This article must adhere to thebiographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced orpoorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentiallylibellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue tothis noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please seethis help page.
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited tojoin the project andcontribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to thedocumentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Latin music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related toLatin music (music performed in Spanish, Portuguese and the languages of Ibero-America, see project scope for more details) on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Latin musicWikipedia:WikiProject Latin musicTemplate:WikiProject Latin musicLatin music
This article is of interest toWikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of allLGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit theproject page or contribute to thediscussion. Explanation for inclusion inWikiProject LGBTQ+ studies: Gay icon[1]LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Mexico, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofMexico on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.MexicoWikipedia:WikiProject MexicoTemplate:WikiProject MexicoMexico
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related topop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofWomen in music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music
Keep - Sources added, why someone is deleting the new sources?. I also think the subject is notable in its field .User eddyvirto 09:30,4 april 2007 (UTC)
I added a paragraph in the "Ananda to present" section relating to Paulina's performance in Oslo, Norway at the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony.PopolVuh!06:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
None of their first albums with EMI reach the million of copies. The information is totally false.
does any one know the actual sales for Paulina's 1st albums? i have read that La Chica Dorada has sold a little over a million in a magazine and i know for a fact the 24 Kilates has been certified gold in mexico at least.
Can someone please post she recently performed on jay leno show to sing "ni una sola palabra"becoming only the 2nd artist allowed to sing in spanish.
PAULINO ROBIO SOLD 10 MILLION COPIES??????OH GOD.....THIS IS TOTALLY FALSE...SHE HAS SOLD 13 MILLION.ARE YOU CRAZY?20?ALSO,PLEASE PUT THE SITES WHERE YOU FIND THE INFORMATION THAT YOU GIVE.20 MILLION IS NOT TRUE.HERE WE DONT WRITE WHAT WE LIKE BUT WHAT IS CORRECT,NOT DEPENDANT ON HOW MUCH WE LIKE A SINGER.—Precedingunsigned comment added by85.74.126.212 (talk)09:20, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Edits without citations to record sales and other facts. . .
Generally, weasel terms are statements that are misleading because they lack the normal substantiations of their truthfulness, as well as the background information against which these statements are made. Weasel terms are the equivalent ofspin in the political sphere inBritish English. Saying that one artist is the best or a generalization like, "it has been decided" without citing a neutralPOV veriable source will draw attention to your edits. Wikipedia is not afansite where unsubstanitated rumors can be written.Ronbo7617:05, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
On December 6, 2006, Paulina Rubio performed on Jay Leno and before she appeared, Jay Leno said that she had sold over 16 million albums worldwide. Check out this link:
Youtube is not considered a reliable source, even though the artist may appear. Citations are just like a term paper: you write it; it is back up by a third party neutral reliable source. Otherwise, it will not be accepted here.Ronbo7607:12, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
None of your references checked. The first opened to a Nobel Peace site, which could be seen as a bad faith edit. Once again, if you cite a fact, i.e., "Rubio sold xx albums." The link must read on that page, "Rubio sold xx albums." If the citation is not veriable as per above, it will be reverted.
The article is valid as the album sales are listed near the end of the article. There is a section about her in the article. You need to read the article carefully before making false reverts.
You may wish to reviewWikipedia:Citing sources. That paragraph tells you how to properly cite a fact backed up by a reliable source. The problem with the citation you used is that the reference to her sales is a passing reference that invites a reasonable editor to ask what is the source. With an established fact like "Columbus sailed in1492. . ." reliable third party sources are available to back the fact. With album sales about a current performer it is difficult to find a good source. Billboard might be that source but even it is subject to how record sales are reported, adjusted, etc. It is easier to find good sources for a performer whose numbers are not clicking like an odometer.
Wikipedia strives to preserve a reasonable amount of information about topics pertinent to an article. However, there is a caveat, and that involves what Wikipedia is not.WP:NOT#BLOG Wikipedia is not a blog or indiscriminate collection of information. There is another proposal about what it is not: Wikipedia is not a fansite. Wikipedia is about preserving information in a reasonable manner that the next reader does not have to worry about how good Wikipedia's information is.
Inre Paulina Rubio's article, several editors like me have seen this and companion articles descended upon fans who want to make an impact statement without doing their homework. They will make edits without providing sources and in some instances make malicious edits. That is why this article was semi-protected less than a month ago.
Wikipedia strives for aWikipedia:Neutral point of view meaning that articles should be well written and grounded on facts. The best example given to me recently by another editor about how articles should be written is "term paper is a good analogy. An overview article in a scientific journal would be another example."
I will admit that I am a fan of Paulina's but that is where I have to stop myself concerning editting her article. If I put fansite blog material into her article, I am doing her readers a disserve and more importantly myself. As an editor I have to ask myself, "what would a reader of an encyclopedia expect to read?" Encyclopedias are facts written with a neutral point of view. If a reader is looking for facts, then Wikipedia and encyclopedias are the place to come. If not, then I would gently suggest that other sources of information should be sought out.
BTW, before I revert, I do a voluntarydue diligence review. I did a Yahoo search last night on the term,Paulina Rubio album sales. It did not yield a good reliable NPOV cite. It was interesting to see thisPaulina Rubio URL on her official website. This is a messageboard there with a link back to this article and its author states,
"I used Paulina’s Wikipedia article as a reference for most of the album sales figures. It doesn’t list all of them, but it is a start. Here is a link to that article: (Wikipedia link not included.)"
All editors may wish to review my post above this one. To make it easy for you, I wrote:
It was interesting to see thisPaulina Rubio URL on her official website. This is a messageboard there with a link back to this article and its author states,
"I used Paulina’s Wikipedia article as a reference for most of the album sales figures. It doesn’t list all of them, but it is a start. Here is a link to that article: (Wikipedia link not included.)"
I will not pretend to be an expert on this matter but ask that editors consider this when seeing record sales posts.
I will discuss with other editors the number one way to cut down on the number of vandal edits - the elimination of album sale numbers. Gold, silver and bronze sales are more easily tracked achievements.Ronbo7604:09, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is there such a thing as silver and bronze when it comes to albums sales? Isn't that the way they award olympic athletes? Album awards are gold, platinum, and diamond.
In some countries, like the UK, in terms of albums it goes silver, gold and platinum
Image:Paulinapaulina.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used underfair use but there is noexplanation or rationale as to why its use inthis Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to theboilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent withfair use.
Please go tothe image description page and edit it to include afair use rationale. Using one of the templates atWikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described oncriteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at theMedia copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot06:58, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Ananda.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used underfair use but there is noexplanation or rationale as to why its use inthis Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to theboilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent withfair use.
Please go tothe image description page and edit it to include afair use rationale. Using one of the templates atWikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described oncriteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at theMedia copyright questions page. Thank you.
This section needs significant work: it's out of order, has a number of grammatical errors and there's too many 1-sentence paragraphs.IKrolm (talk)07:24, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
File:Paulina Rubio at the 2011 Latin Grammy.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
If the image isnon-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is nofair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
Every time I make an edition in this article, were Paulina Rubio is known as The Queen Of Latin Pop with at least 15 references all over the world in several languages, this userChrishonduras revert it, please I request from blocking this user to make any edit to this article, since this user doesn't offer any reason for revert these edits. He just simply erase it. Please help preventing this userChrishonduras from making any edit to this article.
This are the references where Paulina Rubio is named as the "Queen of Latin Pop":
User@Carlomagno2013: hasnotified about this article in the Spanish Administrators' noticeboard and doesn't proceeds (is a different article). I will answer here:
He said that I just reverted him without any reason. It's ironic, because I removed some statements onDecember 12 with aedit summary ("Bias. PEACOCK context. Also, top-selling Mexican female maybe in Nielsen figures (and is not update information)"). But actually he reverted my edition without any reason or at least without making a edit summary sincetoday.
However, I oppose about the version that he restored. Why?: some references like YouTube not meets the criteria ofverifiability. It's a PEACOCK context also, because even artists like Thalía, Shakira or Gloria Estefan have been named with this honorific nickname several decade ago and by international press and more than Paulina Rubio.
The reference about "top-selling mexican artist" (in United States) is not accurate information now. Since 2008, Thalía has sold more than Paulina Rubio according toNielsen. Even, I think that she has more certified units.
Can you see this is a Thalia's fan reverting versions in Paulina Rubio's article? This clearly a vandalism case. What is it doing a Thalia fan editing Paulina Rubio's article in Wikipedia? Did you notice he uses the phrase "I think"? This is a valid argument to revert versions in Wikipedia? Because he thinks? Please you got to do something.
So can you@Chrishounduras: please bring that reliable reference where Nielsen says Thalia has sold more albums than Paulina Rubio? Because this is not a realNielsen reference, and this is outdated too, this is from 2008! This is not accurate information now. And besides that's not an article is just a forum where anyone can ask and answer a question. This is not accurate information in anyway. The same arguments that you use. In 2006 Emi Music gives Thalia an award for having sold 10 million albums throughout her career, wich means 10 millions albums in 16 years.[2] Two years later Thalia was fired in 2008 from the same record label Emi Music for low record sales from her album "Lunada"[3]. Then in 2009 she signs with Sony Music where her husband Tommy Mottola was president, and she went from one day to another from 10 millions to 40 millions. How did it happens? 30 millions albums sold in one year?
Paulina Rubio is the only mexican female singer with 2 Gold "standard type certifications" according to RIAA[4] Here is important to repeat these are "Gold Standard Type certifications" wich represents 500,000 record sales each one in USA, and Thalia only have "Latin Type Certifications" representing only 30,000 sales in USA each one...[5]
So there's not any Billboard o Nielsen reliable reference saying Thalia has sold more albums than Paulina Rubio, because the one you mention is outdated. And is not accurate information.
Please stop reverting versions just because you are Thalia's fan and Paulina Rubio's hater, this are a clear example of vandalism.Regards,Carlomagno2013(Diskussion)
That is more incredible. I just arguing the point about Thalía (ref 2008) vs Rubio (ref 2005) in sales. Who has oldest news?. This is not reason to be a "Thalía fan" or "Paulina Rubio hater". PleaseAssume good faith. And yet, is realible, is from Billboard.com and they have a section when a reader asked about sales or something from this section. However, you see with a realible source that Rubio is not the best-selling female artist in United States or can you provide a update about this statement, please?.
Nobody said Paulina Rubio is the top-selling female artist in the United States, who said that? Even my reference doesn't even said that, you keep lying and lying and taking control of Paulina Rubios's article. Thanks for you threatens, so if you are not a Thalia's fan why are you doing edits in her article in Wikipedia? It is clear you have an special interest in Paulina Rubio's article, and we remember when you wrote in the description that Thalia is the Queen of Latin pop, not Paulina! And you blocked the article from editings right after doing that vandalism! Do you really think we don't have memory? I repeat you keep lying and lying.Carlomagno2013(Diskussion)
So, what's the point about your comments?. This is Paulina Rubio's article, not Thalía's article. You're creating disruptive editions here. And... "top-selling Mexican female pop singer in the market" in which market?, United States?, Worldwide?. Referencesaid: "according toNielsen SoundScan, Paulina is -after Shakira- the top selling Latin femela pop artist in the market". Where operates Nielsen SoundScan? for Mexico, Europe or Worldwide? I think that is only for United States/Canada. Doesnt makes sense this statement in the lead or in any part. And at least, in the context that you wrote Queen of Latin Pop is PEACOCK. There is not mention why and I can gave you opposite and a major context for other artists with this nickname.Chrishonduras(Diskussion)08:17, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
She's best known and referred to as "the golden girl" not only as "the queen of latin pop" so it should be included too in the main topic since its one of the most famous characteristics of her.Moonlight Entm (talk)05:36, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
