Talk:Lady Gaga#up

{{edit extended-protected|Lady Gaga|answered=yes}}

Can someone please add this to the bottom of the philanthropy section:

In January 2025, Gaga was the final performer at the FireAid benefit concert in the Intuit Dome in Inglewood, CA. She performed "Shallow", "Always Remember Us This Way", and the original song "Time is a Healer (All I Need is Time)", written with fiancé Michael Polansky.

:{{Not done}}: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Charliehdb (talk) 15:38, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

So myself and another user have agreed that it would be best, starting with Joanne, to refer to Gaga’s albums as the following:

-Joanne: 4th studio and 5th overall album.

-Chromatica: 5th studio and 6th overall album.

-Mayhem: 6th studio and 7th overall album.

We need at least one third-party user to agree on this for the changes to be implemented on her album pages, otherwise all of her albums on this site will remain referred to as “a studio album”, meaning we will have numbers for every artists’ albums except Gaga, which is just pure inconsistency. 50.174.202.210 (talk) 21:51, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

:That's not exactly it; the idea was actually to use 4th solo and 5th overall for Joanne, 5th solo and 6th overall for Chromatica, and lastly 6th solo and 8th overall for Mayhem. The way you phrased this also incorrectly implied that there's some other non-studio type of album being counted. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 22:36, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

So, there's the 2023 picture with Joe Biden at the White House. I was previously opposed to using it for the infobox but I couldn't help think it was a waste as it is a professionally taken HQ picture of Gaga looking directly into the camera. No funny or akward facial expressions. Ideal candidate. My only issue with it was that she's standing so close to Biden that it's hard to completely crop him out and I'm not a fan of very close close ups as they are overwhelming imo. Nevertheless, I played around with it a bit and ended up with this, which I think is actually quite alright. What do you guys think? Do you think we could use it as the new infobox pic?File:Lady Gaga at the White House in 2023 (1).jpg ArturSik (talk) 18:21, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

:I think it would be a good photo for the infobox, especially since in this one she's facing the camera. I don't think Biden's arm is much of an issue, or at least not as significant as the benefit of having a photo facing the camera. wiglett (talk) 21:55, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

The Michael Polansky article is ridiculous. I can see the value in it if it is merged with Lady Gaga, but this individual falls incredibly short of satisfying WP:GNG separate from his relationship with Lady Gaga. Notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. I wanted to give the courtesy of having a discussion about merging rather than immediately nominating this article for deletion. The subject’s company that he started doesn’t even have its own article yet. How is it that this person is notable for starting a company that isn’t notable for its own article yet?Brickto (talk) 07:48, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

:Since you quickly opened up Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Polansky anyway after starting this thread, it's better to keep discussion on that page instead. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 12:08, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

:I certainly don't agree with your assessment, nor do I find the current biography "ridiculous", but I agree with SNUGGUMS that discussion belongs at AfD, not here. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 13:17, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

::Another Believer the template for the proposed merge linked to this talk page for the discussion, which I found odd. I agree with you that the article is probably best deleted. It was nominated earlier this morning. Kindly, Brickto (talk) 04:27, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

:::Actually, I don't think the article should be deleted, but comments can go to the AfD discussion. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 04:31, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

{{edit extended-protected|Lady Gaga|answered=yes}}

On the lead: it’s important to add “and six of her songs have topped the Billboard Hot 100” right after stating the amount of number-one albums on the Billboard 200. TheHipHopRapping (talk) 12:48, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

:{{done}} Lova Falk (talk) 07:54, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Gaga's record sales are reported at 170 million. The 124 million figure is years old and barely covers Gaga's digital single sales, let along her other record sales. Why was this reverted?

Sources:

• The White House: https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/04/13/president-biden-announces-key-appointments-to-boards-and-commissions-23/
• The Times: https://www.thetimes.com/culture/music/article/lady-gaga-new-album-mayhem-interview-l6ncqxvtn
• V Magazine: https://vmagazine.com/article/v-celebrates-the-15th-anniversary-of-lady-gagas-debut-album-the-fame/
• NMW: https://newmusicweekly.com/lady-gaga-experimenting-with-sounds/
• Complex: https://www.complex.com/music/a/jaelaniturnerwilliams/akon-remembers-pre-fame-lady-gaga-straight-from-80s

Please update this to make this article more accurate. SpearsRR (talk) 11:30, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

:Not really. The 124 million claimed sales are from two reliable sources, dated 2021 and 2022 so they pretty much reflect the current number of records sold by Gaga. There is a discussion in this talk page regarding why the 170+ million claimed sales is considered inflated. You are there so you already know the explanation about this matter. 143kittypurry (talk) 14:59, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

::The discussion is you saying you "don't feel" Lady Gaga sold the reported sales that I've listed several more recent sources for above, while referencing certs that are incorrectly calculated on that same article. SpearsRR (talk) 15:22, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Then correct those "incorrectly calculated" certs on the article. It's up to you to correct them, not me. 143kittypurry (talk) 17:12, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Gaga won an Emmy award for her Hold My Hand performance on Bourbon Street, New Orleans for the Super bowl LIX. Worth adding the Emmy award in her intro in her awards list, and adding specifics where the Hold My Hand song is mentioned in the body of the article.

RS: https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/lady-gaga-sports-emmy-win-hold-my-hand-1235344544/

Variety: https://variety.com/2025/music/news/lady-gaga-wins-sports-emmy-hold-my-hand-super-bowl-performance-1236403376/

Billboard: https://www.billboard.com/music/awards/lady-gaga-2025-sports-emmys-winner-pre-super-bowl-tribute-1235977209/

Not sure if worth mentioning she is a Tony-award win from EGOT as all these reports do. SpearsRR (talk) 11:35, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

:It's better to focus on what she has won, and the Emmy achievement has been added to the article. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 16:51, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

{{edit extended-protected|Lady Gaga|answered=yes}}

Hey! I would like to edit the Lady Gaga article to change the picture of her from the Joe Biden event in 2021. It’s been there for 4 years and it’s in need of an update. That’s not her appearance anymore. BeyonceKnowlesFan123473 (talk) 06:30, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

: {{Not done}} A change of photo would require a new photo that is free for us to use. This means it must be explicitly licensed freely (Commons definition, see [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:L COM:L]). Unless you can find such a free photo, we cannot just change it to any random photo you can find online. Thanks, WhoAteMyButter (🌷_talk│🌻^contribs) 06:47, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

I'm surprised that the sentence "She has spoken of suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder after being raped at the age of 19" has been removed from the final paragraph of the lead section which mentions her activism on mental health awareness.

BBC News reported (in the link below) that she suffered a breakdown after the rape led to a pregnancy and that the trauma had changed her as a person, and would never leave her.

:[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-57199018 Lady Gaga had a 'psychotic break' after sexual assault left her pregnant]

The BBC News reference above states that she was still suffering from the effects of being raped when she won an Oscar in 2019 for A Star Is Born, years later.

According to Lady Gaga this is a lifelong trauma that she suffered. It would "never leave her" she said. Is a lifelong trauma after being raped not notable enough to have just one sentence about this in the lead section?

Why is it important enough to include in the lead section that Gaga's philanthropy and activism focus on mental health awareness and LGBTQ rights and supporting the wellness of young people, but it is apparently not noteworthy enough to include a brief mention after that about a lifelong trauma she has had?

In my view, the sentence is appropriate to include as per WP:LEAD and it doesn't take up a lot of space. Just one sentence in the lead.

Also please see the advice page at Wikipedia:Revert only when necessary which states: "It is usually preferable to make an edit that retains at least some elements of a questionable prior edit than to revert it entirely. Your bias should be toward keeping as much of the prior edit as possible."

Regards, Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 00:21, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

:As far as I can tell, she's never mentioned any connection between the incident and those other things, and either way gets more attention for helping others than for what once happened to her. It therefore is rather presumptuous to say they're linked in the way you seem to be suggesting. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 02:16, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

::The important point is not whether there might or might not be a link between the breakdown and trauma she had and her activism focus on mental health awareness. The important point is that a reliable source is available from BBC News to state she was still suffering from the effects of being raped when she won an Oscar in 2019 for A Star Is Born, more than a decade after the rape. Clearly it has had a major impact on her life. She herself has stated it would "never leave her".

::So I'd welcome the input of other editors for their views on the question – Is a lifelong trauma after being raped not notable enough to have just one sentence about this somewhere in the lead section? Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 03:13, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

:::I respect the fact that this had a massive effect on her personally, but in the lead we tend to focus on a person as a public figure and what they are widely known for. The lead is just a summary of the entire article. If someone was a victim of sexual abuse and that experience heavily influenced their involvement in say the Me Too movement, and they were widely associated with their activism towards it then that for sure would grant a mention in the lead. But Gaga’s activism has primarily focused on the LGBT community throughout her career. While she spoke about her abuse and trauma publicly and how it affected her life and her as a person, it’s never been the central focus of her activism. So I agree with SNUGGUMS’s removal of it from the lead. ArturSik (talk) 07:43, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

{{edit extended-protected|Lady Gaga|answered=yes}}

Change "one the best selling ng" to "one of the best selling". (Typo) 2600:8805:1A00:84D0:583:1B63:C6EE:1088 (talk) 16:22, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

:{{done}} thanks for pointing that out. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 17:07, 17 June 2025 (UTC)