Talk:David Archuleta

I recently added the text to the article regarding Archuleta's participation in the MTC Choir during the annual General Conference of his church, but my edit was reverted (see diff). I believe this event to be notable and ask that the community restore the content. It's very rare to learn of missionary activities during their service due to the secluded nature of their work, and this occurrence received widespread coverage, including Disney Dreaming and Deseret News.

WP:NOTNEWSPAPER applies here, especially points 2 and 4. Wikipedia is not and should not be an ongoing newsfeed of Archuleta's activities. Where he has been reportedly assigned, and when he began his missionary service, is notable; that he in six months baptizes three people or meets random fans in the market on a day off, something then reported on TMZ or JustJared, is not. Ylee (talk) 21:11, 4 April 2012 (UTC) [reply ]

Interesting point. I would say that since Archuleta is a singer, the switch to choir belongs in the article. I think NOTNEWSPAPER should be interpreted to mean, no items that stray from the notability that merited the article. "Archuleta rides in parade at Miley Cyrus's Disneyland Sweet Sixteen," "Archuleta visits boyhood home, signs autographs," would be out. "Archuleta transitions to Mormon religious music," would go in. Going all the way back, Little Richard turned, for a while, to singing gospel when his version of rock went stale. So did Joe Tex, though it was Islamic family values that inspired some of the late songs. This may be a similar turning point. If it's music, it's part of Archuleta's career arc, and belongs in. IMHO. Profhum (talk) 19:14, 21 May 2012 (UTC) [reply ]

No word about David Archuleta's sexual orientation in the article. Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.204.96.74 (talk) 07:09, 7 June 2013 (UTC) [reply ]

Does David discuss his sexual orientation? Does reliable sources discuss his sexual orientation? If you can't answer yes to both of those questions it doesn't belong in the article. GB fan 10:13, 7 June 2013 (UTC) [reply ]

Actually only your second point is valid. That Archuleta does not talk about his private life *publicly* is of no consequence at all. The *only* issue is a reliable source. .&checktime(2601,8,91,':')80:604:219:D1FF:FEA8:25F0 (talk) 03:58, 6 October 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

I have listened and watched (subscribed) to David Archuleta through YouTube, and gospel music is a large part of his repertoire. Where I enjoy his pop music releases, nearly half of the body of his work is gospel music. It is inaccurate to exclude it from his musical genre. I propose: Genres: pop & gospel Tlmccue (talk) 04:55, 27 May 2021 (UTC) [reply ]

Refer to WP:No original research. (CC) Tbhotch ^TM 19:15, 27 May 2021 (UTC) [reply ]

Per my edit summary, I am fairly certain this does not belong in the lead but not sure where it fits in the article given there is no Personal life section so opening a discussion. S0091 (talk) 20:22, 12 June 2021 (UTC) [reply ]

With the good faith edits by an IP user, primarily regarding use of the full name of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I did not continue updating the edits due to WP:3RR. There is nothing about being obsessed with doing this a certain way. It deals directly with the consensus-agreed on manual of style for the church. This also includes standard editing practice, where in the first instance a full name is used (the church in this case), with an appropriate short name is established for use later in the article. This addresses the editors concerns about providing a better understanding of "LDS" stands for. Additionally, regarding where he lives. This should be changed back to reflect 2018, as per the included source, rather than extrapolating but then indicating there is no specific, available source. As potentially a new user, given no other edits from that IP address, learning the pillars of WP and associated guidelines for a desire to engage in good faith edits will be valuable. ChristensenMJ (talk) 02:36, 8 November 2021 (UTC) [reply ]

In March 2012, he released his fourth album, "Forevermore", exclusively in the Philippines. This was his first Original Filipino Music (OPM) album, composed of several covers of Filipino songs. The album was certified gold in the Philippines (10,000 units) as of June 2012. 47.222.15.143 (talk) 04:43, 17 December 2022 (UTC) [reply ]

Update the man’s photo. He has come into his own, especially with his latest release Maybe one of the photos from spotify?

https://open.spotify.com/track/1cxIpB7eTtYPnde6hQWJZj?si=6jI98eWkQrSCAXKX4JIq0Q 2600:1004:B292:580B:D03C:7C4C:A6F0:5556 (talk) 17:07, 8 November 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

Wikipedia uses non-copyrighted content to illustrate living people. (CC) Tbhotch ^TM 17:47, 12 November 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

Looks like this article has been at GA status for over 16 years and hasn't been reassessed since. There are a some issues that should be looked at if this article is to remain at GA status.

I'm bringing these issues up here so that we can work towards fixing them and prevent this article being de-listed at WP:GAR.

Some issues I noticed:

• The latter section of the Career section is very poor. Most of the more recent stuff (last 10 years) reads as a WP:PROSELINE list of chronological events instead of proper prose.
• Some of the paragraphs are very short - some only two short sentences long. These should probably be restructured to be more substantial.
• There are a few citation needed tags (and other tags) interspersed throughout the article, once again mostly in the latter part of the article.
• Not particularly a GA issue, but in general the citations in the lead & in the infobox should be moved into the body of the article (MOS:INFOBOXCITE, MOS:LEADCITE)
• It doesn't look like there are any citations at all for the Performances table
• The Filmography section is also missing many citations.

RachelTensions (talk) 18:26, 12 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result pending

This article has been at GA status for over 16 years and hasn't been reassessed since. There are a some issues that should be looked at if this article is to remain at GA status.

I brought these up at the talk page a week ago but I don't think anyone is watching.

Some issues I noticed:

• The latter section of the Career section is very poor. Most of the more recent stuff (last 10 years) reads as a WP:PROSELINE list of chronological events that has been assembled piecemeal instead of written as proper prose. (WP:GACR6 #1)
• Some of the paragraphs are very short - some only two short sentences long. These should probably be restructured to be more substantial. (WP:GACR6 #1)
• There are a few citation needed tags (and other tags) interspersed throughout the article, once again mostly in the latter part of the article. (WP:GACR6 #2)
• Not particularly a GA issue, but in general the citations in the lead & in the infobox should be moved into the body of the article (MOS:INFOBOXCITE, MOS:LEADCITE)
• It doesn't look like there are any citations at all for the Performances table (WP:GACR6 #2)
• The Filmography section is also missing many citations. (WP:GACR6 #2)

RachelTensions (talk) 00:51, 20 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]