Talk:Lady Gaga/Archive 16

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

There should really be a section about criticism of her on her main page

she is a very divisive figure and the criticism of her image and her ploys for attention along with whether or not her music has any artistic value should be discussed. This would also be a good place to discuss the accusations of plagiarism or similarities that are made between her and Madonna, as she is almost never mentioned in the press without an allusion to Madonna. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiepdiax818 (talkcontribs) 23:41, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

See the Artisty section. There's quite a bit there. But comparisons by the media are sometimes profusely unfair and unnecessary. But yes, some accusations and plagiarism are included. And there's definitely a fine mix of positive and negative in the Artistry. Stephenjamesx (talk) 19:44, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

This seems to merit it's own section, even if it's a subsection outside of the Artistry section, as the criticism of her extends beyond "artistry" and includes her personal image and manipulation of the media. Many big names have also been critical of her image and media manipulation like Noel Gallagher. http://www.spinner.com/2011/09/28/noel-gallagher-lady-gaga-madonna-lite/ Justin Beiber's article has it's own Criticism subsection so I think Lady Gaga's should be made separate given her criticism is even more widespread than Beiber's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiepdiax818 (talkcontribs) 02:06, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Criticism from peers as such hold no candle as reliable reviewer interpretation and cannot be added. — Legolas (talk2me) 13:30, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Lead image re-visited

Back again with a new discussion. I did find this current image—high-resolution, 2011, free etc. Consensus to change? — Legolas (talk2me) 17:21, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Other options: 1 and 2, both are magnificent. — Legolas (talk2me) 17:25, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
I think Option 1 is best. Though the hand on her mic is a bit blurry. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 18:42, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Lol, are we gonna use the hand for identification of Gaga? Come to think of it, she might some day release a song called "I'm my hand.. this is my hand... ". :D — Legolas (talk2me) 18:46, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
I think the very first one you have is perfect! - Christianrxx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christianrxx (talkcontribs) 18:47, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Hehe, I really enjoyed the plain blonde hair, but seeing this is the latest and highest quality image, what other choose do we have? Mind my hand fetish (JK). —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 18:56, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I'd actually vote for the second image above, the one that currently appears as #1. warshytalk 20:38, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks all, I'll wait for two days and then change it. — Legolas (talk2me) 03:00, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
I have uploaded the image and will change it. Thanks for the comments guys. — Legolas (talk2me) 15:00, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

The current image looks sort of weird to me, it's as if she's going to eat her microphone lol. In, my opinion Legolas the first image you provided is much better. - Christianrxx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christianrxx (talkcontribs) 22:26, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

I think this photo is also good. You can see a clear shot of her face and it's high resolution too. - Christianrxx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christianrxx (talkcontribs) 02:17, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Unfortunately, it's not free (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0; the noncommercial restriction disqualifies it as free content per Wikipedia's definition). You'd have to get nikotransmission to release a version of the image—probably lower resolution—where commercial reuse and derivative works are permitted. —C.Fred (talk) 03:46, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Ok, I still think the current image looks awkward though. It should be changed to this or back to (File:The Monster Ball - Poker Face revamped2-tweak.jpg) this. --Christianrxx (talk) 19:32, 12 December 2011 (UTC)Christianrxx
Did you know? Italiano, Bahasa Indonesia, French and Nederlands pages, especially their LEAD IMAGE of Lady Gaga is far more better than this page. Not to mention that people are mostly visits the english page in the first place for reference. Yeah... I was being sarcastic. So, can't we do something about this? (just saying and asking) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Book knight (talkcontribs) 08:39, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
What about this picture? Lucas RdS (talk) 17:15, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit Request for Brunell USEP

I am a student from Dr. Brunell's Feminist Thought class, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ambassadors/Courses/BrunellFeministThought, and I have a few suggestions of edits that could be made to Lady Gaga's page in regards to her views and stances on feminism.

First off, it can be seen through several of Lady Gaga's music videos that she highlights themes that are prevalent to the women's movement. "The three central themes that shape Lady Gaga's music videos are sex, violence, and power.”[1] Her videos also explore the themes of bondage and sadomasochism. “Vaudevillian and carnal, Lady Gaga has got the knack of sending rape-like fantasies—in songs and videos that double as catch club hits—to the top of the charts.”[2] The three main videos where these themes are present are Paparazzi, Bad Romance, and Telephone. “Whether it is physical violence or sexual exploitation, these videos offer vivid depictions of male power over women's bodies.” [3] Even though calling Lady Gaga a feminist may take some further analysis of her music videos, it can still be argued that she is a feminist icon who can empower young women to stand up for what they believe in. [4] “Gaga calls herself ‘a little bit of a feminist’ (she rejects man-hating feminism) and asserts that she is ‘sexually empowering women.’”[5] Lady Gaga has also said that she is working to help liberate her fans so they can feel “less alone.”[6] “..She not only reiterates her assertion of total originality but also finesses it until it’s both a philosophical stance about how constructing a persona from pop-cultural sources can be an expression of a person’s truth—a la those drag queens Gaga sincerely admires—and a bit of a feminist act.”[7]

Also, Lady Gaga has pushed the conventional boundary of what is expected of female performers since her debut album in 2008. “The space for women in pop to try out new aesthetic identities hasn’t been this vast in sometime. This new feminism is more about the opportunity to make choices than about any specific choice itself.”[8] Lady Gaga’s impression can be seen through performers like Katy Perry and Kesha, but most noticeably through Beyonce. Due to a pair of collaborations Beyonce has performed with Lady Gaga, it can be seen that “she appears to have come alive.”[9] “Her frank talk about how female artists aren’t even expected to write their own songs or about how young women are afraid to ask for what they need from their sexual partners inches her toward a new articulation of feminism.”[10] This influence that Lady Gaga holds over other performers only aids in her ability to help move the women’s movement forward.


  1. ^ Fogel, Curtis (2011). "Lady Gaga and Feminism: A Critical Debate". Cross-Culture Communication. 7 (3): 185.  Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  2. ^ Smith, Emily Esfahani (07 April 2010). "The Pop Singer as Ultimate Predator". Wall Street Journal (Online).  Check date values in: |date= (help)
  3. ^ Fogel, Curtis (2011). "Lady Gaga and Feminism: A Critical Debate". Cross-Culture Communication. 7 (3): 185.  Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  4. ^ Fogel, Curtis (2011). "Lady Gaga and Feminism: A Critical Debate". Cross-Culture Communication. 7 (3): 186.  Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  5. ^ Smith, Emily Esfahani (07 April 2010). "The Pop Singer as Ultimate Predator". Wall Street Journal (Online).  Check date values in: |date= (help)
  6. ^ Juzwiak, Rich (20 Jan 2010). "Lady Gaga Approximately". The Village Voice. 
  7. ^ Powers, Ann (13 December 2009). "The Cultural Critic; Lady Gaga". Los Angeles Times. 
  8. ^ Caramanica, Jon (25 July 2010). "Pure Gaga: [Arts and Leisure Desk]". The New York Times. 
  9. ^ Caramanica, Jon (25 July 2010). "Pure Gaga: [Arts and Leisure Desk]". The New York Times. 
  10. ^ Powers, Ann (13 December 2009). "The Cultural Critic; Lady Gaga". Los Angeles Times. 
You've made very interesting points yet I don't know how fellow Wikipedians will respond to this. I love it, but I don't know whether it can find a place. We definitely need a piece on music videos - they're vital to her artistry yet we have nothing. I think we could use parts of this. :) Stephenjamesx (talk) 21:03, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Stephen, it can definitely be made into a separate section. Why don't you give it a try? I have complete faith in you. — Legolas (talk2me) 04:45, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Shouldn't this be put in an upcoming "Legacy" section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.239.66.108 (talk) 15:25, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
No. — Legolas (talk2me) 15:48, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

EDM

Nice article from MTV regarding Gaga's influence on EDM. — Legolas (talk2me) 07:58, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Gaga's fourth best-selling digital artist in the US history

Hi! Where could this info be put?[1] Gaga has sold 42 million digital copies in the US. -- Frous (talk) 21:46, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't think this is exactly necessary? This ranking is so so much random that waht to say. In the following one month only Gaga will jump to number two on the list and then fall to number three I'm telling ya. — Legolas (talk2me) 05:19, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Yeah. I guess so, too. Just thinking. :) -- Frous (talk) 18:42, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

The constant changing of the infobox image.

Why is her infobox image keeps changing each time I go onto the page? And, please change it *back* to the *original* here: [2]. Thank you. Tribal44 (talk) 21:45, 26 December 2011 (UTC)Tribal44

I agree that it changes way too much, editors on here seem to be obsessed with using pictures as recent as possible when we're supposed to be using the best picture, which I still feel is the high-quality File:Gaga at monster booth2.jpg. The current infobox image isn't of as good quality. –Chase (talk / contribs) 01:00, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
IMO, the current image[3] is the best if you want to present her "average style", but it doesn't show her face very well. The "Poker Face revamped" would be better, for now.[4] -- Frous (talk) 18:46, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
The current image does show her face and is not much different from the Poker Face revamped image. This image is fine as it is. And that Monster booth image is just so fucking old. — Legolas (talk2me) 19:08, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

http://cdn.littlemonsters.com/781/i5525_700.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.230.178.215 (talk) 03:11, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

"Left-handed Gaga began playing the piano"

What? Gaga does make a connection between her handedness and her musical style in the cited source, but surely, if it has to be mentioned, there is a more readable way to do so. 24.22.217.162 (talk) 05:52, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Artistry

Hey guys, just a thought here. I personally think that we should have a "Comparisons To Madonna" sub-section in the artistry. After all the constant comparisons between the two, Madonna's comments on Gaga and the subsequent feud surrounding that, and just generally critics noted their styles and music to be similar PLUS heaven knows that there's more than enough information on it!--Jakeriederer (talk) 23:57, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

The comparisons that she receives to Madonna are usually unfair with the outcome being "Madonna is the best" blahblahblah. There's a lot of material in Artistry already on her likeness to Madonna; I think delving into it too deeply would be inappropriate and a violation of basic human dignity. I think all these comparisons are only appropriate on specific pages, for example "Born This Way" being like "Express Yourself" etc. is covered on "Born This Way" but not here. Gaga is as much of an artist of Madonna, and can survive without the comparisons. Stephenjamesx (talk) 19:12, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Exactly, the comparisons are just bullshit tabloidy journalism, not even academic and professional writings. — Legolas (talk2me) 02:37, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Genres: Adding 'Electronic' to the Infobox

I think electronic should be added to the infobox. Many of Gaga's songs have strong elements of electronic music in them. What does everyone else think? --Christianrxx (talk) 22:18, 17 January 2012 (UTC)Christianrxx

I completely agree--Jakeriederer (talk) 00:26, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Thank you! :) --Christianrxx (talk) 04:17, 20 January 2012 (UTC)Christianrxx
What does everyone else think? --Christianrxx (talk) 02:09, 21 January 2012 (UTC)Christianrxx
Gaga isn't considered an electronic artist. Her main genres are pop and dance. –Chase (talk / contribs) 16:53, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Lady Gaga's third studio album

FYI, there is Lady Gaga's third studio album. Article warranted at this point? If so it should be de-orphaned. :) Amalthea 10:06, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Redirected. I'm just so tired at these Gaga fans creating everything that does not even come close to WP:GNG. — Legolas (talk2me) 12:45, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

{{UK best-selling singles (by year) 1990–2009}}

Headbomb (talk · contribs) has removed {{UK best-selling singles (by year) 1990–2009}} from this article two times (here and here). Is there consensus on this page for that decision?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:40, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

I do agree with Headbomb that those templates are more suited for the "single" pages rather than the artist page. — Legolas (talk2me) 05:20, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Born this Way Ball Tour

The first group of tour dates for the Born this Way ball tour have been announced. Can the page for that tour be developed now?--MusicGeek101 (talk) 21:11, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 9 February 2012

(Personal attack removed) P. KrishX (talk) 22:13, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

N Not done and not likely to be done, this is exactly why we have page protection. --andy4789 · (talk? contribs?) 23:13, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
(you also haven't actually stated what you want changing) --andy4789 · (talk? contribs?)

Image for 2011-present

Might I suggest a change? 1, 2 or 3 These present Gaga more face-on and more "fuller". I just don't like the one currently! Stephenjamesx (talk) 13:36, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

I would say no to any one of them. They don't exactly represent anything to do with Born This Way, which is what the section is all about. Those pics would be more suited in the Gay icon article. — Legolas (talk2me) 17:03, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
What about an enlargement of the current? Stephenjamesx (talk) 23:06, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
The coloring on that image looks odd. Honestly, I do not see the problem with the current picture. There are five pictures before the "2011-present" one, so I think the reader will be able to see her face clearly enough by that point. Also, the current one shows the rest of the piano and justifies the unicorn's head being behind her. — Jonadin93 (talk) 01:49, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
The coloring on the enlarged image looks fine to me, however, Jonadin raises some excellent point that is to be taken into consideration. — Legolas (talk2me) 05:18, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Hmmmm. I sill just don't like it! Maybe just personal preference but...!! I prefer this one over the current one: File:Lady Gaga The Edge of Glory GMA2.jpg Stephenjamesx (talk) 22:58, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

I think we can delete this section of talk... the picture is fine; she is more laid back, her hair is falling out (see it on the piano?); she is more jazzy and interactive, less robotic, no longer having to 'prove' herself, or be a 'product' ... the alternative pic is really a juvenile suggestion, so... go ahead and delete this section if you would, thanks ;>jamvaru (talk) 12:16, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

It would have been archived in two days if you hadn't replied, Jamvaru. It will get archived in two weeks, if there's no further activity. —C.Fred (talk) 13:34, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Lady Gaga Picture

Please change the infobox picture of Lady Gaga. I really want to change the picture and everytime I try to, it just keeps coming back to the picture that was there before. I suggest you choose one of these pictures to put in the infobox section.


This one's a good picture, at least it is in 2012


Maybe this one?


I like this one


This one is my favorite

SO please choose which one you want choose as the new infobox picture. CPGirlAJ (talk) 20:42, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Please read the above discussions regarding the lead image for more information. --GouramiWatcher (Gulp) 02:07, 28 January 2012 (UTC)


The discussions don't really give me any information on the picture and which one you would like to use for the infobox picture for the article. CPGirlAJ (talk) 21:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

None of these pictures are really good for general identification. However, the present image needs to be changed because it looks awkward - like she's about to eat her mic. Even though it's high-quality, it's just not a good picture of her. --Christianrxx (talk) 22:37, 1 February 2012 (UTC)Christianrxx

Can you please give me a picture I can use for this article? CPGirlAJ (talk) 21:16, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Many people have been debating on a new lead image, like you, but unfortunately there are no pictures of Lady Gaga that are both recent or high quality. It was previously decided that the current picture was a decent choice, although it is not the best for recognition. Sorry for disappointing you.--GouramiWatcher (Gulp) 21:54, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Why was the old photo taken down? This (File:The Monster Ball - Poker Face revamped2-tweak.jpg) is a GREAT shot of her, and a much better choice than the one we have now. It should be changed back to the original. --Christianrxx (talk) 03:02, 9 February 2012 (UTC)Christianrxx
Fully agree with the above. The current picture is awful and frankly embarrassing. I will change the image to File:The Monster Ball - Poker Face revamped2-tweak.jpg tomorrow if there isn't a huge disagreement? --andy4789 · (talk? contribs?) 23:24, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! And yes, that sounds good! --Christianrxx (talk) 05:14, 10 February 2012 (UTC)Christianrxx
No. None of the those images specified are showing her face, or of high-resolution and are infobox quality. And there was an extensive discussion to replace the PokerFace image with the current one. So, until you can find another recent image which is of similar high-quality and encyclopedic for an infobox, the current one stays. There is no reason to go against consensus just because YOU don;t like it. Wikipedia doesn't work like that bro. — Legolas (talk2me) 05:18, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
I think at the moment there really is no consensus... and anyone with a basic knowledge of photography or Lady Gaga would agree that the current photo is really, really bad. It looks like she's eating her frigging microphone! Can someone else help me out...? --andy4789 · (talk? contribs?) 16:23, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
My thoughts exactly andy4789 and I would really like to know why the poker face image was replaced. It's probably the best picture of Gaga we've ever had --Christianrxx (talk) 18:17, 11 February 2012 (UTC)Christianrxx
Isn't anyone going to actually change the current picture? Why isn't anyone going to help solve this problem? A lot of us don't like the current picture sand we really want to change it. CPGirlAJ (talk) 20:39, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Legolas has it right; it needs to have the qualities he talks about. Why don't you find a pic that meets the requirements, then post a link to it here? I'm sure we will find something eventually. I thought she was picking food out of the corner of her mouth, or something... lol. I would like to see a pic of her in her 'angel' outfit from monster ball. But, most would probably appreciate a snapshot from the marry the night video, perhaps, it being the most recent, with the burning cars in the background? Hmm...? Speaks more to our reality than tiger/leopard outfit with mic for lunch. But finding the proper pic, that is the hard part. If you only had an inside track to the studio producer perhaps? ;>jamvaru (talk) 12:26, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately we can't have a non-free image for the lead image here, so having the Marry The Night screenshot is out of the question, but I'd have to agree the monster ball pic for its high quality. But I almost wonder if there should be a collage of multiple pictures of Gaga since she has had so many different appearances throughout her career. --GouramiWatcher (Gulp) 17:18, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

World Wide Sales of Born this way.

Born this way the article states. "In addition to exceeding 8 million copies in worldwide sales". This is not sourced and when I checked, she sold 5.4 Million by year end 2011 and she certainly hasnt sold over 2.5 since. I suspect the 8 million figure is referring to shipments, not actual sales. 86.178.229.183 (talk) 21:19, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

I think they may be including the bootleg sales actually reported in China and other bootleg nations ;>jamvaru (talk) 12:41, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Another new photo suggestion

http://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fil:Lady_Gaga_performing_2011_cropped.jpg

Much more flattering and recognizable photo, in my opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.94.240.194 (talk) 04:31, 12 February 2012 (UTC)


i like it !


This image was decided against during an archived discussion. – Jonadin(talk) @ 04:42, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
yeah, what a shame... just about any other picture would be great, right now ... do something, someone, duuh! ;>jamvaru (talk) 12:44, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Editing =

Hi i cant edit this page????????????????????????????????????????? i dont know why???????????????????? i want to because i have things to say but it wont let me?????????????????????? help????????????????? It doesnt and WOnt let me edit this page???????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.59.166.229 (talk) 18:52, 22 February 2012‎

The page has been protected from edits by anonymous users because of vandalism. You can ask for changes to be made here on this page. Shuipzv3 (talk) 07:57, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
lol, why do people insist on remaining anonymous, at least use a nickname, duuh!... sign in 0!O

I am always impressed with the sense of detachment I perceive when reading almost any wikipedia article, but especially this one. There is a mix of admiration and positive vibes with disgust and negative vibes. It is almost like someone is trying to not be too offensive when criticizing her in print. I don't understand why it has to be included. If any negative perception is included it should be clearly defined as such. For example the phrase "she seems sincere"... how trite. I'm sure there are so many people watching these pages that any little correction will be instantly undone, so why bother? It is a sense of the illness of the net, that wikipedia is a lost cause, that we will soon lose our freedom of internet. You get articles with negative tone as a result. And when the tone is removed you have only boring factual regurgitation. But, that is better than the whiner/complainer crap you get in most articles, esp. this one.

just had an interesting thought... the first post in this talk page might be lady gaga... :) :) :) explains the juvenility... gawd... ok, i'll go with your suggestion on the one with the gold sequined crotch :)

;>jamvaru (talk) 12:37, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

(imagine LG on her laptop trying to change her own picture on her own wikipedia page, lol! "WTF, why can't I change my Fn picture, GD SOBs!") ;>jamvaru (talk) 12:49, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Ancestry

Gaga is also of German and English descent http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_9QCFncbAnNw/TLWngPnv4AI/AAAAAAAAAsc/5wZXgOt0_h0/s1600/Gaga.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.210.62.232 (talk) 11:48, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately, that image is not a reliable source. —C.Fred (talk) 02:53, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Lady Gaga signature

Most other wiki pages for famous performers feature their signatures at the bottom of the info box. Is that possible for Gaga? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.31.59.143 (talk) 08:49, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Born This Way Foundation launch error

The article says the foundation was launched at Stanford University when it was actually at Harvard University at an event hosted by the Harvard Graduate School of Education. (See http://www.gse.harvard.edu/news-impact/2012/01/lady-gaga-to-officially-launch-born-this-way-foundation-at-harvard-on-feb-29/ and http://www.gse.harvard.edu/news-impact/2012/02/oprah-winfrey-to-join-lady-gaga-for-btwf-launch/). (Note: I apologize if I'm not doing this right. I'm new here, but know this one since I was involved with the event.) PatriotMike (talk) 17:16, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Can I re-propose this image?

While it was originally rejected, I think we can all agree it's much better than what currently have. And at the time of the discussion, the "microphone swallowing" wasn't the original picture.

What do you think? http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Monster_Ball_-_Bad_Romance_revamped12.jpg I cannot think of a single reason to decline over our current one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.94.240.194 (talk) 07:59, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

I'd have to say that that image won't likely be used because of the low quality (as in pixelation) of the image you have proposed. --GouramiWatcher (Gulp) 21:54, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

additions

the Page could do with her signature and net worth of $150,000,000 US dollars — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.111.246 (talk) 23:59, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Hiatus

Why isn't it mentioned that she was staying away from press and that she told Oprah that she would not be doing interviews for a while? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.180.118.85 (talk) 07:38, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

New Picture

The picture of Gaga at the moment is really awkward, and there are many better ones out there. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gaga_pyro_bra_02.jpg - this one clearly shows her face, although it is a little dark. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lady_Gaga_2011.jpg - same outfit as current, but she's not eating her mic here. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gaga_living_dress.jpg - shows her eccentric style.

Gaga690 (talk) 23:27, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree, please change it! File:Lady Gaga 2011.jpg is perfect to me--94.36.58.250 (talk) 21:55, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
I say the mugshot from paparazzi (and get over the 'requirements', a.n.a.l.);>jamvaru (talk) 03:21, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Can someone please change the Lady Gaga image? A lot of people don't really like the one that is in the infobox right now. Here are some suggestions for the infobox image.

CPGirlAJ (talk) 21:47, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

I changed the image to one of her Monster Ball performances from 2010. --GouramiWatcher (Gulp) 01:16, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Billboard's Moneymakers list

Why did you include only the latest list? Last year she came at #1 and so. I just don't see why this relevant to the main section, you can either say she has been regularly placed on Billboard's Moneymakers list or don't put it there at all because it seems biased. You're not going to include it in the main section for the next 5 years are you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.35.234.249 (talk) 14:13, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Forbes figures

http://www.forbes.com/profile/lady-gaga/ this is the actual figures you put up the wrong ones — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.111.246 (talk) 03:21, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Medical condition allegations

At points yesterday and today (UTC), a section was added alleging that Lady Gaga was diagnosed with brain cancer. At one point, it was sourced to a CNN iReport. I saw the iReport around 02:00 UTC; by 04:50, CNN had pulled it. It's worth noting that iReports are contributed by users; when I saw the report up, there was a "not vetted by CNN" banner at the top of the page as a disclaimer.

If CNN pulled the story, that tells me they vetted it and weren't able to confirm it. Accordingly, I don't think the alleged diagnosis should be mentioned in the article until it's carried widely by mainstream sources. —C.Fred (talk) 04:53, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Agreed, something of this nature should have solid reports, since this is a high profile BLP. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 05:10, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

New Image?

Lady Gaga Glitter and Grease2.jpg

This picture was recently added and seems to be of higher quality. Any thoughts on changing it to the lead image? --GouramiWatcher (Gulp) 00:22, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

This image has the common problem of not showing her face clearly. It could be practically anyone in a blond wig.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 01:07, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

there should be. because 2010 picture? there are some late 2011 and early 2012 pictures too... --94.21.36.71 (talk) 14:34, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

We don't prefer the most recent, we prefer the best picture, visually talking. We can't start to change the main image each month because somebody believes the current image is "old". Tbhotch. Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 05:00, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Gaga's little monsters and figures

your forbes money makers of 2011 figures are wrong and still haven't been fixed also she had a once off show on Channel 4 (UK) Called Gaga's little monsters — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.111.246 (talk) 17:26, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Guitar

She's playing the guitar on the new tour (1 and 2), shouldn't it be added to her instruments? --94.36.33.141 (talk) 12:22, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Men in Black 3

There's been many articles about Gaga appearing in a cameo in Men In Black 3. Men In Black 3 teman13 (talk) 21:35, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Here is a link to one of the articles. The statement "both pop stars will have small roles" is a little vague, maybe it would be best to wait until the movie is released for her official role to be added to the "Filmography" section? – Jonadin93 (talk) 17:47, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Is Lady Gaga Satan?

Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar: Police in Indonesia banned the star Lady Gaga concert in Jakarta after protests Islamists that American girl called "Satan"!. Maybe they do not know that Lady Gaga sings also about Jesus Christ?78.2.97.91 (talk) 17:18, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Social networking site

Might be relevant here or on Lady Gaga on Twitter, but MTV reported that Gaga's starting her own social networking website called "Little Monsters". Here's the article: [5] --Thevampireashlee (talk) 21:42, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Discography

Can i get a discussion on having 4 albums on the Discography? I don't see the big issue with listing 1 extra for 2010 since it was one of the bigger sellers comparable to the albums featuring original songs. I don't see how listing this 1 album which got the most sales is unrealistic and it would only result in adding:

I actually think it makes the list look a little better than the 1 year gap it appears to show at the moment. Comments? Thanks Jenova20 08:37, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

I really don't think listing of albums should be about the aesthetics of the page. Although there is a gap in between, I think the discography listing should only be used for albums that contain predominantly new material. For example, although The Fame Monster was an EP, it still contained completely new material, was sold as a standalone album (not just a double disc attached to The Fame), and was promoted as a standalone. The Remix, however, was simply an album that contained already released material that had been remixed. It's not new material and it's not a studio album in the sense that it contains new material that she wanted to promote. If it were listed, we would have to go to every artists' page and list their remix albums (i.e. Kesha's "Dance Commander" remix album, which sold very well but is not a studio album). Jpagan09 (talk) 17:11, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Fair point, i see your argument. Thanks Jenova20 18:11, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

For the Influences section

Lady Gaga Recalls Beyonce's Inspiration In MTV's 'Inside The Outside' 114.77.226.195 (talk) 12:33, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Updating

Something needs to be mentioned about the religious uproar Gaga caused in Indonesia regarding her tour. Also, once it's aired, her appearance on "The Simpsons" should be noted. --90.195.223.61 (talk) 01:17, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Let's be clear; the uproar was caused by the Islamist groups that threatened violence. Gaga was the victim, not the cause.William Jockusch (talk) 16:48, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Can somebody please update the link to my course page on Lady Gaga and the Sociology of Fame (my university pages are being moved). The reference appears in note 164. http://deflem.blogspot.com/2002/08/socy398d.html I also write a lot about Gaga from an academic viewpoint. Use sources as applicable: http://deflem.blogspot.com/p/publications.html#gaga Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MathieuDeflem (talkcontribs) 17:44, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Did any of the web archivers pick up the pages at their old location? It may be better to link to the archived version than to a blogspot version. —C.Fred (talk) 00:17, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Lady Gaga cameo in a Katy Perry new movie

Gaga will appear in a new documentary Katy Perry: Part of Me. Should it be added to article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JovanMonster (talkcontribs) 21:08, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Do you have a reliable source to support this? teman13 TALKCONTRIBUTIONS 21:57, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Yep > http://www.clevver.com/music/music-news/2084/lady-gaga-makes-a-cameo-in-katy-perry-movie.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by JovanMonster (talkcontribs) 11:46, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

That is not a reliable source, reliable sources are established companies such as NBC, ABC, MTV, etc. I'm quite sure Clevver is not a relaiable source, when you find one it will be added. teman13 TALKCONTRIBUTIONS 16:12, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 26 June 2012

I want to edit Lady Gaga's wikipedia because there is a news that Lady Gaga was worshiping satan.

125.164.144.195 (talk) 11:34, 26 June 2012 (UTC) With this confirmation, I will edit the article.

You cannot for two reasons:
1 - This is a BLP article, all content must have multiple reliable sources - especially for content that will cause somewhat controversy.
2 - Only Autoconfirmed Users can edit this article. -- MSTR (Chat Me!) 11:40, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Trimming "associated acts"

Does anyone else think the "associated acts" section of the infobox needs trimming? Most if not all of the people listed there do not meet the definition of "associated acts", and instead seem to meet the various criteria the field is supposed to avoid. Normally I would go ahead and trim it outright, but for this article I thought I should bring it up here first. Thanks. Acalamari 11:55, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

An associated act it is a group or duo the artist has been a part of. Lady Gaga's only associated act is Lady Starlight. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 20:51, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

MIB3

Lady Gaga does not appear in the film, only appears in two images, that does not make a cameo, must remove that part, this information is false. Ozkithar Salas (talk) 23:00, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

I'll take it off the Filmography list, and post a note not to add it back. --Electric Ooh La La, Who brings a gun to a knife fight? The winner. 01:31, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Lead infobox image

Could I suggesst this image Lady Gaga in Rome for the Lead image?? Its a better quality picture, more flattering and a wee bit more recent than the current one. Feel free to drop me your opinions folks! BrotherDarksoul Blether 03:38, 03 July 2012 (UTC)

I like it! I really do! It is time for a change, I think, and I can definitely see that as the new one. --Electric Ooh La La, Who brings a gun to a knife fight? The winner. 01:31, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

The problem with that image is Lady Gaga is known to be a blond instead of having blue hair. Likewise, she may be hard to recognize for some. --GouramiWatcher (Gulp) 01:41, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
I agree I think it is time for a change too! Also gourami watcher, isn't Gaga known for having several different styles and for being in a state of constant change? I do get what you are saying though, especially when she first started out. I just felt that when I found that picture that it was slightly more flattering to her. BrotherDarksoul Blether 13:00, 04 July 2012 (UTC)

Both of you make excellent points. Let's not forget, though, there are plenty of recent instances where Gaga is seen with blonde hair. If it is decided a change will be made, there's a ton of image options out there to make everyone happy. --Electric Ooh La La, Who brings a gun to a knife fight? The winner. 17:03, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Trimming Down?

I've recently saw two discussions about the Rihanna and Jennifer Lopez articles about their size and unnecessary information, and I was wondering if some things in this article should be shortened or moved to sub articles so it won't get too big and overwhelming like the Jennifer Lopez article? teman13 TALKCONTRIBUTIONS 21:12, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

There's a lot of trivial items in particular the Born This Way and "Philanthropy" sections. Some of this stuff will have to be removed as her career progresses. —DAP388 (talk) 03:03, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Singles template

I have noticed that Lady Gaga has 11 (yes 11) "other songs" in her Lady Gaga Singles template. I think there needs to be a stringent overhaul as most of these songs are not notable, were not promotional singles and it is quite ridiculous that they are allowed to be kept. There is 13 (yes 13!!!) separate pages for the Born This Way singles and songs alone!!! Can something be done about this? Just because there is sources for a song does not mean it is notable. Keep the notable "other songs" and delete the others! jwad.... blah | blah | blah 15:49, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

True a lot of these songs are very pointless and little input and editing have been put in to develop them. Tay(uhoh) 17:35, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lady Gaga on Twitter and other nonsense

I just pulled out a hatnote in this article mainly because the contents of that hatnote have nothing at all to do with the section it was marked in. The AfD about the Lady Gaga on Twitter may interest those editing this article (and certainly deserves some feedback from those editing here) but if that article has any notability at all it deserves at least its own separate section here on this article as well. For myself, I don't think either is appropriate and I'll leave it in the good hands of those who generally maintain this article.

I made a comment in the AfD that even a hatnote didn't exist linking to the "on Twitter" article from this main article, so somebody was cute and added it in. Not only is that not funny, but really was inappropriate where it was placed too. If you want to use those sources in that other article that will very likely be deleted, go ahead. Just don't be a troll. --Robert Horning (talk) 16:18, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Lady Gaga on Twitter

This article needs to be summarized into this article once and for all. --George Ho (talk) 19:52, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Summarized? I doubt it. Merged into this article more likely, if there is anything in terms of reliable sources that can be used and if the information can be added to avoid WP:UNDUE. It can be overdone very easily. --Robert Horning (talk) 01:42, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 18 July 2012

Could we please add a Fan site of Lady gaga in External Links Section as Below. http://www.lady-gaga.in

Chintan39 (talk) 04:53, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Not done, fan sites fail WP:EL, and this one has nothing very substantial in it.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 05:18, 18 July 2012 (UTC)


The main picture

Oh My God, whoever takes charge on this page is very unreasonable. I mean... look at the main picture. Katy Perry's page picture are change like... every month! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.255.204.245 (talk) 07:29, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

We're not a fan site, we're an encyclopedia. If she still looks the same and the image is good quality then there's no need to change it. Thanks for the input though Jenova20 (email) 08:27, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Actually, I'm hoping that the most recent image change on the Katy Perry page will bring stability to the infobox for the time being (the images changes there have been very annoying). The image here seems fine for now, but if there's a better free picture available that would be great. Acalamari 15:58, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Men In Black 3

Why is there no reference to the widely publicized expectance for her to make an appearance in the film? It attracted a lot of media attention and though it didn't happen it is still notable. Thanks Jenova20 (email) 21:25, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Filmography

While I am not completely against the idea of having a filmography on Gaga's page, it does seem unnecessary. Okay, she's about to make her film debut soon and has done some acting bits but the things mentioned in the table could be articulated in prose. And how are we deciding what goes into filmography? The Hills & LA Ink & Miss Universe & Logo (first TV appearance) are missing...not saying they NEED to be there, but it doesn't seem like there's any structure to it. Stephenjamesx (talk) 15:04, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Twitter use

I haven't seen Twitter section added into this article. I wonder if it is worth an inclusion. --George Ho (talk) 21:07, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't have thought that was too notable, except for being the most followed person in the world i mean. Other than that there's nothing else to add is there? Thanks Jenova20 (email) 11:17, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

NEW ALBUM TITLE: ARTPOP

https://twitter.com/ladygaga/status/231363860244865024 http://cdn.littlemonsters.com/4fc06d49c64dfcba55000000/i4c65bbab66c7f_2048.jpg http://gagadaily.com/index.php?/page/index.html/_/lady-gaga-gets-new-album-tattoo-r155 http://gagadaily.com/index.php?/topic/26987-dj-white-shadow-art-pop-tattoo/ <- One of Gaga's producer gets new album title tattoo http://gagadaily.com/index.php?/topic/26950-lady-gaga-artpop-is-not-the-single-wanna-turn-warhol-inside-out/ <- Somebody answers: Is Artpop the single name or album name? ~She answers: Not the single. http://gagadaily.com/index.php?/topic/26944-lady-gaga-gets-artpop-tattoed-new-ink-new-album/

GAGA HAS CONFIRMED IT HERSELF: http://gagadaily.com/index.php?/topic/27011-gaga-confirms-artpop-as-the-title-of-the-new-album/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.25.97.2 (talk) 07:31, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

ENOUGH! NEW ALBUM: ARTPOP — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.25.99.125 (talk) 20:23, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

No, those links don't look like confirmation to me: Lady Gaga hasn't explicitly stated that the new album will have that title, and none of the above links are reliable sources. Most of those links are from a forum, with people just stating this is the title. Until there's some sort of official confirmation, I don't think this should be added just yet. Acalamari 08:08, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
https://twitter.com/ladygaga/status/232114376067403776 this is sort of an official confirmation--78.12.79.191 (talk) 14:26, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

She said she was announcing the title in September. You all need to calm down. She's clearly describing the album's sound as Artpop; a play on Pop art. Statυs (talk) 14:50, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/news/a397438/lady-gagas-new-album-to-be-called-artpop.html

She has confirmed the title on twitter and there are thousands of articles confirming ARTPOP as it's title. --Rui78901 15:23, 5 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rui78901 (talkcontribs)

Are any of the articles in reliable sources? —C.Fred (talk) 16:37, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Taylor Kinney

There is a source on Taylor Kinney's page supporting the fact that they are dating. I think she confirmed it in her recent webchat too. Is there a reason why this hasn't been included?? Jennie | 22:30, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

ARTPOP in all caps, or Ga[Gg]a and WP:MOS, part two

Since an article exists for ARTPOP, it's a question best asked now, and I've asked it at Talk:ARTPOP. Per MOS:CAPS, do we leave the title in all capital letters, or do we reduce it to mixed case? —C.Fred (talk) 23:08, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Leave the title in capital letters since that's how Gaga said it should be https://twitter.com/ladygaga/status/232114376067403776 --Christianrxx (talk) 02:27, 6 August 2012 (UTC)Christianrxx
"Official names" are not mandatories. This is Wikipedia not Gagapedia. We follow the MOS, not Little Monster's desires. Tbhotch. Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 02:47, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Per MOS, the title and any reference to it should be written as Artpop, regardless of whatever Gaga says. Same scenario as Janet (which was stylized by Jackson as janet.) The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 02:52, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 9 August 2012

All references to her upcoming album ARTPOP should be in all caps. Current this article has the album listed as "Artpop." Here's Gaga's tweet about the correct spelling: https://twitter.com/ladygaga/status/232114376067403776

Jackiehbua (talk) 21:16, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Not done See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trademarks, as referenced above. Dru of Id (talk) 23:06, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 13 August 2012

== Personal Life ==

Gaga is openly Bisexual, which she expressed her experiences though her hit single Poker Face (Lady Gaga song). "Poker Face" was inspired by Gaga's boyfriends who enjoyed gambling, and also dealt with her personal experience of bisexuality; her fantasies about women while having sex with men, thus representing her 'poker face'." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ziggybooboo (talkcontribs) 22:08, 13 August 2012 (UTC) In early February, at her visit at Brentwood School in LA, Gaga confessed that she suffered from Bulimia Nervosa, in her teens. She stated that "I used to throw up all the time in high school. So I'm not that confident. And maybe it's easier for me to talk about it now because I don't do it anymore." Gaga later stated as a teen she wanted to be a skinny little Ballerina,and always questioned her father every dinner on why they always ate pasta and meatballs. Gaga stopped purging due to fear of damaging her vocal chords. "The acid on your vocal chords -- it's very bad. But for those of you who don't sing, you maybe don't have that excuse until it's too late. It's very dangerous," she said. Gaga also spoke about societies pressures of being thin on young girls especially in the fashion industry. "Every video I'm in, every magazine cover, they stretch you; they make you perfect It's not real life... The dieting wars have got to stop." Ziggybooboo (talk) 21:53, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Without a source, we can't include this—especially since there are direct quotes that must be verified. —C.Fred (talk) 21:57, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Here are the sources: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/music-news/9073751/Lady-Gaga-reveals-she-suffered-from-bulimia-as-a-teenager.html http://jezebel.com/5883971/recovering-bulimic-lady-gaga-is-sick-of-the-diet-wars http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2012/02/09/lady-gaga-tells-students-was-bulimic-as-high-schooler/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ziggybooboo (talkcontribs) 22:17, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

The information is already there, at Lady_Gaga#Immigration_and_LGBT_advocacy. Tbhotch. Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 22:48, 13 August 2012 (UTC)