Talk:Madonna/Archive 5

message: This sounds like a daft queston, but how do you pronounce "Ciccone"?
Thanks St91 09:11, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Maddona's name: A question

message: This article does not flatter Madonna enough. It needs more text about her being the Queen of Music and her unrivaled quality as a lyricist. I would add all of this but I don't have an account.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.75.89.122 (talk) 21:48, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Then get one! It's easy. 
Create an account now(secure server)
 Andreas  (T) 00:11, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I disagree! Madonna is the best! 

message: This tag has been added without reference in the discussion as required. Therefore adding it open for discussion. Creator of the neutrality tag has made some comments under 'fancruft' which I assume is the reason for the tag. I personally cannot comment on the reason for the neutrality tag, as I have no interest in what is written just that it is referenced and accurate. Other editors, please comment Maggott2000 01:15, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality tag 

message: From Wikipedia:Lead section: The lead should be capable of standing alone as a concise overview of the article, establishing context, summarizing the most important points, explaining why the subject is interesting or notable, and briefly describing its notable controversies, if there are any. Many users read only the lead, so it should be self-contained and cover the main points. It should not "tease" the reader by hinting at important information that will appear later in the article. It should be between one and four paragraphs long, should be carefully sourced as appropriate, and should be written in a clear and accessible style so that the reader is encouraged to read the rest of the article.. And as has been mentioned by Orane this can be improved, and needs to be improved. Can someoe take up this challenge? Maggott2000 16:12, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Leave it be. I reverted it. It was FINE AS WAS - it does NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT need any extra stuffing, or talk about singles sales, or ANYTHING. LEAVE THE INTRO ALONE NOW PLEASE!! PatrickJ83 01:05, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Patrick, calm down. Please behave yourself if you want to have a productive discussion. You don't have to shout to make your point. I really don't believe that I have to explain anything further. All you have to do is read the excerpt presented by Maggott2000 (as well as my edit summary here). Orane (talk) 03:10, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

text: shut up orane. i dont care what 'maggot' said. he is wrong. PatrickJ83 20:55, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The lead paragraph 

message: Section # 3.1 Religion, Ethnicity and Family
What is the point of this section? The few sentances which actually make much sense are filled with speculation and "weasil words". It hardly contributes much to the factuality of the article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.107.185.104 (talk) 14:50, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  # 3.1 Religion, Ethnicity and Family 

message: STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP putting her singles sales, tour grosses, soundtrack songs into the intro. It it not necessary and does NOT make the intro look better - it makes it look worse.
Apparently I am the ONLY one around here who wants this page to look professional. LEAVE THE INTRO ALONE!! PatrickJ83 20:55, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Stop putting the singles sales???  But why are you putting the figures of her "unverifiable 75 million singles sales" in the intro???  75 million looks like a small figure... Stop claiming your a Madonna fan as we believe you're an anti-Madonna person.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.132.173.195 (talk) 23:00, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  STOP MESSING UP THE INTRO! 

message: The image that is currently the main picture for Madonna is ridiculous. If I knew how to change it I would....
Bobbonew 04:23, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  new picture... again 

message: Why doesn't Wikipedia include the Veronica in her name?!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.242.14.239 (talk) 22:29, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: I feel the article has too many fair use images; it makes the article look cluttered and fan-siteish and contradicts one of our key principles, which is to minimise such nonfree image use. Could we select say the best four or five? For an article this length I think that would be plenty. --John 16:58, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is very long,so this number of pictures is good.There was a time when there were only 4 pictures(from everybody, erotica ,bedtime story and american life)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alecsdaniel (talk • contribs) 17:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use images 

message: If I'm not mistaken she was also widely considered New Wave wasn't she?  I thought that during the 80's she was classified as such...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vgamer101 (talk • contribs) 03:48, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep. Tvoz |talk 03:53, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Genres of Music

message: This section has got to be vandalism, right? I went to the article about the water bear, and there is no mention of Madonna whatsoever. The external sources given as references do mention the use of the name "madonnea," but they make no mention of Madonna the singer. I think this is a joke. I was going to delete the whole section, but I decided to ask first.  -- Andrew Parodi 07:35, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think if there;s nothing to back it up it should go. JKW111 (talk) 12:53, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Impact on science" section

message: I now have fixed capitalization (as per WP:MUSTARD) and New wave is now on 1 line. If the genres would stay on 1 row I wouldn't see any problems, but as the last change made 1 genre (New wave) wrap over 2 rows (which honestly doesn't look really professional) and makes the use of genre capitalization ambiguous (should genres start with a capital after comma or not?). I reverted it to the former lay out.
Please note that there is no consensus on the lay out of genres. It's a topic that has been discussed quite a few times, and consensus has never been reached. Many musical artist infoboxes on featured articles have line break separated genre lists. These articles are not broken and don't need fixing.Kameejl (Talk) 23:24, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Your edit also undid over 2 dozen repairs to inconsistent double spacing in the article... which was in bad form. 156.34.236.16 00:55, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK my bad, it wasn't clearly visible in the diff. You should know there certainly is no "general consensus" on comma delimiting, please read the templates talk page and search for "genre delimiter". There is consensus on the use of capitalization, which I have fixed. Kameejl (Talk) 16:14, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox lay out 

message: What's this stuff,that she is called Milly?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.77.9.6 (talk) 17:53, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Milly?

message: Why is there a link to some bizarre music video about Madonna (not of her, about her) in the external links section? I'm not all too familiar with Wikipedia, but I don't think that's what it's for. 70.157.21.248 12:07, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: What the hell?!

message: Could someone please update the external links? Here is my suggestion how it could be changed:
== External links ==
* Official Site
* 
* 
* 
* --84.179.73.134 02:09, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  updating the External Links 

message: Why do all of Madonna's single/discography pages list the position that her singles got on the Oricon international subchart as opposed to the full chart? Wouldn't this give a severely false impression of how popular she is in Japan? --Quarrel of Lawyers (talk) 07:07, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Oricon International

message: Forgive me, but all the music video images on the page appear to be nothing more than decoration, and I propose they all be removed from this page accordingly.  They do not substantially contribute to the article. Ejfetters (talk) 01:20, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Video images