Jump to content

Talk:Lady Gaga

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rcnaranja (talk | contribs) at 15:47, 5 April 2009 (→‎"Pop Princess" Title). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


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)[reply]

References

What is the this???Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 06:15, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Doesnot comply with WP:RS Lovegame. --Legolas (talktome) 06:47, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
Gossip. — R2 20:17, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]

If they perform a duet, well that will be something. — R2 10:44, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Remember guys this is not a forum. --RCNARANJA 15:37, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Not important enough to be worthy of mentioning in the biography article. --Legolas (talktome) 04:39, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Billboard is a very reliable source. --Legolas (talktome) 04:39, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
There is a Fame Ball article. The info. could be uesd there.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 03:31, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving

Talk page is becoming too long. Its more than 127KB. Can we apply for archiving? --Legolas (talktome) 10:48, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, agree. Archive is in order. — R2 10:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Anybody care to apply to Misabot? I don't know how to :-( --Legolas (talktome) 11:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think we don't need for bots. It can be archived manually. --Efe (talk) 11:36, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
Hmmm, so are you archiving it? --Legolas (talktome) 11:51, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You can do it yourself. I don't like archiving. Hehe. --Efe (talk) 12:02, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See how cunning you are. *wink* --Legolas (talktome) 12:11, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
He he. Nobody likes it, except for their own talkpages. --Legolas (talktome) 13:20, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'll do it, piece by piece, sending only long stale sections over to the archive? — R2 13:21, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think thats the best way to do it... and Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 03:26, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Done You scaredy cats (kidding, kidding). --Whip it! Now whip it good! 06:17, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

I recently removed a source to digital spy, which doesn't comply with WP:RS. — R2 14:04, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]
Just because it happens on another article that does not mean it is acceptable. — R2 22:48, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

We will probably wait until all the album promo has ended. — R2 12:27, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
2. Lady Gaga. Sparks Fly 13:51, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

The lead is meant to repeat parts of the article. — R2 05:02, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

This is english. Mr sarcasm.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 03:42, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Fixed, I think. — R2 21:05, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


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)[reply]

GaGa vs. Gaga

There was some discussion about the correct spelling here [2], and the title has been redirected to "Gaga". However, the artist's own website uses both spellings, "GaGa" [3] and "Gaga" [4], though her record label, Interscope Records, uses "Gaga" [5]. So, could someone please write something like "Lady Gaga[6] (also: Lady GaGa[7]) is an..." in the beginning of the first paragraph? -- Frous (talk) 22:41, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's really not not needed, sine it pronounced in exactly the same manner. We are getting a little obsessed with a trivial issue. The probably isn't a right or wrong method of writing it. — R2 23:44, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It isn't trival, the article needs that, there are so many ways of spelling it, or perhaps a consenus.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 07:46, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd support also spelled GaGa or something like that because neither way seems to be the most common. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 12:39, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
i think we should go with GaGa. diRk dARyL ♫ 13:28, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could it be lady gaga this is how she spells it on twitter, any lady gaga fan would be looking at her twitter profile-http://twitter.com/ladygaga —Preceding unsigned comment added by GagaLoveGame (talk • contribs) 07:44, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't necessarily derive the rule from Twitter, 'cos all words are often decapitalized there, regardless of the spelling practice elsewhere. -- Frous (talk) 15:13, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like Reuters is using the InternalCapitalization style of "GaGa": Lady GaGa wows with big beats, bluesy surprises —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.79.16.68 (talk) 16:50, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When you buy her music on iTunes it lists her as Lady GaGa. Dt128 (talk) 12:19, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I think we have enough support and sources calling for a move back. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 16:45, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We have discussed this before, look at archive. I could go out and get alot of sources like you. We are all happy with this (most). FYI check Gaga's LoveGame video and you will see it spelled like Gaga. Are you really going to distrust what came from the horse mouth itself??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by GagaLoveGame (talk • contribs) 04:48, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Things can change especially when it was as weak as "the record label spells it like that", and all of the new found sources are more or less as official as the video and support GaGa. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 12:34, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OM*G

Check out this everyone, it mentions wikipedia, I think it has a place on the article under recpetion--LOL! You will get the LOL after you read the article.http://www.signonsandiego.com/entertainment/street/2009/03/lady_gaga_the_woman_who_fell_t.html

and check this vid. http://www.desihits.com/blog/article/lady-gaga-performs-new-song-20090312 Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 07:00, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

and this article says she smoked cocanine--interview http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/people/Lady-GaGas-music-is-all-about-fun-41127332.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by GagaLoveGame (talk • contribs) 07:02, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ha ha. LOL for the first article. --Legolas (talktome) 08:00, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Lol. — R2 12:01, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know this not a forum but found mor OM*G--so to keep this message not a forum do you think this could go on the article, the answer probably no.Lady Gaga at her tour in a bubble costume? just see the links... http://blogs.nypost.com/popwrap/archives/2009/03/lady_gaga_poker_face and htmlhttp://www.celebuzz.com/lady-gaga-bubblicious-s93091/ and http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/bizarre/usa/article2318161.ece. Was anyone went to show, if so what was the setlist.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 05:28, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did, I did. It was awesome. The sun link is correct but its not needed here, it can go to the tour article. --Legolas (talktome) 05:32, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Check this photo of gaga she looks like a she devil or a drag queenor some sort of creature- http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/71763/Lady-Gaga-My-show-will-be-orgasmic —Preceding unsigned comment added by GagaLoveGame (talk • contribs) 07:42, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Last vote/consenus of 'HER stage name

Hello, to all who want to end this dispute should vote on want they think based on there evidence tey have sort to come by. Rules- No evidence needed - one vote per user(one for every single person) or ip ( do not vote with user then ip or muliple users) - type in name you want e.g. Lady Gaga - then put a vote beside it, if someone also wnats the same name type agree then your user name next to it - if a user name is not submitted the vote is not valid. Do not use loop hole to contridicting theses rules, as they are not the full terms and conditions - the consenus is merley to end this disscussion and can be changed with the "appropritate source"(e.g.-her saying how to spell it). The vote must end at some time - that is to be debated. ( if you have a concern, please message me or at the debate section) Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 07:54, 14 March 2009 (UTC) Change of rules 1.Provide source which is reliable next to the name you want, if you agree second the notion by (2) after I agree. Please not at least two sources MUST be provided ( I changed it because of the disscussion below). Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 23:43, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vote (underneath)-

Lady Gaga-

Lady GaGa- I --oRange 23:02, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

debate over vote/consenus

Any concerns please debate underneath Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 07:55, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My concern is that you don't demonstrate any awareness of how these things are decided on Wikipedia.—Kww(talk) 12:04, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Or, more directly, "Wikipedia decisions are not made by popular vote". The discussion and evidence presented are far more compelling than a mere show of hands. —C.Fred (talk) 12:50, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I understand all of this however, we already have evidence, I have and others have already provided it. I only want the matter to be going a clear direction, I am here to improve the artilce not make it a pile of collected information. Thst is why people will read the evidence and then decided, I will change the rules if I have to so people need to provide ot second an evidence.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 23:37, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

her gender

Should the article not cover the rumours and discussion about her gender? Many people claim her to be a post op transexual or a transvestite, especially here in the UK. I have no idea about what her actual Gender is or isn't but if someone could make a mature mention of this I think it would be helpful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.80.225.2 (talk) 17:20, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We deal with facts, not gossip. — R2 17:21, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

perhaps someone needs to clarify the facts then. Has she ever referred to herself as a female? is the 'lady' part of her name a knowing wink to her gender difficulties?

Dies she look like a male, sound, act. I think she is female, this disscussion is complete gossip and false 'triva', peoples fabtasy, they want to be different. Freaks (no offence).Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 03:47, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As was said, it's gossip and that's the only thing keeping hecklers alive. She's a perfect natural girl, period! And if anyone has doubts about that, just go to perezhilton dot com and look up her pre-celebrity pictures when she was 12 or 13. Em27 (talk) 05:11, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with you 10000% Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 04:29, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Real date of birth

Which is it? 20st or 28th of March?... Se sais in this-clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZDxGXDsUps it's on the 28th and a lot of people are buying it... not to mention calling Wikipedia unreliable because of this simple thing. It might be false deliberately, out of privacy reasons... who knows! Em27 (talk) 05:55, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will watch video, and come back. Wiki's sources say the 20th.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 06:19, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, video says (she) thats its her birthday, no editing on video so I will go woth that, watch the video before anyone takes it off.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 04:36, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the video is that conclusive. The audio is grainy enough that it's hard to tell if she says "twentieth" or "twenty-eighth", and the source of the super text - which was edited into the video - is unknown. I'm not willing to give the super text any more credence than the channel author - a fansite - so I think Allmusic is still the more reliable source. —C.Fred (talk) 15:55, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's not the same video that was linked to in an earlier edit. The one Em27 links to is a longer clip with no text superimposed into the video, plus some context about playing a concert on the twenty-eighth. I think the clip supports the 28th. —C.Fred (talk) 21:10, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

it is definitely the 28th, NOT the 20th —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.141.90.64 (talk) 21:00, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, should it be changed? Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 23:53, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
More evidence her birth date should be changed to 28 March: in addition to the birthday performance at Moomba, referenced in the YouTube video, entertainment reporter/promoter Perez Hilton posted a birthday message on the 20th, then later updated it citing Wikipedia being wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.79.16.68 (talk) 17:49, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WELL... i think that should be 28th... cause she herself say it on twitter.. today so 28th :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.17.247.170 (talk) 20:16, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i couldnt find her twitter acct. linkpls--oRange 23:00, 28 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rcnaranja (talk • contribs)

I'm this video from her March 27th concert in Ottawa, they sing happy birthday and she says its her last night being 22 so I think between both of these videos, there is enough to correct her birthday in the article. Per WP:SELFPUB, her own word is more reliable than even the most reliable source. You cannot deny what she says because it's her life and she obviously knows more about it than anyone else. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 18:35, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SELFPUB would only apply if this had been published by Lady Gaga on some official Lady Gaga channel on Youtube. This is just some anonymous fan recording that may or may not have been doctored.—Kww(talk) 18:44, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well there are two videos supporting this and there is no proof that it was doctored. Why would two different people both doctor their videos to say the same thing? It does not have to be official either. If she said it in an interview or anything like that that is also legal for wiki. We can bring this up on reliable sources if you would really want to waste time. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 18:48, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can't believe someone is overblowing this birthday thing? Are they doing it for a laugh?!. HER BIRTHDAY is MARCH 28th. The person in the video is obviously her... and wikipedia cites ALLMUSIC.COM? How the hell is that more reliable then that video? This evdience is an audio-visual source from Lady Gaga's mouth. --Franch (talk) 21:32, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you make some valid point instead of shouting? We all know very well that youtibe videos do not fall under reliable sources. Wikipeida goes for verifiability from third party sources and that too which can be reliable. Allmost all of the youtube videos badly fail copyright permissions, and as I can see that the video in discussion is not even on Gaga's youtube channel, no-wayyy can it be used in the article. --Legolas (talktome) 03:58, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's why there is the other one also which is not copyrighted...Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 12:27, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I understand. It seems this Wikipedia article likes to verify things based on technicalities rather than common sense. This is kind of the reason why I left Wikipedia two years ago... superfluously pedantic. II'll just leave it to someone else who will dig up the source eventually. --Franch (talk) 13:07, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If we did not have the "technicalities" as a safeguard, Wikipedia would look very different, not for the better either. — R2 15:41, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


I was talking about this particular article. I understand about the guidelines pertaining to other subjects (in most circumstances), but Lady Gaga has confirmed her birth date through audio-visual media that just happens to be on Youtube. People are saying "youtube is not a source", youtube is not the matter, the evidence is the content. There are articles that I have witnessed in the past where details of a subject were accepted through audio-visual evidence that happened to be posted via sites like Youtube etc. Wikipedia's Verifiability article states that electronic media 'can be used'. The technicality? It can only come from a "reliable" source despite the fact the source deemed "reliable" here cites her fake birth date, March 20 is a music review site which self-admittingly asks people to submit corrections from errors they make. The content clearly displays Lady Gaga (by common sense one can discern that it is not an imposter) saying "...and actually March 28th is my birthday" (which is probably a subtle reference to the mistake erred by Wikipedia). But whatever, enough of this dramarama. I'm out of here without my two cents. --Franch (talk) 16:59, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention that there are two different videos at different occasions where Gaga states her real bday. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 17:01, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You are working this problem from the wrong direction: if you find those YouTube videos convincing, e-mail allmusic and tell them. If they agree, they will change the date on their site, and then we'll follow.—Kww(talk) 17:38, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lady Gaga fan of British culture

Recently I have come across many interviews etc with Lady Gaga where she has expressed her love for the British accent, men and culture in general. I believe this would be an important addition to the article as she herself has stated that English singer Amy winehouse paved the way fro her success, and she has been inspired by Queen and David Bowie, she has also called her British fans cool and innovative in the way they think about pop music and culture, a possbible entry such as the one below in my opinion will be a good addition to the article (although I understand if some of it was to be reworded or shortened down):

Lady GaGa has consistently shown her liking for the United Kingdom and in general her love of British people and culture on many occasions. Her stage name was 'inspired by the English rock band Queen's 1980's hit Radio Ga Ga and Gaga herself has also stated that she couldn't have made it to where she is today without the London singer Amy Winehouse paving the way for the acceptance of quirky and unique singers such as herself into mainstream society, she has also refered to singer David Bowie as an inspirational figure.[1] Gaga has also expressed her love for the British accent (one one occasion calling it borderline pretentious) as well as having refered to British men as "smart" and "cool" (one notable example is her comments about Prince Harry).[2] After the announcement that her debut single Just Dance had reached #1 in the UK Singles Chart, Lady Gaga reportedly broke down in tears saying it had been a life long dream of hers to have a big hit in the country and her British fans are "so sexy and the people are so innovative and free in how they think about pop culture and music".[3] The British public similarly has taken a liking to Lady Gaga, her first two singles ("Just Dance" and "Poker Face") have both reached the top spot in the UK, even her songs "LoveGame", "Paparazzi" and "Beautiful, Dirty, Rich" have charted even though many are yet to even recieve a release date.

Stevvvv4444 (talk) 23:08, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

::She is a fan of britain really. She even cried when Just dance went to No.1. She didnt when it did in the US. Why is this disscussion even on. Its not going to be in the artticle. Thsi is not a forum. But wesure do treat like one. P.S. I like it like a forum, but just giving you the heads up.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 05:21, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This can be discussed and not falls under forum. Personally I feel that inspirations could be anybody, co-incidentally happened to be British. And that part about crying for Just Dance, its already there in the "Just Dance" article, not needed here. Things like reference to Prince Harry etc are purely gossiip and not encyclopedic. Hardly inclusable. --Legolas (talktome) 05:27, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OMFG. Thst exactly what I said. How do you cross my statement, that reallly hurt my feelings I didn't say put the crying on the article. I told you this was a pointless disscussion and has just become a forum.... I luv Gaga>I think taht falls under forum. Just jokes, but that really made me sad  :( Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 04:51, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What you exactly said was "This is not a forum". We use this statement only when users are discussing things forumlike. User:Stevvv4444 simply pointed out an info (which if I may point out, you do 1000 times more). His additions are not forumlike and are discussable. Its legitimate to strikeout your lines for that. Understand what is what first. --Legolas (talktome) 05:04, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok your crossing the line, there mate. I just made it a forum, my last comment. The disscussion is over and don't make this any worse then already is... Just a warning. P.S. the only reason I put info. on this page, is so I can go on the artilce then people like you keep taking it off. This is such a long process, i put something on te article, you take it off, goes to disscussion THEN it goes on the article, Grr...Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 07:52, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well Dance-pop. It seems like ultimately you will show your colours again. As I said before and will say the 10000th time, bad edits, i will take it off. Stop overreacting and concentrate on edits rather than tail gating other editors comments. --Legolas (talktome) 08:00, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My name is GaGaLoveGame or Has...You are overreacting, And I will say for the 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 time, I don't make bad edits, you A\are making this worse for you Legolas, "go speak with Gandalf maybe he will help you with you probleems"( no offence ). I am OMFGing at your statements. Just calm down, this disscussion was over from the first edit.Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 04:17, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Transmission Gagavision

I don't know if any of you are aware but each week Gaga puts an episode online "Transmission Gagavision" and it outlines what she got up to that week. Should it be included. I know the answer will be "no" but i'm asking just incase someone agrees.

Child Funk (talk) 08:00, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did you find anything encyclopedic in those videos like, development of music videos, or song backgrounds, or the Fame Ball tour infos? If so we can include them in respective articles. Those videos won't be a copyright problem since they are published at the artist's own web page. --Legolas (talktome) 08:32, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no good at judging as to what is encyclopedic and what is not. I'd suggest that you go onto youtube and watch some episodes as you have a better knowledge in comparisson to myself. The most recent one is here (which I didn't find to be all that informative) Oh and yes, its from Gaga's official Youtube channel! Child Funk (talk) 05:08, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have watched all of them and some of them are just her talking about crap, but some are about the tour. She talks about sets, music videos, interviews, etc IT SHOULD BE IN THE ARTICLE —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.58.203.31 (talk) 15:28, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

read pls

okay okay so i know this has been the biggest issue of the article and FINALLY we have agreed she is Lady Gaga and sometimes she spells it Gaga and sometimes she spells it GaGa, BUT i think that "The latter part of the name is variably spelled either GaGa[10] or Gaga." is quite possibly the worst way it could be said. keep it simple stupid!--oRange 22:59, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

cherrytree sessions ep

she has another album which should go under discography that cherrytree sessions ep thing --oRange 22:59, 28 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rcnaranja (talk • contribs)

AGREED!RCNARANJA 00:38, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No it won't. --Legolas (talktome) 04:06, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why not? Other artists have their EPs on it. 81.141.171.210 (talk) 16:22, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Other artists' EPs are backed up with reliable sources. There wasn't one for this EP the last time we had this discussion. —C.Fred (talk) 16:25, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Other crap exists" is not a good reason to include the EP's. — R2 17:12, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

on her website it says to go purchase her EP, what kind of "reliable source" do we need. ITS FROM THE GAGAS MOUTH --RCNARANJA 23:52, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See below section. --Legolas (talktome) 04:06, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

cell phone

i am working on finding out what kind of cell phone lady gaga has. this is IMPORTANT. --RCNARANJA 18:51, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No it is not. — R2 18:57, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If I see this included in the article, I will swiftly remove it. Dmarquard (talk) 04:02, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Seconded. --Legolas (talktome) 04:05, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
RIDICULOUS!!!! do you know this is the 21st century?? --RCNARANJA 23:51, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Talk about something which will help in improving the article. Writing in caps won't help you. --Legolas (talktome) 04:05, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Political Views

I think it should address her support for Obama, and her participation in the Pepsi campaign for change. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.91.223.175 (talk) 19:10, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can any of that be reliably sourced? —C.Fred (talk) 19:13, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Yeah, would the YouTube video be reliable? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.91.223.175 (talk) 19:30, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, no. That doesn't establish the notability of her views. — R2 19:50, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Pop Princess" Title

Someone should address the fact that she was "crowned" the new Pop Princess on PerezHilton.com and in an interview with the London Times "Style" magazine where she was declared a "pop icon". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.91.223.175 (talk) 19:17, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What perezhilton thinks of anything is relevant, but do you have sources for the other publications? Maybe we can incorporate it. — R2 19:22, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Those are both sources, one more reliable than the other. http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/music/article5746827.ece

http://perezhilton.com/2009-02-28-gaga-licious —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.91.223.175 (talk) 19:44, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What Perez Hilton thinks of anything is relevant? I disagree. He has "crowned" her the "Princess of Pop", but I don't think that everything that comes out of his mouth is relevant. He has articles about Lady GaGa all the time. They are friends. Every single thing he says about her is not relevant to this article. --RCNARANJA 15:47, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gender and Sexuality

The article should also say how she isn't a transsexual, I know its not supposed to be gossip but someone needs to clear up the rumors, there are pictures of her on PerezHilton.com of when she was younger. Also it should address her sexuality, in an interview with Fab Magazine she stated she was "bi" but then took it back because people weren't open to it she was also seen kissing a girl in the LoveGame music video. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.91.223.175 (talk) 19:27, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Her sexuality only needs discussion if it has a notable impact to her biography. Gossip and kissing a few girls is hardly important. Don't most girls kiss other girls these days? Sure seems like it. — R2 19:49, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Yes but she frequently gets critized and bagged on accusations of being a transsexual and it raises a significant amount of controversy over it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.91.223.175 (talk) 19:55, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What sources do you have that prove it's a "significant controversy"? A few web blogs written by a few spotty teenagers is hardly noteworthy. Additionally, per WP:BLP we should not add to the embarrassment these lies might be causing her. We have a duty to respect her human dignity. — R2 19:59, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


It would much rather be helpful for who those who believe she is, to search the web and find the article to discover that she isn't trans gendered which is respecting her dignity and supporting her against ignorant people who might believe the rumors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.91.223.175 (talk) 04:02, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Live Performances & Appearances

I think all the live Performances are talked about much too broadly and need to be described a tad bit more vividly, the Pet Shop Boys one was definatley significant as well as Ellen and Dome 49. You could also use a few more pictures. You might also like to add all the appearances she's made not just in performing but on TV,publications, Transmission Gagavision. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.91.223.175 (talk) 04:19, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ [8]
  2. ^ [9]
  3. ^ Lady Gaga response on number one in the UK
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lady_Gaga&oldid=281911161"