to be pregnant. Source is http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-607582. What is the guideline for how long to wait, or how the information gets confirmed before updating the article with this sort of information? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikkedit (talk • contribs) 15:45, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

That report is user-generated and unofficial. Her twitter page explicitly says that she's not pregnant. ~Ttony21^{(talk, contribs)} 17:54, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

The report is also flagged by CNN as being under review -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:02, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Nice work. Regarding my original question, I found the help section at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:PROVEIT#Other_issues useful, especially the section titled "Exceptional claims require exceptional sources". Wikkedit (talk) 13:10, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

It's a prank done by ebaumsworld. http://img204.imageshack.us/i/1305480167676.png/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.105.83.232 (talk) 18:37, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

• Its not a very inspired prank, either. ebaums/4chan are slacking on this one.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 11:40, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

"Appropriate and Clean?"

In her music video there's a thirteen year old driving a card and middle schoolers going to parties. Someone explain to me how that's appropriate? 76.235.129.231 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:43, 27 April 2011 (UTC).

How do you even know those kids are thirteen and the kids attending the party are in middle school? For all you know they're 16 and up. -- GunMetal Angel 04:12, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

How does one drive a card? 174.57.203.45 (talk) 02:31, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Pic

Here is a pic by Rebecca. [2] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.29.83.253 (talk) 20:02, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, images of living people must be non-free (and that image is copyrighted) —GFOLEY FOUR— 20:37, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from DillonMN, 25 May 2011

 Not done

To whom this may reach,

As you can see on Rebecca Black's website, www.rebeccablackonline.com, her manager is Debra Baum. On her Wikipage it says John McEntee. Wikipedia lists www.rebeccablackonline.com as her official website. If you go to this website and scroll down you will see on the right hand side Rebecca's management contact information, NOT JOHN MCENTEE. So please change "By March 25, 2011, Black hired a publicist and a manager. Her manager John McEntee, president of TEI Entertainment, Anaheim, California confirmed that he has been contacted by songwriters and record labels with ideas for more songs and an album.[20]" to "Black hired Debra Baum as her manager." And Rebecca's official website can be listed as the verifiable reference. If I need to supply more info, please reply and tell me! Thanks.

DillonMN (talk) 22:06, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

We go by what we can verify in reliable sources. Whoever her manager may be now, the reliable sources reported John McEntee as related to that part of her history and story and so will we. Active Banana (^bananaphone 22:11, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Did you not read the response? We go by what the reliable sources say. Active Banana (^bananaphone 00:30, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

RESPONSE: (for the third time) NO we will not change the article to say that someone else other than the person named in our reliable source made a statement that they did not make. We report what the reliable sources state and that is that. Active Banana (^bananaphone 00:37, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

I have to say that is the stupidest response I have ever read if it contradicts the person it self it is clearly not a reliable source in the first place. --174.45.204.216 (talk) 23:32, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

People change agents ALL THE TIME and can have different agents representing different aspects of their life/career.

All you have is that at the time you looked at the website, a certain name was listed as her agent at that time on her website. There is no evidence that McEntee was not her agent at the time he made the statement that we are quoting. And there is ABSOLUTLEY no evidence that someone other than McEntee made the statement that was in our reliable source. And if you find evidence that our source was mistaken, then we will completely remove the quote.Active Banana (^bananaphone 01:41, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Negative reaction

Shouldn't it be discussed some where in the article that the reason this singer rose to fame was because the song was generally considered horrible? Ignoring negative feedback is just as biased as focusing on it. 75.39.32.138 (talk) 05:55, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

YES! The song was viral becuase of how bad and cheesy it was! That is why it became a hit! BEcuase it had so many veiws form people saying "You HAVE to watch this video!" becuas it is bad, I can't belive record companies saw through that and said "Your getting famous, sighn with us" that is so stupid, especially becuase if people call that singing, I dont know what is happeing to the music today! look at Adele, That is music , not this squeaky-pop that is horrible unless everyone else likes it.

There is clear main stream media coverage of this now being the most disliked video on youtube ever. A google news search of "most disliked video ever" is currently resulting in over 200 sources. To leave this out of the page is more biased than not including it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.6.175.122 (talk) 03:08, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

"The song was generally considered horrible"

It isn't horrible -- just hastily written -- and that's an opinion which is not encyclopedic. The song went viral for a simple reason: she is appealing. Her most important characteristic is that she appeals to the crowd, and that she connects with the camera. Her gravely voice, obviously genuine friendships, and strong intonation and rhythm, and genuine expressions are why she went viral. She is a mark of the success of the Information Society.

What I think is worth discussing is why such a high percentage of web maganzine writers and forum posters moved so quickly to attack her talent. I think she has exposed the root problem that society faces, and more important, the Information Society faces.--John Bessa (talk) 14:31, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

You're joking right? The video clearly went viral for how awful it is. I, like most, first heard about it from a friend saying "Dude, check out this f***ing awful song". 04:01, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Stuff goes viral because it's bad just as often as it goes viral because it's good. Remember 2 girls 1 cup? That video went viral and it certainly wasn't because it was appealing; just look up reaction videos for it and you can see people throwing up because it's so disgusting. For the record I'm not implying Friday is that bad, but assuming it did well because it was good shows a basic misunderstanding of how people think. 74.115.126.183 (talk) 21:02, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Yeah the true problem is the internet is exposing just how much of an asshole everybody is when they have a computer to hide behind. 24.218.123.138 (talk)

I think it should be specifically noted, that 90% of YouTube users that rated her video clip disliked it. 195.113.65.215 (talk) 11:54, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

though i dnt like the song i think its unfair that evryones being such a b**** to her —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.25.147.251 (talk) 20:39, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

• It does seem worth discussing that the lack of quality of the song is responsible for its fame. What's truly funny about it though, is that all of her detractors made her a star by making fun of her and parodying her, thereby giving her legitimacy and fame. If not for her extremely poor songwriting ability, nobody would have heard of her. 205.250.222.39 (talk) 03:47, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

She didn't even write the song. ARK Music Factory did. 184.152.83.22 (talk) 04:06, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Rebecca Black is 13?

That's sorta unbelievable. Because in her single Friday it shows her 13 year old friends somehow driving a car, which doesn't make any sense at all. Notshane (Talk | Contributions) 00:25, May 28, 2011 (UTC)

Videos are NOT real life. Active Banana (^bananaphone 01:45, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

hell she looks like shes 18 maybe 19 i guess that ppl seem older then they are. [CECN BLAISSE ROBERT USN] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.26.177.70 (talk) 15:33, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit Request: "River" cover release

Rebecca Black has confirmed on her Twitter account that the cover of "River" and the YouTube channel it belongs to is by a poser. Anyone who is able to, please remove the information at Wikipedia ASAP. I can't because the page is protected. 218.186.17.237 (talk) 08:29, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 21:59, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, but erm.... LOL you've removed what is actually the truth! Rebecca Black did appear in the TGIF Music Video by Katy Perry. :D I was referring to the line "In June 2011, she uploaded another single instead on her VEVO-based account. It is called "River", a cover of a track taken from singer Lights' 2009 album The Listening.[34]" If you checked out Rebecca Black's twitter messages, she maintained that the VEVO-based account is fake and the cover too as well. The cited news was misled as well. Also Rebecca was only in "Last Friday night" was becuase she is viral for being really bad. Therefore, People know who she is!

But anyway thanks again for listening. 218.186.17.234 (talk) 13:41, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Now, the River cover was removed and the "In Popular Culture" section has been restored. Sorry for any confusion this may have caused. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 16:38, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 58.179.125.214, 23 June 2011

Please change "Roberta Black" to "Rebecca Black" in the following sentence "In April 2011, the MTV O Music Awards, one of the annual awards established by MTV to honor the art, creativity, personality and technology of music into the digital space nominated "Which Seat Can I Take?" for "Favorite Animated GIF" that included footage by Roberta Black featuring 50 Cent and Bert."

Thank you.

58.179.125.214 (talk) 09:41, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Done Verified at source of original statement Jnorton7558 (talk) 10:00, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit Request "In Popular Culture"

Under the "In Popular Culture" section it states...

Rebecca Black appears in the music video of Katy Perry's hit single "Last Friday Night (T.G.I.F.)", an obvious parody of Rebecca Black's viral song "Friday".[citation needed]

How can Katy Perry's song be a parody of Rebecca Black's song Friday if it was released in August 2010? Or is it trying to say the music video meant to be a parody? Either way I don't think it is "an obvious parody" of anything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.182.220.226 (talk) 08:34, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree with this, and ask that the entire section be removed. 68.35.40.154 (talk) 08:55, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Done While the song Last Friday Night (T.G.I.F.) was indeed released late last year, the music video was not produced until mid-May of this year, well after "Friday" gained viral popularity. That said, I've removed the section as it was unsourced. elektrikSHOOS 20:47, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Copyright Claims??

Sofia1233 (talk) 10:05, 25 June 2011 (UTC) Shouldn't there be a section in the article where it says that the video has been removed. It does say so briefly in the beginning paragraph, but it doesn't exactly say so why. It has been removed because ARK music factory began paying people to watch the video. And Black's mother had paid $4000 for making the video and their were claims as to who kept the money and who exactly owned the video. Shouldn't there be a section on this? Because i happen to be confused.

4000.00 fee

I think "allegedly" needs to be added to the statement her mother paid 4000 for the video. It may be a quote, but it's still not true. The studio charges over 50k per video as an entry point. No one is going to write, record and produce a video for that cheap. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lnlogauge (talk • contribs) 17:09, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Fair use and image

In an earlier now-Archived thread, I suggested including a picture of Miss Black just above her InfoBox (as is general practice for other Articles on individuals). Someone mentioned the Copyright issue. However, something occurred to me just now. Rebecca Black is from the USA (so am I by the way), and our country's Copyright laws contain a fair use exception for scholarship- and research-based use of nonfictional material. As Rebecca Black is not a fictional character, this exception applies. (This fair use clause would not apply to Mario for example; we need Nintendo's permission to show him no matter what.) The exception is also revoked when one derives financial gain from said use, but, as Wiki is not a pay site, I don't see that as an issue either. So, are there any other objections? The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 06:30, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Her Mom Paid $2,000, not $4,000

Her mother paid for her to have a song recorded by Ark Music Factory. She paid $2,000, not $4,000. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lavaster2 (talk • contribs) 05:01, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a source to back this up? We can't put this in the article based solely on your word. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 05:05, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Plants, 19 July 2011

Youtube -> YouTube (capitalize Y and T)

Plants (talk) 07:44, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Done I think Jnorton7558 (talk) 07:47, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Edit Request 21.7.2011

Can someone change "The music video has more than 160 million views, causing Black to gain international attention as a "viral star", before being removed from the site on June 16" to "The music video had more than 160 million views, causing Black to gain international attention as a "viral star", before being removed from the site on June 16". Verb is in the wrong tense. RumDrools (talk) 00:47, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Done I changed it to received. Jnorton7558 (talk) 01:36, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Ryancats23, 29 July 2011

add a photo of rebecca black

Ryancats23 (talk) 21:52, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Not done: Is there a non-copyrighted picture that we can use? Jnorton7558 (talk) 04:35, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Ugh, VIral Star?? Viral for being aweful! sadly a lot of poeple tuned in becuase it was so bad!

Sorry to break it to you

Um sorry but Rebecca Black went to Milford middle school not in California she went to Milford which is in Delaware so get your facts strait please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apersonudntknow:p (talk • contribs) 23:51, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

And why do you claim this.Can you source it.Try spellcheck too while you're at it.Sam 17:00, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Rebecca Black descent

You did mention that rebecca is from english, spanish, italian and scottish descent, but you don't mention his mexican descent since her mother is mexican ¿racism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.155.69.168 (talk) 17:34, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

"his mexican descent"? ¿Sexism? a_man_alone (talk) 13:54, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Coverage assurance on things that are negatively received to the point where it's notable?

I noticed all from the song "Friday", it was so badly received worldwide that it actually had its own page with Black not even having her own article originally. This is just the case of people's dislike for something so much to where the page actually becomes notable because of its worldwide hate. I was thinking; if this is so, could the same thing be done for a page on Design the Skyline? (If you don't know about this band, Google, click on one of the YouTube results and shield your ears) They're so badly panned that I think their page could be created even if they only have one demo out and a full-length on the way while WP:MUSIC states that an article's notability is usually on instance of having two full-length releases and other things. But they are signed to Victory for one, and for two they already received a ton of media coverage from everyone's dislike for them. • GunMetal Angel 06:20, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

The dislike has to profound and widespread.There have to be references in the popular media.It has to attain a certain degree of fame.Then I assure you it will become a wiki article.Being bad does not validate an article.Ps:I consider this request highly out of placeSam 16:24, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Well thanks for listening but as for the last part... well that's your opinion. Sorry you want to be rude about it. It was a question. • GunMetal Angel 16:33, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

This isn't the place for a new article request or idea.They have forums for that.Sam 16:59, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

America's Got Talent

She performed last night August 10 on America's Got Talent. Source: http://www.okmagazine.com/2011/08/rebecca-black-performs-her-youtube-hit-friday-on-americas-got-talent/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.197.202.161 (talk) 16:37, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Auto-tune

Could someone please include the fact that Rebecca Black uses auto-tune in her songs. I think this is relatively germane. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.26.98.156 (talk) 19:04, 21 August 2011 (UTC) Rebecca uses auto tune, whih majes her voice sound better, sadly its still not good, she sings through her nose! oh well, her mom paid 4,000 to get her popular, and she got it, saldy she's famous for being bad. :(

Rebecca Black and school

I found:

• Duray, Christopher. "“Friday” singer Rebecca Black bullied out of school." Houston Chronicle. August 12, 2011.

WhisperToMe (talk) 18:41, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

She also made a statement about that: http://twitter.com/#!/MsRebeccaBlack/status/101732970641104897 http://www.twitlonger.com/show/cb29tn . If thats going to be added to the article, so should this.Nerdopolis (talk) 00:43, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Rebecca Black uses Auto-tune witch makes her voice sound better, sadly she is still not good, her voice is very sharp and flat, she sings through her nose. Her mom paid 4,000 to get her popoular but she is famous for being bad!

ARK Music Factory among "Labels"

The musical artist infobox states that what should be listed is the "record label or labels to which the act has been signed". Rebecca Black, however, never actually signed with ARK Music Factory. I wanted to bring this up to see if anyone objected before I removed that from the infobox. -- Atama頭 01:44, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

...So I see that it has been replaced without discussion? Does anyone even read the talk page here? -- Atama頭 18:42, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

You say that Rebecca black did not sign with ARK.Can you please source that?Let the status quo remain until thenSam 19:45, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Um... You know, unless we have a sources that explicitly says she did, it might not be possible to prove the negative. This is why the burden of proof is in those who wish to include information, not those who remove it. Cheers. lifebaka++ 21:42, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Exactly. I couldn't provide a source that says I've never signed with ARK either. ;) But this Rolling Stone article suggests that she never was signed:

• "She's not our exclusive artist," said Wilson. "Once an artist meets with us and once they blow up, they have a choice to retain us or move on if they can. Rebecca is now signed with someone else."
• Wilson's Ark Music Factory partner Clarence Jey contended that Ark did act as a record label for Black, and distributed and promoted her with her mother's consent – until it became clear that Black was going to make actual money.

It "acted as a record label" but she never signed on as an artist with them. Also, on another note, we don't "let the status quo stay" when we have a BLP with unsourced disputed information. -- Atama頭 06:09, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Ah well,search engines failed to reveal any reference to Black signing with ARK.Sam 10:15, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

My Moment reaction

mostly

: for the greatest part : mainly'' -Merriam Webster Dictionary

Now I'm no Math genius but 63% seems like the greatest part to me. Here's a piechart. It's a fact. --TheAmericanizator (talk) 17:28, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

How about just using a source like this article from The Nation? It says, and I quote, "The comments on the video, which were mostly negative, were disabled in May 2011." -- Atama頭 17:39, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

We are not talking about "Friday". This is about the sequel song "My Moment". There has been no RS coverage of the reaction yet. So any estimate or evaluation on our part is simply WP:OR. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 18:59, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake, I misread the comment and page history (it would help if TheAmericanizator was a bit clearer in the comment above). Yes, without a reliable source it's best to remove any analysis of the reception of the video. What TheAmericanizator wants to do is basically use Wikipedia the way a journalist uses a newspaper; to look at information, draw a conclusion, and write about it. Doing so is original research. Now, you could say that as of a particular date, the video received more dislikes than likes, which doesn't require any analysis. But to go through and draw a conclusion based on reading comments left for the video is the kind of work that we rely on third parties to do. If we find a source similar to the one I found for Friday above, that would be acceptable I think. -- Atama頭 21:11, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree. Personally I don't think that even reporting the Youtube "like", "dislike" numbers is acceptable unless a reliable source has covered them. Just going to Youtube and reporting them by ourselves does not satisfy the notability criteria since it is unclear how notable these numbers are in the absence of coverage by RS. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 21:49, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, that's another issue. I was just pointing out that it wouldn't be OR, but even still it might not be worth mentioning. -- Atama頭 22:24, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

So something like this or this? Maybe coupled with this to show how quickly the negative ratings built up? --TheAmericanizator (talk) 23:00, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

The Zimbio article isn't a reliable source, it's a member-contributed article so it's about as reliable as someone's personal web page or a blog. The IB Times and Metro articles, on the other hand, should work just fine. Both seem to be legitimate online news sources, and the Metro in particular is also a print newspaper. -- Atama頭 00:45, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

The International Business Times article is not attributed to a named reporter while the newspaper itself is of dubious notability. The Metro citation may be slightly better but why concentrate on the Youtube dubious likes/dislikes metric while the article of the song itself has much more coverage, especially from reputable newspapers such as the NYT etc. This is a BLP. An obscure Youtube statistic covered by a tabloid such as Metro may well be WP:UNDUE for inclusion here. It may belong in the article of the song itself but not here. Except if we are to prove by WP:SYNTH that Black is a poor artist. Personally, I  Dislike the idea. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 01:15, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't know, I'm divided on it. On the one hand, for the sake of consistency it would make sense for that kind of information to be restricted to the article on the song itself, since I doubt many artist biographies list the approval rating of all of their YouTube videos. On the other hand, let's face it, much of Rebecca's notability stems precisely from the attention gained from the negative reaction to her initial video which made her famous (infamous?), and so it might be more relevant in this biography than it would be for, say, Justin Bieber's biography; despite being another musician who became famous through YouTube, his fame didn't stem from the negative reaction to his videos. On the other other hand, even Bieber's biography mentions how one of his videos was the most disliked video on YouTube until Friday... So again, I'm divided on the issue. -- Atama頭 02:05, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

For milestone songs, best, worst etc. with sufficient RS coverage maybe it is ok for this type of info to be included in a biography article. But "My Moment" doesn't appear to have such distinction. The coverage of the likes/dislikes is also poor. Plus the NYT and other papers have critiqued and even praised Black on other aspects of the song and its execution. There is, however, no mention of these other points of praise/criticism. Just the like/dislike metric. Why? Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 02:24, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Regarding immanent edit requests about rumors of her being abused:

Just to let Wikipedia editors knowledgeable about probably imminent edit requests regarding rumors about her father from pranksters or misinformed people: It seems some people are trying to spread this rumor as seen in this screenshot of their conversation: http://twitpic.com/6e7ev5 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nerdopolis (talk • contribs) 01:14, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Who takes anything on 4chan seriously?Sam 10:17, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Looking at the archives for this talk page, apparently a WHOLE bunch of people did on May 15 2011, that it forced her to Twitter... On the day I posted this, I noticed Youtube comments where being filled with these allegations (but after I saw nothing in Google News, and given their history, they where my first suspects. Using an image blocker, and a specialized search engine I indeed found the conspiracy thread.), They also created a fake Facebook page, and infiltrated Yahoo Answers. I just thought that if edit requests for this came from one of the insiders, or a gullible person, I should let Wikipedia know of the origin.Nerdopolis (talk) 14:40, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry, Nerdopolis, if we see anything we'll be glad for the warning. And I do expect we'll see something, given time. Cheers. lifebaka++ 15:08, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from ChrissehJohnson, 19 September 2011

On the re-uploaded "Friday" section, you should put speech marks on "Friday" and have a capital letter on the T on YouTube. On the Ark Music Factory and "Friday" you should have the 2010-2011 on the left hand side including the second one with RB Records and you should have capital letter at the beginning of "Album".

That's it! Thank you. <3 :) ChrissehJohnson (talk) 05:52, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

I have completed the first part of the request, but from what I can tell everything looks correct in relation to the second 2. --Jnorton7558 (talk) 14:06, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from ChrissehJohnson, 19 September 2011

There sould be a picture of Rebecca Black also.

ChrissehJohnson (talk) 21:38, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Not done: no free image is currently available. Danger (talk) 21:42, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from ChrissehJohnson, 20 September 2011

Rebecca Black is nominated for "Iconic Web Star" at the 2011 J-14 Teen Icon Award.

ChrissehJohnson (talk) 11:47, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a reference for this? lifebaka++ 12:57, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

A quickie Google search shows this to be true: J-14 TEEN ICON AWARDS 2011: Who is your Iconic Web Star?

I suppose that since J-14 is pretty popular among pre-teens and younger teens, it might be worth mentioning, but then again it's just a nomination. I can't claim to be an expert on these things. -- Atama頭 16:40, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 121.79.15.66, 22 September 2011

There shouldn't be a "Teen Pop" it should only say Pop because Rebecca Black is a Pop singer. Teen Pop is like Demi Lovato, I suggest you get rid of Teen Pop. Love yous! xo

121.79.15.66 (talk) 05:58, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

I'll remove that. I'd recently trimmed it down to just "pop", because at one time it listed just about every kind of "pop" music genre that there is, including teen pop, bubblegum pop, and dance pop. Template:Infobox musical artist states, "Aim for generality (e.g. Hip hop rather than East Coast hip hop)." So yes, it should only say "pop". -- Atama頭 17:27, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 121.79.15.66, 23 September 2011

You guys should put a picture of Rebecca Black. Love yous! xo

121.79.15.66 (talk) 01:01, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

We'd be happy to, if we had a free one.  Not done. lifebaka++ 01:04, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

What do you mean there's no free one? ChrissehJohnson (talk) 06:37, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

I mean that there is no image of Black that is available under a license compatible with Wikipedia's. Due to the fact that it's supposedly easy for someone to take a picture of a living person and upload it here under a proper license, fair use images of living people always fail WP:NFCC #1, because a free equivalent shouldn't be that hard to find. In practice, sometimes it is, and in cases where it is we end up without a picture until someone can take one and provide it. I suppose someone could email Black's manager or label asking for one. I will early next week if no one else is up for it. Cheers. lifebaka++ 14:12, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Do you have her manager's email? --Sam 15:14, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Seems easy enough to find. I can't find a website for RB Records, so that one's a bust. lifebaka++ 16:58, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks,I sent her an email.but I notice that there is already an image here.Is it good to go? --Sam 18:46, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

The image is one that was already on WIkipedia at the Friday (Rebecca Black song) article. I did a search at Commons and in Wikipedia and this image was the most pertinent one I found. Shearonink (talk) 20:56, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm a complete idiot when it comes to image use policy, and I've never claimed otherwise, but I'm not sure if using the image in this article matches the fair use claim on the image itself. You're using it as an image for Rebecca, not the single. WP:NFCI includes, "Cover art from various items, for identification only in the context of critical commentary of that item (not for identification without critical commentary)." Hopefully someone with a better grasp on such things can confirm if my concerns are valid.

Also, if nobody else can get through to them, I know another channel to get through to Rebecca's management and I imagine they'd be willing to help with an image, though someone might have to help them if they need to contact OTRS or use other channels to give Wikipedia permission to use an image. I can confirm that the link that Lifebaka provided above has Debra Baum's direct email address. -- Atama頭 22:22, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

I know the album cover-art isn't ideal but it was the best image I could find within Wikipedia's various venues that illustrated Miss Black's looks. If it isn't acceptable in its present location (within the Infobox) then as a pre-emptive action I'll move the album art to within the article to illustrate Miss Black's initial claim to notability. If the management needs clear/easy to use instructions on how to file an OTRS for an image, then feel free to send them this instruction set.Shearonink (talk) 22:38, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Yea,I sent Debra an email.Anyway you better go through your channel.This page has been without an image long enough. --Sam 22:59, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

No, we really can't use Friday's single image, and it's been removed before. As I mentioned above, it would violate WP:NFCC #1, because it's obviously replaceable. All one needs to do to get a replacement is take a picture of Black and release it under an appropriate license. As this is not necessarily easy (especially for those of us who don't live anywhere near California), consensus has not tended to allow fair use images of any living persons because of this logic.

If you feel like you're in over your depth, Sam, feel free to ask Mrs. Baum to email me at lifebaka@gmail.com instead, I'll be happy to explain the licensing requirements and other legal bits (in non-lawyer terms). Cheers. lifebaka++ 23:11, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Lifebaka, I've posted the complete/simple imaging instruction set on your talk page here (don't worry it's short). I can see the rationale for not allowing the use of the album-cover. Shearonink (talk) 23:58, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Is it just me or does the current image look photoshopped? --Sam 15:40, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

The rationale for that image on its file looks spurious to me - it's from a twitter account in Brazil & frankly looks like a reprint out of a magzine - but I don't know quite where to report it. I'm trying to find that out at the moment, but if anyone else knows, feel free. Shearonink (talk) 16:00, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

commons:Commons:Deletion requests/listing a request manually has the instructions. The file itself is located here. Cheers. lifebaka++ 16:05, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 121.79.15.66, 24 September 2011

Rebecca Black is nominated for a J-14 Teen Icon Award for Iconic Web Star and it's currently pending. Also, on September 22, 2011, Rebecca Black did a live concert in Australia. Love yous! xo

121.79.15.66 (talk) 02:38, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.

And per the edit request template...

This template may only be used when followed by a specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".

You could always register for a Wikipedia account and edit Wikipedia articles that are semi-protected. Shearonink (talk) 04:33, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 121.79.15.66, 26 September 2011

This is the reference for proof that Rebecca Black is nominated for a J-14 Teen Icon Award 2011. http://polls.j-14.com/polls/319517/thank_you

Rebecca Black also performed live in Sydney, Australia on September 22, 2011. You guys should put that in Rebecca Black's WiKi. Thank you!

121.79.15.66 (talk) 06:49, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

The poll isn't even listed as featured on j-14.com, so I'm really not sure it's worth mentioning even if she wins.

Since it only took about a minute of searching to find this source for the Australia thing, I went ahead and added a little bit to the article. Cheers. lifebaka++ 08:04, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Honor student?

It's in the Biography section. It sounds nice. It's sourced. (To the O.C.Register.) But what does it mean? What Honors study has this girl done in the first 13 years of her life? HiLo48 (talk) 07:49, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Probably, it simply refers to good grades throughout her schooling. That's the most common usage of the term in the US. I'm not terribly concerned with whether or not this information stays in the article, as it's really not important. Cheers. lifebaka++ 15:02, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Being an "honors student" is nice on a bumper sticker but I don't think it would be exceptional enough for a Wikipedia biography. -- Atama頭 16:19, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Rebecca Black 01.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Rebecca Black 01.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests September 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:49, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Rebecca+Black+2011+Teen+Choice+Awards+Arrivals+jlSsoN454CBl.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Rebecca+Black+2011+Teen+Choice+Awards+Arrivals+jlSsoN454CBl.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 05:10, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Rebecca-black-music-awards-01.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Rebecca-black-music-awards-01.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:16, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Request

Shouldn't it be pointed out that despite the amount of views the video gained, it received FAR more 'dislikes' than it did 'likes'? It seems relevant that despite it's tremendous amount of views, it was, and is very unpopular. I know it says already it was 'derided as the worst song ever' but surely the like/dislike ratio is proof of that and should be included for relevancy and confirmation of a previous statement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.176.211.28 (talk) 06:44, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

It may have receive many dislikes but was very, VERY popular, based simply on 167 million hits. Popular does not equal liked. Chrisca123 17:43, 18 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisca123 (talk • contribs)

Edit request from

would anyone be so kind as to remove the list of music videos in the article because they destroy the table.

 Done ----Bruvtakesover (talk!) 16:45, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

no pictures

Why does this article lack a picture of Rebecca Black? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.45.189.232 (talk) 23:07, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

If the subject of a biography article on Wikipedia is living, all images of them must be under a "free license". Sadly, no one has ever taken a photo of Ms. Black, and released it under such a license. -- Zanimum (talk) 21:19, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps they have. If you really want such a picture, you just have to look harder (I certainly won't).--RM (Be my friend) 05:10, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

RB Records and upcoming album (2011–present) (section)

The section starts out, "After the fallout with Ark Music Factory," What "fallout" was there? There is no previous mention of any disagreements/fallout between Ark Music Factory and Rebecca Black. Chrisca123 17:47, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 30 December 2011

Rebecca Black died on 30th December 2011, suicide, self-inflicted cutting.

Rebbeca is dead (talk) 22:05, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Source?  MegastarLV  (talk)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Bility (talk) 22:18, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

It's all over the internet since Friday, she dyed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.178.57.155 (talk) 16:24, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm sure she wouldn't be tweeting then? Bruvtakesover (T|C) 16:28, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

"It's all over the internet since Friday, she dyed" - I don't think changing her hair colour is notable. a_man_alone (talk) 16:45, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Rebecca Black.JPG Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Rebecca Black.JPG, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 10:31, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Rebecca Black is of Mexican descent.

I had made the change a few weeks ago and then someone deleted the information. Her mother is Mexican, there is no doubt about this, and part of her family is known to live in Mexico. Her grandmother, in fact, is a professor at UNAM. Therefore, I do not understand why people erased this information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juanfibarra (talk • contribs) 18:54, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't really know if calling her Mexican is accurate though. It seems Rebecca's 'Mexican' heritage is Spaniard -- not indigenous or mestizo. So instead of saying Mexican she says Spanish because that's her genes. For instance, if an American of, let's say, Italian descent, moved to Australia, met an Australian woman of Irish descent, and had a kid in Australia, that kid would be an Australian of Italian and Irish heritage. The kid would not be American because American is a nationality, and that kid would not be an American citizen because he/she wasn't born in America, nor have they become naturalized. That kid would also not be American because he doesn't have Native American ancestry, but rather Italian. His father would be American, but he wouldn't. It's the same with Mexico. Unless one has Mexican citizenship -- which Rebecca does not -- or possesses Mexican genes (i.e. Native American from Mexico) -- which Rebecca apparently also does not -- an American can not really be Mexican because Mexican is a nationality. If you are not a citizen of Mexico and you don't have indigenous Mexican heritage, you are not Mexican. You ancestors may have been, but you are not. From what she told us, Rebecca is an American who's genetic heritage consists of Spanish, Italian, Polish, and English. She doesn't include Mexican because the Mexican background of her is really Spanish genes. Just like that hypothetical Australian kid would not claim American heritage because the American heritage is really Italian genes. He/she would say they were an Australian of Italian and Irish descent.

The two main groups that one's heritage revolves around in the modern world are nationality (what country you are a citizen of) and genetics(what country/region your ancestors evolved in). If you are not a Mexican citizen, you don't have Mexican nationality. So you wouldn't be Mexican in that regard. If you are not a Native American from Mexico, then your ancestors did not evolve there, and thus, you wouldn't have Mexican genetics. So you wouldn't be Mexican in that regard either. If you don't have either Mexican citizenship or Mexican genetics you are not Mexican. It's clear that Rebecca does not hold Mexican citizenship, and from her descriptions of herself (mentioning Spanish genes), she isn't of indigenous Mexican descent. Hence I would not refer to her as Mexican. I think it's best to just label her as an American of Spanish, Italian, English, and Polish heritage like she identifies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheyCallMeTheEditor (talk • contribs) 03:18, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

I get what you say but this is not the case at all. First of all, an overwhelming majority of mexicans (over 80%) are mestizos, which means that limiting "Mexican genes" to the Native American pool is absolutely wrong. Second, Rebecca's Mexican heritage is NOT Spaniard (at least no more than the average Mexican), as her family has no immediate links to Spain. Her grandmother, in fact, is niece of General Lucio Blanco, a hero of sorts of the Mexican revolution. In other words, Rebecca's heritage is as Mexican as it gets. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juanfibarra (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that is open to editing by all. If an edit was removed by another editor, then there might have been a good reason for it. I have not looked at your particular edit but was the information referenced from a reliable source? For instance, blogs/Facebook/MySpace are not considered reliable sources for Wikipedia, sources with editorial oversight such as major newspapers/magazines or transcripts of major-market TV/radio interviews are considered reliable. Shearonink (talk) 20:03, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Of course I referenced the information. In fact, the source is an actual news outlet (Terra), wheras the info claiming that she is of "Spanish, Italian, English, and Polish" decent is referenced from Rebecca's blog. Talk about reliable sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juanfibarra (talk • contribs) 23:26, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 21 February 2012

Add this image to infobox.

98.118.173.223 (talk) 01:41, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Done Thanks, Celestra (talk) 03:43, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Hooray, a picture! It's at least a start. -- Zanimum (talk) 18:46, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Her new single

Her new single is called Sing It. https://twitter.com/#!/MsRebeccaBlack/status/18299210330603520171.245.67.92 (talk) 01:19, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Viral

The article merely states she “went viral,” but doesn’t specify how. Did she get reddited? Did someone famous post a tweet? Did someone unfamous post a tweet? Etc. —Wiki Wikardo 06:37, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

It spread from Tumblr then to Twitter then everywhere else. 79.97.21.118 (talk) 13:53, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Shouldn't this be taken out?

"Shockingly, the video has nearly twice as many likes as dislikes."

Sounds more like someones blog than a wikipedia article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZedBozon (talk • contribs) 16:18, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 July 2012

I think that one should remove the sentence, Rebecca Black has a pet betta fish named George; which often appears behind her in her YouTube videos. She also has a puppy, which she rescued from the streets - and named Nelly.[14] Black is also an avid fan of her mother's homemade spaghetti. because I do not consider it appropriate for an encyclopedic article. Thank you. --80.161.143.239 (talk) 17:45, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

• I removed the spaghetti line. The pet thing I've left for now. Thanks.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 20:32, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Partly done: Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 16:53, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 29. July

Source number 10 is dead, Her Tumblr profile has changed its URL. --80.161.143.239 (talk) 14:13, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Comment What is the new URL? Floating Boat A boat that can float! 18:35, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

• http://stayingsincere.tumblr.com --80.161.143.239 (talk) 18:43, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Not done for now: I can't see any confirmation that's her profile, nor does it indicate the nationality of her or her parents. If you find a source that does, please provide a link here and reactivate this request. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 13:45, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngiJWx951jE&feature=plcp. She confirms the description of vidoen that it is hers official tumblr.--89.249.2.53 (talk) 07:24, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

 Done Set tumblr to match Ms Blacks request.--Canoe1967 (talk) 10:16, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request 8/20/12

"My Music" is listed in Rebecca's Filmography section. First of all, there isn't a space in the title. It's "MyMusic". Secondly, there is a page for MyMusic, so you can link to it in the article. I'd appreciate it if you would edit the page to take this into account. Thank you. :) --Arkatox (talk) 00:54, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

In Your Words

There should be some info about in your words, her upcoming single. See her official youtube video here — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.227.116.150 (talk) 03:45, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Ark Music Factory fallout?

The "RB Records (2011-present) section begins "Following the fallout with Ark Music Factory," but there is no information about this fallout, nor a link to an article that does cover it.99.60.33.131 (talk) 00:39, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done - I have included information and made a link to the song Friday as that is what the section mostly talks about. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:51, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Mexican politics

We now have an unfortunate reference to Rebecca Black meddling in Mexican politics. According to Wikipedia "she drew criticism for supporting Enrique Pena Nieto for President of Mexico in the 2012 general elections, despite a prohibition in the Constitution of Mexico barring foreigners from being involved in Mexican politics." But as if this was not enough, we speculate on why she supported Nieto. We say: "Her uncle is a city council member in Cuernavaca". Conclusion: She is not bright enough. but her "uncle" played with her mind and she (American of Mexican origin) volunteered with this one sentence of praise that she likes Nieto... (the rest of the 3-minute piece she did has nothing to do with politics... It is this unique sentence of uttering his name).

So what does this piece improve on our knowledge of her? Apparently she is breaking laws because she has an opinion (freedom of speech out the door...). Her uncle "used her" for his own electoral purposes and partisan politics. And yes, she should stick to her stupid music then and nothing else.

Let's apply this to another country with the same wording. An American-Iranian artist asked about what he feels about Iran said I prefer that Rouhani gets elected in next month's election.... He can bring change. Then somebody points out: But the Iranian constitution, you non-Iranian, forbids "foreigners" like you from interfering in our politics....You are breaking our law and constitution.... You see how ludicrous we are by keeping this item in Rebecca Black's article. It is insult to our intelligence and an insult to Mexicans. People of Mexican origin or non-Mexican origin can have an opinion about Mexican politics, regardless of what the Mexican Constitution says. Probably Mexican Electoral Laws (not the Constitution) prohibit financial contributions by non-Mexican citizens to Mexican parties. That's what they mean and this is in line with other electoral laws anywhere else. Regardless, a reference to an unnamed uncle's deliberate influence to use her is just speculation. I suggest removal of the whole incidence from her page. werldwayd (talk) 05:40, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

I think it should remain, it is notable in the fact that her name came up through politics and is supported by reliable sources. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:51, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

And through her heavy handed ultimate support, Nieto became president right? Because of her and her all-influencial uncle! Good for the uncle also, a sheer speculation on our part. You don't address the part that including this "piece of gem", we our exercising our great discretion of biased selectiveness. And by keeping it, we expose Wikipedia through increased ridicule for our choice of "reliable information". In the end, how important is a one sentence utterance by a fourth rate American adolescent singer of Mexican origin in Mexican politics in contradiction to the country's "constitution" another very doubtful fact. I can understand your concern of documenting each and every of Rebecca Black's utterances, but this brief insignificant incident (reported as some OMG joke piece) is not the best way of doing so. werldwayd (talk) 21:16, 3 July 2013 (UTC) werldwayd (talk) 21:19, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

In my opinion it should be removed. Its not really that notable. Throughout the entire thing, http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=sjV9Xz-V2iQ she only said ONE sentence of support for the guy, that he would do a 'good job'. Not 'vote for him', the rest was about her family, and how youths should get involved in politics, and she was invited by her uncle, to receive keys to the city on that day it seems http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&u=http://tamaulipas.milenio.com/cdb/doc/noticias2011/e76a7d71d362008321e3bedac33992dd&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%2522rebecca%2Bblack%2522%2B%2522Gustavo%2BPetricioli%2522%26biw%3D1252%26bih%3D496%26tbs%3Dcdr:1,cd_min:5/27/2012,cd_max:6/9/2012. And never made a single mention about the Nieto again on her social media sites or interviews. I watched over the months as her philanthropy section got nuked down to almost nothing, as editors considered the things on there 'too minor', but this gets to stay? Nerdopolis (talk) 03:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 27 October 2013

Add middle name Rebecca Renee Black
Quoted from one of her personal YouTube channel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rG6sqlNXHwg&t=1m12s 207.62.170.219 (talk) 03:11, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. (I think a confirmed primary source would also be fine for this.) --Stfg (talk) 11:22, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Done Thanks for the link. The trouble with video links for things like this is that it's rather mumbled, and it doesn't give the spelling (could be Renée, for instance). Still, I've put it in the Personal Life section. --Stfg (talk) 09:28, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Correction

There's a typo on this page: 'video video' in the introduction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.73.122.41 (talk) 21:35, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Corrected to music video werldwayd (talk) 23:28, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Another error - there's a comma splice here: 'She creates YouTube videos, among these are primarily original songs and video blogs.' This could be fixed by changing the word 'these' to 'which.' Imjordanwhite (talk) 22:09, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Lead

Hi all, including user:MPFitz1968. LEADCITE doesn't prohibit citations in the lead, sure. But these same facts are repeated in the article proper. I don't see why they need to be up top.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rebecca_Black&oldid=prev&diff=623217270 -- Zanimum (talk) 20:42, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

The sentence that is in question: "Her mother paid $4,000 to have the single and an accompanying music video put out as a vanity label through the record label ARK Music Factory." I agreed with the edit made by user PjeterPeter [3], which removed that sentence and the sources that back it. A lack of explanation of the edit led to a revert, but if the one reverting took time to read that sentence and see its relevance in the lead section, I'm thinking it would not have been reverted. A similar sentence later in the body is okay, but I don't think it's necessary on top. The lead should establish why Black is notable, and talk about her mom paying money to put her debut song out is a bit too specific, and does little to explain notability. So, I can go ahead and remove that sentence, with a sufficient explanation. MPFitz1968 (talk) 21:03, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Picture

I'm sorry, that's just the worst picture ever. And I hate Rebecca Black but did they really have to use a picture that makes her look 40? PLease change it... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.4.113 (talk) 21:24, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Sure only if you have some free non copy-written pictures that show how Rebecca looks as of recent. Just because its on the internet does not mean nobody owns the rights to the pictures so we cant just go and post anything here like Wikipedia owns it. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:44, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 October 2014

I would like to change her picture to this https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQZIXLWogX2LNZVlyz1TXyROnakelJQnbQCDmSZK95Df1QK80It5FxSJMty

Snowglobe123 (talk) 23:11, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Okay here is what you need to ask yourself first:

1. Is the image free to use? Please read: (WP:COPYRIGHT), and (Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright).

2. Is the image recent? Having a recent image of Rebecca would be better than having an older one.

If the image is of free use then feel free to upload it here: [4] if it is not free it will be swiftly deleted. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:23, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Biographical Information

Regarding "As of June 2013, her grandmother lives in Illinois, and her aunts and uncles live around the U.S." Is there a particular reason why this is relevant?

No, I removed it. Beach drifter (talk) 08:03, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Rebecca Black, Pitch Perfect.jpg historical?

I am very wary of the copyright status of this image, the uploader has stated that the image in question is "Historical" is there anyway to confirm this? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:21, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Rebecca Black. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110505043009/http://www.dawn.com:80/2011/04/29/rebecca-black-works-to-overcome-friday-infamy.html to http://www.dawn.com/2011/04/29/rebecca-black-works-to-overcome-friday-infamy.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111130023041/http://www.telstra.com.au:80/latest_offers/4gfun/? to http://www.telstra.com.au/latest_offers/4gfun/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130318141637/http://boulevardindustries.com/gallery/mazik-self-aviary/ to http://boulevardindustries.com/gallery/mazik-self-aviary/

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:03, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rebecca Black. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20111105000946/http://rebeccablackonline.com/ to http://rebeccablackonline.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:56, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Philanthropy

I have removed the self serving philanthropy section. The sourcing was dubious and there was no mention of an amount. A one time donation of an undisclosed sum of money is far from noteworthy information. Ridernyc (talk) 11:58, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 December 2017

Makoshark155 (talk) 21:08, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

@Makoshark155:  Not done. Please look into previewing your edits. If you'd done that here, you'd have seen that your request is empty. CityOfSilver 21:13, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 November 2016

Could somebody add [Category:YouTube channels launched in 2005]? 173.73.227.128 (talk) 01:41, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Can you provide a reliable source for the info? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:52, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Here's a source proving Rebecca Black created her YouTube channel in 2005, and as you can see there's a "Verified" symbol next to her name to prove it's her official YouTube channel. --173.73.227.128 (talk) 16:18, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Source(s):
https://www.youtube.com/user/rebecca/about

Done st170e^talk 18:30, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

The 2005 date of her channel is odd, she probably got control of a dormant account https://twitter.com/MsRebeccaBlack/status/82889778873372674 she had a Facebook post IIRC where she actually announced creating it, but I could not scroll that far downNerdopolis (talk) 04:28, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rebecca Black. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120605042426/http://www.googlezeitgeist.com/en to http://www.googlezeitgeist.com/en

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:19, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

New song/music video

Could we update the 'Music Videos' section to include the video for "Girlfriend", which premiered on 2021-01-29? Video is found on YouTube, here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEy5x-vTH4g and thanks in advance. 65.110.215.0 (talk) 19:23, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 July 2021

Replace this permanently dead reference in the 2010–2011: "Friday" section:

<ref>{{cite web |url=http://old.news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20111220/ap_en_ot/us_youtube_top_videos |title=Rebecca Black tops all other YouTube videos in '11 – Yahoo! News |publisher=Old.news.yahoo.com |access-date=January 5, 2012 }}{{dead link|date=April 2018 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref>

with this updated reference:

<ref>{{cite web |url=https://gadgets.ndtv.com/social-networking/news/rebecca-black-tops-all-other-youtube-videos-in-11-224801 |title=Rebecca Black tops all other YouTube videos in '11 |agency=[[Associated Press]] |date=June 5, 2012 |website=[[NDTV]] |language=en}}</ref> 108.56.139.120 (talk) 09:12, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:08, 13 July 2021 (UTC)