Talk:Give Me All Your Luvin'/Archive 1

assertions

Do we really need so much detail about Nicola Roberts here? Hers and Cheryl Cole's comments on Twitter had nothing to do with Madonna or this song (as confirmed by Roberts herself), and given this, the picture of Roberts with a caption about her "accusing Madonna of copying her song" is completely unnecessary. Also, factual errors reported in the press have been included in this article, and actually contradict other assertions in the article (e.g. the comment about Nicki Minaj performing the chants in the demo - completely incorrect).109.116.219.162 (talk) 20:23, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Completely agree with you. Bluesatellite (talk) 09:39, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

12th studio album title

In the FIRST PARAGRAPH, it states that her 12th studio album is called "Luv". There has been NO confirmation of that title.

Thegirlieshow (talk) 06:46, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing. Already removed. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 13:52, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Add a Release History

Country	Date	Format	Label
United States	February 7, 2012	Top 40/Mainstream	Interscope Records

This has been added. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:50, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Please, can you add this: German - 2 Track CD Single, 24th February, 2012 http://www.amazon.de/Give-All-Your-Luvin-2-Track/dp/B0076VAM2M/ref=sr_1_14?ie=UTF8&qid=1328709431&sr=8-14 87.182.5.238 (talk) 14:02, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

The new CD Single release date for Germany is now March 2nd, 2012. Source: www.amazon.de 87.182.20.203 (talk) 16:22, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Song title change (again)

Apparently many Madonna fansites are reporting that the new single has been changed to "Give Me All Your Luvin" - watch this space for official confirmation :) 2012 ^{Communicate|Nicely} 00:33, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Songwriting credits and video release

According to the official press release just issued by Interscope/Universal and posted by fansite MadonnaTribe.com, "[the] song was was written by Madonna, Martin Solveig, Nicki Minaj and M.I.A, composed by Martin Solveig and Michael Tordjman and produced by Madonna and Martin Solveig". The press release further mentions that the video will premiere on Madonna's YouTube Channel on 3 February at 9am EST/6am PST. However, FOX will air a preview of the video on 2 February during American Idol. Until 6 February, the song will be available for downloading only from iTunes.--MsigDK (talk) 13:43, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

M.I.A. singles chronology

In the M.I.A. singles chronology at the side, the single before "Give Me..." should be "Bad Girls" (released 31 Jan 2012), and not It Takes A Muscle.

http://pitchfork.com/news/45258-premiere-mia-bad-girls/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.118.35 (talk) 17:42, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Corrected...Lifebonzza (talk) 01:19, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Fancrufty content

User LifeBonanza is insisting on adding content like this, which I do believe fails WP:FANCRUFT, WP:PEACOCK and WP:UNDUE. Saying someone is inspired to work with each other is one thing, but saying something like "OMG she's number 1, so I'll work" is really not needed in an encyclopedia. And this is coming from a big Madonna fan like myself. What do others say? — Legolas ^(talk2me) 13:08, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I agree that the information is hardly relevant and does not add anything to the reader's understanding. Background is supposed to be about the inspiration and origins of the song. What does the Super Bowl performance--which hasn't even happened yet--have to do with anything? The two opposite sides thing is an interesting concept however, but that would go in Live performances. I'd remove the stuff about the dope achievement too. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 13:25, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi! The info that you take issue with in this edit is "Confirming her performance of the song alongside Madonna and Minaj at the Bridgestone Super Bowl XLVI Halftime Show on February 5, 2012, from Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis, M.I.A. told BBC Radio 1 DJ Zane Lowe of her admiration for Madonna, noting “If you’re going to go to the Super Bowl, you might as well go there with America’s biggest female icon.” She continued "As musicians, we’re two women and we represent two opposite sides of the world. If we can come together on a piece of music or something like the Super Bowl, I feel like that’s actually a cool thing to see." ? Misquoting someone/saying x reason for wanting to work together is "not encyclopaedic" doesn't make this motivation/background to the collab fail any of the policies you've listed. Perhaps the superbowl thing might fit in a live performance section better, but nothing here is irrelevant to the song.Lifebonzza (talk) 13:29, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Similarly having an issue with the words dope achievement in a quote about why she chose to work with her in this quote " M.I.A. notes of Madonna "She is the original. If you’re gonna support someone, that’s a pretty dope achievement. I’m sure my mum is gonna be way [more] into that than me putting "Galang" out in a club." doesn't mean this isn't background to the collab.Lifebonzza (talk) 13:37, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Lifebonzaa: the addition was unenclopaedic and very weak for inclusion because she's just complimenting Madonna (by discussing her "dope achievement") and talking about her mother's 'feelings'. It's not relevant to why she actually wanted to work with Madonna and how the song came about. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 13:46, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Greetings LifeBonanza. Please understand that the information you put may have received coverage etc, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and we avoid such fancrufty stuffs here. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 15:08, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the swift replies, and assuming good faith. I'm still having trouble understanding your point, only because M.I.A., who as the Radio 1 interview reference states, is always careful about who she chooses to collaborate with, and it was in response to a specific question as to why she chose to collaborate with Madonna that she explained it with these quotes, and therefore would it not make sense to add these quotes here? My point would be, most readers/listeners would understand that her seeing such a collaboration as a "dope achievement" and 'something her mother would be proud' of as background to why she chose to write/compose/perform etc. with Madonna warrants this here. Like the preceding quote of Madonna as to why she wanted to work with M.I.A. and Minaj. Perhaps it might be better to state that these quotes were in response to questions asking why x wanted to collaborate with y here? I'm sure there will be quotes from Minaj and M.I.A. about their motivations to work with each other on this collab too. This explains to me why User:Legolas who started this discussion kept this part in his/her edits here and here, unless he/she has another explanation.Lifebonzza (talk) 15:41, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

That might work: going with a q&a format. I'd even suggest paraphrasing the response and writing it much more neutrally because the quotation on its own does not serve any context to the reader's understanding and sounds like she's just bragging (yuck). Something like "M.I.A. viewed her opportunity to collaborate with a musician like Madonna as an achievement (notice there is no reference to "dope" here) that her mother would also acknowledge." What do you think? Thank you for your patience and ability to converse civilly, a trait past editors with whom I've disputed lack. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 16:03, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

With this link in question, I don't really see the problem with it? Perhaps it would be better if it was paraphrased and not quoted. "If you’re going to go to the Super Bowl, you might as well go there with America’s biggest female icon" could be completely cut as I agree that part is not relevant. I'd say "As musicians, we’re two women and we represent two opposite sides of the world. If we can come together on a piece of music or something like the Super Bowl, I feel like that’s actually a cool thing to see" is worth paraphrasing. Aaron • ^{You Da One} 16:20, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome! I think paraphrasing might work, however this may come off to a reader as not specific enough i.e. it might be counterproductive to what you are intending, for there to be more context to the reader's understanding. I feel somethings should be left to the interpretation of the reader, so paraphrasing and quotes should be balanced. My suggestion would be something like "Confirming her performance of the song alongside Madonna and Minaj at the Bridgestone Super Bowl XLVI Halftime Show on February 5, 2012, from Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis, M.I.A. told BBC Radio 1 DJ Zane Lowe of her reasons to collaborate with Madonna, noting she viewed her as an original artist. She continued "As musicians, we’re two women and we represent two opposite sides of the world. If we can come together on a piece of music or something like the Super Bowl, I feel like that’s actually a cool thing to see." (ref)She felt that it was an achievement her mother would be proud of, "way [more] than me putting "Galang" out in a club."(ref) When the live performance section comes in, what's relevant to the Super Bowl performance can be transferred there? What do you think?Lifebonzza (talk) 16:43, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

That's much better. I don't think there's a problem making the Live performance section now. It's better than where the info is right now. The opposite sides portion can be moved there and the what we should have is this:

Background

In December 2010 Madonna posted a message on her Facebook exclaiming: "Its official! I need to move. I need to sweat. I need to make new music! Music I can dance to. I'm on the lookout for the maddest, sickest, most badass people to collaborate with. I'm just saying". Madonna has stated she wanted to work with M.I.A. and Minaj on the track as they were both strong, independent girls with a unique voice, and that she liked their music and what they represented. She paid tribute to the stars, saying "They're not conventional pop stars and I really admire them both. I love both of them actually. M.I.A. felt that it was an achievement her mother would be proud of, "way [more] than me putting "Galang" out in a club."

Live performance

Confirming her performance of the song alongside Madonna and Minaj at the Bridgestone Super Bowl XLVI Halftime Show on February 5, 2012, from Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis, M.I.A. told BBC Radio 1 DJ Zane Lowe of her reasons to collaborate with Madonna, noting she viewed her as an original artist. She continued "As musicians, we're two women and we represent two opposite sides of the world. If we can come together on a piece of music or something like the Super Bowl, I feel like that’s actually a cool thing to see."

References

—WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 17:14, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

That looks fine! Lifebonzza (talk) 18:05, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

To be fair, let's wait until Legolas comments on the issue because he initiated the discussion. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 18:20, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I removed another sentence where MIA claims Madonna is "the greatest performer" or something along those lines. See, MIA talking about what inspired the collaboration, or what was the recording process, or who wrote what in the song is fine. What blatanly crosses the borderline between fancruft and encyclopedic content is the above line which I removed. We are NOT here for MIA's critique or compliment of Madonna, she's a part of the same process anyways. Hope this clears up. (On a different note, why the fuck hasn't any 1 of those three talked about the inspiration behind it?) *kanyeshrug* — Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:56, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok we can move forward based on the agreed content above. My own understanding however is that attributed, well referenced quotes/info, when used and described in the right context, can be as "fan-like" sounding or not, but the inclusion of said info does not constitute Wikipedia:Fancruft. Had M.I.A. stated "Madonna is a great performer" as a quote in a response to the question asked (such a quote is not in the sources here), that would be a legitimate addition. Lifebonzza (talk) 17:17, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

This suggests M.I.A. collaborated on the song with Madonna and Solveig over two days, maybe including the other collaboration "B-Day Song". Lifebonzza (talk) 00:30, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Track length

"Give Me All Your Luvin'" is now available in iTunes Japan. The track clocks in at 3:22. It has been reported by several fansites that the album version is a minute longer, though these reports remain unconfirmed by official sources.--MsigDK (talk) 17:46, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

UPDATE: The song has been removed from iTunes Japan again. However, fansite MadonnaTribe.com has posted a screenshot that clearly shows that the song has been available for purchase. Apparently, the song was planned to be released worldwide tomorrow at 2.00 p.m. GMT.--MsigDK (talk) 18:12, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

MadonnaTribe has edited the article, which was posted before the song was removed from iTunes Japan, and taken down the screenshot.--MsigDK (talk) 18:24, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

MadonnaTribe is a fansite and alas, is not reliable. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 18:25, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I know that fansites are considered not to be reliable - but that doesn't change the fact that the song has been available for sale in iTunes Japan. Here's a screenshot to prove it.--MsigDK (talk) 18:39, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

CD Single Release

There are sources for the CD Single release date? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.182.31.47 (talk) 21:13, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Not yet. If there is any the article will have them. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 21:16, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

The German CD Single will released in mid-march. The tracklist is yet unknown. 87.182.41.168 (talk) 12:14, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

06.02.2012

According to Universal Music Germany there will be released a physical single (CD) for "Give Me All Your Luvin'" (00602527962214) probably on March 2nd, 2012.

No more details are known. http://madonnadiscography.pl/article/view/42/ 87.182.5.238 (talk) 09:36, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ GERMAN 2 Track CD SINGLE!!! February, 24th 2012 This can also wrote to the release history section!

Amazon Germany - http://www.amazon.de/Give-All-Your-Luvin-2-Track/dp/B0076VAM2M/ref=sr_1_14?ie=UTF8&qid=1328709431&sr=8-14

87.182.5.238 (talk) 14:00, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Added. Thanks Bluesatellite (talk) 01:05, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Amazon.de now lists the 2-track CD single with a 2 March release date. --MsigDK (talk) 15:01, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Critical Reception (Rolling Stone Magazine and Slant Magazine added)

Rolling Stone Magazine review (2/5): http://www.rollingstone.com/music/songreviews/give-me-all-your-luvin-20120203

"The tune & the lyrics seem dashed off, and the aggressive, assaultive spunkiness makes you want to run & hide" -RollingStone

Slant Magazine review: http://www.slantmagazine.com/house/2012/02/single-review-madonna-featuring-nicki-minaj-and-m-i-a-give-me-all-your-luvin/

"Have you ever watched a dog vomit and then immediately lap it up? That was 1 of the notes I made after Madonna's new single" -SlantMagazine --West231 (talk) 23:10, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

There are many very positive reviews of the video around. Surely an encyclopaedic entry should provide a balanced, unbiased viewpoint...?220.237.235.60 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:43, 5 February 2012 (UTC).

Music video section

Could someone add the synopsis for the music video and some reviews?

Notable?

This single hasn't even charted yet... 78.143.210.84 (talk) 22:04, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Already discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gimme All Your Luvin (Madonna song). Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 22:05, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

In summary, the single has enough information to have a standalone article. True that one can consider creating an article for a song that has charted or won awards, but it all comes down to how much info there really is and whether there is enough. If there isn't however, that should be merged into an album article. Hope this helps, —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 22:12, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Update needed

I just had a read and noticed quite a few things are listed in future tense, but we have gone beyond the dates. Like the super bowl, radio impact, release date.Rain the 1 06:29, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Belgium

GMAYL peaks at No. 6 in Belgium/Wallonia and No. 3 in Belgium/Flanders. http://www.ultratop.be/nl/showitem.asp?interpret=Madonna+feat.+Nicki+Minaj+%26+M.I.A.&titel=Give+Me+All+Your+Luvin%27&cat=s Please add =) ! --93.229.105.180 (talk) 14:37, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

 Done but I've just added the highest one (the top 40) so the table makes sense. --andy4789 ★ · (talk? contribs?) 19:05, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Netherlands

The song debuted at number 2 on the Dutch single chart, http://dutchcharts.nl/weekchart.asp?cat=s — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.163.153.64 (talk) 15:22, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Chart

I added this to the chart section but it seems to have been removed:
In the United Kingdom, the single debuted at number thirty-seven. A significant proportion of download sales were discounted by The Official Charts Company as a result of a promotional offer that allowed the song to be downloaded for free if pre-ordered with Madonna's MDNA album
These were the sources:

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/news/a364883/madonna-give-me-all-your-luvin-single-sales-discounted-from-chart.html

https://twitter.com/#!/officialcharts/status/167643794966196224

Jizzaster (talk) 11:14, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

'Significant' seems like the wrong word to use. There's no way of knowing how many copies it would have sold on the Sunday and Monday, so maybe 'Two days of download sales...' would be a better beginning for that sentence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.15.26.147 (talk) 21:53, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Germany - Official Media Control Singles Charts: # 8

http://www.media-control.de/xavier-naidoo-schickt-dankesgruesse-von-platz-eins.html 87.182.3.114 (talk) 08:51, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Added, thanks Bluesatellite (talk) 11:14, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Twice it says in the entry that it's Madonna's worst performance for a lead single since You Must Love Me for Evita, which reached No.10. This is incorrect and doesn't make sense. To find a worst performing lead single, you have to go back to the last lead single to peak lower than No.37 - therefore, it's Madonna's worst performing lead single since Everybody from her first album failed to chart in 1982, as every other lead single since has charted higher than No.37. RPJ [25 Feb 2012]

Yes, thanks for pointing out. Bluesatellite (talk) 03:29, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Billboard Dance Chart

The song has currently peaked at #2 with a bullet—it has not yet hit #1. 66.26.95.207 (talk) 16:18, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Billboard Hot 100

The song has peaked at #10 on the Billboard Hot 100. Here is two articles stating this:

http://music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart-watch/week-ending-feb-12-2012-songs-luv-madonna-012009756.html

http://www.billboard.com/#/news/whitney-houston-returns-to-hot-100-s-top-1006203562.story

Please edit accordingly. Thank you! 76.189.253.72 (talk) 03:12, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Y Updated. Bluesatellite (talk) 03:21, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

GAON International

Give Me All Your Luvin hit #2 with sales of over 102,000 on GAON international. This page has #5, which is wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iblamethestars (talk • contribs) 18:55, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Here is the source BTW: GAON International - GMAYL - #2 - 102,187 (Sales) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.89.105.69 (talk) 10:41, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, but your link is actually for "Online" chart, not overall singles chart. GMAYL reached #5 on the "Digital Comprehensive" chart, which is regarded as the official singles chart in Korea. If you are confused please see WP:CHART. Bluesatellite (talk) 03:09, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Confusing sentence

This sentence is unclear:

The song then debuted at number twenty-nine on the New Zealand Singles Chart, becoming Madonna's first single since her lead single from Hard Candy, "4 Minutes", until falling out.

Can you explain to me what this sentence is trying to tell me? | ^help_dןǝɥ | 22:00, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Fall from 10 to 39 on Billboard Hot 100 in one week 23/2/2012

Looks like it will fall out of the US charts as it did in the UK: http://www.billboard.com/charts/hot-100#/charts/hot-100?order=drop Should that be included? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.26.21.206 (talk) 00:13, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't matter. It's the weakest song on the album and was never meant to be a single. It was released as a single only because it fitted in with the Superbowl. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.31.8.39 (talk) 11:30, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Controversy/Lawsuit

Why is there no mention about the controversy/lawsuit surrouding the song? Madonna is being accused of plagiarism, as seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2YL53kYAQ8&feature=share Johnnyboytoy (talk) 05:18, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Nicola Roberts

Why has all reference to the demo's similarity with Nicola Roberts's "Beat of My Drum" been removed by obviously biased fans who seek to remove as much criticism of their "queen" as possible? The controversy surrounding the incident was one of the leading tools used to promote the song prior to release. Any and all reference to the incident being removed from the article is a clear misstatement and contrary to the very purpose of Wikipedia. Inappropriately removed statements and sources should be reinstated ASAP. Homeostasis07 (talk) 02:16, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

GMAYL has got the platinum in italy upgrate http://www.fimi.it/temp/cert_GFK_download_142012.pdf if you need me i'm on it.wiki--AccendiLaLuce (talk) 04:27, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

someone read here?--AccendiLaLuce (talk) 03:05, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

The page is not protected, you can add it by yourself. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 05:42, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Contraverse

Why haven't you included the Contraverse about huge similarities between it and LOVE BANNANA?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.111.246 (talk) 04:25, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Do you have any reliable source?. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 04:20, 29 May 2012 (UTC)