Talk:Lady Gaga/Archive 11

This is an archive of past discussions about Lady Gaga. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

→

The Fame Monster

Why isn't The Fame Monster listed under "Discography"? There was a standalone CD too, so it's considered a full album. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.70.203.216 (talk) 13:36, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Seems like it is an EP and that column is for studio albums, only. Futhermore, the album is mentioned throughout the article, so for what is necessary? Tbhotch^Talk ^C. 17:14, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

EPs are normally omitted from the short discographies in articles. That's why Fame Monster is excluded. —C.Fred (talk) 19:09, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

If an exception should ever be made it include an EP, shouldn't it be for "Fame Monster" i think it would be difficult to think of many more successful or important EPsBlackballoon222 (talk) 19:24, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

No. –Chase (talk) 20:16, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Fame monster went platinum, spawnned 3 top 10 singles, was heavily promoted,and called by lady gaga herself her "sophomore project" ep or album it derserves a spot in her discography68.171.231.80 (talk) 04:17, 9 October 2010 (UTC),

Agreed; if she'd released five or ten studio albums, it would be sensible to exclude The Fame Monster from the discography on this page on grounds of length; but as she has only released two significant collections of work (The Fame and The Fame Monster), it makes sense to list both of them in the discography here.VoluntarySlave (talk) 06:00, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Notable album = yes, for the section = no. Just because Greatest Hits (Queen album) has sold 25 million copies it is not being added to Queen's biography. Tbhotch^Talk ^C. 06:25, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Queen released lots of records, so it makes sense to limit the discography to studio albums. Lady Gaga has not released lots of records, so it does not make sense to limit the discography to studio albums.VoluntarySlave (talk) 06:36, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

A "less" successful ABBA with ABBA Gold: Greatest Hits. The problem is not that "Gaga has only a few albums2 the real problem is that fans never are satisfied with anything. Tbhotch^Talk ^C. 06:49, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

That's not really an argument, though. Why should we not mention Lady Gaga's two most prominent releases in this discography on this page? Other things being equal, it is more useful to the reader to include more information than to include less information. So, then, what is the disadvantage of adding The Fame Monster here?VoluntarySlave (talk) 00:41, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

We follow rules, you like it or not, her damn album is mentioned throughout the article, so why YOU need to add it??? Tbhotch^Talk ^C. 00:46, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Actually we don't follow rules without thinking about the specific circumstances. Anyway, there's no rule that says a discography on a musician's page must only include albums. The guidelines for musician articles say "The discography section of the musician's primary article should also provide a basic summary of the musician's work. In most cases this can done using a simple list of their albums." So the main thing to do is to summarize their work. Lady GaGa has so far released only one album, but has also released a significant EP. A simple list of her albums is not as good a summary of her work as a list of these two notable records would be.VoluntarySlave (talk) 02:55, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Read WP:ignore again, improve and maintain are the only two conditions, and this is not the case. You can ignore WP:ROLLBACK because you are maintaining the order on the encyclopedia, you can ignore WP:NSONGS, when a single has no charted, but there's enough information for improve the song to GA status, now I hope that understand the short but complex rule. Also what will happen when Stefani release her third or four studio album, we'll keep The Fame Monster on a studio only section?. Tbhotch^Talk ^C. 03:24, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

And "basic summary" is generally studio albums only. If we were to include The Fame Monster, we'd have to include the other two EPs, and then people would go and add her compilations, singles, videos, etc. We use the main template for a reason - TFM is listed at the Lady Gaga discography article. –Chase (talk) 03:21, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's generally studio albums only, but its primary function is to summarize the artist's career. "Records that have been certified platinum," say, is a better criterion to use to summarize the career of an artist who has only released one album, than "studio albums" is. That criterion also provides a straightforward way to exclude the other two EPs; when she releases more records, we can easily change the criteria, and it may well make sense to remove The Fame Monster then. The only argument that seems to have been put forward so far against including The Fame Monster is that other articles exclude EPs. That's not a good argument.VoluntarySlave (talk) 04:27, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

See Miley Cyrus, the same as Queen and Abba. She released an EP as notable as the Fame Monster, and no one is requesting for add it. So I would recompend you to drop the stick and move to another article. Tbhotch^Talk ^C. 04:31, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Time of our lives is not as significant as fame monster... Fame monster has sold mor copies then time of our lives, spawnned 3 top ten singles, and was supported by an international tour, the growth of her popularity due to the fame monster is far greater then any other artist's due to an EP and for that matter even for a studio album, it has been established that it is an EP, but it is still a major accomplishment in her career, no one can argue that

68.171.231.80 (talk) 05:33, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Of course it IS notable and you don't decide which album is most notable than the other. As I said before, if you are logged out or are other user drop the stick Tbhotch^Talk ^C. 05:35, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

But it's not even an EP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.70.210.157 (talk) 16:23, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

See Talk:The Fame Monster for further information. Tbhotch^Talk ^C. 23:29, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Missing album

The fame monster is missing from her discography list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Conradhcatm42 (talk • contribs) 17:06, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

See #The Fame Monster above. It's not an album, only an EP, and EPs are not included in summary discographies. —C.Fred (talk) 17:29, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

It should technically be seen as a new album. It's not just an Extended Play. Gaga said herself that it was an entirely different piece of work. 71.1.93.149 (talk) 00:13, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Gaga said it was an EP - which can be entirely different pieces of work. –Chase (talk) 19:26, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

HOW MANY TIMES ARE WE GOING THROUGH THIS??? ANYTHING OVER 30 MINUTES IN LENGTH IS OFFICIALLY AN LP! END OF DISCUSSION!!! How many times has this been discussed? --Cprice1000talk2me 20:31, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Please read WP:YOUREWRONG. Yves (talk) 20:33, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Does not apply to me as this refers to not being open minded and listening to others. I just joined this conversation.

Anyway, this is a ridiculous discussion. See album. --Cprice1000talk2me 21:00, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't see anything on that page that contributes to this discussion. Yves (talk) 21:03, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Reliable sources found for "Red and Blue EP"

Some of Gaga's early work was up for auction recently and, ashamed of her old work, she bought it all back from the auction house. Sources here about the forthcoming auction, article written Oct 4, here and here about her pulling the work, dated Oct 14 and 15 respectively. These name some of her earlier works and are reliable sources: they prove the EP "Red and Blue" existed and was by Lady Gaga. Can we mention it in the article? If more sources can be found, could an article be written? Someone must have a copy of the CD with liner notes. -- EA Swyer ^Talk _{Contributions} 11:27, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Demo albums generally aren't notable for inclusion. –Chase (talk / contribs) 13:57, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Disagree, when reputed sources are including and noting it, a one line inclusion won't be undue. ~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.167.212.58 (talk) 14:15, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Sopranos Appearance

Why isn't Gaga's appearance on The Sopranos considered notable? It was covered in various news outlets [1] [2] [3] [4], and it shows one of her early forays into show business. Iloveapphysics (talk) 23:17, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

It's an uncredited cameo. Just as non-notable as her appearance on Boiling Points, if not more so. –Chase (talk / contribs) 00:27, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

I think that her Sopranos appearanceis more significant than her Boiling Points appearance for two reasons. First, it received more coverage in mainstream news outlets than coverage of Boiling Points, which was restricted mostly to gossip blogs. Second, whereas Boiling Points is a reality show and her appearance was random, The Sopranos is a critically acclaimed drama, and her appearance shows her early interest in the entertainment industry. Iloveapphysics (talk) 11:25, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

For a subject who appears in the media as much as Lady Gaga, we must maintain a balanced presentation of important information without going into undue detail about relatively unimportant items. This is one of those items. --Andy Walsh (talk) 13:36, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Citation

"It has recently become known that Ms. Gaga's identity and even her gender are an elaborate hoax. The singer is in fact comedian Zach Galifianakis in drag."

This sentence needs citation. Or is it just a joke? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.192.116.121 (talk) 20:14, 26 October 2010 (UTC) Done Removed. Tbhotch^Talk ^C. 20:17, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Whatabout her internet accomplishments?

I think internet is very important these days. Someone should add the facts that she reached 1 billion views on youtube, that she has the most followers on twitter and facebook. And that she was (with Michael Jackson) the most googled person last year. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.2.49.209 (talk) 21:36, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

This is an interesting point which has been discussed before. Some users have argued that there is WP:RECENTISM in this, and that Twitter followers etc are not notable or reliable sources. What do other users think?--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:32, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

I think User:Laser brain summed it up best in the section regarding Gaga's The Sopranos appearance above: "For a subject who appears in the media as much as Lady Gaga, we must maintain a balanced presentation of important information without going into undue detail about relatively unimportant items." –Chase (talk / contribs) 23:25, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

a balad which... (Just a spelling error)

Just read through the Born This Way section and ballad was spelt incorrectly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.131.65 (talk) 15:54, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Fixed. --John9988 (talk) 22:45, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

New York

What, Lady Gaga born in New York, New York?????????????? New York, NEW JERSEY!!!!!!! please change that, since the article is protected! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.253.164.118 (talk) 09:24, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Not sure about this, New York City is in the state of New York. Standard sources say that Lady Gaga was born in New York City in 1986.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 09:36, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Not sure if you are aware, but New York is in New York and not the neighbouring state of New Jersey. Yves (talk) 03:36, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Wendy Starland

Is it worth mentioning Wendy Starland's role in this article or is it too minor/irrelevant? I ask because that article says she was "solely responsible for discovering Lady Gaga". Christopher Connor (talk) 03:30, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

I, personally, find that very important. It IS a major part of her life, which, partly, led her to fame. Vincent9679 (talk) 03:44, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Doesn't logically make sense!!!

2011-present: Born this way. How can it be 2011 to the present day, when 2011 is in the future? Therefore there is no possible way it can be the events leading up to the 'present'. 109.155.219.226 (talk) 23:58, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, the album in question won't be released until 2011. It should probably be worded "2011 onward" until the end of the year. —C.Fred (talk) 00:03, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Actually, it's more WP:CRYSTAL since it is to be released some time in 2011. (Too far away) It should be under 2010-present or whatever it is. --Cprice1000talk2me 01:35, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Lady Gaga is one of the Best-selling female artists

According to the List of best-selling female artists Lady Gaga is one of them, with 64 million of records. I think this information should be added on the main description. Lxhizy (talk) 09:30, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Disagree. She really isn't for two reasons. First of all, she not, she's in a list in Wikipedia. In reality, count how many females are ahead of her, I'd say at least 30, or so. So you call top-30 one of the best-selling? No I would say up until top-5. Secondly, all her sales are singles, which way nothing in comparison to album sales. Shes sold like 12-40 or some ridiculous ratio. Lastly, the page says 55, not 64 million. Thing is an album costs 10 times more, so its really not fair.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 09:36, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

"Record" sales include all formats: CDs, EPs, LPs, cassettes, singles and digital album/singles. If the source in question is accurate, she automatically qualifies on the List of best-selling music artists as long as her total record sales equal 50 million or more. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 10:24, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

In the age of the Internet, "best-selling" is almost impossible to verify. The days when people bought vinyl records and CDs regularly are gone, and even then the sales figures were often self-published estimates by the record companies, who had a vested interest in hyping up the figures.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 10:38, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

50 million? Maybe if you add her single sales to her album sales. She's only sold like 15-18 million ALBUMS. --Cprice1000talk2me 15:24, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah but what about Britney Spears?, in her main description says that she has sold over 100 million records (albums, EPS, singles, etc). "Spears has sold over 100 million records worldwide, making her one of the best-selling music artists." and also Christina Aguilera's article "Aguilera has sold over 46 million albums worldwide making her one of the best-selling music artists of all time" and she's not even mentioned in the list (50 million or more). Obviously there's a difference, because Britney has 100 million records (about 80 million albums and 20 million singles) and Christina is only albums (she has sold more than 35 million singles but there are no sources). So, if Spears is among the best-selling music artists because of her RECORD sales, why Gaga not? Lxhizy (talk) 18:41, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

I think a little bit of WP:RECENTISM is coming in the picture. It's just simply too early to gauge her sales well. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 18:47, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

It's just a comparision with other pop artists, who have obviously more time than Gaga in the industry so they have more records sold. Lxhizy (talk) 18:52, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, if you add her album and single sales together, it does equal 50 million. I thought by "record" they meant album. --Cprice1000talk2me 19:04, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

I know that, and they are calculating all albums + singles + videos (bootlegs) i guess. However, the artist in question is not even 2 years in the business, and her numbers will continue to grow like this, untill and unless a stable phase comes, where a consensised number or a range will be reported by the media. I guess then such claims as "best-selling etc" can be added. Hence my stance on it as a bit of recentism. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 19:14, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

I know her career is still beginning and her sales will increase, but i think it's important to stand out that her record sales are high even if she has 1 or 50 years in the industry, we won't know when her sales take a "stable" number. Lxhizy (talk) 19:25, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

I always believe that let the artist have atleast 3 years in music business, maybe then. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 19:28, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Well as I said, just because the Wiki article lists "Best-selling" does not mean they are. Lets say someone who is at the very bottom, ad has like 120 artists before them (Gaga) you would call her one of the best? Um, shes not even in the top 100, its absurd. And I would guarantee Britney has at least double the certs and sales, let alone the fact that they are albums--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 20:15, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Matty193, 9 November 2010

{{edit semi-protected}}

A 15-year-old Lady Gaga appeared in a cameo role in the Sopranos, in the 2001 Season Three episode titled "The Telltale Moozadell", where she played one of A.J.'s friends.

Matty193 (talk) 10:24, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

This is sourced at [5]. I think this is probably notable enough to be in the article, what do others think?--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 10:32, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

(Univolved editor) Seems OK to me. Stickee (talk) 12:29, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

One line and that's it. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 06:20, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

This was how Gaga got her start and I think it should be mentioned because it was a cameo that she had intended to take part in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.226.217.18 (talk) 04:16, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

The Fame Monster

I'm curious as to why "The Fame Monster" isn't listed under her discography, but "Born This Way" is? Can someone enlighten me? I know it's a summary, but surely this is relevant there? Also, Album states: "a recording counts as an "album" if either it has more than four tracks or lasts more than 25 minutes" which applies here? --Marc ^Talk 02:22, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Consensus at the respective talk page has decided it is an extended play, a type of album, which is not normally included on discography sections of artists' pages. Yves (talk) 02:26, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Ahh yes, so it does! Thank you kindly :) --Marc ^Talk 02:32, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

You're quite welcome! =) Yves (talk) 02:37, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

After much consideration, I think that we should allow The Fame Monster into the discography section here. It clearly is a major release by Gaga - it had its own era, world tour, etc. I know only studio albums are generally permitted in these types of summaries, but IMO a summary should be a list of her "core" work. To omit The Fame Monster is irresponsible as it would cause our readers confusion, and inaccurate as Gaga considers it to be a major part of her discography (note how she calls it her sophomore album and Born This Way her third album). I'm not saying we have to change TFM to be a studio album, but to allow the EP here. WP:IAR is here for cases such as these (and is the studio albums only thing even a rule?). –Chase (talk / contribs) 16:36, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

If there's no objections within the next few days, I'll consider this a non-controversial addition. –Chase (talk / contribs) 00:34, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

How do you propose to add it? I mean in what format? — Legolas ^(talk2me) 10:21, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Simply to just add it to the summarized discography here, as an extra bullet between The Fame and Born This Way? –Chase (talk / contribs) 16:36, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Well that certainly seems reasonable and not WP:UNDUE. Go ahead and add it. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 08:15, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Born This Way IS OFFICIALLY the third studio album

"But the reason I got the tattoo was because I wanted you to know how deeply serious I am about my third studio album 'Born This Way'. I'm serious about the music, the amount of time I've spent on it, it's been years of working on it, and I'm really really serious about the message and everything that it stands for." Please correct the article immediately. --70.242.160.138 (talk) 19:34, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

not sourced

Not done Tbhotch^Talk ^C. 19:37, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

She says it in this video. WP:YOUTUBE says it's fine to link to videos that aren't copyright violations, but there are still some concerns with it: it's not said in YOUTUBE if it's allowed to cite non-violating videos, and the video contains a performance of the copyrighted song "Telephone". I would assume the person who filmed the video would own the copyright if the "Telephone" performance was omitted, but I'm not sure if that trumps the copyright Gaga's label has to the song. –Chase (talk / contribs) 21:37, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

An EP is an album that is shorter than a normal LP. The Fame was an LP because it went for more than 50 minutes. The Fame Monster only goes for 34:09 way too short to be considered an album. So theoretically Born This Way is her sophomore album. Rackshea (talk) 09:12, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for finally clearing this up. I understand that in technicality based on RIAA standards, TFM is an EP, but it is too important of an album in Gaga's career to not be listed under her discography. This is going to to affect the articles of many other artist's pages too (i.e. Kesha who's Cannibal will also be receiving it's own tour). Jpagan09 (talk) 06:03, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

It is already added as part of the discography. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 07:37, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Capitalization of her name in an exact quote

At least two editors have changed the following, which is a direct quote from a source:

In combining music, fashion, art and technology, Lady GaGa evokes Madonna when she was good, Gwen Stefani circa Hollaback Girl, Kylie 2001 or Grace Jones right now.[6]^{[emphasis added, capitalization verbatim]}

The issue is that the source spells her name GaGa, but we have standardized to Gaga throughout the article. It is not appropriate to just change the capitalization. WP:MOSQUOTE directs us: "Preserve the original text, spelling, and punctuation.… Trivial spelling or typographical errors should be silently corrected…unless the slip is textually important." Arguably, this is either not a trivial error or it is textually important. Do we leave the CamelCase without notation, or do we need to do one of the following?

…Lady Ga[g]a evokes Madonna…
…Lady [Gaga] evokes Madonna…
…Lady GaGa [sic] evokes Madonna…

Since the change has happened more than once, I wanted to bring the issue here and see what consensus is. Note that none of the editors have changed the CamelCase in the title of the cited article; that's been left intact, and in all cases, my opinion is to not change that title. —C.Fred (talk) 15:48, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

"Lady Gaga" is the spelling on her Twitter and Facebook accounts, so it is safe to see this as the correct spelling. Journalists sometimes use the CamelCase version GaGa, but for the sake of article consistency I think the article should "silently correct" this to Gaga.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:02, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the above - Jer757 16:26, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

According to me, we can go with option 1 of the three options posted by C. Fred. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 17:50, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Fashions of Gaga?

Q: I thought she had a house of Gaga or something but i don't see a separate fashion area, anyone know? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.139.3.142 (talk) 04:03, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

"Germanotta" vs. "Gaga"

I was just reading a few other articles and saw that usually, the real name is referred to instead of the stage name. ie for Fergie (singer): "Ferguson was a member of the female trio Wild Orchid, which she fronted with Stefanie Ridel and fellow Kids Incorporated star Renee Sandstrom." The article continues to refer to her as "Ferguson" throughout.

vs. for Lady Gaga, "An avid thespian in high school musicals, Gaga portrayed lead roles as Adelaide in Guys and Dolls and Philia in A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum."

Should this not be "An avid thespian in high school musicals, Germanotta portrayed lead roles as Adelaide in Guys and Dolls and Philia in A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum."? Has there been past discussion of this?

Also - I was just thinking. Is it acceptable to refer to her as simply "Gaga"? Has that become her de facto last name? Save-Me-Oprah ^(talk) 18:29, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

There was past discussion. A quick search (via the box in the header) turned up Talk:Lady Gaga/Archive 5#Gaga/Germanotta. Since she's known best as Lady Gaga, WP:SURNAME indicates that it is acceptable to refer to her as Lady Gaga throughout the article rather than Germanotta, per WP:SURNAME. As for shortening it to just Gaga, in a functional sense, it functions as either a last name or a title of nobility—and in either case, WP:SURNAME permits using just Gaga. —C.Fred (talk) 18:37, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Just to clarify for Save-Me-Oprah, the part of SURNAME that this would fall under would be the one about artists who are best known by stage names but use their legal names professionally. Fergie has used her legal name professionally, unlike Gaga, which is why using "Germanotta" is not appropriate. –Chase (talk / contribs) 21:56, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

New Album Name

The album name has changed to "Almost Perfect". http://www.billboard.com/#/news/billboard-bits-gaga-calls-new-album-almost-1004128006.story —Preceding unsigned comment added by Itachisan125 (talk • contribs) 11:41, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Lol, are you even serious? — Legolas ^(talk2me) 15:52, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Aha. Just stop. 71.115.176.58 (talk) 00:12, 2 December 2010 (UTC) What do you mean. I put out a reasonable and appropriate source providing for what I said, if thats good enough for you spoiled nerds. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Itachisan125 (talk • contribs) 00:56, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

You seem to have misunderstood that article, the album is most certainly not called 'almost perfect' - Jer757 01:46, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

lol, that was the funniest thread on a wikipedia talk page XD, she means that the album itself is almost perfect in terms of recording and arranging.--GagaLittleMonster (talk) 13:54, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Goodness, no Gaga said her album is almost perfect.. it's definitely called "Born This Way". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.226.217.18 (talk) 00:08, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

It says right in the first sentence of that source article that the title is "Born This Way". Apparently, the OP only read the headline -- and stopped reading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.113.104.58 (talk) 02:20, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Languages

It's stated that Born This Way will have songs recorded in four different languages. I've checked the sources and none of them are reliable. It says that the guy is only trying to persuade her. There is no official statement from Gaga or any of her affiliates and we can't know for sure that the album will contain said songs.--GagaLittleMonster (talk) 16:56, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Can you give a gist of what is written in thew article? — Legolas ^(talk2me) 17:54, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't get you. The source says that said person is trying to persuade Gaga to do some songs in other languages such as Russian. There was no official response on behalf of Gaga or any proof that she was recording any multi-lingual songs.--196.218.126.73 (talk) 09:43, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Associated Acts

I saw this on several other artists pages. Is there any reason why an "associated acts" line is not on the info block on the top-right on the page with here picture. It would make sense to include Semi Precious Weapons, Lady Starlight, and Space Cowboy in it. It almost seems weird to leave them out.163.118.213.59 (talk) 06:21, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Associated acts are referred to bands or acts who would have performed for a long time alongside with the artist, ie Gaga. SPW are just opening for Gaga, and cant be associated. LS did not perform alongside Gaga. She was just the DJ, same for SC. A previous consensus resulted in the removal of the tag from the infobox. I suggest you do a search of the archives. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 07:56, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Not Full Italian American.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

In a recent article, published it is stated that, her father is Italian American, while her mother is of, French and English decent. Please Note the change ASAP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.174.152.109 (talk) 18:23, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

The family tree on her mother's side has been discussed before, eg in Talk:Lady_Gaga/Archive_9#Gaga.27s_roots..._and_work_with_Nick_Knight. The problem is that some of the sourcing is not very reliable. In this Daily Star story from May 2010, Lady Gaga is said to have contacted the College of Arms about her English roots.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:48, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

No, roots web is not reliable. Her mother is half Italian and half French. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.226.217.18 (talk) 01:34, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Maybe in the Gaga family collective imagination. Since that thread linked by Ian above, which I feel rather bad about now, I have discovered the so-called Clan Bissett, right here at Wikipedia (my knowledge of Scottish and Northern Irish history is not the greatest). It appears they were once nicely landed before falling into obscurity.[7] More research should be done on the later history of the Irish branch of the family, probably Gaga's ancestors, making her a cousin of the MacDonnells of Antrim and the celebrated Sorley Boy MacDonnell, whose great-great-great grandmother was the heiress Margery Bisset(t) of the Glens of Antrim. I was surprised to learn they came to Ireland so early, in 1242. It is possible she descends from either the Scottish or Northern English branch, and perhaps the possibility of the latter has inspired her... or that story is just nonsense (a strange thing to make up though). But given the location of her mother's family since the 19th century I am personally more confident they will be Scottish/Irish Normans who later got mixed in with the proper Ulster Lowland Scots-Northern English of the Ulster Plantation. There may also have been Bisset(t)s who came to Ireland then. I hope to get around to putting some of this, avoiding OR, in the Bissett family/Clan Bissett article, and should contact my team here. Looks like Margery/Mary above is also an ancestor of Iníon Dubh and the last Kings of Tyrconnell .[8] Sexy. Maybe Gaga has a little pedigree after all. Her mother's family could descend from a near relative of Margery for all we know today. DinDraithou (talk) 17:28, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

So it looks like Bisset(t) is a known Scotch-Irish surname,[9][10][11] and nearly all if not all will in this case be, meaning when Scotch-Irish, of the Irish branch. However, there are a number of the family in Canada and these would seem to be of the Scottish or Aberdeenshire branch. There is a Bisset family in Nova Scotia for example.[12] So conceivably Gaga's mother's ancestors could have been Scottish Canadians and come down at any point (I have some myself). The first reliable one is probably this Raison/Reason Bissett born in 1822 in Pennsylvania,[13] whose father is given as one Jacob Bissett alleged to be identical with one Jacques Pascal Besset born in 1796 in Quebec.[14] This is possible but doubtful in my opinion. Perhaps they retain some memory of a Canadian origin and the similarity of the surname to the French one made Quebec look obvious. But a Canadian origin of any kind could be later speculation that eventually became family tradition. This is fairly common when a surname allows for speculation and for some reason the lineage has been lost. I still think the family is Scotch-Irish American and thus of the Irish branch of the Bissetts. Many Scotch-Irish went to Pennsylvania, for which read that article. DinDraithou (talk) 19:20, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm having fun, and although this is still about Gaga I feel a responsiblity to this interesting family in West Virginia now. I have more sources and now know the "source" of the (direct) French or French Canadian origins claim. In 1920 one Marion Bissett, a cousin of Gaga through her mother and grandfather, published a Bissett family booklet on the history of the sept and therein we find the claim that Jacob Bissett was French.[15] But according to census records he was actually born in Maryland.[16] Thus regardless of his lineage he is probably not identical with our Jacques Pascal Besset of Quebec mentioned above.[17] This innocent mistake is likely the eventual product of someone's educated guess which became family tradition. Also, distant cousins of Gaga have independently researched the line themselves and do not give a (direct) French or French Canadian or any origin for Jacob and simply have him born in 1786 in Maryland.[18] His forbears still might have been of recent French origin but this is no longer likely in my view, for the following reasons (coming soon): DinDraithou (talk) 23:47, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Can we please have an official source and not some tabloidy shits like Daily Star? And can we cut down on the OR? — Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:13, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

What are you talking about? So far, believe it or not, you haven't seen the real thing here (OR). Why don't you cut down on the source of that attitude? DinDraithou (talk) 07:03, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

So I will eventually be creating an article on the Byset family to cover their history in Scotland and in Ireland, and also to discuss their uncertain origins in some detail. It now looks possible they were actually Greek Normans, as claimed in an important Irish source, although a Teutonic origin, whether Norse or Frankish, can also be supported. Clan Bissett serves its own purpose for modern Scotland and its strange laws concerning the current and former nobility, the Bissetts at present belonging to the latter, but is not suitable for the fascinating history of the sept in medieval Ireland or their modern descendants. Whenever the new article starts, which could be a day or weeks from now, I'll let everyone here know.

As promised, however, and without original research (OR), I have reliable sources which would, were a paper or volume to be written on the subject, support the argument that Gaga's maternal grandfather's lineage is in fact Scotch-Irish as that classification is understood in America. First of all, we have Jacob Bissett, evidently born in Maryland in 1786 and who is obviously not Jacques Pascal Besset of Quebec. Jacob moves to Fayette County, Pennsylvania and there marries Sarah Enochs,[19][20][21] herself born there in 1778 and who may or may not have descended from a Dutch-gone-Swedish family (who knows?),[22] and the two have Reason/Raison,[23] and at least one other child Brice Brison.[24] Now none of any of this so far tells us Jacob was Scotch-Irish, that is besides his Scoto-Irish surname Bissett, but this source more or less does:

Morrow, Paoli S., The Scotch-Irish of Fayette County, PA.", in The Scotch-Irish in America: Proceedings and Addresses of the Fifth Congress. 1893. pp. 166-77. superior scan

That article only covers selected individuals and Morrow does not mention the Bissetts. What he does say, however (p. 166), is that Maryland was one of the principal sources for the families of Fayette County. This claim we can easily support with lots and lots and lots of sources, which state that Maryland was in fact a principal source of the Scotch-Irish basically everywhere in Pennsylvania, including Fayette County. Here are two nice ones.[25][26] And now we get to go back from Maryland to Ulster and understand it all.[27][28][29][30]

Jacob Bissett was Scotch-Irish. Saying more might be original research but maybe I'll come back just to tease you with a little speculation anyway. The noble family in Ulster actually persisted on some of their lands into the 16th century. In any case I'll tell you when Byset family is up and started. DinDraithou (talk) 00:22, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Before all that, let me state clearly that even with genetic tests it may be impossible to say whether Jacob was descended from the Ulster Bissetts or from cousins in Scotland who may have migrated to Ulster later. Even though they surely lost touch after a time, they all belonged to the same family in the 13th century. Historical cases can be made for either but unity and common inheritance should be stressed. Collateral descendants can make claims to and inherit whatever it may be, as can those through the female line. Adoption of the mother's surname, or grandmother's, is a well known practice in the British Isles and so it is the case that many large families, and especially Scottish clans, have acquired a number of paternal lineages over the centuries. There are also NPEs, but these are far less common because people were easily killed for such misbehavior until only recently. There is a small Bisset(t) DNA Project ongoing,[31][32] if you happen to be reading this and are one, are related to one or know one, and several paternal (Y-DNA) lineages have already been discovered,[33] for the moment actually separating the Scottish and Irish branches of what we know historically to be one family. Curious. It can't be said at this point which if either might preserve the original. Perhaps the E1b1b might support the Greek origin reported in the 17th century Irish source, and this might also interest (for a moment at least) my pal User:Andrew Lancaster, who knows that haplogroup better than anyone around here since he's written a paper on a subclade of it. I will be my duty to contact the administrator of the project, who doubtless won't know his Irish sources well (most humans don't), once I have the article up. But I know mine, some better than others, which is why this is fun. By the way I am not a Bissett, am not related to any and have never met one. I'm just tired of people trashing Gaga, who I listen to all the time when I do my research on this and that.

It turns out the Bissetts were one of the most prominent noble families of Late Medieval Ulster according to the authorities. Stay tuned. DinDraithou (talk) 04:31, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Guys please be reminded, that this is not a forum, and lets not deviate too much from the subject in consideration. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 07:54, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

For anyone who is interested, I have begun to assemble the primary sources which I will eventually use for the article at User:DinDraithou/Byset family (click the star to watch the page). This may end up becoming an article principally on the history of the family in Ireland, since I have discovered they developed a relationship with the O'Neill dynasty and I am equipped to discuss the aspects of this and other important developments, especially in their sovereignty. They soon enough got an O'Neill princess out of it, and at some point before or after began to act like something like flatha (princes) themselves, according to the documents. Earlier in Scotland one Bissett had already married a daughter of one of the kings from the House of Dunkeld, a dynasty itself probably of Northern Irish origin. So the Bissett family did very, very well in both nations, for a time. Whether Gaga has the Scoto-Irish or Scottish only lineage she (and most Bissetts) will have some distant Gaelic royal ancestry. Many people do of course, like yours truly (southern Irish), but this is still a pleasure to discover.

Sadly the Irish Bissett pedigrees do not survive to my knowledge and so there is only genetic testing to discover or reestablish lineages. If the family, who seem to have lost their lordship by the mid-16th century, had remained in good shape a little longer then their pedigrees would have made it into the 17th century compilations of Duald Mac Firbis and Cú Choigcríche Ó Cléirigh. The Battle of Cnoc Buidhbh in 1522 probably ruined them, leaving them too weak to defend against their encroaching kinsmen and "friends" the MacDonnells, who eventually grabbed the lordship, basing their claim to it on the marriage to Marjory a century and a half before. This still exists today in part, belonging to the Earl of Antrim, who although technically a Kerr does descend from the MacDonnells and through them the Bissetts. DinDraithou (talk) 23:29, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Hopefully I will have the article started in less than a week. Then it can be expanded over time. Most importantly I am now familiar with the majority of the primary sources for the history of the family in Ireland. Which Hugh (Aodh) O'Neill was the father of the Princess Sabia (Sadhbh, pronounced like sav or sow) is no longer possible to discover. Either she was a daughter of Aodh Reamhar, King of Ulster, or Aodh, Prince of Clanaboy, who were fairly close cousins by Gaelic standards in either case. Probably the former. The Irish Bissetts will have other Gaelic ancestors but the O'Neills were clearly the leading source. As far as recorded Scottish Gaelic ancestry, I have encountered criticism of the 17th century Fraser account claiming John Byset married a daughter, Agnes, of William the Lion of the House of Dunkeld, but this isn't the end of the world because Byset was a prominent and wealthy courtier and royal families commonly produced scores of illegitimate children.

If you are interested in the genetic history of the Bissetts and the others you should also, in addition to the already linked Haplogroup E1b1b (Y-DNA), have a look at Haplogroup R1b (Y-DNA), Genetic history of Italy, genetic genealogy and genealogical DNA test among other articles. These articles are not perfect and a little difficult, but are for the most part nicely sourced and much better than you can find elsewhere. Wikipedia is fortunate to have some very well informed contributors in some areas. DinDraithou (talk) 21:27, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

up

Bissett family (Ireland). The article will grow slowly. I have it outlined, but the family have not been well covered in Irish scholarship and so the secondary sources are limited. They are discussed a little in some recent scholarship but I do not have these papers. Hopefully other editors will contribute as well. I will make as many of the primary sources available as I can find, and thankfully nearly all of these are online at the CELT Project (UCC), the Internet Archive, and Googlebooks.

Yes, unbelievably we are on Lady Gaga's talk page. Time for an admission. I soon enough discovered that I could benefit from studying the history of the family. There are a variety of uses for what I have found. Importantly they are a wonderful example of cultural assimilation in Late Gaelic Ireland. In any case, it is my belief that our dear own Lady Gaga's maternal grandfather is somewhat more likely to have the Irish lineage than the Scottish, although a genetic test might reveal anything, or very little. It at least appears that some Bissetts remained in Ulster following their dispossession, and the Ulster Scots people were mostly from a region of Britain where relatively few Bissetts, at least today, are native. The Scotch-Irish incorporated more than the Ulster Scots, including a small variety of the native Irish, to whom the Irish Bissetts by that time belonged. There is little more to be said right now. DinDraithou (talk) 15:44, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

If anyone is following, I have some of the origins section written. But now I need to learn a little Greek, possibly even Byzantine Greek (maybe only a word or two). A Greek origin for the family is likely unprovable but should be explored as much as possible. Also we've just gotten some help from a nice person, for which see Talk:Bissett family (Ireland). The article will actually contain some history, eventually, and I've learned from another editor here that it became a free-for-all in the mid-16th century with several families claiming their share of the lands after the Bissetts went under. Sadly we'll never learn exactly what happened after the battle or night ambush of 1522 but the family were no longer viable. They had already been ravaged by the Earl of Kildare a decade before, surely for being supporters of the O'Neills. The Battle of Knockavoe will be expanded to include O'Neill's supporters slain at the camp. Thank User:Newm30 for creating the article. DinDraithou (talk) 03:23, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure Lady Gaga herself is not aware of all her family ancestry as you seem to be interested in. It's not that this topic's completely irrelevant, just it has nothing to do with who Gaga is as an artist and should be kept to a minimum. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.226.217.18 (talk) 04:18, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Actually she checks her Wikipedia article, or people watch it for her, and has undoubtedly seen some of this by now. When I first got interested in her back in March, I watched some interviews and read this and that and found she is quite class conscious. Convent of the Sacred Heart is one of those schools which attracts families who imagine themselves to have some lineage or purpose for being and Stefani belonged to the group or class imagined to be without that, one reason why her family were denied whatever they were denied, which Gaga was upset about in May. And her family didn't even classify as exploitable "new money", merely being newly "comfortable". I wish I knew more about the Italian American experience but know that they continue to have some difficulty gaining acceptance and suffer from stereotyping still. That her Italian background is lower to working class she could do absolutely nothing about. They look like fine people to me and hopefully we'll see more of them become successful.

Kids whose parents came from lower or working class families but who then make a little money usually become preps. The dynamics of New York City may be a little different from what I'm familiar with but Stefani's parents appear to have followed the classic pattern and Gaga got fashioned into something of uninteresting appearance. Have you seen the pictures? But she was too talented and too spirited for that world of pretensions and at some point it lost her.

It turns out that all along her mother was walking around with the name of an old noble family and does not seem to have known it. The Bissetts were of far greater status in their time, very long ago and worlds away now, than probably any of the families whose children Gaga might have gone to school with at Convent of the Sacred Heart. Sure her small sept now hail from West Virginia but the knowledge that they almost certainly have, however distant, nobility and some royalty in their past would have given Stefani and Gaga a different consciousness. No one can state the extent of her maternal grandfather's influence in her life and genetics but certain knowledge is understood to be restricted to lineage, however thin or however "bent" through the female line, and can still recall ancient privileges.

I don't plan to insert any of this in the article. This is a fine purpose for the talk page, which is not being misused. DinDraithou (talk) 00:07, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

And this thread does help the article. It's what you'll have to refer to when the inevitable "also French, etc., on her mother's side" reappears. DinDraithou (talk) 19:34, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Irrelevant to improving the article, and largely uncivil

No, the talk page is for discussing improvements related to the article. I suggest you cease adding useless stuff, lest I will archive this whole section for irrelevant commentary. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 08:24, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Personal attack redacted GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 19:34, 19 December 2010 (UTC) DinDraithou (talk) 08:35, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

What on Earth?! WP:EQ --Cprice1000talk2me 17:38, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Middle Earth? When someone sounds like they live in the Lord of the Rings and pretends to have special powers then they're fair game. Legolas is a respectable enough technical contributor and polisher but here at Gaga he's gotten into the habit of hounding me. Check the archives. And I hate anything to do with elves, admittedly not his fault. Just typing this is making me cringe. DinDraithou (talk) 19:08, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

And this thread does help the article. It's what you'll have to refer to when the inevitable "also French, etc., on her mother's side" reappears. DinDraithou (talk) 19:34, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Hounding you? I think it's more of a low tolerance for nonsense. --John9988 (talk) 23:31, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Lady_Gaga/Archive_9#Gays.3F. It looks like that. Really he's just trying to look like he's in charge, probably an aspiring admin. Are you trying to tell me I've been posting nonsense? If you are then I'll point out your contributions to Wikipedia have been remarkably negligible so you don't really get to talk. I've created over 80 articles, none of which have been deleted, so this subject is hardly my entire life. DinDraithou (talk) 00:34, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Record labels

Has there been any discussion on the record label tag in the infobox? Presently, both Def Jam and Cherrytree are included. However, she is no longer signed to these labels. Should there be a date (ie 2006 and 2007-2009, respectively) next to them? Right now, it looks like she is signed to ALL those labels at the current. Save-Me-Oprah ^(talk) 21:59, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

If she isn't signed to them, yes that is exactly what should happen. --Cprice1000talk2me 22:01, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

No. See Template:Infobox musical artist. –Chase (talk / contribs) 00:11, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Chase. The labels—current and past—are presented per the documentation for the infobox template. —C.Fred (talk) 00:32, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Classically trained or entirely self-taught?

OK, it's been established that she's been playing the piano since she was four, and learned by ear. What I would like to know is, did she at any point take up piano lessons or did she always rely on her own skills? Because I've read elsewhere that she was classically trained, so I'm entirely unsure. And can she read music? 24.189.87.160 (talk) 05:09, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Read music as in? Read the musical notes? Yes, she can, she said that herself. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:29, 20 December 2010 (UTC)