Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:47, 5 December 2005

Britney Spears has been listed as one of the good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: No date specified. To provide a date use: {{GA|insert date in any format here}}.

Archives

• Archive 1
• Archive 2

Britney Has Given Birth

I can't add this obviously as the article is protected, but Spears gave birth today.

Yes, it is true, she has given birth via c-section (looks like her husband won't be throwing his hot dog down the hallway after all).

I'll unprotect the article, but I think there have been false rumors about this before and you will need to cite a source for it. Everyking 21:56, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Lots of sites reporting this now, albeit national enquirer is one of them. Why does the article say she gave birth on the 9th though?? Mutor

Disputed factual accuracy?

Exactly what is being disputed as far as the factual accuracy of the article? Am I missing something on this talk page? It seems like the major factual controversies have been cleared up, so I'm removing the notice unless someone objects with a factual inaccuracy? Caphis 02:50, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"Worldwide disk sales Certification" is disputed !! And nobody answers my question !Vorash 03:10, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) There is no such an organization ,it's an invention of Britney Spears's fans !Vorash 03:20, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I believe the RIAA certifies worldwide distribution, though I have no idea how to search their database by artist. I believe wikipedia policy on this is to "be bold" and go ahead and delete that line, if you feel it is unverifiable. If someone can come along and back it up with a cite, they will. In any case, the neutrality of this article isn't under debate, so I've removed that tag again. If you want to delete the line certifying worldwide sales until someone backs it up, be bold.Caphis 03:46, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I already deleted this "WW certification" twice, but user User:Triggy reverts it again and again. "RIAA" doesn't certifies worldwide distribution, because it's an impossible task and nobody can certify sales in more than 100 countries !!! Vorash 04:02, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Its also not a single line , whole passage should be edited !:

===Studio Albums===

1. 1999: ...Baby One More Time #1 (Debut) US (6 weeks), #4 UK, #1 CAN, #2 AU, US Sales: 10.5+ Million; US Certification: 14x Platinum (WW Sales: 22+ Million ; WW Certification: 25x Platinum)
2. 2000: Oops!... I Did It Again #1 (Debut) US (1 week), #2 UK, #1 CAN, #2 AU, US Sales: 9+ Million; US Certification: 10x Platinum (WW Sales: 18+ Million; WW Certification: 20x Platinum)
3. 2001: Britney #1 (Debut) US (1 week), #4 UK, #1 CAN, #4 AU, US Sales: 4.5+ Million; US Certification: 4x Platinum (WW Sales: 11+ Million; WW Certification: 12x Platinum)
4. 2003: In the Zone #1 (Debut) US (1 week), #13 UK, #2 CAN, #10 AU, US Sales: 2.9+ Million; US Certification: 2x Platinum (WW Sales: 7+ Million; WW Certification: 8x Platinum)
5. 2006: Original Doll working title (due for release in 2006)

Compilations

1. 2004: Greatest Hits: My Prerogative #4 US, #2 UK, #3 CAN, #4 AU, US Sales: 1+ Million; US Certification: Platinum (WW Sales: 5+ Million; WW Certification: 5x Platinum)

Certified WW Album Sales: 70 Million

Misplaced Pages policy on editing/reversion wars If you think User:Triggy keeps reverting the page to include unverifiable info, my suggestion would be to remove the section and post a request to temporarily protect the page until Triggy is able to provide a cite for the edits. Again, just my suggestion, but in any case, the 'neutrality' of the article isn't under debate, as far as I know, so I'm editing to remove that. Caphis 19:47, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"Trivia" Section

I've been thinking... Should the size of the "Trivia" section be more limited? I know I added a lot about how she ranked on all these music channel things, but maybe it should be removed, along with some other things. The only reason I'm bringing this up is because the page is already pretty long, and maybe some of the smaller facts shouldn't be included. What does everyone else think? -- Triggy, Jun. 30.

• Agreed, the listing of the notes she hits in her songs is a waste of space. If they were notes she hit singing *live*, then a small vocal profile displaying min and max vocal range would be in the interests of article. To list indervidual songs is too much unnecessary info. Besides, the amount of post-production done on her vocals means that what you hear in the songs probably isn't what she can really do...

• All of the other singers have listings of the notes they hit on record. Why shouldnt Britneys be on her page? Britney only has pro-tooling credits on one album which was her latest "In The Zone" i also want to say all vocalists use post-production and pro-tooling when they release a studio album.

About her Vocal Profile

Better you check Britney's vocal profile, because she doesn't hit 3 octaves (the same as Toni Braxton, Alicia Keys etc). Nobody can judge exactly her range through her recordings because there are many computer effects in her voice. And she has a few live performances (everytime, i'm not a girl not yet a woman etc),and she always "tune off" and her sound tends to "fail" when she tries to reach a high note in these live performances. And I don't know, but the fact that she is soubrette interfere in her vocal range? can she hit 3 octaves being a soubrette?

Sorry if I'm wrong and sorry for the bad english.

Well according to this information and her recorded music she has a 3 octave range. All singers use studio magic or "pro-tools". Since Britney didn't start pro-tooling her albums until "In The Zone" its safe to say those statistics are right. Since there aren't any pro-tooling credits on any of her other albums (Britney, Oops... and ...Baby) also are we are going by recorded songs are we not?

I don't know about any of this, but I am tired of seeing the number change from 2 to 3 and back again every few minutes. How about we just omit the "octaves" number completely until we figure it out? Alternately, we could have it say "2 or 3 octaves". Everyking 9 July 2005 00:33 (UTC)

Well C3-B5 is 3 octaves

C3 D3 E3 F3 G3 A3 B3 C4 D4 E4 F4 G4 A4 B4 C5 D5 E5 F5 G5 A5 B5

Don't you think its alittle weird that your comparing Britney to Alicia Keys and Toni Braxton because there both Contralto's while Britney is a Soubrette?

Sorry that was me who changed it to 2 octaves because I agree with you it's impossible for Britney to have the same vocal range as such singers like Alicia Keys, Toni Braxton even Beyonce'. Plus I don't think Britney even has 2 octaves. When I went to go edit the page I was blocked. And whoever is putting she has 3 octaves is completely wrong on so many levels and needs to actually listen to Britney's music and her live performances to see she can not sing a note even if it saved her life.

Does anybody here who knows about musical notes and singing want to actually listen to all of Britney's albums Baby threw Greatest Hits to see how big her octave range is along with her highest and lowest notes are. Cause this editing is getting annoying.

I agree that the edits aren't getting anyone anywhere. I don't particularly care about Britney either way; I've just seen all the edits going by in RC. Since Britney fans have an incentive to widen it and Britney detractors have an incentive to narrow it, the only thing we can really get here is research. Someone needs to find the points in the recording where the extremes are so someone else can verify it, or someone needs to get something from a publicist, or something like that. Alas, I haven't even been able to find the name of her management company, but I don't have any of her recordings.

It doesn't matter if one "agrees that it's impossible". You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. It would be an exceptional range, but she may have an exceptional range, and by now it seems clear that no-one editing is certain what her range is. Narrowing the range listed in the article because of a poor opinion of her singing ability is POV. Narrowing the range because of research is not. — mendel ☎ 02:03, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

I changed Britney's voice type because according to the Soubrette page it says Britney is a Lyric Soprano

Can somebody please gaurd Britney's vocal profile i used sources to back up my information and people are still messing with it and the stuff they are putting in there is stupid like Soubrette with Lyric Soprano range. WTF! she's a lyric soprano! They also keep changing her lowest note to Db3 when it is C#3! Also the song is called "I Was Born To Love You"

Look, I'm a big fan of Britney and a big fan of vocals. Britney does not have a 3-octave range, nor is she a soprano. If you listen to her live peformances (when they're live, that is), you can see that there is struggle when she tries to get up there. There's nothing wrong with Britney's range. It's just fine for a soubrette. The sources you cited would be fine if it had the notes written for the vocals. The notes on those music sheets are only for the music. It doesn't count. Her highest note is somewhere around a G5. I'll have to go through her music again and find it. Where exactly does she hit the C#3 in Oops? I can't find it. Also, there is no song by Spears called "I Was Born to Love You" - that's like a mix of her songs "I Was Born to Make You Happy" and "I Will Still Love You" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.160.116.44 (talk • contribs) 09:04, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Hmmmm, aren't Db3 and C#3 the same note?

Britney's "Chaotic" Ratings

I would like to change the facts of her ratings because according to other sources she had 3.66 Million veiwers on the shows debut.

http://www.realitytvworld.com/index/articles/story.php?s=3516

Also the second show which scored 2.97 Million viewers according to

http://www.tv.com/who-said-anything-about-love/episode/422097/trivia.html#Notes

The third show got ratings of 2.5 Million

http://www.jossip.com/gossip/britney-spears/jiblets-britneys-chaotic-cant-muster-crazy-ratings-20050602.php

The Fouth show got 3 Million total veiwers and 1.5 Million viewers for the adult demographic

http://tv.zap2it.com/tveditorial/tve_main/1,1002,272%7C95741%7C1%7C,00.html

Citation of sources for the vocal profile of Britney Spears

Can someone please WP:CITE sources for the claims posted regarding the vocal profile of Britney Spears? Hall Monitor 23:14, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

The Vocal Profile subsection of this article is highly contentious, as is demonstrated by the edit history. In accordance with official Misplaced Pages policy, this section has been removed until a valid external source can be referenced which documents her vocal capabilities, otherwise it is original research. Hall Monitor 17:26, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

"WP:CITE sources" is style guideline !! It is not an official Misplaced Pages policy ! In order to remove this section you should prove that this is an original research !! Vorash 17:48, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

The point of removal is that no sources are cited within the article as to what Ms. Spears' actual vocal profile is, and, as the edit history has demonstrated, her "vocal profile" tends to change with the wind. If no sources can be found, it should be removed, no questions asked. Hall Monitor 18:08, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Based on what are you saing that "If no sources can be found, it should be removed" ??? Vorash 18:12, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

In this particular instance, yes. Hall Monitor 18:13, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Your conclusion reminds me "Original research" ! You don't have any facts to prove that this section was "Original research", and that such a famous singer as Britney Spears doesn't have any sources for information about her voice ! Vorash 18:17, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

HEY! i atleast want Britney's voice type on the vocal profile page according to wikipedia's Soubrette page Britney is a Lyric Soprano the LEAST you could do is put that up after you deleted all the information you did.

Citing another Misplaced Pages article does not necessarily mean anything unless there is a valid source within the Soubrette text. Hall Monitor 18:48, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

WP:CITE guideline :

Disputed statements for which a credible source has not been provided may be removed from Misplaced Pages articles. The disputed material should generally be moved to the article's talk page, to give an opportunity for editors to identify sources for the material.

Disputed information which, if verified, would remain in an article, should be placed on the article's talk page. Potentially useful information ought to be retained — and by placing disputed information on the talk page, you give other users the opportunity to find sources to support it, in which case the information could be re-inserted into the article proper. This guideline does not endorse or mandate that all unsourced information must be removed: it is recognised that some information is self-evident and that a source for it might not be necessary, or that something may be true and accurate but as-yet unsourced. However, it does make clear that users who, in good faith, dispute information to an article may remove that information and, where, if verified, the material would be suitable for the article, paste it to the talk page. Vorash 18:52, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Hall Monitor violates official Misplaced Pages guidline ! He deletes usefull information in Britney Spears article, "based on" Misplaced Pages:Cite sources. Misplaced Pages:Cite sources is guidline, which says "This guideline does not endorse or mandate that all unsourced information must be removed" and in any case "The disputed material should generally be moved to the article's talk page, to give an opportunity for editors to identify sources for the material". Vorash 19:24, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Make up your mind. Either it's a guideline, in which case Hall Monitor is free to disregard it, or it's a policy, in which case people have to come up with support for their claims about Spears's vocal profile if they're going to add it to the article. You can't have it both ways.

If it's really that frustrating to be unable to find that bit on the talk page and having to look at the history to find out what happened, let me summarize: A lot of people think that Britney's vocal range is either big or small, either 2 or 2.5 or 2 11/12 or 3 octaves, and that her low note is either C3 or E3 or something else, and her high note is either B5 or something lower than that.

As it stands it's pretty clear that none of the editors modifying that bit know what her range is (since even the high and low sides can't agree among themselves as to how high or low it is). When something verifiable comes up then the section can go back. — mendel ☎ 19:53, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

This section is edited by many Anonymous users !! You can't force them to cite sources !! They don't know anything about rules and guidelines here. Frequent edits only prove that there is an actual dispute between these users, it doesn't prove that they don't have sources. Vorash 20:04, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

There is no need to shout. The fact remains that her vocal range is in question, and in order for Misplaced Pages to be a reliable source of information, we too need to WP:CITE our sources whenever possible. In this particular instance, it is necessary (IMHO). Hall Monitor 20:13, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

In any case, the lowest note on Oops! is not a C, but a C#, as the key chord of that piece is C# (or Db, frankly I haven't got my virtual ears tuned well enough). I'm more comfortable calling it a C#, but.. Bobo192|Edits

The obligations of anonymous and logged-in users are identical. — mendel ☎ 20:17, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

THe obligations are the same but the situation is different ! If Anonymous users don't provide a source it doesn't mean that they haven't one, it can be because they don't know about these guideline ! Vorash 20:28, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

The following information has been moved from the main article until these claims can be substantiated and this dispute resolved:

  ==Vocal profile==
  *Voice type: Lyric Soprano
  *Highest note: G5 (Toxic), B5 (mimicking opera singer on Chaotic)
  *Lowest note: C3 ("Oops!... I Did It Again")
  *Vocal range: 3 octaves (C3-B5)

  Britney has a larger range than most singers in her vocal class (Soubrette) do. She is able to   surpass the restriction of F5 and is able to hit notes as high as G5 and A5 which most in her  category cannot. Spears can also hit lower notes than A3 and is able to hit notes like F3 and E3  with relative ease. She arguably has the biggest range of any soubrette in contemporary music.  Britney is also able to sing in Middle Voice, Falsetto Voice and Head Voice. Her vocal  range is similar to that of Madonna.

  *She hits notes A3, D4, E4 and B4 in her song "Lucky".
  *She hits note C5 in her song "Sometimes".
  *She hits note G4 in her songs "From The Bottom Of My Broken Heart" and "Stronger".
  *She hits one of her lowest notes in her song "Stronger" with G3.
  *In Britney's piano ballad "Everytime" she hits one of her lowest recorded notes, E3;  she is also recorded hitting notes C4, E4 and B4.
  *Britney hits C3 in her song "Oops!... I Did It Again".

When an actual external reference stating these claims can be cited, only then should this information be moved back into the main article space. Hall Monitor 21:00, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

I found a source:

Britney Spears - Dear Diary Sheet Music (Digital Download) scoring:, Piano/Vocal/Guitar. instruments:, Guitar. Piano, range: Bb3-C5. Voice, range: Bb3-C5 ... from the book:, Britney Spears / Oops!..I Did It Again ...

www.musicnotes.com/.../features/artists/ britneyspears/default.asp&bd=Britney+Spears This is Britney's sheet music and i'll review some more about her sheet music and what her range is on this site.

Oops!... I Did It Again Selection Details: pages: 7 form: Song scoring: Piano/Vocal/Guitar instruments: Guitar Piano Voice, range: C#3-A4 http://www.musicnotes.com/sheetmusic/mtd.asp?bl=%2Ffeatures%2Fartists%2Fbritneyspears%2Fdefault%2Easp&bd=Britney+Spears&ppn=MN0036621

Everytime Selection Details: pages: 6 form: Song scoring: Piano/Vocal/Guitar instruments: Guitar Piano Voice, range: Ab3-Eb5 http://www.musicnotes.com/sheetmusic/mtd.asp?ppn=mn0046992&bookmark=0

(You Drive Me) Crazy Selection Details: pages: 5 form: Song scoring: Piano/Vocal/Guitar instruments: Guitar Piano Voice, range: G3-Db5 http://www.musicnotes.com/sheetmusic/mtd.asp?ppn=mn0028943&bookmark=0

I Was Born To Love You pages: 4 form: Song scoring: Piano/Vocal/Guitar instruments: Guitar Piano, range: C2-Bb5 Voice, range: Eb4-C6 http://www.musicnotes.com/sheetmusic/mtd.asp?ppn=mn0035060&bookmark=2

I've Just Begun (Having My Fun) pages: 5 form: Song scoring: Piano/Vocal/Guitar instruments: Guitar Piano Voice, range: G3-Eb5 http://www.musicnotes.com/sheetmusic/mtd.asp?ppn=mn0048756&bookmark=2

The Beat Goes on Selection Details: pages: 2 form: Song scorings: Guitar/Vocal Guitar Tab notation: Guitar TAB instruments: Guitar Voice, range: Eb4-Bb5 http://www.musicnotes.com/sheetmusic/mtd.asp?ppn=mn0041726&bookmark=4

Toxic Selection Details: pages: 6 form: Song scoring: Piano/Vocal/Guitar instruments: Guitar Piano Voice, range: G3-F5 http://www.musicnotes.com/sheetmusic/mtd.asp?ppn=mn0046548&bookmark=4

It looks like according to her sheet music her highest note is C6 in the song (I Was Born To Love You) and her lowest note is C#3 in (Oops...I Did It Again)

Her range is incorrect,this music sheet only told us the overall range of the song which is come from Guitar/Piano/Voice.It's not just her vocal range. In music,voice has been considered as one of the instruments.

Actually no her range isn't incorrect it tells you the range of the Piano/Guitar then it tells you the singing range of the song. It's sheet music. Its telling you the range of the song in Guitar, Piano then it tells you the notes that are hit in the song.

Why is Britney not credited on allmusic.com for the "I Was Born To Love You?" Eric Carmen does indeed sing this song, but it makes no mention of it being a duet. The album that the song's on was released in 1998 as well, and Britney's first single didn't get released until the end of 1998. This all seems to point to the fact that Britney didn't sing this song. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.2.100.53 (talk • contribs) 19:13, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Then why is Britney credited for performing the song? Performed by: Eric Carmen, Britney Spears http://www.musicnotes.com/sheetmusic/mtd.asp?ppn=mn0035060&bookmark=2

I Was Born To Love You by Eric Carmen and Andy Goldmark performed by Britney Spears

http://www.musicnotes.com/SheetMusic/index/GuitarPianoVoice/html/defaultI.asp

I do believe that Britney has demonstrated a 2.5 to 3 octave range on her recordings, but I am a big Britney Spears fan, and I have never heard of her singing a song entitled I Was Born To Love You, let alone her singing a duet with Eric Carmen. Allmusic has been around since 1991 and their website's been running since 1995, and their reviews are used by a variety of sources, such as MSN. I would consider them more reliable than a website selling sheet music. While there probably is plenty of good information on that website, there's probably some errors too. Plus, has any Britney Spears fan visiting this area ever heard of her singing this song before now? The only thing I can think of is someone mixed it up with I Will Still Love You, as mentioned above, which is a duet with a male artist that has love in the title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.2.100.53 (talk • contribs) 06:52, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Weither she is a Lyric Soprano or a Soubrette

it is clearly impossiable for Britney to be a Soubrette with her range. Soubrettes can only sing from A3-F5 Britney can sing from C#3-C6 it insulting and wrong for her to be classified that way when she obviously isn't!

Also my source clearly says in Oops...!I Did It Again that she hits note C#3 not Db3 like the person keeps changing it.

Overall she is a Lyric Soprano it even says that on the Soubrette page!

C3-C6 is 3 octave full but her lowest note (C#3) is 0.5note higher than C3 ,So she her range is about 2.9 octave not that 3.1 like someone said.

From the soubrette page,A lyric voice is stronger and heavier than a true soubrette, which is the lightest female voice. The soubrette does its best singing in the octave between Middle C and High C or D. Any higher and the voice is well into high head voice. It also has no great depth in the lower register, since the vocal folds are nearly always small and soprano in stature and the person slight and very young. Many times a soubrette can sound so weak as if any change in vocal dynamic would cause the singer to crack.Range isn't a soubrette strong point.--->> The definition of Brtiney Spears.

__________________________________ It should be noted that both Cotrubas and Spears can be classified as lyric sopranos, as they have the range to execute the high lofty notes most soubrettes do not reach.----> There it says on the soubrette page Britney is a Lyric Soprano. Emma Bunton and Jessica Simpson are Lyric Sopranos and Emmas Highest note is B5 while Jessica's is G6 Are you telling Me hitting C6 doesn't qualify her to be a Lyric Soprano when Emma Bunton can hit B5 and be Qualfifed as a Lyric Soprano!

Please Rachelle can hit F7 but she is Contralto because her tessitura is fitting for the Contralto. And Emma'highest note is F6 in Something Kinda Funny.

From my memory, Britney doesn't have any song call "I Was Born To Love" It's QUEEN's song.

According to Emma Buntons page her highest note is Bb5 until you changed it. According to her musicsheet she has a song called "I Was Born To Love You" and the highes note there is C6. It is a duet with Eric Carmen and Britney. check the site

http://www.musicnotes.com/sheetmusic/mtd.asp?ppn=mn0035060&bookmark=2

I also find it unbelieveable that this is being argued! she is a Lyric Soprano according to the Soubrette page!

Yes it's mine because Emma highest is F6. If you see the history of her page.Her F6 is there til' someone changed it to B5.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Emma_Bunton&diff=16119332&oldid=15829057

And the article in wikipedia is NOT THE FACT,especially the article about notes and octaves.If it's a fact,history page is unnecessary.

How do you know Emma even hits F6 you even said its almost inaudiable because its in the background?

And the song she sang with Don Philip is called "I will still love you" which Eric Foster White is a composer.Britney doesn't have any song call "I was born to love you" Go to this link and you will see that the fifth results

http://www.google.co.th/search?hl=th&q=%22i+will+still+love+you%22+britney+eric&meta=

Britney has a duet with eric carmen called "I Was Born To Love You" http://www.musicnotes.com/sheetmusic/mtd.asp?ppn=mn0035060&bookmark=2

OK.It's my fault.Let me ask you something, what wrongs if she is classified as Mezzo.It'just range.Being soprano is not superior than others.

Theres not a problem but she is only one note away from a whistle register i think thats soprano material. Also britney's voice isnt as dark as a mezzo-soprano's is. Whitney and Janet have darker voice then Britneys while Britneys voice is lighter like Jessica's and Emma's

http://en.wikipedia.org/Kylie_Minogue#Vocal_Profile I think Britney has smoky tone than Kylie.But Kylie is Lyric Mezzo,I think Britney should be classified like her.

Yeah thats true Kylie and Britney do sound similar. But according to the Soubrette page Britney and Ilena are Lyric Soprano's.

I think that Britney should be classified as a lyric mezzo soprano, because her range used to be from E3 to B5 or A5(2.5 octaves for those of you who don't understand what an octave is) on the page before everyone started changing that part of the page every 10 minutes. A typical vocal range for a soprano is from C4 to A5, and for a mezzo soprano from A3 to F5, and while Britney can hit notes and sing in ways similar to both vocal ranges, she usually sings in a smokier tone as mentioned above. The claims about her being a soubrette are also very changeable. See the problem is that while Britney sometimes sings like a mezzo-soprano, she usually sings like a soubrette in her recordings. It reminds me of how Ashanti is said to have an incredible voice but that she doesnt ever sing with it, instead choosing to use a very lightweight voice. This also applies to Janet Jackson. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.2.100.53 (talk • contribs) 19:40, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Yeah Britney sings in a lower tone with songs but she also sings in a light voice in her latest cd "In The Zone" but she sang smoker in her early recordings like those from her earlier records Baby and Oops. Then she used her lighter voice with her albums Britney and In The Zone. So do we disregard her light voice and only recognize her Dark voice or do we say she has a lighter voice? what do we classify her as since she sings both ways. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.12.253 (talk • contribs) 19:48, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Looking back now, Britney should be considered a lyric soprano rather than a lyric mezzo. For instance while Mariah Carey can sing deeper than some male vocalists,and often has a smoky tone to her voice, she is still classified as a soprano. Britney has lately been singing in a lighter voice as mentioned above so she should be a soprano. She shouldn't be considered a soubrette however. If Ashanti and Janet Jackson can be called Lyric Sopranos then Britney certainly can as well. Janet's talk page doesnt once mention any disputes about her voice, which she has been in a soubrette style since her album All For You was released. One person disputed Ashanti's range on her talk page, expressing doubt that she could hit a G6, which is justified as this quite likely talented singer hasnt demonstrated the talent she has on any of her records. Yet the claim about her voice is accepted. If these two can be qualified as sopranos or mezzos without any dispute, and if one of them has barely any recorded proof to back up these claims(Ashanti), then why cant Britney, who has demonstrated a soprano or mezzo voice in several songs, as well as in her movie Crossroads, not qualify as a mezzo or soprano? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.2.100.53 (talk • contribs) 07:40, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Britney's vocal profile has completely disappeared now.

• Suggestion: Reading this dispute is very confusing because none of the editors are signing their comments. Please sign your commentary with four tildes "~~~~". This will automatically sign your name with a corresponding timestamp. The vocal profile section has been removed until this dispute has been fully resolved. Hall Monitor 17:13, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

I Was Born To Love You Isn't A Britney Spears Song!!!

Has anybody hear ever heard of Britney singing a song called I Was Born To Love You, or a duet with Eric Carmen? There is no recorded evidence to support that she has, allmusic.com lists this as a song by Eric Carmen alone, and any Britney fan can tell you that they have never heard of her singing this. She does have a duet with a male recording artist (Don Philip) entitled I Will Still Love You and that song is on her first album. There seems to be nothing to support the fact that Britney ever sang this song, save for a page at musicnotes.com that says she has, but is this source truly as reliable as allmusic? Britney never sang this song, and therefore it can't be used for her vocal profile. I think she has between 2.5 to 3 octaves, but I'm not going to embellish how big her range is just so that she looks better. Range doesnt mean too much. Celine Dion only has 2.5 octaves to her range, and she is consistently rated about the best singers of all time. Basically I'm trying to say as a Britney fan myself, let's not lie to make Britney look better. She's accomplished a lot in her life, and whether or not she has a 2 or 3 octave range wont diminish what she's done in her life.24.2.100.53 20:23, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Either way she has a 3 octave range. C#3-B5 is 3 octaves and so is C#3-C6 the only difference is C6 is a higher note.

SOMEBODY HELP US PLEASE!!! This is getting so frustrating! I am a huge Britney Spears fan and her range is important to me, and despite what many people think, she is a very skilled vocalist (when she wants to be) but has simply embraced the simplicty of her song arrangements and has not paid much attention to her singing like Christina and others. That doesn't mean she is not able. I think we need to look at everything she has ever sung from Mickey Mouse Club and before to the present! Live...studio...movies and TV! And finalise this information. Britney, according to my musical knowledge, is not a soubrette! And the quality of her voice varies from album to album.

Britney has demonstrated a 2.5 octave range in her recordings. Her lowest note is a E3 in Do Somethin' and her highest note is a B5 in Lucky. However she probably does have a wider range, as in shows about her on tv people always say she has a remarkable voice. However, she hasn't demonstrated this probable talent on her albums. Many of the other artists have demonstrated this on their albums. What I meant earlier was just that because she hasn't shown all of her talent doesnt mean that she doesnt have it. I am a huge Britney fan as well.24.2.100.53 06:25, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Actually Britney has hit note C#3 in Oops...I Did It Again and has hit B5 in her song I Will Still Love You her duet with Don Phillip.

Why Britney Spears is a soubrette

Britney is an example of a soubrette under the guidelines of her singing style (which is what a soubrette is based on), most of the others are classified (read: lumped in) because of a lack of range. To sing that softly, and mellowly, and stay melodic without cracking isn't a cake walk. Aaliyah should also properly be classified as a soubrette, but many would consider that heinous because of her rich lower register. A soubrette isn't a vocal class or fach like the traditional lines of soprano, mezzo (itself subject to occasionally scrutiny as a fach) or alto. The classification deals with the tone, pitch, and volume of a voice. In short it is more a style than a true fach. Britney's voice is soft, mellow, yet every melodic and sweet. One listen to her song Everytime and you can hear why she fits the profile of a soubrette perfectly. The lines of vocal classification are blurry. Being a soubrette doesn't mean you are totally incapable of vocal altitude, just where the voice prefers to be. For example, Blu Cantrell is considered an alto. The alto's high note is considered to be the F or G above High C (F or G under Soprano C). OK!. She can (and has demonstrated in Waste My Time) the ability to execute a pitch well in whistle register. The high (or low note) of a person is individualized. The vocal fach is a guideline, not a militaristic maximum. Ileana Cotrubaş is a great operatic example of a soubrette in the classical sense. She however was capable of coloratura. So Britney can (and is) both a lyric soprano and a soubrette. Many, many people are capable of sing more than one vocal fach (Pharrell Williams: countertenor and baritone), Usher (baritone and tenor), Mariah (alto, mezzo, soprano, even tenor if she really wanted). So yes, you can classify her EASILY as a lyric soprano, but because she fits the profile of a soubrette so well, that is why she should be classified as a soubrette. There is no shame to her being classified as such. Britney, like Ilena have the unique ability to truly sing in this genre. Just as it takes a skill to belt or carry notes well into the ozone layer, it takes a special gift to sing so softly in a tatering-like style, not crack, and STILL sound melodic.

If it were strictly up to me, the only people in the Soubrette category would be Pebbles, Nicole Parker (barely), Ciara, Ilena, and Britney. Hilary Duff is too brassy to be a soubrette in the sense of style. So is J. Lo. And Lumidee couldn't carry a tune if she moved it with a dump truck. So they only quality as a soubrette because of their lack of range, and NOT because of their great singing style, like Ilena or Britney.

Antares33712 00:20, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

I agree with you on the fact that on most of her music Britney sings like a soubrette soprano. However, in my opinion the voice she sings in her movie Crossroads is definately not a soubrette voice. She sounds wonderful in that movie, but her voice sounds much smokier, much more rich, and far more deep than on her recordings. It sounds heavy to me,not light like on her records. This is what confuses me most.

How about we just say she is a lyric soprano with Soubrette capabilities.

No complaints from me, but Britney fits the soubrette profile better. She can sing in another style, which any singer of true talent can do, but she fits the bill in the proper definition of soubrette. I also think the picture of her on the soubrette page should be restored, as she is the definition of a soubrette. Think about Mya. She is a lyric voice. She could be agrued into the soubrette category. But she occasionally synthesized a brassy, more dramatic voice. She just doesn't LIVE there. Blu Cantrell can hit whistle register notes, but she doesn't LIVE there. Britney doesn't LIVE in the brassier, heavier vocals. She lives in the world of the soubrette. Vocal classification is very individualized. The will always be a good debate. Tamia is classified as an alto, I say she is a mezzo. When Elisabeth Schwarzkopf started training to sing, her voice coach thought she was a mezzo soprano. Her mother took her to another coach who immediately saw her as a coloratura, which she is popular and known for today. Antares33712 13:57, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Vocal Profile

• Voice Type: Lyric Soprano, Soubrette
• Highest note: G5 ("Toxic"), B5 ("I Will Still Love You")
• Lowest note: C3 ("Oops, I Did It Again")
• Vocal Range: 3 octaves (C3-B5)

• E5 - Britney hits this note in Everytime, which also showcases her melodic soubrette abilities.

In her movie Crossroads, Britney shows us that being a soubrette is more style than fach by singing in many styles, including rock and roll.

Can we reach a consensus on this people, please :-) Antares33712 13:39, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

I mistakenly changed the word 'fach' to fact. I looked it up, and found this:

A term universally used to designate vocal category or type of singing voice. This categorization is used in many German opera houses as a guide to what roles a singer would be expected to sing.

Source: Vocal Terms

So I changed it back :) Gbeeker 14:23, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks GBeeker. Once again people, vocal classification is a guide not a militaristic maximum. Antares33712 16:29, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Antares thank you for your message on my talk page. Misplaced Pages has a very strict policy on no original research and a strong style guideline which encourages people to cite sources. Due to the way in which her vocal profile was being manipulated on a daily basis (at times on the hour), it would behoove everyone involved to find an official source documenting this information before adding it back into the article. Just my thoughts. Hall Monitor 16:34, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Actually Britney hits F5 in "Toxic" you can go to britney's discography and its say so. She hits note G5 in her reality Tv Show "Choatic" in episode 4 "Magic Happens" where she mimics Opera and seranades the city. also i would be more then happy to lend my sources of sheet music as a source for Britney's high and low notes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.12.253 (talk • contribs) 16:58, 19 July 2005 (UTC) 68.49.12.253 (talk · contribs)

NPOV

Is this article completely NPOV or not? (bad sexual image vs. great pop star) — Stevey7788 (talk) 21:30, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

I just read over the article, and it seems to be pretty NPOV to me. I don't see anywhere in the article where she is claimed to be a "great pop star"... As for the controversy over the bad sexual image, I can see where one may find the fact that her public image is described as "raunchy" a bit opinionated, but the descriptions all work well with what's trying to be described in the passage. I really don't see any problem with the article at the moment. Triggy 07:23, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

The part on the Controversy is not from a neutral point of view, resulting in unclear phrases like: Spears's popularity has certainly been a catalyst for exposing the complex feelings that come with sexual maturity. These kind of statements do not belong in an encyclopedia that tries to be neutral.

I'm more concerned by the opinionated opening paragraph ("iconic pop star", "sweet, mellow voice", etc.) It reads like a fan page more than an impartial biography.--RicardoC 04:08, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

This article is most definitely POV. It definitely reads like a fan wrote it, not like a measured encyclopedia entry. There are many, many people who dislike her brand of sexuality (but such a good Christian girl) and dislike "her" music even more (considering she doesn't write her own music, she's hardly an original artist). - Ta bu shi da yu 13:57, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

For your information,Ta bu shi da yu, if you want to call out someone, make sure that your personal feelings do not get in the way of facts. Britney Spears does indeed write her own lyrics and even arranges the vocals and music. If you researched a little before you wrote, you would see that you are printing lies, and furthermore, your label of hardly being an original artist is strictly opinion. However, seeing as you wrote, "considering she doesn't write her own music, she's hardly an original artist," when she does in fact write her own material, you are simply describing her as a highly original artist. In my opinion (notice I clearly stated), any artist who creates music is original, be it for the way the sing (which does not necessarily have to sound amazing), the way the write, the way they market themselves, etc. They can do all or one. And it would be wise for RicardoC to think about what he's writing, for it is a FACT that Britney Spears is an iconic pop star, whether you like it or not. It's true. Just look at the way she influenced popular culture with her music, videos, products (Curious, anyone?), and life in general. People claim to hate her yet lead similar lifestyles. They call her trashy while smoking and shoveling down Cheetos in a pair of pocket-peekers. Because of Britney Spears, the "perfect people" (the people who look down on those who are like them or even unlike them, but maybe don't get dolled up every day) of the world have come to reveal a side of undeniable hypocrisy. Just because you have issues of accepting her music does not give you authority to tell other people not to listen to it. Music does not have to be what YOU want it to be, and you would not be complaining if she were not the tremendous icon that she is. You don't have to spoil everything with your barbaric vandalism just because you loathe her. But you, another "perfect person," would never be able to accomplish half of what she did in a fifty-year career. If her voice is so terrible, then surely you could sing better. If she is so trashy, then surely you would be in a dress or tuxedo every living hour of the day as the paparrazi hunt you down. The girl has a right to make her our life choices, just as you do. Please choose to go against the trend of the ever-popular "perfect person" and let her go about her business. You don't have to support her, but why not leave her alone? By the way, I'm not saying this in an angry tone. You don't have to try to trash everything with her name on it. Doesn't that make you a smaller person? What are you accomplishing? Nothing. So keep your personal problems with her out in the street, and write facts only please. Or at least post were your opinions are. For that I will never criticize you, unless you again post out of hatred. I'm sorry if I offended you by posting your usernames. Again though, don't just edit my comment because you're mad at me. Instead, post a new comment directly after this one. I'll respect you a lot if you do. - TheRyan 16:36, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Songwriter?

Can Britney really be considered a true songwriter? It was recently added to the top of the page and I can't decide if it's justifiable or not. Sure, she has co-wrote some material on her albums, but oftentimes it was with several other people. Triggy 18:30, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Same can be said for many other modern artists - many of them co-write, rather than writing alone. A couple of examples that I wouldn't have expected to produce a lot of dispute: Avril Lavigne and Liz Phair. Both co-wrote everything on their last album and didn't write alone at all.

Well on ASCAP and her album credits it lists her as the sole writer of her song "Everytime", if anyone else did help her or co-write the song with her she would legally have to list their names. So since she wrote this song she is considered a songwriter.

Image:654britneyspears bz-2003promo18-03.jpg

It should be noted that this image (the first one in the article) has been listed on IFD by Jimbo Wales for "egregious copyvio, abuse of fair use tag". A replacement image that can be used in this article will likely need to be found. --Blu Aardvark | 07:25, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

What was the old image we had at the top? It was of her performing in 2003, I believe...I suppose we could go back to that one, unless it's a copyvio too. Everyking 08:00, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

I looked through the article's history (and believe me, it wasn't easy to find), and discovered that the image previously used was Image:Britney Spears.jpg. Image was taken from a U.S. Navy site, and asserted to be in the Public Domain. --Blu Aardvark | 09:17, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

• Image has been moved from Images for deletion to Possible unfree images. --Blu Aardvark | 23:27, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Protection

Why is the article being protected? Sorry if it's obvious or something, but I can't find any explaination for this. Triggy 23:05, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Probably due to vandalism. I've unprotected. Everyking 04:29, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Seems to have been reprotected. I've unprotected again as it's been nearly a week. --Tony Sidaway 08:16, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Unprotect again? Yes or no? Everyking 02:08, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

I filed an unprotect request a while ago - this page gets vandalized as much as George Bush.... probably the best thing to do is just leave it unprotected and block the vandals... Ryan Norton 02:11, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Crappy sentence

From the article:

"However, there does seem to be reason behind Spears' methods; her shows almost always include extensive dancing, meaning that she likely would be too out-of-breath to sing live while doing this.".

This is complete crap, there are many performers who do equally or more physically intensive acts and sing too. This seems almost like a POV sentence defending britney and I think it looks quite bad in an wikipedia article. I'd defend eliminating the sentence completely since I don't think it can be saved - any suggestions are welcome though.... Sorry for my strong words, I won't change them since I mean no offense to anyone, just the sentence in itself :) Rbarreira 01:24, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

As is it most definately is POV. You could reword it to

"It is possible that there are reasons behind her methods, as is argued by some, that because her shows almost always include extensive dancing that she may not have enough breath to both sing and dance for the same period of time."

Well, that's a bit funny but you get the idea Ryan Norton 02:32, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Well, having thought a little about I maintain my opinion that it should be just deleted. We're not here to justify why a singer chooses not to sing on stage - it should really be her main priority, not the dancing :) Rbarreira 01:56, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

I disagree. What other group sings live while dancing as technically, atheletically and as fastly as she does without having some form of back up vocals? There are tons of artist that do it (lip sync) when they dance. No its not our job to justify it but i think if theres going to be critism of lip syncing then we need to list both sides.

Point taken. However, Destiny's Child, Christina Aguilera, Madonna, TLC, N Sync (including Justin Timberlake and his solo venture) and Backstreet Boys are a few artists who dance just as much as Britney and rarely lip-sync, if ever. No one is making Britney have a dance troupe for every show that she does. Perhaps she could show more growth as an artist by taking some voice lessons and singing live on her tour.

All of the artists you have mentioned have used some type of prerecorded vocals. Which could be seen as lip syncing. Destiny's Child has lip synced there single "Lose My Breath" and have used Reverb and prerecorded vocals in there performences of "Soilder" on saturday night live. Beyonce has used prerecorded vocals in performences of Crazy In Love and Baby Boy on the VMA's and several other award shows. Christina Aguilera doesn't dance as much as Britney and Madonna has been caught several times using guide vocals in her performences. Nsync and Backstreet Boys (Justin solo included) have lip synced many times in various performences weither in concert or on TRL performences. I have never seen TLC live so i can't comment on them. But there are alot of artists that lip sync to there songs.

Hebrew tattoo

Ironically, in getting a tattoo and desecrating her body, Spears has committed a taboo in traditional Judaism.

Why ironic? Why committing a taboo? Spears isn't Jewish, is she?

Baby

Britney has said that she has always wanted a child. She was going to adopt but then she was pregnant and has had a child. She is married to Kevin Ferdeline. She is a good singer who is famous.

Britney's Remix album

shouldn't someone include Britney's remix album on her discogrpahy page and on her article under post Zone. Jive has announced there will be a remix album released on Nov. 8th

It's name has been changed to "Love Is A Dancefloor" According to Billboard, the title of Britney's new album is actually Remixed: Love Is A Dancefloor.

Top photo

Can we use Britney's "In The Zone" picture as the top photo? i mean every other artist has there top photo of there most recent album.

Actually, that would be a bad idea. The current top photo, Image:Britney Spears.jpg is public-doamin, and can legally be used, pretty much, however one wishes. The other image, Image:Inthezone.JPG is copyrighted, and used without permission, and can only be used when discussing the topic of the album and/or the topic of the album cover, with a "fair use" justification. Image:Inthezone.JPG may be justified in it's current spot, because it's actually discussing the album in that section. However, it's use at the top, would be more doubtful. Generally, copyrighted images (like Image:Inthezone.JPG) should not be used, if public-domain options exist, even if they qualify as fair use. Most other articles, are much smaller bios, and there really aren't large separate sections, so that's no a great comparison. Also, the fact other articles do something, doesn't mean it's a good idea, since other articles have also had copyrighted images suddenly deleted. --rob 23:36, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Actually, if someone can find a better image of her for the top photo, I think it would be better for the article. I feel that a top photo should be a good head shot (see Michael Stipe) so that you can tell what they look like without having to scroll down to a better picture of their face. Right now, if you needed to know what B.S. looked like, it'd be hard to do with the top photo. Dismas| 11:46, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

I would love it if somebody found a better top image of Britney, especially a proper head-shot, *if* it is properly sourced, tagged, and public-domain/GFDL. The issue is about copyright, not which image would look best, be clearer, or be most helpful. --rob 14:22, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Absolutely. Free photos must take precedence over non-free ones. In fact, it is arguable that many non-free photos in the article can be removed. "Fair use" on Misplaced Pages is explicitly not a carte blanche to take whatever you want and do whatever you want with it. It's meant to be a rare exception to be used in cases where we cannot come up with free alternatives.--Eloquence* 16:02, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Not NPOV

This article is not NPOV. One example:

That summer, she kicked off her first head-lining tour, approriately titled the ...Baby One More Time Tour. By late 1999, Britney Spears had become one of the year's biggest stars. Consequently, it was no surprise when award show season rolled around and she became one of the most common nominees. In December, she took home four Billboard Music Awards, including Female Artist of the Year. The next month, at the American Music Awards, she was nominated for three trophies, of which she won one: Favorite Pop/Rock New Artist.

hardly NPOV. "Not suprisingly" is an opinion that boosts Ms Spears. "Appropriately titled" is a POV expression (who believed it to be an appropriate title?). This article hardly makes us look good. - Ta bu shi da yu 13:55, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

I think I've mostly solved the problem, so I removed the "neutrality disputed" banner. Triggy 00:24, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Triggy, great job! Though I think that a further review could be done to see what else needs doing (will look into this later) I think you've been almost completely succesful in satisfying my NPOV objections! - Ta bu shi da yu 22:41, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Career Decline

Should wikipedia mention Britney's career decline? Most critics and people considered her at the top of her popularity in 2003 and say she has been declining since.

I don't think so. Her musical career did well in 2004 she had 2 top 20 hits. Then after that she hasn't really promoted anything since July. I think it would be better if we waited to see how her next carrer venture turns out before we list a decline. She has had success. She has had hit perfumes, has sold pretty well and has overall done pretty well for a pop artists at this age and time.

She was actually at her career peak in '99-'00 and has been in decline since. Granted, her career is still OK. Everyking 05:38, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Stolen baby pictures

shouldn't the article include some information about the stolen baby pictures? It has been mentioned everywhere on the internet.

Name

Has Britney actually taken Kevin's last name? The intro says so, but it kind of surprised me. Everyking 03:43, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Record Sales

• okay according to time Magazine britney has sold over 76 million albums worldwide could we possiably add this to her discography and sales section?

• http://www.time.com/time/photoessays/achievers_feature/

• Here's what it says:

• Early signs of ambition

She used to lock herself in the bathroom and sing to her dolls. After each number, she practiced smiling and blowing kisses to her toy audience.

• Achievements

Her first single and first four albums made their debut at No. 1. Since then Spears has sold 76 million records and amassed a $150 million fortune, this with records sale only.

And Then We Kiss

It says that "And Then We Kiss" was released on Nov. 9th. It's not on itunes or anyother legal download place. I also haven't heard it on any radio stations and Jive hasn't said anything either.

Move over Britney?

"Although Jessica Simpson was not seen a worthy opponent to Spears back in 1999, it looks as if the tables have turned. In December 2004, Spears faced much media speculation that she had lost her fanbase and that Jessica Simpson was now the new It-girl. Britney auditioned for the role of Daisy Duke in the remake "Dukes Of Hazzard" but was beat out by Simpson (Britney beat Jessica in the Mickey Mouse Club). Jessica's album "In This Skin" has sold over 3 million copies in the US while Spears' "In The Zone" sold 2 million. Britney tried to win back most of her fanbase by putting out a reality show like Simpson's hit "Newlyweds" but critics bashed Britney calling her 'unoriginal' and a 'cheap rip-off of Newlyweds'. TV Guide even said that the show was almost like an adult sex show. Britney has yet to rebound her career."

I WANT TO PROTEST WIKIPEDIA REFUSES TO ADD QUEEN BRITNEY'S SON TO LIST OF SEPTEMBER BIRTHS

WHY ???????????????????????????????//

Vandalism

I think Misplaced Pages should protect Britney's page of vandalism again. Someone is putting penis pictures on it!!!

Yes dear,vandalism

It was I who vandalised britney's page and will continue to do so until her son's name is put on list of september 14th births.

Can you at wikipedia add it?

Baptist??

Why was Britney in the category of Baptists? Removed unless someone can provide some sort of link :P

• Misplaced Pages good articles
• Undated GA templates
• Good articles without topic parameter