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 Electronic music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electronic 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.Electronic musicWikipedia:WikiProject Electronic musicTemplate:WikiProject Electronic musicelectronic music
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 Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock 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.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock 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 California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia
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 of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion. Explanation for inclusion in WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies: The project does not reflect Cher's sexual orientation; Cher falls within the scope of the project because of her status as a gay icon.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dyslexia, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.DyslexiaWikipedia:WikiProject DyslexiaTemplate:WikiProject DyslexiaDyslexia
Cher is within the scope of WikiProject Disability. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.DisabilityWikipedia:WikiProject DisabilityTemplate:WikiProject DisabilityDisability
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:
I'm currently diving deep into Newspapers.com to gain a clearer understanding of how Cher's public image and media perception evolved throughout different phases of her career. Along the way, I've come across some great quotes and materials that might be worth including in the article. Since it's already packed with information, I'm sharing my findings here for anyone interested in exploring whether they should be included or not. Cherfc (talk) 15:02, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Bookseller: "The question of visibility is less of an issue in the US, where co-writers often become stars in their own right, such as William Novak, Mickey Herskowitz and Jeff Coplon, co-author of Cher's The First Time."
Life and career — 1970s
"In ... Las Vegas, Cher is a drawcard second only to Sinatra." [1]
"Cher [is] the most sought-after ticket in Las Vegas, no matter whose names are glittering from other hotel marquees." [2]
Life and career — 2000s
"One last tribute must be paid to the Colosseum's new goddess. Any sixtysomething who can wear flesh-colored body stockings ... is truly supernatural ... Maybe she really is immortal." [3]
Artistry
"'Believe' [is] perharps the greatest disco song written after the alleged death of disco[.]" [4]
"Underrated as a vocalist, perhaps because her dusky contralto is so different from the songbird voice most female pop stars cultivate, Cher has always diverted attention from her singing skills." [5]
"[Cher's] lavish concerts have become bigger than the music they're meant to promote." [6]
Legacy
"[Sonny & Cher] transformed ... into mainstream translators of the counterculture[.]" [7]
"Cher -- the cherished icon of pop reinvention, beloved by freaks and squares, gay liberationists and straight soccer moms ... [presents] performance based upon her larger-than-life story [and] mythology of self-reinvention[.]" [8]
"[The] queen of over-the-top pizazz bridges several eras of entertainment [and] has crossed a surprising number or musical boundaries. She found new commercial appeal in classic pop forms, such as women’s blues and burlesque, by linking them to hippie rock, pop rock and disco[.]" [9]
"What grounds her many incarnations is a sexy unpretentiousness that’s straight out of the Mae West handbook." [10]
Thanks for the suggestion! I plan to do this at some point, but I don't have the time right now. For now, the best option I could find was to collect the new information I found in the article's talk page instead of adding it right away, just so it doesn't get lost. This way, when the time comes to create a proper content fork, all the relevant details will be readily available. Cherfc (talk) 15:47, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia can't be used as a source within Wikipedia, so the fact that Allman's article says 1978 instead of 1979 isn't relevant. The article refers to the year the divorce was officially finalized. Please check the sources for confirmation. Cherfc (talk) 03:00, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
False information about "most number-one singles in the US"
The whole statement that she became the female artist with the most number-one singles in the United States is incorrect, even if some sources try to claim it to be true. Looking back at the number-one singles on the Billboard Hot 100 during the 1960s and the 1970s, we can see that if we talk about solo female hits only, Connie Francis was the first woman to have three solo number-ones, whereas Diana Ross was the first woman to have four SOLO number-ones. Now if we actually count in "I Got You Babe", which is credited to Sonny & Cher, we have to count "Love Child" and "Someday We'll Be Together", both of which are credited on Billboard to Diana Ross & the Supremes (not to mention the other ten number-ones credited to the Supremes, which Ross was obviously still a part of). That means that by 1973, Diana Ross had two solo number-ones, two number-ones as Diana Ross & the Supremes and ten number-ones as the Supremes. Meanwhile, Cher had one as Sonny & Cher, and two as a solo artist, with her fourth one ("Dark Lady") topping the chart only in 1975.
I understand that some sources may try to claim otherwise but I'm just doing my research on the Billboard charts and all the stats are clearly there. I don't think we should be spreading information on Wikipedia that clearly doesn't stand as true when there are articles that prove the facts. Hubert555 (talk) 18:53, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
By Billboard's rules, "I Got You Babe" counts as a Cher #1 single, just as "S&M" counts as a Britney Spears #1 because her name is in the credits. After further review, I found that Diana Ross was indeed the first woman to achieve four Billboard Hot 100 #1 hits credited to her name, with her fourth topping the chart in late 1973. Cher's fourth, "Dark Lady," reached #1 a few months later in early 1974, tying her with Ross for the most #1 hits by a female artist at the time. Since this was a notable achievement, especially considering how much easier it is to get a #1 today, I suggest rewording the statement to reflect that Cher and Ross were tied in 1974. We might also consider adding this detail to Ross's article for consistency. Let me know your thoughts. Cherfc (talk) 19:29, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ross' article summarizes her record for six number-one singles so there is no need to change that one but I do agree with you that rewording Cher's lead would make more sense. I'd personally delete it and only mention that she scored three solo number-ones in the '70s simply because of the length of the lead (the length of that first paragraph honestly hurts my eyes but that's just me haha) but I don't mind the idea of rewording it. You have a free choice as long as it's not misleading. Hubert555 (talk) 20:03, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Cherfc While I'm at it, I don't mind suggesting you my opinion, as I can see the featured article candidate nomination. I tend to focus my edits on the leads of musicians and generally there is a pattern. In my opinion, that first paragraph is way too overstuffed and the length of it makes me want to not read the rest. Personally, I'd finish that first paragraph on "Her adaptability has fueled multiple comebacks, cementing her status as a cultural icon", that's certainly enough to summarize Cher. The next two paragraphs can easily be joined into one, as the second paragraph usually focuses on musical career and it tends to be longer than the rest (see: Michael Jackson, Elvis Presley, David Bowie, all featured articles). Third paragraph, focused on acting, is perfectly fine. Then the last paragraph is usually focusing on achievements, where I'd move Cher's awards, record sales and Billboard records. We can also move the statement about her Living Proof: The Farewell Tour to that paragraph, as it is an additional achievement. Similarly, the statement about Cher's political views and work as an advocate could be moved there, with a forenote "Outside of music and acting, ...").
This is obviously entirely up to you. I am just giving you my opinion after years of focusing on the leads of famous musicians, including a lot of extensive rewording. Hubert555 (talk) 20:37, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Actually the book cited for this statistic is not reliable enough. A lot of information contradict Billboard itself. For example, the book says The Beatles have 23 number ones (20 per Billboard), Elvis Presley have 20 number ones (17 per Billboard), and The Supremes have 13 number ones (12 per Billboard). The book also randomly credits The Jackson 5 with 10 number ones, by including the solo works, something that Billboard never done. According to Billboard, Cher have 3 number-one singles until 1975[11], with "I Got You Babe" is listed separately as a part of Sonny & Cher listing.[12]Bluesatellite (talk) 10:10, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is the official statement from Billboard back in 1974:[13]During this period only three female vocalists have managed to achieve three #1 hits on the pop charts: Rosemary Clooney, Patti Page, and Connie Francis. Cher now joins this three-some with her third #1 single - "Dark Lady".Bluesatellite (talk) 03:35, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Per Billboard rules, a song counts as a solo artist's hit if their name appears in the credits. However, judging by your link, these rules may not have always been like that and might not be applied retroactively. That explains why the two Billboard #1s credited to "Diana Ross & The Supremes"—both essentially solo songs (one without any other group members in the recording session)—aren't counted as Ross's solo #1s, while a song like "S&M (Remix)" gives Britney Spears a #1 for singing a few lines in an already successful song. The same applies to "I Got You Babe" by Sonny & Cher not being considered a solo Cher #1, while singles released by "Selena Gomez & The Scene" are counted under Selena Gomez's Hot 100 entries. Anyway, that's just an observation. If these were indeed Billboard's rules at the time (and it would be great to know when exactly they changed), then I agree the statement should be removed. Cherfc (talk) 03:57, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's kinda flawed, as Cher hit the Hot 100 before Sonny & Cher's first entry, and her solo career ran concurrently with the duo's from the very beginning. I find it tricky and subjective to determine exactly when an artist's career becomes "established" outside of their non-solo acts. I'd still love to find the actual reasoning behind Billboard's rule change, as well as when exactly it occurred. Maybe I should email them, lol. Best. Cherfc (talk) 05:05, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Cher was never married to Gene Simmons. As for the other claims, please enlighten me on why the highly reputable sources used in this article are wrong. Cherfc (talk) 00:43, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
