Talk:Christina Aguilera/Archive 6

This is an archive of past discussions about Christina Aguilera. 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 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

→

Archive 10

Did Christine Aguilera live in Newfoundland, Canada and Japan as a kid? I think the answer is yes, but the writing needs to be made more clear.

Military children who moved a lot as kids are very interesting people, although also there also can be very difficult and challenging things about a military childhood.

Not all soldiers are like this, but some soldiers are extremely controlling and abusive parents (they try to treat their loved ones like little soldiers).

I noticed Aguilera is also listed on the 'Military Brat' wikipedia article. She is in a subsection of "famous military brats".

Note: The term "military brat" is not considered insulting at all in the military world but is considered a term of affection.

I am a former military brat myself. What an interesting but bittersweet life!

I wonder if Aguilera will someday write a song for military kids, I'll bet that could be a very moving song.

Sean7phil (talk) 19:37, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I consider it urgent for Wikipedia to begin controlling fanatics who try to gloss all of the articles of their favourite divas. Compared to her previous studio records, Back to Basics has hardly had "strong sales", being rather an OK-selling album which went merely platinum in the US, just like (for instance) Madonna's latest record which isn't considered a "strong seller". But anyway, the guys who want to make her sales figures look higher than they actually are would keep putting the word back there eternally... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.110.70.55 (talk) 13:58, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Can we add this Please? This official website confirms it: http://hollywoodchamber.net/icons/walk_fame.asp

yea i've read it in many paces so someone needs to add it, it was on hear but someone deleted it [[1]] hear is the link it doesn't always work but if you go to the www.hollywoodchamber.net and have alook round it's there that's now i found it i'll put more link up thats says it.Veggiegirl (talk) 14:04, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

here one [[2]] and another [[3]] more [[4]] i can add more if people still don't belive add it in please it will go better at the top after it says how many records she's sold worldwide something like on June 8 2007 Johnny Grant announced that christina would one of the new walk of fame recipients for 2008 does anyone esle think that sonds good untill they actually held the induction ceremonie then it could be changed and add the date of the ceremonie instead.Veggiegirl (talk) 14:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

she was Executive producer on back to basic's this is not a place to put your own personally opions on someone you clearly hate christina and while the acticle should be fair it's not right for you to take info done just because you done like see someone you don't like doing well a recored producer is someone who produce songs and she has done that doesn't matter if there just her own songs she produced them which makes her a producer to —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.22.206.205 (talk) 03:25, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Nathan86 (talk) 10:11, 22 September 2008 (UTC)Um, Executive Producer and Producer are not the same things. And she is not NOTABLE as a producer; she CO-produced ONE song (FOR HERSELF) in her entire career. Therefore, she should not have "Producer" listed as an occupation. Nathan86 (talk) 10:11, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

US Weekly says that Christina has not given birth yet, but they are the only source that says this. [5] THE evil fluffyface (talk) 16:54, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I went to Christina's livedaily page and a member of her management confirmed the birth. The majority pf the published reports say she has given birth. I think the associated press is more reliable than Us Weekly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.237.241.11 (talk) 17:08, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

^How do you know that someone from her management team confirmed the birth on a messageboard? THE evil fluffyface (talk) 20:53, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Also, this rep for Christina has told Access Hollywood the same thing. [6] I've also yet to see the AP report on Christina's birth--I think most of the reports are taking their sources from either E! or Life & Style, who reported that Christina has given birth yesterday. THE evil fluffyface (talk) 21:05, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

we have everything under control here now with official news! All is sourced and set to Go! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alextwa (talk • contribs) 14:13, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Would it be possible for someone to add the following information into her motherhood section:

The name Max Liron appears to have a special meaning for Aguilera and Bratman, who is Jewish. In Hebrew, Liron means "my song" while Max means "the greatest". It follows that Max Liron is intended to mean "My Greatest Song" for the couple, both of whom are in the music business. Source: Perezhilton.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trojan18 (talk • contribs) 21:10, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

It would be great if someone would add the way her surname is pronounced to the article (like in IPA style). huji—TALK 08:43, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Pronounciation is not a word, maybe you are thinking of pronunciation —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.70.179.117 (talk) 12:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

• Christina Aguilera 2007
• Inspire 2008

Fragrances are done in cooperation with P&G Prestige Products —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.78.209.211 (talk) 02:17, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Can we please keep;

"Currently working on projects for his label, Year Round Records, Premier shared plans to head back into the studio with Christina Aguilera soon.

"I'm definitely working with her on the next album," Premiere said. "She's doing an all pop album again, but she wants me to keep the tone like what we did before. She's ready to start next month...She's so cool, she's like my little sister now."

In the fourth album section? Seeing as the person who posted it has sourced it.^[1]

Thankyou.

(81.156.67.191 (talk) 18:04, 4 March 2008 (UTC))

I think we need some pics, especially in the Back to Basics zone. If it's possible another one in the philantrophy and in the endorsement topic would be nice. Olliyeah (talk) 12:15, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Liron does mean "my song" in Hebrew, but Max is of LATIN origin, coming from "Maximus", meaning "the greatest". Could someone change this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.201.19.80 (talk) 23:34, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

and tayla is as close to christina aguilera at singing then anyone else ok?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.107.56.67 (talk) 04:11, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

"The overtly sexual image Aguilera displayed during the promotion of the album became the subject of intense criticism and ridicule."

We seem to be having an issue in regards to this unsourced or poorly sourced claim (there is currently no inline citation directly following it).

Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons says the following: "Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons — whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable — should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion, from Wikipedia articles, talk pages, user pages, and project space."

Jimmy Wales in Wikipedia:Verifiability says the following: "I can NOT emphasize this enough. There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative 'I heard it somewhere' pseudo information is to be tagged with a 'needs a cite' tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced. This is true of all information, but it is particularly true of negative information about living persons."

From what I understand, the guidelines above apply to all articles and all material on living persons in the encyclopedia. If there is a source for the claim being debated, then it needs to be provided immediately after the sentence, as is the usual procedure with inline citations. The burden of evidence rests with the user continually restoring the claim. Thank you. --James26 (talk) 18:16, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Is there any other pictures that can be uploaded as the main page picture as its quite and old picture now, and its not a very good one. ive tried uploading them but they always get deleted because there not 'free images', thanks.

The age of the current picture is not terribly relevant: it's relatively modern, displays Christina reasonably well, and overall, it's a free image. In addition, please don't re-add images without desciption and add little to the article, as you did here. Thank you. Acalamari 16:25, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

"Aguilera" is one of the names people may easily pronounce incorrectly. It would be great if someone who knows IPA would add her names pronounciation to the top of the article. huji—TALK 20:22, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Someone may want to mention her new wax figure at Madame Tussauds. I would have added it but I couldnt find the right section! --Cameron* 16:28, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Christina Aguilera/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Hello. I will be doing the GA review for this article. I've only scanned the article thus far, but here are some initial suggestions:

• WP:DASH: made sure endashes go between dates and ranges of numbers. Emdashes go in text.
• Make sure songs are in quotes and album titles are in italics. When scanning, I noticed at least one (Instant Karma: The Amnesty International Campaign to Save Darfur) that was incorrect. YOlliyeah (talk) 11:16, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
• Need to be correctly formatted using Template:cite web: 3, 30, 11, 152, 138 (the date is funky), 106, 107, 83 YOlliyeah (talk) 11:16, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
• Something is def. wrong with ref 22: "^ Dominguez, Pier (2002). Christina Aguilera: A Star is Made: The Unauthorized parties and in talent competitions, which she usually won. Aguilera soon gained media Biography. Amber Books. ISBN 0-9702224-5-9." - The title is messed up with text, it seems. It also needs a page number. YOlliyeah (talk) 11:16, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
• I feel like I've heard that she thinks of Madonna as an influence at least 100 times, so I think it is possible to find a replacement for the dead link. YOlliyeah (talk) 11:16, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
• The lead is supposed to summarize the main points of the entire article. Consider adding info about her life, philanthropy, vocal ability, film/acting, etc. The lead (for an article this size) can be up to four full paragraphs.
• Consider de-linking the dates in the article. The MoS was recently changed so that having all the dates unlinked was fine, as long as it is consistent throughout the article. It is up to you, but it is a trend at FAC recently to delink the dates to "let the valuable links breath" and "reduce the sea of blue".YOlliyeah (talk) 08:28, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• A think a general copyedit would also do some good. See if you can get a someone to help out.

That's it for now. You'll have seven days to make these initial changes. Nikki311 03:29, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Additional comments

• The article is not following logical quotation. (See WP:PUNC). Examples include: "Genie in the Bottle," and "Genie in the Bottle." --Efe (talk) 12:03, 12 August 2008 (UTC) YOlliyeah (talk) 13:47, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
• I dont think SOHH.com (ref 74) is reliable. --Efe (talk) 12:03, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
• This is not a GA requirement but only a suggestion. Ref dates formatting (the parenthesis) is not consistent. For the publication date parameter: (March 10, 2000). (March 10), (2000). --Efe (talk) 12:03, 12 August 2008 (UTC)YOlliyeah (talk) 13:45, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
• Other info in the references like Blender Magazine and Billboard Magazine Online. These should be Blender and Billboard only. Please check the other. --Efe (talk) 12:03, 12 August 2008 (UTC)YOlliyeah (talk) 13:45, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
• Refs 39 and 55 are offline sources. It would be better if it have page numbers.YOlliyeah (talk) 13:45, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. --Efe (talk) 12:03, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate the effort, but the seven days are up, and so much more still needs to be done. I'd suggest getting a copyeditor or starting a peer review to iron out MoS problems and tighten up the text. Great work with the improvement so far! Good luck! Nikki311 00:07, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

a lot of websites are reporting that Christina will release a greatest hits album "Keeps Gettin’ Better — A Decade of Hits on November 11. The album will be exclusively available through Target. She also released a statement according to few sites. Someone needs to confirm the story and add it to her page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.96.228.87 (talk) 09:25, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

what is your favorite color? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.128.173.204 (talk) 01:28, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

      Christina Aguilera was born December18,1980.Christina is also known as Christina Aguilera-Bratman,Xtina who now lives in Pittsburgh,Pennsylvania,UnitedStates.She is a pop R&B singer and songwriter.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.112.183.151 (talk) 20:08, 2 October 2008 (UTC) 

Christina coming Istanbul, Turkey for contesting on Var mısın? Yok musun? (Turkish Version of Deal or No Deal) on 19th October, 2008. Source: [7] Please write this note in article. --85.101.3.58 (talk) 10:30, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Welcome, and thank you for your attempt to lighten up Wikipedia. However, this is an encyclopedia and the articles are intended to be serious, so please don't make joke edits. Readers looking for information will not find them amusing. If you'd like to experiment with editing, try the sandbox, where you can write (almost) whatever you want.

It's note a joke, stupid.. man said true... christina came turkey and contested. please add this article! --85.101.7.196 (talk) 17:56, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I thought you meant she became a Turkey (bird). I don't know. --w^{L<speak·check>} 03:54, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I always here that she is refered to the greatest voice of her genertation and was thinking that maybe that it would fit well in her opening paragraph? Totally up to wiki users as im not registered but let me know. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.35.161 (talk) 18:23, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

“

On January 12, 2008, Aguilera gave birth to her son, Max Liron Bratman, at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, California. His name translates to "Our Greatest Song" in Hebrew.

”

No, it does not. I'm Jewish and Israeli (live in Israel) and I can definitely say "Liron" does not mean "our song". At least not in current or correct Hebrew. It is possible it is so in ancient Hebrew, but I highly doubt it. (Searches will yield nothing, too.) What's sure is that "Max" is not "Greatest" in Hebrew, it's short for "maximum", both of which are derived from English and only exist in slang and current Hebrew. Smiley Barry 16:52, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I think that it is worthy of going on here. So, Christina says she thought Gaga was a man. She also stated that she didnt take Gaga's look. But, Gaga stated on E! that her look was her's and that it was more that just a look, it was her life.

idk. I think it should go on there... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.104.104.165 (talk) 06:42, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

E! is known for its gossip content, if it gets widespread media coverage (magazines, Entertainment Tonight, and such) it could be possible. --w^{L<speak·check>} 09:50, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

The Times/The Sunday Times. Very reliable source. — Realist² 03:57, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for my bad english, i'm from the spanish wikipedia. So, suddenly, when i'm looking for news of Christina Aguilera, exactly in 2006, i found This page where talk about (in a part) of the Aguilera's Childhood. Thanks --190.222.80.16 (talk) 18:19, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I think that Mariah Carey should be listed as one of Christinas main influences. I could not stretch how many times Christina has cited Mariah as one of her idols. Despite that nowadays the two dont get along, early Christina called Mariah her idol and there are countless articles and videos to back up this information! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skye 0913 (talk • contribs) 23:07, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Her father's name is "Fausto Wagner Xavier Aguilera". So, is he of German ancestry? Wagner, and even Xavier (a name often found in Bavaria) indicates, that he is indeed of German ancestry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.153.200.190 (talk) 16:56, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1458223/20021018/aguilera_christina.jhtml Should be included directly and have a little about it. The sentence on the controversies is a bit too vague too. What were the controversies? It will add a bit more NPOV to the article. Articles are supposed to be fair to people, but not show everything that's right about them, and sweep away all their wrongs.--Hitsuji Kinno (talk) 03:21, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

In the succession-list, someone should fix the link to the Santana/Michelle Branch collaboration. It now points toward an album by Elena Paparizou. 77.110.48.71 (talk) 21:40, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Well I have no doubt that her mother is 100% irish, when the yellow journalism claims that. It's just, Fidler, from Pennsylvania, does not sound/seem very irish to me. How about that? 84.56.141.30 (talk) 23:41, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Turns out that the current one (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:VMA_06.jpg) is a copyright infringement.

So I looked in flickr and found some:

• http://flickr.com/photos/leeleelu/2366348551/
• http://flickr.com/photos/darraghb/390417467/ (I'd prefer this)
• http://flickr.com/photos/29202761@N08/ (someone went to a concert and snapped a bunch of photos)

I can't really decide which one to upload to the commons (my user name there is Lpdrew) so let's take a vote shall we? --Andrewlp1991 (talk) 06:13, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Well I'm not in the least bit shocked that the current image is nominated for deletion due to copyright infringement, because I highly doubt that a mere fan took the picture while sitting at Radio City Music Hall during the Video Music Awards and uploaded it here, agreeing to release any rights on it. In fact, I was always wondering how that picture could be allowed in the article, since it doesn't constitute as fair use, because as long as the subject is still alive, there's always a chance at finding (or taking) a free picture. About the Flickr pictures, the first one shows her face up-close and clearly, but like you, I think the Dirrty one is better. However, I also like this one and this one. But I'm not sure Candyman is under the proper license for Wikipedia to use, so I'd say it's a tie between Dirrty and Understand (the one in the white dress). --Whip it! ^{Now whip it good!} 07:23, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

This one, currently in use in the infobox is extremely unflattering and doesn't really represent the subject very well. Can't we find something better? –xeno (talk) 17:57, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

It's the only one (that we know of) with a proper license that shows her face up close and clearly. Maybe the "surprised" look on her face doesn't make it the best pic, but it's not a bad picture either. That's what we'll have to settle for, until someone finds a better picture under an attributable license. But personally, I don't see anything wrong with the picture other than the fact it's a little outdated considering her ever-changing style, although I'm sure that will be fixed once she promotes her next album, when they'll be plenty of new photos of her. --Whip it! ^{Now whip it good!} 06:03, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

An editor has repeatedly replaced the close-up in the infobox with a full body profile. Most bio articles have a facial shot in the infobox if it is a free image and of good quality. This needs consensus to change. The other shot can go elsewhere in the article. Ward3001 (talk) 20:57, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

The close-up image is correct in the infobox. The other image, assuming it is a free image, would be fine lower down in the article. Acalamari 21:06, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

The other image is a free image. If most bio articles have a facial shot of GOOD quality, it's clearly not the case with the image that you are so eager to revert back. On the other hand, christina aguilera is a singer/performer so a picture of her doing what she is famous for does not sound as 'disruptive'. Is there any wikipedia community guidelines regarding the picture, other than it has to be free? Gjuteriet00 —Preceding undated comment added 17:40, 7 April 2009 (UTC).

Without commenting on anything else, and ignoring the blatant sock/meatpupptry going on, I hope that the ceasing of reverting, and the posting of your above comment is an indication that you wish to discuss the issue. Acalamari 18:03, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

• I've just seen this forum discussion, which explains everything going on. To anyone reading this, it may be a good idea to read WP:NONFREE to why we can't use just any image of Christina Aguilera. Acalamari 18:07, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

The image has a known source and it's verifiable. In my opinion neither picture is good enough, but I stand by what I said in my previous comment. I'll try to find a personally-taken picture of herself my safe, and it can be up for discussion. Gjuteriet00 April 7th 2009, 21:17 (EET) —Preceding undated comment added 18:18, 7 April 2009 (UTC).

I've contacted a neutral administrator, J Milburn, who is both not involved with this dispute (hence "neutral") and is experienced with images. He'll be able to answer your questions better than I can, as he is far more knowledgeable about images than any of us are. He'll be able to help you. Thanks. Acalamari 22:39, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

What about that picture http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0a/Christina-Strapless-3.jpg (Christina-Strapless-3.jpg) ?Chronisgr (talk) 02:09, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

It is copyrighted and cannot be used on Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. Ward3001 (talk) 02:40, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I have fully protected the article for two days so that the current dispute can be resolved. I do not feel that the edit warring was at all appropriate. Note that this protection does not endorse the current version of the article- this was merely the version that was current when I arrived- see the protection policy. As for my own opinion- I have no preference for either image, for me, the important matter is whether the chosen image is free. I have very little doubt that File:Christina Aguilera (2006).jpg can be considered free (although currently listed as all rights reserved at Flickr, it was at one time listed as Creative Commons, and the CC license cannot be revoked) but I do have concerns about the new image. If it was taken by the uploader, could the uploader please provide the original, full-size shot, as well as the date and location of the photo, to verify that the image was not taken from elsewhere? J Milburn (talk) 22:51, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I found a credible source on the musical Aida's article that Christina is set to play a major role in a film adapation. I tried to put it on here, but it was deleted after a few weeks. Wouldn't it be ok to put it on with a good source? Jedi Striker (talk) 18:56, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I am not a fan of this girl or her truly crap music.

The only reason I know (suspect) she has a song called "Dirrty Girl" (sp?), or something along those lines, is because journalists like to call her either "the Dirrty Girl" or "the former Dirrty Girl".

So, if you can't find a citation for that, then you are not doing your homework properly. That, or you don't know how to read a simple newspaper article.

Varlaam (talk) 17:25, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Your personal attacks are quite inappropriate. And it is your responsibility to find the citation since you want to add the information to the article. Ward3001 (talk) 17:37, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Wrong.

I don't give two sh*ts.

I am not a fan. You guys are. They don't play her songs on the classical station between the Shostakovich and the Mahler.

Therefore your beautiful blonde heroine's nickname should be listed there already, without a non-fan having to do anything at all.

Right?

The accuracy of this page is your responsibility, not mine. It's your job to make the facts complete. Do your job, and don't try to pass it off on me.

When my pages are inaccurate or incomplete, I fix them. I don't reject criticism automatically, or complain about it.

Varlaam (talk) 19:11, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

No, you are wrong. Read WP:BURDEN. That is Wikipedia policy. If you add the information again without a reliable source, or if you make another personal attack, you will be blocked from editing. Ward3001 (talk) 19:16, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Obviously, when I said "your", I mean your collective responsibility, not your personal responsibility, since a wide assortment of different people have refused to do their homework at that page.

Yes, threats are a wonderful response to criticism of a shortcoming on a page. As a fan, you have access to data sources I do not have as a non-fan. You could have fixed this problem in the time we have been having a friendly, colleague to colleague, discussion about it, since we are both interested in accuracy and completeness as our joint goal. Can we not agree on that? That we are both interested in accuracy and completeness?

First of all, you have no idea whether I am a fan. Secondly, I will not agree to anything that does not conform to policy. You added it. You find the source. End of discussion unless you can follow policy. Ward3001 (talk) 19:35, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I love Christina, but since when on earth has she been a coloratura soprano? Definitely not. I would have cahnged it personally but I'm not to sure if she would be better suited in just plain soprano or mezzo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.127.30.72 (talk) 20:48, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I was thinking she had more of a spinto soprano than anything else, hence the range and the pushing of her belts... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.253.193 (talk) 15:18, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

christina voice type spinto coloratura soprano (official christina center). Ok first off there is no such thing as a Spinto Coloratura Soprano. There are only three types of Coloratura Sopranos: 1. Piccolo Coloratura Soprano ( the lightest and most agile)This is what Christina Aguilera is her bottom register is very light and disconnected from the rest of her voice. She is able to sing a C#7 in full voice. 2. Lyric Coloratura Soprano (light and agile) think Kristin Chenoweth and Debelah Morgan 3. Dramatic Coloratura Soprano (the most rare of all three-has the range and agility of the piccolo but the bottom register is stronger than the other two some can reach a Bb2 or lower. Mariah Carey fits this description like a glove.

"Voice 0f Her Generation", Range Vocal 4,1 octaves: "C3-C#7"

High Whistle Note: Get mine, Get yours C#6, Angel we have heard on high (live) Eb6, It's Man's Man's Man's World (live) Eb6, Have yourself a merry little christmas (studio, live), Soar F#6, Car Wash F6 B6, What A Girl Wants E6, What A Girl Wants (live disney summer, live stripped ...) G#6, Falsas Esperanzas (live, studio) F#6, Hello (live in milan) Eb6 G6, Por Siempre Tu (live) A6, The Christmas Song D6 C#7. (Whislte note: "The Christmas Song" C#7 : 4 m 00 s, piano version, original album "My Kind Of Christmas" and Range Vocal Studio)

Voice Falsetto: At last live, Keep on singin' my song, Candyman G#5, Walk away (studio, live) A5, Nobody wants to be lonely, Without you Bb5, Makes me wanna pray (studio, live) C6, the christmas time, get mine get yours C#6, The christmas song D6 (3:23) ...

Great Belts (High Note): Candyman: E5 8 secondes (studio) and E5 6 secondes (LIVE MTV). At last (live stripped): C5-B4 18 secondes, Makes Me Wanna Pray (live dvd): E5 5 secondes, It's Man's World (live) E5 4 secondes, Mercy On Me E5 (3:50), Dirrty (live back to basics) Eb5 4 secondes, Fighter: E5 4 secondes and Eb5 5 secondes, Lady Marmelade D5-F5 4 secondes, Ain't No Other Man: C5 5 secondes (live). Get Mine, Get Yours: C5 5 secondes (studio and live stripped). Keep On Singin' My Song: B4 12 secondes. Mercy On Me: A4 14 secondes. Angel310 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Angel310 (talk • contribs) 10:23, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Christina, Voice Powerfull: I Will Be, Hurt (live mtv vma 2006) C5-E5, Mercy on me, Hello, Cruz, Reflection, Fighter, Ain't No Other Man (live), Can't Hold Us Down (live stripped), At Last (live stripped), Makes Me Wanna Pray (live dvd), Impossible (live stripped), The Voice Within (live stripped), Walk Away (live stripped), Candyman (live mtv) ...

high belt note (studio) F5-G5: I turn to you, Soar, Underapprciated, falsas esperanzas (live) F5, Car wash, I will be, we're a miracle, nasty naughty boy, slow down baby, can't hold us down, tilt ya head back, Lady marmelade, Beautiful, Keep on singin'my song G5

SO she is not a Contralto...Im have not been formally educated on vocal types but does her voice not lie in the range of an alto...someone please inform me —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.34.246.81 (talk) 19:29, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Christina voice type "alto", (videos Youtube, range vocal christina aguilera "low notes" C3-B3): C3 At last (live), We're a miracle, C#3 Walk away (studio, live), The christmas song, Angel we have heard on high, D3 Impossible, Soar, falling in love, Eb3 Beautiful, Hello, Walk away, Dreams eyes, I got trouble, Oh mother, I love you porgy (live) E3 The voice Within, Understand, A song for you, Keep on singin'my song, F3 Save me from myself, Keeps gettin' better, F#3 Makes me wanna pray, G3 Hurt, A3 Ain't no other man.

Falling in love again and I love you porgy (live), singin' 2008-2009.

Range vocal (studio): C3-C#7 = 4,1 octaves, range vocal (live) C3-A6 = 3,7 octaves. --Angel310 (talk) 07:53, 29 May 2009 (UTC)Angel310

Please correct Christina Aguilera's voice type. I'm a classically trained singer and I know for a fact what a SOPRANO COLORATURA means (the highest female voice). Not because she can hit the whistle register (on record but haven't heard yet live) and make runs with the high notes makes her a soprano coloratura. (Paula Cole can do that to because she's classically trained but she's correctly tagged as Mezzo-Soprano) The proper way to identify someone's voice is to know their TRESSITURA or normal voice range (without using headtones - falsetto and whistle notes). Her range lies within Mezzo Soprano to dramatic soprano to say the least.

BTW, I can sing her songs in modal/normal range (excpet whistle, not yet perfected) and I'm only a counter-tenor. No harm meant because I'm also a big fan of her (I have all her albums). KCQuest (talk)KCQuest —Preceding undated comment added 09:48, 18 June 2009 (UTC).

I'm pretty sure I removed the voice type before because it was unsourced, and I'm surprised I missed it getting re-added without any sources. Rather the changing the voice type, I've removed it altogether, as it's neither sourced nor mentioned in the article. Acalamari 15:02, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Christina Aguilera, range vocal studios, albums and live (youtube) --Angel310 (talk) 05:42, 25 June 2009 (UTC) First of all Christina Aguilera is a Soprano. Look at her build look at her head look at her neck she is absolutely tiny in every facet of the imagination. She darkens the color of her voice falsely to produce a heavy sound. She has incredible agility and flexibility in the flageoloet or the whistle register (F6-F7)for Coloraturas. Believe me she is a Coloratura and now beacause she sings in the incorrect voice type her voice suffers greatly. In her new show The Voice Aguilera recently performed the song Lady Marmalade with the rest of the female contestants, if you noticed she was not able to hit those notes she usually likes to hit. Her voice sounds very heavy and tired and now she struggles to hit any note. Look at her voice and how it has gotten deeper over the years. When she started singing she had a beautiful light Soprano voice capable of performing Coloratura trills,very high and fast melismas and staccatis. But now her voice has aged because she tries to make it bigger than it really is and it sounds awful. You are all wrong. There is no way she is a MezzoSoprano. Very few people are MezzoSopranos the large majority of women are Lyric Sopranos.

I am not a fan of her (there are so many things I could say right now but I will not). There is fine line between gaga editors and her editors. I have just crossed the line. On Gaga's page it states a feud between them-long story. Anyhow it should go on this article. Sources are on Gaga's page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Gaga Hey Boys and Girls (Welcome to the Show…) ° 07:58, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I disagree because it's a very small feud for Aguilera in a very big career. Also their was never a feud.

Hi. Some time ago, i've been uploading pinctures of Christina Aguilera. Actually, i don't like the main pic in the Infobox, so i have some possibilities to do the work:

• I'm asking about this picture on Flickr to the author, and i tell him that if he change the license, the pic could be the main on this article.

• This pic is already on the Wikimedia Commons, but i put it on the article, and was removed. The pic looks good and can be edited to be croped on the article.

• And, finally, i like both of this pictures: This one, obviously can by cropped, and this one ....

Sorry irf i wrote bad in English, but is not my mother language. Thanks. --Contributions/190.29.153.108 (talk) 17:29, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

• Why is Christina's voice type not noted, especially considering that she is quite obviously a spinto soprano. Would the administrators please add her voice type so it does'nt get deleted. As I said if you are unsure she is a soprano, most likely spinto soprano. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.253.193 (talk) 20:44, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Aguilera is a Piccolo Coloratura Soprano a Spinto is someone like Kelly Clarkson or Joanna Levesque. Aguilera reaches a C#7 in the Christmas Song in full voice almost effortlessly. If she was a Spinto it would have sounded pushed or false. She has very bad technique and belts way too much. Her voice is permanently damaged now because she sings in the wrong vocal range. Listen to her voice warmup with her vocal coach. Aguilera's voice is very light and is only pushed when she puts too much weight on it to sound more dramatic.

Since this page is semi-locked I wanted to propose a change. In the Public image and personal life section under 1999-2003 there is a section that says " They dated for nearly two years until the relationship ended ironically on September 11, 2001." That should be changed to "They dated for nearly two years until the relationship ended on September 11, 2001." since there is nothing ironic about that date. Perhaps if it had ended on February 14th that would qualify as ironic, however, as it stands it does not. Michaelmoran (talk) 23:00, 27 July 2009 (UTC) Died 1.25 PST —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.16.15.239 (talk) 15:26, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Rsolermo keeps changing the image to this article. The trouble is, the recent images they've chosen to replace the current image have all been images that showed her face from a distance and/or she was surrounded by several other people. Before then, the images they used were copyvios (now all deleted). The image they want replacing is File:Christina Aguilera Sanremo.jpg. Now I don't support keeping this image in the infobox because I like it, but rather because it shows her performing and it's close to her face (rather than far away). As stated here and here, the reasons Rsolermo wants that image replacing is because they think it's "boring" (which isn't a very good reason for replacing it) and that she "doesn't look good". The current image is too far away from her, and her eyes are closed. Thoughts on this? Thanks in advance. Acalamari 18:16, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Does she really need all those boxes at the bottom? In other artist pages they don't include all the Grammy wins and so on. The BNA is fine but the rest? Really? It seems a bit desperate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.86.197.25 (talk) 12:46, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I think we should change the image to one of her public appearances within the past year, e.g. this years Golden Globe awards. She looked great there!:D This current picture doesn't feel very "Xtina" like. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.96.61 (talk) 01:30, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

The picture where she's wearing all white is from the grammy's when she sang "it's a man's world"

It says here in the article that she is "ranking as the youngest and only artist on the list under the age of thirty" - that is incorrect. Of the people LIVING NOW she may be that. But Jim Morrison and Janis Joplin are on the list and they only lived to be 27. So Christina isn't the only one under the age of thirty —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.225.244.179 (talk) 13:27, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Comment moved from Talk:Christina Aguilera/Archive 7 - Archives are for OLD discussions. Astronaut (talk) 02:19, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

She's sold over 50 million albums Worldwide.

Debut: 20 million Stripped: 13.7 (14 million) B2B: 5 million Mi Reflejo: 6 million My Kind of Christmas: 3 million Keeps Gettin Better: 856,000

And over 30 million in singles.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.27.72.130 (talk) 18:31, 23 October 2009

35 millions albums and 50 millions singles  !

Studio Albums:

Christina Aguilera: 14 millions (1999), Stripped: 11 millions (2002), Back To Basics: 4,5 millions (2006)

Other Albums:

Mi Reflejo: 2 millions (2000), My Kind Of Christmas: 1,5 millions (2000), Keeps Gettin' Better "A Decade Of Hits" (Greatest Hits): 900 000 (2008) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Angel310 (talk • contribs) 21:20, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I think some changes should be made to the first three paragraphs of the article. It has been nearly 8 years since the release of Stripped and now it really is not seen as controversal as it was upon release. It was on a superficial level and I believe the information about stripped in the second paragraph should be removed. I think it would be best just to mention how "beautiful" was instrumental in helping the albums success and targeting a wider audience for the album. The controversy over the sexualized image is tabloid like and in a way is bias and I feel it should not be included in that paragraph. Removing that would make the paragraph more impartial. --Alextwa (talk) 20:51, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Go ahead. Add reliable sources and feel free to change the details. ▒ Wirεłεşş ▒ Fidεłitұ ▒ Ćłâşş ▒ Θnε ▒ _―Œ ^{♣Łεâvε Ξ мεşşâgε♣} 05:02, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Took care of it, done. --Alextwa (talk) 20:40, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

After the mentioning of Bionic, I'm going to add that it was released to mixed reviews and sales. Myownworst (talk) 16:43, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

I read the reference article regarding the recently added claim that she is bi-sexual. I have read the article and no where does she sate she is bi-sexual. Until we hear the words "I'm bi-sexual" come out of her mouth I don't think this should be added. From what I can tell it seems like her words are being twisted.125.238.96.175 (talk) 10:54, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't know whether her words are being twisted . . . but her statements are more equivocal than the article indicates. Someone with more time ought to break them out a little more fully. Innocent76 (talk) 17:14, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

That was my thinking too. As you've mentioned it too I will jump on it and try to rework it slightly. --Errant Tmorton166^(Talk) 17:16, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

On balance this link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1286009/Christina-Aguilera-Im-attracted-women.html which is the main source doesn't really seem to suggest she is bi. To me that MSN.com link just added that as link bait. I swapped sources and toned down the sentence to be simply factual. --Errant Tmorton166^(Talk) 17:26, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I think what it's been changed to its much better (: Saying she is bisexual is really jumping the gun a bit I felt considering all she has really said is that she has always found the female body beautiful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.96.175 (talk) 00:14, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I've removed it; as it stands it's just gossip/trivia and not really that relevant. An awful lot of young women in the public eye like to through around comments about bisexuality without actually meaning that they are bisexual. Even the Daily Mail, hardly a beacon of serious journalism, avoided actually stating that she is bisexual. Quotes like "I think [women are] more attractive to the naked eye" are hardly revealing any sexual identity. I know gay men who say things like that. At the very least, lets get proper references to the "multiple interviews" that the Daily Mail used to synthesise their "article".--BelovedFreak 18:34, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Well Aguilera admitted in a lot of talk shows(and you can find it in YOUTUBE, search ARTISTS WHO PRAISE MARIAH CAREY)and even in her home video titled GENIE GETS HER WISH where she said, "I love Mariah Carey, she's been a huge influence". I just hope you guys aren't biassed. Well, there has been a conflict between the two, but I hope the writer of this article could just stick to the facts that are obvious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.138.10.131 (talk) 06:59, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

The Article picture is currently from 2006, since the Bionic Album has now been released and we are in 2010, i'm going to try and locate a more up to date image we can use Ksood91 (talk) 13:37, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

It would really be a good idea to use a more recent picture to help keep the article to up-to-date standards. An image from this year, 2010 would be the best option. --Alextwa (talk) 04:25, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

I feel that that section is a bit too lengthy. Does it really need to mention the feuds with Pink, Mariah Carey & Eminem? I shortened the section to make it less tabloid-like and simpler. Any other thoughts on making the section better/more up to date? --Alextwa (talk) 04:32, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

The Article Sounds Like it Was Written by Her Publicist. It does not sound like a neutral source of information. After a while it reads like a brochure for her rather than about her. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.83.215.186 (talk) 19:23, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

I disagree. It just states the reality of it all. Can you maybe show an example of what your talking about to justify this a little more?125.238.96.175 (talk) 07:12, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

The article does sound like it was written by her publicist and/or a hardcore fan. This was evident in the intro which gave positive side-notes to all of her albums except for Bionic which is both dubious and not neutral, so I changed it.Myownworst (talk) 06:06, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, this article does need some fixes. With any artist, fans can go on wikipedia and put in a slant on things to make it bias. With the reputation of Bionic and its low sales its important for the article to be to the point and yet, not be bias or sensational. --Alextwa (talk) 13:42, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I have heard that sales of the album were at 221,000 in the US and 526,000 as of today. It actually says that on the spanish version of wikipedia. I've heard that number in some other places too. Is there an official source confirming these numbers? --Alextwa (talk) 14:35, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Hearing it and reading it from a reliable source are two different things. I've been looking for a credible source to verify it, but so far I haven't come across anything. If you find a reliable source, please insert the citation as soon as you can - Thanks Myownworst (talk) 02:01, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Got one citation in confirming the US sales --Alextwa (talk) 04:27, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Ok thanks for that one. If you can find a citation for the worldwide sales amount, please add it as soon as you can.TYMyownworst (talk) 15:33, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

The info-box says that she is also known as Xtina, Baby Jane, and Madame X. I agree that she is widely known as Xtina but I do not think she is or has ever been known as the latter two. I have been unsuccessfully trying to find a source to credit her widely known alternate names (except Xtina) but I cannot find anything aside from the fact that she decided that she would be called by those names according to the liner notes included with both albums. I do not believe most people in the music industry would easily know who was being discussed if you mentioned 'Baby Jane' or 'Madame X.' If a credible source cannot be found within one week than this information should be removed. Myownworst (talk) 01:28, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

I could not find a credible source on her also being known as Baby Jane or Madame X so I am going to remove those monikers from the info box. If anyone can find sources for the aforementioned names, please add them back and add the citation as soon as possible.Myownworst (talk) 03:12, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

she we include the soundtrack album for Burlesque in her discography section? --Alextwa (talk) 18:55, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Since she has more than 50% of material on it, it will be counted towards her album sales. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 11:07, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

No, technically it wouldnt count towards her sales because it is on an Soundtrack meaning she is not the only one who contributed to the album.....wow, jealous of Christina much??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.105.154.156 (talk) 17:28, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect. The soundtrack will contribute to her sales. 80% of the soundtrack's material belongs to her. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 19:07, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

I agree with above 80% of the soundtrack was sung by her. She also colaborated with writers to write music for the soundtrack. I think this should be noted in her discography.219.89.137.146 (talk) 10:20, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

8 out of 10 songs sung by here means that it is a majority sung by her. It means more than 50% of the playing time is her. IT should be included. --Alextwa (talk) 15:08, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Saying that Bionic was released to poor sales feels more like a swipe at Christina than anything else. Relatively speaking for her, the number of albums sold have been poor, but for other artists it would be a welcomed amount. Album sales are pretty subjective so I'm changing it back to mixed reviews and sales.Myownworst (talk) 14:41, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't think sales can be "mixed". Its physically impossible. Sales were low. I replaced "poor" with "low". There is no question that her sales were low for this album. --Alextwa (talk) 15:01, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Ok, that is an acceptable compronise IMHO. Myownworst (talk) 15:27, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I think you should just say album sales for bionic were low compared to what her albums usually sell.219.89.129.156 (talk) 09:12, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

There is absolutely no information about the controversy between her and Gaga. I think it deserves mentioning? Stephenjamesx (talk) 21:00, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

It's not exclusively between Christina Aguilera and Stefani Germannota, it's between Christina fans and Lady GaGa fans, really. If GaGa started calling her out or Christina started calling GaGa out, it would be different. --Cprice1000talk2me 13:31, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

This had no major affect on Aguilera's career. I think its mentioned on Gaga's page because when people compared the two Gaga made a statement about how it put her on the map. Christina didn't really say anything.219.89.129.156 (talk) 09:13, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

At first I really did not think this was worth mentioning but now, I think it would be worth considering it. Many reviews did compare Bionic to Lady Gaga and it was criticized on those grounds on some levels. However many other artists have been accused of ripping off gaga. It does seem to be more intense with Aguilera. Yes, I would agree with Caprice1000 that a lot of this is between fans. I would argue however that what goes on between fans can be picked up by the press. I am kind of torn over whether its worth adding a controversy section to the Christina Aguilera page. --Alextwa (talk) 16:46, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

I dont really see the controversy to it though. "Gaga compared to Christina!". It's not that big of a deal every female singer is compared to every other female singer. Maybe just say "Many saw similarities between Christina's Bionic and Lady Gaga's style of music." or something.. I dont think its needed though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.89.137.146 (talk) 10:18, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Really, the thing about Christina ripping from GaGa couldn't be true; Bionic pre-dates GaGa by over a year. Anyway, maybe some of this can be put into the "Bionic" page, but not on the artist page. --Cprice1000talk2me 15:17, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

A quote from the current version:

"The low register is light and tired, the belting register is ample and full, but very scratchy because she scream; and head voice as well as whistle register are light, pure and bright. Her vocal range extends from G below middle C to C-sharp one octave above soprano high C (G3 - C#7). She can belt to F one octave and a third above middle C (F5). She possesses a good-sized technical arsenal. Her trill is solid, she have a big mastery of melisma, and can sustain very long notes."

I realize that we're talking about voice teachers, not English teachers, but if the source material REALLY says what I've quoted word-for-word, I think we should look for a better vocal appraisal. Renaissongsman (talk) 17:01, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

And if you can't see the issues in that paragraph, you're probably not the one to make the changes. ;-)

I think that people forgot to say that her album Bionic just went Gold in Austrailia... And by the way, she had great sales for Bionic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.105.154.156 (talk) 17:24, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Do you have any source? and Bionic was a commercial failure (229,000 sales in the US). Lxhizy (talk) 01:08, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

I really think the musical career section should have the "Christina Aguilera" subsection merged with the one for her spanish and Christmas album. It was all around the same "era" in her career. It was really one whole chapter. Stripped was a different chapter in her career that followed the 1999-2001 part of her career There is also very little mention of the Christmas album in the 2000-01 section. I feel it is slightly less significant in her career. He spanish album had a certain level of significance given its Latin Grammy win and chart success. --Alextwa (talk) 14:45, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I get what you're saying, I do. But how I see it, if you're going to put her spanish album in it, why wouldn't her christmas album be included also? Eventually, I'd like to change the style of this page to such as Britney Spears' but that will obviously take some time. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 01:25, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

The article currently says "Rumors of their relationship were fueled after the release of Eminem's song, "The Real Slim Shady" in which he also insinuated a romance between Daly and rocker Fred Durst." but the lyrics insinuate relationships between Daly & Aguilera on the one hand, and Durst & Aguilera on the other, not Daly & Durst. 98.224.219.2 (talk) 05:11, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

I've been looking at several artists wikipedia pages lately and I've noticed Aguilera's is slightly different at the start. It states that she is a "pop singer" whereas Aguilera has actually done several genre's of music of the years. Also other artists like Maia, Jacquline, and Geneva's pages start of with that they are "recording artists". I mean I'm trying to figure out why hers is different. Is it because Aguilera is better vocally therefore she is a singer? Or is it saying she isnt artistic even though Britney Spears never writes her music?219.89.129.156 (talk) 09:19, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

I think Christina's should probably say singer-songwriter, as she writes pretty much all her songs. Recording artists is more like recording songs written by other people, like Britney. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 19:26, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

1.Christina has only a couple times written a song by herself and besides that has co-writers;Britney is the same. 2.Recording artist seems more appropriate since she has done 4 very different sounding albums (Teen pop,R&B,jazz,electropop) --Cprice1000talk2me 22:09, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Yeah I was thinking singer-songwriter or recording artists.. I'm leaning towards recording artists...219.89.129.156 (talk) 03:48, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

She may not have written all the songs herself, but she has certainly written/co-written about 90% of her songs. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 23:52, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Britney has, too, and she is labelled as a recording artist. --Cprice1000talk2me 20:52, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

I think "recording artist" is the better term to use. That can replace "Pop singer", "songwriter" and "dancer". In a way recording artist (for Aguilera's sake) encompasses those three things. --Alextwa (talk) 17:40, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

{{edit semi-protected}}

The Sources 23 and 24 are innaccurate and should be removed.

23 leads to a Clay Aiken website which states that Aguilera was a top selling artist in a single paticular year, not of all the 2000's.

24 leads to a Billboard article where a reader requested information regarding Aguilera's sales statistics and nowhere states that she is the second highest selling single artist of all time.

71.232.8.130 (talk) 04:13, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Done Thanks. -Atmoz (talk) 17:41, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

i think it needs an update because, recently she released her 5th fragrance called royal desire. on the article, there is only an information about her 4th fragrance (by night) and nothing about her latest fragrance royal desire. it was released on fall 2010. source: http://www.christina-aguilera-perfumes.com/royaldesire/ (it's official.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.166.162.157 (talk) 11:54, 1 December 2010 (UTC) gramme's efforts to bring food to survivors of the earthquake.^[2] Later that year Aguilera made her first visit to Haiti as an ambassador against hunger where she visited two schools in the town of Léogâne. During her time there she assisted in the ongoing efforts to help the badly damaged town where she served meals and highlighted reconstruction efforts in the country.^[3]

Is Stripped Aguilera's second or fourth studio album. Aguilera herself stated that it was her second studio album. But, here in Wikipedia, when we consider Mi Reflejo and My Kind of Christmas it is the fourth. Should we stick to what Aguilera said or name it fourth? (Thanks to Muhandes for raising this doubt first) Novice7 ^(Talk) 14:16, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Mi Reflejo and My Kind of Christmas are both different types of album, the first one is a Spanish record and the second one is a Holiday album, so they're not considered that important as the English studio albums. Lxhizy (talk) 18:45, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

There are no such thing as "other" type albums. Studio albums are studio albums. Candyo32 20:42, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I am positively certain that Christina Aguilera is a singer-songwriter, not a singer and songwriter. Check out the albums, she writes practically all of her songs since she released Bionic. Disney09 (talk) 01:11, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

• nearly 50 million is correct.ARMOR89 (talk) 18:34, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Whoever keeps changing this back and forth its really confusing....

I believe Back to Basics is her third studio album. Here is one source: http://www.hollywoodchamber.net/index.php?module=blogs&blog_id=25 if you want more let me know I'm sure I can find another dozen or so to show that stripped was her second, back to basics was third, and Bionic is fourth.219.89.137.146 (talk) 09:09, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

• • Definitely agree! I don't know who keeps changing these, but Mi Reflejo and and My Kind of Christmas are not studio albums! Stripped is indeed her sophomore album and whoever keeps changing it needs to stop. Yes they are indeed albums by her, but they should be considered more like special side albums.Jpagan09 (talk) 20:44, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Nope! Studio albums only mean new material, spanish or holiday themed. Stripped is her fourth studio album. --Cprice1000talk2me 20:56, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

• Okay that's fine, you can keep it that way all you want, but she, the artist who actually put out these albums, has said for the past 7 years that Stripped is her second album. She is the artist and she is right about her work, not anyone who feels that they can change information on a Wiki because she put out another two albums on the side. This is indeed a wiki, but we should respect that work of the artists and how they refer to their work. Jpagan09 (talk) 04:47, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

There are no such things as "other albums" a "holiday" album or "Spanish" album. A studio album is a studio album. Enough said. Candyo32 20:39, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

True, but there is such a a thing as respect for an artist, something the administrators of Wikipedia don't seem to have. Christina and her record company has said that it is her Stripped is her SECOND studio therefore that's what it is regardless of any technicalities there are. THAT is enough said. Jpagan09 (talk) 21:03, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

It's not a matter of respect. Its a matter of there is no such thing as an "other album." A Christmas album is a studio album. A Spanish-language album is a studio album. Call them what they are. Check up on WP:COMMONSENSE. Candyo32 22:55, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

--Mathiassandell (talk) 12:50, 11 December 2010 (UTC) Mi Refleho and My Kind of Christmas are not worldwide released and doesnt have released singles and should not be included as her second and third album, firts of all one is a spanish album and another a christmas album, you think it is the same as stripped and back to basics album. Nobody is talking that stripped is her fourth album its her second album, and stop changing it to her fourth!!

Who cares if it's not a worldwide release? And actually singles were released from them. An studio album is simply new material, the theme or language does not matter. --Cprice1000talk2me 15:11, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

So I guess Lady GaGa's The Fame Monster would be considered a studio album because it's a new studio album containing 8 new material. My Kind of Christmas contains 11 tracks, but "Xtina's Xmas" is an interlude and the final track is a re-mix. Thus bringing the track list down to 9. **Light.darkness09 1:04, 15 December 2010 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Light.darkness09 (talk • contribs)

Notice that it mentions it must be of "considerable length." Anyway, we are still discussing whether TFM should be an EP or not, but that's not the point. They are considered albums by Christina, her label, and everyone else. A "holiday" or "Spanish" album is a studio album. That's like saying Shakira only has 3 studio albums because the rest are "Spanish albums." Not true. --Cprice1000talk2me 21:56, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I think a useful suggestion would be to indent Mi Reflejo and My Kind of Christmas underneath her debut album since they were all during the same "era" of her career when her record company controlled her image. A useful comparison here would be to compare My Kind of Christmas to Mariah Carey's Christmas albums. Although MC did not actively promote her Christmas albums through means of a tour or such, she still promoted them as being new studio albums. However, on Christina's end, Mi Reflejo contained Spanish versions of songs on her debut album as well as a few original Spanish songs. Several admins have stated that studio albums contain new material however this is not the case with MKOC since the majority of the songs were covers. I just think the circumstances surrounding MR and MKOC do not constitute them as studio albums. Indeed, they are albums, but they do not contain enough original material to be completely considered studio albums. Also, in Shakira's, your argument is illegitimate because she began as a Spanish singer and eventually branched out into English albums making her a bilingual artist. Christina only once branched out into Spanish music but did not make it a heavy part of her career. Jpagan09 (talk) 04:55, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

During the summer of 2010 reports surfaced of tension between Christina Aguilera and RCA over the performance of her fourth studio album Bionic. It was reported that RCA was in "rescue mode" over the album's poor performance. Her most recent album has failed to be a commercial success and the album's lead single "Not Myself Tonight" also performed poorly. Her summer tour was also cancelled. The album was panned by the press and was labeled as a rip-off of Lady Gaga. It was reported that RCA was unhappy with Aguilera because she failed to listen to the label's input and dialogue. RCA quickly denied these reports and said that there was no tension between them. It was later reported that RCA was going to drop Aguilera over the album's performance and that she would sign a deal with Live Nation. Her manager Irving Azoff denied these reports on his twitter stating that she has a long term contract with RCA. Bionic has sold 258,000 units in the US as of early December 2010; 26 weeks since its release.

• okay this is posted on RCA Records apparently by some Lady Gaga fan, the sources aren't even reliable source (gossip webpages). someone should try and take care of it because i tried and it was reverted back. ridiculous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Light.darkness09 (talk • contribs) 19:31, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Aguilera is listed as a singer-songwriter and she did co-produced tracks from Back to Basics so should't she be called a record producer too? It means she has experience about recording music. I really would like to know other editor's opinion. Lucas RdS (talk) 02:39, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

She should be listed as a "recording artist." She has only co-written her songs and not entirely written them. Lady Gaga, Britney, and Shakira are all the same as Christina (they co-write most of their songs) and they are listed as recording artists. --Cprice1000talk2me 03:07, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

So Christina lets the homophobic organization Foundation For A Better Life use "Beautiful" in one of their ads. Considering the content of the music video and Christina's massive gay follow, this needs mentioning in the article. NOW. --98.232.176.109 (talk) 01:56, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

OK * That heading is hilarious! LMAO * Please add a source that says it was used in the video. --Cprice1000talk2me 02:06, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

They must not be playing the ad in your area. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeXen7z53wQ --98.232.176.109 (talk) 02:31, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

I think that somewhere, they should include that Christina Aguilera was named the 6th most illegally-downloaded artist of 2010. You can see here: http://perezhilton.com/2010-12-28-top-ten-most-illegally-downloaded-albums-songs-and-music-videos-of-2010 or http://ileaks.com/2010/ 74.216.6.127 (talk) 07:39, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

--91.154.100.124 (talk) 11:36, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Current projects...? what does that mean?, she maybe go on tour to promote Bionic or release a fourth single from the album, or do something else whit burlesque, i think its to early to have that section. Its just one line.

I know it's already been settled that "Mi Reflejo" and "My Kind of Christmas" are considered studio albums, but I still feel that this is quite misleading since both were released while Christina's image and music were still being controlled by her recording company, and thus she doesn't approve of them too much. After reading Enrique Iglesias's I feel something useful would be to distinguish her debut album, "Stripped", "Back to Basics", and "Bionic" under a header labeled "English Studio Albums", "Mi Reflejo" under Spanish Studio Albums, and "My Kind of Christmas" under Holiday (or Christmas) Studio Albums. Enrique Iglesias has this distinction and she should as well. 130.126.107.106 (talk) 04:26, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

I think you've got a point. This would be useful to distinguish her albums. Both Mi Reflejo and My Kind of Christimas are different releases by Aguilera. Lucas RdS (talk) 14:56, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree. I went ahead and made the change. All albums are still referred to as studio albums, but a little bit more of a distinction is made to show that all they are all studio albums, Mi Reflejo and MKOC are not really part of her main line of albums. Hopefully, the admins will find this change acceptable. Jpagan09 (talk) 19:57, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

It doesn't matter. They are studio albums. That's all there is. ℥^nding·start 20:49, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Christina's a singer-songwriter, isn't she? She writes most of her songs in Stripped, Back to Basics, and Bionic. Discovermine (talk) 14:45, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Christina Drinkingwater rewrites songs, too. One by Francis Scott Key comes to mind. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.42.95.107 (talk) 14:30, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Aguilera Rosiedanugbtugn (talk) 13:22, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

--91.154.97.81 (talk) 14:31, 29 January 2011 (UTC) Iwe just wondering if we can add a another photo in Christina Aguileras page, that represents her bionic-electronic style because we have already her teen pop image and black dirrty image and the 20s-40s image, so it would be fun the have a new picture added.

Here is some pics to select from:

Bionic-Electronic Image

Bionic-Electronic Image 2

Bionic-Electronic Image 3

--91.154.97.81 (talk) 14:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC) I agree, we could replace it we the booring walk of fame pic.

--91.154.97.81 (talk) 14:39, 29 January 2011 (UTC) sorry, i meant we could replace the walk of fame pic whit a xtina picture

Why are you talking to yourself may I ask? And a photo has to be very well sourced to be added. Who took them, etc. ℥^nding·start 01:41, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

--91.154.97.81 (talk) 14:58, 29 January 2011 (UTC) Instruments: Vocals, Piano. Iam pretty sure she cant play piano, never seen her play it or heard, i lookt up in google: christina aguilera can play piano, nothing came up. if its true she can play piano, please give a source.

Removed. ℥^nding·start 01:44, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

{{edit semi-protected}}

Screwing up the National Anthem at the Super Bowl: Christina missed part of an entire verse of the national anthem during Super Bowl 45. Embarrassing not only herself bu tthe United States of America.

RJKroum (talk) 23:44, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

• DONE, see below. Wikid77 12:10, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

{{edit semi-protected}} Christina Aguilera botched the Star Spangled Banner at the 2011 Super Bowl, omitting one line and partially changing another.

Edit: Sounded like crap too, on top of the botched lyrics. <smaller>—24.18.196.215 (talk) 07:30, 7 February 2011 (UTC)</smaller> NilesMonkey (talk) 00:56, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

• It has been added already, plus 2 sources. As relating to 1 event, this topic should be discussed, further, under "Talk:Super Bowl XLV#Christina Aguilera fumbled the lyrics". In general, one-event text is discussed on the talk-page for that event, rather than on all the numerous article talk-pages related to that event (to avoid repetition). -Wikid77 12:02, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

christina aguilera has sold 52 millions albums worldwide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Horneyaguilerafan (talk • contribs) 17:18, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Aguilera has sold over 52 million of albums worldwide making her one of the best-selling music artists of all time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Horneyaguilerafan (talk • contribs) 17:29, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Nice original research! You need a source to say that. --ĈÞЯİŒ 1ооо 02:24, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

{{edit semi-protected}} christina aguilera has sold 52 million albums.

24.139.233.34 (talk) 20:07, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

 Not done You need a source for that. --ĈÞЯİŒ 1ооо 21:45, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

{{edit semi-protected}} Aguilera's vocal range is described as G below middle C to C# one octave above soprano C. The scientific pitch notation for that should be G3 [not C3] to C#7. 69.148.169.90 (talk) 04:13, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Done -Atmoz (talk) 15:49, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Messed up In singing the National Anthem

Get over it, it was an honest mistake, she's performed it amazingly many times before. --Duphin (talk) 18:06, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

In reality, Xtina goes of G#2-F7 to studio and C3-G7 live.

That thus depends on songs heard, taken into account because she can lower more low that what what you says and in live At Last she goes until C3. And at the beginning of her career, on her first albums in particular, she makes low notes indeed below G3, she came down until C3!!!

• C3: album Christina Aguilera (1999)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUzNCZAcK_4

• Eb3: album Mi Reflejo (2000)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZ5kIT6dxoc

• C3: album My Kind Of Christmas (2000)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmlgYdVedV0

• C*3: album Stripped (2002)

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

• Eb3: album Back to Basics (2006)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qAZpEBNul8

• G#2: Bionic album (2010)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LdYwWWadso G#2 Elastic Love, A2 Morning Dessert, Bb2 I Am...

• Eb3: Burlesque album (2010)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6b1KO9LaTx0

• C3: Unreleased, Featured Tracks, B-Sides...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8ByMRaJZ3g

And Xtina can even sing everything of the stanzae to see a whole song in low register: Falling In Love Again (D3), live I Love You Porgy, the first stanzae of Walk Away (C3-E3), the first stanzae of Oh Mother (Eb3-F3) and the first stanzae of Bionic as well as the second stanzae of Prima Donna (F3).

I am going to stop and not to bring quite his low notes lives I have not that ca has to make. Know that Xtina uses its voice and of his numerous octaves, always intelligently and often as of an instrument.

The scientist it is surement to deceive in the notation or it is to stop simply tuned to the songs the most known (Hurt G3, Ain't No Other Man A3) and was not to look farther.

For betls she goes until G*5 live Lady Marmalade (Grammy Awards on 2002) and to studio song Christmas Time !!!

Exclamation notes: F7 Car Wash (2:28), G7 Dirrty (live)

Other key point of its voice, the contrast enters are soul and strong stamp of its chest voice; Tell Me, Ain't No Other Man, Slow Down Baby, Singin 'My Song, Beautiful, Something's Got a Hold On Me... while it is a white/South American singer and his small flat voice spoken in song Love & Glamour, the intro and final Not Myself Tonight and also its flat voice sung which is beautiful, what gives songs really stunning vocally as in Save Me From Myself, Castle Walls, Dynamite, Vanity, Elastic Love, Morning Dessert, Monday Morning, Im A Good Girl, All I Need, Genie in a Bottle as well as in the first stanzae of Dirrty and Not Myself Tonight and sung there falsetto song; Lovin Me 4 Me, Miracle, as well as over the first two minutes of Glam and You Lost Me and over the third stanzae of Fighter and Soar... She rap on third Come On Over Baby's stanzae, in the The Beautiful People's first stanzae and in all the song Bobblehead.--Angel310 (talk) 08:06, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Why the note G3 is still visible in the vocal ability article, it was not still changed! What is what somebody could correct him fast? --85.170.225.147 (talk) 07:05, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Christina released only 4 official studio albums not 6:

• Christina Aguilera
• Stripped
• Back to Basics
• Bionic

Albums like Mi Reflejo may be in the "Other albums" category like My Kind of Christmas, Just Be Free, Justin & Christina and Burlesque 'cause "Mi Reflejo" was promoted as studio album only in Hispanic America, not worldwide. Arlindo 88 (talk) 05:33, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

What?! XD Other albums do not exist. There are studio albums and studio albums. --ĈÞЯİŒ 1ооо 03:23, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Mi Reflejo is a studio album regardless of promotion, and My Kind of Christmas is also a studio album. These have already been decided by consensus. If you wish to [re-]open a discussion, please do so on the respective page. Thanks! Yves (talk) 03:30, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

yes, there is other albums, maybe they are recorded in a studio, but its not a major release, both where released in 2000 one month apart, thats not a "typical studio album release", you think britney would have released baby one more time and oops i did it again one month apart?? so yes there other studio albums!! fu#k you stupid idio-t, you just dont see the hole picture....nerds...--217.152.60.66 (talk) 11:45, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Riculous/Pathetic, but I agree, the article should specify which albums are major releases and which are not. Lxhizy! (talk) 03:58, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

I think it should be split into "Studio Albums" (Major releases), "Spanish Albums" ("Mi Reflejo") and "Other Albums" (Holliday album and Soundtracks etc).

Christina and her label have always said "Bionic" was her fourth Studio album. --Duphin (talk) 18:16, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

What they say is different from what it actually is. A Spanish album is a studio album. A Christmas album is a studio album. Look at Merry Christmas II You and Mi Plan. --ĈÞЯİŒ 1ооо 19:38, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Christina Aguilera herself, and her label, acknowledge that she has had 4 studio albums. Her christmas and spanish albums were not considered as studio albums as they 1. Were not released worldwide. 2. Were not recorded in studio but on tour.

She recorded Just Be Free as a young teen, does that make that a studio album?94james94 (talk) 23:34, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

It does not matter what they label it. It doesn't matter if they were not released worldwide, which BTW they were, and it doesn't matter where they were recorded. Just Be Free is a DEMO album, unofficially released by some unknown label. Let me ask you this, if her label said that Bionic wasn't a studio album, should we remove it as an album? ℥^nding·start 00:40, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

In regard to the mug shot it is missing response from the police and E!. I searched on line and found responses from both here: http://www.celebritycrimereporter.com/2011/03/publication-of-christina-aguileras-mug.html the sheriff's comments are especially interesting, IMHO. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.179.39.205 (talk) 21:03, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

A discussion was brought up on Bionic's talk page after I changed recording artist to singer-songwriter. It's best to bring it here, because it affects all her articles here on Wikipedia.

So here's the thing, there's no doubt in my mind Christina is a recording artist. She records music in a studio, and she is an artist. Simple really. Recording artist is a quite general term. Christina writes a majority of her songs, whether or not she writes with others or not, she still co-writes the songs. She also has co-produced several of her songs. For these reasons, which I could go into more detail if needed, I believe that she should be labeled as a singer-songwriter. The dictionary says a singer-songwriter is: "a performer who writes his or her own songs". It does not say that the performer has to write the songs all by themselves.

To compare, Britney Spears, for example, only co-writes a few of her songs on each album, so that is why she is, and should be listed as a recording artist. Christina co-writes mostly every song, except a few, on each her albums.

Please leave your input here, and please state boldly which you think she should be listed as, and please further explain your reasoning. ℥^nding·start 02:27, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

• Recording artist. "Co-writes" signifies the songs belonging to others as well. For example, in the case of Bob Dylan's work, who is referred to as singer-songwriter, most of his recorded work are songs written solely by him, with him providing the musical accompaniment. "A performer who writes his or her own songs". Dan56 (talk) 02:40, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand fully what you are saying. How are songs she sing not her songs? Yes, she didn't write the songs solely by herself, but that doesn't mean that her songs aren't her songs. For example, a film is usually labeled as the director's or main star's film, not the lighting crew's film. Not really a good example, but that's all I can think of right now. I think what you said on the Bionic page about her being listed as a singer would work better. If other people agree that her credits don't warrant as a singer-songwriter, I suggest her just being listed as an "American singer". ℥^nding·start 02:46, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

"Own" definition. 1. belonging to oneself or itself 2. used to express immediate or direct kinship. And singer-songwriters are usually associated with pop stars that work with a group of producers and writers. Dan56 (talk) 02:49, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I know what the word own means. I just don't understand the context of which you are using it in. ℥^nding·start 02:54, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

What context? The songs are not her own. Ownership/credit is shared, but they are performed by her for recordings, hence "recording artist". Many pop singers perform/record songs that aren't entirely, or even, theirs. She's more "recording artist" than "singer-songwriter" is all I'm saying. And since she's had additional musical role, in producing, in her recorded work, this more "general" term would be even more appropriate. Dan56 (talk) 03:05, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

How are they her songs though? I don't quite understand where you're going in that sense. I do see see what you mean, but I don't get how the songs aren't considered hers because she didn't fully write them herself. To me, a recording artist is someone who sings other people's songs. That is half correct with Christina, but not fully. What about just using simply singer. The page on singer-songwriter says, and I know it's unsourced, but it makes sense: "A number of other well-known musicians may write some of their own songs, but are usually called singers instead." I think singer is a better comprise, as just recording artist makes it sound like she just records music and has no involvement in it what-so-ever. ℥^nding·start 03:33, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, following that logic, "singer" is worse, as it makes her out to be nothing but some voice. "Recording artist" does not downplay anything; its just a musician known for making recorded music. There are singers that to not make recorded music/releases and there are those that do. Dan56 (talk) 03:47, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I want to point out that Spears has had co-writing credits on half of the tracks on the majority of her albums and she is still listed as a "recording artist." Aguilera, however, only had 1 co-writing on her debut album, none on Mi Reflejo, and three on My Kind of Christmas. While she did take a huge step forward in her writing part in later albums, you still had many tracks that she was left out of and then were all done with several others. This does not justify her to be a "singer-songwriter." --ĈÞЯİŒ 1ооо 15:23, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

If Aguilera's song contributions don't qualify her as a singer-songwriter, then what about Mariah Carey, P!nk, Kelly Clarkson, Mya, Carrie Underwood, Michael Jackson, Mary J. Blige, Ne-Yo, Usher, Brandy, Nicki Minaj, Nelly Furtado and so many more who are listed as "singer-songwriters", but mainly "co-write" their music. I'm saying, if you don't consider Aguilera a singer-songwriter, then why are the aforementioned singers referred to as singer-songwriters? If Aguilera's category is changed to "recording artist", then it'll only be fair if all the other "co-writer" articles out there are changed to recording artists, and that will cause an upheaval of angry editors to rebel against this proposition. Wouldn't you agree? The public usually views a singer-songwriter as someone who bears a majority of contribution in all or most of their music, and Aguilera has managed to do this since her release of Stripped in the early 2000's. True, she isn't as "traditional" as maybe Dolly Parton, Taylor Swift or Shania Twain, but you don't have to be in order to earn a title as "singer-songwriter". Furthermore, if you suddenly change all these artists titles to "singer" or "recording artist", people might generally start to think that the have little "behind-the-scenes" contribution in their music. This might seem to be an assumption and may be a bit inaccurate, but there needs to be a distinct difference between those who use their voice to portray others' lyrics, and those who use their voice to portray their own lyrics. For examples of musicians who definitely are not singer-songwriters, see Barbra Streisand, Celine Dion, Whitney Houston, Bette Midler and Aaliyah. Orlandodreaming (talk) 11:49, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Most of the artists you cited are not singer-songwriters, despite assertions to the contrary in Wikipedia. I didn't check all the artists listed, but the ones I did look up elsewhere lack sufficient solo (or even duo) songwriting credits. An exception is Michael Jackson who did get credit for many of his songs and therefore, at least qualifies on that basis. In the strictest sense, however, the term "singer-songwriter" implies a singer who writes most of his or her own material and accompanies himself or herself on an instrument such as guitar and piano with minimal backing. Hence, Stevie Wonder, who clearly is a singer and a songwriter is not what people refer to when they use the combined term. In fact, no serious writers use the term as loosely as it is bandied about in Wikipedia. For example, look up Michael Jackson on AllMusic and you won't find any reference to it in his bio, whereas you will find it applied to Neil Young, Bob Dylan, Laura Nyro, Billy Joel and others who played many a stage without backing, especially earlier in their careers. For some reason, fans of today's pop artists feel that the label "singer-songwriter" confers some level of legitimacy on their heroes, blurring the perjorative implication associated with "pop". Even "singer" and "recording artist" are not enough. What a horrible fate to be merely an Elvis or Frank Sinatra and not a Jackson Browne. Allreet (talk) 15:34, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

P.S. I will take on the assignment of removing "singer-songwriter" from most of the artists you listed, as long as there are no authoritative sources or "settled issues" to contend otherwise. Allreet (talk) 15:50, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. All I'm asking is that this change be distributed equally among Wikipedia's articles, which might take a while, as long as I'm not the one making the changes. Orlandodreaming (talk) 19:42, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Shes both! Why not songwriting recording artists? :P94james94 (talk) 23:36, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

I vote for "singer-songwriter". A singer-songwriter doesn't have to write all or most of their songs all by themselves. I know that in some cases singers that co-write their songs write all their lyrics... Some of them also compose melodies and other parts of their songs (chords, hooks, basslines, etc.). And no, they don't have to play any instrument... Many singers that only co-write their songs are still labelled "singer-songwriters" in the lead of their Wikipedia articles, so why are Madonna's and Christina Aguilera's articles any different?

Co-writing her songs means Christina Aguilera shares ownerships of her songs with one or more writers; those are her own songs as well. Israell (talk) 16:31, 17 July 2011 (UTC)