Talk:Like a Virgin (song)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Like a Virgin (song) has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Good topic star Like a Virgin (song) is part of the Like a Virgin series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
March 15, 2010 Good article nominee Listed
October 1, 2010 Good topic candidate Promoted
Current status: Good article

Authorship[edit]

Much of the material in this edit represents material from the article Like a Virgin moved to this article by me. Jkelly 22:29, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Marylin Manson cover[edit]

Did Marylin Manson cover this song? Cuz there's an alleged Marylin Manson cover floating in P2P search results —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.147.223.143 (talk) 17:15, 2 April 2007 (UTC).

Yes, he did a cover version on his album 'From Highway to Hell - the Ultimate Cover Collection' in 2001 although they haven't got it on his wiki discography. It is on discogs.com though. 90.202.31.245 (talk) 21:28, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

No From Highway to Hell (The Ultimate Cover Collection) is a bootleg and he never did a cover of that. Yawaraey (talk) 21:38, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

like a version[edit]

shouldn't there be something about triple j's section "like a version" which is a play on madonna's song.

"those wikilinking and italics are done for a reason"[edit]

Although I had considered those changes as a prelude to reviewing the article, your rather hostile revert of my efforts - yes, it took some time - has knocked me a bit out of joint. Would you kindly elaborate why you reverted those changes, other than saying "they were done for a reason"? I certainly do not consider the changes "unnecessary". The instances where 'publisher' was changed to 'work' is to conform to WP:MOS (and WP:CITE, I think), in that 'traditional' (ie paper) journals have their titles in italics while all the rest are not so formatted. The '|work=' parameter is the one which gives the italicisation, not '|publisher='. Notice I did not change instances where '|newspaper=' was used, as it achieves the same effect. Usually, there is little need to be so exhaustive as to include the publisher if the name of the journal and enough information already exists to identify and find the source article concerned. 'Time signature', 'Rolling Stone', 'Entertainment Week' are all linked to already. It is also bad practice to overlink - repeated wikilinks to any article are not considered desirable. Ohconfucius ¡digame! 01:57, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't mean to be patronising, but I should also mention that a coiffeur is French for hairdresser, and a coiffure is a hairstyle. The more widely used past participle in English is 'coiffured' Ohconfucius ¡digame! 02:16, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

It is done for the same reason as you stated above, online publications are not italicized and the work parameter automatically italicizes anything attributed to its code. Hence those extra signs were added to make them appear straight and not italicized. You changes places like the Media Control Charts etc, which are purely online sources. You should also notice that I didnot revert your other changes. As for coiffured, it was an honest mistake during reversion. The format is similar with all the other Madonna wikiproject articles. Your efforts are appreciated, however, changing MoS like that is not desirable. Sorry if my comment seemed hostile to you. --Legolas (talk2me) 03:54, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
OK. I apologise. I see what I done wrong now. Ohconfucius ¡digame! 05:07, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Nile Rodgers' apology[edit]

There doesn't seem to be any indication of him having done something wrong, or which Madonna got offended about, so why is it so important to mention the 'apology'? I don't think the story isn't any the weaker without it, unless there is something missing which needs building up more. Ohconfucius ¡digame! 09:39, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

It has already been mentioned that Rodger's did not want Madonna to record the song and announced the hook as not-catchy, it was for this that he apologized later. There is clear indication that this apology is not for doing something wrong, rather a normal human nature to say sorry for things which contradicts oneself. --Legolas (talk2me) 09:52, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Well, that's what I thought. In this case, don't you agree it's gratuitous as far as this article is concerned? Ohconfucius ¡digame! 09:55, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
The original quote from Rodgers said: "I handed my apology to Madonna and said, you know...." Hence I believe this is not totally gratuitous. --Legolas (talk2me) 10:05, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
As it seems like a formal apology, the above cite is included in full. Ohconfucius ¡digame! 15:37, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Reservoir Dogs[edit]

In the beginning of the Quentin Tarantino's movie "Reservoir Dogs", Quentin Tarantino's character "Mr. Brown" gives 'his comparative analysis on Madonna's "Like a Virgin"'. Is that reason enough to have an "In other Media" section? 148.61.117.180 (talk) 15:26, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Why is "Reservoir Dogs" only mentioned once in this entire article? - It's for the Lutz (talk) 05:53, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

First song?[edit]

The statement in the lead: The song is noted for being the first song by a female artist to have a profound effect on society. is really misleading, there is not a direct source that have this, and if that is the case the person who said that should be mentioned. The legacy section said that the song attracted an unprecedented level of attention from social groups compared to any female singer's song, this is not the same thing. What about songs from Patti Smith, Joan Jett, Pat Benatar, Janis Joplin, Barbra Streisend, Aretha Franklin, Blondie, even Cyndi Lauper. "Girls Just Want to Have Fun" was released a year before, if you were living in Northamerica during 1983 and you were old enough to remember, you would clearly remember the song and the impact it had back then, it may not have attracted the attention of social groups but the impact on feminist movements was huge. That part should be reworded or removed altogether. 190.234.90.14 (talk) 05:17, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

No, it is sourced and present. The explanation clearly prooves the effect of the song, not only in US, but elsewhere. A feminist impact is not the same as an impact on the hwole society by provoking them, which this song clearly did. This is not original research, scholars and academics have written about the song's notability in this area. --Legolas (talk2me) 05:21, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Please point the exact source where is saids that "Like a Virgin" was the first song to have a profound effect on society. The quote from the Legacy section dosen't mention this. Per WP:SYNTHESIS: Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources. 190.234.90.14 (talk) 05:26, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Authors Mary Cross and Carol Clerk, biographer Andrew Morton etc already notes this. Case closed. --Legolas (talk2me) 06:25, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
This is a lie, none of those books said what is written in the lead, that this is the first song that have an effect on society, so decades and decades of songs didn't have any impact whatsoever, hardly. I will re-add the tag that you removed until a direct quote is given. 190.234.90.14 (talk) 06:42, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
All of these authors say that it was the first song by a female artist to have such a provoked effect on society and all of these is present in the book references cited. If you continue adding such unnecessary tags, you will be reported. --Legolas (talk2me) 06:45, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
That is not true, I can easily access those books in Google Books, none of the sources said that was the first, not Madonnastyle, not the Andrew Morton biography, not Madonna: The Style Book. You clearly put your own conclusion, which is not correct nor appropiate. 190.234.90.14 (talk) 06:56, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Clerk clearly stated that the song attracted such attention, more so than any female singer's song. She says "the song caused storms of outrage around the world as her reputation gathered a new and controversial clout. Never before a female singer's song has attracted such level of attention. It was not Madonna's fault that so many people listened to superficially to the lyric." In BB book of number-one albums, Craig Rosen comments "Madonna had a vision. She knew that 'Like a Virgin' was the single that would attract unwanted attention to it." Taraborrelli comments on the effect of the song on fashion and younger generation. Hence the song affected the society and was received in both positive and negative way. ll of them use the word "first" in their notations. --Legolas (talk2me) 07:42, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
The fact that it said that attracted more attention that any other song by a female artist attracted at that point dosen't mean that it was the first one to do it, like I said before the statement is misleading. None of the sources you are citing said first. 190.234.90.14 (talk) 08:00, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

{Outdent)clerk used the word unprecedented, Taraborrelli did use "first", Morton said never before - all of these point to the simple fact that they beleived "Like a Virgin" was the first song to do so. You are making argument for argument's sake. --Legolas (talk2me) 08:28, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

You said it yourself, they use never before, unprecedent but not in the context the lead is referring, they said that the amount of attention was unprecedent and never seen before, that does not make it the first, it means that it gathered more attention that all the previous songs released by female artists not that it was the first one that generated an effect on society. That line is clearly unaccurate. 190.234.90.14 (talk) 08:52, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
I believe we can definitely reword it as Clerk says and achieve a consensus on this. --Legolas (talk2me) 09:40, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

As the editor who initially added the "whom" template to this statement in the lead, I think I should comment. I had a problem with the claim that the song was "noted for being the first song by a female artist to have a profound effect on society" because it's demonstrably false that this song was the first. Someone may have "noted" it as such, but that someone would be wrong and, in fact, I don't think anyone of repute has made such a claim. In my edit summary, I specifically mentioned the example of the song "Strange Fruit", recorded by Billie Holiday in 1939 which arguably had a much bigger impact on society than "Like a Virgin". "Strange Fruit" is credited as a major impetus behind the civil rights movement. I've removed any reference to "Like a Virgin" being the "first" in its impact on society because such a statement isn't supported by the evidence. I think my current wording ("The song is noted for its profound effect on society") is fair and accurate. —D. Monack talk 00:41, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

  • Change statement in lede. As is being argued, being the first to have profound effects is not the same as having unprecedented effects or greater impact than in the past. —Ost (talk) 18:07, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment - before I read any of this, I immeadiately thought of "Strange Fruit" as taking the honour of "being the first song by a female artist to have a profound effect on society". There have been many others between that and "Like a Virgin", as pointed out. What about D-I-V-O-R-C-E or Stand by Your Man? Anyway, "Like a Virgin" was written by two male songwriters not by Madonna, so the original lead statement was a little misleading in that sense, also. "The song is noted for its profound effect on society" is fine --Jubileeclipman 23:30, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Drop comment Obvious unjustified hyperbole. Martin Hogbin (talk) 15:05, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment - When referring to the key of the song, it should be noted that Madonna's studio recording, and all other subsequent releases of the song are in in F Sharp Major. Only the original demo version by Steinberg Kelly is in F Major. This should be emphasized to avoid confusion. My source of this information is my absolute pitch (AP).Kevkunx (talk) 05:19, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Billboard[edit]

This song was ranked in Billboards 100 greatest songs of all time

http://www.billboard.com/specials/hot100/charts/top100-titles-00.shtml (98.181.62.167 (talk) 20:49, 28 June 2012 (UTC))

Infobox image swapped[edit]

I swapped the cover art of the maxi-single with the cover art of the 7" single as the infobox image. This isn't original research, is it? --George Ho (talk) 00:18, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

I rescind what I did. I like the former image more, so the image was undeleted as requested. --George Ho (talk) 18:09, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

key[edit]

Hello everyone, this song is in E♭ minor, not in F major. 162.247.120.161 (talk) 21:57, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 4 August 2015[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Though the supports are numerically superior, many appear to be, err, empirically disconnected. It is not true that the song is "by far the most popular article"; it is not true that "one has to be the primary topic"; it is not helpful to say that something is the case without providing any evidence; and "per nom" !votes are hollow, since the nominator did not argue that the article should - in fact - be moved. There's certainly a precedent, but unless that precedent can be justified, it is little else than consistency for its own sake. I'll be moving the disambiguation page to "Like a Virgin", and we can revisit this at some point in the future - perhaps after some deliberation on the topic of homonymous songs and albums at another venue, where people feel less compelled to !vote. (non-admin closure) Alakzi (talk) 22:50, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


Like a Virgin (song)Like a Virgin – Now that Like a Virgin (album) is no longer primary, perhaps we'll make the song the primary topic. That is, even if just as popular as the album, is the song more prominent than the album itself? George Ho (talk) 22:36, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Support I closed the album discussion, but probably won't close this one, so I might as well comment. I would have moved this if it had been part of the album RfM. The dab page has enough entries to be at the primary name (that was the RfM proposal), but most of them are references to the Madonna song, so I think the song should be primary. (And the album is named after the song. Cf. ...Baby One More Time and ...Baby One More Time (album).) — kwami (talk) 22:45, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support definitely the primary topic as I noted on the album's talk page. Comparable examples are how the songs ...Baby One More Time and Oops!... I Did It Again are primary topics over their albums. I was going to put this up for RM if George hadn't already done so. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:38, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support for the very first time. Randy Kryn 1:23, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support per Randy Kryn and the nominator. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 04:48, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support per nom. Clearly the primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:01, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support—the song is more prominent than the album and is thus the primary topic. The Wikipedian Penguin 13:55, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support. Far more likely that a reader is looking for the song that routinely plays on the radio, has been covered many times, and is regarded as one of the defining hits of a decade than its parent album. Chase (talk | contributions) 17:33, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose I think that this can work either way. I am personally quite happy with the current situation in which Like a Virgin redirects to Like a Virgin (disambiguation) which starts with the line of text:
"Like a Virgin is a 1984 song in an album of the same name by Madonna."
I think that the disambiguation page is particularly helpful in this instance as it presents a number of contents which will generally have been produced in knowledge and, perhaps, the shadow of the song yet, in many cases gaining some level of their own notability.
GregKaye 18:09, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, you make some good points. I wouldn't mind if it stayed. "Weak support" maybe. — kwami (talk) 16:16, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
If this ends as not moved or no consensus the dab page will be moved to the base location per WP:MALPLACED. Jenks24 (talk) 07:37, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, but until recently the album dab was just a rd, so we wouldn't expect much traffic. As soon as I moved it, the numbers shot up. Recently the album has gotten more hits than the song, though some of that will be due to the recent move discussion. — kwami (talk) 16:16, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Also might be how the dab is written: "Like a Virgin" is a 1984 song from an album of the same name by Madonna. , with the album link being longer and actually more prominent when someone is reading the entry. If reading it someone may actually miss the first link and go to the second expecting to find data about the song there. Randy Kryn 12:47, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
I wasn't going to say this, Randy Kryn, but the album is viewed 250–340 times per day, while the song is viewed 165–250 times per day as of now. I can see the album passing the song... barely. Not as much as used to be. --George Ho (talk) 03:13, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose save money for mobile users. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:50, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose move the dab to base name 73.154.175.89 (talk) 20:16, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support The song is by far the most popular article and should thus be the primary topic. Kaldari (talk) 01:47, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. When it ceases to be a song there would be an excellent argument to remove the word "song" until then we are only making work for ourselves and our readers. The present name (including the disambiguation page) works well. --Richhoncho (talk) 09:09, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
PS. WP:PRIMARYTOPIC says quite clearly that to be primary topic it must be significantly more primary than all other topics, looking at the views of editors on this and the album article RM and the stats below quoted by George Ho, there is no primary topic, which confirms this should not be moved. --Richhoncho (talk) 09:10, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support One has to be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. If not the album then it is the song. We have to decide which but it cannot be either. Certainly, one has more searches than the othere and it cannot be neither nor both. Shhhhwwww!! (talk) 11:16, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Am I allowed to "withdraw" this nomination? I had to start the discussion, so kwami wouldn't make the song primary. The stats show that the album could be... a little more popular than the song. --George Ho (talk) 04:48, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
    • No, other good faith users have supported so you have to let the RM play out. Jenks24 (talk) 07:36, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Like a Virgin (song). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:34, 15 May 2017 (UTC)