Talk:Bad Romance
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bad Romance article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 40 days |
Bad Romance is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bad Romance is part of the The Fame Monster 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. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Armadillo shoe was copied or moved into Bad Romance with this edit on August 2, 2022. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Composition
- http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2014/03/lady_gaga_s_bad_romance_owen_pallett_explains_the_pop_diva_s_genius_using.2.html
- https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-story-behind-lady-gagas-bad-romance-video/
—Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 19:11, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
Release history
FrB.TG Hey! I see that you're working on this article, which is very cool - good work! But I see also that you removed various things from "Release history" section. And when I'd agree of removal of eBay, then I don't get why you removed French and Italian radio impact dates - they were sourced by sites agreed to be reliable (Pure Charts, EarOne). From what I see, Fnac is not user-generated, but I might be wrong about it. infsai (talkie? UwU) 01:28, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
- Hi, Infsai. I rechecked Fnac; it seems you are right. The CD purchase was posted officially by Interscope so this should be restored. As for Pure Charts and EarOne, I didn't find any indication that the sources are high-quality reliable (which goes against the 1c FAC criterion). FrB.TG (talk) 15:50, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
- This is the source I removed. Checking it again, it seems the CD is sold by a user called momox, making it a user-generated content. FrB.TG (talk) 16:22, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
- @FrB.TG: Okay, so I'll start with something that I'm 100% sure that's true - EarOne is considered as a reliable source according to WP:SINGLE?. For Pure Charts, all I can say is the fact that many articles use it as a source for not only radio impact date (e.g. "Love Again (Dua Lipa song)") but sometimes as a primary single release source (e.g. "Free Woman" or "I'll Never Love Again"), so or all of those articles are wrong or I don't know. Thanks for replying and clearing info about that Fnac source! (And sorry if my grammar is bad right now, but I'm tired...) infsai (talkie? UwU) 23:28, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
- Okay, I am convinced of EarOne's reliability. It's been mentioned in RTL 102.5, ReveNews and Radio Italia. As for Pure Charts, it being used in other articles doesn't justify its presence here. For starters, their website is not even secure and nothing I read about it truly convinces me of its reliability. FrB.TG (talk) 08:54, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
- Hmm, okay then. I guess it'll be a good time to bring Pure Charts for a discussion. But hence you removed it from the article, please change the release date back to October 23, since October 19 was a date that was "indicated" by Pure Charts. Thanks! infsai (talkie? UwU) 05:39, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
- We still have a source for the October 19 (#7) release. :) FrB.TG (talk) 12:58, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
- Oh, interesting. infsai (talkie? UwU) 14:39, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
- We still have a source for the October 19 (#7) release. :) FrB.TG (talk) 12:58, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
- Hmm, okay then. I guess it'll be a good time to bring Pure Charts for a discussion. But hence you removed it from the article, please change the release date back to October 23, since October 19 was a date that was "indicated" by Pure Charts. Thanks! infsai (talkie? UwU) 05:39, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
- Okay, I am convinced of EarOne's reliability. It's been mentioned in RTL 102.5, ReveNews and Radio Italia. As for Pure Charts, it being used in other articles doesn't justify its presence here. For starters, their website is not even secure and nothing I read about it truly convinces me of its reliability. FrB.TG (talk) 08:54, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
- @FrB.TG: Okay, so I'll start with something that I'm 100% sure that's true - EarOne is considered as a reliable source according to WP:SINGLE?. For Pure Charts, all I can say is the fact that many articles use it as a source for not only radio impact date (e.g. "Love Again (Dua Lipa song)") but sometimes as a primary single release source (e.g. "Free Woman" or "I'll Never Love Again"), so or all of those articles are wrong or I don't know. Thanks for replying and clearing info about that Fnac source! (And sorry if my grammar is bad right now, but I'm tired...) infsai (talkie? UwU) 23:28, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
Image usage
I have removed File:Lady Gaga BR GMA.jpg from the "Critical reception" section. I had discussed this in the article's FAC and my rationale is an image of a live performance is not relevant to a section about reviews. An image used in this section should be related to the actual prose, and I do not see the connection. The image seems more decorative than informative in my opinion. I am pinging the editor who removed the image (@Sricsi: with this edit) as well as the FAC nominator (@FrB.TG:).
I do not see a clear rationale for Sricsi's edit, but I want to hear from them and give them the space to discuss this further. To answer their edit summary, there are plenty of song FAs from the past two or three decades that only use a single performance image. See articles like "Blank Space", "Shake It Off", "Dance in the Dark", etc. I am posting this on the talk page as I want to open a dialogue about this point rather than just remove and potentially cause further issues. Open communication and discussion is vital for Wikipedia and I want to make sure I do my part in keeping that up. Aoba47 (talk) 18:43, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
- Wikipedia featured articles
- FA-Class Featured topics articles
- Wikipedia featured topics The Fame Monster featured content
- Low-importance Featured topics articles
- Featured articles that have not appeared on the main page
- Old requests for peer review
- All unassessed articles
- FA-Class electronic music articles
- Mid-importance electronic music articles
- WikiProject Electronic music articles
- FA-Class Lady Gaga articles
- High-importance Lady Gaga articles
- WikiProject Lady Gaga articles
- FA-Class Pop music articles
- High-importance Pop music articles
- Pop music articles
- FA-Class song articles
- FA-Class Women in music articles
- Unknown-importance Women in music articles
- WikiProject Women in Music articles