Talk:Michelle Shocked

message: The article currently states, "The front cover of her (arguably) best-known album, Short Sharp Shocked, shows her restrained by the chokehold of a San Francisco policeman in a supposedly authentic photograph of this incident. However, some indie music critics of the time observed that the style of this image showed a strong similarity to a photo that appeared on an album cover from British punk band Chaos U.K. This led some to assert that she plagiarized the concept, but the accusation was never answered nor seriously pursued."
The booklet included in the 2003 Mighty Sound re-issue of Short Sharp Shocked discusses the cover in more detail.  The incident depicted in the photograph was authentic.  However, Mercury Records altered the photograph to make the policeman less identifiable.  (The unaltered photograph is included in the re-issue.  (Could someone who has a copy of the reissue nearby verify the details and update the article?)   --Heath 68.191.7.126 11:49, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: ''Short Sharp Shocked'' cover

message: She's in an episode of Season 1 of Dharma and Greg.  I have no idea if this is noteworthy enough to put into the entry, but she acted (well, sung, but in a manner that was functionally dialog).  Dick Clark was also in the episode.  I fear it may be too trivial, but it is interesting to me that she acted in a network sitcom. (My perception of "appropriate" is skewed, being an editor of another wiki with different community standards, so I'll toss this out for an experienced Wikipedian to make a judgment call on -- feel free to delete this).  68.63.165.28 20:09, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Acting? 

message: This article was automatically  assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 23:54, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: Could we please get a quote of her discussing her sexuality openly? Otherwise is is not important and she shouldn't be in the LGBT cat. "She has been called..." really isn't very encyclopedic. She has also been called "straight" and has really be married. --Knulclunk (talk) 04:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shocked LGBT 

message: I removed a sentence on her personal life.  It struck me as unnecessarily invasive.  It was also unsourced and potentially libellous.  If we are going to publicize the intimate details of someone's life, we should (a) have a reliable source to cite for it and, more importantly, (b) have a compelling reason why the public has the right to know about what might be an intensely painful topic for the subject of the article.  Just because a person is a 'public figure' doesn't mean we have a right to publish their secrets.  I don't care what a court of law would call libelous or not.  There's a standard that's far more important: human decency.Star-lists (talk) 17:36, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sentence deleted 

message: I've made some small edits to removed personal information that was not cited, and that the subject of the article (apparently editing as ) has expressed some concerns with. Notable change is the lead - there was a lot of fluff there, and the subject appears to feel the birth name listed there was incorrect, so I've yanked it until cited. Most of the article remains uncited and needs work to be up to quality. I'd encourage editors to work on finding good source material to flesh things out from here. Tony Fox (arf!) 18:40, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I"m sure as editors have the time to research and find proper sources, the article will expand with cited information from where it is now. For the moment, since it's a living persons bio, it's best to have unsourced personal information out than in. Tony Fox (arf!) 20:17, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

text: 9 months later, and that hasn't been changed.  i WAS confused when i read that it was a parody of Addicted to Love; but i thought maybe i couldn't remember the vid from that song, and that i was remembering the vid from Simply Irresistible, but the Addicted vid ALSO had some models that could be ridiculed (or, at least, the choice to use them/employ such a visual could be).  but your comment, Goodknight, lets me know it wasn't me that was remembering incorrectly.Colbey84 (talk) 12:54, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contentious material, bio editing, etc. 

message: As of April 1, 2011, this article is a stub or at least stub like. It appears that some relevant and valuable material has been removed. I am not an expert on Michelle Shocked (which is why I read the article) so I don't know anything about the veracity of the various claims and counterclaims in this "talk" article, but I sure hope somebody with the appropriate expertise cleans things up and fills out the article accordingly.
Dagme (talk) 16:56, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stub 

message: Suggested minor protection on this page until her statements at her San Francisco show that made the news today are clarified/agreed upon... Everything I've read says "allegedly" and I came here to this page to read more about the incident and see it hasn't been added yet... I'm certain it will be flooded soon.  12.162.122.5 (talk) 22:11, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I agreed to semi-protection for one day, based on what happened as noted in this blog. Bearian (talk) 22:49, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Protection

message: The following text was introduced some time back by user Mschocked along with a number of other non-factual claims. Most of the others were corrected, but somehow this was left in place, although it was challenged at the time:
In 1984, Michelle adopted the nom de guerre "Michelle Shocked", often misquoted as "Miss Shell Shocked" or "Me-Shell-Shocked" as in the misquote in Green Left Weekly: 
Suggested replacement:
In 1984, Michelle adopted the alias "Michelle Shocked", a deliberate play on the phrase "Miss Shell Shocked" as she explained in an interview in Green Left Weekly: 
(i.e. it can hardly be a "misquote" when the cited source is Shocked herself -- unless editor Mschocked is claiming that Green Left Weekly misquoted her, in which case he should provide a citation showing such.)
Czetie (talk) 22:48, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Since I "semi-protected" the article, I don't think I should rule on any requests to edit. Bearian (talk) 22:53, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

text: Page is not protected now.  I suggest the OP be bold and follow WP:BRD.  RudolfRed (talk) 04:32, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 18 March 2013 

message: Current text:
:*On March 17, 2013, Shocked spoke out against gays during a concert at Yoshi's nightclub in San Francisco, which led to the audience leaving in protest and club management ending the show.
Suggested replacement:
:*On March 17, 2013, Shocked spoke out against gay marriage during a concert at Yoshi's nightclub in San Francisco, which led to members of the audience leaving in protest and club management ending the show.
Let's follow the BLP rules.... she was quoted as opposing gay marriage and then she threw out a widely quoted sardonic remark about twitter. As per BLP rules we should stick with her opposition to gay marriage and hold off on going full-bigot until it's confirmed. Her history suggests a complex artist/person who has no opposition to homosexuality - her comments regarding marriage politics and the rights of religious orders to follow their own faiths notwithstanding. BLP demands we hue strictly to our sources which show she is pro-gay with an opposition to imposing gay marriage requirements on those of different religious faiths. She will speak again and we will be more certain soon, that much is sure - but until then strict BLP demands narrow and focused prose.12.144.158.18 (talk) 14:36, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Reliable, mainstream sources on that paragraph describe Shocked's comments as a "gay slur" and an "anti-gay rant". Therefore, I am not comfortable narrowing the scope of that sentence to labeling her comments as being anti-gay marriage. "Spoke out against gays" might be too strong a wording, but I do think that limiting the scope to gay marriage is a worse characterization. I will leave this edit request open for another 24 hours to see if others agree. —KuyaBriBriTalk 15:03, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: If it "might be" too strong a wording, then per WP:BLP - it is too strong a wording. Time will fill in the blanks and resolve doubt, our job is to get it right and adhere strictly to BLP. 99.18.140.172 (talk) 19:25, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

text: The parting shot about "fags" was probably meant ironically, but the rest of the rant in the second half of the show was widely reported as being anti-gay, not solely anti-same-sex-marriage. Certainly it was a rant against those who oppose California Proposition 8, but there was more homophobic sentiment underneath, as far as I can tell from various audience reports. Binksternet (talk) 15:20, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

text: I agree that the scope of her comments seem to be in regard to gay marriage. The subsequent "God hates fags" statement was very likely meant ironically - it fits how I have perceived her sense of humor over the years. I don't think we should use "mainstream" media sources as the standard.174.25.64.198 (talk) 15:28, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

text: The page is not protected now.  If there is consensus, any editor may make the change. RudolfRed (talk) 04:34, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 19 March 2013 

message: It has been erroneously reported on Wikipedia and in a number of news and media outlets (e.g., http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/03/19/singer-who-everyone-thought-was-a-lesbian-spews-anti-gay-hate-at-concert/) that Shocked won the 1989 Grammy for Best New Folk Album. Shocked did NOT win the Grammy that year, or any other year. Tracy Chapman won the 1989 award http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammy_Award_for_Best_Contemporary_Folk_Album. I have added this to the Miscellaneous section, because I think a major source of this erroneous reporting was Wikipedia itself.Binningboy (talk) 17:27, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Along the same lines, everyone is so sure that someone like her would have performed at Lilith Fair that she is constantly referred to as a "Lilith Fair regular" or even "Got her start with Lilith Fair" (I can provide numerous references).  Is it worth mentioning that she never toured with Lilith Fair?KaturianKKaturian 21:19, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shocked Did Not Win the 1989 Grammy for Best Folk Album 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Michelle Shocked. 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/20120529090945/http://laist.com/2011/12/02/la_times_posts_list_of_those_arrest.php to http://laist.com/2011/12/02/la_times_posts_list_of_those_arrest.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:10, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article says she adopted the name "Michelle Shocked" in 1984. But I have a video of her on the Coca Crystal using the name Michelle Shocked in January 1983. http://dlib.nyu.edu/findingaids/html/fales/mss_468/dscaspace_677d309ffe7f29cda55ddd8cd563b8b7.html  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.122.88.142 (talk) 19:22, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name Adoption 

message: I changed the page and said i fixed the bad links in the references on the page, but I also put back some of the things that were taken out the other day with dead references. Forgot to put that in. I did not mean to leave it out. 203.0.31.68 (talk) 04:32, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Forgot adding