Talk:Miley Cyrus/Archive 4

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Copyright Problem in "Rock Star"

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Miley's Hannah song, "Rock Star" is very similar to "Scotty Doesn’t Know" by Lustra from the movie Eurotrip. Should we mention that? I heard it everywhere that the band, Lustra, are thinking about what to do about it (lawsuit? demanding credit?) ♥, calliegal_x (talk) 01:31, 11 June 2008 (UTC)Calliegal

Stripping out the publicity angle of Cyrus falsely being accused of plagiarism. This is a song she didn't write and her only involvement is as a for hire singer/actress performer. This topic properly belongs in the song article as it objectively has nothing to do with Cyrus. --NrDg 01:38, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

2007 Salary??

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Miley earned 18.2 million last year, according to Parade magazine's annual "What People Earn" issue. This amount seems much more accurate than the measely 3 million mentioned currently. I suggest this higher figure be used as it seems more correct based on all the facts we have today. Forbes reported in June 2008 that Miley earns $25 million per year. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LancerDog (talk • contribs) 04:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

In the People Edition of World's Richest Kids, it was reported that Miley made $50 MIL per week on tour, so it is impossible that she ONLY made $18.2 MIL. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.83.135.5 (talk) 22:21, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

When you are looking at these things, you need to keep track of what's being reported. If Cyrus's tour grossed $50mil/week, she wouldn't personally get a huge percentage of that.Kww (talk) 02:02, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Miley on track to be a billionaire by age 18

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

With all of Miley's new business ventures, financial analysts predict she is on track to be a billionaire by age 18.http://www.hollyscoop.com/hannah-montana/hannah-montana-to-be-a-billionaire-by-age-of-18_14622.aspx —Preceding unsigned comment added by LancerDog (talk • contribs) 05:48, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

She herself won't be a billionaire, but the Hannah/Miley franchises will be worth about that much (that's my understanding of it at least)

Signature Again

Latest comment: 15 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

I'm still a little uncertain as to why Miley's article has a signature. Is there some policy that covers this? WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 20:21, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

My real concern is with authenticity. It is in commons and it is a content decision whether or not to include it in this article. --NrDg 20:50, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I searched Google images to try to find examples of her handwriting. While the file we have may not be a typical example of her signature, certain characteristics, particularly the way the tail of the "y" is drawn out, make it fairly certain (at least to my mind) that it is genuine. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 04:56, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

There is no need to remove this signature. Miley has thousands of posters given out in simple magazines with her signature on it. --Tiah12345 (talk) 09:35, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

G.N.O.

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

i am a bit confused, on the meet miley cyrus cd it say Mley co-wrote it, right? well on the Best of Both Worlds Concert cd it says only Matthew Wilder Tamara Dunn wrote it should it be mentined some where? Meliss402 (talk) 21:57, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Miley's Signature.

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Why did Wikipedia put Miley's signature on the page. You know, anyone could copy it, put it on a piece of paper, sell it, and get rich! Could someone change that? --Mileyhannahroxsox (talk) 23:59, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

That is extremely unlikely. If someone copied the image, and tried to pass it off as the original, it would be painfully obvious if they tried to print it on something. A laser printer looks very different than a pen. Also, Wikipedia is not the only place that has pictures of Cyrus' signature. If was able to make a printer print something that looks enough like a pen to fool someone into thinking that it is a genuine copy of Cyrus' signature, that person would easily know enough to be able to scrape Cyrus' signature from some other image of her autograph. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 04:52, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

There is a signature for most people articles on Wikipedia. There is a whole infobox syntax devoted to it. If you have a problem, take it to higher-level discussion pages. I have no examples since there is no precedent for something like this. --haha169 (talk) 01:01, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Jonas Love

Latest comment: 15 years ago8 comments5 people in discussion

Not quite sure which Jonas was involved but should it be mentioned that she had a relationship with (Nick, i think) one of them?! I myself am not totally upto date on the tween scene but I've heard that she has written a song "7 Things" to tell this boy her feelings so seeing as she has written a song which has become a single should there be a mention to the relationship that sparked Cyrus to write this YouTube hit Nisior (talk) 22:24, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Unless we have a reliable source, we need not include it. This issue has been discussed b4 also i guess. Gprince007 (talk) 05:42, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Miley Cyrus said she was not romantically involved with any of the Jonas Brothers. 72.95.139.17

I've read an aol article and it said that Miley was dating him,because of those hacked pics posted.One of them has her and Nick in it.PacManFreak (talk) 01:33, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I've seen all of those pictures and none of them had Nick Jonas in it. 72.95.139.17

We do not know what is going on in Miss Cyrus's private life, unless she said she is dating someone with HER OWN MOUTH NOT SOME BLOGGER then maybe we will add it.Mooncrest (talk) 02:08, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

ok miley and nick dated for 2 years (sometime in 05 till Dec 07) keeping it secret until the pressure got too much and they spilt, miley was interviewed by SEVENTEEN mag and this was what she said but in differant words (Mini no ipod (talk) 15:11, 13 August 2008 (UTC))

Magazines aren't really reliable enought to put that kind of information in the article.Mooncrest (talk) 20:43, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I also read it in 4 other mags including People and several websites like comcast.net and aol.com -(Mini no ipod (talk) 03:28, 19 August 2008 (UTC))

It's already added.Mooncrest (talk) 13:47, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Teen Choice Awards

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

It should be added that Miley will be the host for the 2008 Teen Choice Awards, which airs on Fox on August 4. It is reported on the wikipedia page for Teen Choice awards (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teen_Choice_Awards) and www.teenchoiceawards.com that this is true. I don't know why it hasn't been updated on this page already, but it is definitely significant for her. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Liam8 (talk • contribs) 23:17, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Overnight Sensation

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

She wasnt an overnight sensation, that would mean everyone loved her the first day. It sounds like an idoit fan wrote it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChuckCoke (talk • contribs) 23:09, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree..and "instant hit" sounds more appropriate but, Hannah Montana was an instant hit, not Miley —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zammit123 (talk • contribs) 09:21, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Talk Show

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Tyra Banks has pitched the idea that Miley should have her own talk show. Like a teenage version show of Tyra's. Tyra said she is very talented. I guess after Miley made over 50 million dollars this year somone finally realized she had talent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.229.198.173 (talk) 03:47, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Pictures allegedly from Cyrus' camera phone

Latest comment: 15 years ago14 comments11 people in discussion

As far as I can tell, all we know about the alleged hacking of Miley Cyrus' camera phone is just speculation. No one has been able to verify whether the images are authentic. Previously, I remove all references to this from the article as they were uncited and undoubtedly violated WP:BLP. In my opinion, the citation used now is not appropriate, since it is speculating as well. I have re-worded the statement in the article to emphasize that nothing has been proven yet, but I think it should just be removed completely until some concrete information comes out. This is dangerous ground to be walking on. Thoughts? J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 04:28, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the removal of info...because it does sound too trivial and tabloidish. This is an encylcopedic article and not gossip news....Gprince007 (talk) 04:08, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

It was from her fucking email not a camera-phone I dont see where you fucking numbskulls get your information. Quoted from the fucking first page "bro, i got those pics out of her email, and now that i lost access to everything after having access and watching her emails for months... i have nothing to loose for leakin." "A while back I haxed her email... might as well leak these photos" Get a clue wow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lostcauses (talk • contribs) at 12:51, July 15, 2008

From the AOL News webpage cited in the article:

"On Saturday a Web site called Digital Gangster posted photos that they allege were found by a hacker known as TrainReq in the memory of the singer's cell phone.".

From the Fox News webpage cited in the article:

"The photo was allegedly obtained by a hacker at DigitalGangster.com, who reportedly accessed the actress’s cell phone memory."

In the future, please try to be more polite. There is a strict policy against personal attacks in place on this website. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 13:59, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

And the way the FOX News headline was worded would make you think this was something she released. WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 15:40, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah your quotes don't mean shit I gave you quotes from THE HACKER HIMSELF saying it not some shitty middle man that has crap information and can't remove watermarks for shit. Trainreq himself has been saying he has got it from the email get a clue. If you even went on DG for 2 seconds you would know better but thats fine keep posting lies on wiki w.e —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18:10, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

What is required for inclusion on Wikipedia (at least, SHOULD be) is that the source is considered reliable according to the following. WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 19:10, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

How isn't the words coming straight from the sources mouth reliable? Really I could care less its a small detail e-five ? \|/_(o.o)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.208.148.249 (talk) 20:57, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Nothing has been confirmed. The photos all have bad quality to them, and the website that posted them put a disclaimer saying that the photos are not confirmed to be Miley Cyrus. Either the people that took the photos are not sure that it's her, or they know it's not her and put the disclaimer there so that they can cover their ass if the photos turn out to be fake.

The link to Digital Gangster is directly to the thread where someone posted the pictures. The same thread goes on to include fake fully nude pictures. Does wikipedia really want to link directly to nude pictures of a 15 year old, even faked? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Austintal (talk • contribs) 05:14, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Keep in mind Wikipedia already has tons of pitures that it hosts of material inappropriate for kids. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cowbellallen (talk • contribs) 18:51, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

If the "controversies" section includes her not wearing a seat belt in a movie and posing for a magazine, I think the photos should at least be mentioned. 66.30.172.77 (talk) 02:28, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to burst your bubble, but at least one of these pictures are without a doubt fake. Copy and paste this:

http://www.babble.com/CS/blogs/famecrawler/archive/2008/07/14/so-those-nude-shower-photos-of-miley-cyrus.aspx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.95.139.248 (talk) 18:41, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

we should not put in anything inapprpropiate for i know plenty of kids ages 5-12 that go on here to learn more about Miley,JB,Jesse Mcartney, Jordin Sparks, basically anyone shown on Radio Disney, so i say no false or genuine nude pics. Agreed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mini no ipod (talk • contribs) 03:34, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

This comment is not in the correct section and Metro Station should not be in the Associated Acts part because Miley Cyrus has not performed with the band Metro Station. The only relation she has to this band is that her older brother, Trace Cyrus, is a member of it.--Tiah12345 (talk) 09:31, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

actually Miley has played lead guitar in some songs(i do not have any examples cuz the only song i have heard is Shake It) so Metro Staition should be added to Associated Acts —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mini no ipod (talk • contribs) 03:36, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

If Miley has, please provide a reliable source to prove this. This shouldnt be added unless one is provided 124.176.91.125 (talk) 10:58, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Miley Cyrus YouTube videos

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I was wondering how indepth we go into this in the article. Currently, we have the YouTube page, but we only have one paragraph in the Personal life section about this. Should we include more on this and include information about leaked songs, such as Step Up 2 Miley which she did with Jeremy Shum and Mandy Jiroux, or should we simply leave it as it is? The reason why I ask this is a lot of information may be rumor-based? Thanks!!!Mileycyrusfan2009 (talk) 05:31, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Rumor-based non-notable info shd not be included in the article. Also any information shd be backed up by reliable sources...Gprince007 (talk) 07:01, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy on biographies

Latest comment: 15 years ago10 comments4 people in discussion

this is really a puff piece isn't it - and veers on teensploitation... the poor little girl is entitled to a life and privacy. Should we have wiki articles about minors? My view is no.Excalibur (talk) 00:21, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

She's obviously notable, and there is plenty of press coverage. I mean, it's not like she's trying to keep a low profile. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 00:21, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

If she was my daughter, I wouldn't allow her to do this promotional stuff. She is still a child. Who is using who, and who is making money from the kid? She should be in school, not on Wikipedia, IMHO. Excalibur (talk) 00:24, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

What you would allow your own daughter to do really doesn't have anything to do with how this subject's life has gone so far. As it stands now, she clearly meets the notability guidelines. If you think there shouldn't be articles on minors, WT:BIO would probably be a better forum...although I doubt you'll find much support there. --Onorem ♠Dil 00:36, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

(ec) Look, she's a minor. Her parents have to have given their consent for what she's done, or at the very least, they gave consent for her agent to act as a proxy guardian. I wouldn't, and I don't think there are many people who would let their daughters do what Miley Cyrus has done, but that is irrelevant. Obviously, Cyrus' parents let her do those things. As far as her privacy goes, no one forced her to do what she does. In addition, Wikipedia can only draw on existing materials published by third-party source for the content of this article, so we are not the ones to complain to. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 00:44, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Well I had never heard of her until twenty minutes ago, and as far as I can see, minors should be protected from commercial exploitation by their parents and anyone else regardless of notability. If my kids had her fathers PR machine behind them, they would be notable too - she just isn't old enough to be in control of the beast. She is being used... for profit... that's clear. I thought Wikipedia had very tough policies on biogs of living persons, but in this case I think we are failing to protect a minor from teensploitation, and that bothers me. Shes a kid for chrissake! Excalibur (talk) 00:54, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Miley Cyrus is very well known. A Google search for the exact phrase "Miley Cyrus" returns more than 29 million results. A Google News search returns 5,500 results. She stars in one of the most popular shows aimed at kids, Hannah Montana (The first episode of that show attracted more than five million viewers). She is definitely notable, and her privacy is not a consideration here. An actress, by the nature of the profession, has to give up some of their privacy, and we have not unreasonably intruded into Cyrus' personal life in this article. Besides, everything in the article was already published somewhere else. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 01:06, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I was a pretty well-known newspaper delivery boy in my neighborhood at her age, and I acquired the Queen Scout or Eagle Scout award at that age. So are we defining notability by income here? As a charity, is that what we value as notable? If so, maybe I should quietly just leave the project...Excalibur (talk) 01:32, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

We are defining notability based on the guidelines at Wikipedia:Notability. Specifically, since this is a biographical article about a singer and actress, we are defining notability based on Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Criteria for musicians and ensembles and Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Entertainers. Cyrus easily meets the criteria set forth by those pages. As a newspaper carrier and recipient of an Eagle Scout award, you would unquestionably not meet any of those criteria, so your comparison is not a valid one. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 01:43, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Further explanation (somewhat simpler one) as to where Excalibur's explanation falls apart: There is a MAJOR difference between being notable locally and notable on a national (and/or international) scale as Miley is. WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 16:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Front image

Latest comment: 15 years ago10 comments4 people in discussion

Seems like some people disagreed with having Image:Miley Cyrus.jpeg as the front image on the article, do any body oppose, or support this new change? --Kanonkas : Talk 14:03, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I think that this image is much better than the other images we have. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 19:24, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

The PNG should be used because it is easier on the eyes and is better quality. XxJoshuaxX (talk) 19:26, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

The PNG version isn't better quality, it's lightning is hiding the real lightning as you can see by Image:Mileydog.PNG and then see Image:Miley Cyrus.jpeg which isn't hiding the lightning. --Kanonkas : Talk 19:33, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Still,the PNG looks better. XxJoshuaxX (talk) 19:36, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

As the uploader of the original PNG, I think it looks better as well.--CyberGhostface (talk) 02:48, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Would be nice with more opinions, as User:XxJoshuaxX has been blocked as a sockpuppet. --Kanonkas : Talk 10:04, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

If there are no other objections to add this image I'll add it as it's 2 against 1 on adding this image (not counting the sockpuppet). Thanks, --Kanonkas : Talk 09:56, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

User:J.delanoy was probably saying that picture of Miley and the dog itself was better than the other pictures on the article, being as you didn't list the other image for comparision when you made your initial post.--CyberGhostface (talk) 23:55, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

That is correct, but it really makes little difference to me which version of that picture is used. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 02:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Typo under Touring

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Just a note to someone with edit access, there is a typo in the "touring" section where the date of the Disney Channel release of Miley's tour should be 2008 rather than 2009. This is clear when checked via internet sources and by the past tense used within the text. Rack88 (talk) 23:04, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Done. Next time u can do it urself. Remember to be BOLD while editing. Gprince007 (talk) 05:12, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Controversy Section

Latest comment: 15 years ago6 comments5 people in discussion

There are way more things that need to be said in that section. There is the candy thing with her friend, the shower pictures, the Selena/Demi thing, and more. Should we add them???

The abovesaid incidents have not had any serious impact on her career or her personal life ....so it's just tabloid fodder which i believe doesnt warrant any mention in an encyclopedic article. Gprince007 (talk) 15:48, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the shower photo shouldn't be mentioned, or it should be mentioned that a series of constant photos has been leaked on the internet of cyrus wearing revealing clothes etc. don't mention each individual set of photos.

 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tiah12345 (talk • contribs) 09:01, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I think that the pictures that were hacked should be there. They were taken privately, and I understand that. But, Vanessa Hudgens Wikipedia page has a Controversy section, which only talks about her PRIVATE pictures, as well. It is very similar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.229.84.95 (talk) 01:05, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Actually, yes, I do agree with you. The hacked photos was a subheading under the controversy section, but was later removed. Now the controversies has been tagged for merging with other sections to make a more neutral presentation. How is this to be done? --Tiah12345 (talk) 09:09, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I just took care of that. All I did was remove the Controversy heading so that the controversies were sub headings of her Personal Life. 68DANNY2 (talk) 19:50, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Okay, Sounds good. Hopefully this will resolve the problem 124.187.104.81 (talk) 08:27, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Bot report : Found duplicate references !

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

"test" :
- [http://www.teenchoiceawards.com Official Teen Choice Awards|Inside TC], Retrieved on [[19-7-2008]].
- [http://pbskids.org/itsmylife/celebs/interviews/miley.html It's My Life . Celebs . Miley Cyrus | PBS Kids GO!]. Retrieved on [[2008-07-14]].

DumZiBoT (talk) 12:44, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Forgot to mention that I fixed them. Since they only appeared one time each, I removed the ref name from both. bibliomaniac 1 5 23:01, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

7 things

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

she co-wrote this song about Nick Jonas. video director Brett Ratner said that "The necklace she's wearing in the video is the necklace he gave her" and she said to MTV that "breakout" album was about Ex-boyfriends

http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1591241/20080721/cyrus__miley.jhtml

Peacekeeper-89 (talk) 07:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Hanah Montana Ending

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I hear that miley and he dad are done with hannah montana. Should this be mentioned or is it just a rumor? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ehccheehcche (talk • contribs) 22:57, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

rumor.Kww (talk) 23:01, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Miley death hoax

Latest comment: 15 years ago13 comments8 people in discussion

The online hoax

On November 16th, 2008 a rumor of Miley dying in a car accident was circulated on the internet. Apparently someone hacked into her youtube account and posted a "good bye" video. I think this should be on the page.

everyone knows shes not dead. i only heared about it after the video was taken of. it wasn't that big of a deal. --gdaly7 (talk) 07:48, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

but the other rummor that she died on set of the hannah montana movie a while ago that could get put in, that was big news.--gdaly7 (talk) 07:48, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

This incident has been noted by Associated Press among others. References exist from at least one reliable source. I don't think it belongs in the article so I won't put it in, but that is just my editorial judgment and I won't remove it if someone adds the info with a reliable source reference. --NrDg 19:11, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I will remove such entries on sight, per WP:DENY, and, if you look through the edit history, you will see that Acroterion does so as well. There is no reason to provide support to these people by recognizing their vandalism.—Kww(talk) 19:48, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

WP:DENY applies to Wikipedia vandalism only but I agree, in general, with the principle for other things which is one of the reasons I don't want to see this in the article. However, when notabilty is shown by reliable sources picking up and reporting this we cannot use WP:DENY as a reason to keep it out of the article. I think this is trivial information that adds nothing to the article and should stay out for that reason. --NrDg 20:27, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

The YouTube vandalism and Wikipedia vandalism were essentially simultaneous. It was all one event, so I think WP:DENY covers both the Wikipedia and YouTube aspects.—Kww(talk) 20:33, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

At this point I WP:UNDUE would apply. This routine "controversies" here already take up a much of the ToC. But if this is still considered significant in a month (Wikipedia:NOT#NEWS) and can be written to respect Wikipedia:BLP#Basic human dignity, would it be reasonable then? Gimmetrow 20:43, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree. --NrDg 20:49, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

If something happens to make it genuinely notable (triggers a new YouTube security policy, spawns a mad wave of YouTube vandalism that ultimately cripples the site, etc.), it can be added then. That would bring it past WP:NOT#NEWS and WP:DENY.—Kww(talk) 20:51, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

-- For the record, I just read about this Hoax on my Nintendo Wii (via the News menu) so I don't think any of Wikipedia's silly DENY rules really apply any more. The Associated Press has picked up on this story. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.254.41.154 (talk) 07:15, 19 November 2008 (UTC) I believe we should add it to the article! it would b good, plus we could prevent phycotic fans from getting ticked off(Mini no ipod (talk) 17:37, 19 November 2008 (UTC))

Per Gimmetrow's comment and WP:NOT#NEWS, if this is still significant in a month, then it may have validity. Otherwise, it's just ephemera. I am unconcerned about the feelings of "psychotic fans. " Acroterion _(talk) 18:33, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

it was breifly mentioned in Time Magazine, as were the myspace photos.

of course Cyrus has a full time staff of internet reputation purifiers who edit this page constantly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.37.36.94 (talk) 04:17, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Why has this not been placed back on the page?! i agree there are some die hard fans out there who don't want to believe any of this. Biased wikipedia!! I'm certain that facts can be added regardless of wether it has sustained in mainstream media for 2 months. Complete bull. Even the presidents inauguration is not in the media anymore. Are you saying we should edit that off wikipedia as well?!?125.236.154.70 (talk) 21:51, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Hanah Montana Ending

Latest comment: 15 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

I hear that miley and he dad are done with hannah montana. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ehccheehcche (talk • contribs) 22:57, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

rumor.Kww (talk) 23:01, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

It has been consistantly denied that she wants Hannah Montana to end. 72.95.139.157 (talk) 13:32, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

If u put that her n her father are done the show say that there is rumor on them stopping the show ---cakato89@aol.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.229.37.102 (talk) 07:58, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

yeah only insert things that are verifiable

7things

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Please be4 change the article can anyone tell me what's wrong ? i've add a reliable source, and it's obvious that the song ia about nick...so why deleting it!!?? Peacekeeper-89 (talk) 11:43, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Miley herself said that the song is not about anyone. Look at the article for 7 Things. 72.95.139.157 (talk) 13:31, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

That's right but after that the Director of the video clip said the necklace in the video was belong to nick you can see this link for more http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1593775/20080828/cyrus__miley.jhtml Peacekeeper-89 (talk) 17:58, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

List of Songs

Latest comment: 15 years ago5 comments5 people in discussion

Could we make one? I know all of the song names in her C.D.s. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.214.203.72 (talk) 02:13, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

No need for one. Her album articles list every song on each album, and the discography list each album and every single, too.Kww (talk) 02:40, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Well I think we should! It would be a great help to people! And I think we should also include the lyrics because a lot of people dont know where to go to do those things! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.192.167.211 (talk) 18:25, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

As Kww said, a list of songs would be quite unnessesary as all of her songs are on listed in the album and singles articles. It's not as if she has loads of songs that are unreleased but the song titles are somewhat known to the public(or at least the fans), in that case it might be acceptable but even artists that do have many known unreleased songs don't have a "list of songs" article for example Britney Spears. Also adding lyrics would be a blantant copyright violation as the lyrics are copyrighted by the publishers and Wikipedia would not have the permission to use such copyrighted content. Anyway lyrics are readily available on any fansite and Wikipedia is not a fansite, it's an online encyclopedia. AngelOfSadness talk 18:46, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but putting lyrics to the songs would be violating copyright! As AngelsofSadness said, it's not a fan site. Tweedle20 (talk) 17:54, 23 December 2008 (UTC)Tweedle20

sophomore

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

If you are going to protect this page, at least have the goddamn common sense not to use esoteric american words like "sophomore" in the introduction. This use of the word makes absolutely no sense in thjis context.

Please rectify this issue.

Anonymous/121.209.235.20 (talk) 10:32, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea who did that either. I've changed it to "second." bibliomaniac 1 5 17:58, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Good boy. Anonymous/121.209.235.20 (talk) 05:24, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Controversy

Latest comment: 15 years ago6 comments4 people in discussion

Why hasn't there been any mention of the photo controversy where Cyrus and one of her friends were photographed sharing candy? That caused a huge internet shockwave, and yet it hasn't been added. I expected Wikipedia to have that info like a year ago when it first happened. But there was no mention of it...Moocowsrule (talk) 21:02, 19 October 2008 (UTC)moocowsrule

It hasn't been added because it doesn't meet Wikipedias notability guidelines. Edgehead 5150 21:13, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

There were at least a few pages on some notable and reliable new pages... Moocowsrule (talk) 03:07, 21 October 2008 (UTC)moocowsrule

The info might have been on some reliable sites, but it still isn't notible. Edgehead 5150 07:39, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

I actually wonder why that Vanity Fair photo is under the header "Controversy" at all. Both artistically and in any frankly sexual sense it is at the same level as a van Gogh. Unless you're a pervert artophile, it doesn't turn you on. Mikael Häggström (talk) 19:29, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

If everyone agreed with you it wouldn't be a controversy. Since they don't, it is. --NrDg 19:34, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Miley isn't 16...typo?

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

So how could she have an event at disneyland celebrating her 16th birthday?

No as the Disneyland thing was an event for her to celebrate her birthday with her fans i.e. it was a concert pretty much just two months in advance. AngelOfSadness talk 14:27, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

FBI found Miley's hacker

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Some of the controversial photos on the internet (not the Vanity Fair photos) of Cyrus exposing some parts of her body were apparently posted by somebody who hacked one of her former e-mail accounts. The FBI raided his house. Here is one article, and there are others out there in case it is not reliable enough (although I think it is reliable): http://tech.yahoo.com/news/nm/20081022/wr_nm/us_cyrus_tech_1 Stevv (talk) 01:13, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

I think it's newsworthy, but like the Chris Brown saying Miley Cyrus is ugly thing, because it's breaking news, I'm not sure if it should be included. Read here on Recentism —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mileyshockdown (talk • contribs) 05:38, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Playboy offer

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I was wondering whether this is really relevant: "In May 2008, Hugh Hefner made news when he offered a magazine pictorial to 15 year old Miley. Hefner said she was a "pretty lady" but would have to wait until she was 18 to appear in the magazine.". This honestly soudns more of an advertisement for Playboy on the biggest teen pop star's MySpace than something genuine?Mileysmileyday (talk) 07:02, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

I'd take it out. Miley possibly gets a lot of offers for many things that don't warrant inclusion here within her article. -- Longhair\^talk 07:18, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, i feel that in light of her backless photo controversy, Hefner offer might be included. But i feel it doesnt require a separate section to mention it. It might be merged in the photo controversy section.Gprince007 (talk) 00:51, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

"You're a prick!"

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

...is written under the pic...can someone please change it?! 86.45.206.241 (talk) 22:36, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

That vandalism was reverted over three hours ago and according to the most recent revision the vandalism isn't present. AngelOfSadness talk 22:38, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Try bypassing your browser's cache. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 22:42, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

someone wrote under the first heading at the bottom some inappropriate and false content, and it needs to be removed immediately!

Age

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

She is now 16, someone needs to update the age on the right hand side. Simsianity (talk) 10:33, 3 November 2008 (UTC)Simsianity

November 23rd hasn't happened yet, making her still 15 until then. When November 23rd does happen, the page will be automatically updated. Therefore, currently, there is nothing wrong in the article about her age as there is multiple reliable sources to back up that content. AngelOfSadness talk 18:16, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Mileys age

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Miley is 16 now so somone should change that —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.42.217.5 (talk) 01:30, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Miley's birthday is November 23, so she isn't 16, she's 15. Edgehead 5150 01:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Besides that, there is a template, Template:Birth date and age, that calculates the person's age by looking at Wikipedia's servers' clocks and comparing it to the person's birthdate as entered into the templates parameters. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 07:50, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Playboy "offer" never happened

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

The alleged "offer" from Hugh Hefner for Miley to appear in Playboy NEVER HAPPENED. What did happen is that an idiot reporter saw Hefner at an event, and completely out of the blue asked him if he'd want Cyrus to appear in the magazine. Hefner responded that she was a "pretty lady" but would have to wait until she was 18 to appear in the magazine. It was a completely reasonable response to a really stupid question, but only someone in the media looking for a headline would confuse it with being an offer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikefulton1963 (talk • contribs) 02:19, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Really, do you have a Reliable Source to prove that? Edgehead 5150 08:09, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

It's not a news item I read somewhere... It was on the EXTRA entertainment news show. It showed the reporter asking Hefner what he thought about the Vanity Fair photos (the story about those had just hit a day or two earlier), then he asked if he'd want Miley to appear in Playboy. There's probably a video clip of it online somewhere... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.27.169 (talk) 04:07, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Piano?

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Does Miley Cyrus also play piano? Isn't there a pic of her playing a keyboard? Geekboy6 (talk)

yes she does --gdaly7 (talk) 07:54, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

picture

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

the picture of miley is like a year old can we get a new one --gdaly7 (talk) 07:54, 17 November 2008 (UTC) i dont think we need a new picture, this one is a good enough resemblance--Blacksmith^talk 07:39, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Mileys name

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

i don't know if this is for everyone but in the article at the Very Very top Miley Cyrus the name of the article it is in green? why is that is it for a reason i think it is tacky. so if it has no reason then can we change it back to black --gdaly7 (talk) 15:34, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

The background is yellow - the same for other actors and actresses and many musicians. Gimmetrow 20:43, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Relationships

Latest comment: 15 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

ok so miley and nick DID NOT date for 2 years and she said "he will marry me one day" which is creepy so i want to put that in there to show ho9w she was clingy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonasgirlie418 (talk • contribs) 16:16, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

This article is not fan site or gossip speculation about motives and behavior of the subject. Unless something is notable (and that means much more than just interesting to people pushing a point of view) and well referenced, it does not belong. --NrDg 16:56, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Also see WP:CRYSTAL for more details about the "speculation" part. --Kanonkas : Talk 17:01, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

WP:NOTSCANDAL is a good explanation as well. --NrDg 17:07, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Vocal Range?

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I've never seen anything official, but I'm thinking Mezzo-soprano? Lowellt (talk) 16:20, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Find something published from a review or such that we can use as a reference and don't speculate. --NrDg 16:48, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

is justin gaston a notable rumor?

Latest comment: 15 years ago6 comments5 people in discussion

maybe something that indicates she is rumored to be romantically linked to this guy and it's a controversy because of age difference? i guess once this new emancipation rumor plays out it will be more clear whether this is relevant or not. Ingridjames (talk) 08:20, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Rumors don't belong in articles. --NrDg 15:15, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a serious encyclopedia, not some tabloid where we spread around unsubstantiated suppositions and rumors from dubious sources as fact.

1.There is not currently a single quotable statement at the time of this posting where either Miley Cyrus or Justin Gaston have said they are romantically involved. This is FACT.

2.There is not currently a single quotable statement at the time of this posting where Miley Cyrus, her lawyers or her parents have said that Miley Cyrus was seeking emancipation. This is also FACT.

3.Two people spending time together does not prove that they are romantically involved. To argue such is merely affirming the consequent which is a non-sequitur.

4.Anonymous sources and "insiders" are of dubious reliability and have no business being used in Wikipedia. Only verifiable sources should be used.

-Damicatz (talk) 04:00, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Everything I've ever heard are rumors. All reliable sources I can find say they are just rumors. You have to read the fine print, though, and use some common sense. As stated above, two people spending time together or being seen together doesn't prove much...except that it should sell a few magazines. – Alex43223^{T | C | E} 11:18, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I've been waiting so long for someone to say that it's just a rumor. 72.77.14.129 (talk) 14:15, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

defensive, demicatz? i was just wondering since there was something about her alleged feud with Selena Gomez, which also hasn't been reliably confirmed. there didn't seem to be a line drawn. wikipedia is amazingly unstandardized, and one celebrity's page might have a different type of information than another's (ex. more personal vs. more professional, rumors, etc.) I think a lot of people who watch pages on wikipedia don't realize that many people come here as the go-to place to find simple information, so notable things about celebrities are useful on their pages. it's the people's encyclopedia, so it should be used how the people want it to be. Ingridjames (talk) 08:43, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Music career section

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I think that the Music career section have few things. I know that everything in here are important but are so superficial.
Miley made several covers for Disneymania's albums, recorded a song to Bolt, wich was nominated to Golden Globe Award, and many other important things.
Can someone help me to put more things on this section? Renanx3 (talk) 00:37, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a tabloid

Latest comment: 15 years ago13 comments3 people in discussion

Folks, please stop adding in useless trivia and gossip to the article. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid and not a place where unsubstantiated rumors, gossip and fun trivia are spread around. Please consult WP:NOT 2.3.3 for more information.

In particular :

1.Without a verifiable source, Justin Gaston does not belong in this article. Any notion that the two are romantically involved remains idle speculation.

2.Without a verifiable source, alleged feuds between Miley Cyrus and other people (e.g Selena Gomez) do not belong in this article. In addition, I'd question whether such information is even encyclopedic in the first place.

3.Random quotes from interviews on non-notable subjects do not belong in this article.

4.Miley Cyrus's every whereabout does not belong on this article (please stop adding in information saying she was spotted at such and such place or she goes to such and such restaurant).

Thanks Damicatz (talk) 19:50, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

What you say about a verifiable source? Well, I think that People is a really verifiable source.
Other thing: so we should delete ALL the things in the Personal Life's section, no? Why we need to know that Cyrus is friend of Emily Osment? Wikipedia isn't a Tabloid to show personal life informations. ;) Renanx3 (talk) 13:01, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

No Renanx, you're wrong. Damicatz makes some strong, yet valid points, your information does not belong. --Charitwo ^(talk) 13:18, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't consider People a reliable source. They quoted Miley Cyrus ad verbatim as saying that she was dating Justin Gaston from that Ellen interview when in fact she said nothing even remotely close to that during the interview. It's just another tabloid written by a bunch of yellow journalists. As for the information appearing in the Selena Gomez article, that was added in by one of the people that tried to do it to this article and has since been reverted. - Damicatz (talk) 14:17, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

So tell me, why is revelant that Cyrus is friend of Emily or she's hipoglicemic and her feud with Gomez doesn't? The feud between Aguilera and Osbourne are liste here, or Aguilera and Mariah are here, why not that feud shouldn't be here? Renanx3 (talk) 14:22, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Read Wikipedia:Notability - Damicatz (talk) 14:27, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I can't understand the wikipedia's words can you tell me with your words? Renanx3 (talk) 14:31, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Her hypoglycemia has to do with her character as a person. She is big on encouraging people to limit their sugar intake. Also that information comes from a reliable source. Her friendship with EO also comes from a reliable source. As far as this alleged "feud", I have yet to see anything out of a reliable source. Everything I've seen is gossip and idle speculation. - Damicatz (talk) 14:35, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I still can't understand but if you saying that you right I stop. We should remove it on the Selena's page too, right? Renanx3 (talk) 14:39, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

If it's still on Selena's page, yes it should be removed. - Damicatz (talk) 14:40, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

See the section with your eyes to confirm if doesn't are verifiable sources, because if I delete it will don't have anything in the section. Renanx3 (talk) 14:45, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Renanx3, this is an encyclopedia, not the National Enquirer. I suggest you read WP:NOT a little more closely, particularly here, here, and most importantly here and here. I also suggest in your spare time, you check out some external reading. It seems you are having some difficulty trying to get a point across. --Charitwo ^(talk) 15:09, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I think you didn't understand my problem, I asked why her relationships are revelant and her feuds don't but now I know that the problem was just the sources. Renanx3 (talk) 16:39, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Article

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

You know what everybody? I think this article is pretty dang good. So why are we all worrying about "Oh my gosh! Miley did this and this and this and this! Add it to the article!" No. Let's only update it because of age changes or special major news that is not gossip, something serious like she was diagnosed with some serious disease. Relax, if you have nothing but gossip, I suggest you go to a chat forum. Tweedle20 (talk) 18:02, 23 December 2008 (UTC)Tweedle20

Opinions are sometimes diverged in relation to "is or not gossip", so that's the real problem, is not that easy to know whether or not it is. Renanx3 (talk) 00:11, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree with tweedle20. 72.77.14.162 (talk) 23:47, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Body double

Latest comment: 15 years ago6 comments5 people in discussion

First hey tweedle20 i agree not a place for gossip. but i feel that we should add in the contrversy section about her use of a body double in the bobw concert tour, it did cause a big stir. also i would like to say that she used partly because she is hypoglycemic which is mentioned in the artice, but we may want to expand on that topic also, because it is a big part of her life and she is dealing with it consently, like in consert we often see her drinking orange juice on stage.

So what you think? --gdaly7 (talk) 17:39, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Why should her using a body double be added to the controversy section? It wasn't a controversy and wasn't a major event, so it shouldn't be added to the article. Edgehead 5150 18:19, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

It used to be covered in the article about the concert tour but was removed as this is not a real controversy. It is purely a show design issue and has nothing to do with Cyrus. Show was designed by Kenny Ortega and Cyrus just did what she was told to do. --NrDg 20:18, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey! Thank you! Unfortunately, we can't add that. That is considered vandalism. Even though I told everyone this is not a chat forum, I must say this. Do you not find it a little odd she drinks ORANGE JUICE at her concerts? Sorry everyone, but I just had to add that. I didn't know this. Odd... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tweedle20 (talk • contribs) 20:15, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Man this page is biased... why don't you add the body double bit back to the tour section. It was an important addition and fact! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.236.154.70 (talk) 21:38, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Actually we work really hard to keep bias out of articles. In what way was this an important addition and fact about Cyrus as opposed to the tour? Show design issues generally are talked about in the article about a show, not the artist. --NrDg 22:41, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

height and weight

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

someone find out somehow and write it. height is ok if its approx i think. Madmaxxx (talk) 12:29, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

This information is usually not notable for a singer/actor - given it is hard to find indicates no reliable source has "noted" it which is basically what notable means. For occupations where this is important, such as athletes, it is always widely available. --NrDg 15:48, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Hypoglycaemia?

Latest comment: 15 years ago9 comments5 people in discussion

I agree that Miley said it, but as a licensed medical doctor it appears to be a medical nonsense. This bascially means that she is underfeeding herself. If this is the case it is not "hypoglycemia" but a form of anorexia. Now, I'm not saying that she is anorexic, which I don't think she is; but I do question how she could be claming to be a [long term] "hypoglycemic" (she'd have to be clinically diabetic for this to be medically possible). Any info anyone? fr33k man -s- 04:30, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Ya, I just saw this. Looks like another Hollywood fad tbh. I suggest changing it to "Cyrus claims to suffer from long-term hypoglycaemia[insert the reference]-an unrecognised medical condition."GiollaUidir (talk) 23:48, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

I'd suggest "an unrecognized condition" rather than "an unrecognized medical condition". The later gives it some credence. fr33k man -s- 00:14, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Yup, agreed. :) 86.154.208.198 (talk) 00:42, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Nope, strongly disagree. I have no problem with "Cyrus claims to suffer from long-term hypoglycaemia [insert the reference]." That is if that is what the reference supports. The wikilink to the term gives all the additional info and discussion required for anyone interested. It is not our job to do interpretations if the subject's beliefs are in error as that is prohibited Original research. --NrDg 01:17, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

We also aren't required to add it to the article if it is foolish. NOR isn't a suicide pact. Protonk (talk) 03:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

The article hypoglycaemia discusses the controversy of whether or not it is medical nonsense - a view not uniformly held. We can use editorial judgment in what to include in the article. We can't editorialize. This is an insignificant medical factoid that, in my opinion, does not add anything of value to the article. Also the reference seems to have died. --NrDg 03:59, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Well if the reference has died, then I think that points to it being removed in its entirety. fr33k man -s- 16:46, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

I have removed the statement under the WP:BOLD policy. fr33k man -s- 00:36, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Death Hoax again

Latest comment: 15 years ago7 comments5 people in discussion

Again wikipedia says that she died but on bed this time, and the article is locked, so could someone please change it?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.43.12.1 (talk) 12:38, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

ok where does it say that cause i can't find it

--gdaly7 (talk) 14:01, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism already reverted, editor blocked.—Kww(talk) 14:19, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

In 3.3 2008–Unfortunate Disaster —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.43.12.1 (talk) 14:23, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Er, don't think Miley's dead... Maybe someone would like to remove this section about Miley 'dying peacefully in her sleep.' She's 16, this sort of stuff is just twisted. I can't edit it, but please can someone? - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.105.161.9 (talk) 16:42, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

It was only in the article for less than a minute.[1] EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:48, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Explicitly purged the page cache. It probably did nothing, but doesn't hurt to try.—Kww(talk) 16:59, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Chris Brown saying Miley Cyrus is ugly

Latest comment: 15 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

Ok this youtube video has had like 17,500 views last time i checked so its quite a big thing! anyway, i was wondering whether it should be included in her wikipedia - http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Et96sDfZDFc Smileychiley (talk) 07:45, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Just because a youtube video has over 17,000 views doesn't make it a big thing. And no it shouldn't be added to her wikipedia page as it is not notable. Edgehead 5150 08:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Why is it not notable? explain. If a big name singer calls another big name singer ugly and it is reported on the news and IS a big thing it should be added on the wikipedia page. Compare this situation to such things as the Christian Bale deal! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.236.154.70 (talk) 21:42, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Which major news source reported this? See WP:N and WP:RS for what we need. Videos are easy to modify so don't trust anything that is put on an anonymous YouTube account. --NrDg 22:36, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

name change source

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I just noticed that the source for the name change from Destiny Hope Cyrus to Miley Ray Cyrus is no longer available due to the sites update. But I did find another reliable source on it. http://www.etonline.com/news/2008/01/58023/ --Ksto9 (talk) 06:54, 29 January 2009 (UTC)Ksto9

Updated. Edgehead 5150 07:42, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Put back original reference with updated url. Jan 2008 source was wrong as it reported the name change has having happened then that actually did not occur until May 2008. --NrDg 16:44, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Mocking people of asian descent

Latest comment: 15 years ago5 comments4 people in discussion

I feel that such an info needs to be backed up by more than one reliable source. TMZ is a tabloid site and we need a more Reliable source to back the fact. Moreover, is the incident just a gossip news or has it been covered by mainstream media??? Unless it's been broadly covered in mainstream media, I personally feel that it is not worth putting in the article. Ofcourse, if its been largely covered and affects her career, then maybe we can mention it in the article....just wanna know others' views on it ...Gprince007 (talk) 15:18, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Reuters, and MTV are reporting about this incident. --Kanonkas : Talk 15:21, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Could make a weak case for the Reuters link, but probably would be best served waiting this one out for a few days (there may have been more coverage yesterday had it not been for the Michael Phelps fiasco or two Obama appointees having to bow out). WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 18:42, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I left the press release link and the reuters reference that reported on the press release. All other news sources I've seen just restate the press release and add nothing. This is only news because a sensitized organization officially complained. When and if there is further fallout from this event we should add that then if it is notable. --NrDg 04:58, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok before the apology, we need to say she denied it first. 04:52, 11 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dance-pop (talk • contribs)

UPDATE: The FOX News site has a new story stating that there's one woman who has filed a class action lawsuit against Cyrus for a total of $4 billion. WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 16:40, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

External Links

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Miley has a page on omg! that links to articles, photos, and other resources: http://omg.yahoo.com/celebs/miley-cyrus/223 --Lalaboywp 15:03, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

There are lots of similar pages all over the web; we don't add every link that's relevant, just the ones that are actually helpful to the reader. EVula // talk // ☯ // 23:07, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Please review our external links guideline. I suggest you don't put that in the article. --Kanonkas : Talk 23:08, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Link

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Just wondered it anyone else noticed a wrong link. I know that Miley went to Heritage Middle School and its says that in the article but it has the wrong link, the wikipedia article it links to is a school in Georgia and Miley went to Heritage Middle School in Franklin, Tennesse. That link needs to be removed. MyOwnWorld (talk) 15:38, 12 February 2009 (UTC))

Done --NrDg 15:45, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Nick Jonas

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Could someone please add that Miley and Nick are back together. it was confirmed by Joe Jonas http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20286353,00.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.129.18 (talk) 02:53, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Miley death hoax

Latest comment: 14 years ago17 comments10 people in discussion

The online hoax

Online Hoax Text copied verbatim from a previous archive by someone else. Conversation continues below