Jump to content

Talk:Paparazzi (Lady Gaga song)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 75.82.217.37 (talk) at 01:16, 30 December 2009. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Deep bias from an editor of this article, and a resistance to impartiality

There seems to be a user called 'Legolas' who is intent on biasing this article positively. It seems deeply contrary to the spirit and ideals of Wikipedia. From earlier in this discussion page: WEll im 100% sure that "Just Dance" will be a GA and I'm pushing LoveGame next. Paparazzi I'll push later but we need to work on "Eh, Eh". Its practically lost now.

To have such an affinity to the point of rendering entries partial and biased seems unfortunate given Legolas' potential eloquence. As an aside, to consider a person who has been on the music scene for about 9 months as worthy of tainting one's impartiality as a writer and potential contributor to the Wikipedia community seems rather unfortunate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.146.164.20 (talk) 05:15, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Starstruck?

Since when was Starstruck confirmed to be the next single? Claimgoal (talk) 04:10, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It hasn't been. If users add it without a source then it should be removed. Slowpoke (talk) 18:34, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Music video section

There has been some confusion over the music video section. If you wish to take the section of please disscuss.Cloverfield Monsta (talk) 00:57, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the content had been removed as the sources used clearly met WP:FANCRUFT in many ways.
Even though the sources are likely to be true [as photos of the actual music video were leaked onto those sites],
we have to base our knowledge on encyclopedic fact as oppossed to original research or prediction.
When the video is released and those sites appear to be correct, then we may use them constructively!
childfunkchat 05:49, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The boyfriend yelling at her was mistaken as a part of the actual music video. It is not her real boyfriend. --58.168.47.38 (talk) 06:25, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, much thanks for letting me know! From what source did you gather that it was an actual scene from the music video? We need everything we can get in order to expand the article considering the source is reliable! childfunkchat 08:44, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
At present everything that has been added to the music video section badly fails WP:RS. Its a good thing that it has been commented. I would advice everybody not to keep on reverting it. Else the section will be deleted. Reliable sources are being looked for, untill then it will be hidden. --Legolas (talk2me) 10:28, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest to leave it until the video is out.--58.168.47.38 (talk) 11:34, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the section also says that entire video was filmed in london, then the next paragraph it says bel air.... Mister sparky (talk) 12:16, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fan-sites fail to meet WP:RS, so please do not add them as source --Smanu (talk) 16:17, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well said Smanu, I very much agree. We have no choice but to wait it out! If anyone finds a source besides the ones that have already been used, I would suggest posting it up on here so each of us can determine whether it complys with WP:RS or not.
  • And Mister sparky, well picked up with the filming location. I noticed that also. Some sources claimed it was filmed in London, others claim in Bel Air (which I believe only exists in Los Angeles) and even most recently, I read from another source that it was shot in Malibu which is also in California. It's very confusing. They are all most likely all wrong or there is a slight chance that one is correct. childfunkchat 22:43, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well all of it is gone now, but the part of the director needs to be put up, the source for that was relible enough. Agree/Disagree.Cloverfield Monsta (talk) 00:40, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Only the one about the director has been kept. --Legolas (talk2me) 03:34, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why this source is on the music video section? It's a fan-site! There is write "GaGaDaily.com the hottest Lady GaGa fansite!" Fansite are not allowed! I remove it everytime, but people re-add it! And last...where the cover of the single comes from? --Smanu (talk) 15:12, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have written the current description of the music video - it's not really 100%, but it's the bare bones so everybody else can improve it. See edit history, what I've written is all original. Mc8755 (talk) 21:42, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

==Ref 8 (23/04/09)

Refrence number * is a wikipedia URL which can't be used. If I am wrong please correct me. Can someone take it off.Cloverfield Monsta (talk) 00:42, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removed. --Legolas (talk2me) 03:35, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Audio Request

The article needs an audio sample please. Usually 23-30. Find the guideline, if you do not--sorry. Cloverfield Monsta (talk) 05:33, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I put the sample on the page. JGab12 (talk) 17:35, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Official cover

I believe an official cover has been released as I see it in Chartstats and other reliable websites. But is there any confirmation to this? --Legolas (talk2me) 10:52, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that cover is actually official. It's been out all over the net for months now. I even remember it from last year! Personally, my view on it is that it has been made by a fan.
childfunkchat 11:00, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Thanks for clearing that up. And take a look at teh brand new version of the article. I extended it completely !! --Legolas (talk2me) 11:28, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed. Nice work! We are finally getting there now :) childfunkchat 11:49, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WEll im 100% sure that "Just Dance" will be a GA and I'm pushing LoveGame next. Paparazzi I'll push later but we need to work on "Eh, Eh". Its practically lost now. --Legolas (talk2me) 11:53, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Eh eh is kind of lost. Lets improve this. Probably cause it is not one that is popular or like poker face and just dance (uptempo). Cloverfield Monsta (talk) 00:45, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No my dear :) Eh, Eh is not lost . I have pulled it back. Content size being less than Just Dance or Poker Face doesnot mean that the article is not GA quality. Everything is properly referenced to begin with, we just need a writing and inspiration for it. --Legolas (talk2me) 05:33, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(plz read this in *mono tone* s no offense is taken)Ah but you see that the LoveGame article only just being created is ahead, due to it's popularity I am assuming. I suggest looking for sources then waiting for people to find it like me. Cloverfield Monsta (talk) 08:22, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I really have difficulty in understanding what you write. Could you please check your spellings and prose before you save? It simply doesnot make any sense at all!! --Legolas (talk2me) 08:27, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I just typwe quickly and do not check my spellings, I'm actually using my laptop-internet expolrer while my other CPU has Google Chrome-spell check. I just do not really care how I spell--I will try to check my spelling and structure. And this edit has no spelling mistake but not formatted. Eh Eh *was* a bit *lost* but you brought it back. If you want new info. on articles actually seach the net for news sources! Cloverfield Monsta (talk) 05:46, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sheet music request

Sheet music is requested. Cloverfield Monsta (talk) 00:57, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Issues.

Hi there. The praise for this song is way overdone for a song that's barely even charted. Does it even reach notability requirements for a song? WP:NSONGS. Also, the live section is very poorly written and reads very clumsily. -"She wore a silver and black short skirt like a tutu with a triangular piece set on her right breast[16][17] and high heeled ultra spike shoes", "As the video got over, a countdown from ten to one happens and the screen drops to reveal Gaga emerging from the middle of the stage holding her hands upward". Also the source which acclaims this performance doesn't actually do so. Thanks Jambo-numba1 (talk) 14:50, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It has long passed WP:NSONGS and everything is properly cired. Read the references carefully. --Legolas (talk2me) 03:15, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, i was maybe wrong there. However, the praise for this song is way overdone - 8 positive to 1 negative. The critics obviously love this song but it could be toned down slightly, it reads pretty biased at the moment. The live performance section is good until you reach the Fame Ball Tour part - its written really badly! Am i wrong? Someone who has the seen the show needs to re-write this properly. Also the source which acclaims this simply doesn't, it comments on her sunglasses(it acclaims the whole show but not this song, it certainly doesn't comment on voice clarity). I apologize if its just me missing something. Thanks. Jambo-numba1 (talk) 10:47, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thats not a biased writing. If critics have praised it then thats how it should be. It doesnot matter whether there are 8:1 or anything. Maz there can be 10 reviews which is there now. For the live performance, its completely accurate if you have seen the show. The references do talk about the screens and their meaningless movies. Again please read them carefully. --Legolas (talk2me) 11:10, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK I'm gonna give in, apart from the live section. Its badly written with some good grammar omitted. If you read I'm sure you will agree. "The show started with a video intro called "The Heart" where Gaga played an alternate persona called Candy Warhol.[18] As the video got over, a countdown from ten to one happens and the screen drops to reveal Gaga emerging from the middle of the stage holding her hands upward. She wore a silver and black short skirt like a tutu with a triangular piece set on her right breast[19][20] and high heeled ultra spike shoes. Gaga's hair was made an austere blond bob and she wore black sunglasses.[19][21] She was surrounded by her dancers holding plates which were encrusted with crystals and completely hid them.[4] The plates were angled similar to the dress she wore. As the music started, the plates opened up and Gaga started singing the song while standing on the platform.[22] The stage was surrounded by mechanical fog and heavy lighting was being emitted from the background.[19][21] The song progressed with Gaga moving her hands in choreographed moves, with her dancers moving the plates in the same rhythm." Jambo-numba1 (talk) 11:38, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That can indeed be changed. --Legolas (talk2me) 05:31, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Overall

I added music video section with an MTV source. Plus Gaga states (on MTV source) she is going to release 6 new songs by the end of this yr and is writing for her next album (joke?) Cloverfield Monsta (talk) 08:25, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MTV complies with WP:RS, so well done! • вяαdcяochat 07:10, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Live Section Again

Hi there, I'm Bringing it up again. Sorry. Why has this been left in this state? I was reading it again, it's all pretty bad, but one sentence actually changes tenses! - "As the video got over, a countdown from ten to one happens". This whole section doesn't flow well and is clumsy. Something to look is the description of her outfit, the sources provided seem to describe it well on an individual basis. If you squash them both into one this is what u get - "She wore a silver and black short skirt like a tutu and shaped like peplum on both sides[22] with a triangular piece set on her right breast" Emmmm.....what? The performance, if described well, is very important but i think maybe some of the information isn't needed, her shoes are pretty trivial for example. One last thing, they are clearly plastic or mirrored glass and not crystal. [1] . Many Thanks Jambo-numba1 (talk) 11:34, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry also i fail to see this link acclaim the performance. "For the first number, the electro-beat stalker manifesto "Paparazzi," we could basically only see the singer's platinum-blonde-dyed hair (which has led to comparisons to both Christina Aguilera and Gwen Stefani) and her oversized sunglasses." It comments on her strong voice in Lovegame, maybe this has been confused? Thanks. Jambo-numba1 (talk) 11:37, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Single artwork and video premiere

File:Lady gaga paparazzi.jpg uploaded, single artwork and video premiere confirmed on digitalspy - http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/blog/thesound/ UKWiki (talk) 14:57, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

yea i've seen this floating about the net quite a bit today. the video premier is definitely genuine cuz its also in the sky tv planner thing. th cover art is also probably real, altho completely different from whats been posted before! what do people think? Mister sparky (talk) 16:07, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
also it looks as though there are 2 versions of the video, because channel 4 are showing the "explicit late night version" of the video according to the tv listings on their website http://www.channel4.com/tv-listings/daily/2009/06/03 Mister sparky (talk) 16:17, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Digital Spy source used has been removed. Please don't use this "pile of shit" website run by a 13 year old. --Legolas (talk2me) 04:47, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is no need for rudeness Mister sparky (talk) 11:56, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My rudeness was not directed to any of you but to this website. I really hate it. Also since our main goal should be to make the Gaga articles GA or FA, I really donot want anybody to add this shitty website and request not to do so. Also Perezhilton.com (hate it like anything). These websites are now considered unreliable. If my comment has hurt anybody then I'm sorry. --Legolas (talk2me) 12:21, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Legolas is always rude^^ anyway I think the cover isn't official, it's too good to be true, official cover are alwayas...ehm...too bad --♫Smanu! 13:38, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't care for you Smanu. I will be rude with you always. --Legolas (talk2me) 04:11, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
well the video premier next week is definitely real, we'll just have to wait and see about the cover. there's so many different ones floating about. and legolas, i guess you're forgiven :) Mister sparky (talk) 14:33, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
the video has leaked a week early! i thought it was going to. the full version is about 8 minutes and it is typical jonas akerlund. it is awesome!!!!! http://www.zshare.net/video/606443394e9d41c7
what do you guys think? Mister sparky (talk) 22:25, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The coverart is real since posted by Digital spy, though its not a reliable site, but the past news show that they do post the real cover arts. Also the music video,(thiugh awesome), there is no reliable sources to create a description of the video and thus it has been reverted. --Legolas (talk2me) 04:11, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
thumb|right|250px|Gaga lying on top of golden eighteenth century lounge wearing a black dress, heels and bob hair in the "epic" music video for "Paparazzi."Once the music video makes an official premiere, that is when we can add details regarding the music video, considering we have reliable sources that is. I have been experimenting with my sandbox and uploaded a screenshot of the music video along with reconstructing the grammar of the description that was removed. I am not all that sure if the image actually meets guidelines, is notable and improves the article but anyway take a look to the side if you hadn't already noticed. • вяαdcяochat 09:18, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(Outdent)Hi Brad. I have checked the sandbox and removed the other images and writing as well as categories. They are not supposed to be on the sandbox. The description appears to be good but we really need reliable sources backing it up since this video has such varied scenes. As you said, the image does fail WP:NFCC#8. Images which can be added are Gaga mixing poison in the drink, or Gaga walking in a shiny leotard with the help of crutch, or Gaga in the wheel chair plastered, or Gaga dancing with the pleather brush dress. I am sure that will be indeed encyclopedic. Also the shot of Gaga in a tall headdress getting arrested will be a good image. --Legolas (talk2me) 09:33, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

good video! I love it! anyway, this part in the music video sectin sounds a bit ridicolous: "The video will have it's television premiere at 12:05 am on June 4, 2009 broadcast in the United Kingdom on Channel 4." the time of the air is extra, it's better in this way: "The video will have it's television premiereon June 4, 2009 broadcast in the United Kingdom on Channel 4." and last, the date of the leak isn't notable, see WP:LEAK --♫Smanu! 10:40, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Video leaked. All soures that I have found are below. Lest get desciption up.

http://music-mix.ew.com/2009/05/lady-gagas-papa.html http://www.celebuzz.com/video-lady-gagas-paparazzi-music-s109021/ http://www.mtv.co.uk/artists/lady-gaga/news/122498-lady-gaga-to-release-paparazzi http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1612375/20090529/lady_gaga.jhtml http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQJ9Vi8GLok&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fmusic%2Dmix%2Eew%2Ecom%2F2009%2F05%2Flady%2Dgagas%2Dpapa%2Ehtml&feature=player_embedded http://www.celebtv.com/lady-gaga-paparazzi-music-video-single http://www.examiner.com/x-8099-SF-Inexpensive-Fashion-Examiner~y2009m5d29-The-style-and-music-of-Lady-Gaga-Watch-it-and-get-it-here http://www.edmontonsun.com/entertainment/music/2009/05/27/9582796-sun.html http://www.metro.co.uk/fame/article.html?Gaga_murdered_in_sex_video&in_article_id=675315&in_page_id=7 http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/music/article2454854.ece http://www.mtv.co.uk/artists/lady-gaga/news/122498-lady-gaga-to-release-paparazzi http://twitter.com/ladygaga Hey Boys and Girls (Welcome to the Show…) ° 00:31, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The accompanying video

Per my edit summary when removing the very detailed review of the official video to the song, "Wikipedia is NOT a music video review site - it is an encyclopedia. Comment regarding the video may be cited, but a description is OR or Primary source. Please don't add it." Please note that Wikipedia content must be referenced to reliable, third party sources; websites don't count, especially record company ones and blogs, and even the Official Lady Gaga website - even if reliable, these are primary source references. Even when a good enough source can be found, Wikipedia need only provide an overview and synopsis of the video content per WP:NOT#PLOT, and not an exhaustive review of each scene.
Think of it this way - fans of the artist will wish to see the video themselves and by reading this may have their anticipation and pleasure diminished by knowing the outcome and different scenes... and other folk will not be bothered whether they see the video or not and will be even less interested in reading the plotlines in an encyclopedia. Lastly, people who do not know who Lady Gaga is will however think it is entirely reasonable to explain the entire Wagner's Ring Cycle opera's in excruciating detail and if that happens I will make it my lifes work to have every pimply fan of Lady Gaga have to read all that bilge every day for six years and three weeks! LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:30, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopeida. If new info. is found. It is added--if it acomplies with wikipieda soures policy. f you are a fan please keep it to the talk page. If a fan does not want to hear about the video, they should not vist the site. The info. is going to be added, as long as the soures complies with the guidelines. Hey Boys and Girls (Welcome to the Show…) ° 00:39, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. Reliable, independent third party sources. No original research, no primary sources, and no WP:SYNTH - and no violation of WP:NOT#PLOT either. LessHeard vanU (talk) 00:44, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Hey Boys and Girls (Welcome to the Show…) ° 00:53, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can somebody clean up the music video section so as to make it smoother? There's a lot of information there that's going into far too much detail and reaches asanine. just because infomation is availible with citation doesn't mean it's noteowrth enough to be in the summary, which shouldn't take longer to read than the article takes to type. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.141.130.38 (talk) 00:10, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Video Premiere

Premiered on Australian Television show sunrise 31.05.09. Check her twitter, she confirms it herself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.228.7.10 (talk) 12:07, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will check that out. Hey Boys and Girls (Welcome to the Show…) ° 03:06, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We should add that it premiereed there and not on the UK channel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.228.7.10 (talk) 11:20, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OMG IT PREMIERED ON AUSTRALIAAN TV NOT UK TV SO CHANGE IT! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.228.7.10 (talk) 05:28, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NZ premire is sometime this week, I WILL FIND A SOURCE. Hey Boys and Girls (Welcome to the Show…) ° 23:33, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Video screenshots

I have self taken some screenshots of the video hopefully meeting guidelines just to see what you guys think:

1, 2, 3
• вяαdcяochat 06:16, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think only the middle picture is encyclopedic. however I believe it would be better if we get a screenshot where she is walking on the crutch. Better NFCC. Thanks Brad. --Legolas (talk2me) 06:59, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have uploaded the image of the crutch and of Gaga lying dead. --Legolas (talk2me) 09:26, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have managed to find a higher resolution image that is slightly different of Gaga on crutches. Do you think it is appropriate? • вяαdcяochat 07:19, 3 June 2009 (UTC)File:Paparazzi_-_Music_video_-_Crutches_scene.jpg[reply]
Woww. Wonderful job. It is a better image. I have added it. --Legolas (talk2me) 07:49, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
:::Well the section is good, but the second pic. with the caption

Gaga wearing a metallic cyborg leotard with matching helmet attempting to walk with the help of crutches in the music video for "Paparazzi is not clear enough, I will try to find a new one (and I will disscus it here first). Hey Boys and Girls (Welcome to the Show…) ° 23:25, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How is it not clear enough? The visual description is exact to the point. I don't know how we could actually improve it. • вяαdcяochat 23:40, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Check out these pics. and I will upload the one which is of most "encyclopedia" value. http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2009/jun/04/lady-gaga-paparazzi-video Hey Boys and Girls (Welcome to the Show…) ° 00:12, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have reverted the edits to the music video section made on June 6 and June 7 back to revisions made on June 5 with all content correctly sourced primarily due to most edits being major and not particularly necessary. Before making changes of such, we must discuss here before doing so. • вяαdcяochat 08:35, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Good job Brad.--Legolas (talk2me) 15:09, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Video recpetion

Does a video recpetion section needed?- Or should it go under reception. Notable and relible souce http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2009/05/29/lady-gagas-sexy-cinematic-paparazzi-video-hits-the-web/Hey Boys and Girls (Welcome to the Show…) ° 00:23, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ONly Rolling Stone will not be enough for a separate subsection. LEts see what I can work on.

Found sheet music

here http://www.musicnotes.com/sheetmusic/mtd.asp?ppn=MN0074157 Hey Boys and Girls (Welcome to the Show…) ° 01:39, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Already added.--Legolas (talk2me) 15:09, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New images

Here is two, please disscus, if do not want to change-[File:Gaga paparzzi screen shot] and [File:Gaga_paparzzi_screenshot_2.jpg] Hey Boys and Girls (Welcome to the Show…) ° 09:47, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

not encyclopedic.--Legolas (talk2me) 15:09, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How? Her are images I could get, if any are needed I will get them. Hey Boys and Girls (Welcome to the Show…) ° 05:21, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Title

There are no other songs entitled 'Paparazzi' so shouldn't the page title be changed to 'Paparazzi (song}'? 83.70.68.89 (talk) 16:29, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there is Paparazzi (Xzibit song) 16:00, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
There is also a band called Unarmed For Victory who has covered her song. It has gotten quite a pop. Sarrrah777 (talk) 18:19, 17 December 2009 (UTC)Sarrrah777[reply]

Premiere in Oz

The video premiered on Sunrise in Australia! Not Channel 4 on the UK! GaGa confirmed it on her twitter herself! I think we better change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.228.7.10 (talk) 11:58, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How the director was chosen

Source- http://nymag.com/daily/fashion/2009/06/lady_gagas_stylist_demystifies.html Hey Boys and Girls (Welcome to the Show…) ° 05:26, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good fins! Can go in the article. --Legolas (talk2me) 05:58, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ERROR

The Video premiered in Australia for God's sake not the UK! Even check her twitter account, she confirmed it! It premiered on 'Sunrise' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.228.7.10 (talk) 10:07, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Paparazzi (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 Paparazzi (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 "canada":

  • From Just Dance: "Canadian Hot 100". Billboard. acharts.us. August 23, 2008. Retrieved 2009-04-28.
  • From The Fame (album): "Canadian Hot 100". Billboard. acharts.us. April 4, 2009. Retrieved 2009-04-06.
  • From LoveGame: "Canadian Hot 100". Billboard. acharts.us. May 30, 2009. Retrieved 2009-05-21.

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⚡ 11:55, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Music Video section edit request

I think it should not include the comparisons other people make with the video to other beings. I think the Music Video section should only contain what is in the content of the video. The comparisons can go to the reception section. It's too long, that's what it is.\:.:bibboorton:.:/ (talk) 04:47, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No. Its a section on the music video and should contain all the info related to it. Please see WP:SONGS for further clarification. --Legolas (talk2me) 04:59, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The music video section is very long. maybe it can be cut down slightly?Mister sparky (talk) 14:21, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually its not that long if you compare to other GA worthy articles. The music video section is ok. What we need to do is develop the Writing and inspiration and chart performance more. That will take time when the single is officially released everywhere. Our goal should be to make every Gaga article FA worthy don't you think? :) --Legolas (talk2me) 03:44, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gossip Girl

The song was featured in the Gossip Girl episode "Summer, Kind of Wonderful", which originally aired September 1st, 2008. Two questions: Is this notable enough to be included, and is the episode itself an appropriate source? Liquidluck (talk) 19:33, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nopes. Not that important if its only used for airing, however publicity is different which I believe is not the case here. Thanks anyway. --Legolas (talk2me) 03:34, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Video image

The video was made like a movie, and it also has about 8 minutes. The four screenshots are used in one image, so that keeps it to minimal use. Also, your image is included in that four screenshot image, so, if the other image fails, it means your image fails as well. Alecsdaniel (talk) 11:55, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian iTunes Remix EP

This release is now avaliable on the Australian iTunes Store. Therefore being, would it be appropriate to change the title in the tracklisting to iTunes Remix EP? • вяαdcяochat 23:04, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. --Legolas (talk2me) 13:56, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

UK Airplay Chart

It's Number one with week, I think its deserves to be added. Heres a source. http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/news/jls-michael-jackson-top-u-k-charts-1003995368.story —Preceding unsigned comment added by CybertonicRockmanSonic (talk • contribs) 23:45, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gold Certification in ARIA

Needs to be added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.228.139.26 (talk) 20:10, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Singapore

I heard it peaked at number one but I'm not 100% sure of the source but it should be added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.228.139.26 (talk) 03:44, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Paparazzi (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 Paparazzi (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 "ultratop":

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⚡ 15:36, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Easily repaired: it was a falsified reference, apparently copied from another article.—Kww(talk) 15:40, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lucrezia Borgia?

Just wondering if there's grounds for putting the bit about poisoning with a ring with a reference to the noblewoman/early celebrity? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.124.133.38 (talk) 04:12, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"This Decade"

With the song, Gaga joined Christina Aguilera, Beyoncé, and Fergie as the only women this decade to collect four Hot 100 top tens from a debut album.

Christina Aguilera's debut album was released in 1999, so it's not "this decade." I know the source made the same error, but I'm going to change it to "in the last decade" to be accurate. Viciouslies (talk) 14:44, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Legolas2186 biased?

I keep adding some information to the Music and Lyrics section of the article about the misuse of the term "paparazzi" in the song, citing references and all, and Legolas2186 keeps removing it, saying it violates the terms of use 'cause it is original research, and that I should cite a reliable source. Well, I cite the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, as well as The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. I'd say they are pretty reliable, and by no means my original research. Is Legolas2186 biased? Is he/she on a mission to erase any info he/she may consider harmful to Lady Gaga? He/she had no basis on which to remove my contribution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.115.1.142 (talk) 14:02, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here I am. Your addition fails as WP:OR because you are trying to interpret the meaning of the song based on what the dictionary term of paparazzi means. This is called original research as this doesnot directly relate to the song, nor does it means a correct interpretation. As you can see, in the writing and inspiration section, the meaning behind the song has been explained already. --Legolas (talk2me) 03:15, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Either you fail to understand what I imply or you try to mislead the issue. I didn't touch the meaning or the interpretation of the song, neither did I try to interpret anything, but only pointed out to the fact that she commited a grammatical mistake. As the references show, it is an objective issue, not a subjective one. And the section is called Music and Lyrics, thus my observation is pertinent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.115.10.225 (talk) 03:08, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The word paparazzi is not used in a sentence in the lyrics. So saying it as singular or plural is putting your interpretation of the song. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.223.47.235 (talk) 23:29, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There's such thing as poetic licence. The meaning of the song, particularly the term "Paparazzi" was meant to be ambiguous, Lady GaGa herself saying so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.224.155 (talk) 01:28, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, guys? First, the word IS used in a sentence in the lyrics. Have you even bother to listen to it? Let me remind you: "You know that I'll be your papa-paparazzi". So, sorry, it's not my interpretation of anything, it is using a plural where a singular should be, plain and simple. As for the poetic license, now it is you trying to discuss the meaning, when, as Legolas2186 points out above, the place for it is in the writing and inspiration section. Even worse, you are trying to interpret what Lady Gaga meant when she said it was "ambiguous", implying it is about the singular/plural stuff. How do you know that was what she was talking about? "How do YOU know?" you may ask. I don't, and again, I'm not interested in it here, either, but only in the objective issue of a misplaced plural form.

Really, what is wrong with admiting she misused the thing? It's not the end of the world. Composers use stuff outside the norms of grammar all the time, for the sake of rhyming or otherwise. I'm just pointing the mistake out, so it gets clear that it is outside standard English. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.115.11.128 (talk) 07:14, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because at the end of the day, it is your interpretation of the lyrics or the ambiguity of the word used in what context, not by some reputed publicised source. Hence "at the end of the day" it is your original research and "hence" it will not be added. --Legolas (talk2me) 08:14, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cover

Somebody changed the official cover to that Coverlandia cover. Tried to revert it, but it didn't work. Could someone with more fix it? --It's Flo (talk) 13:07, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's a fan made cover too. It's a photoshop mash-up job of the Special Edition cover and the promotional poster of an unrelated film. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.224.155 (talk) 01:27, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's the cover I meant. The one with the pictures from the music video, that's the right one. Somebody uploaded this Mash-Up up cover. I tried to revert it. but it didn't work. --It's Flo (talk) 16:49, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Put a picture of lady gaga bleeding at the VMA's next to the description of her performance at the VMA's cause it's so epic. :)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Paparazzi_(Lady_Gaga_song)&oldid=334826397"