# Talk:The Shirelles

I changed some references to Doris Kenner Jackson to "Doris Coley"; I think the best idea is to include "now Doris Kenner" where it would fit chronologically, but I wasn't sure when her marriages took place. If anyone knows, please add it. 130.101.20.153 19:47, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
I think this is on her bio page.  Speaking of bio pages, these pages should be merged as one page; the bio pages are way too short.  The bio pages can be deleted then. What do you all think?-BlueAmethyst .:*:. 00:46, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Makes good sense to me. 72.52.156.92 (talk) 22:03, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Fancruft sadly prevails - hence the POV tag. For example -"The Shirelles were the first major female vocal group of the rock and roll era, defining the so-called girl group sound with their soft, sweet harmonies and yearning innocence." - etc. Read Wikipedia:Reliable sources, Wikipedia:Verifiability and  Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not etc.  Thank you,
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 23:48, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
If someone has the time to go through this and remove everything copied and pasted from allmusic [1], that would be very helpful. --99.253.224.234 (talk) 21:20, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I was notified on my talk page that this article needs to be cleaned of copyright problems. It contains content duplicated and closely paraphrasing the AllMusic biography. This content was entered into the article here on 24 August 2006. Interested contributors are more than welcome to please help salvage the article by rewriting it in the temporary space linked to from the article's face (there are more instructions in the template). This version seems to be untainted, if it is necessary to restore to it as a base for building. My sympathy to those who work on this subject. :( --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:55, 18 September 2011 (UTC)


### The Shirelles
This peer review discussion has been closed. 
I've listed this article for peer review because I hope to bring it to GA status and would like feedback as to what needs to be improved.
Thanks, Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:33, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Also, if possible I'd like some ideas about taking this to FA. Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:46, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Comments by Sarastro1
This is a pretty good piece of work. As it stands, it would be a fairly clear GA if I were reviewing and I think it is nicely on its way to FA. I've reviewed with FAC in mind, but I would suggest taking it to GAN before you do this. I've done some light copy-editing, but feel free to revert anything you are not happy with. NB: I have not looked at sourcing at all. --Sarastro1 (talk) 15:12, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Lead
"the first to have a number one single on the Billboard Hot 100": Aside from the fact that is is not quite clear of what they were the first, this fact is repeated later in the lead in what I think is a more logical place.
"after several months of courtship." A little imprecise: I'm not too fond of "courtship" and also it is not clear who was "courting": the company or the group.
Instances of close repetition in the lead: "girls … girls", "group … group".
"they were unable to keep their previous popularity": maybe "maintain" rather than "keep".
"due to the numerous girl bands…": Maybe "due to the success of numerous girl bands…"
"while several of their hits used strings and baião-style music": Not sure about using "while" here as there is no obvious connection with the previous part of the sentence. A simple "and" would be enough, unless there is a connection with these styles and their "sexual themes".
"They have been credited": By who?
"with much of their music reflecting its essence": Unclear what this means. Reflecting the essence of what? Does this mean that the "girl group genre" came to embody/contain/reflect many of the Shirelles "themes" (for want of a better word). Also, "with … music reflecting" is not great construction (noun-verbing): suggest "and much of their music reflected".
"Their multi-racial popular acceptance predates Motown…": I know what you mean here, but "multi-racial popular acceptance" is slightly ambiguous. It's not a big deal (and sounds quite elegant) but could it be pinned down slightly more?
"which has been noted as reflecting the early success of the African-American Civil Rights Movement.": Again, not too clear. Are you saying that the Shirelles were successful as part of the early Civil Rights success, or (as it reads to me at the moment) that Motown reflects this success? Also, for the uninitiated (and there might be some, somewhere!!) who don't know what Motown is, perhaps "predates the success of Motown music".
"They have received numerous honors, including receiving the Pioneer Award from the Rhythm and Blues Foundation, being accepted in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1996, and being selected as one of the 100 best acts of all time by Rolling Stone in 2004." Perhaps put this into a better tense. I would favour past tense, but at the very least "being selected" could be replaced with "were selected". Also, "received…receiving".
Initial career and success
"Shirley Owens Alston Reeves": I appreciate why her name is given like this, but why not "Shirley Owens (at that time Shirley Reeves)" or "Shirley Reeves (later Shirley Owens)" to make it easier to follow?
I'm not entirely comfortable with the idea of them avoiding Greenberg without a little more explanation. Did they not want to join a record label, or did they want to sign for someone else. It just needs a bit more here.
Also (and just a personal thing), I really don't like lines like "The song combined doo-wop with pop melodies" in music articles; for the general reader, "pop melodies" is meaningless and I never like the use of "combined" like this. At the very least (and I still am not too struck) I think "The song was influenced by [the] doo-wop [genre?] but included [more populist?] pop melodies". But feel free to ignore this one.
"Flopped" does not sound completely encyclopaedic, but I think more precision would be better. Failed to chart? Reached only number 99?
"the low rating has been attributed to poor distribution": Who attributes it.?
"Greenberg made an agreement with songwriter Luther Dixon": Presumably to write for them? It needs to say so as the sentence is left hanging.
"booked to perform with several major artists" It would be nice to say who, where and when.
"it went on to become either the first Billboard Number One Hit by an African-American girl band[11] or the first Number One Hit by any girl band.": Why is there an either-or? Surely it either was or wasn't and if there is debate, the debate should be explained and spelt out.
"In 1963 Dixon left Scepter, which preceded a decrease in The Shirelles' charting ability...": In other words, they had less chart success? I think keep this simple.
"They did not, however, give up": Tabloidese? Maybe "However, they carried on performing/recording".
"and has been theorized as having been a blow to their creativity": Theorized by who? And to be honest, it sounds a bit wishy-washy anyway.
"In a 1981 interview with Bruce Pollock, Owens said that Greenberg has put on a "mother routine", which she and her bandmates had "fall[en] for ... completely"." Don't quite get this; what is she saying? Was Greenberg responsible for the non-existent trust, did the group blame her? This sentence needs to link to the previous stuff a little better.
Later career
Could we say when the contract expired with Scepter?
Style
"has been described": By who?
All the quotes in this section need in text attribution (i.e. XXX said that "blah blah blah")
"The other members, on background...": Maybe "as backing singers"?
"with numerous instances of syncopation.": I'm no music expert, but this sentence implies that syncopation is an exclusive feature of Brazilian baião, which is not the case.
"in their acceptance by Whites": Not sure about capitalisation here, and it sounds uncomfortable. What about "across racial demographics"? And again, there was other music that crossed the "divide" before this, I believe.
"and strings sounding White": Again not sure about either "white" or "White" here, and how on earth can strings sound white?
"She noted that "the people who love[d them] and [they] loved [were] right [there]."" The parentheses make this uncomfortable reading; why not just quote it as it was said?
Stage musical
Any comment on how well it was received? --Sarastro1 (talk) 15:12, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Reply
I've done most of it. The source does not state which artists, although I remember seeing a biography of one of their chaperones that may have the information. The sources say different things, but its not really a debate. Both sources seem equally reliable, so I'm not comfortable choosing one. I'd appreciate a bit of feedback regarding the changes thus far. Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:21, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Fixed the remaining two issues. Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:28, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Generally looks OK. "after several months of avoiding her" sounds a little clumsy and "sounding like something from white-people's music" sounds a little odd. For the latter, I might suggest something like "and string section influenced by music popular among [white audiences may sound better here than "white people"]." And "and insisted they only sang for fun" I assume refers to the group, so it may be better to say "as they only wanted to sing for fun" or "they did not want to sing professionally/seriously". My only other suggestion is to watch out for close repetition of "group" or "girls". Nothing specific, but I think these may be (perhaps unavoidably) over-used. --Sarastro1 (talk) 18:15, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
How's this? Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:17, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Looks good. Certainly a very good shout for GA as it stands. My only remaining quibble (not a GA issue at all) is the first sentence which was changed to "The Shirelles were an African-American girl group that achieved popularity in the early 1960s, consisting of schoolmates Shirley Owens, Doris Coley, Addie "Micki" Harris, and Beverly Lee." Now, the "consisting of" clause could refer to "the early 1960s". It obviously doesn't, but this is the sort of thing that gets picked up at FAC. The only problem with switching it around is that you end up with comma overload because of the list of names. A possible solution would be to return it to two sentences. --Sarastro1 (talk) 17:43, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
I'll touch that up. Thanks for the review. GAN, here it comes. Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:25, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


#### Comments by Ghmyrtle
As an outsider with no particular experience of WP:GA criteria, my main comment is that I don't like the style of the opening paragraph.  It's too long, and goes into too much obscure detail.  It doesn't present a very clear overview of the group's career and influence - it picks out certain points and, in my view, gives them undue prominence.  If I were writing it, I'd have a short introductory paragraph something along the lines of:The Shirelles were an African-American girl group that achieved popularity in the early 1960s.  They were the first such group to top the Billboard Hot 100, with the song [not "their" song, in the sense that they didn't write it] "Will You Love Me Tomorrow."  The original group [not "band" - they didn't play any instruments] consisted of schoolmates Shirley Owens, Doris Coley, Addie "Micki" Harris, and Beverly Lee.  The second paragraph would then summarise the key points of their career, but not go into unnecessary detail.  The sentence, "The Shirelles were unable to maintain their previous popularity due to the numerous successful girl bands following their lead and ongoing British Invasion" seems to me particularly redundant - words like "due to" are often a sign of WP:OR and the wording in the Allmusic bio doesn't use that terminology.  For example:"Formed in 1957 for a high school talent show, they were signed by Florence Greenberg of Tiara Records and their first single was released the following year. After a brief and unsuccessful period with Decca, they went with Greenberg to her newly-formed company Scepter Records where, working with Luther Dixon, the group had their first hit with "Tonight's the Night".  In all, the group had seven top twenty hits in the US between 1960 and 1963.  Their popularity diminished after the British Invasion, although The Beatles were among those to cover their songs.  This shouldn't be taken in any way as criticism of all the excellent work done on this article - just a commentary on the style of the opening section which, in my opinion, doesn't really succeed in meeting WP:LEAD.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:00, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Copied from talk page to keep it all in one place. Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:01, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Hmm... I'd expect "Will You Love Me Tomorrow" to be in the lead as it was their first number 1 (and the first number one by a [African-American?] girl group), so it is important enough. I like your suggestion to change band to group, so I will implement that. Regarding the influence of the other girl groups, Wadhams et al. write "...competition from hundreds of girl groups following The Shirelles' lead simply overwhelmed them..." (page 62), so I don't think it should be left out willy-nilly. Perhaps the "Last Minute Miracle" bit could be cut? Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:19, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
I also think that their original name, and the reason they left Scepter, are too detailed for the lead - but the lead should state that they had several major US hits (I'd suggest seven top 20, or 25 Hot 100).  My objection re the declining popularity is mainly to the words "due to" - that idea of causation isn't really supported by the sources.  If they'd changed their style or had better material they may have stayed popular.  The Supremes, for example, didn't have a decline of popularity "due to" the "British Invasion" (a wholly US-centric term that I often object to, by the way!) - it was changing tastes that were the factor.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:10, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
How's this? Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:17, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
I've tweaked it into my preferred style, which you can either agree or disagree with!  I don't think the bit about avoiding Greenberg is necessary to the lead - it's basically anecdotal trivia - and I think describing Motown as a "powerhouse" is unencyclopedic and WP:PEACOCK.  I'm uncertain about the term "Hot 20" - as a Brit it's not a term I know or use, as we would use "Top 20" or "Hot 100" (for the Billboard chart), but there seem to be a lot of Google hits for it.  My view on the opening paragraphs is simply that the maximum amount of information should be conveyed in the opening two or three sentences, and the later paras of the lead should develop those - hence my suggestion to separate out the essential facts into a short first paragraph.  In my opinion that style accords with WP:MOSBEGIN.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:08, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
PS: I'm as much to blame as anyone, but the article should be consistent as to whether "The Shirelles" takes a singular or plural verb.  "The Shirelles was a group...." or "The Shirelles were a group...."  Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:57, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
I did a another copy-edit. I prefer my earlier formatting of the lead, but this way is okay too. I have no problem with your rewording of the information in the lead. Regarding the singular/plural divide, it seems to all be plural. I have not seen anything like "The Shirelles has..." or "The Shirelles is..." in the article. Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:47, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
"The Shirelles were...... It consisted of....."  I know that they "were" a group, and the group "was...", but it seems slightly odd to me to move from plural to singular in that way.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:23, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Ah, gotcha. How's my wording now? Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:40, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Looking good to me. :-)  Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:49, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


#### Moving forward
I feel that the recent copy edits have improved the article to the point where it is now worth nominating for Good article status.  Any remaining 'issues' that exercise unearths, can then be addressed.  I think this is a logical step forward, and then any further 'tweaks' would leave the path clear towards potential FA.  At present, the article does not seem to have any quality rating.  This appears to be an easy omission to rectify, whichever way the nomination process deliberates.
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 10:57, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Maybe tomorrow; I'd like to have feedback from Sarastro1 first, and it appears that time zones work against us. Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:03, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough, I do not mean to suggest it had to be done yesterday.  Patience is a virtue, as my granny used to say, dipping into another bowl of sherry trifle.
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:34, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Shirelles/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Aircorn (talk · contribs) 01:33, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Will review this over the next few days. AIRcorn (talk) 01:33, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:00, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


### Opening Remarks
Looks good at first glance, a bit shorter than I expected but that could be a good thing (and certainly makes reviewing a lot easier). I view this as a collaborative process, so if you disagree with a comment feel free to tell me why. I know virtually nothing about The Shirelles, which I believe is an advantage as a good article should be accessible to everyone. While I will review this against the criteria some of my comments will most likely go beyond into areas I think could improve the article, while others will most likely be questions to satisfy my curiosity. Being unable to clarify or fix these particular concerns will not result in a failed article, but a response here explaining your reasoning would be appreciated. AIRcorn (talk) 05:51, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


### Criteria
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
More details of specific issues with the criteria can be found under comments.
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
Nicely set out and generally well written. A few issues with some of the sentences, but they are all minor. Lead was excellent. Some of the names are inconsistent. I know there names changed but maybe there is a way to keep their maiden names and just put in brackets their married names when needed.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
Will check these later
Happy with the sources used and they reflect them well from the few that I spot checked.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
Nothing major appeared to be missing. A few points could be expanded on though. The focus was a nice change from some other music reviews I have done recently.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 
No red flags here
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 
Talk page and History suggest no instability
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 
I am still learning a lot about copyright so want to check a few things before I comment too much on this criteria. However the fair use rational for File:The-shirelles.jpg could be a lot better and I can't access the source for File:The Shirelles - Tonight's the Night.png.
Suspect images hidden until the deletion debate is decided.
Overall:
Pass/Fail: 


### Comments
History
The Shirelles were formed in 1957 by four teenage friends from Passaic, New Jersey,[1] under the name The Poquellos[2] (or The Pequellos[3]) They were not called the Shirelles at this stage so this opening is a little confusing. Maybe just open with "The Shirelles original lineup formed in 1957..."
I changed it to something similar.
After several months of avoiding Greenberg and telling her that they were not interested in singing professionally, they were booked to Tiara. This is a but abrupt. Why did they change their mind?
Not in the sources why they relented.
Greenberg stayed as the manager, securing performances for the group, including one at the Howard Theatre in Washington D.C.. Double period.
Double checked the MOS. Removed the period.
After two singles did poorly, including their first release of "Dedicated to the One I Love", a cover of The "5" Royales song of the same name with Coley as lead vocalist,[8] Decca returned them to Greenberg and gave up on them, considering them a one-hit act. This sentence is a little confusing. It reads like Coley was lead vocalist for The "5" Royales.  The "and gave up on them" seems superfluous and too informal, returning them is saying the same thing (although if Greenberg went with them returning isn't the right word).
How's the rewording?
Greenberg formed a new label, Scepter Records, and brought them with her. This can surely be tied in with the other sentence better. It is in essence repeating some of the same information (given to Greenberg/Greenberg brought them with her).
I think I've fixed it.
the song went on to become either the first Billboard Number One Hit by an African-American girl group[12] or the first Number One Hit by any girl group. This is a bit vague. Was it both or does no one really know which one it was.
I personally think one of the sources is just playing safe, but there seems to be no debate presented in the sources.
they were also promoted by Dick Clark. This seems tacked on. There is a photo of him so it would suggest to me that he had more of a role than seven words. Otherwise the photo is really just decoration.
Nuked
In 1963 Dixon left Scepter, which preceded a large decrease in number of The Shirelles' songs to chart Grammar
Added "the"
In concert, Dionne Warwick replaced Owens and Coley, who took leave to be married, and the group continued to record material. What does in concert mean? Did Warwick replace both Owens and Coley? Did they marry each other or both get married separately?
I hope the fix works better.
However, later in 1963 they learned that the trust that they were supposed to receive on their 21st birthday did not exist Feel this needs more information. Where was the trust coming from?
Added a bit more.
In response, they left Scepter,[8] and later filed a breach of contract suit against the company which was met by a countersuit by Scepter; both suits were withdrawn in 1965 Maybe more information, why was a countersuit filed? Why was it dropped?
Added a bit more.
Split this sentence and tweaked slightly (used quiting). Feel free to revert or change. Didn't like the withdrawn - withdrawing combo. AIRcorn (talk) 11:32, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Your wording looks fine.
The knowledge of Scepter's dealings disappointed The Shirelles, who felt deceived. What dealings are we talking about? I am assuming that they were suppoesed to set up a trust fund for them, they didn't so The Shirelle's sued and they were disappointed by the whole thing. If that is correct it could be written a bit clearer. If that is wrong then it needs to be written a lot clearer.
I've hopefully made it clearer.
Coley returned as lead singer in 1975,[8] replacing Owens, who left that year Why did Owens leave?
Afterwards the original members toured as different groups,[5] although the trademark was eventually acquired by Lee. The Shirelles trademark I assume? Not sure what as different groups means. Did they stay together and just change their name or did the each join different groups or something else?
Clarified
Style
Wadhams, Nathan, and Lindsay describe The Shirelles style in their early work as "tight, almost doo-wop harmony". Slightly ambiguous. This could be read as either W, N and L's earlier work or The Shirelles.
Disambiguated
Owens' vocals, described by Alwyn W. Turner as being "wonderfully expressive", were capable of sounding "almost, but not quite" out of tune, which led to Owens' sounding innocent in her songs,[21] as well as being able to intone desire and vulnerability. Whos is AWT, why does his opinion matter? If he is saying all this it needs to be tweaked to make that obvious. The last part is almost said in Wikipedias voice.
I think I've fixed it.
Influence
A few more people commenting whose importance is not specified.
I only see one, fixed.
Michael Campbell was the other. He appears first in style so giving him a title their will cover it. AIRcorn (talk) 11:00, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Done Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:03, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Lee and Reeves accepted the award. I had to search back through to find out who Reaves was. Maybe you could use Owen and put (now Reeves) afterwards.
Changed to Owens
Musical
The show opened on Broadway at the Broadhurst Theatre, directed by Sheldon Epps and starring Beth Leavel as Florence. This is slightly ungrammatical.
Fixed
The use of their likenesses without permission led to Lee, as well as the estates of Coley and Harris, to sue Warner Bros. Are their any further updates over this.
Nothing yet that I could find. Owens performed afterwards once or twice, but she's not party to the lawsuit, and I didn't think it was major enough to keep in the article.
it had "a tunestack only one quarter as imperishable" as Jersey Boys. Just a question, but what does this even mean?
To put it in plain English (as I interpret the comment), The Shirelle's songs didn't age as well as the ones used in Jersey Boys.
Leavel was nominated for a both a Tony[35] and Drama Desk Award for best leading actress. This might need a better link as it goes from negative reviews to Tony awards.
I've tried to fix it but I'm a little iffy on it.
Reads fine to me. AIRcorn (talk) 11:41, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Lead
They were the first African-American girl group to top the Billboard Hot 100, with the song "Will You Love Me Tomorrow". This was ambiguous in the body.
Fixed.
The Shirelles had a "naive schoolgirl sound" that contrasted with the sexual themes of many of their songs and several of their hits used strings and baião-style music. This probably needs to be taken out of Wikipedias voice. Simply saying "The Shirelles music has been described as having a "naive schoolgirl sound" ..." or something similar would be enough. Would also consider splitting out the last part of this sentence.
Thanks for the in-depth review. I've touched up the article and images; hopefully it is enough. Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:41, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
As the images are up for deletion at commons, should we remove them for now so that the GAN can continue? Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:41, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Opened up more than I meant to with that question. Still if they survive deletion it will go a long way to confirming their validity. Obviously I can't pass an article while images are up for deletion so we can either wait for the discussion to end, remove them or even just hide them until it is sorted out. Up to you. AIRcorn (talk) 23:56, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
I'll hide them for now; they don't reflect on the text, and I don't want this GAN to sit unfinished for 3 months while the FFD at commons runs its course. Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:07, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
I am more than happy that this now passes the GA criteria. If the images survive deletion then feel free to put them back in. As far as any further improvements go I think it would be nice to sought out the the song went on to become either the first Billboard Number One Hit by an African-American girl group or the first Number One Hit by any girl group sentence. I couldn't access the references so can't help interpret them. This says they had the first number by any girl group, plus has mentions us. Not sure how reliable it is but there must be something out there you can use. PersonallyI think you will get away with saying that just the the first Number One Hit by any girl group as that covers the other claim in any case. AIRcorn (talk) 11:46, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. Before going for another peer review in preparation for FAC (fingers crossed) I will see if the majority of sources say first female group. Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:46, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

I have deleted the reference in the first sentence of the lede to "African American"--specifically, in the phrase "The Shirelles were an African American girl group." Their race is extraneous in this context, for the same reason that race would be extraneous if someone described the Chordettes as a "white girl group" or a "European American girl group." Their race is described later in the paragraph in the discussion of "Will You Love Me Tomorrow" being potentially the first chart-topping song by an African American girl group. I left in this reference because there is at least arguably a point to mentioning their race in that context (as it adds some information to the discussion and is not gratuitous). ChicagoDilettante (talk) 19:22, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

That's fair comment, but their nationality should be mentioned in the opening sentence.  Not everyone in the world will know they were American.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:52, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The Shirelles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110914233343/http://www.playbill.com:80/news/article/150437-2011-Tony-Nominations-Announced-Book-of-Mormon-Earns-14-Nominations to http://www.playbill.com/news/article/150437-2011-Tony-Nominations-Announced-Book-of-Mormon-Earns-14-Nominations
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:11, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on The Shirelles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110902224421/http://www.playbill.com/news/article/150328-56th-Annual-Drama-Desk-Nominations-Announced-Book-of-Mormon-Scores-12-Nominations to http://www.playbill.com/news/article/150328-56th-Annual-Drama-Desk-Nominations-Announced-Book-of-Mormon-Scores-12-Nominations
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.playbill.com/news/article/150437-2011-Tony-Nominations-Announced-Book-of-Mormon-Earns-14-Nominations
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111011182127/http://vocalgroup.org/inductees/the_shirelles.html to http://www.vocalgroup.org/inductees/the_shirelles.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20010124014500/http://www.theshirelles.com/ to http://www.theshirelles.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:44, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Why do sources state her real name as "Michelle Harris", and "Addie Harris McFadden"? TheGreatestLuvofAll (talk) 04:10, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

This book states that Micki was living in San Diego and married to Vernon McFadden at the time of her death. She was cremated on June 11, 1982 in Stone Mountain, Georgia and her ashes were picked up the next day. Is it okay if I try to revive her article?TheGreatestLuvofAll (talk) 04:24, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
This is what i found, and it states she was born in Guilford, NC as Addie Elizabeth Harris. [redacted] This could be changed, but may still be reverted Never mind, High Point is in Guilford. TheGreatestLuvofAll (talk) 21:25, 1 May 2024 (UTC)