Talk:Lady Gaga/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Lady Gaga. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
BBC sound of 2009
I think it needs to go on the article. Its notable. She came 6 out of the 15.GagaLoveGame (talk) 00:52, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
References
What is the this???Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 06:15, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Paris and Gaga?
I found this and supposes it can go on the art. Ref-http://www.bild.de/BILD/news/bild-english/home/regularieninhalte/celebrity-gossip-ticker/top-celeb-news/2009/03/02/lady-gaga-paris-hilton.html. Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 06:28, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Doesnot comply with WP:RS Lovegame. --Legolas (talktome) 06:47, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- If I found a good refrence do you think i is even worth a mention on the article. It seems like they are going to do single and Mark Ronson (producer-Amy Winehouse) as even being talking to Gaga about her next album. Excited.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 07:23, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- I don't think so. It would fail as it seems like gossip only and has no encyclopedic value. --Legolas (talktome) 08:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- P.S. I think this could be a better source. But still unsure how much encyclopaedic value it will have. --Legolas (talktome) 13:02, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Gossip. — R2 20:17, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- It's true, it could BE defined as goosip and speculation. But they will probably do a duet, and IF that is done, it would have encyclopedic value. Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 04:09, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Gossip. — R2 20:17, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
If they perform a duet, well that will be something. — R2 10:44, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Ha ha. Imagine the IPs will go completely mad to create the page on the single. We'll have a hard time reverting the vandalisms. Enough haters for Gaga and Hilton combined. --Legolas (talktome) 10:51, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Gaga dose not have many haters, however Paris does. Just protect the page for like a year or something but then we will have IP's who are users. Its a lose-lose situation. LOL.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 22:44, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Remember guys this is not a forum. --RCNARANJA 15:37, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
New tour
I found this on Google news. Gaga doing a tour in Ireland; probably promotion. http://www.efestivals.co.uk/news/09/090303a.shtml Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 04:19, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Not important enough to be worthy of mentioning in the biography article. --Legolas (talktome) 04:39, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- She is doing a tour- actually at a festival Oxygen, a section called Tours could be on the article along with each tour she has done.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 04:43, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Writing for new album
Gaga's says in a interview shes writing for new album, already. In the Fame Ball tour the Fashion song and could be sung, and possibly a new song from her writing and she is creating new stage fashion. However it needs veriblity. http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/news/lady-gaga-ready-to-go-for-headlining-tour-1003946983.story Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 04:25, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Billboard is a very reliable source. --Legolas (talktome) 04:39, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Yes Billboard is a good source, but what information could be used in article.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 06:09, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- None of it, the link mainly says about tours and no particularly concrete info about a next album. Its too early also. MAybe after the hyped tour gets over. LoveGame, find out as much source for the tour as you can. The page needs updating. --Legolas (talktome) 06:14, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- There is a Fame Ball article. The info. could be uesd there.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 03:31, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
- None of it, the link mainly says about tours and no particularly concrete info about a next album. Its too early also. MAybe after the hyped tour gets over. LoveGame, find out as much source for the tour as you can. The page needs updating. --Legolas (talktome) 06:14, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Yes Billboard is a good source, but what information could be used in article.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 06:09, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Archiving
Talk page is becoming too long. Its more than 127KB. Can we apply for archiving? --Legolas (talktome) 10:48, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, agree. Archive is in order. — R2 10:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Anybody care to apply to Misabot? I don't know how to :-( --Legolas (talktome) 11:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- I think we don't need for bots. It can be archived manually. --Efe (talk) 11:36, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Still its better to apply for bots. Per day on an average i see two three sections coming up. --Legolas (talktome) 11:43, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- That's only for now because GaGa is hot nowadays. And because there are unresolved threads, bots might archive them. --Efe (talk) 11:47, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Hmmm, so are you archiving it? --Legolas (talktome) 11:51, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- You can do it yourself. I don't like archiving. Hehe. --Efe (talk) 12:02, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- See how cunning you are. *wink* --Legolas (talktome) 12:11, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Hey. I really don't like archiving talk pages of articles because I am concerned with "unfinished business" and have to check many threads before they get archived. --Efe (talk) 12:28, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- He he. Nobody likes it, except for their own talkpages. --Legolas (talktome) 13:20, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- I'll do it, piece by piece, sending only long stale sections over to the archive? — R2 13:21, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- I think thats the best way to do it... and Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 03:26, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
- He he. Nobody likes it, except for their own talkpages. --Legolas (talktome) 13:20, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Hey. I really don't like archiving talk pages of articles because I am concerned with "unfinished business" and have to check many threads before they get archived. --Efe (talk) 12:28, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- See how cunning you are. *wink* --Legolas (talktome) 12:11, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- You can do it yourself. I don't like archiving. Hehe. --Efe (talk) 12:02, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Hmmm, so are you archiving it? --Legolas (talktome) 11:51, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- That's only for now because GaGa is hot nowadays. And because there are unresolved threads, bots might archive them. --Efe (talk) 11:47, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Still its better to apply for bots. Per day on an average i see two three sections coming up. --Legolas (talktome) 11:43, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- I think we don't need for bots. It can be archived manually. --Efe (talk) 11:36, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Anybody care to apply to Misabot? I don't know how to :-( --Legolas (talktome) 11:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Done You scaredy cats (kidding, kidding). --Whip it! Now whip it good! 06:17, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Really Bad Sources
So, the "Jim Gibbons citing her as an inspiration for budget cuts" story comes from a humor columnist writing in the student newspaper at University of Nevada, Reno. It was a joke and is presented here as fact.
Given many of the other claims here seem trumped up or outlandish, I'd think a review of sources for their reliability is in order. I'd do it, but I really don't care enough. Just came here to see who this woman is and couldn't believe some of the claims in this article. Viciouslies (talk) 03:54, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
All of the sources are extremly reliable, there might be one that is "bad". Refs and sources here are scrutinezied more than enough, by some of the MOST est. usres.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 04:36, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
I recently removed a source to digital spy, which doesn't comply with WP:RS. — R2 14:04, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- I believe digital spy is very relable and complies with WP:RS. Ot is used throughout wikipedia,on Britneys page as well so how can you say it is not reliable.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 22:42, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- Just because it happens on another article that does not mean it is acceptable. — R2 22:48, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- I do not see how it is not "reliable", could you give a reason, I have checked WP:RS, and it complies. I used the Britneys Speears example, because she is famous and "more est." user would probably be editing it. Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 22:55, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- No, please look for recent GA or FA articles that use Digital Spy as a source, you won't find many. Some crappy web site, run by gossiping 7 year olds is not a reliable source. — R2 23:01, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- Like you said before just because it's on another article does not mean It cannot go on theartilce. Please do not attack websites or use sarcasm on Wikipedia. It is still reliable and complies with WP:RS and therefore can go on the artilce. Let me put something for you in prespective, digital spy is actually more reliable then Wikipeida, most sites say Wikipedia is "untrustworthy", even the BBC is unsure of wikipedia( because its user created articles) because it's sometimes gives false information. Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 23:13, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- A couple of points: sarcasm is a quite legitimate form of communication, and directing it at a site like digitalspy is a fairly rational thing to do. Second, we know that Wikipedia doesn't pass WP:RS]: that's why you can't use one Wikipedia article as the source for another.—Kww(talk) 23:25, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- Points taken, points already know. Sarcasm which i also use is a form of black humour if you know what I mean. And I was just pointing out some obvious facts. Now back to the "point" of this descision, digital spy is still reliable and it should go on the artilce.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 10:36, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
- Your entitled to your opinion, but we really want to get this article to GA, we can do it without digit spy. — R2 11:33, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
- Ok, you are alos entiled to your opinion of the site, but I want the artilce to go to GA, so I will find another source.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 11:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
- Like you said before just because it's on another article does not mean It cannot go on theartilce. Please do not attack websites or use sarcasm on Wikipedia. It is still reliable and complies with WP:RS and therefore can go on the artilce. Let me put something for you in prespective, digital spy is actually more reliable then Wikipeida, most sites say Wikipedia is "untrustworthy", even the BBC is unsure of wikipedia( because its user created articles) because it's sometimes gives false information. Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 23:13, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- No, please look for recent GA or FA articles that use Digital Spy as a source, you won't find many. Some crappy web site, run by gossiping 7 year olds is not a reliable source. — R2 23:01, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- I do not see how it is not "reliable", could you give a reason, I have checked WP:RS, and it complies. I used the Britneys Speears example, because she is famous and "more est." user would probably be editing it. Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 22:55, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- Just because it happens on another article that does not mean it is acceptable. — R2 22:48, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
GA
When do you think it will be the right time to put the article foward to the GA.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 11:52, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
- We will probably wait until all the album promo has ended. — R2 12:27, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
- It is highly doubtful that this even closely resembles a professional encyclopedic work, it requires less about feuds and tabloid and more about Lady Gaga the person. Pistolpete384 (talk) 12:47, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
- Well finding the "Lady Gaga" the person is very diffucul. She nevers gets out of "character", she even said when she wakes up she does not put on a "Gaga mask". So the article is just how Gaga is. Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 00:46, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- It is highly doubtful that this even closely resembles a professional encyclopedic work, it requires less about feuds and tabloid and more about Lady Gaga the person. Pistolpete384 (talk) 12:47, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
New Move
Please disscuss new move here form Lady Gaga to LADY GAGA. I am sorry, I should have disscussed it here first. Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 01:56, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Already reverted you. We need consensus first. All Michael Jackson albums have his name in capitals. Your logic is terribly flawed on this issue. — R2 01:58, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Strongly oppose, as it violates the naming conventions: "Items in full or partial uppercase (such as Invader ZIM) should have standard capitalization (Invader Zim)." —C.Fred (talk) 02:01, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Still, I will let the disscussion run it's course. It could be spelt that way, so my logic is somewhat flawed. Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 02:03, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Now I am officail confused about how to spell her stage name. This youtube video The Fame:Part One, and official LADY GAGA short movie says it's GaGa. So is it 1--LADY GAGA--2--Lady Gaga3--Lady GaGa--4Lady Ga Ga5--Lady Ga ga(maybe not this one)6--lady gaga7--ladygaga. Any sugesstions.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 06:37, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- 2. Lady Gaga. Sparks Fly 13:51, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- I have her album and she put the ltrics on the booklet, on Eh Eh its says GaGa. What about the Fame Part one, but on the section where she puts who wrote the song and the producer it's Gaga. Let's have a consenus.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 03:47, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
- 2. Lady Gaga. Sparks Fly 13:51, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Now I am officail confused about how to spell her stage name. This youtube video The Fame:Part One, and official LADY GAGA short movie says it's GaGa. So is it 1--LADY GAGA--2--Lady Gaga3--Lady GaGa--4Lady Ga Ga5--Lady Ga ga(maybe not this one)6--lady gaga7--ladygaga. Any sugesstions.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 06:37, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Still, I will let the disscussion run it's course. It could be spelt that way, so my logic is somewhat flawed. Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 02:03, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Founf another source, from Gaga's official source--http://www.ladygaga.com/bio/--halve way through it changes to Gaga once, but the rest of the time it is GaGa.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 04:25, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Haus of GaGa
I put the Haus of GaGa with this source-http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/art/2009/03/143_40885.html Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 04:01, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Early Life
Please stop including 'early life' parts in the introduction paragraph, especially if they're repeated, almost verbatim, in the 'Early Life' section! THANKSDryamaka (talk) 04:58, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
- The lead is meant to repeat parts of the article. — R2 05:02, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Sorry; that's not a valid enough point. When you make a stronger point, then I'll allow it. Until then, you are only perpetuating the reason why people are turning less and less to Wikipedia for information (6 universities have already banned the domain from campus so students can't cite it- go figure). Can someone explain why donations are down? Revert. Dryamaka (talk) 05:05, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
- Take it up with the relevant people, sorry, but per WP:LEAD, the lead must be an overview of the entire article. The lead will get bigger, not smaller. — R2 13:59, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
That is kind of obivios like really obvious, if you were not a user you would probably say it useless. You are only talking abouy 6 unis. in about 70 uni.s in the US(I guess). Anyway the intro. should follow guidelines and english language rules. So it should be stated in the begining. 05:42, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
- What language is this.--Adam in MO Talk 06:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
This is english. Mr sarcasm.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 03:42, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Genres
Ok, i'm creating this new section regarding what we put as genres for Lady GaGa. First of all I tried adding in electropop but of course it was reverted "suprise, suprise" by the same user that usually always reverts everyone elses edits (you probably all know who it is) so I thought no, I'm not going to rave and start an edit war this time. I'm going to discuss it here. Lady GaGa states in this interview here that her music is electronic-pop. The interviewer says it's electro-pop? Lady GaGa responds, yes it's electronic-pop. Obviously Electronic-Pop means the same as electro-pop since electro is short for electronic. So I was thinking, why not put electropop in the article under the Genres section. I don't see why not so share your thoughts! Child Funk (talk) 06:32, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
- Again, the source itself badly fails WP:RS. Youtube cannot be authenticated. As for genres it has already been discussed that untill and unless a third party verifies her music as electropop, its not gonna be put in the article. Please see WP:PSTS for more info. This discussion is pointless. --Legolas (talktome) 06:37, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
- Child Funk- this link [1] is better support. It is the video from the source, since any source that describes Gaga in a different matter from the one that the "chosen ones" want to write is invalid, or British, or untrustworthy. To me that is a bunch of xx, and they ought to go fill one of these up instead with all that excess O2 they are wasting here. Pistolpete384 (talk) 17:30, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
There are billions of examples for her genres, that is why it is best to keep them broad, Example- pop and elecrtronic= electropop. If you want be specfic do it at the songs. Can someone find a source for dance.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 06:13, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure that "Electronic" and "Electro" mean the same thing. Comparing Electronic Dance Music and Electro music should explain it pretty clearly (Electro is a genre). If Lady GaGa said "Electronic-Pop" in an interview, I would NOT abbreviate it to "Electro-pop" here. Conor (talk) 15:30, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Hairstyle
It says twice that she changed her hairstyle from brown to blonde. The sentences are right after another. Please edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.58.203.31 (talk) 21:01, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
- Fixed, I think. — R2 21:05, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
I think it should still say that she's blonde now, just not as repetitive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.58.203.31 (talk) 23:52, 13 March 2009 (UTC)