Template:Did you know nominations/Bitch I'm Madonna
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Keilana|Parlez ici 20:20, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Bitch I'm Madonna
[edit]- ...
that Madonna felt as though she had been raped and terrorized when "Bitch I'm Madonna" leaked?
Created by 11JORN (talk). Nominated by Calvin999 (talk) at 08:13, 5 June 2015 (UTC).
- Hook is no good as the article doesn't state that (and, reading the sources, Madonna didn't either) Belle (talk) 12:26, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
- She said she felt "artistically raped". I'm not using direct quotes, I'm using wordplay. — Calvin999 14:51, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
- ALT1:
... that in response to the criticism of Madonna's profound use of "bitch" on "Bitch I'm Madonna", she said that the "word police can fuck off"?
- Going for another shock hook; at least they aren't boring. Unfortunately the quote in the article is the "word police can f--- off", so she could have been awarding them an f triple minus for their efforts or perhaps suggesting they "funk off" in the PG dubbed version; "file off"?, "fall off"?, "flit off"? You could change the hook to include the exact quote of "f---", but then there would be crying and wailing from people that suppose that we censored it. Belle (talk) 08:15, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
- Well we all know that she is saying fuck and nothing else lol — Calvin999 08:22, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
- Going for another shock hook; at least they aren't boring. Unfortunately the quote in the article is the "word police can f--- off", so she could have been awarding them an f triple minus for their efforts or perhaps suggesting they "funk off" in the PG dubbed version; "file off"?, "fall off"?, "flit off"? You could change the hook to include the exact quote of "f---", but then there would be crying and wailing from people that suppose that we censored it. Belle (talk) 08:15, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
- IndianBio has since expanded this article further, maybe enough for a GA nom; let's try and salvage this. Striking the original hook and ALT1 for not being directly sourced. How about:
- ALT2: ... that when a demo version of "Bitch I'm Madonna" was first leaked, Madonna was criticized for describing it as "artistic rape" and "a form of terrorism"?
- ALT3: ... that the music video for "Bitch I'm Madonna" features Beyoncé making a "Vogue" pose and Miley Cyrus giving the finger? Fuebaey (talk) 21:06, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
- Well I don't know if my comment would matter, but I would definitely go with Hook3, its definitely the best. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 04:34, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- And ALT2 is the same as the original hook I supplied which was rejected. — Calvin999 07:59, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- Not really, it's a direct quote rather then a paraphrase - one of those (controversial BLP) remarks where quotation marks are needed for attribution. It also focuses on the aftermath rather than what the artist felt at the time. But feel free to suggest another if you prefer. Fuebaey (talk) 15:51, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- Well, yes really. It's the saying the same thing. Let's not be petty about it please. ALT3 is fine. — Calvin999 16:41, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry, I'm not sure how explaining why the original hook was rejected and how ALT2 differed to it could be construed as "petty". I accept that the two hooks relate to the same situation but if you don't like the original hook premise, please just say so instead of conflating issues like that. Fuebaey (talk) 18:25, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- Well, it was me who nominated this article in the first place. I'm just saying ALT3 is better than ALT2, because ALT2 is the same as the original just worded differently. — Calvin999 19:01, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry, I'm not sure how explaining why the original hook was rejected and how ALT2 differed to it could be construed as "petty". I accept that the two hooks relate to the same situation but if you don't like the original hook premise, please just say so instead of conflating issues like that. Fuebaey (talk) 18:25, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- Well, yes really. It's the saying the same thing. Let's not be petty about it please. ALT3 is fine. — Calvin999 16:41, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- Not really, it's a direct quote rather then a paraphrase - one of those (controversial BLP) remarks where quotation marks are needed for attribution. It also focuses on the aftermath rather than what the artist felt at the time. But feel free to suggest another if you prefer. Fuebaey (talk) 15:51, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- And ALT2 is the same as the original hook I supplied which was rejected. — Calvin999 07:59, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
Full review request. Fuebaey (talk) 18:25, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
The article was sufficiently long (3,825 characters) on 11 June 2015, seven days after expansion of the article from a redirect started on 4 June. The article passed Earwig's copyvio detector, and seems sufficiently referenced. Both the ALT2 and ALT3 hooks are of an appropriate length, and are supported by references. Good to go. — SMUconlaw (talk) 19:23, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
