# Talk:Kesha

I suggest that "Rapper" should be added to the list of her occupations. She does rap in several of her songs.  2607:FB91:E98:9108:501A:FCA:2568:7C8E (talk) 05:37, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: Please provide secondary reliable source that is independent of the subject. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 06:27, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
She raps on songs Crazy Kids and Sleazy. Or on unreleased demos like Boom Boom Bang. She was also named hip-hop's guilty pleasure by Vibe magazine. https://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/Entertainment/kesha-covers-vibe-magazine/story?id=17452394
(talk) 12:24, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
Personal observations are not "secondary reliable source that is independent of the subject". Jibal (talk) 14:25, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

@Richardgrayson3451: I reverted your photo addition because that 2025 photo is not a good infobox photo. It's too zoomed out and doesn't show her face well. The 2022 photo is higher quality and is focused clearly on Kesha. Photos that are focused clearly on the subject are always preferred on Wikipedia. Yes, the photo is three years old, but that doesn't mean it needs to be replaced. Newer doesn't always equal better. Bowling is life (talk) 20:28, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

 
I understand your point, but I haven’t really seen this as an issue — there are plenty of pages that use similar, more recent images even if they’re a bit zoomed out. I think Wikipedia should try to stay updated with newer photos rather than keeping ones that are already three years old. Personally, I believe giving priority to updated images helps keep pages more current and reflective of the subject as they are now. Richardgrayson3451 (talk) 07:54, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
Getting the latest photo of Kesha has been pretty hard, though — not many recent ones are freely usable. Richardgrayson3451 (talk) 07:55, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
No, read MOS:IMAGEQUALITY. "Use the best quality images available. Poor-quality images—dark or blurry...showing the subject too small...ambiguous, or at an awkward angle; and so on—should not be used unless absolutely necessary." Using this photo is not necessary when this photo from 2022 is a sufficient image for the infobox and shows the subject much better. If it's so hard find a new photo for Kesha, we shouldn't be settling for poor ones just because they are newer. The other image is only three years old. It does not need to be replaced unless we can find a new photo that is high quality. Bowling is life (talk) 11:01, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
Hey,
I’d like to clarify my support for keeping the newer image currently in the infobox. While MOS:IMAGEQUALITY emphasizes using the best quality images available and avoiding ones that are genuinely dark or blurry, I don’t believe the new photo meets that threshold. It appears reasonably sharp, properly lit, and clearly shows the subject — not “poor quality” by MOS standards. The newer photo is also more recent, and while there’s no explicit policy requiring newer images, general consensus on biographies favors using a current photo when the quality is comparable, so that the subject’s present appearance is accurately reflected.
The 2022 image is good, but the newer one offers an updated and still clear representation. I don’t think it should be dismissed simply because a few perceive slight softness — that can be subjective or screen-dependent. If there’s still disagreement on the technical quality, could an experienced image reviewer or Commons admin take a look and provide input? I’d appreciate guidance from someone familiar with MOS:IMAGEQUALITY and Commons assessment standards.
Until then, I’ll be reverting the page to use the latest image, as I believe it meets Wikipedia’s quality and relevance standards for living subjects.
I’ll also add both images below so other editors on Kesha’s Talk page can directly compare them and share their input (Top one is 2025 Bottom one is 2022)
Thank you and looking forward for your response Richardgrayson3451 (talk) 16:25, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
(←) IMO, I think the 2022 photo is a better illustration of the individual, you can at least see her whole face clearly and tell who it is in the image. The new image could be any number of young, blond performers (Is that maybe Britney or Jessica? Who is that?). Plus, the top ~25% of the newer image being blank black does not help. - Adolphus79 (talk) 16:34, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
Also, Richardgrayson3451, you have violated WP:3RR with your edit warring over this image. - Adolphus79 (talk) 16:41, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi Adolphus79,
Thanks for the note. I didn’t realize things had escalated to that point, and I apologize for any disruption caused. That wasn’t my intention at all — I just thought the newer image might be an improvement, but I understand there are differing views on that.
Could you please let me know the best place or person to appeal to in order to resolve this image dispute properly? I’d like to make sure it’s handled the right way and avoid further conflict.
Appreciate your patience and guidance.Richardgrayson3451 (talk) 17:19, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
Discussing it here and gaining a consensus before forcing your changes is a good place to start, accepting that consensus also helps. - Adolphus79 (talk) 17:33, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
I did just think of a potential compromise. We could include both photos in the article. The 2022 could go in the infobox for now until we find a newer one that is a good infobox photo. And the 2025 photo could go in the body of the article. That way we at least have a new photo of her in the article. Also, @Richardgrayson3451:, no worries here and no hard feelings. I should have taken this to the talk page sooner. I didn't revert your latest edit because it was clear we had a dispute that needed to be resolved in the talk page and I didn't want to break the three revert rule. Hopefully the compromise I came up with can be a temporary solution until a better image becomes available. I'm not saying that we should absolutely go by the compromise I came up with. Do you have any other possible solutions or do you think the one I came up with is good for now? Bowling is life (talk) 17:48, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
I have no problem with the new image (cropped to remove the huge empty space at the top) being added lower in the article, but not as the infobox image due to my above concerns. - Adolphus79 (talk) 17:56, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
Okay, will do as you say — thanks for the alert earlier, and wishing you all the best. Richardgrayson3451 (talk) 19:16, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
That actually sounds like the most decent way to sort this out @Bowling is life:— at least until I either get those brownie points for the 2025 image or finally give up my endeavor (haha). I do agree the image (2025), while not fully unclear, has its own limitations. Thanks for coming up with a fair compromise here, really.
At least the 2025 photo will still have a spot in the body of the article (her 2025-onwards section), which honestly is the best place for it right now. And who knows — that 2025 Kesha pic was quite a quick find, so maybe a better and more updated one will pop up sooner than we expect.
Appreciate the thoughtful approach, truly.Richardgrayson3451 (talk) 19:14, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
Okay Ive edited my part please do review and confirm
Thank You! Richardgrayson3451 (talk) 19:31, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
👍 Looks good. I'm glad we could work something out. Hopefully a clearer and more centered photo will become available that also follows Wikipedia's copyright policies. Bowling is life (talk) 20:21, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Why is there a blurb about Feeld at the very top of the article? Ambndms (talk) 01:59, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure why that was added. I removed it. Bowling is life (talk) 02:24, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

I think it would be important to highlight how she got her name in the beginning:
Her given name derives from the combination of her Hungarian great-grandfather’s name, (Ke)cse-Nagy (Sá)ndor, forming the variant “KeSa,” which later became also the basis for her stage name.
Sources below:
https://www.blikk.hu/sztarvilag/kedollarha-ez-egy-magyar-nev/kt3zhcn
https://www.origo.hu/teve/2024/05/kesha-felismerhetetlen-plasztika-vadak
https://www.eonline.com/news/1263802/youve-been-saying-keshas-name-wrong-this-entire-time
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS5JAuYZCIY ~2025-32493-18 (talk) 08:33, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

 Not done. Saying how she hot her name isn’t necessary, but an IPA would probably work. NotJamestack (✉️|📝) 13:05, 18 November 2025 (UTC)