This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (center, color, defense, realize, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article must adhere to the biographies 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 or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Beyoncé, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Beyoncé on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BeyoncéWikipedia:WikiProject BeyoncéTemplate:WikiProject BeyoncéBeyoncé
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music
This article is within the scope of WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of R&B and Soul Music articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.R&B and Soul MusicWikipedia:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicTemplate:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicR&B and Soul Music
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music
This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora
Beyoncé Knowles → Beyoncé, No consensus, 21 September 2007, discussion
Beyoncé Knowles → Beyoncé, No consensus, 20 March 2010, discussion
Beyoncé Knowles → Beyoncé, No consensus, 11 July 2010, discussion
Beyoncé Knowles → Beyoncé, No consensus, 7 August 2011, discussion
Beyoncé Knowles → Beyoncé, Not moved, 23 February 2012, discussion
Beyoncé Knowles → Beyoncé, Not moved, 3 February 2013, discussion
Beyoncé Knowles → Beyoncé, Not moved (speedily closed), 20 March 2013, discussion
Beyoncé Knowles → Beyoncé, Moved, 16 January 2014, discussion
Beyoncé's three-act project was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 19 March 2024 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Beyoncé. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
Hey, thanks for reverting the inaccurate information I previously made a request about 750h+. I'm not sure if you're responsible for adding this sentence or not but since you're actively editing right now, please remove or change "In June 2007, Beyoncé and Jay-Z announced their engagement" as this notoriously private couple certainly did not make an announcement about being engaged during this time frame. Bey waited until 2013 to inform the public that Jay-Z had proposed to her in Paris on his 38th birthday, December 4, 2007.
i’d have to agree, the old image before the current one is by far more flattering than the current. i don’t think we should use the much older one since it’s already been used in the article 750h+00:47, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi talk page watchers: after reviewing this article at GAR, I think this has the completeness necessary to become a featured article. However, some fixing up and checks need to be done before the article can be nominated at WP:FAC. If promoted in time, this could run as WP:TFA on Sep 4, 2026, Beyonce's 45th birthday. Here's what I think needs to be done before an FAC:
The article, at over 10,000 words, is WP:TOOBIG. Off-topic, redundant, or too detailed information will need to be cut. I can help with this.
This is a popular article, so lots of different editors have added sources: all of them will need to be checked to ensure that the article prose is verified by the source text. This task can be split by different editors.
Lower-quality sources should be replaced by higher-quality sources. Since there are so many sources written about her, I don't think the article needs many primary sources or low-quality news sources. If multiple sources are supporting the same information, the lower-quality sources can be removed.
A check for high-quality sources should be conducted in WP:LIBRARY and Google Scholar. High-quality sources include publications from univeristy presses and academic, peer-reviewed journals. If this source verifies the same information as a news source, then the lower-quality news source can be replaced.
During the above source checks, editors can also check to ensure that the article is "complete" and no major aspects of her biography are missing. Since this article is already over the recommended word count (per TOOBIG), I don't think this will be a large barrier.
The lead and infobox will need to be checked to ensure that all inforamtion in supported in the article body or cited. I would prefer that most of the citations are removed from those sections as unnecessary.
The whole article should go through a copy-edit for spelling, grammar and prose. This can be done by multiple editors and noted below.
I personally decline to make such a preparation, but wish luck to whoever pursues FAC here, and nevertheless I should note that one shouldn't blindly assume a page needs reduction solely based on word count. There have been times when editors carelessly remove important details in a misguided attempt to keep things under a certain size or word count, showing no concern for anything else. Take some time to assess the article's actual content before cutting things out. Furthermore, the page you linked says things above 9K words "Probably should be divided or trimmed, though the scope of a topic can sometimes justify the added reading material." Ms. Knowles could potentially be one of those cases. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 02:30, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Earth, one of Wikipedia's featured articles, is under 9,000 words. After doing some trimming today, I found many phrases with promotional text, announcements about things (usually not needed) or redundancy. I think there is other text that can be trimmed. If anything is removed that others think shouldn't be, they can start a discussion here. Z1720 (talk) 02:35, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Z1720 and SNUGGUMS: i actually did want to make this an FA (im the second largest contributor to the article and the one who did the most revamping in the GAR) but i did stop. however i have reconsidered continuing work on this. if I do re-continue id like to do a full scale revamp of the article (prose and sources, images are fine i think) which would take some time but i am very willing to do it. 750h+03:10, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
this is one of the articles about a significant figure that i do want to make FA, so i think it’s good that this article does become one. also i think the 10k length is somewhat justifiable given articles like Katy Perry, Lady Gaga, Taylor Swift, etc are of a similar size, slightly shorter or longer (Beyonce has had a longer career than all of them, and is by far more influential in terms of music) 750h+03:12, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@750h+: So far, I have been cutting individual sentences from various places: the article history has the edits I made today. Some of what I cut are announcements of things that happened later, which I usually cut and to emphasise the actual event happened. I also cut explanatory information about things like Tidal, which I think is better in the article about the topic. I cut some share price information post-announcement as too much information. There was a lawsuit about the Gate Five promotion that I removed, but I wouldn't oppose it returning to the article but reworded to explain what happened more effectively. Z1720 (talk) 03:27, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding page size: when Perry, Gaga, and Swift were promoted to FA, they were all under 9,000 words. They only became larger afterwards and I think if they were submitted to FAC today there would be questions about their length. If this is to go to WP:FAC larger than 9,000 words, editors will have to explain why Beyonce needs to be larger than larger topics like Earth and Philosophy, and it will be hard to convince editors that the extra length is justified. I am happy to continue going through the article and considering more text that can be cut. Z1720 (talk) 03:27, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody who reviewed those FACs was worried about sheer word count, Z1720. Those who left comments rightfully paid more attention to which details were and weren't important to mention. You should do the same instead of over-focusing on exactly how many words are used. It's not a firm requirement to stay under 9K as you seem to think, so please don't treat that as one. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 03:37, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Z1720: thanks for the edits but i am currently working on the article (replacing sources, prose etc) so i think it’d be nice if you could do your copy edit when i finish. 750h+02:58, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Z1720: think i've done a good amount of the article, if you want to do your copyedits you can (I think the article is fine in its current condition but i will look over your copyedits and if i see anything we can discuss that) and the article is submittable for peer review. I might do some things within the Business endeavors but you can do your ce 750h+09:59, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes red refs all over....added tag but was removed saying "ref errors only visible to people with a script"......no clue what that means. Yes pls steepup and fix huge sources problem. Moxy🍁02:17, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I just noticed this under FA review..... I will assume that there's some sort of error going on while things are being fixed. Should have looked more closely hopefully it's fixed shortly. Moxy🍁02:23, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
it doesn't seem like we had to much work. all i did was add 'ref=none' and the problems i believe were fixed 750h+02:23, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm seeing this on a PC.... still seeing 38 reference errors? Let's make sure that mobile and PC view are being reviewed. Moxy🍁02:25, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps I should be more clear....we have Harv cites that link to nothing..... thus displaying an error that the references isn't there. Moxy🍁02:28, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Moxy: i'm on PC too. i'm confused as to what error you're seeing. I have went through every reference in the "Print sources" section and they are cited appropriately in the article. Also I believe my additions of the 'ref=none' parameters to the long-form sources contributed to the article no longer being included in the Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors. 750h+02:39, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your trusted editor so I assume you're doing the right thing...... I see that others are complaining about multiple articles having the same problem I'm going to assume there is just a reference display problem for people using service outside the United States right now. Moxy🍁02:41, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing comes up for me, i don't see any references issues appear. However, I am outside of the US so maybe. In that case I'll be waiting for a response from Shearonink. 750h+02:44, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As mentioned before this is under a review with multiple experience editors overseeing it....... any experience editor will assume that this will be taken care of .... Or it simply something I'm seeing as a Canadian. Sorry to cause any distress. Moxy🍁02:49, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
About the single-numbered/multi-ref'ed accolades...
This seems to be veering into WP:OVERCITE territory. Besides the Harv warnings, there are 14 cites for Ref #7, 4 for Ref #386, 8 for Ref #494, 6 for Ref #500, 8 for Ref #502... - Shearonink (talk) 01:58, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've reduced the 14 cites and merged it with another ref; I think given the the statements it supports (past controversies [most recently from November 2024 to January 2025] over the statements "greatest entertainer" and "most influential artists") having the number of cites it does now (8) is warranted. Cite 386 only has 4 sources because each source supports a sentence that could possibly become outdated or be seen as untrue. 501 prevents cite clutter for the fact that her albums, singles, music videos and etc have all been considered some of the greatest of all time. Thanks and best, 750h+02:53, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
_(52946288505)_(slightly_cropped).jpg){kind=small}
_(52946364598)_(best_crop).jpg)
