Template talk:Lady Gaga: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Dalejenkins (talk | contribs)
Riffic (talk | contribs)
Line 30: Line 30:
:OK, I'll agree with u for now, but I think it would be better if the section is called "other singles" - promo, featured, alternate... and not the main ones. --<font face="maiandra">[[User:PlatinumFire|<font color="silver">'''''Platinum'''''</font>]][[User talk:PlatinumFire|<font color="gold">'''''Fire'''''</font>]]</font> 17:57, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
:OK, I'll agree with u for now, but I think it would be better if the section is called "other singles" - promo, featured, alternate... and not the main ones. --<font face="maiandra">[[User:PlatinumFire|<font color="silver">'''''Platinum'''''</font>]][[User talk:PlatinumFire|<font color="gold">'''''Fire'''''</font>]]</font> 17:57, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
::As I said, there is nothing here that differentiates "Singles" and "Other singles". "Other songs" is the best of both worlds really. '''[[User:Dalejenkins|Dale]]''' 19:16, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
::As I said, there is nothing here that differentiates "Singles" and "Other singles". "Other songs" is the best of both worlds really. '''[[User:Dalejenkins|Dale]]''' 19:16, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
:::if this is going to be an arbitrary list of songs without any criteria for inclusion, it shouldn't be included. Listing her singles make sense because those are releases, but the "other songs" section doesn't belong in a template such as this [[User:Riffic|riffic]] ([[User talk:Riffic|talk]]) 08:20, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 08:20, 10 November 2009

LoveGame

LoveGame is the 4th single after "Eh, Eh." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.118.139.115 (talk) 23:57, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sessions@AOL and Chillin

These are two very real releases from Gaga. I hardly see why people feel the need to delete them everytime someone puts them up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tikkuy (talk • contribs) 01:26, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, people like me feel the need to keep Wikipedia as accurate as possible since there is no confirmation for release of Chillin and AOL sessions is not even a release. --Legolas (talk2me) 04:07, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I think you'll find that if you check Wale's and/or Interscope's official site, Chillin' will be listed as an official single. As for AOL Sessions, I'm pretty sure that is an official release, but if not, then I don't see why you can't just put it in the 'Related articles' category rather than deleting it entirely. Tikkuy (talk) 07:43, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Because if the AOL sessions are not a release then its in no way related to Gaga. Also Chillin' needs to assert notability to warranty a place in the template. At present we have to wait for it to release and chart, else it cannot be in the table. --Legolas (talk2me) 08:53, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The AOL Sessions EP doesn't even exist infact, I insist in it be nominated for deletion. It is obviously fancruft. Look at the cover. It is the same image used for an "Eh, Eh" remixes release. The fan has replaced some of the text with "AOL Sessions." Also there are no reliable sources backing up the release therfore should not be incorporated into the template. We will have to wait for Chillin', although confirmed with a behind the scenes video on MTV, there is still little on the release. • вяαdcяochat 09:22, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. I will nominate it for deletion. --Legolas (talk2me) 09:28, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well considering AOL Sessions stars Lady Gaga, I hardly see how it isn't related to her. It does exist, as you can clearly see on the internet. As for Chillin, it has been announced as a single, and hence should be treated as such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tikkuy (talk • contribs) 09:43, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(Outdent)Please stop adding this single. Read WP:CONSENSUS. If you go against it you have to be blocked. --Legolas (talk2me) 10:15, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not going agains consensus, because as you can see, most people agree with me. Tikkuy (talk) 09:36, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tikutty, I am aware of her performances at the AOL sessions but there has been no notable release of the EP. It does not exist. This being, there is no need for an article. • вяαdcяochat 05:52, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chillin

Because people seem to be continually removing Chillin from this template, I think we should put it to a vote as to whether or not the text should remain. I am voting for it to stay as it is quite clearly a released single and belongs in the template. Even if the article Chillin is deleted I believe we should keep the text there because of it's status as a single. Tikkuy (talk) 09:28, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No. --Legolas (talk2me) 13:35, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you understand that nobody will take your opinion seriously if you do not explain it thoroughly. As such your vote will not be counted. Tikkuy (talk) 07:01, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, Chillin has been added and kept for a while now, so I don't think this conversation is really needed any more...Tikkuy (talk) 14:07, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Other songs/Other singles

Personally, I feel that this section should be named "Other songs" with Fashion included. This is because every other artist template does so, there is nothing here that differentiates "Singles" and "Other singles" (thus leaving readers confused) and the reasoning that Fashion isn't well known enough is WP:POV. Also, Fashion looks weird alongside a discography and a list of awards; it is a song and should be listed with the other songs. Dale 15:12, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll agree with u for now, but I think it would be better if the section is called "other singles" - promo, featured, alternate... and not the main ones. --PlatinumFire 17:57, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, there is nothing here that differentiates "Singles" and "Other singles". "Other songs" is the best of both worlds really. Dale 19:16, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
if this is going to be an arbitrary list of songs without any criteria for inclusion, it shouldn't be included. Listing her singles make sense because those are releases, but the "other songs" section doesn't belong in a template such as this riffic (talk) 08:20, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]