Jump to content

Talk:Shallow (Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper song): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
adding MarioSoulTruthFan for taking over GA nom
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{Talk header}}
{{GA nominee|10:31, 2 April 2019 (UTC)|nominator=—[[User:IndianBio|<span style="font-size: small; font-family: Courier New; color: #6F00FF;"><b>I</b><b style="color: #FF033E;">B</b></span>]] <sup>[ [[User talk:IndianBio|<b style="font-family: Tempus Sans ITC; color: #1C1CF0;">Poke</b>]] ]</sup>|page=1|subtopic=Songs|status=on hold|note=}}
{{GA nominee|10:31, 2 April 2019 (UTC)|nominator=—[[User:IndianBio|<span style="font-size: small; font-family: Courier New; color: #6F00FF;"><b>I</b><b style="color: #FF033E;">B</b></span>]] <sup>[ [[User talk:IndianBio|<b style="font-family: Tempus Sans ITC; color: #1C1CF0;">Poke</b>]] ]</sup> and [[User:MarioSoulTruthFan]]|page=1|subtopic=Songs|status=on hold|note=}}
{{Article history
{{Article history
|action1=WPR
|action1=WPR

Revision as of 17:50, 28 September 2019

Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 11, 2018Guild of Copy EditorsCopyedited
March 22, 2019Guild of Copy EditorsCopyedited

Template:WPUS50

sources

@IndianBio: Please, see these links:

here and here and [0=ts_chart_artistname%3Agaga&f[1]=itm_field_chart_id%3A-&f[2]=ss_bb_type%3Achart_item&solrsort=ds_peakdate%3Adesc&type=2 here] :) -- Max24 (talk) 20:00, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Midweek flash

How reliable are the UK Midweek flashes? —IB [ Poke ] 11:21, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Country song? I say no

This article originally listed this song as being "country", and that's it. I strongly disagree - 1) iTunes lists this song as "pop", 2) This song isn't on any US country music chart, but it is on pop charts, 3) Most articles I've read describe it as a power ballad, or just as pop. There are some folk elements as well. The only connection to country music is that the character in the *movie* portrays a country music singer. However, realise that this is a fictional character, and Cooper himself is not a country singer in real life.MisterZed (talk) 20:20, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MisterZed: I strongly suggest that you go through Wikipedia's policy of verifiability and reliable sourcing. We have NPR calling it "country croon" explicitly and the other source from Rolling Stone calls it folk-pop. These are two extremely reliable sources and hence we go by them. Not what you or me or anybody else editing this article thinks. iTunes always does generalized listing of genres based on the main artist's genre and is not to be considered. Now coming to power ballad, its not a musical genre, its a style of performance. So it cannot be listed. —IB [ Poke ] 20:33, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Surely NPR's article is just one person's opinion, though? MisterZed (talk) 10:38, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with IndianBio. Also, there's nothing wrong with calling a song a ballad and adding the ballads category (assuming secondary coverage supports this claim), but a ballad is not a genre of music. ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:35, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Remove Remix Promo CD from tracklisting

The tracklisting of the promo CD with the Remixes should be removed, it is not an official release. The site misspelled Lady Gaga's name, left out Bradley Cooper entirely on the site, mistitled "Is That Alright?" and literally says "a pressing of official and unofficial remixes". It is clearly marked as an unofficial bootleg CD. Not to mention that the site fails to mention any relation to Gaga's record label. --2A02:810B:1040:FB8:AD49:1AB0:134E:29FD (talk) 21:21, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Enigma

Should the article mention Gaga's performance of "Shallow" in Enigma?

---Another Believer (Talk) 15:07, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Accolade Table

Have put this back as it is a common feature on ‘singles’ pages, and can see no reason why it was removed. If anyone disagrees, we should discuss reasons here. BenBowser (talk) 13:46, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly you have no idea how articles and lists work in Wikipedia. The whole information is already present in the article and in the actual section and this is not a WP:LIST. And you were reverted multiple times previously, so it is your onus to first discuss here. —IB [ Poke ] 14:10, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Woah, ok calm down. Whoever that IP is, it isn’t me, so you don’t need to be so abrupt. :) I came to the talk section to ask why it had been reverted, since it is a useful table to have, especially for a song such as this which is performing unusually well with accolades. It is helpful for giving information quickly, without having to read the paragraphs. Quick information after all is what most people use Wikipedia for. BenBowser (talk) 14:30, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Really? That IP isn't you? Oh well, you were still removed in the next edit so yeah you are correct in discussing. MOS:LIST only allows usage of Embedded lists for See also and References section. This is Wikipedia rule-governed, not my personal preference. All details of the songs' awards are present in the Lady Gaga awards list, which is linked in the {{See also}} tab at the top of the section. —IB [ Poke ] 14:35, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Whoops, forgot my ‘:’s! Don’t worry, I’m not bothered enough by this to start an edit war, I see you’ve had enough of those on here already, haha. Wiki rules on this are just weird I guess. As you seem to run these pages, maybe you should be a little more fourthcoming, understanding and open with IP Wikipuppies over these issues? Explaining reasons properly etc. would’ve saved me (and I’m sure others) from making the same mistakes, as we’d understand more where you’re coming from. At first glance it seems like you’re just being pedantic. (I understand now of course! I don’t mean this in a bad way. Just suggesting what I think might save you from all those pesky rollbacks!) BenBowser (talk) 14:39, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No problem at all, glad you understood. Sometimes I feel like my hands are tied because of so many rules and etc. —IB [ Poke ] 14:44, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a line about the techniques used by her fans to generate streams?

In the past week there has been a lot of coverage of different strategies utilized by Lady Gaga's fans to generate more streams for the song.

https://www.thefader.com/2019/03/01/lady-gaga-shallow-starbucks-twitter-scam-shallowbucks-spotify

https://www.iheart.com/content/2019-03-03-lady-gaga-fans-create-starbucks-scam-to-boost-shallow-streams/

https://www.altpress.com/news/lady-gaga-shallowbucks-shallow/

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/davidmack/starbucks-shallow-lady-gaga-scam-shallowbucks

https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/lady-gaga-scamming-starbucks-and-spotify-to-get-shallow-to-no-1.html/

not sure how credible these articles are but it's certainly noteworthy enough to be added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lukestepford (talk • contribs) 22:42, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. WP:FANCRUFT and WP:UNDUE applies. —IB [ Poke ] 15:23, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pop Culture Moment

Guys I am having a bit difficulty in thinking where this particular source about the song's popularity. An impact section maybe? —IB [ Poke ] 14:23, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Or rename the Critical section to Critical response and impact? But it would be great to include some of the infos from this source. --Sricsi (talk) 22:31, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good point. Let me work out something. —IB [ Poke ] 09:55, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cover versions section

Why is there an infobox for one of the covers? There are at least 10 other covers mentioned in that section. Putting an infobox for just one of them seems WP:UNDUE weight to the Keiino cover. Schazjmd (Talk) 21:41, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Schazjmd, But Keiino's cover seems to be only one recorded and released as a single. ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:54, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Another Believer, the versions by Pentatonix and Andy Mineo are released for sale. (I can buy either on amazon) Schazjmd (Talk) 01:01, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Schazjmd, I understand those tracks are available for digital download, but not necessarily released as a single. I don't feel strongly about keeping the inbox, but I'm trying to decide if single release is enough to justify inclusion. I'm also wondering if cover art should be added. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:06, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Another Believer, could you explain what you mean by "not necessarily released as a single"? Schazjmd (Talk) 01:11, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Schazjmd, Singles are released to promote albums. Simply recording a song and making it available for digital download as part of a collection is not the same as releasing a single. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:16, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Another Believer I'm not seeing an album release by Keiino, only singles, same as the other two covers. When you look at this page on mobile and go to the covers, first thing you see is the large infobox for Keiino. It seems like promotion. Schazjmd (Talk) 01:19, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Schazjmd, Ok, then I'm not sure and I'll let others decide. Not too concerned either way, TBH. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:20, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, Another Believer, I'll wait and see if anyone has any arguments for keeping it, thanks! Schazjmd (Talk) 01:45, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Artwork

Was the alleged cover ever posted by a primary source? The chart website linked in the upload is not a reliable source for artworks. A reverse image search only reveals usage on fan pages and unreliable secondary sources. We need to remove it unless proof of it being official is provided.--NØ 12:14, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Recording Asociation of America (RIAA) lists the image as an official cover in their database. The official website of the German Charts also lists the image as the official cover
Chart and certification websites are not reliable sources for artwork though. A simple reverse image search reveals that this cover is of fanmade origin and has never been shared by Gaga, Cooper, or the record label. Those chart websites probably saw it as the cover on Wikipedia and just went with it.—NØ 16:08, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's quite an arrogant assumption to make about the hegemonic intellectual power of Wikipedia. The Recording Industry Association of America, which Universial Music/Interscope Records is a part of, listing the image as a cover should be enough of a source to verify its officiality. --213.214.19.84 (talk) 10:30, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
What exactly that I said was arrogant? Use any reverse image search engine, fan sites and fan twitter accounts were posting the "artwork" months before it was used on RIAA. It was never posted by any primary source (Cooper, Gaga, on a CD single, or by the label), so where exactly do you suppose it originated?—NØ 12:10, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The RIAA is about as close to an official source as you can get as they are the official certifier for US singles and albums. Adding the cover back and updating the file info to use that site as a source. Chase (talk | contributions) 23:33, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No. And the RIAA has used a fanmade cover for their plaque for Taylor Swift's "Style" before. You need to produce a link to a primary source (which doesn’t exist because primary sources wouldn’t share a fake cover they know they didn’t create)—NØ 01:17, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lawsuit

The new lawsuit. Here are a couple of sources for those who wish to add to the article. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 13:43, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

1, 2, 3, and 4

GA Review

The following discussion 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.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Shallow (Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Kingsif (talk · contribs) 02:48, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'll review this - comments should be added here soon Kingsif (talk) 02:48, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Style

  • Lead good length for article
  • Lead generally written well, made minor edit for clarity
  • Background and release section could use some tightening on what is in the fictional film, that Cooper is also the director, and then the real filming of the sequence at the Greek
    • The mention of the internet meme use could be incorporated better since the article doesn't otherwise have a Culture section for it to go in
  • Writing and recording section good (again, one tweak)
  • In Composition, the sentences "Cooper sings the line "Tell me something, girl" to open the first verse with restraint. Gaga joins from the second verse belting in a "sturdy voice"." feel like they could be phrased better. Maybe 'Cooper opens the first verse by singing "Tell me something, girl" in a restrained voice; Gaga joins from the second verse, belting with what is described by Pitchfork as a "sturdy voice".'
  • Saying "The song moves gradually toward the final chorus with a vocal run" makes it seem like the whole song up to the final chorus is a building vocal run. Some expansion before the
  • The Composition and lyrical interpretation section (especially last 2 paragraphs) are weaker than the rest of the writing. Sentences and getting information across can definitely be constructed better.
    • Also, structurally it could be better sectioned off - parts about composition and performance and lyrics are all currently mixed together in the second paragraph.
  • In Critical reception, the word "boffo" needs a wiktionary link - it's slang and unique to the US, and understanding the sentence relies on knowing the word when many won't.
  • When parts rewritten, a comma check may be useful for this article.
  • Critical reception section well structured
  • Some of the information at the start (first paragraph) of the Charts section seems to be disorganized - there's a lot of numbers and I don't quite know which chart-topping and position stats refer to which of the two charts initially mentioned (the info about Streaming Songs chart is ok). Maybe separating by chart could help the confusion.
    • Question on why chart performance and the actual charts are not together?
  • Again, this (Chart performance) section is weaker, probably because it's just trying to handle a lot of numbers and needs some breaking up of the stats and some extra prose to make it clearer and less like a really long list of numbers.
  • Accolades is good and both high enough up the article and not excessive enough to warrant a table
  • Some bits of clean-up elsewhere but otherwise good
  • Could probably wikilink the first instance of Eurovision to Eurovision Song Contest for those who don't know what that is.
  • Needs work Some parts weaker than others in terms of writing
I tried, take a second look. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 17:12, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Coverage

If IB didn't add it it's because he couldn't find it. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 16:49, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Does the sentence "Nate Jones of New York magazine noted the track was the basis for the romantic relationship that develops between Jackson and Ally in the film. "'Shallow' is the moment Ally and Jack both realize how great they can be when their talents intertwine, and the rest of the movie explores what happens when they start to fray," he added." in Critical reception actually need to be included - this isn't a review, it's just a clear statement about it that has already been made in the article.
  • This section otherwise good
  • May be too much in the Chart performance section, especially with a lot of this reflected in the Charts table below
  • Accolades good, especially with link to main article
  • Live performances could maybe have a mention of 'after the initial recording, the song has been included in several live performances', e.g.
  • If not mentioned, it's good
  • Attention Only a few things to look at

 Done take a look one more time. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 16:49, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Illustration

Neutrality

Stability

  • A whole section was removed on Sep 15. It was sourced and may be relevant, so I don't see why except to avoid covering the plagiarism claim - it has a brief section on the talk page where I feel its inclusion should be discussed before finalizing this review (I'll put it on hold until discussion's over, for a reasonable period, unless the discussion isn't started in the next week)
Where should I add that? It's not a matter of discussion it has several relable sources and coverage. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 09:31, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'd put it after Critical reception, before Chart performance. Good to see someone taking this up, thanks :) Kingsif (talk) 16:17, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Done please take a look. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 16:13, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Verifiability

Overall

I will do by best.MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 09:35, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
MarioSoulTruthFan, Thank you. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:44, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've added you as a co-nominator since you're taking over in IB's absence. Thanks again. ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:51, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Cartoon network freak, SNUGGUMS, and DAP388: Pinging you 3 as active editors and members of WikiProject Lady Gaga. Care to help see this GA nomination through in IndianBio's absence? ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:56, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I doubt it given my current off-wiki obligations :/. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 20:34, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Shallow_(Lady_Gaga_and_Bradley_Cooper_song)&oldid=918442458"