Talk:The Fame Monster/Archive 3

Covers?

Since it has been decided that this is indeed EP, why is the single EP cover not the one being used in the infobox? ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 00:58, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm confused. The EP was released with either one. Yves (talk) 01:02, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

On iTunes for the stand-alone EP it uses the alternative cover on here http://itunes.apple.com/ca/album/the-fame-monster/id350699166. And the cover in the infobox seems to be used for the deluxe version only. http://itunes.apple.com/ca/album/the-fame-monster-deluxe-version/id340083607 ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 01:05, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

No, there is no "EP cover". The standalone 8-track is available with either cover and stores stock them both. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 01:11, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, I guess the iTunes Store chooses one and sticks with it. When I went to hmv to purchase my copy, there was the option of either one—I bought the one with the bob. Same with Crazy Love and its five-plus covers. Yves (talk) 01:13, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

And looking around I see that that's the main one her label uses to promote so just never mind. I saw it on iTunes and I was a bit confused. They certainly don't like keeping things easy involving Gaga do they? ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 01:16, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Track listing?

I don't understand why there's the other track listing in this article. Since it is an EP, I think it should only include one. Such as Cannibal (EP)'s. Maybe do something like this to The Fame's article. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 23:33, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

An EP is a kind of album, many EPs have many traklisting. Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 00:06, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

I know. But is The Fame a re-release of The Fame Monster or is The Fame Monster a re-release of The Fame? This makes it look like The Fame is included with The Fame Monster, which it is the other way around. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 00:35, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Ending-Start. We can remove the tracklist pertaining to TF like the Cannibal EP. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:19, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Would you like to do? I'm sure you're more creditable to do it. ΣПD!ПG–STΛЯT | TΛLK | 00:19, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Lol, what do you mean more creditable? — Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:27, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

As in, people wouldn't revert your edit. xD ΣПD!ПG–STΛЯT | TΛLK | 17:48, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

"So Happy I Could Die" producer??

why does it say redone and space cowboy. on Fernando Garibays official website it says that he produced it. http://www.fernandogaribay.com/?page_id=344 the very last one in 2010 70.173.230.88 (talk) 02:31, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Chase can you help out in this matter? — Legolas ^(talk2me) 06:00, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Official album notes (CD liner) say RedOne, Space Cowboy and Lady Gaga. Adabow (talk · contribs) 06:10, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Garibay's discography also lists it under his 2010 work; The Fame Monster came out in 2009 and his only production credit, "Dance in the Dark", is listed under that year. It's quite possible that he did a remix of "SHICD" as other remixes of Gaga's work are listed. –Chase (talk / contribs) 13:26, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

ok i was just getting very confused when i saw his website. 70.173.230.88 (talk) 20:12, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Grammy

This album was nominated for 6 Grammies, not only 2. According to the Grammy's official nominations page, this are Gaga's following nominations:

• Album of the Year, The Fame Monster
• Best Female Pop Vocal Performance, Bad Romance
• Best Pop Collaboration With Vocals, Telephone ft. Beyonce
• Best Pop Vocal Album, The Fame Monster
• Best Dance Recording, Dance in the Dark

*Best Pop Vocal Album, The Fame Monster

• Best Short Form Music Video Bad Romance

Please update this information. --201.230.12.129 (talk) 12:59, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

I corrected the nominations that you posted, and also, nominations which are for the songs, don't count for the album. Hence, TFM still has two noms, "Bad Romance" has 2 noms, DITD and Telephone each has one. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 15:27, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

In the future, if you notice something wrong in an article, you can fix it yourself. Wikipedia is, after all, the encyclopedia anyone can edit. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:17, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

But this is an article not everyone can edit. Tbh®tch^{Talk ©} Happy Holidays 19:36, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Good point. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 20:11, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

From FA Thriller (album): "The album won a record-breaking seven Grammy Awards at the 1984 Grammys." This includes songs. "Bad Romance", "Telephone", and "Dance in the Dark" are tracks from the album so they are inherently The Fame Monster nominations as well. All except the "Bad Romance" music video since it wasn't on the album. –Chase (talk / contribs) 22:57, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

On second thought I'm not totally sure if the "Bad Romance" video nom should be mentioned or not. –Chase (talk / contribs) 22:58, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Wrong Chase. Just because an FA is saying it doesnot make it right. Separate song noms are not counted towards the album. It never was and never will be. TFM still has two nominations. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:44, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't be so worried about it being a FA (in itself). I would be more worried about it apparently being sourced to the Guiness World Records (and of course it being FA it's not surprising a bold claim like that is sourced). On the other hand, I think there's a valid question whether 'The album won Jackson a record-breaking eight Grammy Awards in 1984, including Album of the Year' means the album itself won 8 awards since it could be interpreted to mean the album and parts of it won Jackson's 7/8 awards. Also I wonder whether Guiness comments on the album at all or just notes Jackson's record of 7/8 awards in that year. If there is a belief the other article is wrong or misleading. Nil Einne (talk) 12:39, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

The Fame Monster a EP !!!???

Why has The Fame Monster been changed from a studio album to a EP. The Fame Monster is a studio album and its been confirm by Lady Gaga herself. Nobody is talking about Born This Way as Lady Gagas second album its her third and everyone says so. A EP is much shorter and i dont think from a EP you release four singles + supporting it whit a big tour, The Monster ball Tour. Please change it back to a studio album!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.154.104.31 (talk) 17:37, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Read the talk page for a change will you? Nobody has time to continuousoly explain the same thing over and over again. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 17:43, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

to be fair, when you make a stupid decision, you should probably expect people to question it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.91.118.239 (talk) 21:01, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

If i was to own a dog but called it a cat... does it make that animal a dog or a cat? Use your brain please! The industry decides what an EP is and what a studio album is. An EP can be an album or a single. Thus The Fame = 1st studio album, 1 st album, Fame Monster = 2nd album, 3rd EP, Born This Way = 2nd studio album, 3rd album overall. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 21:18, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

LISTEN LEGOLAS: THE National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences (THE ONE THAT GIVES THE GRAMMY) Nominated TFM as album of the year, isn't that ENOUGH for you to classify it as an album?

TFM, World's best-selling album of 2010.

Can you not erase what I put that it is the world's best-selling album of 2010? If you don't like how I put it, put it how you want it but it is important information that must be on the top. Multiple sources are bringing it up so don't just erase things, put the numbers.

Yes, but multiple reliable sources are needed. Dr. Zombieman ^brains.../_{the infected} 16:11, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

When I (or someone else) get the source I'll call you Brainless Nurse, ok?

Also TFM was nominated as Album of the Year by the Grammys that should really cut it for you to just stop obsessing with calling it an EP, it's like you personally hate her that you delete everything positive about her if it doesn't have god as a source.

Excuse me? Personal attacks? You started it with the Dr. Zombieman thing, linking me to a page that treats who reads it as a retard. God grow up.

Firstly, calling me a Brainless Nurse has just made me do this and secondly; NPOV applies as usual. Dr. Zombieman ^brains.../_{the infected} 16:28, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Secondly, where does it say "you are a retard" then? Dr. Zombieman ^brains.../_{the infected} 16:32, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Hey hey, mr, I got it wrong I thought you were Legolas (the crazy guy up who refuses to call the TFM an album even though National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences of the United States already does), saying I'm a zombieman some sort of nerd insult I thought, so, sorry, but you should change the article. TFM is an album.

That's another diff to put inside the report - calling Legolas a crazy guy. Dr. Zombieman ^brains.../_{the infected} 16:41, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Are we in school or some sort of thing? The article is inaccurate, put that in your performance report.

You're getting extremely unkind. I advise to shut down your computer, make a cup of tea and watch TV for a bit to calm down. Dr. Zombieman ^brains.../_{the infected} 16:48, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

I consider unkind that I'm adressing an issue a lot of times and you blatantly ignore it. I advise you to stop contributing to Wikipedia or get some social and LISTENING skills.

Can a competent Wikipedia contributor put TFM as a her second studio album?

Lady Gaga says is her second album. The lenght of the album is LP classified from 30 minutes. The Fame Monster is longer than 2 Weezer considered-albums. The National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences of the United States considers it an album.

ISN'T THAT ENOUGH?

Stop SHOUTING. It just shows more incivility. Dr. Zombieman ^brains.../_{the infected} 16:55, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Ok, let me put it this way. Oh, Dr. Zombieman, since I don't know your name I'm calling you like that, oh respected sir, are you gonna address the issue I'm putting and edit TFM as Lady Gaga's second studio album? :)

No, there is no consensus. Only just your uncivil comments and the one above which I find particularly patronising. Dr. Zombieman ^brains.../_{the infected} 17:04, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

So the NARS doesn't matter?

Yes, since everybody seems to oppose this move. Dr. Zombieman ^brains.../_{the infected} 17:10, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Ok, so since there is no consensus why should you call it EP in the first place? You are actually classifying The Fame Monster as her Cherry Tree Sessions and her HitMixes? They are simply not in the same league, the first one is a couple of live recordings and a mixes album of a couple of her songs, TFM is more in the league of an album and has receive nominations as such so, the natural thing is to consider it one. Are you actually reading what you're classifying it with? It doesn't matter what 50 guys say out here, what matters is what is real and what is real is that in the most important segments of the music industry Lady Gaga's The Fame Monster is considered an album, her second one, and an article in Wikipedia must tell the truth about it, what it is, an album, so could you please edit it?

For the last time - there is no consensus. Dr. Zombieman ^brains.../_{the infected} 17:18, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

The Fame Monster is an album not an EP.

Receives nominations as an album. Has the lenght of an album. Considered by a lot of people an album.

If some person here thinks there is not consensus it shouldn't be listed neither as an EP or an album.

The person who closed my discussion above, Dr. Zombieman, unpolitely ignores what I say, when I'm citing reasonable facts.

What is more realiable than the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences of the United States?

For the last time - this is closed. Dr. Zombieman ^brains.../_{the infected} 17:27, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Dr. Zombieman should be banned from TFM article for incompetence

Why do you complain I'm unpolite if you don't listen what I'm saying? The article must have been changed since TFM received the nominations for the Grammys, I'm not inventing here and you should stop obsessing about it, do you have any personal issue against Lady Gaga that you still have to put it is an EP before true facts?

Does someone pay you to discredit Lady Gaga's work? Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia, not your imaginary fascist country where you get to rule, a fact is a fact and the fact is that The Fame Monster is Lady Gaga's second album.

Sigh, I'm not even gonna bother to properly reply to this... Dr. Zombieman ^brains.../_{the infected} 17:36, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

And yet, you did reply, Zombieman. :) It's getting that last word in. I think both editors here have some valid points, but they're completely lost in the bickering and name-calling. There's no discussion of the issues anymore, just discussion of who called who what. Might be a good time to just NOT have the last word and step back for a while. Just my thoughts. Wikipelli ^Talk 17:40, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, I just want to get on with my work and all this nashing and grinding of teeth is quite disruptive. Dr. Zombieman ^brains.../_{the infected} 17:43, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

I went to Zombieman's profile and read: "This user does not understand American English and doesn't bloody well want to."

With this arrogant attitude I may be preferring talking to an actual person that doesn't have a bunch of hate to the United States and a brain full of prejudice and closed-mindedness. Goodluck with your life Zombiehead.

Oh and Wikipelli is like a really kind person.

Wow... NEITHER of you can go without having the last word. ENOUGH!  :) Take a break... You're not helping yourself by slamming other editors. Jeez... Wikipelli ^Talk 18:34, 17 February 2011 (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.

2010 sales????

Can someone add Australian end of year charts 2010 @ #6. http://www.aria.com.au/pages/aria-charts-end-of-year-charts-top-100-albums-2010.htm

First, in certain territories, The Fame Monster charted in conjunction with The Fame under the same title, sales are also combined. That means if media traffic tracking album's sales, they must combine the sales of both album. Second, this may be true: "5,8 million is the sales of Lady Gaga's album in this year (2010)", not only The Fame Monster. if some of Gaga's fans think TFM sold 5.8 mil this year, than The Fame will soil 0 copy this year! That does not make any sense!! Media traffic use the bracket with the word "Monster", because they khow they are tracking both album! P/S: If you look at the certification on the article, and calculate the sales by your sefl, it's only about 2,5 million coppies! 222.252.119.129 (talk) 12:49, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Copies sold are tracked by sales tracking systems such as Nielsen SoundScan and not sales certifications, so it cannot be calculated by your self. In many cases, certifications are based on unit shipments to retailers and not number of the copies sold from those shipments, such as with the US RIAA and UK BPI. See the list of music recording certifications for more information. Dan56 (talk) 12:58, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

My point is not how i calculate the sales, 5.8 is not true and until now, no reliable source (media traffic, RIAA, Nieslen, IFPI,...) certificate that TFM monster sold 5.8 million. And we can't say that 5.8 is an estimate, it's tottally wrong! Based on the certification, we can find a better number, such as 2.5 or 3 million. And again, i'm not finding TFM sales by myself, but 5.8 is the combined sales of Lady GaGa in 2010, NOT The Fame Monster's.222.252.119.129 (talk) 13:57, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

The Fame sold 1.6 million copies in the US last year [1], while The Fame Monster sold nearly 6 million copies worldwide [[2]. What's so hard to believe about that? I know it was sold with The Fame in certain countries, but since there is no hard, concrete sales figures of the number of copies sold of only The Fame Monster, why not use this information. It seems like a lot of media outlets are naming it the biggest selling album of 2010. Perhaps we can put: "Worldwide, the EP has sold nearly six million copies, making it the best-selling album of 2010. However, since it was sold with The Fame in certain countries, the exact number of copies sold is debatable." Just a suggestion. - Enter Movie (talk) 01:22, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

The "hard to believe" is which is the source in which Yahoo! is basing their article. Since when Yahoo! makes the work of Nielsen Business or IFPI. Tbhotch^™ and © 01:40, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Yahoo says that "as per German website Mediatraffic". End of topic. TFM 6 million won't be added, unless reported by an independent reliable source, not quoting Mediatraffic. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 07:24, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

This EP was the best selling album worldwide of 2010. It is mentioned on Eminem's Recovery wiki page that it was the #2 best selling album wordwide of 2010, so why can't it be mentioned on this page as when the source is considered reliable for Eminem's page but apparently not for Lady Gaga's? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bears8989 (talk • contribs) 02:52, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

This information will be removed from Eminem's page also. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:56, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

What is your problem? multiple sources are citing this information, Nielsen isn't the GOD of numbers, the number must have definitely been provided by the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), wich also gives numbers of the world's best-selling singles.

Nielsen is the officially recognised international organisation for tracking sales. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 15:14, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

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.

---

Ridiculous non-sense and obstination denying to call The Fame Monster an album

An EP is not contradictory to album, so it's her third EP and second *studio album* because she recorded it that way. Why are ignorants about the field allowed to make modifications, lock an article, delete factual edits? this is not vandalism, we're fighting your blatant ignorance. Consensus is undermined by fact.

Hi there. Consensus is not "undermined by fact" on Wikipedia. Wikipedia's core policy on verifiability states verifiability in reliable sources always trumps truth. Also, just a reminder to sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~).Yves (talk) 17:52, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

I always thought truth was the most reliable source, and more when it is so obvious. Grammy nomination as an album, one of the strongest, specialy when they nominate studio albums.

http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/awards/58086/eminem-lady-a-lead-grammy-noms/ Tbhotch* ^{۩ ۞} 22:23, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

EPs can be singles or albums... — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 23:39, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

"The Fame Monster is the first EP to be nominated for Album of the Year." Well I think that settles the case, if it already wasn't settled a year ago. Are you done? I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 00:00, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

No, I'm not done because I've already admited before, (I'm the one with the last 3 posts), that TFM might be an EP, is considered by many as it, even though is isn't quite it as a fact, but what I'm totally disagreeing is that you still call it a "major release", that is a problem, "major release"? What's that supposed to mean? Of course I know that is to mimic the commercial intention of the release of a studio album, but major release is a very ambiguous term, the Bad Romance video was a major release, Just Dance single was a major release, you can't use the term "major release", yeah EP, ok, but this EP is her second studio album, both terms don't contradict each other, Lady Gaga says it's a standalone album, ok, call it EP, but it's a standalone album, even though TFM does not at all fall in the same league as The Cherry Tree Sessions and the HITmixes to call it EP and it's more and less ok for you to call it like that because a lot of people in the media do it, it's not OK to call it "major release", this "EP" was recorded in a studio album fashion, you know? like studio albums, contain all original songs, and was promoted as a studio album, so yeah, call it EP but after that it should say "...and her second studio album"

I must add, her Born This Way album is being documented as her third album in multiple sources:

http://idolator.com/5722311/lady-gaga-born-this-way-bbc-interview

http://www.undercover.fm/news/13811-lady-gaga-s-born-this-way-highest-selling-digital-single-in-australia-after-just-one-week

http://www.billboard.com/news/lady-gaga-claims-1-000th-hot-100-no-1-with-1005036702.story#/news/lady-gaga-claims-1-000th-hot-100-no-1-with-1005036702.story

(This is Billboard, people)

http://www.sheknows.com/entertainment/articles/824673/lady-gagas-born-this-way-debuts-at-number-one

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/music/2011/02/16/2011-02-16_lady_gaga_born_this_way_being_1000th_number_1_song_on_billboard_hot_100_is_great.html

So, wich is her second album? Doesn't exist? The format classification of The Fame Monster is taking more attention than a much more important fact, it's her sophomore album, and Born This Way, the third, says Billboard, New York Daily News and more, so anything, else? Akerk (talk)Akerk —Preceding undated comment added 20:02, 22 February 2011 (UTC).

Akerk, could you clarify exactly what you want changed in the article. I think everyone agrees that TFM is an EP, and that it is Lady Gaga's second album; certainly, the article repeatedly refers to the record as an album. Do you want the first sentence to be changed from "second major release" to "second album"? Are there any other changes you think should be made, regarding the records status as an album?

Other editors - given that there is consensus that TFM is an album, is there any particular reason not to refer to it as Lady Gaga's second album in the first sentence? I guess the phrase "third EP and second album" might be confusing to readers; on the other hand, it is correct and sourced, and would hopefully put an end to these continuing arguments.VoluntarySlave (talk) 21:47, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that is exactly what I want changed and as an important chracteristic of it should be in the first sentence probably before the fact that is an EP because the reader is more interested to know that is her second album than to know that is her third EP following minor releases (Cherry Tree/HITmixes). I suggest: The Fame Monster is the second studio album and third extended play (EP) by American.... Just that. Akerk (talk) 00:03, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

That's a pretty good compromise. --ĈÞЯİŒ 1ооо 00:12, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Incorrect... The Fame Monster is Gaga's second album and third EP. Born this Way will be Gaga's second studio album. A studio album does not refer to where an album was recorded, it refers to the length. EPs are short albums. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 00:31, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Let's look at the definition of an EP... "An EP (short for extended play) is a musical recording which contains more music than a single, but is too short to qualify as a full album or LP." How can TFM be both an EP and a studio album? The way it is now is perfect. It's her second major release. ℥^nding·start 00:32, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Has this user even seen the above discussions? Candyo32 00:45, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

OH MY GOODNESS! I thought I was VERY clear that I AGREED that TFM is an EP, why do you keep bringing it up? Do you think I'm a retard? READ PLEASE PEOPLE, it's not good nor nice from you to make me keep explaining the SAME thing over and over when YOU are the ones who are wrong.

Replying to this: "An EP (short for extended play) is a musical recording which contains more music than a single, but is too short to qualify as a full album or LP." How can TFM be both an EP and a studio album? The way it is now is perfect. It's her second major release"

Now, EP is a term coming from the vinyl era and does not correlate with the actual digital era, that part of the article is flawed, but I won't even try to modify it. It is being said that TFM is the first EP nominated for Album of the Year because, yeah, it was an EP promoted as an studio album. Now you can't be seriously be taking as sacred a term that is becoming old, few people use LP anymore professionally talking about today's albums and EP is starting to have incompatibilities with the digital era, like, now. Akerk (talk)

STUDIO ALBUM does not at all refer to the length, where have you read this? I will put this to you from Wikipedia itself:

"A studio album is an album made up of tracks recorded in the controlled environment of a recording studio, as opposed to a live recording made at a performance venue or a compilation or reissue album of previously recorded material. A studio album is usually planned and scheduled in advance, and may take anywhere from a few days to more than a year to complete."

The Fame Monster is not a live recording at a performance, nor a compilation, nor a reissue album of previously recorded material. Lady Gaga and RedOne recorded this album in a controlled enviroment of a recording studio, where else does Bad Romance do you guys think was recorded, in the bathroom?

Now, a person who wants to research about Lady Gaga and wants to know wich is her second studio album, where can that person look more than in the first sentence of an article dedicated to Lady Gaga's considered by many reliable sources as her second studio album, including, you know? The Academy (Grammies)

They nominated The Fame for album of the year, also The Fame Monster, so we're clear on that right? The Academy only nominates studio albums, albums with new material and TFM happened to be an EP. Aren't we clear on that?

So yeah TFM is an EP and much more importantly her second STUDIO album. And major release is not a term that should be in an encyclopedia when there's a more accurate term that can be used. Akerk (talk) 01:27, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

What you are saying would make sense if studio was the only type of album. The Fame Monster charted in the United States as an EP. It charted on the album charts but still as an EP. Live albums can be nominated for Grammys etc so you argument makes no sense. Read through the previous discussions very thoroughly before responding again. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 01:54, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

First of all, I said ALBUM OF THE YEAR. I named a category. That is the problem with you guys, this conversation would be over on my side winning the argument talking to a professional, because you pass a lot of time editing wikipedia does not automatically make you a professional in the field, people do study to write properly, you know, I repeat for the 13891347135790th time I have not denied it's an EP, do you know how to read? I've read your english is intermediate so I recommend you to read a little better before responding, and again offending my intelligence. ALBUM OF THE YEAR only nominates STUDIO albums, and yeah I totally beat your length argument. And the other argument saying it's not a STUDIO album. Akerk (talk) 02:01, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Again I ask of you to read the previous discussions and actually note down what evidence was provided as it greatly outweighed the evidence for the opinion you're trying to shove through. No one is offending your intelligence and likewise I don't see the need to write in perfect English on wikipedia talk pages. (Remember to be civil and criticise the editing not the editor). This is not about beating arguments etc. go and visit Billboard and The Official Charts Company. On their websites they have PDF documents which clearly outline what an EP is.... The Fame Monster fits those criterion, it is listed on Album charts as an EP. EPs cannot be studio album by default as it is a conflict of terminology. Studio album was born out of the term LP which referred to vinyl records. In many places in the world The Fame Monster was promoted as the 2-disc deluxe edition of The Fame and was made available as a standalone EP album also. The evidence is already clearly laid out. Now instead of shouting and screaming and criticising people's professionalism (you frankly don't know what I do for living, I don't know what you do), rationally and calmly state your point. If you stand by your argument go away and find some sources which counter-act Billboard Charts etc. and then logically, coherently and succinctly present your argument then someone might be able willing to discuss things further and actually look in more detail and what you're saying. Right now this conversation seems to be over... — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 02:14, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

At the end of the day, Wikipedia is a about verifiability. I have this PDF here that says absolutely nothing about having to be a studio album. The only requirement I see is, "Albums must contain at least 51% playing time of NEWLY RECORDED material." We've got a citation. All that I am trying to say is, where is yours? I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 02:25, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Look, it is not nice, nor respectful, nor considerate to ignore a person's valid arguments. I have not denied in any way in my recent arguments that The Fame Monster is an EP. Yes, you're offending my intelligence because you're not reading the facts I'm explaining, and reply something I'm not arguing at all, I'm not arguing it is not an EP, I'm arguing that "second major release" is not the term that should be in the first sentece of TFM article, "second studio album" is the exact term to use. In order for you or anyone who can do it to unlock the article and put second or sophomore studio album I definitely have to present a valid argument and beat yours. Akerk (talk) 02:55, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I have no need to counter-act Billboard because I'm not disagreeing with them in the first place.

Billboard agrees with me that Born This Way is her third album, and obviusly is implying studio album because they're on the line of The Fame, The Fame Monster wich are albums recorded in a studio and released as ones, the fact that Lady Gaga decided to sell TFM in a pack with TF does not imply TFM is not a studio album, because it was also released alone to be bought alone.

There is not a conflict in terminology between EP and studio album, the music industry is changing because of the digital era and terms become old and contradictions start to arise. LP is an old term, EP is a term that has modifyed its meaning in the digital era to keep existing. Now an EP can be nominated as an Album Of The Year, something that didn't happen before so now, there is not contradiction between studio album and EP and this article must be modified to say on the first line that it's her second studio album. I've already backed this up.

Now about the last thing, where do you think newly recorded material gets recorded? In a studio. I would like you to tell me what album with newly recorded material does not take place in a studio. Even a computer with a microphone and a recording program is a studio. Now albums released by record companies that have newly recorded material are recorded in a studio, a professional one for professional standards.

I'll tell you what Wikipedia itself says: Akerk (talk) 02:53, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Definition of studio album:

A studio album is an album made up of tracks recorded in the controlled environment of a recording studio, as opposed to a live recording made at a performance venue or a compilation or reissue album of previously recorded material.

Definition of recording studio:

A recording studio is a facility for sound recording and mixing.

Now the Grammys don't disagree with me either. Are we on the same line now? Akerk (talk) 02:52, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

It's an EP. ℥^nding·start 03:17, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I second that notion. Dan56 (talk) 03:31, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Me too! Yves (talk) 03:36, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

The method of argument here.... is completely the definition of WP:OR. You've gone... this is my viewpoint and these are the sources which support it. You've haven't addressed what the majority of sources tell us which is that this is an EP according to the charts companies around the world. Unless you have sources explaining their views... — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 03:38, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I hoped we could avoid getting in to the discussion of whether TFM is an EP or an album, as there seemed to be consensus that it is both; it's certainly referred to as both by reliable sources, often both within the same source. The question is, should we refer to it as an album in the first sentence of the article (as we do throughout the rest of the article)? The discussion of "album" vs "studio album" strikes me as unnecessary hairsplitting, but I don't see a problem with avoiding the debate by just avoiding the word "studio".VoluntarySlave (talk) 03:40, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

The articles on EP and Studio album define them as mutually exclusive. One cannot be the other hence we have a different color infobox for each. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 03:43, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Ok. In your argument, you said, "ALBUM OF THE YEAR only nominates STUDIO albums, and yeah I totally beat your length argument." Well, no you didn't. The PDF file I presented earlier in this argument states nothing about that, which crumbles that statement you tried to make. I added this to show that my argument was relevant and not just going back to the Album VS. EP debate. The Grammy Awards don't support your views, so take them out of your argument. Thank you. I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 03:56, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

The length argument was to explain that a studio album is not about the length, but of the definition I provided earlier by Wikipedia.

The PDF you provided backs up my argument that is a studio album. Because newly recorded material happens in studio albums.

This is not a EP vs. Album debate. This is to put on the first sentence that is her second studio album and third EP.

Now, everything clear? Akerk (talk) 04:09, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

This problem compromises Born This Way, too. You can't say Born This Way is her third album and her second studio album, we all know third album means studio. People have to know that The Fame Monster is definetely her second studio album AND third EP, we have reliable sources for both. VoluntarySlave is the only person that seems to be understanding my point. Akerk (talk) 04:14, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

"The PDF you provided backs up my argument that is a studio album. Because newly recorded material happens in studio albums." If we ARE using the Wikipedia definition of a studio album, where does it say "newly recorded material"? "...we all know third album means studio..." We do? Third album ≠ third studio album. Third album ≈ third live album, Third album ≈ third greatest hits album, Third album ≈ third remix album... etc. "You can't say Born This Way is her third album and her second studio album..." We can't? It's the truth, backed up by reliable sources. Time to dissect your citations.

• http://idolator.com/5722311/lady-gaga-born-this-way-bbc-interview — the word "studio" is not present in the article whatsoever.
• http://www.undercover.fm/news/13811-lady-gaga-s-born-this-way-highest-selling-digital-single-in-australia-after-just-one-week — same problem.
• http://www.billboard.com/news/lady-gaga-claims-1-000th-hot-100-no-1-with-1005036702.story#/news/lady-gaga-claims-1-000th-hot-100-no-1-with-1005036702.story — OMG! same problem.
• http://www.sheknows.com/entertainment/articles/824673/lady-gagas-born-this-way-debuts-at-number-one — ...
• http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/music/2011/02/16/2011-02-16_lady_gaga_born_this_way_being_1000th_number_1_song_on_billboard_hot_100_is_great.html — .......

Now what could I not understand about the fact that not a single source you have provided or we have provided calls The Fame Monster Gaga's second studio album. Now, maybe there is something that I am missing here. What is it? I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 04:34, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

You're kidding right? Third album, wich were the first two? The Fame and The Fame Monster, well The Fame is obviously a studio album, and BTW is a studio album and what type of album we're talking about, yeah, studio albums. When these sources say third album, you have to wonder yourself, third album of what? What do these albums have in common, and yes, they are studio albums. Man I'm not actually doing this it's simple communication theory and logic.

I'll quote again wikipedia:

A studio album is an album made up of tracks recorded in the controlled environment of a recording studio, as opposed to a live recording made at a performance venue or a compilation or reissue album of previously recorded material.

The Fame Monster fullfills this criteria.

These tracks to be recorded in a controlled enviroment are new, because it says it's an album recorded, what is recorded in present was not recorded before so it's new, that's reading comprehension.

Are we gonna analyse letter by letter now? Or are we adults who can comprehend text?

Hey, I also in the mean time found a source calling BTW her third studio album, New York Daily News, so now you know what they were referring in their other article.

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/music/2011/01/03/2011-01-03_lady_gaga_born_this_way_photo_shows_her_pantsless_nude_rear_album_release_date_a.html

Akerk (talk) 04:54, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

You are just filled with original research. Tell you what, I am just gonna drop the stick and go to bed. I suggest you do the same. Sources trump inferences any day of the week on Wikipedia, and if you don't understand that, I don't know if you belong here. Anyway, I blame myself for thinking that you would listen. I am opening myself up to your point of view, but Wikipedia is not about thoughts, inferences, drawing conclusions. It's about facts and supporting yours. I think that we have, and I'm sure the statement will remain unchanged. If it does change, oh well. It's not the end of my life. Cheers, and good night. I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 05:10, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

PS, YAY!!! Now I wonder what her second studio album was... I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 05:10, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm citing here with resources, this is not original research. It's fact with resources. I'm not making complicated inferences, it's reading comprehension and I just cited you a resource that said studio album. Akerk (talk) 05:23, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

There are conflicting sources, with some citing it as an EP, some as a full-length studio album. The other point is that if we defined all studio-recorded EPs as studio albums, and the same for Live/video ones, there would be no such things as EPs. Adabow (talk · contribs) 05:29, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

It's not complicated, Adabow, there are different kinds of EPs. When you cite TFM as an EP you're being inaccurate, it should say studio album and third EP, the studio album information is important. And to reply "I help when.." I'm not making this effort to win a battle, I read the link of drop the stick, I want TFM first sentence changed referring TFM as a studio album, it's not false information, and Wikipedia is being inaccurate.

I found some sources that call The Fame Monster her "second studio album" with the three words:

http://www.weekinrewind.com/2009/12/lady-gagas-fame-monster-review.html

• Note: Looks like a blog, might not meet standards... I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 23:33, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

http://bubblegumway.wordpress.com/2010/04/25/review-lady-gaga-the-fame-monster/

• Note: Definitely a blog. I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 23:33, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

http://thehypefactor.com/lady-gaga-alejandro-music-video/

• Note: Looks like a publication that holds no weight here, but I'm not a major editor of this article, so... Who knows? They may accept it. I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 23:33, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

http://music.ign.com/articles/104/1049183p1.html

• Note: Aforementioned issues. I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 23:33, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

http://www.dnainfo.com/20100706/manhattan/lady-gaga-brings-monster-ball-tour-madison-square-garden-this-week

• Note: I see no problems. I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 23:33, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

http://www.tvbuzz.info/the-fame-monster/

• Note: Nah. Doesn't hold weight. I Help, When I Can. ^[12]

http://www.5fm.co.za/station-blog/blog/new-on-our-playlist-8

• Note: No. I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 23:33, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Born This Way as "third studio album" with the three words:

• Note: Using any websites below this point would require making the jump into original research. I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 23:33, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Akerk (talk) 05:38, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

*Sigh* I really don't give a care anymore, but I am willing to look at the sources above. I will cross out ones that don't count and give a reason. I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 23:33, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Got the ones that say it. Now I am going to see the citations on the page and see which ones are more powerful. I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 23:33, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Done. We've got no name, blog look-alikes versus Yahoo Music, Los Angeles Times, Slant Magazine, Allmusic, and MTV News. And in addition to that, I took another look at the Wikipedia page for studio album. It itself has no sources, so I think that should be left as inadmissible. I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 23:33, 23 February 2011 (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.

3rd EP???

Ok, so my problem isn't exactly related to the album vs. EP debate. What I want to know is what makes this release Gaga's "third extended play". Five sources are directly footnoted for this statement, but none actually make this statement. Yes, I know it's a mere count of the other EPs we've gathered on Wiki, but to say this is her 3rd EP, whether we agree that it's an EP or not, is still original research. There are TONS of Gaga EPs, most of which are digital releases, and some of which are market-specific (e.g. available on iTunes stores of specific countries only). In fact, Gaga may well have over 30 EPs by now sold in various markets around the world, all of which are official merchandise generated by her record labels. Most certainly because she's in the dancepop domain, most of her singles receive a digital release marked as an EP, containing several (label commissioned and licensed) remixes. An example of a market-specific EP is the Dance in The Dark song which was released as a single in Belgium and which is accompanied by a remix EP on Itunes store Belgium. So call TFM what you will, but this is certainly not by any stretch of the imagination her "third extended play". It may, however, be her third physical-format EP, judging from Wikipedia observation (assuming her Wiki discography is complete). After all, her "second EP" per wikipedia is in fact, another market-specific remix EP, just like her countless digital-format remix EPs. Imperatore (talk) 04:09, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Digital EPs found at the iTunes Store are not really EPS, but more maxi-singles. I'm not really sure why iTunes calls them EPs, but they are not. See this previous discussion. Adabow (talk · contribs) 06:16, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Just pretty much echoing what Adabow said above me. A lot of artists now-a-days release remix EPs on the iTunes Store, Amazon, etc. They are simply just maxi-singles released digitally. If you bringing this up because you're wondering why Hitmixes is an EP, and the others is not, it's because it contains remixes of more than one song. It's essentially a remix album, but since it doesn't have a long enough length it's listed as an EP. I'm not 100% sure that's the reason, but that's all I can think of. Hope this helps your confusion. ℥^nding·start 02:37, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

TFM, World's best-selling album of 2010. PART 2

Why the hell do people keep deleting my contribution about The Fame Monster being the best selling album of 2010? The whole thing about the reliable source LOOK IT UP!!!! I have already put a reliable source and I don’t know who keeps deleting it. Can you please effing stop!!! Damn! --Logicalfoundationisdoubt (talk) 05:08, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Gagadaily is and will not be a reliable source. Tbhotch* ^{۩ ۞} 05:20, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

I found one. I put it but someone still took it down. Here it is: The Fame Monster Best Selling Album for 2010. --Logicalfoundationisdoubt (talk) 21:44, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Starsentertainment.com is a bit dubious to me. If it were true that TFM is the best-selling of 2010, why has the list not been published widely, such as in MTV, Billboard and other sources? Adabow (talk · contribs) 05:20, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

IFPI has put an end to all this hoopla. Eminem's Recovery is the best selling album, not TF/TFM. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 15:34, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

In the US yes Eminem's album is the highest selling album, but WORLDWIDE (in case you can't see it or inability to understand the word)Lady Gaga's The Fame Monster is #1.--Logicalfoundationisdoubt (talk) 05:05, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

So according to you websites, that in their life will certificate albums, are much more reliables than IFPI? Tbhotch* ^{۩ ۞} 05:07, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Read it and fucking weep assholes! Yes I had to curse because you guys drive us up a wall acting like you own Wikipedia. The Fame Monster Best Selling Album of 2010--Logicalfoundationisdoubt (talk) 05:34, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

MTV is a better source, but please refrain from cursing others. We do not act like we own Wikipedia, we just want to make sure we comply with verifiability. Now, the United World Chart could be added, but it interprets another source, mediatraffic.de, which some users have expressed is unreliable. Tbhotch, could you comment on this please? Adabow (talk · contribs) 05:41, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

United World Charts was deleted because there were no statements of its reliability/notability. Many sources which states that TFM was the best-selling album with 5.8K copies are based on mediatraffic.de, therefore this websites are not reliables, regardless their WP:V. Tbhotch* ^{۩ ۞} 05:49, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Who cares cite me all you want. I won. I reign supreme. --Logicalfoundationisdoubt (talk) 05:47, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Sure, you know what happens to users with a superiority complex? They are blocked most of time, so I recommend you to calm down. Tbhotch* ^{۩ ۞} 05:49, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Hey it's not my fault people didn't care to look hard enough. If they used half the time and effort they wasted in deleting everyone else's posts, they might have found this article too. --Logicalfoundationisdoubt (talk) 05:51, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, we care to look hard enough, that's why we deleted such things. Anyway, as my summary stated, MTV bases their article on something we have banned from Wikipedia United World Charts. Tbhotch* ^{۩ ۞} 05:56, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

And what is your criteria for deeming it unworthy seeing as it is a globally recognized and accepted database? Whatever, do what you guys want. I guess it is a way for you guys to have some form of jurisdiction in your lives. Ban me all you want doesn't take that FACT away. --Logicalfoundationisdoubt (talk) 06:02, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Please Assume good faith. No, the reason the United World Chart is not used is because it is not widely recognised or referenced to. Adabow (talk · contribs) 06:40, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Umm Ada nd Tbhotch, why r u guys even wasting time? Take the lols from it as NPA have been highlighted for this one. And Logical..., yes you are on a good way to be blocked. IFPI still rules supreme against Mediatraffic, because its relioable. End of discussion. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 13:12, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Belgium or Belgian

When referring to the various country charts, we have Argentinian (not Argentina), Australian (not Australia), Brazilian (not Brazil), Canadian, Croatian, Danish, Dutch (not Canada, Croatia, Denmark, Holland) , etc., Shouldn't it be Belgian rather than Belgium...!? The charts are, after all, Something or someone of, or related to, Belgium (See Belgian (disambiguation)). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.154.182.211 (talk) 15:07, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

 Done Nice spotting. Adabow (talk · contribs) 09:10, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Chart performance

Follwing a jump from No. 121 to No. 88 on the Billboard 200, The Fame Monster also climbed to No. 3 in its 3rd charting week on the Catalog chart, making it the album's highest charting position there. sourcesource--79.199.24.6 (talk) 22:33, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Concept album?

Shouldn't it be named that the album is a concept album? All songs have the bad/negative sides of The Fame and how Lady Gaga deals with them, as a topic. --79.199.21.71 (talk) 19:36, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

As nice as that sounds, the album really does not deal with that topic throughout. How does "Telephone" (A woman getting annoyed over an ex's repeated calls while at a club), "Dance in the Dark" (Insecurities during intimacy), "Teeth" (This ones quite obvious) or "Speechless" (Regarding her father's illness) have anything to do with fame? As I said, its not a concept album. Also, you would need a strong source, and possibly references from Gaga herself claiming this to be true before adding it.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 22:47, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

This article already says the album deal with the darker side of fame (in different words). What's the source for that? Since it obviously says so itself, wouldn't it be a concept album already? Also, "Teeth" is not obvious-- it's about the truth, not sex (as many seem to believe). Even the article for 'The Fame' says that The Fame Monster "...deals with the darker side of fame, as experienced by Gaga over the course of 2008–09..." Since it is posted on Wikipedia here itself, wouldn't it therefore mean it has been confirmed by a source? 99.59.86.60 (talk) 03:12, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Studio Album Vs. EP

So this argument, I assume, died out, but I must point this out: If the reason it is grouped as an EP is due to its length of 34:15, how come this is an EP, but Selena Gomez & the Scene's album 'A Year Without Rain', with a length of 34:43, is classified as a studio album? Shouldn't this, too, be a studio album then? If that's not the problem, what's to say what's an EP or a studio album? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.31.156.21 (talk) 08:22, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

The reason that TFM is called an EP is because it is what most reliable sources have noted it as. The definition of an EP varies, but besides length or number of tracks, the way it was released also gives an idea of what type of release it is. TFM was bundled with The Fame as a deluxe album package, just like Raymond v. Raymond/Versus, B'Day/Irreemplazable, Animal/Cannibal (EP) and My World/My World 2.0. Adabow (talk · contribs) 08:52, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Dance in the Dark recognition as a Single

On the article for Lady Gaga's album "The Fame Monster" only 3 singles are listen "Bad Romance", "Telephone" and "Alejandro". However, on the article for the song "Dance in the Dark" its says that "Dance in the Dark" is a radio only single. Therefore I ask of you to please list "Dance in the Dark" as the fourth single under "The Fame Monster" article. I am reporting this problem because Rihanna's album "LOUD" lists her radio only singles therefore Lady Gaga's radio only singles should be listed as well.

Mishternagy (talk) 00:31, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

"Dance in the Dark" was released as promotional song, not official song. Rihanna business to Rihanna articles. ۞ Tbhotch^™ & (ↄ), Problems with my English? 00:38, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

It was released as a promo single through Digital Download however after that it was released through radios in France and Australia. Just like Alejandro was first a promo then became an official radio single in the US and other countries — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mishternagy (talk • contribs) 00:47, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

See Talk:Dance in the Dark#Promo single? for further information. ۞ Tbhotch^™ & (ↄ), Problems with my English? 00:51, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

current Worldwide Sales for The Fame Monster

In the first section, add in that the final sales for "The Fame Monster" world wide are "12.8 million copies" according to Mediatraffic.

Citation http://www.mediatraffic.de/albums.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sindelian (talk • contribs) 06:07, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, mediatraffic in an unreliable source. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 06:09, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from BiggestLittleMonster, 4 July 2011

Hi im a big lady gaga fan :) so i'm asking if you or me can edit the page where it says "Singleds from The Fame Monster" by adding "Speechless" "Dance In The Dark" and "Monster" while i think that all 3 or the first 2 came into US billboard top 100

BiggestLittleMonster (talk) 19:28, 4 July 2011 (UTC) thats all thanx :)

 Not done Read the concept of single: Neither of them were released as singles. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:30, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

THE FAME MONSTER PEAK 4 ARGENTINA

Hey guys. The Fame Monster peaked at Nº4 in Argentinian Singles Charts. If you go to www.capif.org.ar , then you go to "Ranking y estadisticas" then "Ranking Semanal Pop" and the week of 14/02/2011. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elbebitodelamuerte (talk • contribs) 18:46, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

The Fame Monster sales

Contact Music reports The Fame Monster has sold 6 million copies. Why was that figure removed? I understand some people argue this figure is TF + TFM sales combined. But it is really the deluxe edition of TFM which is a double-disc CD that just includes TF within the CD deluxe edition — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christianrxx (talk • contribs) 14:08, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

The info is present already. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 14:22, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but it was removed from her discography page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christianrxx (talk • contribs) 14:08, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

The Fame Monster EP wasn't released WW, It was released only in US, Canada, Japan and a few more countries. WW it was part of The Fame re-release, called The Fame Monster too. The article is talking about the re-release not the The Fame Monster EP. This wikipedia article is about The Fame Monster EP, that is why you can't put 6 million sales because that include The Fame re-release too. The Fame Monster sales as a re-release are already included on The Fame total sales.--Albes29 (talk) 14:58, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

The Fame re-release was the deluxe version of The Fame Monster. So it is still part of TFM sales. The deluxe and standard version make up the total sales that is 6 million copies. - Christianrxx

Almost every country counted the version TF + TFM with The Fame sales, not The Fame Monster EP. On Mediatraffic when TFM was released they stop counting TF sales and made it The Fame(Monster), The Fame Monster EP counted as a different album. Just tell me how you explain The Fame sales before TFM release were around 6 million and now are around 14 million?. That is because they counted TFM Deluxe together with The Fame.

In this article is clear That sales from TFM Deluxe count together with The Fame: http://music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart-watch/week-ending-nov-29-2009-women-take-charge.html --Albes29 (talk) 19:14, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

QUESTION

Does Gaga being put second to RedOne on the writing credits mean that she only rpovided addtional lyrics and didn't actually write the song, cos they did that on Rihanna's Talk That Talk when she only provided addtional lyrics? Muthamonster (talk) 02:30, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Does Not Meet The Criteria For An EP

"The Fame Monster" doesn't meet the criteria for an EP according to Wikipedia's article on EPs...so why is it listed as such? Lady Gaga herself considers it a standalone release, and it most countries, it was considered a proper album. Perhaps this article needs to be revisited.211.31.230.98 (talk) 04:18, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

No. Countless discussions (available in the archives) has led to the consensus that this is an extended play. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 12:10, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Even though it doesn't match the criteria according to Wikipedia itself...? The criteria are pretty clear and it doesn't make sense to label something incorrectly, consensus or not.211.31.230.98 (talk) 14:55, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

I dont understand why The Fame Monster from Lady Gaga is 34 minutes and is an EP, and Talk That Talk from Rihanna is 35 minutes and is a LP. Anyone understands? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angelordemon (talk • contribs) 12:15, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

It has something to do with how the release is catalogued by the record label/music publisher. Dan56 (talk) 18:51, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

If considered a EP, then why refer to it as "album", starting with Musically, The Fame Monster is a pop album... So, what this is? An EP album? It is either album or EP, not both. That's ok if it charts on an album chart or gets an album award, but it should be referred as an EP in the article text since it has been decided by consensus. 85.217.43.255 (talk) 18:09, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

DITD

dance in the dark a single??????? it is a promotional single! i dont get this, i havent heard from gaga or anybody that this was a single..gaga is a very crative person and if she has a song that would be released as a single, she would have promoted it more, and definetly had a music video for it, this seams very weird...

--Mathiassandell (talk) 18:52, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

So Happy I Could Die

Does anyone know the genre for "So Happy I Could Die"?

It's synthpop- http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/So_Happy_I_Could_Die--(CA)Giacobbe (talk) 04:15, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Typo: "runaway"

I think they meant "runway". Fix it, someone? 76.28.156.138 (talk) 17:10, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Done. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 07:34, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

"Lyrical Content"

I have a question as to the validity of the statement "However, it was criticized for its lyrical content.". The only place where lyrical content issues were voiced was with "Monster" with one reviewer, and that would obviously not carry over to the entire album. I propose that this sentence be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.226.28.182 (talk) 07:23, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Genre

I feel that the genre should be changed since most of the songs on here are synthpop and not electropop (ala Bad Romance, Dance In The Dark, Alejandro, So Happy I Could Die, Monster), so is there a consensus to change it from electropop to synthpop?--(CA)Giacobbe (talk) 04:18, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Dance in the Dark (Australia, France, and New Zealand)

Where all the singles are listed on the right side of the page, shouldnt dance in the dark have " (Aus, France, & NZ Only) " written next to it. Kind of like how Coldplay's single White Shadows has (Mexico) written next to it. Arturo52311 (talk) 04:09, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Rolling Stone Album Guide Score

The Rolling Stone Album Guide gave the album 4/5 stars. Thought we might like to add it to the page. Found here: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/artists/lady-gaga Also found here: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/artists/lady-gaga/albumguide — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.113.80.175 (talk) 00:04, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

The ratings template accurately reflects the album's reception as is. And it already includes Rolling Stone's review of the album. Dan56 (talk) 02:07, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Auto-Tune Usage

If you listen closely 2 songs from this album have auto-tune in it: So Happy I Could Die(Eh, eh, ye-ha, ye-ha), and Monster (I wanna, just dance but he took me home instead, uh-oh, there was a monster in my bed, we French-kissed on a subway train he tore my clothes right off, he ate my heart and then he ate my brain, whoa, whoa...) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Exterscope (talk • contribs) 08:35, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

That still needs to be verified by a reliable source. If it's notable information, there's surely a source out there for it. Otherwise, it's original research. Dan56 (talk) 18:23, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

studio album

Yes we have had this discussion, but why is this labeled as an EP, when Madonnas debut album Madonna (album) cointained 8 tracks the same as the fame monster. While Like A Virgin and True Blue (Madonna album) both contained 9 tracks. All those album are STUDIO ALBUMS.

--91.154.99.187 (talk) 12:12, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

This is why they are studio albums. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:20, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

---I'm confused - the link provided above indicates that "The Fame Monster" is considered a full-length album by the RIAA, since it contains more than the maximum 5 songs listed under their EP criteria. Why does Wikipedia consider it an EP when the RIAA doesn't?220.236.196.183 (talk) 06:57, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Alejandro Release

Could you look on the Release date of the single Alejandro on the infobox. The date denotes April 20, 2010 and the mere fact is we have not reached the date April 20, we are on the 27th of March. Can you fix this error. --Jaypeepacres (talk) 1:23, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Rock and Roll Hall of Fame

The Fame Monster was admitted to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Library + Archives.

http://catalog.rockhall.com/catalog/468821268 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Born2booze (talk • contribs) 04:39, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Cover art

On the article for "The Fame Monster," the cover art is mixed up. The cover that is listed as the "alternative" cover is actually the cover for the standard edition; the cover art at the top of the article is the cover art for the deluxe version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.239.34.205 (talk) 21:19, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Mixed-Up Covers

The covers are backwards. The "alternate" is the original cover, while your "official" is the deluxe edition cover. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LadyGaGaKaboom (talk • contribs) 03:27, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

I believe you are correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NoDoubtWorkingHard (talk • contribs) 02:43, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Speechless

In the french page of "The Fame Monster" they wrote that "Speechless" was released as a promotional single on 29 December, 2009. Is it true?--MDNA (talk) 13:01, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

They contradict theirselves fr:Speechless (chanson) and fr:Modèle:Palette Lady Gaga

WP:GTC

I think that it really meets featured topic criteria so I suggest that one of the major contributor of the article(s) should nominate it for Good topic. Just a suggestion, thanks.--★ FrankBoy★ _(Buzz) 17:38, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Suggested Edit

Reference #116 is a broken link, it leads to a "not found" page on the billboard website A possible replacement that holds the same info would be lady gaga's US 200 year end chart history page which can be found at http://www.billboard.com/artist/306341/lady-gaga/chart?f=412 and holds the relevant information to the reference. Sconosciute (talk) 21:29, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Done I used an archive url instead. Thanks, Stickee (talk) 23:03, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Proposed merge with So Happy I Could Die

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Fails WP:NSONGS. Not enough coverage from reliable secondary sources outside of album reviews to warrant a separate article. The most it gets is brief mentions outside of such reviews. Can easily be summarized with a paragraph or two in this article. Snuggums (talk / edits) 19:01, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

I don't think it should be merged as it doesn't exactly go together. It will be easier to find as it's own page. User:Adamtb24 20:29, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

That article is already GA and well written. I don't see real reasons to merge. GagaNutella^talk 04:48, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

If I'm going to be honest, that shouldn't have been promoted in the first place as it's little more than a content fork. No meaningful content that can't be included here. As for whether it "goes together", song articles are quite often summarized in parent album articles (which includes EP's and reissues). Snuggums (talk / edits) 18:57, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

I can see pros and cons of both. —Indian:BIO ^{[ ChitChat ]} 19:00, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose merge. This is a well-written, short article and deserves to be kept. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 23:08, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

• Prose quality and length are irrelevant in this case. It doesn't "deserve to be kept" when fails WP:Notability (music)#Songs for not having more than brief mentions in any reliable sources outside of album reviews. Snuggums (talk / edits) 01:26, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

• In my opinion, the song meets notability per WP:GNG. I don't think upmerging an entire Good article into a couple sentences on the album article is making Wikipedia better. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:15, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

• It doesn't exactly get enough commentary from quality sources to meet GNG either, but as you very well know, the relevant notability criteria for song articles is WP:NSONGS. The specific notability criteria for songs exists for very good reason and is what should be applied to song articles. As stated before, it really shouldn't have become GA in the first place as it's just a content fork with no meaningful content that can't be summarized in parent album article. Snuggums (talk / edits) 20:07, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

• Alright, well, agree to disagree. I believe the song passes WP:GNG and hope the article is kept. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:37, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

• I, as well, Oppose merge. The article has "good article" status, so it would be quite silly, not to mention unfortunate, for Wikipedia to lose an article. This article is extremely well written. Well, that's my opinion anyway. Carbrera (talk) 02:55, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

• OK I give in, I was on the fence but I believe this just passes enough notability to be kept standalone. —Indian:BIO ^{[ ChitChat ]} 11:14, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

NOTE TO CONSIDER: prose quality is irrelevant to WP:Notability. It also doesn't matter in this instance how long or short the song article is. Album reviews DO NOT COUNT as sufficient coverage for songs per WP:Notability (music), and even if they did, none of the references listed in that article give it more than a few sentences and neither do any other quality sources available. Maybe standards were different when it became "good article", but don't let that fool you now; it shouldn't have been promoted in the first place as it is a needless content fork with no significant independent content and doesn't meet notability criteria in any way, shape, or form. The idea of an "unfortunate" loss also doesn't really have any merit. There so far has been no solid evidence demonstrating independent notability. This would require multiple reliable secondary sources independent of album reviews that consist of more than just a passing mention or only a few sentences. For reasons beyond my knowledge, there have so far only been (unconvincing) attempts to mask the lack of notability. Snuggums (talk / edits) 20:49, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

I have read your points Snuggums, and I disagree. Pretty sure the references don't give it a fleeting mention. There is independent coverage regarding the song itself and the fact that it had multiple chart placements in WP:GOODCHARTS as well. Coupled with the fact that it passes WP:NSONGS point #1 is enough reason to keep it, as well as since "Notability aside, a standalone article is only appropriate when there is enough material to warrant a reasonably detailed article; articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album." —Indian:BIO ^{[ ChitChat ]} 11:13, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

I would even argue that "Teeth" is the article that warrants this discussion about WP:NSONGS since it fails on all counts. —Indian:BIO ^{[ ChitChat ]} 11:14, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Yes, "Teeth" does fail notability. Where is the quality amount of independent coverage for "So Happy I Could Die", though? I haven't come across that anywhere (not counting brief mentions). Snuggums (talk / edits) 15:49, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

::::SNUGGUMS you are right, I was kinda under the impression that except what Gaga said about the song, there were other third party sources, turns out they were just blog or wikia pieces. I'm afraid I would have to support the merge of this article now. However, in the same discussion I would also like to analyze the fate of "Teeth" also. —Indian:BIO ^{[ ChitChat ]} 09:38, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

That article is also mostly filled with album reviews, and of the few independent pieces it does get, those are either based on the notoriously unreliable TMZ or only get at most a short paragraph or two. Even the album reviews don't seem to go into very much detail on the track either. I say that "Teeth" should also be merged here. Snuggums (talk / edits) 14:37, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

I agree if SNUGGUMS promises to take care of the back links lol, I always mess it up. —Indian:BIO ^{[ ChitChat ]} 15:38, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Note – I'm not comfortable yet to have this within the three of us, I want to have it in AFD or through an Rfc to have it finalized. —Indian:BIO ^{[ ChitChat ]} 14:21, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

• I'm striking out my merge decision because I can see that there are somewhat critical analysis of the song in books and academic inputs now. This leads me to believe that the article, which is borderline on WP:NSONGS can work as a standalone article. Not sure about "Teeth" still. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 19:24, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Another Believer can I ask your help in expanding the SHICD article from the sources I listed? —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 10:14, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
    • You are referring to these sources? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:37, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
      • Yeah, the book sources give some independent info. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 15:38, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
        • I'm starting today on the sources AB/SNUGs. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 11:03, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
          • Closing this discussing, both "Teeth" and "So Happy I Could Die" has enough independent content to have their own article. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 18:58, 6 March 2016 (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.

"Teeth" chart?

The lead paragraph says "Teeth" charted, but does not provide a reference or mention a chart history in the article's prose. Is there evidence to support this? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 23:15, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Update: A reference was provided on the talk page for "Teeth". ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:00, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 November 2015

I request to add the Lenght at the Japanese Bonus DVD. I've got it and I'm sure of this information: Bad Romance (Video) 5:15 Bad Romance (Making Of) 3:42 Thanks Marco Gerola (talk) 18:30, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Done Stickee (talk) 02:03, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

The Fame Monster is an album

The page needs to be changed to reflect that TFM is a full album, not an EP. The wikipedia definition of an EP is a record of five songs or less, or under 25 minutes long. TFM is 35 minutes long and has 8 tracks. Gaga herself calls it an album, and it was nominated for album of the year. There is absolutely no reason to call it an EP. Please change it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.86.97.25 (talk) 02:03, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure Wikipedia doesn't have a "definition" for EP: it depends solely on what it's called. While I agree that this should be called an album considering repeated evidence of artistic intent, many sources called it an EP. Since Wikipedia prefers to avoid controversy, it's wrongly listed as an EP for "neutrality". 181.115.9.117 (talk) 19:29, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on The Fame Monster. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.robertchristgau.com/xg/cg/cg2010-03.php
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://repertoire.bmi.com/title.asp?blnWriter=True&blnPublisher=True&blnArtist=True&page=1&keyid=11129493&ShowNbr=0&ShowSeqNbr=0&querytype=WorkID
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.capif.org.ar/Default.asp?CodOp=ESVP&CO=5
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.hitlistan.se/netdata/ghl002.mbr/lista?liid=83&dfom=20090001&newi=0&height=420&platform=Win32&browser=MSIE&navi=no&subframe=Mainframe
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110121160735/http://www.fimi.it/dett_ddmercato.php?id=73 to http://www.fimi.it/dett_ddmercato.php?id=73

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:33, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

The Fame Monster's Impact / Legacy

This is the one of the most impactful albums of the last decade, and yet there is nothing on this page acknowledging the effect it had on the music industry. It has "Recognition" part, which is excellent, but it deserves also to have "Legacy" or "Impact".

Let me state the obvious, with The Fame (Monster) Lady Gaga made dance music relevant and mainstream in 2008 and after. Here is an article by MTV: "LADY GAGA HAS MADE DANCE MUSIC MAINSTREAM, DJ TOMMIE SUNSHINE SAYS". Quotes: "Anybody that is in South Beach right now that discredits Lady Gaga for what she has done for electronic music is out of their mind," Sunshine said. Also: "I mean [Gaga producer] Red One and Space Cowboy and her, in collaboration, have done so much for making dance music mainstream." and "I'm sorry, but there wouldn't be a David Guetta top 10 hit ... there wouldn't be this Black Eyed Peas record, if it wasn't for The Fame. The influence of that record is epic, and we are hearing talking about all of this because of that." He also continued by talking about the song "Telephone" and its video: "That's a dance track! That is the 'Thriller' of our time, you know. And there is all this hubbub about it. I haven't seen that kind of [excitement] over a video in 20 years." Link: http://www.mtv.com/news/1634676/lady-gaga-has-made-dance-music-mainstream-dj-tommie-sunshine-says/

Article by Kevin C. Johnson from St. Louis Post-Dispatch: "Lady Gaga helps bring EDM to the masses". Quotes: "Lady Gaga, performing at Scottrade Center on Saturday as part of her “Born This Way Ball,” plays a big part in EDM.", "She definitely has had influence," & "I think Lady Gaga is exposing people to the music, and anybody exposing people to it is part of the machine," says Rob Lemon, a St. Louis EDM DJ. Mohabbat agrees: "People like Gaga and Black Eyed Peas and these pop stars are really what drove this movement as big as it is now. They are the ones who brought it to the masses, especially when there is a remix.", "DJ Madeon is gaining a whole new fan base thanks to Gaga. He disagrees with artists who disapprove of the marriage of pop and EDM.", "It all helps. You start out listening to Lady Gaga’s dance sounds and move your way up and find other sounds," he says. "In this case, the trickle-down theory actually works." Link: http://www.stltoday.com/entertainment/music/lady-gaga-helps-bring-edm-to-the-masses/article_6ab888b5-5ef6-5cb1-9946-b70556915a5b.html

The Atlantic's Jonathan Bogart: "Buy the Hype: Why Electronic Dance Music Really Could Be the New Rock". Quotes: "The narrative of new music has so often been one of building from a despised underground after years of struggle, rip-off, and hustle to mass popularity. But EDM came in by no back door but right through the front gate, with Lady Gaga's "Just Dance" in late 2008." and "The sound didn't take long to spread: the takeover was complete by the time Ke$ha's unutterably dumb and technologically astute "TiK ToK" began 2010 at the top of the charts." Link: https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/07/buy-the-hype-why-electronic-dance-music-really-could-be-the-new-rock/259597/

In this Beats 1 Radio, Zane Lowe and Calvin Harris talk about Gaga's influence with The Fame (Monster) album. Zane Lowe says: "Mike Skinner (Vocalist from the band "The Streets") told me this, cause we were having a debate about Lady Gaga and he was like "One thing you gotta remember about Lady Gaga she put four-on-the-floor back on American radio." Calvin Harris: "Yeah, her and will.i.am". Zane Lowe: "Up until that moment there was nothing resembling four-on-the-floor in pop music." Calvin Harris: "A 100%. They even had a hip-hop version of Poker Face, for radio." Zane Lowe: "Cause they couldn't handle the dance groove?" Calvin Harris: "Yeah they made two versions and then it was the 4/4 one that hit, and then it just went ridiculous". Here is the link to the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBO4kQHz0mE The conversation starts at 16:04.

Here is another interview also on Beats 1 Radio with Zane Lowe, this time with Lady Gaga herself in which she says: "When I put Just Dance out, there was nothing on the radio like Just Dance". Then Zane tells the "Mike Skinner" story, and adds "You were "Pre-DM" (Pre EDM)", "You certainly put some of the good stuff on the radio. It's true, that was the first time four-on-the-floor came back on radio in America". Gaga goes on to say how all her lead singles are sounding like nothing on the radio and that "it's never gonna be what's happening". Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=in4jUYCnNDQ Starts at: 25:12.

Billboard's Andrew Unterberger wrote an amazing article: "Lady Gaga: How She Raised the Standards for Ambition in Pop". Quotes: "It didn't take long for Lady Gaga to prove that she was the asteroid pop music was begging to have crash through it. Debut single "Just Dance" topped the Hot 100 for three weeks in early 2009, and "Poker Face" made her two-for-two a couple months later." He then wrote how big of an impact she had on her contemporaries: "But other pop stars have picked up the slack. Kanye West, the one contemporaneous Top 40 fixture whose big-thinking could've rivaled Gaga's at her peak stepped up his game even further after her arrival, blowing his music videos into 35-minute short films and eventually expanding the art form to include live projections and stadium premieres.", "Former co-star Beyoncé also went through a conceptual makeover, eventually reviving interest in both the music video and the LP format with her self-titled surprise visual album.", "Rihanna released her weirdest album a year after Gaga's breakthrough and was never quite the same after." and "Even Britney -- who "Telephone" was initially written for -- ended up trying to make her own version of the song's video." Also added: "She took American mainstream music at one of its least-interesting and most star-power-deprived moments and made it bigger, weirder, more visual and infinitely more personality-driven -- in other words, much more fun." Link: http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/pop/7548935/lady-gaga-pop-ambition-kanye-beyonce

With this album, Lady Gaga didn't just had an impact with her music, but she also started a trend in the pop world with wearing outrageous outfits. The critics called this The 'Lady Gaga' Effect, and it became a part of the music industry vernacular.

Page Six's Jarett Wieselman wrote an article: "The ‘Lady GaGa’ effect persists", in which he says: "I’ve repeatedly hypothesized that the success and adoration bestowed upon Lady GaGa has led every female celebrity to assume that whether or not she cultivates a quirky personality, her options for fashion forwardness are limitless!" and "Previously, PopWrap’s cited Rihanna, Ke$ha and Kelis for following in Lady Gaga’s crab-heeled footsteps and now we can add two more names to that list: Jennifer Love Hewitt and songbird Paloma Faith." Link: http://pagesix.com/2010/02/22/the-lady-gaga-effect-persists/

Jezebel's Tracie Egan Morrissey wrote an article back in 2011: "The Red Carpet Reeks Of Lady Gaga's Influence", "Ever since Lady Gaga came on the scene with her bizarre masks, tall hats and concept outfits, everyone thinks looking like an idiot on the red carpet is a sign of artistic integrity.", "Nicki Minaj has a horrible case of Gaga-itis.", "Katy Perry has been into playful red-carpet looks for a while now, but she's typically more theme park than haute couture, as evidenced by the first two outfits here. But the cube on her head is totally her attempt at being avant fashion-y." Link: http://jezebel.com/5835339/lady-gagas-influence-can-be-seen-all-over-vma-red-carpet/

Buzzfeed's Matt Stopera: "Popstars Before And After Gaga" in which he says: "Whether you like her or not, you can’t deny the impact she’s had on the music industry." and there are photos comparing the style of pop stars (Katy Perry, Rihanna, Beyoncé, Christina Aguilera & Nicki Minaj) before and after Gaga's arrival. Link: https://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/popstars-before-and-after-gaga?utm_term=.akWm2LAw0#.ba5e5OadB HuffPost also agreed with Buzzfeed by sharing their article on the HuffPost website: "Lady Gaga’s Impact On Pop Stars: Before And After". Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/01/lady-gagas-impact-on-pop-_n_990129.html

MTV article by Chris Yuscavage: IS NICKI MINAJ THE HIP-HOP LADY GAGA? Quotes: "Billboard proclaimed her the "First Lady (Gaga) of Hip-Hop" last week" (http://hiphopwired.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/nickiminajbillboard.jpg), "We also happen to agree with the comparison." and "To show you why, RapFix gathered a list of the 10 reasons that Nicki Minaj is the second coming of Lady Gaga." He then lists the 10 reasons, in which he mentions "She hasn't quite come around to the idea of wearing a "meat dress" yet, but if she did, would you really be surprised?". Here is the link: http://www.mtv.com/news/2494595/nicki-minaj-pink-friday-lady-gaga-10-reasons/ Also about Nicki Minaj, Hip-Hop Wired's Danielle Canada writes: "Gaga Minaj?: Nicki Minaj’s 10 Most Lady Gaga Inspired Looks", "Forget Lil Kim, Nicki Minaj has been looking like Lady Gaga more and more each day." and "It’s no secret however that the Young Money Barbie has been emulating Gaga’s bizarre fashion, in 2010 Billboard dubbed her “The First Lady Gaga Of Rap." Link: http://hiphopwired.com/115433/lady-gaga-or-nicki-minaj-nicki-minajs-10-most-lady-gaga-inspired-looks/

Jon Caramanica from The New York Times: "Girl Pop’s Lady Gaga Makeover" Quotes: "It’s Halloween-costume empowerment, sure, but her fingerprints are all over the revised images of Christina Aguilera, Rihanna, Katy Perry and Beyoncé; and on new artists like Kesha, Janelle Monáe and Nicki Minaj.", "If Lady Gaga has had direct impact on anyone, it’s been, most surprisingly, Beyoncé, who has spent the majority of her career impervious to influence from her peers. Yet in the last year, in the wake of a pair of collaborations with Lady Gaga — “Telephone” and “Video Phone” — she appears to have come alive. The videos for those songs showed her to be far more humorous than ever before. And her most recent video, “Why Don’t You Love Me,” in which she portrays several versions of a dissatisfied midcentury housewife, is one of her best, and one of her most vivid. It’s as if Lady Gaga swooped in and infected Beyoncé with a bug, a vampiric chain of events." Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/25/arts/music/25feminism.html?mcubz=0

Los Angeles Time's article by Emili Vesilind: "Has Lady Gaga influenced Rihanna's style?" Quotes: "Though there are still plenty of pop stars playing it safe in the style department, Gaga's wacky style has brought total freakdom back into the music arena (finally!) -- and has opened the door for other female artists to cultivate their own deviant looks.", "Rihanna, in fact, didn't start flirting with S&M gear (aside from the occasional Herve Leger "bondage" dress) until Gaga started making the scene.", "Since then, she's gone from tame to totally outlandish", "Is Rihanna trying to out-freak Lady G.? From the get-go, the polished pop tart was fashion-forward. Her enviable figure and adorable face meant designers were always going to be throwing themselves at her feet. But somewhere along the way -- post-Gaga -- she (or her notoriously protective team of handlers) made the decision to take her look several steps beyond red-carpet pretty." Link: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/alltherage/2010/01/has-lady-gaga-influenced-rihannas-style.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoDash (talk • contribs) 23:55, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Because of all of this impact, Lady Gaga was featured on TIME's All-TIME 100 Fashion Icons list in 2012, quote: "Lady Gaga is just as notorious for her outrageous style as she is for her pop hits. After all, Gaga, born Stefani Germanotta, has sported outfits made from plastic bubbles, Kermit the Frog dolls, and raw meat." She was the first and only from her generation to be on that list. Link: http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2110513_2110627_2110688,00.html

Furthermore proving the album's impact are these two new achievements:

This week the album has passed 200th week on Billboard 200, which is rare, and not many albums have done that. Link: http://www.billboard.com/artist/306341/lady-gaga/chart?f=305 Also, today, The Fame Monster has become first album from the 2000s, by female artist, to pass 1 billion streams on Spotify, and second album ever to do so after Eminem's Curtain Call: The Hits, which is greatest hits compilation album. (So technically it is the first studio album to achieve this feat.) There is no article yet written about this, but the streams can be counted on Spotify.

I think the Legacy / Impact article should be written on The Fame Monster Wikipedia page, because it's a reissue of The Fame, and the albums are counted as one era. Thanks in advance to whoever writes this article! JoDash (talk) 01:44, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Three weeks and no response. Can someone respond to this? It is important. Thanks. JoDash (talk) 13:00, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes this can be added but concerned people are busy. This is Wikipedia and everyone is allowed to edit and add information. Why don't you give it a shot? —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 14:36, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Okay. I am new here, but I will try. You can correct me if I am wrong. And also give me tips how to add this! That would be helpful. JoDash (talk) 20:39, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

@IndianBio: I've just posted 'Legacy' on The Fame Monster. You can check it out! JoDash (talk) 13:16, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Top Dance/Electronic Albums Decade-End Charts

The Fame Monster occupies the 16th position in the Top Dance/Electronic Albums Decade-End Charts The Fame Monster--179.56.154.81 (talk) 22:39, 22 November 2019 (UTC)