Talk:Lady Gaga discography

Certs

I think that the certifications for the singles and albums should be made small to clean the page up; because at the moment it looks rather messy. What does everyone think?--Love.Game (talk) 07:48, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

I think the certifications for the albums and/or singles should have their own section, honestly. ---74.232.63.242 (talk) 07:13, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree. There are featured discographies with certifications displayed small, so I think it can be in any way, since both ways show exactly the same information. Decodet (talk) 17:12, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Please check recent FLC promotions, where adding the small tag is strictly discouraged by the reviewers. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 08:14, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Singles "Just Dance" and "Poker Face" have sold over 5 million copies in the United States, but the RIAA states them as only being certified "4x Platinum;" my point being that these two should be kept to their respected certifications. After reviewing the list of Lady Gaga's certifications, both "LoveGame" and "Paparazzi" have not reached "2x Platinum" certifications; thus, they should be restored to their respected RIAA certification of "Platinum" status. Also, "Bad Romance" has only been certified "Platinum," and should be kept as having only that despite the reports of multi-million sales. I reverted "Poker Face," "Just Dance," and "Bad Romance" back to their correct RIAA certification; I felt it necessary to address that incorrect changes were made to these respected singles. Drakehottie (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:49, 4 May 2010 (UTC).

Billboard Pop Songs or Dance?

I think Lady Gaga should have a collum for Pop songs(mainstream top 40) or Dance songs because that is her specific genre and it would only be fair to see how she does under that catagory as well. Taylor Swift had a second catagory for US country, Beyonce has US R&B, Lil Wayne has US rap AND R&B, and the list goes on and on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.251.202.93 (talk) 15:41, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

No. Gaga's genre is still not established and is still too early to add such charts. If only she has unprecedented success on such charts, like Madonna has on the dance chart, then it can be considered. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 08:09, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

tbh i don't get the americans fascination for adding tons of billboard charts to tables. almost every country has different genre charts and they don't get added. i don't understand why the billboard ones should. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.146.25.116 (talk) 02:04, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Biggest market? --Legolas ^(talk2me) 07:57, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the United States has the biggest music market in the world. Also, this particular artist is American, therefore it would be more acceptable for a greater amount of Billboard charts. • вяαdcяochat 08:12, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Pop Chart is a component chart, so it can't be added. Also, per WP:CHARTS, we can only add a total of 10 charts in the table. Decodet (talk) 23:27, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Pop Songs is not a component chart. Also I really don't care about the 10-chart limit; it is nonsense. I think adding Pop Songs chart is a good idea. Also, only US and Canada have official genre airplay charts. Langdon (talk) 04:22, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Pop Songs is indeed a component chart. What the hell are you talking about? --Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:04, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Pop Songs is an airplay chat therefore it's component. Decodet (talk) 16:10, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Speechless and dance in the dark are the singles after telephone. ALEJANDRO IS NOT! —Preceding unsigned comment added by OliverL906 (talk • contribs) 16:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I think Gaga's success on these charts defiantly warrants their appearance on this page, she has released 6 singles and they all have gone to #1 on the pop chart, this is something that deserves to be mentioned —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackballoon222 (talk • contribs) 23:09, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

The Remix

Recently, there has been news of a new Lady GaGa CD called "The Remix". Its a Remix album being released in Japan only. However, for some reason, this has been put under EP's. This Should be put under Album's (or complication Album), becuase it has 16 tracks. (thats more tracks than The Fame orginally had). So i dont think its a EP. But becuase it's not a studio album, its been placed in EP. We should make a new Catagory on the template for Complication album's or something. And why was the article deleted? It had many references for it. (apaboutsims) (cant login)--110.175.56.28 (talk) 22:47, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

It's an album yes. The is a category Category:Remix albums but that is not suitable for the discography article. SunCreator (talk) 00:58, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

THanks i didnt know hwere to put seeing as the page has been deleted.--Apeaboutsims (talk) 08:19, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

The article called The Remix has been redirected being purely a bootleg and nothing else. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 09:17, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

We have no proof that it is a bottleg. Its also on amazon http://www.amazon.com/Gaga-Remixes-Mlps-Lady/dp/B00338T6IS/ref=pd_sim_m_3--61.68.180.221 (talk) 02:58, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

It is of course, most definately NOT a bootleg. It's an officlial release and deserves an individual page. Davidkt 17:31, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Worldwide sales, again

The sources people keep adding are all based on what Lady Gaga wrote on Twitter. See WP:SPS and WP:RS. Can we wait until it is confirmed in a similar manner as to when she reached 8 million albums sold? Nymf _hideliho! 17:21, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Please don't use that source. It says records sold, not albums sold. use this. SunCreator (talk) 17:33, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

A record is the same thing as an album. Either way, my point is that we cannot use sources (such as this) based on Lady Gaga's own words. Nymf _hideliho! 17:43, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

"Records sales" can include singles sales. Album sales not. Decodet (talk) 22:11, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I already said before, this one says "more than 8 million copies," case closed. Sparks Fly 19:35, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Sparks Fly you did, but seems the source gets edited out somehow. I've added it many times now to different Gaga related articles. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 17:16, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

If I had my way, I would keep the album and discography article semi-prot for a long time. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:25, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

What about LPs/EPs before "Lady Gaga" as "Stefani Germanotta"?

Should we add? Why not? - easy for me, please! (sms) 08:26, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

The answers are:

To do so would require reliable sources to verify. See a discussion here. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 17:12, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

The Fame WW sales

Sorry, it is obviously IMPOSSIBLE that The Fame has sold 10 million copies worldwide. Would you please be serious and act as a wikipedian? THIS IS NOT A FAN CLUB! why it is always necessary to distort informations just to pretend that one's sold a lot? You're mistaken to yourself! is it really so important the amount of copies? BE SERIOUS!! --93.146.217.154 (talk) 19:20, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

It's not impossible, but such a claim does require a source. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 17:14, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Honestly, there's been an on-going dispute about the actual worldwide figures of "The Fame;" some say that we must be reliant on the previously mentioned eight million sold, while others point out that the figures are more than ten million. Thus far, the only reliable source is the one stating that the album has sold eight million worldwide. I bring this up because, like other major albums, it should be mentioned how well the album has done commercially. So, I think it should be mentioned that "The Fame" has sold at least eight million copies worldwide. Though the source is dated, it's one of the only credible sources providing the evidence of worldwide sales. Drakehottie 12 June 2010, 13:50

Source: http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1630704/20100128/lady_gaga.jhtml

International Charts

I'm not sure if this has been previously discussed, but why not add in other international charts into the discography table to give a more comprehensive look at how her singles have fared in more countries besides the ones already stated. Of course, there is no point suggesting charts where only one or two of her singles have been released (ie Japan, Bulgaria, Romania, Norway, Spain, Russia, Italy & Slovakia), but how about Austria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland & Switzerland? They have 5/6 of her singles released there (if not counting Eh, Eh, then Austria, Finland & Switzerland would have 5/5 singles charted), not to mention 5 number "1"s between the 3 countries and 9 "1"s amongst the 5 countries.

Any comments? ZephyrWind (talk) 13:15, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

It has been discussed previously that only the 10 major markets where the singles are released, are to be listed. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:38, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok then may I ask what constitutes "major". Madonna's has Austrian, Italian & Swiss; Mariah has Switzerland too; even the Beatles had Denmark, Norway & Spain. So who decides what is "major"? ZephyrWind (talk) 09:13, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

First of all, market share. US leads it, followed by UK, Australia, Canada, Japan etc. Its impossible to source Japan positions hence its not added. For the rest of it, if there are two similar markets, then it is taken into account where the artist performed better and that county is taken. You can search in the archives for a detailed discussion on this. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 11:27, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks for explaining. Just thought that Switzerland was a considerable market as well. ZephyrWind (talk) 09:29, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Eh, Eh Nothing Else I Can Say chared at #2 in Sweden and #9 in New Zealand, which isnt incuded. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.238.204.109 (talk) 09:28, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Singles certifications

Right now, we don't have any problem with the certifications being displayed in the singles table, since she has released only six singles so far. But imagine if she release ten more singles and all of them get at least two certifications... we won't have sufficient space and it will be hard to display. Shouldn't we do something similar to Rihanna discography (a featured discography) and Katy Perry discography here and list all certifications in a separate table and sub-section? Decodet (talk) 16:51, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

IMO single certifications should stay in the singles table. in almost every FLC discussion i've participated in reviewers and admins have insisted on it anyways. as long as it doesn't get ridiculous and people don't start adding certifications for every country under the sun it'll be fine. seems to work fine for artists like madonna, mariah carey, janet jackson etc. but thats just my opinion... Mister sparky (talk) 18:05, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

It should stay in the table. Only the major markets like US, UK, Can, ARIA and EU is added. Five certiications can have enough space in a table. If the table gets long due to her releasing more singles, then its time to split the article, not the table.--Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:57, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

I came here to say exactly what you said. Rihanna has released like 20 singles already, but the table looks still clean, while with Gaga's only 8 singles it already looks like a mess and you have to scroll to see the whole table. It's hard to compare chart peaks. Please remove certifications. Kirillgdaily (talk) 05:33, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

No. Certifications stay on in the tables and is fine. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:52, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

It's not fine. The table looks like a mess. Kirillgdaily (talk) 14:48, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Define mess. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:39, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I have changed the page to the way Rihanna's discography looks. Certifications now have its own section. Legolas, don't change it, you know it looks much better now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kirillgdaily (talk • contribs) 06:28, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Please read WP:CONSENSUS and WP:FLC. Both dictate that the previous version is the one used in all Featured lists. I won't revert it since you made such a good faith effort, but achieve consensus for it please. And sign your posts next time. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 06:35, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Kirillgdaily (talk) 07:03, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I was just about to start a separate topic about this. I think it looks unsightly as well, and looks much better the Rihanna/Katy Perry discography pages way. But someone's gone and reverted it again. I think be bold and go ahead and re-do it... if it gets reverted again, I guess I'll come back here and discuss it further. Ss112 15:34, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

in flc discussions admins and reviewers insist of certifications staying in the tables. its consistent. the album ones are in the albums table, so the singles ones should be too. katy perry's certs have been back in the singles table for a long time btw. Mister sparky (talk) 21:18, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Singles Chart

Shouldn't we put a note in stating that Eh, Eh charted at 68 in Canada due to digital sales and that it wasnt officially released as a single there. Otherwise people will assume that single received radio airplay and promotion which it did not. It also highlights the fact that she had 6 consecutive top5 singles in Canada. --121.214.117.73 (talk) 09:01, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

That can definitely be done. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 09:03, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Her 6 #1's

She holds the record for the whole "6 #1's" thing and I know that you guys can't add a column for it but can it at least be mentioned? That and the fact that she hold the record with Britney Spears for most number ones in Canada. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.91.144.123 (talk) 18:41, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

She has fifteen weeks at #1 on Hot Dance Airplay, that's also a record. Do you want me to add that too? --Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:45, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

- Yes, I feel that's notable. I know other artists discography pages such as Paramore have a column for other Billboard charts that they've made it on and seeing as she has multiple number 1's on that particular chart I think it's noteworthy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.91.144.123 (talk) 06:07, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Teeth

Should we add "Teeth" to the music videos, 'cause you can see this on youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWbbR1TMusA&NR=1&feature=fvwp —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.188.226.93 (talk) 14:44, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Because that is not a real video, that is not Lady Gaga in the video —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackballoon222 (talk • contribs) 23:12, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Sales

As The Fame has been give 3xPlatinum in the US on the discography should the sales not be changed to 3,000,000 as thats the amount it stands for. Also im not sure if any are valid sources but lots of places are saying The Fame has been Diamond certified of 10 million worldwide including Gaga herself in a interview on Tv a few weeks ago. http://www.clevelandleader.com/node/13169 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.16.9 (talk) 15:16, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

When a record get's a 3xplatinum certification, it means that it has shipped 3,000,000 copies, not sold. And the diamond certification can't be true because worldwide certifications don't even exist. Kirillgdaily (talk) 22:37, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Bad Romance/The Netherlands

The single peaked at number 10 in the Dutch top 40 (not number 7). It reached number seven in the Mega Top 100, but that's not the official chart in Holland. You can find it on the Dutch Wikipedia-site; http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Gaga 9:53, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Telephone/The Netherlands

It peaked on number 19 in the Dutch Top 40 this week, not on number 12 (that's the Mega Top 100). It's like the problem with Bad Romance above! See: http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Gaga 11:03, 31 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.209.107.24 (talk)

Edit request

{{editsemiprotected}}

|- |20 |align=left|TBA

• Released: November 2010
• Label: Interscope, Streamline, Kon Live, Cherrytree
• Formats: CD, LP, digital download

| | | | | | | | | | |align=left| |- |}

82.37.19.8 (talk) 15:17, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

 Not done: per WP:CRYSTAL. Nymf _hideliho! 15:33, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

10.000.000 copies for the fame

It's time to add 10 milion at the previous 8 milion! AriandaGAGA (talk) 17:04, 27 March 2010 (UTC) AriandaGAGA

According to Times magazine, BBC.co.uk and many more sources, Gaga has sold 15 million albums to date. As she only has 2 albums (The Fame+The Fame Monster), counted together as one, I think we should use that source for "The Fame" sales. 213.0.38.34 (talk) 10:18, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

No, The Fame and The Fame Monster are sold separately in many nations and it is wrong to club their sales together as one. If a source reports separate sales for them, then it can be added, else not. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 10:30, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Certification

Why were certifications added to the singles table again? It looks like a mess gain. Kirillgdaily (talk) 11:07, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

There are several featured discographies written with them in the singles table. If you don't have a real rationale for your change, it stays this way. Nymf _hideliho! 11:14, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

in FL review discussions reviewers and admins insist on them being in the singles table. if the album ones are in the albums table, then the singles ones should stay in the singles table. Mister sparky (talk) 21:47, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

It looks like a mess. The album charts are big enough to fit them in, but the singles chart are disproportionate because of the no of certs. Some have 3 while others only have 1. It doesnt make sense to put them in together. --Love.Game (talk) 01:49, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Hitmixes EP and other missing releases!

Why is the Hitmixes EP STILL not listed? Why is The DJ Vice Megamix promotional single not listed? Why do the German 4-track "Poker Face" CD single, BOTH the German Lovegame CD singles and BOTH the German Paparazzi CD singles remain unlisted? This discography is hopelessly out of date and remains far too biased in favour of download 'releases'.

I have tried and tried to get these physical releases up and listed but in vain. Everytime I try 'someone' deletes them. Until they are, the discography remains incomplete. Maybe someone else should have a go? Davidkt 17:47, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes I´m wondering too why the Remix-Album isn´t in the discography. 82.113.121.248 (talk) 11:50, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

The Remix has now been added and has a seperate page (finally). Let's hope it now stays put! Some of the other physical releases are still awol though... Davidkt 12:22, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

The format of the single is irrelevant (CD, digital, etc). What's important is the single itself, as sales figures are compiled across all formats. It would also be useless and terminally impossible to monitor all the different issues of CD singles around the world. Today, there aren't that many around since they're only a stronghold in European markets like the UK and Germany, as you mention, but in the past they were very widespread, and tended to vary heavily from market to market. Imagine trying to track all the various CD single issues in foreign markets for international artists who've been around for decades? - That would be terminally impossible and valueless to Wikipedia. This is why the German CD singles you mention are rightfully omitted. Imperatore (talk) 20:47, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

they could have a place in the singles main article, but not the discography. Mister sparky (talk) 21:49, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, for posting the Canadian Hitmixes in the discography, but I might add that as far as this release went, it was a Limited Edition release of 25,000 CD copies only, and was not issued as a digital release. Amazon.ca lists it as a limited edition release. thanks again! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.30.129 (talk) 21:23, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Fair comment Mister sparky, and a valid point. I do wonder however, then what is the point of listing all the various country specific variations of the iTunes downloads? Surely physical releases should take priority? There aren't THAT many for Gaga. On a seperate point, 'another' editor (guess who) continues to delete both the Hitmixes EP and The Remix album, seemingly refusing to believe they are official releases, despite all the evidence to the contrary! This is getting tiresome and makes the discography continually inaccurate. Maybe someone can have a word? Davidkt 12:29, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

The Remix is certainly not a "bootleg" release as I've previously seen it described. It is for sale in Japanese retailers and on import internationally. It is even listed by Gaga's Japanese record company here at Universal Music Japan. As if that weren't enough, Japanese HMV confirm the release here as well as Allmusic. I actually own the remix album myself, and can comfirm with certainty that all four of Gaga's record labels are listed on the back of the CD, along with the Japanese catalog number UICS-19918. Dt¹²⁸ let's talk 14:15, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

the remix is also on uk release schedules for may. definitely not a bootleg. hitmixes charted in canada and japan, bootlegs arent allowed to chart. Mister sparky (talk) 21:03, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

The Remix, Japanese remix album

Gaga has released a remix album in Japan, titled The Remix. HMV, Allmusic. Dt¹²⁸ let's talk 08:49, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

"Disco Heaven" and "Disco Stick"

There is no mention of these two Lady Gaga songs or videos in the article? Why aren't they listed on the discography?

disco heaven is an album track on The Fame, and "disco stick" is lovegame. Mister sparky (talk) 15:40, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 79.79.146.6, 23 May 2010

{{editsemiprotected}}

Lady Gaga is number on in austrlia 

79.79.146.6 (talk) 18:09, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Please state a reliable source for facts that you wish to add, thanks.  Chzz  ►  19:56, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

 Not done

Alejandro in Switzerland

In Switzerland, Alejandro is on number 42 --84.158.3.190 (talk) 10:40, 3 June 2010 (UTC)