Talk:Zara Larsson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Photo

Recent flood of vandalism was caused by subject posting on TikTok requesting the image be updated to a specific image (I went looking for the cause of the sudden influx of vandalism after reverting it). I've replaced it since the new one seems to be better than the prior one, and there doesn't seem to have been any recent discussion or consensus here about any particular image. tony 02:21, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

What the f*ck. I never know she changed this picture by HERSELF????? I was so surprised that my watchlist was terrored by this article. (Redacted) this user is official Zara Larsson and IDK why she persuaded people to NEVER STOP changing pictures. I once required permission to that 2025 picture in Commons and the picture was removed but now VRT received the permission of this picture OMFG!
And yes I also think the 2025 photo is much better than previous one lol Camilasdandelions (✉️) 03:29, 19 February 2026 (UTC)
@Camilasdandelions, I just noticed you uploaded this photo to Commons. It actually looks like the permission is awaiting review. Did you take this photo? If not, where is it from? tony 04:10, 19 February 2026 (UTC)
As the file states, it is "extracted from" its original one. All I did was just cropping the original photo and uploading it to commons, and the original photo was deleted as the permission of its author was not found. Camilasdandelions (✉️) 04:20, 19 February 2026 (UTC)
After properly watching the video instead of just skipping through (I initially missed the part about "never stop"), I'm a little concerned that my edits could be construed as being a proxy edit, and would like to ping @Augmented Seventh: (as someone else who reverted during the disruption) and @Pppery: (as the sysop who applied protection) here to review and/or revert if they feel it was inappropriate. tony 05:39, 19 February 2026 (UTC)
checking. Augmented Seventh (talk) 05:42, 19 February 2026 (UTC)
As usual, your edits are accurate, according to form, and in good faith.
I don't have sufficient back-end skills to parse further as regards image suitability.
cordially, Augmented Seventh (talk) 05:48, 19 February 2026 (UTC)
I have nothing to say here; I saw a flood of outright vandalism, and didn't care why it was happening other than observing that whatever was going on wasn't good. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:49, 19 February 2026 (UTC)
Uninvolved editor here (but I did see the TikTok by the subject - ended up getting here after protection had been applied). I do want to raise a question: does enwiki have a policy on photos used in BLP if the subject requests a particular photo be used - beyond what's already stated in BLP and MOS:IMG? netstars22 (talk) 13:55, 19 February 2026 (UTC)
Actually, it is very rare case that the actual subject requests their specific photo to be used. But does the picture of Larsson in 2025 violate Wikipedia's guideline? I don't think there's a problem with this photo, as Larsson proved herself in Commons that it was taken by her friend. Camilasdandelions (✉️) 14:02, 19 February 2026 (UTC)
No. The subject can have an opinion, and we can listen to it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:53, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
I haven't checked any of her comments, but some WP:BLPKIND may apply. If someone wants to put the opposing thumbs (see what I did there?) in this thread, that could be helpful. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:01, 19 February 2026 (UTC)
I’m not sure how I feel about subjects editing their own entries, as it can be a very fine line that’s easily crossed. I just made this crop on Commons which I think would be a much better choice for the infobox and more in line with the criteria we usually follow. What do you guys think? A vote might help. ArturSik (talk) 19:46, 19 February 2026 (UTC)
I am curious, what is the criteria? This photo and the want she wants show her face clearly. So, at the end of the day, doesn't it come down to an editor's personal preference. I am curious about this, as i'd like to follow the guideline, so if you could provide this info, I would be much appreciated. GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 20:00, 19 February 2026 (UTC)
From the image RfCs I've seen it indeed mostly boils down to personal preference. The only real criterion is if she actually looks like that because this is the info we give to the reader. Secondary criteria involve probably the image quality, how recent it is, and, for older subjects, availability of colour photographs.
These are two very different people on the photos. From the point of view of a passport photo the requested image is the best. If that's how she looks at least on the stage, she can have that photo for all I care. Not that I would prefer to have that look myself.
Now if that image is photoshopped, that's a big no-no. If Larsson insists to edit war to the altered photo she isn't gonna get it no matter what. I don't have any indication it is altered, though.
Btw, we are in the news. Szmenderowiecki (talk · contribs) 20:58, 19 February 2026 (UTC)
@Camilasdandelions was the uploader of the photo that is currently live on Commons so maybe they can speak to the provenance of it. netstars22 (talk) 23:26, 19 February 2026 (UTC)
What about this photo, which official Wikipedia team suggested? Camilasdandelions (✉️) 23:33, 19 February 2026 (UTC)
That’s also the photo she expressed preference for on her social media. My only concern is that the video Larsson posted shows her Googling images of herself, and those web search images tend to not have the proper licensing needed for Wikipedia use. If we can confirm that she gives us the license to use it, I don’t see a problem with it. I like octopuses (logged out) ~2026-11208-64 (talk) 01:20, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
Point of clarification: in the video, Larsson was searching for photos in Commons - not Googling. The currently-live photo (as of this comment) does have the appropriate permissions in Commons (as is noted by the TikTok video posted by Wikipedia social media). netstars22 (talk) 01:26, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
Oops, I didn't see that portion. Thank you for the correction - now that we know the photo has the proper licensing, I'm fine with it being used in the article. We could of course hold an RfC if people really can't decide, but I see no opposition to the requested image. I like octopusestalk to me, talk to me 04:06, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
The current pink one is ok. Like you say, if people want to have an rfc, they can. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:05, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
Another concern could be that the photo she wants fits in her current "era", and therefore I wonder if Wikipedia wouldn't be a way of advertising that and her current album? So it may be that at the end of the day we may prefer to choose a more neutral photo. But I am happy to be corrected here. GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 09:43, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
I wonder if Wikipedia wouldn't be a way of advertising that and her current album it very well may be, but I think the purpose of the infobox photo is to show her current look. If that's what she's like right now and it's, that's what the readers should see. Even if it's not her "natural" appearance. (Literally "my body, my choice")
If she had sponsor brands deliberately plastered on her body for promotion, then yes. But in this photo she doesn't do it.
If she returns to the prior look, then we should replace it once again with the newest photo and move this one to the body. Szmenderowiecki (talk · contribs) 12:25, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
WP:LEADIMAGE is pretty broadly written, and in this case, there is quite lot to choose from. We generally like recent-ish, good quality-ish and perhaps a little doing-their-job-ish if we can get it. What is "best" here is subjective to a pretty large extent, there are many good alts at Category:Zara Larsson (see the sub-cats). Nothing prevents us from going by WP:BLPKIND (as in use "her" pic), and nothing prevents us picking something else if we think that improves WP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:38, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
The fact that she is willingly desorganising Wikipedia to impose her image should urge one to revert the main picture to the original one up until things start cooling down. There is no reason debating for now in such a toxic context, they themselves said they were going to POV-push "over and over". Médicis (talk) 15:35, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
If the file she desires is poorly licensed, I would agree with you. When Hellomoto100 added this file on 30 January, it was reverted as this user (I doubt this user is Larsson's friend, who also took that 2025 photo) destroyed the infobox template. She then re-added the file, but reverted by another user as it still destroyed the template. But she didn't stop, she put the file again and I just fixed the issues rather than reverting it. But the original file was kinda unnecessarily big, so I cropped it in Commons and changed to it. But I suddenly felt that this file was poorly lincesed, so I requested permission of it in original file and it was removed. My cropped version of this photo was also set to be removed, so I just restored it to her 2024 photo. And then, Larsson posted her TikTok video not to change her profile picture in Wikipedia.
So anyway, as I requested permission of it in Commons, Larsson really submitted her permission to VRT, and now it is free to use. Thus, I see no issues at using this file anymore, and I don't even think that this is part of the promotion of her fifth album Midnight Sun. Camilasdandelions (✉️) 15:49, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
How do you know it is not a promotion tactic for her fifth album? Her TikTok video has over 1,5 million views and many of the comments are inciting a change, regardless of being her chosen photo or not. I don't have an issue with said photo, like you said the licensing seems okay, but I don't appreciate the disruption caused and wonder if we have a responsibility in stopping said disruption. GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 15:57, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
I don't like the disruption and the picture itself either. The licensing isn't the problem. Médicis (talk) 15:58, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
Her requesting this very picture shouldn't be an argument at all to change to this picture. People don't have a right to veto their own articles.
Personally, I believe that this picture is much better, firstly because the lighting is much better, you see more of the body including the hands, and the arms aren't dangling. Besides, the picture is from 2024, so the other requested picture being from 2025 isn't much better on this part. Médicis (talk) 16:02, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
Because she said she wanna change her 2024 photo as it looked "ugly" to her. She didn't even mention promotional things in that TikTok video; she just stated that her previous photo isn't good to her so she would keep changing it. And yes, if there's no issue w the license, it's good to go then. Putting ones own opinion at her other pictures (as the writer stated, "Personally") does not fully explains why her 2025 photo should be removed from the infobox. Camilasdandelions (✉️) 16:17, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
We can't WP:CRYSTAL her true intentions. As for the second part of your comment, Wikipedia is a community. If we want to take this to a vote, and collectively decide what is the best photo, then that will be the decision. Same goes for blocking the page from future WP:VAND/disruptive edits/etc. GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 16:24, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
This discussion is absolutely hilariously silly. I only heard about this on the radio while driving home and I sometimes contribute to Wikipedia so my interest was piqued and I decided to look at it.
The photo Zara dislikes of herself, I actually think is a slightly better photo for Wikipedia, it's a bit better lit, there is nobody in the background, and is slightly higher resolution, that said these are hardly official Wikipedia requirements, just personal taste really. Thus, if the photo she prefers:
  • Has appropriate licensing
  • Shows the subject clearly
  • And follows Wikipedia policies with regards to BLP lead photos
Then we should totally respect her preferences on two accounts, firstly it's just the nice thing to do. If I had a Wikipedia photo I'd sure rather it not use a photo I think I look ugly in, that'd suck. Secondly, it'll cause this disruption to the article to stop, and this whole issue to blow over, thus helping to protect the rest of the article from accidents or vandalism (as it won't be caught up in constant chaotic editing), and will help avoid us having to keep protection on the article indefinitely.
As for the assertion the photo might be some marketing strategy, well as you said "We can't WP:CRYSTAL her true intentions", and there is no evidence this is some intentional act of marketing for her latest album or some other ulterior motive, thus we can continue this conversation without speculating on some ulterior motive until evidence for that surfaces. To me though, the assertion it's some marketing gimmick honestly feels like clasping at straws to try and create some reason not to use her image?
Lets just, be nice and use her image. We genuinely have no policy-level reason not to. ~2026-86916-9 (talk) 17:26, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
Potentially, a WP:CONSENSUS could emerge to use another pic, and that's policy. That said, the current pic is IMO acceptable. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:33, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
There seems to be a slight inconsistency between preferring the first photo for the reasons stated while suggesting we keep the subject's preferred other. While I am not opposed to using the subject's preferred image, my main concern is avoiding further disruption to the page. Ultimately, Wikipedia is built on WP:CONSENSUS; if the community reaches a clear agreement on a different photo, we should follow that lead. GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 17:39, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
the current consensus has been reached by trolls and pov-pushers. Médicis (talk) 17:48, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
WP:ASPERSIONS are generally a bad thing around here. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:09, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
it had already been discussed: Médicis (talk) 18:48, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
What POV is being pushed here? And what behavior leads you to identify these editors as "trolls"? It is true her request is the reason for the disruption, but this doesn't mean we should automatically do the exact reverse of what is requested. Although I do agree that the previous pictures are of better quality, it is a little too far to assign malicious intent to other (unexperienced, newcomer) editors. I like octopusestalk to me, talk to me 02:36, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
I'm not actually that much of a newcomer here (assuming Medicis comment was directed at me!) - I've just avoided making an account out of an act of protest against a rather unsavoury editor who greatly disliked IP editors. I might one day make an account, but for the time being, here I am! ~2026-86916-9 (talk) 00:04, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
Two months late here to replying, but User:GrandDukeMarcelo to respond to your reply:
I see no inconsistency in my comment? I'll restate it in case my opinion wasn't clear though:
I do personally, from the perspective of aesthetic qualities of the image think the image is better.
But we aren't running a photography competition here, we are writing and maintaining a publicly accessible encyclopaedia, with this page here covering a living person.
From a standpoint of being encyclopaedic, both photos are more-or-less equal.
From the standpoint of public access and availability, both photos are equal, they're both public domain, right?
From the standpoint of being able to maintain this encyclopaedia, causing this controversy to blow over by conceding to the request means less disruption to the page, helping us to better track any edits, catch any vandalism to other parts of the page, and stop meaningful additions from being accidentally reverted.
From the standpoint of us just being decent people and respecting a living person's preferences on our coverage and presentation of them, conceding to their request is nicer.
So on the balance of those factors, I think respecting Zara's request is reasonable, as we have no compelling encyclopaedic reason not to, no policy reason (other then, as Gråbergs Gråa Sång said, possible WP:CONSENSUS), and a number of reasons to respect her request. ~2026-86916-9 (talk) 00:01, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
More information Edit requests to update the infobox photo (please see the ongoing RfC) ...
Close

RfC: Which image to use as main?

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
There is no consensus on whether or not to use A, but there was a very strong consensus against option C (the status quo ante bellum), therefore, option A should be used, as preferred by the subject and slightly winning a !vote count. Users supporting both A and other options (coalescing around E near the end) made convincing arguments. Those supporting A argued that the BLP policy, specifically WP:BLPKIND, justified the use of option A, even though it was criticized by supporters of other options for being unencyclopedic due to poor lighting and another person being present in the background. (non-admin closure) Feeglgeef (talk) 01:10, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Which image should be used as the main image? Well, here we are. I've included the three images that have gotten support for use on the page. Please discuss civilly and follow Wikipedia policy in deciding which image to use.
Disclaimer: I am an involved editor in the sense that I have an opinion on which photo to use and have shared it. However, I will not be expressing it in this RfC.
Ping for every editor who previously expressed an opinion: Camilasdandelions, Gråbergs_Gråa_Sång, ArturSik, GrandDukeMarcelo, Szmenderowiecki, Médicis.
Thanks, all.
I like octopusestalk to me, talk to me 02:54, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

A. Image requested by Larsson on TikTok (2025)
B. Image used in "Career" section of page (2024)
C. Image used before Larsson's TikTok (2024)
D. Added 17:52, 23 February 2026 (UTC) after start of RfC. (2024)
E. Cropped version of D. Provided later by ArturSik 22:44, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
A: Well licensed, and current picture of Larsson. No promblem with this photo, as it is not even part of the promotion. I'll choose E after that. Camilasdandelions (✉️) 03:03, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
Comment I wouldn't mind seeing more alts, if people want to suggest them, her Commons-cat is pretty extensive, though it's probably reasonable to stick to 2024 and after. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:30, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
Seconded! I encourage editors to add properly licensed, good quality photos to propose as alternates. I like octopusestalk to me, talk to me 15:43, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
A: It is a good quality recent and up to date photo, and one that I would have chosen if I was an editor on this page looking for a modern photo of her through the Commons. Mechanical Elephant (talk) 12:11, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
B -> C -> D -> A: the lighting is much better, you see more of the body including the hands, and the arms aren't dangling. The picture A is also slightly blurred Médicis (talk) 15:00, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
(Summoned by bot) B, second choice C. A's lighting is terrible and the random guy in the background doesn't help. signed, Rosguill talk 16:24, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
A: recent photo, correctly licensed, face is clear, and requested by the subject of the article. In the other photos, she either has her face partially obscured or eyes partially closed. D as a distant second option. Rjjiii (ii) (talk) 07:56, 24 February 2026 (UTC)
B>D (Brought here from RFC/A) - I think option "A" is too dark, but don't really mind if it gets changed. "B" is a personal choice since she is performing and with a mic. MaximusEditor (talk) 22:13, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
C: While both images are strong, Option C appears more representative of the subject in a natural setting. The lighting in Option C is more even, whereas Option A appears to contain filtering or blurriness that could be distracting. Additionally, Option C does not have anyone in the background (unlike Option A) and the subject is not wearing a hat (unlike Option B).GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 16:36, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
Comment: If anyone can find an image that: 1. Is in natural lighting; 2. Doesn't have people or objects in it and 3. Doesn't appear to have blurs/effects/etc, than I am willing to consider that option. GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 16:50, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
Given the new addition, I choose picture D. Clear, no objects or other people in it. GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 18:25, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
What's wrong with File:GreenDayIOW230624 (148 of 367) (53818703835) (cropped).jpg, which is shown in another section of the Talk page? I'm not too fond of "B", since the microphone is oddly positioned, and it seems too zoomed out, and the clothing choice from the waist down is kind of confusing and distracting, and her eyes are somewhat in a shadow. I didn't notice the random guy in the background of "A" until seeing a remark about it. I don't agree with the idea that the main photo should be especially recent or fit with current branding. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:17, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
Can we add this one as an option above? I support your last sentence. GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 17:26, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
 Done. I like octopusestalk to me, talk to me 17:52, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
Support D (and I would consider picture B the worst of the four) as per my prior comments. I don't know Wikipedia's policy on alterations, but removing the random dude in picture A might be worth considering. I don't really see anything so terrible about picture C; I think she looks fine in it. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 20:08, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
My best guess, based off of my knowledge of Wikipedia policies, is that editing the photo to remove the background person would be something that would require further discussion and consensus (i.e. not a clear yes-or-no answer). I like octopusestalk to me, talk to me 20:26, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
If this discussion fails to reach a consensus, I believe the article should revert to picture C, as the long-term stable choice. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 21:06, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
All valid concerns. I will note that we can crop the image we choose afterwards; the discussion is mainly focused on which image we should use. Thanks! I like octopusestalk to me, talk to me 17:56, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
D: clear view of her face, nothing distracting in the way such as her hand or the mic. Also best lighting out of the four. ArturSik (talk) 18:07, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
D Best picture. Nemov (talk) 18:28, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
C->B->D->A I don't find the mic distracting in C, and D makes it look like her eyes are closed until you zoom in. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:53, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
Why do you rank picture A the worst? You didn't say anything about it. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 20:58, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
When I take photos, I'm almost always looking for candids - they feel more alive to me. Someone staring straight into the camera doesn't appeal to me. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:30, 24 February 2026 (UTC)
(Summoned by bot) A. Good quality image and licensed correctly. I also see no need to change from the status quo at this time. GothicGolem29 (Talk) 23:44, 24 February 2026 (UTC)
As far as I know, the status quo ante is picture C, not picture A. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:50, 24 February 2026 (UTC)
No it's definitely A thats the status quo picture per whats in the article now. GothicGolem29 (Talk) 00:11, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
"Ante" means before, i.e., before WP:BRD bold edits and warring. As far as I can tell, picture A wasn't even available until 19 or 20 February. That's just a few days ago. It has no priority or presumption of consensus. I considered reverting the most recent image change myself, but didn't want to contribute to the edit warring series. The discussion here is what should determine what the article uses – not the most recent action in an edit war. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 00:16, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
Oh missed ante. Well I am basing my !vote of the status quo not the status quo ante. The discussion here will determine it but it is a legitimate !vote in this discussion to want to go with the current status quo if there is no reason to change the image. GothicGolem29 (Talk) 21:36, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
Being the most recent participant in an edit war should not be something we reward with being considered "status quo". —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:22, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
You can have that view but personally I don't think there is any should in this something is the status quo or it isn't and this one as the current image is the status quo as the current image and I would need to see a reason to !vote against it to choose a different option. GothicGolem29 (Talk) 00:39, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
See WP:STATUSQUO, for example. Or WP:TITLECHANGES or WP:BRD. There are lots of places on Wikipedia that express a priority for status quo ante bellum (an expression explicitly used in WP:STATUSQUO), but not for simple status quo as it happens to be at the moment during an ongoing dispute. Another example is WP:RM, where approval is considered automatic to revert recent moves away from a stable title. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 00:59, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
BRD is an optional process about reverting and bold edits and status quo also talks about reverts. Neither of those really show bellum is preferred beyond reverting. Approval for what? GothicGolem29 (Talk) 01:27, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
Image C was used for months leading up to the last week. Image A is only a contender because the article's subject posted on TikTok requesting image A. I like octopusestalk to me, talk to me 02:46, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
Thanks for the context but I am sticking with my current !vote based on the current status quo because of the reasoning I gave in a discussion above. GothicGolem29 (Talk) 00:40, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
Comment: she looks unrecognizably different in A compared to the other three. Which "look" is more accurate to how she's typically seen in public right now? Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 22:45, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
The first one seems to have an orange filter, plus tons of make up. GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 22:48, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
It doesn't have orange filter. She has tan on. As for the makeup, she's wearing lots of it in all of the photos. Option A makeup is more representative of the makeup that the subject has been wearing in her recent public appearances. ~2026-25528-5 (talk) 23:08, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
How do you know it doesn't have a filter? As for you second part of the comment, you are proving my point that a potential change is only to fit with the current branding. GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 23:14, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
Having a photo that fits with the current branding is, arguably, what we want. If she wears a shit ton of makeup and that's how everyone sees her in public, then... yeah, that's the look we want depicted in the infobox. I agree that it looks a little promotional, but... eh. One could argue that she "presents herself promotionally", and the photo just depicts that. A > D >>> B > C. Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 00:57, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
I’d recommend going with a natural, unbranded photo for the main feature to keep the initial tone grounded. And the more stylized or branded images would work great as supporting visuals within the article itself. GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 12:26, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
Furthermore, I would suggest that Option A feels somewhat static, whereas the alternative images depict the subject in her professional capacity as a singer. This active portrayal is, in many respects, more representative of her character and better complements the overall tone of the page. GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 12:33, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
For comparison, Lady Gaga is an example of someone that can be heavily stylized/branded, and yet her main photo on her page depicts her in her professional capacity at an event 5 years ago. So recency is not necessarily the main goal here. GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 12:41, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
It also seems like it might have a softening filter / blurring, or some kind of region-specific blurring. Others have remarked about it looking blurry too. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 01:05, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
Comment: makeup notwithstanding, there are some recent instances where one could argue Larsson's "look" is closer to that of A than the others (or at the very least is a blend of A and the other looks). netstars22 (talk) 02:24, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
I'd say those look closer to C and D to me, with a bit longer hair (and recency is not necessarily what we're striving for). —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 07:35, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
Absolutely. The cosmopolitan video (even the tiktoks) is much in line with C or D. GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 12:23, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
Comment: I understand why Larsson hates photo C. It's deeply unflattering for her skin texture in a way that doesn't represent her real appearance. I don't believe there's anything wrong with Photo A, which has the correct license. Honestly, though, I would go with "anything but C." If the people here insist on discarding A, D would be the best alternative.
I would prefer it if other editors who have already commented a lot refrain from replying to my comment in an attempt to change my mind. ~2026-10002-49 (talk) 01:25, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
All for A. Need to cool the situation down and stop mainstream media from pushing the drama even further. Ahri Boy (talk) 02:09, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
C, followed by A. Changing to the newly added E. A is obviously promotional and whatever she looks like IRL, it gives a strong impression of fake/staged. Further down the page to represent one of her stage looks, fine. Of the rest, B and D both show her breasts in embarrassing detail. C avoids this problem and I don't see the aesthetic issues others do. I understand she hates it, but I think A makes her look worse. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:45, 1 March 2026 (UTC) I've changed my position after the addition of E, which looks natural, is clear and in no way unattractive, and no longer has the breast problem. Yngvadottir (talk) 09:24, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
Can't we crop D afterwards? GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 12:38, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
I don't see embarrassing detail. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 19:20, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
C, then A: Per Yngvadottir, but also for my own reasons—C has the best lighting and is not an unnatural or otherwise candid (or seeming as such) photograph; A, while (if I'm understanding correctly) requested by the subject herself (is that true? If so, I'm more inclined to disagree with A, then), does have the drawback of being posed, having poor lighting, and the unfortunate gentleman in the background. — Javert2113 (Siarad.|¤) 16:21, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
Addendum: I have just perused some of the sources above. As a result, I would like to completely withdraw my previous acquiescence to A. — Javert2113 (Siarad.|¤) 17:16, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
With the changes since I first posted, I would like to state that C, then E is now my vote—as both Wikipedria Editor and Boredintheevening have noted below, A is wholly unacceptable due to the violation of multiple of our image-based policies and procedures, even if the subject wants it (and, perhaps, has led to an edit war in so requesting). I also also like to remind all of our fellow editors to assume good faith on each other's parts, as well. — Javert2113 (Siarad.|¤) 18:57, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
Comment: Per suggestions I made a new crop of D without her breasts - File:GreenDayIOW230624 (148 of 367) (53818703835) (cropped 2).jpg. ArturSik (talk) 22:44, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
I added that to the gallery as option E. It seems fine to me. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 01:06, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
Thank you - I wasn't able to do it all weekend. I like octopusestalk to me, talk to me 17:06, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
Option A, obviously. From WP:BLPKIND, Editors should make every effort to act with kindness toward the subjects of biographical material when the subjects arrive to express concern (emphasis in original). wmf:BLP, which is WP:CONEXEMPT for all Wikimedia projects, mandates Treating any person who has a complaint about how they are described in our projects with patience, kindness, and respect, and encouraging others to do the same. "Which image do we use" isn't some ground-breaking question that's going to ruin the neutrality of the article, and it really doesn't matter if it's slightly dark. BLP is policy, and the entire MOS is only a guideline, after all. The idea that this is promotional is no more than unsourced speculation; it's more likely that she genuinely just has a preference for which photo people see of her, and I would like to see a more compelling reason not to use that one than "lighting". lp0 on fire () 12:01, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
I don't really see how WP:BLPKIND is being understood here. To me, it reads as concerning the correction of inaccurate or inappropriate material not just acquiescing to subject's other preferences. I don't believe a reasonable person would see anything 'unkind' about these images. Compared to other subject images I've seen on Wikipedia, these are all quite flattering. Boredintheevening (talk) 16:12, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
My take: What is the "best" WP:LEADIMAGE here is to a large extent subjective, compared to other WP-stuff it's more actual "vote" than usual. Since the subject has a preference, which IMO is acceptable, it's not a great ask to cast your vote in that direction. We don't have to go with her preference per WP:BLPKIND, but it's not wrong to do so either.
Of course, nothing prevents Larsson to contribute a more professional pic with the look she prefers, WP:A picture of you is available. There is no guarantee Wikipedians would prefer this hypothetical image, but some here has mentioned lack of quality as a factor. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:19, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
To my mind BLPKIND applies in two ways. Firstly, as Grabergs described, it means that we should go with the subject's preference unless we have a good reason not to. Secondly, it means we should AGF with respect to Larsson's motives in making this request, and invalidates arguments like fear of the issue of encouraging brigading/edit warring by fans as a reason not to follow her preference (or, even worse, Javert2113's unjustified assertion that the subject's choice is a reason to oppose that photo). lp0 on fire () 18:07, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
Option E then Option A, The cropped version of picture D is reasonably flattering, well lit, shows only her, and does not include any objects obscuring her face. Given that picture A is that requested by the article subject, that gives it the weight of her preference for the picture, but the lighting being dark and the presence of another individual in the background is the reason it is not my first choice in this case. Jiltedsquirrel 🌰 (talk || contribs) 03:16, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
A per the comments of Ip0 on fire. Despite the fact that it is my personal least favourite of the 5, I agree with the WP:BLP context Editors should make every effort to act with kindness toward the subjects of biographical material when the subjects arrive to express concern. I would have gone C, but I am going with A' per WP:BLPKIND, and WMF:BLP. Servite et contribuere (talk) 03:03, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
E: Although Zara Larsson has requested Wikipedia use A, C and E are much clearer representations of her. A has dark lighting, an unidentified man in the background (violates WP:IMAGEQUALITY), and involves heavy makeup which is not a consistent part of her brand image such as somebody like Trixie Mattel (in my opinion violates first bullet point in WP:LEADIMAGE). Other examples, Lady Gaga doesn't have an image of her in one of her well-known extravagant costumes that is a large part of her brand identity, and RuPaul doesn't have an image of him in drag. Meanwhile, C and E are both medium closeups with clear lighting and a plain background. Others have mentioned that D and E obscure her eyes slightly, I don't think this matters much. She's just smiling, and it doesn't distort her face at all. Out of respect for Larsson's request, we shouldn't end up back at C, though.
It could be argued that this case falls under the last section of WP:AUTOPROB, but I disagree. The image is largely in contention because Zara Larsson likes the picture and has asked her fans to create an edit war, not because it is a better picture by Wikipedia standards. I would be all for having a picture somebody likes better if it worked as well for Wikipedia's standards, such as if she wanted the photo to change from C to D, or simply find something different from C, for example, but A has too many issues to consider it viable for the article as I listed above. The situation is also complicated by her creating an edit war, which is why we need dispute resolution. Wikipedria Editor (talk) 01:41, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
I have moved your comment to the bottom so the section is organized chronologically (and so your vote doesn't interfere with the main RfC body). Thanks. I like octopusestalk to me, talk to me 03:32, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
Oh thank you! My apologies, I'm pretty new to participating in Wikipedia talk pages. Is there a way for me to leave a comment in chronological order from the start? Wikipedria Editor (talk) 05:46, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
No worries! I find that the easiest way is to click “edit source” next to the section title (not the page title) and leave your comment at the bottom of the section. I like octopusestalk to me, talk to me 15:50, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
This discussion has been going for 13 days now, aren't we closing it? MORNHOLT 16:04, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
There is no time limit for RFCs, see WP:RFCEND. Jiltedsquirrel 🌰 (talk || contribs) 16:09, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
There is no consensus to use any of the photos; closing it would be unhelpful. I like octopusestalk to me, talk to me 17:21, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
It's not impossible a closer would arrive at something other than "no consensus" here. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:30, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
I mean, there is no consensus. I haven’t tallied all the votes, but it seems like the only image that definitely is out is B. Which image would you say would come out on top if we closed now? I like octopusestalk to me, talk to me 17:35, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
I have no idea, but number of votes aren't the be-all/end-all of it, a closer might find PAG-support for whatever. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:41, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
A has 7 votes and C, D and E are all tied., with four votes each. MORNHOLT 17:37, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
Number of votes is not the only factor in an rfc. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:43, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
That’s what I meant. In this case, although one image has more votes, the debate is still live and very active, so we should not close it. I like octopusestalk to me, talk to me 17:44, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
Agree. 30 days (or at least more days) and WP:RFCC seems the way to go. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:50, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
Aside from the fact that this is WP:NOTAVOTE, I believe there are different ways to see that data. The subject appears to want "A", or at least not to want "C". The non-A photos have some similarities, so there is a vote splitting effect among them. If your counting is correct, there are 7 people who said to use A and 12 people who said not to use A. Also, options D and E were added after the discussion began, and some of the support for using other photos may have been expressed before one or both of those candidates were included in the discussion. Moreover, even if there is no consensus, there has been some questioning about whether we should revert to C as the status quo ante or use A since that is the current article content. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:21, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
Is this counting or not counting all of the edit requests where somebody clearly expresses a preference? jp×g🗯️ 12:54, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
30 days is standard for an rfc, and people seems to keep commenting. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:29, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
Seconding your perspective. C and E accurately represent the subject, they are high quality images, and they are in line with the main images used for other articles about entertainers and performers. I do think that the issue of encouraging brigading/edit warring by fans is what primarily bothers me about this situation. It sets an unwelcome precedent. None of us should publicly promote disruptive editing as a way to force our desired outcomes, celebrities/article subjects included. Boredintheevening (talk) 16:19, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
Agreed in full. — Javert2113 (Siarad.|¤) 18:53, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
A > E > B. Larsson's preference is acceptable, so I take the WP:BLPKIND approach. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:55, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
E - as a middle ground of sorts: it is well-lit, clearly depicts her, and seems reasonably flattering. I do understand why she doesn't like C, and would support A under WP:BLPKIND if not for the random person shown in identifiable detail in the background. Larsson is also free to release a photo of herself under CC 4.0, as detailed in WP:APoY. Zzz plant (talk) 21:45, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • A, and if not, just don't have an image in the article at all. How do we know the proposed replacements are bad? The subject of the article has said so explicitly, is visibly annoyed by them, and has formally gone on the record asking that we change them, repeatedly. The image she wants to use is Creative Commons 4.0. There is no issue whatsoever that prevents us from doing so. The objections to it here are over bizarrely minor quibbles, most of which I have never heard complained about anywhere on Wikipedia. The only special thing here is that the subject has publicly complained and attempted to get the image replaced — so, out of nowhere, we have suddenly come up with eight million dust-mote-sized nitpicks that "prove" she cannot. This is dumb. These are not actual policy-based objections.
There is no policy that says people cannot smile in photographs, or that they must smile, or that their face has to be at a specific angle. There is no policy that says photographs must have a certain type or color of background. There is definitely no policy that says BLP subjects have to behave in a way that flatters us on social media or else we'll punish them by giving them terrible infobox images. I am embarrassed to be an administrator here if we are proud of doing this to somebody. None of the stuff being cited here is an actual requirement of any Wikipedia policy. The relevant policy is WP:BLP, which says that our job as Wikipedia editors is not to passive-aggressively antagonize the subjects of our articles, but rather to (at least try to) act like adults and write an encyclopedia. Good grief. jp×g🗯️ 12:53, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
WP:IMAGEQUALITY states: A biography should lead with a portrait photograph of the subject alone, not with other people. So, by this standard image A does not qualify.
Also, one could argue that WP:CONSENSUS is being applied here, and therefore, we, as a community, are trying to reach a conclusion on the best photo to have as a lead.
In my view, this is not about displaying one feeling over another to and about the subject, but about choosing the best representative photo of the subject, in their professional capacity. With this in mind, and again in my view, photo A does not qualify. MORNHOLT 13:52, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
By this standard image A does not qualify is nitpicking exactly as JPxG described; that guideline is clearly intended to discourage group photos where the subject doesn't stand out, whereas here she is obviously the subject and the other person is obviously in the background.
Also, one could argue that WP:CONSENSUS is being applied here: yes it is, but you can't cite consensus to establish consensus. (reply edited 15:09, 9 March 2026 (UTC) because it saved unfinished) lp0 on fire () 15:00, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
So how do you establish consensus without citing it? Do you have the policy that prevents this? Thanks. MORNHOLT 15:25, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
This is an RfC, which will establish a consensus. lp0 on fire () 15:32, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
You establish consensus by having discussions like this. Since it's not emerging, we should wait longer for further discussion. This is one of the most active RfCs I've ever seen, indicating that this is not a clear issue. If we're unable to establish consensus and it's clear that an RfC will not solve it, there are other more extreme ways to firmly end this dispute. Also, both of you may benefit from taking a short break on this RfC. You have both made your viewpoints heard. I like octopusestalk to me, talk to me 17:11, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
The relevant standard from WP:IMAGEQUALITY is about whether or not it is a group photo (which would inappropriately make the subject of the photograph ambiguous), not the incidental background of the image that might include a person. Katzrockso (talk) 23:16, 19 March 2026 (UTC)
The subject of the article has said so explicitly, is visibly annoyed by them, and has formally gone on the record asking that we change them, repeatedly. My understanding from reading all of the above is that she's asked to change from the previous lead image ("C" in this RfC), but so far as I can tell hasn't commented on the other alternatives – have I missed something?
All else being equal I would say that E is the best image for an infobox: clear, well-lit, without a distracting background, shows the face clearly. C (aside from Larsson's opposition) has her looking away from the camera and her face (very slightly) obscured by the microphone. B has even worse issues with microphone and hat, as well as a slightly worse background. I don't love the stuff going on in the background in A, but it's sufficiently dark that it's not too distracting; if Larsson specifically prefers it even to E then ehh, it's fine. And being slightly more recent is arguably a point in its favour. Even E, which I think is a better image, is not so much clearly better that we can't take Larsson's own opinion into consideration here. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 12:17, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
E . I vote E. The subject doesn't like C, and A is just a really poor photo in my opinion. There's no reason to use a bad photo or a photo Larsson hates when there's a perfectly good option already in E. Sentimental Dork (talk) 02:26, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • C From a strictly informative standpoint, this is definitively the best image, given that it shows her face in a neutral position with good lighting. It may not be the most "stylish" image, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia rather than a publicity site. Its sole obligation is to inform. Image A is obviously worse quality, with a dark exposure, heavy makeup and someone else in the image, B has her face shadowed from a cap, while D and E do not present a clear improvement from the status quo. I don't think that "showing kindness" to a person whom an article is about necessarily includes following all their requests unless there is an obvious and pressing reason to do so, rather than simply a personal belief that an image is unflattering (even despite the fact that it was taken *during* a performance in public). Keep the article protected forever if need be. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:31, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
E->D->B->A->C - E over D simply due to the appropriate crop, both have good lighting and composition, and are recent. B over A, as a preference for well lit shots over what seems to be one from night/in a dark area requiring a flat flash. C last out of respect for the request from the subject, and because the composition is poorer than E/D in my opinion. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 12:15, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • E or another photo of Zara's choosing, like of her performing or an everyday candid. Images are there for educational purpose (WP:IMGCONTENT), respectfully, this isn't social media. Btw MOS:BIO says nothing on images, and it probably should Kowal2701 (talk, contribs) 20:52, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
    Doesn't it look like she was caught mid-blink in D and E? WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:55, 20 March 2026 (UTC)
  • A, if she publicly prefers A then I don't see what the argument is. It's not like there's a big difference in quality between the lot.--Ortizesp (talk) 15:03, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • A. If this is the image she prefers, let's use it. That doesn't mean we change it every time she decides she prefers something different, but she should feel free to upload as many photos of herself as she likes to Commons, then make an edit request to see if anyone is willing to do that work. Valereee (talk) 15:53, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
  • A - There's no harm done in following what Larsson has asked for here. It doesn't really affect the neutrality of the article in a significant way. I think most of the objections are relatively minor things that shouldn't outweigh her wishes. WP:BLPKIND makes sense as well. InfernoHues (talk) 07:27, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
  • A, WP:BLPKIND, see no issues with being respectful to the subject's wishes. A valid and more recent image itself. DankJae 12:18, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
  • A as per the subject, and that its the most recent, most clear image of her rn. JuniperChill (talk) 19:02, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
  • A – I find User:Lp0_on_fire's argument that WP:BLPKIND applies here compelling. There's insufficient difference between the proposed options to prefer one of the alternatives. (I don't find WP:IMAGEQUALITY comments particularly compelling; she's clearly the primary subject of the photo i.e. it's not a group photo.) Cheers, Suriname0 (talk) 20:40, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
  • A - I concur with jpxg that this has become ridiculous. WP:BLPKIND states The Arbitration Committee has ruled in favor of showing leniency to BLP subjects who try to fix what they see as errors or unfair material and we have existing policies like WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE that all make it clear that for BLP, their wishes should be at the very least taken into consideration when writing articles. When the ultimate result here has no appreciable difference on the article, there is no genuine reason to not use the photo preferred by the subject. I would suggest editors use some empathy and try to put themselves in Larsson's shoes; how would you feel if an extremely high-profile website used a photo you thought disparaged your image?Katzrockso (talk) 23:20, 19 March 2026 (UTC)
  • A - because it is the best out of all the options. Ismeiri (talk) 03:37, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

Discussion

  • Comment: I will probably reach out via email to Larsson's team later today to try to get a better photo of her that she would want to use, per WP:APoY. Please let me know if you would be interested in discussing such a picture, or if you would be opposed to that avenue entirely. I like octopusestalk to me, talk to me 17:17, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    I wasn’t able to get it done today, apologies. I will keep this RfC updated. I like octopusestalk to me, talk to me 04:00, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Note to closer: while evaluating consensus for these proposals, you may wish to take note of the rather large amount of edit requests submitted in favor of the BLP's request (presently there are ten in the collapsed section alone). jp×g🗯️ 08:09, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    I wouldn't recommend this, as they have essentially been implored to contribute by the artist on another platform. WP:CANVASS. orangesclub 🍊 08:30, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    Well, that is something the closer may wish to take note of, and the "This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:" stuff. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:42, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    This is not what WP:CANVAS says. jp×g🗯️ 10:39, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    It does say "Because it is less transparent than on-wiki notifications, the use of email, IRC, Discord, or other off-wiki communication to notify editors is strongly discouraged unless there is a significant reason for not using talk page notifications.", though. So, it's fine if the closer evaluates these comments, giving them whatever weight they should be given. The comments we are talking about are currently in a collapsed section at the bottom of Talk:Zara_Larsson#Photo, btw. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:11, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    On the subject of counting or not counting comments that go against policy, it looks like 3 editors in the discussion above cite disruption caused by the subject of the article as a reason to choose or not choose an image. That goes directly against the policy at WP:BLP. Rjjiii (ii) (talk) 11:43, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    Yes, I don't know why everyone here is acting like it's completely fine for Larsson to edit her own article. She should have made a comment on the talk page if it bothered her so much. It's especially odd to me because I think A is a much more unflattering picture than C. I feel like E is a good compromise, though, since I don't want to stick with C just to be petty when Larsson hates it. Sentimental Dork (talk) 13:56, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    Although I am in favour of changing the photo to another one other than A, I think we need to differentiate and establish that the edit war originated by the subject posting the video on tik tok. Subject has clear knowledge of wikimedia commons, as showed in video. However, I would also like to point out that we do not know for sure if subject has edited the article. Do we have evidence of this? MORNHOLT 13:59, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    Yes, Larsson has a user account on the site. She has edited her page twice - once to change her picture to A, once to change her picture to the child photo used later in the article. Also WP:BITE applies: she is a new editor who most likely isn’t familiar with all this policy. Like Rjjiii says, we shouldn’t punish her actions by deliberately ignoring her preference. I like octopusestalk to me, talk to me 15:32, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    I agree that we should take her preference into account, and not choose option C just to be petty. But the TikTok was still such a weirdly aggressive way to go about changing her photo. She encouraged her fans to start an edit war. I think we should go with option E, because that one doesn't upset her like C does (and it's flattering), but we really shouldn't choose A just because she likes it, because it's not a very good photo. Sentimental Dork (talk) 16:07, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    Understood! I wasn’t referring to you when referencing BITE - you make good points. I was using it to describe other editors whose whole rationale is “Zara Larsson is encouraging disruptive edits by requesting a photo, and so we should do the opposite of what she wants to not validate the disruptive edits.” I like octopusestalk to me, talk to me 16:22, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    @Sentimental Dork Odds are she doesn't fully know the purpose of the talk page TBH. Servite et contribuere (talk) 13:59, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    To be clear, I mean citing the disruption as a reason to vote against the subject's wishes is contrary to BLP. Rjjiii (ii) (talk) 15:26, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    Why would that have any bearing whatsoever on what image should be chosen? jp×g🗯️ 04:01, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
    Her edits should not have any bearing on what image should be chosen. Her expressed dislike of image C should be taken into consideration, though. I'm just saying we shouldn't choose image A solely because Larsson wants it. We should choose a GOOD photo that is NOT the one she hates. Sentimental Dork (talk) 16:17, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
    Agreed. The edit warring just means this RfC was needed. Wikipedria Editor (talk) 13:39, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
    Quite so. — Javert2113 (Siarad.|¤) 02:18, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

What Was Zara Larsson's Biggest Break In Music?

Zara Larsson's biggest break in music was Lush Life, do you agree? If not, tell me why. Kk199938!!yay (talk) 17:12, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Zara Larsson article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

lp0 on fire () 20:51, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 April 2026

BACKGROUND INFORMATION... FAMILY LIFE... FAMILY HISTORY...PERSONAL ScottishWikeFan (talk) 15:27, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please detail the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. LizardJr8 (talk) 15:41, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

Related Articles

Wikiwand AI