Ariana Grande was a Music good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ariana Grande, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ariana Grande on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ariana GrandeWikipedia:WikiProject Ariana GrandeTemplate:WikiProject Ariana GrandeAriana Grande
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music
This article is within the scope of WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of R&B and Soul Music articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.R&B and Soul MusicWikipedia:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicTemplate:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicR&B and Soul Music
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion.
To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Florida. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.FloridaWikipedia:WikiProject FloridaTemplate:WikiProject FloridaFlorida
This article is part of WikiProject Miami, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the Miami metropolitan area on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.MiamiWikipedia:WikiProject MiamiTemplate:WikiProject MiamiMiami
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
[[List of most-streamed artists on Spotify#Most followers|second most followed artist and most followed female]] The anchor (#Most followers) has been deleted by other users before.
The anchors may have been removed, renamed, or are no longer valid. Please fix them by following the link above, checking the page history of the target pages, or updating the links.
Remove this template after the problem is fixed | Report an error
@Ben0006 Why have you removed the information of her having all her albums achieving platinum status from the lead?
For the third time, please add, that she was with her dancer Ricky Alvarez. They both were in a relationship for over a year. She even mentioned him in her single "Thank U, Next". Mirrored7 (talk) 03:48, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Don't you think that line is a little redundant for an already somewhat long last paragraph?
I think that having it stated and sourced in the prose/body of the article is more than enough, alluding it to being something significant. But considering the size and stature of name/artist Grande is, that information does not feel as important/worth mentioning in the article's lead. Artists like Taylor Swift, Rihanna, Beyoncé, and Nicki Minaj also have all of their albums certified platinum status or higher, but when you look over at their article leads, that is not mentioned.
Maybe once Eternal Sunshine and Positions are certified double (or higher) platinum—the latter which has been eligible for higher since nearly two years now—the line can be readded that all of her albums are certified "multiplatinum" or higher.
@Ben0006 For the top: Describing "Wicked" as only musical fantasy is a bit unspecific. Let's rephrase it to "the film adaptation of the fantasy musical Wicked (2024)". Mirrored7 (talk) 21:20, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Would the (2024) be after:
Wicked (2024) (which would link to the musical) or after film adaptation (2024)?
Also, is it better "returned to acting with Don't Look Up and [Wicked mention]" or should it be "and starred as Glinda in [Wicked mention]", since she already returned to acting in 2021?
"She returned to acting with the political satire Don't Look Up (2021) and starred as Glinda in the film adapation of the fantasy musical Wicked (2024)." @Ben0006
Also, please remove Fergie as one of the artists, Grande was inspired by. The article is over ten years ago, she only mentions the song specifically, not her as an artist. There are also no other sources other than that one, I could find. Mirrored7 (talk) 08:09, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"...and starred as Glinda in the musical fantasy film Wicked (2024)." People will eventually know, that this is a film adaptation of the broadway musical.
Again, remove Fergie from her influences section. She only mentions the song "Clumsy", not the singer specifically.
@PHShanghai While I appreciate your recent changes. Why you removed genres like Pop & EDM? After her debut album, she clearly experimented with more genres than R&B. Also "Into You" wasn't as big as the others songs globally. No need to mention that. The mention of the number one debuts, was better before, as it puts in retroperspective. The record will be clearly be broken sooner or later. Mirrored7 (talk) 09:41, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pop and R&B have been and will continue to be her main genres for almost every single album she's put out. The only time she ever deviated from a traditional Pop & R&B album was Sweetener andTUN, and that was only because she included more trap influences while still keeping her urban pop sound. "Into You" was a pretty big global hit imo, but if you want to replace it with something else from the Dangerous Woman era, go ahead.
Additionally, she still holds the record for the most number one debuts for a female artist. If that will be broken by someone else then we will change it; otherwise, if she's currently holding the record for most number one debuts, then she should keep it per WP:CRYSTALBALL rule. PHShanghai | they/them (talk) 11:44, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
She still experimented with other music generes on her albums. This should be pointed out in the lead.
(There was nothing wrong with the first paragraph, please revert):
Grande's debut studio album, Yours Truly (2013), incorporated retro-pop and R&B elements and yielded the successful single "The Way". My Everything (2014), her second album, experimented with EDM and contained the internationally successful singles "Problem", "Break Free", and the RIAA diamond-certified "Bang Bang". Grande further explored pop and R&B with her third album Dangerous Woman (2016), which solidified her critical and commercial success.
The first paragraph was fine but the condensation and bringing of two albums into joint material stated together is much easier to read and comprehend, imo.
⠀
About the musicality of those two albums is included, and the sentence about the Dangerous Woman album does feel pretty redundant, in a manner that it stretches the paragraph, due to the "further explored [genres]" and "solidified her success" line. The latter was added to the new sentence and the old version seemed like that was just stated for the sake of having something to say about the album, when there isn't much to say about it in the lead, worth mentioning seperately, unless it's something about its role in her artistry, musical composition, or any records or awards.
⠀
In regard to the mention of dance music, there needs to be an explicit mention of that in some source, or it can be replaced with a mention of the album containing dance elements and influences, rather than being a primarily dance-oriented body itself. Maybe that line can be rephrased. Let me know if you have any ideas.
Grande continued to blend pop, dance, and R&B influences on her next albums, My Everything (2014), and Dangerous Woman (2016), solidifying her critical and commercial success. How is that?
Don't forget to add "along" before "Break Up with Your Girlfriend, I'm Bored".
@Ben0006 Don't forget to remove "Into You" from the lead. The other songs peaked all in the top five in countries like US, UK and Australia, while "Into You" didn't. It's a fan favourite, but not one of her biggest songs. Mirrored7 (talk) 18:01, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"One Last Time" was a hit in many European markets, could it replace "Into You" in the lead?
And should synth-pop be added to the dance influence part?
Also, "Die For You" and "Save Your Tears" weren't number one debuts.
1. Remove Mac Miller. All the songs that have features, are not mentioned. That shouldn't be too.
2. Maybe combine the genres for both two albums, EDM, Pop, R&B. "...experimented or explored with EDM, Pop and R&B. Remove "Into You", as it didn't reach top ten in either US or UK. Also "Side to Side" came after "Bang Bang".
3. ...the top three positions on the chart ALONG with "Break Up with Your Girlfriend, I'm Bored".
(It reads better with the along, add it again)
4. She broke the number one debut record in general, not just for a woman.
@Mirrored7: Not everything should be mentioned on the lead section, which has been quite bloated. You had played ownership on this article for such long time, just let go now. Those Grammy nominations and Billboard Hot 100 trivia could be mentioned on the lead sections of awards article, discography article, or their respective albums and songs. Thank you. Bluesatellite (talk) 01:38, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bluesatellite Have you seen Beyonce's and Miley Cyrus lead? This is quite bloated. How you can have such double standard? In the last days, a huge chunk of Ariana Grande's lead has been removed, unnecessary too. How much do you want to remove already? Her breaking a record 60 year old chart record or having her only AOTY nomination is NOT just "everything". Mirrored7 (talk) 01:47, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1. Re-add "Grande began her career at age 15" by appearing in the Broadway musical 13 (2008), and "as well as" to "rose to prominence as Cat Valentine in the Nickelodeon television series...
2. remove "streaming" from "broke several records".
3. remove "top 50" and re-add "among" in the Rolling Stone mention. Change "top 10" to "top ten" in the Billboard mention.
4. also remove "...both the highest for any artist emerging since the 2010s." and re-add "Grande was named Woman of the Year (2018) and the most successful female artist to emerge in the 2010s" right after Instagram mention. Mirrored7 (talk) 00:17, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bluesatellite First of all, great work! Can you re-add that part "while the latter was nominated for Album of the Year, breaking several records. Grande became the first solo artist to occupy the top three spots on the U.S. chart with the aforementioned songs along with "Break Up with Your Girlfriend, I'm Bored".
Grande only was once nominated for AOTY and the Billboard record was very important to her career. It should be mentioned in the lead. Mirrored7 (talk) 01:31, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1. Replace "Grande began her acting career by appearing in the Broadway musical 13 (2008), as well as the Nickelodeon television series Victorious (2010–2013) and its spin-off series Sam & Cat (2013–2014)" to "Grande began her career by appearing in the Broadway musical 13 (2008), and to rose to prominence as Cat Valentine in the Nickelodeon television series Victorious (2010–2013) and its spin-off series Sam & Cat (2013–2014)"
2. remove "top 50" in the Rolling Stone mention. Change "top 10" to "top ten" in the Billboard mention.
3. also remove "...both the highest for any artist emerging since the 2010s" and re-add "Grande was named Woman of the Year (2018) and the most successful female artist to emerge in the 2010s" right after Instagram mention.
4. re-add ..." Grande became the first solo artist to occupy the top three spots on the U.S. chart with the aforementioned songs, right after mention of "Thank U, Next" and "7 Rings". Mirrored7 (talk) 11:43, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ben0006 Thanks! Also remove "streaming" from "several records", maybe "breaking several chart records; she became the first solo artist to occupy the top three spots on the U.S. chart with the aforementioned songs." Mirrored7 (talk) 12:24, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mirrored7:, this is not a comment on the merit of your suggested edits. However, it would be much more constructive if you engaged directly with Bluesatellite instead of directing another editor to revert Bluesatellite's edits on your behalf to get around your page ban. Aoi (青い) (talk) 14:13, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ben0006 Please: Re-add that part, after breaking several records; "Grande became the first solo artist to simultaneously occupy the top three spots on the U.S. chart with the aforementioned songs."
It's a significant record, that hasn't been broken since the Beatles.
Please don't forget fo add the Billboard record. It's a historical record, the same as Katy Perry has her 5 #1s record on her lead.
Update the number of Billboard nominations in "Awards and recognition". She has 42 now.
Remove Fergie as the source of influence. 1. There's only one source that states that. 2. Grande hasn't mention her as influence in years. Also the source is not recent and from a decade ago. Mirrored7 (talk) 15:50, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ben0006 Update “positive reviews” to “critical acclaim" from critics” in her career section. Also, remove the worldwide gross. It's not the total yet and it's predicted to finish in 700 to 800 million range. Mirrored7 (talk) 14:16, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1. "Former contained the internationally successful singles "Problem", "Break Free" and the RIAA diamond-certified "Bang Bang", while latter became her fist of five consecutive number one albums in the UK", right after "My Everything" and "Dangerous Woman" mentions. Remove "Side to Side".
2. "Grande received critical praise for her potrayal as Glinda the Good in the fantasy musical film adaptation Wicked (2024), for which she earned a Golden Globe Award nomination."
3. Add "and one of the most RIAA-certified artists in history", right after "Grande has sold over 90 million records worldwide".
What is the point of adding the Billboard chart records part? 6 number-one US albums and most number-one debuts is already mentioned. Whichever singles hit number one on the Hot 100 are explicitly mentioned in the lead too.
There's various records that she holds or broke/set in the past, that are mentioned in the Awards and Recognition section. It is pretty redundant to just add that sentence and supplement it with the number of albums and singles that debuted at the summit. Artists like Beyoncé and Taylor Swift also hold various records, albeit not mentioned as a statement in their leads.
What is the point of the consecutive UK number one albums?
@Ben0006 Grande has seven number one debuts. This isn't mentioned in the lead. It just says, she broke the record of number one debuts. You're right with the other ones, I guess. Mirrored7 (talk) 21:04, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ben0006 Place the "sixth greatest pop star of 2024" mention, in "Music records and awards", in the the third section, as it's about a specific year, and not about Grande's overall impact. Mirrored7 (talk) 12:13, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ben0006 Your recent edit was kinda unnecessary. She still received those nominations. Critic Choice Awards is still pending. And she's most likely to be nominated for SAG, BAFTA, and the Oscars. Also replacing the link with the winners wasn't necessary, when the whole point is Grande receiving a nomination. Mirrored7 (talk) 23:01, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Critics Choice Awards is still there in the 2024 subsection, along with its source, just as before, though. The article about the winners lists the nominees and highlights the winner (of each category) in bold. The reason behind replacing the reference was that either way, both state Grande as a nominee. Only using the previous source might make it seem vague as to if she won it or not, while the new source confirms the outcome.
Grande is most likely to be nominated for the Academy Award according to predictions, so wait to update for tomorrow, when the nominations are out. Also, Grande has now 37 Guinness Records. Mirrored7 (talk) 14:25, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Ben0006 Don't forget to reword the rest. Add least that part, "Grande received critical acclaim in Jon M. Chu's 2024 film adaptation of fantasy musical Wicked for her portrayal of Galinda Upland, for which she earned nominations for the Academy and Golden Globe for Best Supporting Actress." Wait after the BAFTA and SAG
ceremonies, before adding them. Also remove "The" from "The themes of personal struggles", as the next sentence starts with "The" too. Mirrored7 (talk) 12:17, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi guys, so it's been a while but it's unfair that Ariana Grande's impact section was removed, i don't know what happened, I would re-instate but i can't do it so someone has to, because Ariana definitely has impacted the industry, last article revisions corrobored it, in fact, I helped to make it, so please, cand somebody re-instate impact section? 2800:BF0:60:F22:B41A:3235:9050:2EBF (talk) 23:37, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I feel like three good stuctured sections would be sufficient. Maybe get some help from the others editors who are in here regularly. There is already section above music records and awards, to start with. Mirrored7 (talk) 19:17, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Ben0006 You have not replied. Like I said, I would like to get this done this month. It's really not a big deal. Three sections of Ariana Grande's impact in the pop industry. I can help you too. Are the sources helpful to you? Mirrored7 (talk) 23:06, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Some of these are solid sources. But I'd not be able to start working on it this month itself.
@Aoi The images haven't been deleted yet, so what's the point of not using either of them on this article? Especially if the Met Gala one is also nominated for deletion. The ones from the Wicked press are her most recent ones and they are also used for other articles of hers. Cynthia Erivo's lead one is also from the Wicked press tour. Mirrored7 (talk) 21:08, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The image was changed under the reasoning that the prior image was being considered for deletion. However, it was replaced with a photo that is also under consideration for deletion, so the change solved one problem by creating another.
More importantly, the prior image was decided by consensus at a pretty well-attended RfC earlier this year, which shouldn't be overturned unilaterally. Aoi (青い) (talk) 18:47, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're right. But now there are several recent pictures to choose from. The discussion only took place because there was no other current picture of her to choose from. The lead image right now, is not her most recent one. It's also not that flattering anyway, with all the butterflies in her face. @AoiMirrored7 (talk) 18:57, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Aoi Can you reply to me? There's no reason to not a have one of the most recent images of Grande as the lead photo. So far, you're the only one to have an issue with it. Mirrored7 (talk) 23:09, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless, this discussion is not really worth having because both of these photos will likely be deleted soon. If anything, we should be discussing which other photo to use afterward. From a quick glance at Commons, all of the options from the past few years are low quality screenshots from YouTube videos, unfortunately. Prefall23:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Prefall How about this one? This has surely more quality. She has no weird butterflies on her face, while its one of her most recent ones and at the Wicked premiere, the era she is in right now:
The first one is a good look, but she has a really awkward smile going on in that particular frame. Second is a worse version of the first. Third is the worst quality, and the least flattering, I think. The current one is still better than all of these, I'd say. Assuming the rationale in the deletion request is accurate, they will all 100% be deleted.
I don't mind the fourth one, but it is super old compared to other viable options. And I think the cat ears are more distracting in that than the butterflies are in the current one. File:Ariana Grande for Vogue Taiwan (cropped).png isn't the most flattering shot, but it'll probably end up being the best "semi-current" photo we'll have left. Prefall14:30, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The cat ears are one of her most iconic looks. Justin Bieber's one is a decade old too. Don't think that matters much.
How about using the first photo for now. I don't think her smiling is a big deal. It suits more for now, because of her still promoting Wicked and the awards season tied to it. Mirrored7 (talk) 18:09, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how many times this has been said already, but we should definitely not be swapping in images that are likely going to be deleted as copyright violations. Aoi (青い) (talk) 18:35, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@SNUGGUMS and @Aoi Is there a specific rule that prevents nominations to be mentioned in the lead? I found it unfairly, as other actors and actresses have their acting nominations mentioned in their lead too. Grande is fairly new in the industry, and acting nominations seem definitely lead worthy to me, especially if we talking about an ACADEMY AWARD nomination, which is a rare feat for any singer turned actress.
It's not a practice reserved exclusively for those who work in music or who primarily focus on acting careers. I could also name other pages that save nominations for article body (if anywhere) while sticking to wins for the lead section. The goal of only mentioning awards won is to reduce bloating/overstuffing. Being from a particular ceremony isn't some boost of significance in the way you seem to view it as. To be honest, I'm not entirely sure why anybody treats the Academy Awards as more important than other American film accolades (which sometimes includes the Golden Globes and those often appear to be deemed a next-best-thing in the country for movies). Being awarded still is getting some form of recognition no matter who it's from. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 03:07, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@SNUGGUMS Still, the Academy Award is the highest recognition you can get as an entertainer. Grande isn't a veteran, and "Wicked" is practically her first big picture. To be nominated for an Oscar, is an achievement in itself, especially if you count, that this is her first nomination and she has been known for decades as pop star. Same goes for BAFTA, SAG, and Golden Globe. It would be a different story, if she has won already, and as been nominated for multiple awards, like with her music career. Mirrored7 (talk) 06:47, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I completely agree with you, Mirrored7. Her Oscar nom is among the *most* notable aspects of her career thus far, and should definitely be mentioned in lead. Krimuk2.0 (talk)
Neither of you have elaborated on what makes them a bigger deal than other film awards. Being from one ceremony doesn't automatically give a nomination more importance compared to other institutions. The stance you have appears to reinforce a systemic bias of treating Oscars as a top priority even when someone has other big wins. I at least would wait until the ceremony takes place before adding that. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 13:20, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's pretty much known to everyone that the Oscars are the highest award you can get in entertainment. Even if she doesn't win, it's still notable to her career and should be added to the lead, as a nomination is a recognition in itself. That you don't think much about that award, doesn't change its importance or makes it lesser relevant. I don't know what purpose it has to wait until the ceremony.
I also think that, BAFTA's, SAG and Golden Globe nomination should be added, as it's a rare feat for a singer to achieve that with one role, especially with the first major one. Mirrored7 (talk) 15:14, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You took my comments the wrong way. I wasn't suggesting that I have a low stance of them or any other institution, I just couldn't grasp the reason(s) behind the "Oscars matter more than other film accolades for America" mentality. One thing I have observed over time is that BAFTAs are seen as the UK equivalent of what Academy Awards are to the US, though am also not sure what made folks decide one particular award was more important than other British accolades for movies. It sounds arbitrary to treat things from non-Oscar ceremonies as "lesser" achievements (for a lack of a better adjective) or to declare anything along the lines of "awards from this place are most important and others don't mean as much". SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 15:28, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I can't believe that we're discussing if an Oscar nomination should be added to a lead, like its some Kids Choice Award. I just know, that this wouldn't be happening to another artist, but for some reason there seems to be a bias against that particular one. Also, her BAFTA, Golden Globe, and SAG noms should be included too. Mirrored7 (talk) 18:34, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't twist this thread into something it's not, Mirrored7; nobody was saying or even suggesting they were similar to the Kids Choice Awards. Your accusations of bias are also unfounded when Ariana isn't some one-of-a-kind case when it comes to talk page discussions or what awards are pending. Regardless of what ceremony somebody is writing about, I thought it was obvious that merely being nominated is less lead-worthy than actually winning. That (along with wanting to avoid potential bloats) was why I recommended waiting until the ceremony had taken place before adding to the lead. Thankfully you aren't one of the Wikipedians who omits other big awards (yes that includes BAFTAs and Golden Globes) from leads for the sake of focusing more on Oscars (a worrisome practice of being too Oscar-centric I sometimes have witnessed on other pages). As for what Krimuk2.0 wrote, it admittedly does surprise me that any British media wouldn't consider awards from their nation to be the biggest deal among film ceremonies, and I previously was under the impression that the "Oscars are the most important movie achievement" stance was mostly one that Americans and their news publications held. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 19:12, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@SNUGGUMS I apologize. I took it the wrong way. Let's keep the Oscar nomination, and wait until the BAFTA and SAG ceremonies instead, as the Oscar nomination is still an achievement on its own, no matter what. There's still a way to add nominations, without the lead looking bloated. I feel like, It's still important to mention, that Grande found success as an actress, after being pop star for a decade. Those nominations, show it, especially because it's not in common, seeing other female pop stars careers in acting. Grande belongs to the minority, actually. Mirrored7 (talk) 09:43, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's not like she was completely new to films or acting in general before Wicked. Sure, most of her prior non-musical recognition comes from TV endeavors, but even non-starring roles still count for something. Supposing for a moment we did include any nominations ahead of their verdicts, how would we manage to avert bloating? SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 14:54, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's still not comparable to star in a major picture and getting that recognizition. This is definitely Grande's breakthrough as an actress. I can tell only five female singers who were nominated in those acting categories and even lesser who won. For now, let's keep the Oscar nomination how it is, one sentence doesn't make anything bloated. If she loses all, we can still add "for which she earned nominations for the Academy, Golden Globe, SAG, and BAFTA for Best Supporting Actress", at the end, of her starring in Wicked. However, we don't mention the nominations, in the section, where the awards are listed. Mirrored7 (talk) 16:01, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I assume the lack of mentions under "Awards and recognition" (which should be retitled to something like "Achievements" or simply "Awards" to avoid clunkiness) is due to them already being discussed within the Eternal Sunshine and Wicked section of "Career". This looks sufficient and avoids redundancies within the article body. On another note, it's misleading to call the movie her "breakthrough as an actress" when she already became quite famous for starring in Victorious as well as Sam and Cat. TV counts for more than you think with or without accolades. Nevertheless, I do see what you mean with one sentence by itself not being a big bloat, but am unsure whether the other paragraph discussing awards is only separated from that because those others are for music instead of acting. If not, then maybe they could be merged. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 17:13, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's definitely her breakthrough as an "Hollywood leading lady". Her roles on Sam & Cat and Victorious are supporting roles on a kids show. Not comparable at all.
As far as I know, the paragraph is for both. If she wins any of the awards (which I doubt), they can be added to them, like Lady Gaga's lead. I feel like only the Academy Award is worth to be added in the Wicked paragraph (if she wins them all). If she loses, I think the nominations (BAFTA/Golden Globe/SAG), should be still be mentioned in the lead, especially the Academy one. (Especially, if in the future, she will be mentioned in the media as an Oscar nominated/winning actress) Mirrored7 (talk) 18:40, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what purpose it would serve to have Oscars in a separate paragraph from any other film awards the lead discusses. It seems more logical to keep those closer together, particularly when for the same role. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 21:26, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, the original ping in the original post was malformed so I did not receive it, and I was traveling. I just happened to see this conversation going by my watchlist. I've only skimmed through this section, but want to note that my thinking when I reverted the original edit was as follows: Yes, an Oscar nomination is notable, but given all of this person's other accolades, is this one nomination really lead-worthy?
In the past, the lead for this article has been very bloated. It's better now (edits in the last year or so have brought it down to about 525 words, which is more than most featured articles, but not as bad as it has been in the past), but I think we need to be judicious in what is added to the lead to make sure what is included is really lead-worthy (and, as Grande's career evolves, her lead should be edited to ensure we're giving specific items the appropriate due weight. Additions also need to be viewed with WP:RECENTISM in mind. The idea is not to show a "bias" against Grande, but to really focus the lead to make sure 1) it clearly states the major reasons why she is a significant figure and 2) ensure that those major reasons don't get drowned out in a sea of trivial details.
If the consensus is to include the Oscar nomination, that is fine, but IMO it should not have been restored without discussion and consensus per WP:BRD.
As for whether this was her "breakthrough" as an actress--I don't think it really matters whether it was or not. What is notable and lead-worthy is that her role as G(a)linda was met with critical praise. The specific nominations are all encompassed in that fact and may not necessarily need to be mentioned separately. Aoi (青い) (talk) 00:01, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 January 2025
@QubeChiba: Please do not say they began dating in July 2023 as the source supporting the statement (and most other reliable sources online) does not say so. Their relationship was CONFIRMED that month. Please do not change this, also given it is a contentious topic with differing opinions on when the relationship started.. People is considered a reliable source and we'll take their word for it. jolielover♥talk17:53, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I just noticed that there is most likely a new picture. Because I had thought it was a different one before or has it always been the one from 2023? WebWhiz123 (talk) 20:42, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Ultraodan (talk) 08:26, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_2.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_premiere_in_LA.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}