Jump to content

Talk:Born This Way (song)

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 78.35.115.245 (talk) at 20:56, 17 May 2011 (→Capital H-I-M). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Verb tense error

In the introduction, it's stated that "Previously, she had sang part of the chorus at the 2010 MTV Video Music Awards in 2010.". This should be "she had sung" instead of "she had sang". Will someone please correct that?

16 countries

The song is number one in 16 countries, not 15, u can count the number ones in the table of the chart success section. Could you update it, thanks ^^

New Zealand is spelt incorrectly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.183.62.233 (talk) 21:23, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Tbhotch* ۩ ۞ 21:24, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

US Radio Songs

This article from Billboard says she is #1 on Radio Songs: http://www.billboard.com/news/lady-gaga-glee-songs-dominate-hot-100-1005089442.story#/news/lady-gaga-glee-songs-dominate-hot-100-1005089442.story Here is the quote: The lead single and title track from her third studio album, due May 23, becomes her second No. 1 on Radio Songs (3-1), following "Paparazzi" in 2009, and gains by 3% to 182,000 downloads sold, according to Nielsen SoundScan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.7.104.229 (talk) 16:06, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Adabow (talk · contribs) 19:59, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Certification

Gold in Switzerland source! --79.216.214.89 (talk) 19:20, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thanks. Adabow (talk · contribs) 19:57, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Songs for Japan

Can we edit something about this link? It's a BTW remix. --NicolásTM (talk) 01:14, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think so. Look at what I added to "Irreplaceable" and do something similar here. Adabow (talk · contribs) 03:22, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, i'm from Wikipedia en español and my english is bad -.- it's basic, for that i wish that somebody who speak english do something with the information. Thanks, --NicolásTM (talk) 04:51, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

#1 in European Top 100

http://www.charly1300.com/eurosingles.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.7.104.229 (talk) 07:20, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That is unofficial. The Billboard European Hot 100 Singles has been out of print since December, but maybe you were thinking of a different chart? Adabow (talk · contribs) 08:37, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just wondered, as Jennifer Lopez is credited with #3 in Europe from the same chart with 'On The Floor' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Floor#cite_note-73)

Not more. Tbhotch* ۩ ۞ 08:43, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

#1 in Croatia

http://www.hrt.hr/hr/top20/strana_lista.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.7.104.229 (talk) 08:41, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is not considered a reliable chart, see Wikipedia:Record charts#Deprecated charts. -- Frous (talk) 17:38, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not a South Korea #1

I don't know who keeps changing it, but the song never reached number one in South Korea. On the Gaon Chart, there has NEVER been a foreign artist number one. "Born This Way" peaked at number thirty three, which is relatively high for a foreign artist. There is a separate chart, called the Foreign Digital Chart, where she did reach number one. But, the chart that is used on Wikipedia is the domestic and foreign synthesis chart. So whoever keeps changing the South Korea number, please stop. Proof here by the way: http://gaonchart.co.kr/main/section/search/chart_list.gaon?Search_str=Born%20This%20Way (국외 is foreign chart, 종합 is the correct combo chart) where it says "2010년 8주" (Year 2010, Week 8). (Higher in the list it says 28, but that is monthly and not weekly.) 21nolja 00:36, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This link: http://gaonchart.co.kr/main/section/search/list.gaon?Search_str=Born+This+Way+&x=22&y=9 Shows she was #1 on the South Korean International Artists Chart. Surely that should be included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.7.104.229 (talk) 12:09, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Can someone fix the similar problem in the "hold it against me" article? it peaked at 73 in the international chart, but the article says it peaked at number 1. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coolkidfromma (talk • contribs) 04:49, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Composition

Here's the link of the Music Notes sheet music, to the composition of the song.--NicolásTM (talk) 02:52, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Added. Thanks. Adabow (talk · contribs) 04:53, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Hot Dance Hit a #1??

the 2011 article about the Dance Hits this year doesn't list Born This Way as a #1, yet this article does. Yes or No? calvin999 (talk) 00:11, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Source Billboard http://www.billboard.com/#/column/chartbeat/chart-highlights-pop-adult-contemporary-1005110862.story —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.211.0.157 (talk) 06:43, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Billboard' releases some of the next weeks chart highlights soon. — Legolas (talk2me) 13:25, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chart history

1. Born This Way is the fastest song of Lady Gaga's to sell 2 mio. copies in the USA as it only took 8 weeks for doing so. This makes the song the 5th fastest one of all songs behind Flo Rida's "Right Round" which did it in just five weeks, "California Gurls" by Katy Perry featuring Snoop Dogg and "Love The Way You Lie" by Eminem featuring Rihanna which both took seven weeks as well as The Black Eyed Peas' "Boom Boom Pow" which also took eight weeks .

2. Hitting the 2-mio-mark, it's the first time that 2 songs did so in the first quartal of a year, as Cee Lo Green's Fuck You already reached this mark a few weeks ago. source--79.216.218.188 (talk) 14:21, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I feel its kinda undue and too much. — Legolas (talk2me) 15:12, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

French Single Chart

According to Disque en france born this way debut at number one on physical chart, but according to lescharts it only peaked at 2. so which one is preferable.Ashishvats23 (talk 10:28, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.disqueenfrance.com/fr/monopage.xml?id=256084

http://www.lescharts.com/showitem.asp?interpret=Lady+Gaga&titel=Born+This+Way&cat=s

It reached #1!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.98.63.220 (talk) 14:06, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Only the chart that takes into account all sales (physical and digital), should be mentioned in the charts list. -- Frous (talk) 17:36, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More charts

"born this way" got to number 1 in the dutch top 40, here is the proof: http://acharts.us/dutch_top_40 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.48.164.201 (talk) 05:06, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Already present. You know that Netherlands = Dutch right? — Legolas (talk2me) 06:40, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think the he/she meant the Dutch Top 40, which is different from the Single Top 100. But I think that we generally only use the Top 100. Adabow (talk · contribs) 07:23, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If so then Top 100 should be removed. It is not a comprehensive chart like Top 40. The top 40 combines airplay+singles while the top 100 is just a singles sales chart. My mistake should have checked. — Legolas (talk2me) 07:31, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from DBoy92, 11 April 2011

I want to add the chart position of "Born This Way" on the South African Singles Chart.

DBoy92 (talk) 08:28, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a reliable source to verify this? Adabow (talk · contribs) 08:30, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I do. Site: http://www.take40sa.co.za/pages/index.asp — Preceding unsigned comment added by DBoy92 (talk • contribs) 08:37, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it was denied as a reliable source. They are a single monitor chart. — Legolas (talk2me) 08:40, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is a radio station vote-based chart, and is therefore unofficial. See WP:GOODCHARTS for charts that are accepted for use on Wikipedia. Adabow (talk · contribs) 08:43, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Poland - 1

In Poland BTW is first right now. zpav.pl/rankingi/listy/nielsen/top5.php —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.23.195.58 (talk) 11:48, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Born this way was met with mixed response from music critics." Hm... most of the reviews I see there are positive. Just saying... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.240.72.100 (talk) 03:23, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews Consensus

"Born this way was met with mixed response from music critics." (General section) "Born this way was met with mixed response from music critics." (Response/Critical Response Section) I would like to change both of these sections that state that the song was met with "mixed" response, to state "Born This Way was met with positive reception from music critics". Clearly, in the reviews cited, the general consensus was positive, if not overwelmingly so.

Reece Leonard (talk) 01:03, 18 April 2011 (UTC)Reece Leonard[reply]


Agreed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.121.222.54 (talk) 23:20, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Overwhelmingly, would imply no negativity. There is some strong negative comments, the relative size of the positive vs. negative reception paragraph's or the number of +ve vs. -ve comments is not necessarily the indication here. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 23:22, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What about "mixed to positive" or generally positive? Adabow (talk · contribs) 23:47, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'd use "generally positive" reviews; according to the sources given in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.121.222.54 (talk) 02:00, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Mixed to positive, based on the fact that there are several negative comments from highly respected reviewers. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 02:29, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Several negative comments"? Mention 3 negative comments showed in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.43.252.18 (talk) 01:54, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


To agree with the statement above, the positives greatly outnumber the negatives. I would like to suggest a final "generally positive" as the consensus. This would change "Born This Way recieved mixed to positive reviews from music critics" to "Born This Way recieved generally positive reviews from music critics". This would sum up the consensus perfectly, as it does suggest there were some negative reviews, although the positives far outweigh the negatives. This would also carry over into the page's "Critical Response" section for clarity and continuity.

Reece Leonard (talk) 06:08, 27 April 2011 (UTC)Reece Leonard[reply]

No, I have personally revamped the article, and find that mixed to positive is the correct tallying for the reviews. — Legolas (talk2me) 06:18, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nope. There are more positive reviews than negative. There's, I think, 1 negative review and one mixed. Is that mixed to positive? Everyone here agrees to use generally positive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.43.179.176 (talk) 00:20, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes its mixed to positive, because comparisons to other songs is a downplaying factor here, which minimises the holier positive aspects. It will be mixed to positive, and not positive. End of discussion. — Legolas (talk2me) 05:04, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming this article.

Is it ok for me to change Born This Way (song) to Born This Way (Lady GaGa song)?Just asking.--Damirgraffiti ☺Say Yo to Me!☺ 00:34, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No. Per naming coventions this is the only song called "Born This Way". We'd only use (Lady Gaga song) where there are multiple songs of the name "Born This Way". — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 01:07, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Alright.I was just asking.Thank you for replying.--Damirgraffiti ☺Say Yo to Me!☺ 01:16, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. It was good that you asked before simply moving it. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 01:37, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Music video image

I think a much more suitable image can be used for the music video still. The zombie thing doesn't really have anything to do with the conception of the song or video. I think it would be more appropriate and helpful if an image of Gaga appearing as "Mother Monster" or something of the sort would be used. It would more efficiently show and help the reader understand the whole "new race without prejudice" thing.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 07:16, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Nathan, I thought so too, but then while developing the article one thing struck me was the NFCC thing. The previous image which we had of the mother monster, was a far more prevalent image of Gaga in this era with the prosthetics on her face. Hence I thought that would not add anything to the readers understanding of the article. And I tried the giving birth to new race images, which, (besides appearing gross) I couldnot take any clear picture. The video frame is too fast in those instants. Hence I felt that a different approach was needed in terms of the other meaning of the video, the conceptual one where Gaga wanted to portray how society doesnot dictate what she thinks is beautiful. That's why she chose Rick Genest's make-up, which she confirmed took over an hour. I felt that it gives a different look from Gaga, an albeit abstract one which would have been pretty unaccountable in words. So that's why I chose that image. Which instant do you feel can serve the NFCC purpose as well? — Legolas (talk2me) 07:35, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, when you explain it that way, I definitely understand why you chose this image. Now, these are a few I personally think would be better, but feel free to disagree. This one while, as you said above, is quite weird and gross, portrays her as "Mother Monster", giving birth to the "new race of people not recognizing prejudice." I think this is pretty much a nice some up of the video. Another worth taking a look at is this one, which kind of mimics the poses she uses in live performances as well. Aside from being so important in the video that Gaga mimics it in all live performances so far, it shows her and the "new race" all together and reaching out to (going to leave that as blank, because it is heavily opinionated). What do you think about these two?--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 09:29, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The second pic you linked to (new race etc) can be replaced by a free image of a concert performance. Adabow (talk · contribs) 09:32, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That is true, but it definitely helps to see the source; the real still from the video. Also, what about the first picture?--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 09:44, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Lol, nathan I did not mean that the birthing scene was grtoss, rather the screenshot which I took, that appeared gross nd blurry. Anyways, I would like to have a consensus on this before I replace the image. — Legolas (talk2me) 09:56, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, lol, ok. Sure, yeah lets see what others think about it. Personally, what do you think? Lets start with that.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 09:58, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The first image is of brilliant resolution and can be used definitely to explain the birthing scene and also some of the neo-surrealism associated with it (third eye etc). As for the second image, I agree with Adabow that it is easily replaceable by concert footage, hence will fail NFCC#7. As for the first one, I think its fine to upload if we have a consensus. — Legolas (talk2me) 10:02, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Other Versions

"The Glee cast announced that they will cover the song during a thematic episode of their second season.[125][126] The episode is also named "Born This Way", and is the eighteenth episode, from the second season of Glee, and it is set to air in the United States in April 2011, on Fox." They already have! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.99.191.115 (talk) 14:54, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Capital H-I-M

There's been quite some discussion on the meaning of "it doesn't matter if you love him or capital H-I-M". Do you think it could be relevant to add some of that? Does she mean that it doesn't matter if you love a man or you love God? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.146.41.55 (talk) 19:56, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There's a double-meaning in that term, if not more. HIM is an abbreviation for "His Infernal Majesty" (Satan) in addition to being the all-uppercase form of the pronoun. In modern times, Christians mostly use capitalization rather than all-uppercase ("Him" vs "HIM") when referring to their god, so that interpretation seems a bit archaic. Oh, and of course there's a popular band called "HIM" (in addition to a now-defunct less widely known band with the same name). -- 78.35.115.245 (talk) 20:56, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Graham Norton Show

Performed Born This Way along with Judas on Friday 13th May 2011 on the Graham Norton Show in the UK where she also gave an interview. Notable as it is only the second time is has performed live on TV apart from the Grammys? calvin999 (talk) 22:30, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction

The music video for the song was directed by Nick Knight and by Gaga herself. It premiered on Monday, February 28, 2011 and was inspired by painters like Salvador Dalí and Francis Bacon, and their surrealistic images. The main idea behind the video is Gaga giving birth to a new race. The video commences with a prologue, in which Gaga talks about the new race who are born without prejudices and concludes with the view of a city populated by this race.

I don't think it concludes with a view of the city. It concludes with a gum-chewing zombie gaga. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.153.113.252 (talk) 15:47, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Born_This_Way_(song)&oldid=429620972"