Talk:The Fame Monster

Alejandro Release

Could you look on the Release date of the single Alejandro on the infobox. The date denotes April 20, 2010 and the mere fact is we have not reached the date April 20, we are on the 27th of March. Can you fix this error. --Jaypeepacres (talk) 1:23, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

The Fame Monster #1 in Finland, not #2

Today, 3/4/2010, had The Fame Monster sold so much, that it's number 1 in Finland http://voice.fi/index.php?mw=&option=com_sbsarticle&tmpl=blog&cid=13377&cat=1 or http://www.ifpi.fi/tilastot/virallinen-lista/artistit/lady+gaga/the+fame+monster+-+dlx. --Squidoh (talk) 13:54, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Sold Gold in Sweden

The Fame Monster has sold gold in Sweden now aswell; http://www.sverigetopplistan.se/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.222.15.71 (talk) 13:40, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

EP?

Why is it considered an EP? With 8 tracks it might as well be an album. For example, Madonna is an eight-track album. And was a cosensus reached in order for this to have its own page? --12345abcxyz20082009 (talk) 20:53, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes consensus was reached that is how it became unprotected and EP was just the choice of one editor. I wouldn't object to it being an album since that is what the sources say. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 20:57, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

It is NOT an EP. First it was considered a re-release, but then Gaga herself said shes ripping this and the original "Fame" apart. Therefore, The Fame Monster will in fact be sold as a single album.

The Fame Monster is not an EP. Not many people still call it an EP. Whoever rumored that it depends on the length is correct. All forms of music below 30minutes is an EP, and above 30 minutes is an studio album. The Fame Monster is approximately 34 minutes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.231.58.192 (talk) 06:35, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

According to her website, The Fame Monster is still a studio album, for it is not marked as an EP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.0.95.132 (talk) 21:53, 12 November 2009 (UTC) Besides, I would MUCH rather have this page be a part of the original "Fame" page, instead of having it sit here as an EP (because that is completely false information). This page needs to be fixed right away. My suggestion, let the fame monster have its own page as a studio album (because thats what gaga says it is) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.0.95.132 (talk) 21:40, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, new information has surfaced, so you must be behind. In an interview, Gaga stated "I would not add, nor take away any songs from this EP. It is a complete conceptual and musical body of work that can stand on its own two feet. It doesn't need The Fame." [1] Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 22:32, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Explicit found an MTV source where Gaga says it's an EP. Therefore, unless more current references (such as AllMusic) say otherwise, it's an EP. CycloneGU (talk) 22:37, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

On her official website, ladygaga.com, it says on the front page in large letters "the new album" so i'd say it's an album. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.242.82 (talk) 23:17, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Then here is what to do. Since MTV quotes Gaga's own comment that it is an EP, we'll leave it alone for now. AllMusic will eventually clue in and get around to adding this, we'll be linking to it in any case. When they do, I for one will carefully look to see if they list it under albums or EPs. Whatever THEY list it as...I will recommend WE list it as that. Further, the album comes out in a week and a half; let's just wait before jumping to conclusions, all right? No need to get into an edit war over this. =) CycloneGU (talk) 03:01, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, in that same interview, she also calls it her "Sophomore album": "In the midst of my creative journey composing The Fame Monster, there came an exciting revelation that this was in fact my sophomore album. I would not add, nor take away any songs from this EP. It is a complete conceptual and musical body of work that can stand on its own two feet".

SOURCE —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.96.229.85 (talk) 21:08, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

WOW!... some of you wikipedia people are really stupid.. The definition of an EP is a CD containing 7 songs or less. OBVIOUSLY the tracklist in 8 songs, so it has to be considered an album - If this is an EP, than Madonna's first album was an EP. --YourBadRomance (talk) 22:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

86.96.229.85 (talk) 21:09, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

It is not the number of tracks which determines whether it is or not an EP, but the length. For example, Animals has 5 tracks, but it is an album because it is 40 minutes long. --12345abcxyz20082009 (talk) 10:48, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

I cant belive you wikipedia people.....now your taking her words literally......before when she said that its her sophmore album in numerous interviewws you were like "a third party source has to confirm its her sophmore album like billbord"............and now just because in one intervirew she sliped the word EP, then ur considering it an EP.........lol....i dont see any site condierding it an EP...including billboard....she said its her SOPHMORE ALBUM....you better change it to SOPHOMORE ALBUM......NOW —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.96.228.91 (talk) 11:46, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

--Agreed, I think this should be considered an album.

Something we must learn is that an EP must have a certain amount of songs, but also must have as long as 35 minutes maximum. Information in the article is mentioned that lasts 34 minutes, so I think the standard version is an EP and deluxe version is a studio album Tbhotch (talk) 06:03, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

EP or Sophomore album?

Since after all the discussion, It ended up on a new page, but following Lady Gaga's own statement, it's not an EP, but a sophomore album, so we should put it in the article, instead of saying it's an EP... --Zefron12 (talk) 23:38, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

According to Lady Gaga's own statement it is an EP [2]. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 23:39, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Gaga called it both her second album and an EP, so we need further sources such as Interscope. --Shadow (talk) 05:03, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I'm waiting on AllMusic to clarify this. Whatever they do, I'll do. Problem is right now, they still seem to think it's a re-release and haven't published the track listing yet. [3] CycloneGU (talk) 17:45, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Wait for Billboard for this. I'm more inclined to think of this as an LP rather than EP, since the EP criteria by OCC denotes no more than 4 songs and 20 mins of track length, hence waiting for BB to clarify again. Allmusic will take it frm BB though. :) --Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:50, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

4 tracks for an EP? I've seen more than one Tori Amos EP that has five tracks on it. CycloneGU (talk) 04:08, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Either of it. 4 tracks or 25 mins track length. That is how OCC decides an EP, but Billboard might have some other rule. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:18, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

It has 8 tracks and 32 minutes length, So I think it will be considered an album.... Hope BB/AllMusic clarify us very soon! --201.19.226.158 (talk) 13:07, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

"The New Album" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZvQWcBPEs4 - official commercial —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.252.227.40 (talk) 13:22, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I think it's an album.. like the first Madonna album(Madonna (album)), with 8 tracks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.117.254.62 (talk) 18:02, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

IT IS NOT AN EP. The confirmation has been made through various radio shows and through a German television programme. Please change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.186.12.226 (talk) 13:10, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Changed to album

I've changed the page to an "album" for the meantime as that appears to be what consensus has decreed. Please discuss any changes here before making them. Dale 20:33, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Good, the official record label article cited at no.23 confirms this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.242.82 (talk) 21:43, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

125.238.242.82, I have indented your comment. Also, feel free to reg. an account if possible. =)

I was one of the ones who originally settled on the EP thing, but since there appear to be many sources stating "album", I will agree. CycloneGU (talk) 02:13, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Gaga stated in an interview that she is releasing the album like Jay-Z released The Blueprint 3 (which is a studio album) so I think it's an album, let's stop wondering over something already confirmed! + The trailer says it's an album so it's an album. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmedfarhat (talk • contribs) 20:50, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Lady GaGa is lesbian —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.101.23.193 (talk) 17:28, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

On the release dates can someone change the format for the UK edition as the UK is only receiving the deluxe edition, the standalone album will not get released here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.78.24.54 (talk) 18:41, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I know. I'm really annoyed about that. I might order the stanard edition from overseas. Sadly, I have no table-fu. -- EA Swyer ^Talk _{Contributions} 15:22, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Billboard magazine labeled "The Fame Monster" as an EP in a recent post about her possible first week sales.. I think it should be changed again into EP. Decodet (talk) 16:41, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Firstly, Billboard have labelled it as an Ep [4] and havent included it in her Albums Discography.

Secondly, its no different to Katy Perry's Re-Release of One Of The Boys. She released One OF The Boys again with a second Disc with new material and remixes (same as The Fame Monster with The Fame but without new remixes) then, for people who already had the album, they released it as a Tour Ep (The Fame Monster EP) so its not the first time its been seperate. Thirdly, Since when has an artist ever released a second studio album as a re-release of the first. They may release it as an EP as well, but never release a second album as part of thier first. Lastly, The Fame Monster is an extended version of The Fame otherwise they wouldnt have said "The Fame with 8 new tracks" but they would have said "The Fame plus her brand new album". Please change it back to an EP, as the first reason (a reference from Billboard) is enough to change the type of album!--Apeaboutsims (talk) 00:53, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

^agreed, billboard say ts an ep, then it is an ep--61.68.181.237 (talk) 03:34, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

it is an EP becuase of all those reasons and billborad has confirmed its an ep. no exceptions, it needs to be changed back. Plus, where did the Cherrytree sessions Ep dissapear too? its an important part of her discograpy and needs to be on here.--Morgan3136 (talk) 04:37, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

it is an ep, as it says on billboard. there is no debating this or voting as what it should be under! please change it back to EP. it was never an album, and never be considered as such. its an EP full stop. thats it. find something else to argue over. this is an EP and it should be mentioned as an EP!--Jackex56 (talk) 04:45, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

The Fame Monster can NOT be labelled as a studio album. It was released as a re-release of The Fame in most countries (it also charted as The Fame in some charts, such as Australia and Ireland). The solo disc, however, was labelled as an EP by Billboard and MTV in the references cited below. I think these reasons are enough. Decodet (talk) 16:55, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

It's a Studio Album, it's also an E.P. Maybe the article should just switch to saying both? SunCreator (talk) 17:02, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

The Fame Monster (the solo disc) is an EP. The Fame Monster (double disc) is a re-release of The Fame, her debut album. But it's not her second album as some of GaGa's articles are saying. Decodet (talk) 17:10, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

"Bad Romance is the first single from Lady GaGa's second album The Fame Monster. " and "The Fame Monster is the second album by Lady GaGa released in 3 different versions." - Top left from Official Lady Gaga site. SunCreator (talk) 17:30, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

That's not her official site, it's just a fansite. However, I checked ladygaga.com and they cite The Fame Monster as "The New Album". It can be treated as her second album but it won't chart in most charts, since it was released as a re-release of The Fame in several countries. Decodet (talk) 17:51, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes at the moment, but only The Fame Monster deluxe edition is available. When The Fame Monster is sold on it's own then it will likely chart in those countries. SunCreator (talk) 17:58, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

If its a new album then why has 'The Fame' been taken off the shelves and off i-tunes? 81.106.148.147 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:51, 9 December 2009 (UTC).

It should be reverted/changed to an EP. If you look at the definition of an EP it is a collection of songs which is two big to be a single but not quite big enough to be a full album. When they advertise the project on tv they refer to it as the next album, an EP! which is available in deluxe edition with a bonus disc containing the fame. stores like HMV also advertise it is a an EP and it was listed under the re-issues section. Lil-unique1 (talk) 03:33, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I believe there needs to be a vote between album and EP as this issue is very debatable. It states on the fame monster edit page that "CONSENSUS HAS BEEN FORMED ON THE TALK PAGE - DO NOT CHANGE TO EP ANYWHERE IN THIS ARTICLE" however that comment is unfair and untrue as over 50% of the comments on the talk page agree the fame monster should be classified as a EP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SexyBlondeGuy (talk • contribs) 04:14, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Shouldn't it mean something that the billboard charts reference it as "The Fame Monster (EP)" i find that to be a more reliable source then any contradicting statements made in any interviews

Digital Spy

The digital spy review was removed, why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.228.139.26 (talk) 01:17, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

They seem to hate anything by digital spy dunno why though :S —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.78.24.54 (talk) 21:40, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Digital Spy

Why is digital spy a bad source, you keep saying that is unreliable, how can a review be unreliable? is the review copied from another source?, one thing is reliability and notability another. Digital Spy is a notable web page, specially in the UK, if this is removed then About.com should also be removed, is it reliable or notable the review from an X person?, everyone can write in that web. Double standars? 190.233.37.136 (talk) 04:35, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Digital Spy is notable for plagiarism. A website run by a bunch of 14 yr ods can hardly be considered reliable. General consensus amongst the GA reviewrs were reached long ago that Digital Spy cannot be considerd reliable. On the other hand, About.com at present is considered reliable, though ongoing discussions are there at WP:RS for validating its reliability. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:53, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Where does it said that about.com is considered reliable, there are always questions in the noticeboard in regard to its use in featured and even good articles nominations. You keep saying general consensus, where is the consensus, neither of those two are listed as professional reviews in the album wikiproject. 190.233.37.136 (talk) 05:18, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

To counter the allegation that Digital Spy is "known" for plagiarism: how? Are there any recent examples of plagiarism? It is one of the leading British entertainment websites run by journalists - the reviewer Nick Levine who wrote The Fame Monster's review is an experienced reviewer. Just because Americans don't know the website does not discredit it as a source. It is a highly popular and widely-visited site in the UK so obviously has a certain amount of credibility; if all it did was plagiarise other sources, then it would not have become so successful! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexanderb101 (talk • contribs) 02:24, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Plus Digital Spy are always correct about their news information, I personally think they just do not want a UK site to be used for an american singer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robinsimpson1992 (talk • contribs) 15:53, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

New Promotions

Not sure what or how to do this.
Can you Please add to promotions section
Performing Bad Romance & Speechless on The American Music Awards Nov 22nd 2009
Appearing as a guest & performing Bad Romance on The Jay Leno Show Nov 23rd 2009
Appearing as a guest & performing Bad Romance & Speechless on The Ellen Degeneres Show Nov 27th 2009

EP/Album situation

I understand that Gaga said this was an album, and the consensus was to call this an album, but why not an EP since Billboard and every mainstream source refers to The Fame Monster as an EP? Candyo32 (talk) 16:16, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Billboard is only US and not worldwide as this article is. Many sources refer to it as an album, just check google. If there could be any doubt after that, then finally Billboard call it an album. Case closed. SunCreator (talk) 23:54, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

I am for keeping this listed as a studio album. It's over 30 minutes in length, and the deluxe version is an hour longer. Chase wc⁹¹ 22:32, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Retro Dance Freak

Please add that "Retro Dance Freak" was also included on the German Editions. I'm from Germany, I've got the CD, it's on the tracklist. --It's Flo (talk) 13:00, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Please also add that it's on the UK digipack version, I have this CD with it on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robinsimpson1992 (talk • contribs) 19:31, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Alejandro confirmed as next single?

This article from the Sun says she will make a video for new single "Alejandro". --12345abcxyz20082009 (talk) 10:29, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

A bogus gossip newspaper. Let's wait for more reliable sources. I think I heard she is shooting for the music video of "Telephone". --Legolas ^(talk2me) 10:40, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like Alejandro is the third single Digital spy also confirmed it http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/news/a195012/gaga-wants-david-walliams-for-video.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robinsimpson1992 (talk • contribs) 10:46, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh there it comes, another kid website. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:43, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

better than nothing...

fyi the sun is not a bogus gossip newspaper, its the most read tabloid newspaper in the uk. but thats another discussion altogether. had a memo at my work today that alejandro will be the next eu single and telephone for the us. but wont add anything till a postable source is available. 78.145.18.68 (talk) 11:41, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

That is where The Sun loses its credibility, because its a tabloid. However, if Alejandro is really being released, repuptable sources will soon report it. Although my personal opinion says that Sun reporter Telephone as Alejandro, the former being confirmed for a video shoot by Rap-Up. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 11:50, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

What Legolas2186 said: For a source to be a reliable source, it needs "a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy", which is what The Sun repeatedly lacks. Amalthea 12:36, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

hmmm interesting, Sky News, an undoubtedly reliable news site, uses digitalspy to announce alejandro video. would this be an example of a reputable source using another, thus showing digitalspy as a reliable source? http://indepth.news.sky.com/InDepth/topic/Lara_Stone_And_David_Walliams —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.243.75.177 (talk) 14:18, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

also, with regards to The Sun being reliable, the Official Charts Company website lists The Sun as an official licensee of the uk charts. surely they wouldn't do that if the newspaper was unreliable? Mister sparky (talk) 21:55, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

official licensee most likely means the Sun pay the OCC for there chart information. That doesn't make the Sun a relieable source, if your in the UK and ever read the paper you will know it's rather unreliable, indeed many blogs are more reliable. SunCreator (talk) 22:51, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Allaccess.com has listed Alejandro in the Cool New Music section of Top 40/Mainstream radio for play in the US. 2 radio stations have already added the song to their play lists as of March 2/2010 according to Allaccess.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.30.223 (talk) 22:03, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Bonus tracks

Can anyone confirm where "No Way" and "Reloaded" are coming from? I've never heard of them being included on any physical or digital release of the album. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.249.191 (talk) 20:08, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

It's not on this album to my knowledge. They are unreleased tracks. See List_of_Lady_Gaga_songs#Unofficially_released. SunCreator (talk) 16:02, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

"No Way" is NOT a bonus track for The Fame Monster. Fernando Garibay released this statement: "we're saving that one for the future". As for Reloaded, the song's state is currently unreleased, and due to the link most likely won't have a physical release. The song was recorded around late 2008-early 2009, which might have caused rumors that it would appear as a bonus track.
HEyyy XxMjF (talk) 01:22, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Alejandro (Lady Gaga Song)

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Alejandro (Lady Gaga Song)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "uk":

• From Speechless (Lady Gaga song): "Chart Stats - Lady Gaga". The Official Charts Company ChartStats.com. Retrieved 2009-12-22.
• From Poker Face (Lady Gaga song): "UK Singles Chart". The Official Charts Company. acharts.us. 2009-03-22. Retrieved 2009-03-23.
• From Bad Romance: "Lady Gaga – Bad Romance – UK Singles Chart". The Official Charts Company. ChartStats. 2009-11-08. Retrieved 2009-11-05. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |work= (help)
• From Paparazzi (Lady Gaga song): "Paparazzi UK Singles Chart peak position". The Official Charts Company. Chartstats.com. Retrieved 2009-04-21. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |work= (help)
• From Just Dance: "UK Singles Chart". The Official Charts Company. January 11, 2009. Retrieved 2009-04-28.
• From The Fame Monster: "Lady Gaga - The Fame positions". The Official Charts Company. ChartStats.com. 2009-11-30. Retrieved 2009-12-02. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |work= (help)

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 15:54, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Monster=Fourth Single?

Lady Gaga personaly said that she would release 4 singles in the album. And although there's still no real source of a 4th single, rumors say that "Monster" will be the 4th single. And it's suspicious that the Confirmed single and the 2 not yet really confirmed single and the rumored single are all in the fame mons†er trailer. YZJay 23:49, 13 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by YZJay (talk • contribs)

She did imply that Speechless would be a single. I have a sense that Alejandro (song) maybe skipped from some countries and we could end up with different releases in different countries. Who knows, it's speculation at the moment. We have only Bad Romance and Telephone for sure and it will likely be many months before things become clear. SunCreator (talk) 23:50, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Not to sound forum-like, "Monster" is not the third single Im afraid. Seems like "Alejandro" it is, although "Speechless" may be the fourth/fifth single. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 10:10, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Here are the singles in order:
1. Bad Romance
2. Telephone
3. Alejandro
4. Dance In The Dark

Yes, Dance In The Dark is the fourth single. She posted this list on Twitter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.231.58.192 (talk) 16:12, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

it's kind of dissapointing since lots of people want monster to be the 4th single 120.33.24.74 (talk) 13:51, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Spelling error

In the introductory paragraphs, someone wrote "complimenting." It should read "complementing." Too bad the page is locked so I can't fix it.70.134.72.99 (talk) 07:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Contemporary critics gave a positive review of the album, with the majority of them complimenting the songs "Bad Romance" and "Dance in the Dark".

From a dictionary definition, it appears the existing text is appropriate. SunCreator (talk) 15:37, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

The Fame Monster Peak position 2 in Mexico

The album Fame Monster is right now in position number eight, but had its peak position to number 2.

Data is collected from Amprofon in its top 100 list http://www.amprofon.com.mx/top100.php?item=menuTop100&contenido=lista

So in general, the wikpedia entry has to be corrected to number 2 (insted of 14) in mexican charts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.234.99.85 (talk) 20:46, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Alejandro IS the third single

Ok, so I know there wasn't concrete information, but I think I now have some. GaGaDaily is Lady GaGa's biggest fansite, also been featured on her official site. They revealed that the third single would infact be "Alejandro", confirmed here http://gagadaily.com/2010/03/lady-gagas-next-single-is/. Please could we add this? I mean this isn't the only source to say that it is the next single. (78.149.49.149 (talk) 08:36, 14 March 2010 (UTC)).

Singles from The Fame Monster

Here are the singles in order:'

1. Bad Romance
2. Telephone
3. Alejandro
4. Dance In The Dark

Yes, Dance In The Dark is the fourth single. She posted this list on Twitter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.231.58.192 (talk) 16:12, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Album covers in infobox

I have combined the two covers into one image in the infobox because, as one is not the primary cover, I feel they should both be represented as the main infobox image. I'm not sure if this was the best idea, so I'm posting here to see if there are any oppositions. –Chase (talk) 20:30, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Strongly opposed - Contrary to the subtitle description, the album is NOT randomly released with either cover- different covers are assigned to different editions; there's absolutely nothing 'random' about that. The alternative covers infobox function addresses this issue perfectly, and I do not see why The Fame Monster would be a special case. Imperatore (talk) 05:52, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

From what I have seen in record stores, the covers are indeed not assigned to special editions. I have seen the blonde cover issued with both the EP and the rerelease, and same with the brunette cover. The only place I have seen that assigns the covers to specific versions of the album is iTunes. –Chase (talk) 14:50, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

OK, my mistake - there is a randomness in the covers. Thanks to the guys over at Gagapedia http://ladygaga.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_international_editions_of_The_Fame_Monster, it seems like the album's native market, the US, got random cover pressing. However, most other Universal Music Group companies outside the US did not go for a randomness it seems. 03:47, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Chase, actually Imperatore is right, its the US which got the mixed album covers. In the opther markets, the first cover is the main cover, with the brunette one as the alternate cover for the combined version. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:59, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Did not know that. In that case, I support the revert back to the original version. –Chase (talk) 20:30, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Alejandro Music Video

Does anyone by any chance know when the Alejandro music video is going to be shot? Some say that Gaga asked if David Williams and Lara Stone can be part of the video, but I just thinkt that they said they couldn't work on it.

Also, is Dance in the Dark the last single of The Fame Monster? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.84.74.182 (talk) 18:13, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Concept album?

Lady Gaga has said that all of the songs on the album are themed to various "monsters" associated with fame, and this is mentioned in the article. Wouldn't that make it a concept album? I hate to use Madonna as a comparison (Lady G gets that enough already), but it seems like a similar case as Erotica. Just throwing this out here, I don't think anyone has brought it up yet. The Mach Turtle (talk) 19:58, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

The Fame Monster

Monster c**k —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.70.58.189 (talk) 11:23, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Dance in the dark promo single

I made the page for dance in the dark since it was released as a promo single. - RebornRocks —Preceding unsigned comment added by RebornRocks (talk • contribs) 22:04, 29 March 2010 (UTC)