Talk:Joanne (Lady Gaga song)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Sources

• http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/pop/7549887/lady-gaga-joanne-lyrics-most-personal
• https://mic.com/articles/157173/who-is-joanne-the-meaning-behind-lady-gaga-s-new-album-title
• http://www.mtv.com/news/2945921/lady-gaga-aunt-joanne-sexual-assault-survivor/
• https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/2041429/lady-gaga-heals-dads-heart-with-emotional-song-tribute-to-beloved-late-aunt-joanne/
• http://www.teenvogue.com/story/lady-gaga-joanne-teaser
• http://www.ew.com/article/2016/10/25/lady-gaga-father-joanne-tattoos

---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:37, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Notability

Extended content

I'm thoroughly offended that a perfectly notable song, "Joanne" is being listed as non-notable. She's performed the song several times since the parent album's release, and the article is growing..... I hate to use this argument, but the song DID chart, despite not being a single. It's also the title track. Wouldn't a better tag be 'stub', and not 'not notable'? Aleccat (talk) 22:03, 7 November 2016 (UTC) Being performed live has no relevance on notability; it doesn't make it notable, or more notable. Charting is good if it also passes the basic notability criteria; charting just helps its standing, it does not necessarily invoke notability on its own. Being the title track is completely and utterly irrelevant to notability, it's laughable that it is even being listed as a reason for being notable. People need to stop just creating non-notable articles just because it charted or was performed and ignoring the criteria.  — Calvin999 22:53, 7 November 2016 (UTC) @Aleccat: I don't really think notability is an issue here, but certainly adding more sources, such as the ones in the above section, will help. ---Another Believer (Talk) 23:14, 7 November 2016 (UTC) that's what I'm trying to say.... Aleccat (talk) 23:37, 7 November 2016 (UTC) @Aleccat: I know, but obviously Calvin999 disagrees, and that's ok. What I'm suggesting is that perhaps your time is better spent expanding the article than worrying about the appropriateness of the tag. I am working on lots of articles and Wikipedia campaigns currently, but expanding this article is on my to do list, and I wonder if User:IndianBio might be interested in helping, too? ---Another Believer (Talk) 23:40, 7 November 2016 (UTC) I will be, but I'm doing stuff chronologically now. First Joanne the album, then will move to "Perfect Illusion" and "Million Reasons" and then will come to "A-Yo" and "Joanne". —IB [ Poke ] 05:38, 8 November 2016 (UTC) If you need to add sources to help, then it is currently not notable. Notable articles don't need 'help'.  — Calvin999 09:11, 8 November 2016 (UTC) If this article is last on the to-do list then I'm inclined to redirect it today, as it's not fair or needed to keep a fan created tiny article in mainspace until someone has time to work on it. That's not how Wikipedia works.  — Calvin999 09:14, 8 November 2016 (UTC) Articles are allowed to be works in progress. It doesn't need to be complete. ---Another Believer (Talk) 23:18, 8 November 2016 (UTC) A work in progress, yes, if it is actually being worked on. Not a stale article which is completely incomplete.  — Calvin999 08:51, 9 November 2016 (UTC) Okay, riddle me this....how did my article on "Jumanji" by Azealia Banks get to positive article status? Isn't it's unfair to say that articles like Heaven_(Beyoncé_song) are notable by your standards? By the way, Aleccat (talk) 12:22, 8 November 2016 (UTC) Both examples highlighted by yourself appear to have a decent amount of third-party, independent sources which are not solely derived from album reviews. Although, "Jumanji" is littered with errors in the references which need correcting. "Joanne" does not have significant third party content, and for that reason it is not notable. Articles should be notable when they are created, not created and left for a while until you have the time to bother to make it notable. It doesn't work like that.  — Calvin999 12:28, 8 November 2016 (UTC) You are being toxic and I don't know why, there are many other articles on Wikipedia that haven't been deleted that aren't notable. Please assume good faith. There are plenty of third-party sources on Joanne, it was one of the most described songs on the album, pre-release. Aleccat (talk) 12:34, 8 November 2016 (UTC) Totally agree with @Another Believer and @Alecatt. You can't just make a bold decision like that completely on your own... and redirecting the page falls under that category. Carbrera (talk) 23:17, 8 November 2016 (UTC) This can be sorted by going to an AFD if necessary, no need to be hostile Aneccat. —IB [ Poke ] 04:58, 9 November 2016 (UTC) Plenty of sources on Google perhaps. Hardly any in this article.  — Calvin999 08:46, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

GA

Congrats on the GA promotion! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 08:09, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Lady Gaga discography

Resolved

Should "Joanne" be moved to the singles section at Lady Gaga discography? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:46, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

(To clarify, the song is currently listed in the "Promotional singles" section.) ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:33, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

The single section has been updated. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:49, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

ro.Wikipedia

Nice to see ro:Joanne (cântec) promoted to quality status, too! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:49, 10 January 2019 (UTC)