Jump to content

Talk:Womanizer (song)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Winger84 (talk | contribs) at 21:56, 16 October 2008 (Reverted edits by 24.23.98.15 (talk) to last version by Feudonym). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconSongs Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Charts section needs to be fixed

The Pop 100 portion says that the song has reached #1 even though it only reached #2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.62.181.157 (talk) 19:59, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect

I have added all the information available for the song. Should we redirect it to Circus (Britney Spears album) for now and restore it when more information is available? TheLeftorium 14:23, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that might be a good idea. This can be recreated once it charts. Cliff smith talk 17:34, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Others Charts

America's Music Charts Top 40 = #46(lw) to #27(tw) Canada Top 40 = #45(lw) to #19(tw) Canada Hot AC = #36(NEW) Reference:http://www.americasmusiccharts.com/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Britneyboy7 (talk • contribs) 05:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

it debuted on the billboard hot 100 without being released digitally because the charts are all done sunday and released thursday and the digital downloading for womanizer started monday —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.139.93.185 (talk) 12:45, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other information

Do not post stuff about a music video or anything else unless it is confirmed, especially when you source yourself and all the sources you're using for this article take you to an article regarding Britney's last album. It's pointless, why waste your time? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.234.15.99 (talk) 01:01, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The single cover that is on this page is a fan made cover. It is NOT the offical cover. It really ought to be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.104.132.205 (talk) 06:42, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Even the radio releases info is too fancrufty. --Efe (talk) 11:55, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jive Records stated to Access Hollywood that the rumors of Womanizer being released on the 29th are UNTRUE and that they have NOT set a new release date yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.234.1.38 (talk) 03:46, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Not going to be released on September 29, 2008........ A new release date has not been revealed............[1]


Sinceseems (talk) 10:19, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Video section

I removed a section on the music video that was entirely sourced to this image: [2]. Not sure if the sourcing was a mistake? But it wouldn't, being an image, be a reliable source. I'm not sure about fadedyouthblog, although the name itself makes me wonder per WP:SPS. Perhaps this blog qualifies, if it has text content to support the information. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 10:51, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely not a reliable source, particularly being an image with no text. We don't do "breaking news", we wait for sources with some authority to report it, even if that takes a bit of waiting. Good call. — Realist2 14:01, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The mobile phone in the video is not an iPhone lol. I was told it was the upcoming Nokia touchscreen phone called the Xpress Music. While I don't know that for sure, it is definitely not an iPhone lol Roosters93 (talk) 06:50, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Single Cover

The photo of her face is from the Onyx Hotel Tour and her "body" is actually Tyra Banks. She was photoshopped on by a fan.

http://www.superficialdiva.com/2008/0924/britney-spears-womanizer-promotional-photo-is-fake/

Harry** (talk) 14:50, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let's just remove all cover work put up until sony BMG releases the official artwork. Ogioh (talk) 20:12, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Charmed36 (talk) 20:41, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is the that cover official? --Efe (talk) 08:34, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If it can't be confirmed through a reliable source as the record company-issued cover, it can and should be removed from the article. Gwen Gale (talk) 09:07, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Since this source is under the britney.com domain, it seems reliable enough for the artwork of a Spears project. Gwen Gale (talk) 11:18, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Itunes on Oct. 7

check the source its when it hits iTunes http://www.britney.com/blog/womanizer-itunes.Ogioh (talk) 23:11, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fan site and a blog in one, gross. — Realist2 23:18, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Britney's official site, and the same blog that all the other official information is released as you can clearly se below it. Ogioh (talk) 23:28, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's a blog on a forum, wait for billboard to report it. — Realist2 23:30, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That "blog" is way more reliable than Billboard. The info comes straight from Jive. Superpop (talk) 23:40, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No really it's not. :-) — Realist2 23:41, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thats her official site though... Anything posted by BRITanica is straight from Jive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.52.54.146 (talk) 20:13, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I can vouch for the above, Britney.com is run by JIVE. The site is given a blog format to engage fans. It is 100% official though and is the labels site for Spears, unlike www.britneyspears.com, which is Spears' own run site run in association with Jive. User:mikepepsi —Preceding undated comment was added at 21:13, 28 September 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Another Review

There's a new review by Reuters[3] and it says the song is catchy and all that.

Just thought that should be added to the review section..I am not really good with this so I was hoping one of you could do it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ikkomuitnederland (talk • contribs) 12:13, 27 September 2008 (UTC) Ikkomuitnederland (talk) 14:59, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Will do Ogioh (talk) 21:12, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually its not a great source, it little info i wouldn't use any of it in the article. Ogioh (talk) 21:14, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews stronger than page identifies

I have seen quite a few positive reviews for this song in newspapers and online already, so not sure why its' recieving a "mixed" review status on the basis of one positive and one negative review cited. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikepepsi (talk • contribs) 21:07, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it actualy been very positive. I'l put the positive info in the article asap. OgiBeaR (talk) 22:36, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How does one article comparing the single to Rachel Stevens' "Some Girls" amount to the single being "widely" criticised in the UK —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.139.86.249 (talk) 17:20, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cover for the Single

Is the single picture posted in the article the real cover work for the single? Well I suppose the single's cover art should contain Britney's picture. Frankly, the before picture was far better, even though it is morphed. It had a Circus theme to it.:) --"Legolas" (talk) 11:23, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is official 200px0

That cover is fake. It looks like fan photo shop. Charmed36 (talk) 05:42, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yeah i agree, the britney promo picture behind the words is used for the album In The Zone, so most likely a fan photoshopped photo —Preceding unsigned comment added by Christopheraymond (talk • contribs) 06:15, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Music video premiere

I've added info that the video will premiere on 20/20 on October 10th... Wasn't sure how to word it.. so if anyone can word it better, feel free to do so. Source: http://abcnews.go.com/2020/CelebrityCafe/wireStory?id=5951582

There is redundancy in the section, the show and time only need to be stated once.72.220.173.73 (talk) 01:03, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Song Reception

There is only one bad review on the article. This has been stated before the reception stays as MOSTLY POSITIVE. This has been said before, editors shouldn't be wasting time reverting edits that change the reception because of somebody who doesn't like britney or maybe just doesn't know the way wiki works. Please refrain form changing the reception status, it's stupid, and i will revert it as soon as i see it Ogioh (talk) 15:53, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Careful, your comment may be interpreted as an attempt at owning the article. The source currently provided indicates "mixed," per the second sentence of that article. Therefore - for Wikipedia purposes - "mixed" is the proper word. --Winger84 (talk) 20:28, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Are you blind Ogioh? There are five negative reviews compared to four positive. You be the judge. Rvk41 (talk) 18:48, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Itunes info?

Who removed all the info regarding how it shot up the itunes charts, its significant, it could of done with a tidy-up and maybe but under a subheading 'Download success' or something like that. But not all of it needed removed. And the airplay success section should be brought back. I smashed a lot of records in many countries.Ogioh (talk) 16:01, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

JUST HIT #1 ON CANADIAN iTUNES —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.139.93.185 (talk) 18:25, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Irish Radio station

It debuted yesterday(6th October) at No. 11 on Spin 103.8, it's an irish radio station in dublin. Could this be added into the article? Here's a link http://www.spin1038.com/zoocrew —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.100.221.196 (talk) 16:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the toxic guy!

I can't edit this in cause the page is protected from IP edits, but can someone please edit in that the large guy with glasses from the Toxic music video is also in the Womanizer video in the office scene with the coffee! -24.92.46.22 (talk) 04:15, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who is that guy anyway? Anybody know and would like to share? - Bell'Orso (talk) 12:51, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Music Video Image

I think there should be another picture used to show Spears in the music video for the song. The current image is just a picture that was taken on the set, and isn't actually from the music video (though it is an outfit she wears in the video, it's not really a picture of the actual music video, just a pic from the set). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.234.15.99 (talk) 22:39, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The 'Womanizer'

The guy that plays the 'womanizer' in the video is Brandon Stoughton, who's also a model. Could someone add this in?

I TRIED TO ADD THIS BUT IT LOOKS A BIT MESSY =/ COULD SOMEONE PLEASE MAKE IT LOOK A BIT BETTER...SORRY ABOUT CAPS XX —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toxicbomb2004 (talk • contribs) 12:20, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading Claims

I removed a claim that the song being number 2 in the UK airplay charts is 'denoting that the single is going to be a success on the British charts when it comes out.' This is clearly out of the remit of a factual encyclopedia. Let's just wait and see how it performs in the UK charts before we start to comment on that. It is certainly impressive that it is number 2 in the airplay charts, but this does not mean it will sell well on release, so commenting on this is premature. --MJ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.170.132.23 (talk) 18:59, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blatantly incorrect quotes/reviews and unreferenced Critical Response section

If you add a review or quote from a magazine/online article please make sure it is a DIRECT WORD-FOR-WORD QUOTE. Anything else is just blatant marketing/promotion for the single, and false information, which does NOT belong in a factual encyclopedia and against NPOV wiki policy. I've had to remove and edit many of the quotes in the "Critical Response" section as the links led to articles with no mention of the quoted sentence. Please can editors keep a close eye on this section and check any over-the-top reviews for authenticity. The bad grammar/spelling is also sometimes a dead giveaway. Thanks. Feudonym (talk) 00:55, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had a fealing most of those negative reviews were phon, il watch it like a hawk Ogioh (talk) 12:30, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, but I actually found that most of the positive reviews were the phony ones.Feudonym (talk) 20:39, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Womanizer_(song)&oldid=245760442"