Talk:Paparazzi (Lady Gaga song)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Paparazzi (Lady Gaga song) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 21 days

Paparazzi (Lady Gaga song) has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Paparazzi (Lady Gaga song) is part of the The Fame series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 13, 2010	Good article nominee	Not listed
January 16, 2010	Good article reassessment	Not listed
March 22, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed
April 17, 2010	Good article reassessment	Kept
April 30, 2010	Good topic candidate	Promoted
Current status: Good article

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.

Lady Gaga High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lady Gaga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lady Gaga on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Lady GagaWikipedia:WikiProject Lady GagaTemplate:WikiProject Lady GagaLady Gaga
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Songs

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Electronic music Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electronic music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electronic music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Electronic musicWikipedia:WikiProject Electronic musicTemplate:WikiProject Electronic musicelectronic music
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chart officialdom

The song reached the top ten of the official charts in Australia [...]

I'm lost. What's the difference between "official" and "unofficial" charts? -- Hoary (talk) 12:49, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Official charts are those listed at WP:GOODCHARTS, unofficial are those bogus blog and fansite charts, generally listed at WP:BADCHARTS. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:46, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article Size

This article is enormous for such a pop song. Not even Yellow Submarine by the Beatles has such an in depth description. After a year this song will fade. As it is already off the charts. Such an article is not needed for a one off pop song. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.242.171.217 (talk) 09:38, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestion. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 09:57, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New Certification

Paparazzi was certified Gold in Germany. Source: http://www.musikindustrie.de/gold_platin_datenbank/ Type "Lady GaGa Paparazzi" in to the box, and it shows up. --It's Flo (talk) 17:10, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chord progression is incorrect

EDIT: The chord progression is now totally bizarre. Fix please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.131.132.156 (talk) 03:11, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The chord progression currently in the article (Ab–Cm–Fm–Db–Ab–Cm–Fm–Db–Db) is both incomplete (it doesn't include the verse), and incorrect. As written, it most resembles the chord progression of the chorus, which is actually a progression of 4 chords that repeats 4x. The actual 4 chords in the chorus are:

Ab-Eb-Fm-Db

This relative progression qualifies as the "Sensitive Female Chord Progression", following vi-IV-I-V, but offset by two chords: I-V-vi-IV. See http://www.boston.com/ae/music/articles/2008/12/31/striking_a_chord/ and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitive_Female_Chord_Progression.

Chorus lyrics with the chord changes at their proper positions:

Ab                        Eb                   Fm            Db
I'm your biggest fan I'll follow you until you love me, Papa-paparazzi

Ab                    Eb                      Fm                Db
Baby there's no other superstar you know that i'll be your Papa-paparazzi.

Ab              Eb                       Fm              Db
Promise i'll be kind, but i won't stop until that boy is mine.

Ab                    Eb                       Fm            Db
Baby you'll be famous chase you down until you love me, Papa-paparazzi

The verse chord progression is as follows:

Verse1: Cm - Ab - Cm

Cm
We are the crowd, we're c-coming out. Got my flash on it's true, need that picture of you

        Ab                     Cm
It's so magical, We'd be so fantastical

Verse2: Cm - Ab - Fm

Cm
Leather and jeans, garage glamorous, Not sure what it means, but this photo of us

         Ab                            Fm
It don't have a price, ready for those flashing lights, 'Cause you know that baby I...

The entire bridge is in the song key of Cm, so there is technically no progression, just that one chord. --Novox77 (talk) 04:16, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks but source used states otherwise. Wikipedia goes for verifiabililty, rather than the truth. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:23, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would have hoped that a nudge to the truth would have triggered some more research on the veracity of the original source, which is clearly incorrect. Here I present three independent sources which corroborate the truth. I'm not sure what kind of source qualifies as a verifiable source, but here they are nevertheless.

http://garyewer.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/song-analysis-lady-gagas-paparazzi/

http://songwriters123.com/blog/2009/11/popular-chord-progression-examples/

http://www.megachords.com/piano/music/133826/paparazzi.htm

I would also hope that wikipedia ultimately wants to present truth, and that the condition of that truth is that it can be verified. As you described it, it sounded like wiki's position was to accept any verifiable source, regardless of its correctness. Novox77 (talk) 16:47, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed you are right my friend. As long as an extremely reliable source reports it, WP will add it even if it says that Jesus was born in Phillipines. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:01, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Semi-Protected

{{editsemiprotected}} In the release history section:

Add that it was released in Germany on September 11, 2009 Source 1 Source 2

Add that it was released in France on Decmeber 7, 2009 Source 1 Source 2

TSWABH (talk) 13:12, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was already

Done. --Mike moral ♪♫ 01:25, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Repetition

In the Music Video section, both the last and second to last paragraphs mention that "Telephone" picks up where "Paparazzi" left off. Different wording, but both making the exact same point. I'd suggest removing the first instance (and would have done myself, if there weren't references attached to both instances). JaffaCakeLover (talk) 11:10, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]