Talk:Poker Face (song)/Archive 1

bwin sponsorship
Under Video:

The logo of online gambling company bwin is visible on a poker table and the backs of playing cards in the video. Bwin has not publicly discussed the cost of the product placement.

I've put this in numerous times, with sources to back it up. It is continuously removed; I believe it is interesting and notable; bwin appears to have quietly paid quite a bit of money to have their logo all over the video, and according to their website, the video was filmed at a location associated with the gambling site. AniRaptor2001 (talk) 23:26, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


 * The reason it is being removed is that the sources that you are adding doesnot comply with Wikipedia's Reliable Source policy. --Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 14:03, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree on that, but also that bwin's sponsorship is a relevant info. I'll try to add it again and back it up with reliable sources. --KnightMove (talk) 07:37, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Billboard Hot 100?
I havent seen it on The Hot 100. No where to be seen on the December 20th, 2008 issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.184.2.187 (talk) 07:24, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The song is at present #81 on hte Billboard Hot 100.&quot;Legolas&quot; (talk) 08:45, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Other Covers
Don't delete the other covers, because they are allowed to be there. Billy4kate (talk) 06:58, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:NFCC . Thank you. --Efe (talk) 08:00, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
 * According to WP:NFCC, the images do increase the readablity of the article, hence it should be kept. &quot;Legolas&quot; (talk) 08:21, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Meaning, that if it would be taken out, it would be detrimental to the article. And its not. Those covers are just, like the text, fancrufty, serving nothing that significant. One cover is enough. Look at other song-related FAs. --Efe (talk) 11:43, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The extra covers should be kept, they are signifcant to the article. 60.234.151.56 (talk) 01:46, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree it should be put back into the article. It is important, because it is an alternate cover.Dance-pop (talk) 01:49, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Most succesful song
it says that poker face is lady gaga's most succesful single and has reached number one in 6 countries. i think this is inaccurate because i doubt it is her most succesful single because it has only hit number one in countries like new zealand and australia whereas just dance has peaked at number one in most major music markets. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sebmcateer (talk • contribs) 16:25, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Australia is a major music market.. Plus it is her most successful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.184.90.216 (talk) 21:22, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

It is her most successful even if it is not in a major country. Do not be bias.Dance-pop (talk) 01:50, 31 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not being biased, I just think that in terms of total worldwide single sales, Just Dance would still be her most successful single.

Just Dance is her most successful song, Just Dance has had more world air play and single sales verses Poker Face which had less compared. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whiteipod2000 (talk • contribs) 01:34, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Correction, "Poker Face" peaked in more places but "Just Dance" sold 4 million+ copies while "Poker Face sold 3 million+ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.91.223.175 (talk) 03:35, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Chace Crawford
That's not him. It's some random model. Besides, it has never been confidermed by either GaGa or Chace. (Excuse me. Im retarded) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.173.183.252 (talk) 15:39, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Wrong cover
The cover isnt the offical go to GaGa's offical site go to msic, you will see the actual cover. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dance-pop (talk • contribs) 09:23, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Two Debut Singles

 * The article reads that "Lady Gaga became the first debut artist to place her two debut singles simultaneously in the top 10 of the Billboard Hot 100". How can an artist be a "debut" and how can she have two debut singles? Sebmcateer (talk) 18:02, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

COVERS!
There are too many covers in the article! --Smanu (talk) 18:17, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * All are removed except the remix cover. --Legolas  ( talk to me ) 05:12, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I think that was needed. Some were even user made.GagaLoveGame (talk) 00:04, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Sampled Music
I admit to being a bit shocked to not find anything here about how she "sampled" the "ma-ma-ma-ma" from Boney M's song Ma Baker. Thoughts, suggestions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.178.75.249 (talk) 08:49, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * You need to provide a reference for it. --Legolas  ( talk to me ) 08:59, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it´s actually on the Ma Baker page... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ma_Baker. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.17.225.60 (talk) 22:38, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Also... http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/chartblog/2009/03/lady_gaga_poker_face.shtml —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.178.75.249 (talk) 00:14, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * We can't use Wikipedia as a source as it itself fails as a reliable source. However the BBC link can be added and I already did. Cheers for your help. --Legolas  ( talk to me ) 04:47, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Chart Performance
The chart performance section is way too long. Its fully sourced yes, but we don't need a paragraph on every single chart it charted on. Here's what I've come up with, but every time I add it to the article, the refrences mess up: JayJ47 (talk) 05:55, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

In the United States, the song originally debuted at number twenty-five on the Bubbling Under Hot 100 chart on the issue dated, October 18, 2008. In the week of January 3, 2009, "Poker Face" entered the Billboard Hot 100 at number ninety-two. "Poker Face" has since reached a peak position of number-three becoming Lady Gaga's second consecutive top five hit. "Poker Face" also debuted at number sixty-one on the Billboard Pop 100 and has since peaked at number-four. The song has also peaked at number-one on the Hot Dance Club Play. "Poker Face" is certified Platinum by the RIAA.

In Canada, "Poker Face" debuted at number fourty-one on the Canadian Hot 100, and on the chart dated December 13, 2008 "Poker Face" reached number-one becoming Lady GaGa's second consecutive number-one hit. It spent a total of nine non-consecutive weeks at the top spot. She now has 18 childeren and disideds the father to take care of them.

In Australia, "Poker Face" entered the Australian ARIA Singles Chart at number twenty-six. It reached the top ten peaking at number-nine in its fifth week on the chart, and eventually peaked at number-one for eight non-consecutive weeks, becoming Lady GaGa's second consecutive number-one hit there. "Poker Face" has since been certified 3x Platinum by ARIA for sales in excess of 210,000 copies. In New Zealand, "Poker Face" debuted at number twenty-one on the New Zealand RIANZ Singles Chart, and ascended into the top ten to number-eight in its third week on the chart. "Poker Face" eventually peaked at number-one for ten consecutive weeks, becoming Lady GaGa's first number-one hit. "Poker Face" is certified Platinum by RIANZ for sales in excess of 15,000.

In the United Kingdom, "Poker Face" entered the UK Singles Chart at number-thirty based solely on download sales, on the chart dated January 18, 2009. "Poker Face" has since reached a peak position of number-three, becoming Lady GaGa's second consecutive top five hit.

"Poker Face" has also become a major hit across Europe, reaching number-one on the singles charts in Austria, Switzerland, Sweden, Belgium, Finland, Norway, Denmark and France.


 * No, its fine. When a song has reached number one in so many countries, a detailed chart performance is needed. --Legolas  ( talk to me ) 06:04, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * P.S. I removed some unnecessary chart performance and shortened it a little. --Legolas  ( talk to me ) 11:29, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, now it looks a lot better. I was getting worried that someone would tag it as requiring clean up so yea, I wanted to shorten it. Happy editing. JayJ47 (talk) 04:19, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your concern. --Legolas  ( talk to me ) 04:24, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey everyone, Poker Face isn't number 1 in the U.K. as the artical states, but, I am terrible at editing, so, I decided I should tell somebody. http://www.theofficialcharts.com/top40_singles.php  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Strelitzia Reginae (talk • contribs) 20:08, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * It is #1, that page just isn't updated as the new chart was only announced today NinjaChucks (talk) 22:36, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Italian peak
Legolas, why do you keep reversing edits in which editors change the Italian peak? I provided a credible source but you still reversed it. Xamkou (talk) 08:32, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:BADCHARTS the italian section. --Legolas  ( talk to me ) 08:36, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, the major explanation is in WP:GOODCHARTS .&mdash;Kww(talk) 12:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, the problem only got documented on the talk page of WT:Record charts. I'll update WP:BADCHARTS.&mdash;Kww(talk) 12:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

UK Chart Run
Just noticed this 'This made Lady GaGa the first american female singer to have the first two singles at number one spot in the United Kingdom.' Not true, many have done it such as Britney and Madonna. It is worth mentioning however she is the first artist since Timbaland in 2005 to have two #1's from the same album without re-releasing the album or having a deluxe edition etc therefore having two lead singles. NinjaChucks (talk) 15:41, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, someone added to the sentence about since Christina but it's since Timbaland with Shock Value not Christina —Preceding unsigned comment added by NinjaChucks (talk • contribs) 18:34, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Reverted all such changes. --Legolas  ( talk to me ) 03:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Britney Spear's first 2 singles were NOT both number 1 in the uk (baby one more time - 1, sometimes - 3), neither was madonna (holiday - 6, lucky star - 14). so that statement is completely false. i can't think of anymore american female artists that it could be. so i think yes lady gaga is the first american female to have her first 2 singles hit number 1 in the uk. if i am wrong please correct me :) Mister sparky (talk) 21:31, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Its a completely unnecessary addition, WP is not a collection of junk statistics. IT badly fails WP:NPOV. So please don't add it. There are tons of things she is good that but everything she does is not encyclopedic. --Legolas  ( talk to me ) 04:18, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * i wasn't going to add it, i was just correcting a previous statement Mister sparky (talk) 10:51, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Its a talk page. Comments are not directed at anybody. By your comments someone might have added it so just warning before hand. Anyways such discussions are forum like and should be avoided. --Legolas  ( talk to me ) 11:04, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Chart peak in US
Although this might change by tomorrow, I'm pretty sure that Poker Face's current peak on the Billboard Hot 100 is #3.

http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/esearch/chart_display.jsp?cfi=379&cfgn=Singles&cfn=The+Billboard+Hot+100&ci=3106759&cdi=10152617&cid=03%2F14%2F2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.31.224.78 (talk) 02:46, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * It has since changed and has therefore been updated - Thanks! Xamkou (talk) 14:16, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Alternate Cover
The alternate cover is the official cover in germany. Should this be changed or remarked? --DasallmächtigeJ (talk) 20:59, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * There is nothing in the alternate cover to be discussable in the article. --Legolas  ( talk to me ) 11:15, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, like most, I've never been keen on the aspects surrounding "significance." It is just ever so subjective. Using the exact same logic, I could say that the main single cover is decorative, isn't actually discussed anywhere within the article and wouldn't impair the reader's understanding. And yes, I'm quite well aware of how the history tab works; I dunno know, I just prefer to keep it blank. Thanks anyway for the reminder. And ya know, I could easily just write a brief sentence about GaGa emerging from the pool, one of the standout moments of the video mind you, being fully depicted on the official remix cover in the Music video section. Though I honestly feel that such an action would be quite stingy, which is why I'm more or less asking you for the go ahead first. A while ago I came across some information regarding the photo shoots behind the remix covers as well as the single covers. Dates, directors, photographers, etc. I would think that could fit somewhere within the articles. Maybe? --LupEnd007 (talk) 13:54, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, as you said such a line is essentially redundant to the article as is the image since that aspect and choreography is already captured in the music video section (standout moment or not is your point of view, not a third party's). We don't need another non-free image which wssentially doesnot illustrate anything more, we try to reduce as much of non-free images as possible. The main picture is essential for WP:SINGLE whether its discussable or not in the article. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 03:34, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Romanian Singles Chart
Why have you remove the peak position from Romanian Singles chart? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crokis (talk • contribs) 21:51, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Because you are giving a reference which is a temporary one and will be invalid once the song goes doen the chart. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 05:15, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Italian Singles Chart
Is that source still valid since it hasn't updated for nearly a month now? Slow poke  (talk)  13:59, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Lady Gaga Sampled On New Kanye/Kid Cudi Song
Source interscope-http://www.interscope.com/artist/news/default.aspx?nid=21062&aid=599Cloverfield Monsta (talk) 01:26, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 03:30, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Wrong cover
On Gaga's Offical website the cover is the same as the article but does not have the grey 'queens' card in the background. Should it be changed??? Cloverfield Monsta (talk) 01:59, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Srry, Source http://www.ladygaga.com/discography/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cloverfield Monsta (talk • contribs) 02:02, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * That is the digital single cover, not the physical. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 06:53, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * How do you know that?Cloverfield Monsta (talk) 01:38, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Italian Singles Chart
Poker Face Peaked #1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.91.223.175 (talk) 03:29, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Which Italian chart? --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 03:31, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * he/she means in the acharts.us --♫Smanu! 19:07, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

lyrics
As everybody knows, Legolas2186 owns every Lady Gaga's related articles on Wikipedia, and nothing can be changed without his consensus...

\sarcasm mode off\

anyway, this source (used in the article) stated that in chorus of the song there are two alternating lyrics, rispectively "He's got me like nobody" the first time and "She's got me like nobody" the second time. This is obviously false, the song repeats two time "She's got me like nobody", as you can see on the official booklet of "The Fame" and on the official site (anyway everybody who speaks a little English can cleary hear that). So I think that this should be removed from the article. --♫Smanu! 11:56, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Go find a valid source first then try to mock me (as if I care). --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 12:00, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * what more reliable of the official site? oh, sorry, I forgot that you need a "third part reliable source" even to state if Gaga is a girl or a boy --♫Smanu! 12:28, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ya I need. Any problem? --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 13:04, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

yes, because of this there is a wrong information in the article, thank you very much Legalos Legolas ^^ --♫Smanu! 13:20, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * find a better source, i'll accept. otherwise no. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 13:29, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * and...can you tell me why the official site cannot be used, and dailystar.co.uk can? Just to let me know about your own personal self-invented policy about source --♫Smanu! 13:34, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Because like all star official sites, its full of wrong iformation and blogs written by fans. I saw tons of mistake in that link. Daily Star is a reputed third party reliable source. You simply don't like when i revert your changes. Please leave and go edit something else. I don't have time for your drama. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 14:04, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm right and you're wrong, that's all --♫Smanu! 14:13, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * P.S: you DO NOT own the article, so I'm free to edit it everytime I feel --♫Smanu! 14:15, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Haah. There comes your true colors. Baseless arguments. You are free to edit it untill and unless you put some garbage like you usually do. I can thank you for the Italian charts, but for this, sorry I won't reach a consensus with you when you clearly have a complete disregard for WP Policies and guidelines. People like you need to be blocked. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 14:18, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * my contributions aren't garbage. Yours consist only of reverts --♫Smanu! 14:22, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Well it is. My contributions consist of reverts because I revert vandals like you. Anyways that information which you want to add, cannot be as you don't have a reliable source for it. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 04:10, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Update. I found a way to incorporate both the versions. This discussion is closed now. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 08:15, 19 May 2009 (UTC)


 * User:Smanu, please familiarize yourself with WP:CIVILITY otherwise you may be indefinitely blocked from wikipedia for making personal attacks towards other users. User:Legolas2186, unfortunately I must warn you for the exact same reason. Responding to incivility with incivility is not how any wikipedian is supposed to conduct themselves and administrators will warn or block you for responding negatively to another editor's baiting. The Bookkeeper   (of the Occult)  08:32, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ya I know and I do apologize. I'll keep that in mind. Anyways I found a way to address Smanu's concerns and I believe this issue has been addressed properly. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 10:01, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Legolas called me stupid here: User_talk:Bradcro. he is really uncivil, not me! --♫<b style="color:green;">S</b>manu! 12:58, 19 May 2009 (UTC)


 * if the booklet could be used as source (and it can) it's better to use the official, instead of keep having false informations by an unofficial source --♫<b style="color:green;">S</b>manu! 12:53, 19 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Please explain clearly. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 13:23, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

the booklet is an official source, made by the record label, dailystar.co isn't (altough it is reliable). I think that when two sources say different things it's better to use the most official source possible. For example Billboard (a very riable source) states that the Cherrytree EP has a song called "My Love" as first track, but this is wrong, as the first track is a live version of Poker Face, as you can see on the official site (and on iTunes). This mean that even the most reliable source can be wrong --♫<b style="color:green;">S</b>manu! 13:40, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Its not our fault that reliable sources sometimes report something wrong. Please keep in mind again that Wikipedia doesnot go for truth, it goes for verifiability. If you can mail Daily Star and get them to rectify it in their newspaper then it will be changed here also. you are approaching the problem from the wrong side by deleting information. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 14:20, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * When something is wrong it should be deleted --♫<b style="color:green;">S</b>manu! 14:26, 19 May 2009 (UTC)


 * First User:Smanu you have been equally incivil as User:Legolas2186. All any administrator would have to do is look at your comments specifically in this section to realize that, so please do not play the victim and take responsibility for you actions as Legolas2186 has.


 * Second: Please read WP:VERIFY, which states:
 * The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth&mdash;that is, whether readers are able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether we think it is true. Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, or the material may be removed. Verifiability is one of Wikipedia's core content policies. The others are No original research and Neutral point of view. Jointly, these policies determine the type and quality of material that is acceptable in Wikipedia articles. They should not be interpreted in isolation from one another, and editors should familiarize themselves with all three.


 * Third album booklets are considered to be reliable sources, you would simply have to indicate there is a discrepency in media reports verus official sources. The article should be presenting both, not one over the other. You may want to discuss this with Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs or open a Requests for comment. The Bookkeeper   (of the Occult)  00:29, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Either show both sides or just the official booklet. The Star is a poor source, down there with scum like The Sun. — R  2  02:22, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * She has (I do not have a source) that she says both, bisexual song, etc. Hey Boys and Girls (Welcome to the Show…) ° 04:40, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

U.S. Billboard Hot Latin Tracks
Why to add U.S. Billboard Hot Latin Tracks if song is not latin? —Preceding unsigned comment added by SveroH (talk • contribs) 20:28, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Good point. I suggest we add it in the prose, that way the chart is not elongated further. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 04:25, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Croatian Singles Chart
Why not add Croatian singles chart? I think that this is official singles chart: http://otvoreni.hr/default.aspx?id=43&rnd5=25.5.2009%2022:55:46&arhivaliste=&idlista= —Preceding unsigned comment added by SveroH (talk • contribs) 20:56, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Please take it to WP:CHARTS and see if it is approved there. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 04:06, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

A minor?
isnt it a-flat minor? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.234.65.29 (talk) 02:16, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Pictures
Why do all the pictures describe her articles of clothing rather than whats going on? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.202.80.7 (talk) 02:32, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

How often has POKER FACE been bought in Germany, yet?
Hey... When you read the text, you´ll see that POKER FACE has been bought about 150.000 time in Germany... But this can´t be right, because this fact has been standing here for weeks, and in this weeks it still has been number one (and usually a german number -one-single is bought about 15000 time per week) ...! So please find out how often it HAS BEEN BOUHT...! Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.134.208.238 (talk) 13:12, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Billboard Dance Airplay Chart Listing Is Getting Deleted, why?
Lady GaGa has done very well on Billboard Dance Air Play Chart. I have twice posted her number one spot, with Pokerface, on the billboard dance air play chart, and the listing was deleted. GaGa has the record for one of the longest number one reigns on the chart why delete it? I did site my source. Answers? --Streetcreed (talk) 19:29, 30 June 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Streetcreed (talk • contribs) 19:24, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Because Hot Dance Airplay is a component chart of Billboard which is not allowed when the song has already charted on the Hot 100. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 03:32, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Chart Peaks
Someone has messed them up and they need to be fixed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.91.165.126 (talk) 18:28, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

SALES NOW STAND AT 3,713,766+ http://perezhilton.com/2009-07-27-lady-gaga-tops-the-tops-with-her-pop#more-62568 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.189.247.27 (talk) 19:14, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, bad, evil, unreliable website. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 04:04, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Critical reviews
Why does it matter what the New Times Broward-Palm Beach newspaper thinks? It's not like it's some reputable music critic. There should be a more respectable source for the opposition.

24.126.176.39 (talk) 18:22, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Genres
Is Poker Face a dance-pop song? -- PK2 (talk) 10:21, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Bisexuality?
"The main idea behind the song is bisexuality..." I can't deduce this from the text, nor the video. Can anyone explain pls? --KnightMove (talk) 07:09, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The video doesnot portray this. However, the idea was to think about a girl while making love with a boy. That is the idea of bisexuality. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 08:53, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * This is just one of contraditcing explanations she issued in several interviews. As it's not deducible from the song/video, I don't deem this relevant enough to be mentioned in the introduction. --KnightMove (talk) 13:47, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Poker Face (Lady Gaga song)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Poker Face (Lady Gaga song)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "acharts":<ul> <li>From Sex on Fire: "Kings of Leon - Sex on Fire worldwide chart positions and trajectories". aCharts.us. Retrieved September 15, 2008.</li> <li>From Amy Winehouse: Amy Winehouse - Rehab - Music Charts. acharts.us. 2007-12-18.</li> <li>From The Fame: </li> <li>From Jessica Mauboy: australian-charts.com. [http://www.australian-charts.com/showitem.asp?interpret=Young+Divas&titel=Turn+Me+Loose&cat=s Young Divas Chart Peak australian-charts. Accessed September 8, 2008.</li> <li>From Right Round: http://acharts.us/song/41575 Belgian Singles Chart (Wallonia)</li> <li>From Sorry (Madonna song): </li> </ul>

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:01, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Hidden profanity?
This probably goes against WP:OR, but someone recently pointed out to me that the part of this song where she is supposedly singing "pa-pa-pa-poker face, pa-pa-poker face" if you listen closely sounds as if she is actually singing "pa-pa-pa-poker face, fa-fa-fuck her face". Now, I can't say these are the lyrics with 100% certainty of course, but the second "poker" definitely has more of a "uh" vowel sound than the first.

Also, given the fact that it has been confirmed that this song has bisexual elements, it didn't seem completely unlikely those were the (semi-hidden) true lyrics.

Has anyone come across any reputable source who has noticed this element and confirmed, or at least commented on it? -- Grandpafootsoldier (talk) 01:46, 8 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, all the sources mentioned in the article are fairly reliable and none of them mention any profanity. It just depends on what and how you listen and take the song. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 04:59, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Year End Charts
Billboard released its 2009 Year End Charts, and "Poker Face" has charted very high on many of them. This is an important accomplishment that should be noted.

Year End Chart positions for "Poker Face":

Billboard Hot 100: #2 - http://www.billboard.com/#/charts-year-end/hot-100-songs?year=2009 Billboard Hot Digital Songs: #2 - http://www.billboard.com/#/charts-year-end/hot-digital-songs?year=2009 Billboard Hot Pop Songs: #4 - http://www.billboard.com/#/charts-year-end/hot-pop-songs?year=2009 Canadian Hot 100: #2 - http://www.billboard.com/#/charts-year-end/canadian-hot-100?year=2009 European Hot 100: #1 - http://www.billboard.com/#/charts-year-end/european-hot-100-singles?year=2009

This information should be put into a chart in the current "Charts" section —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.0.95.132 (talk) 01:14, 12 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot for the information, however only the main charts will be used like US (Hot 100), Canada (Canadian Hot 100) and Europe (Eurochart Hot 100 Singles). --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 04:21, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Certification in Germany
Poker Face recieved 2x Platinum in Germany. Source: http://www.musikindustrie.de/gold_platin_datenbank/ Just type Poker Face into the Box. Gonna add that. --It&#39;s Flo (talk) 11:36, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Cover images
I added the 7" format as it is shown at . There are other cover art works on this external link. Should they be included? Adabow  ( talk )  00:32, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I removed it as its unsourced. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 07:56, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * It IS sourced, Legolas, you could have simply added the link I gave above. By the way, the other two formats aren't referenced. Regardless, my query was regarding the alternative cover images. Anyone's thoughts? Adabow  ( talk )  07:55, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * As per WP:NFCC, another image can be added, if it increases a reader's understanding of the article. I don't think any of the other images satisfies this. Alternate covers were added before also, and were remved by admins. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 08:10, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Year-end charts for UK Singles Chart
The link originally used for this was http://uk.yearinreview.yahoo.com/2009/blog/13. Now that article may of been correct at some point but as the article was published Mon 30 Nov 2009 16:12 PST (and written before) then it clearly cannot include the December sales that make up the end of year chart. The only reliable link that I know of is this from musicweek. It gives the years top sellers including Poker Face at #1. To view the full article you have to sign in, so don't assume the snippets first paragraph is all you get, it's a long article with much detail in sales numbers. The article is also published in printed form. SunCreator (talk) 04:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)


 * And where in this link do you find Poker Face taking the poll position as you are using it to support may I ask? --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 04:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC)


 * "'....are topped by the aforementioned Lady GaGa’s Poker Face, on sales of 882,059.'"
 * The bit quoted above. SunCreator (talk) 04:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC)


 * The article states "The 522nd and last sales week of the first decade of the 21st century brought no addition to the 275 number one singles and 273 number one albums that have topped the charts, with returns to number one for Lady GaGa’s Bad Romance on the singles list and Paolo Nutini’s Sunny Side Up on the albums list after absences of three and 30 weeks, respectively." Where the hell is Poker Face in that? --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 04:38, 6 February 2010 (UTC)


 * As i said above. Sign in to see the full article. SunCreator (talk) 04:46, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh ok. I apologize, I didnot see the printed part. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 04:48, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

cover
i have a question why is this cover used in the article, i have the cd single from both europe and australia and they have the photo with gaga coming out of the pool, the cd for the remixes is also like this, the only place i have seen this cover is on the british vinyl single. 190.42.116.75 (talk) 08:12, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Offical websites discography page lists this as the cover. Subsequent separate images might have been released later in other territories, however, in US (her main charting territory) this one was the cover as so is used as the cover image. Did it clear your douibt? --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 08:16, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * not exactly, the only physical single released in the states was the remixes with the pool cover, the article track listing also only list one physical release there. the australian and european physical singles also have the pool cover, the only different is the french cover but its not this one. Perhaps this is the digital cover in northamerica, if that is the case how its decided which one should be in the article, i always thought the physical have priority. maybe you should see some of the online retailers they have the images for the singles, believe me i have never seen this one except for the british vinyl single. 190.42.116.75 (talk) 08:35, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * As I said, the official website lists this as the cover. The remix cover with the pool have been added before, but was deleted on account of failing WP:NFCC a number of times. So for present we have this cover only. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 08:43, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The official website have the digital cover that is why under the photo there is a link to itunes and amazon because when you buy the single online that is the cover you get, however the physical single is the pool one, but not the one that said remixes on it, why is all of the other songs have their physical cover and this one have the digital, that image should be replaced, none of the formats listed on the article have this cover except for the itunes one. i am not saying this because i like the pool cover and wanted to be there, i said this because that is not the correct cover. 190.42.116.75 (talk) 09:03, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm you have the link to it? --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 09:08, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * this is the official websiteas you can see there are links under the photo to buy the mp3 single, and when you go to amazon for example that is the cover they show you when you are going to buy the digital download. i think the correct one is the top one on this page the one that said Poker Face in gold letters, that is the official cover for most of europe and australia, the second one there is the remixes that is for the usa and canada, the third one is the french cover, the fourth that have Poker Face is silver letters is the british single, and the other two are the digital covers. 190.42.116.75 (talk) 09:21, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Actually I own a physical copy of the European CD and the Remixes, and they are with the pool cover, I don't have it but I have seen the cover with the red hood, it's the cover for Australia and New Zealand, which are the first countries where the single was released. Frcm1988 (talk) 20:31, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Spanish Certification
Poker Face has been certified Double Platinum in Spain —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.19.133.127 (talk) 21:07, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

World music awards nomination
In 2009,GaGa has recived once a nomination for world music awards "best international song of the year!" you must add this .... it's possible to see this on the official site of WMA AriandaGAGA (talk) 19:41, 9 March 2010 (UTC) AriandaGAGA

Double Platinum Digital ?
"The song was certified six times platinum by the Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA) for paid digital downloads of 240,000.[37]" >>>> I Thought Platinum was 1,000,000.--74.69.177.29 (talk) 20:38, 20 March 2010 (UTC)


 * No, seems right to me. The awards depend on country and type of work (and sometimes, source of the work). WP has a useful article on it, but go right to #Digital download singles for this particular question. Canada's platinum cert for Digital downloads is awarded at 40,000. 6 x 40,000 is 240,000, which is what's reported. &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk) 23:15, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Songwriters
Songwriters must be of ther stage name not their real name unless there is a long list. CharlieJS13 (talk) 16:21, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

User:Gunmetal violating MoS on the article
This user is continuously changing the MoS of the article, not adhering to WP:GAGA and simply creating mal-information and unnecessary sections. When I restored to the old version, he just came and mis-used Rollback to revert me, and gave me a warning for owning the article. Anybody else feels that these are unnecessary changes? --Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 04:10, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Me. But Spanish Charts must keep. Tb hotch Ta lk <sup style="color:#2C1608;">C.  04:12, 12 May 2010 (UTC)


 * The reason I removed the Spanish link was because promusicae.es links are always temporary and becomes a dead link after 1 week. I wanted a permanent link for it as later it would create a link-rot in the article. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 04:17, 12 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I added Status quo. Until both users decide what do with the article stay, any revert of content (not obvious vandalism) will consider WP:Edit War and I will request protection. Tb hotch Ta lk <sup style="color:#2C1608;">C.  04:46, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you. The user is against reason and discussion it seems. But oh well, worth a try always. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 04:55, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Images
I notice that all Featured topics/The Fame articles have images and these have Alternative text excepting this. Could someone add it. Thanks Tb hotch Ta lk <sup style="color:#2C1608;">C.  03:31, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Me me  --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 03:35, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Russian certification
Can someone add that the song went platinum in Russia (as a ringback tone) and sold 200,000 copies? Source : http://2m-online.ru/news/detail.php?ID=5658 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pablitto (talk • contribs) 18:28, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Duff info
The following text in the article appears to misrepresent the cited source and does not agree with the song lyrics - which do agree with the 'liner'.

It also seems relatively irrelevant and does not make a worthwhile contribution to the article.

I'd go for complete removal.

"According to Daily Star, the chorus repeats two alternating lyrics. After the hook "Can't read my Poker Face" the backup singer says "He's got me like nobody" and then in the next line says "She's got me like nobody". Gaga explained in an interview with them that the line carries a bit of an undertone of confusion about love and sex.[6] However, the liner notes from the album booklet indicate both these lines only repeat "she's got me like nobody"" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.155.251 (talk) 00:50, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * they mean the live version from the cherrytree sessions album

Actually, that's far from all the stuff Lady Gaga does with those song lyrics. What she sings on the album and what she says in the liner notes absolutely do not match. The album sure sounds like "she's got to love nobody", "i'll get him HARD. show him what I got" and "p-p-p-poke her face fu-fu-(expletive deleted) her face" and that's definitely NOT what the liner notes say. Open your eyes and ears. 99.99.70.93 (talk) 21:55, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Faith No More
I added in the bit about Faith no more's cover for the second time today. Please leave it up, I don't want to have keep coming back here to change it. I cited my source and everything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.55.142.158 (talk) 05:19, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * If you can cite a reliable third party source then it can stay, else Youtube links are not accepted. — <i style="color:blue;">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 05:27, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

why cant Youtube links be accepted it clearly shows them covering the song in fact how much more reliable can you get than from actually seeing and hearing them sing it?Feedmyeyes (talk) 02:18, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:ELNEVER Tb hotch Ta lk <sup style="color:#2C1608;">C.  02:20, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

why is the fact that Faith No More covered this song persistently deleted even when third party references are put in??????Feedmyeyes (talk) 23:38, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * because its not notable. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1   (talk2me)  23:40, 27 August 2010 (UTC) Its not notable.. Really?? you are wrong... please dont troll the cover of faith no more.. its a very good cover by the way

its just as notable as the south park version or the fact that glee covered itFeedmyeyes (talk) 19:11, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Continuous repetition of the same bull-shit won't make it notable, neither will twitter or any other crap references that you are using. I suggest you stop the continuous disruption. — <i style="color:blue;">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 05:17, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

ok i will no longer add itFeedmyeyes (talk) 02:47, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

You having a hard on for an artist doesn't make a notable cover irrelevant. It is especially relevant due to the musical similarity of the song in which Faith no More follows the cover.94.0.23.60 (talk) 17:45, 14 December 2010 (UTC) Oh, and here is the woman herself referencing the cover on her facebook http://www.facebook.com/ladygaga?v=feed&story_fbid=193395065452 94.0.23.60 (talk) 17:49, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

BPM
The BPM of the song is incorrectly listed as 120 BPM, when the actual recording is at 119. "Poker Face: Digital Sheet music" from Musicnotes.com is cited as a source for this, but the actual recording on the album is at 119 BPM. It's easy enough to verify this -- simply count the number of beats in one minute. I can provide a screenshot of Traktor showing the beats lining up with the recording at 119 BPM, and not lining up at 120. You probably have the song, so load it in Traktor demo or Mixxx and set the BPM to 120 and 119 and see which is correct. Not allowing this edit is akin to insisting that grass is blue because some reference somewhere says so, when tools exist to quantitatively measure the wavelength of light reflected from it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.223.233.19 (talk) 02:24, 5 January 2011 (UTC)


 * See WP:OR. Marnanel (talk) 02:31, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

So let me get this straight… Wikipedia prefers to have factually incorrect information as long as there's a source, even if the correct information can trivially be determined? In that case, I would hardly consider sheet music for an arrangement of Poker Face as a reliable source and the BPM should be deleted entirely. Piano/Vocal/Guitar, Piano Solo, and Piano/Vocal/Chords, SATB Choir & Piano arrangements are not equivalent to the actual album recording, and I suspect the publishers simply selected 120 BPM as an approximation that's close enough. 98.223.233.19 (talk) 02:53, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * There's a big difference between "BPM should be deleted entirely [because it is incorrect, per X, Y or Z]" and "BPM should be deleted entirely [because I think it is incorrect]". Musicnotes do not round BPMs to the closer number, see Halo as an example. If you have not a reliable source which states its 119 BPM further than yourself, we cannot do anything. Tb hotch ™ and  ©  03:03, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * We have been having this discussions enough times. Those feeling that Musicnotes is wrong, lemme getchu the number. The sheet was published by Sony/ATV, who are responsible for the sheet music development of a number of artists, including Gaga. If you have problem with Musicnotes, go to them, write a mail or shout at them. Not here, coz we are tired of uttering the same thing. — <i style="color:blue;">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 04:55, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Clearly, they've faced such an issue already:
 * "The Arrangement Details Tab gives you detailed information about this particular arrangement of Poker Face - not necessarily the song."
 * "The Song Details Tab gives you detailed information about this song, Poker Face."
 * Given that disclaimer, the tempo is given on the arrangement details page, and therefore should not be cited as relating to the actual album recording. Nowhere on the Song Details Tab does it list a tempo at all!  Musicnotes lists 3 different tempos for Just Dance, Poker Face, and Bad Romance, but riddle me this… if they aren't ALL the same tempo, then why can you play them all simultaneously and have them stay in perfect sync? Clearly, they are all the same tempo, and that tempo is 119 bpm.  If Wikipedia won't accept such trivial "original research", then it would be better to delete the incorrectly cited BPMs from these songs rather than list the wrong information. —98.223.233.19 (talk) 07:54, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * As I said, mail them. WP:V is what we use. Sorry it won't be changed. — <i style="color:blue;">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 08:23, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Live Performances
She performed it in the Grammys! Its not written! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.153.47.242 (talk) 06:57, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Added now. — <i style="color:blue;">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 07:08, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Update
In May 2011, Poker Face re-entered the top 100 of the UK Singles Chart in its 111th charting week by jumping from No. 127 to No. 97 due to the release of Born This Way.source

Please include, I guess it's important and interesting! --79.199.56.239 (talk) 18:28, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Dont think so. — <i style="color:blue;">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 05:33, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Films featuring the song
I think films that have featured this song should be listed. I first heard this song - I think - in "Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World" and it is featured in "The Karate Kid" remake. The wife says she has heard it in yet another film also. That info belongs in this article, since I see you've made a longer article from this one song than most people's biographies on here!75.21.153.249 (talk) 02:07, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Well were their inclusion notable? Songs are simply included in many films and we do not include all, if they are not notable. — <i style="color:blue;">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 02:49, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Legolas, if you mean by "notable" that they were in the film, featured as songs and were recognisable, then YES. I can't envision how a song could be in a film and NOT be notable unless it is not a notable song to begin with!!75.21.113.40 (talk) 18:35, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Let me be more clear: "Poker Face" was featured in several films, a total of 3 to my limited knowledge. It was deliberately featured fully in the soundtrack, the lyrics and full effect felt by the audience and it was deliberately done - I mean, the song not chosen merely for background noise. Is that good? As I said, the two films that I know prominently, NOTABLY featuring the song were "Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World" and "The Karate Kid" (2010). Clear now?75.21.113.40 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:40, 4 October 2011 (UTC).

Citations Needed
Hi. Some citations need filling. Dated FEB 2012. I'll leave the info up for 2 months for someone to fill.Danceking5 (talk) 01:19, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Usa certification
Here in article says that Poker sold 6.222.000 copies in Usa,but down there poker fays is 5X platinum,please change that to 6X platinum,you could change that also in Just Dance artticle because Just dance Sold over 6 million copies,so Poker Face 6X,and Just Dance 6X..THANK'S — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.201.186.7 (talk) 17:20, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
 * ❌ Certifications are not updated by themselves, unless the RIAA certifies the song as 6x Platinum, "Poker Face" still being 5x Platinum. Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it!  See terms and conditions.  19:24, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Nomiantion for FA
Do you think it would be a good idea to nominate Poker Face as a featured article ? This song was the peak of Gaga's career and she won many awards because of this song. Rackshea (talk) 12:17, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Poke 'er Face
Isn't the whole POINT of the song a play on this rather lewd homophone?

Article says it is full of sexual innuendo, but leaves out the most blatant example! 173.9.95.217 (talk) 19:51, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 27 May 2013
Official Sales is 1.13million not 1.11million. --iAdam1n (talk) 17:34, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

iAdam1n (talk) 17:34, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed.. Its sold several million, according to the sources.  RudolfRed (talk) 17:45, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

"Poker Face" song used in Percy Jackson: The Lightning Thief?
I think I heard it before in the movie, when the main characters enters the casino scene. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.84.246.76 (talk) 20:16, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Video screencap up for deletion
The video screen capture from this article is up for deletion as failing WP:NFCC #8. Please see Files_for_deletion/2014_November_19 for details. -mattbuck (Talk) 09:44, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Dance-pop?
How is this song not considered dance-pop, but "Just Dance" is? Just curious. Cloverboy19 (talk) 16:32, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Genre
The song is dance-pop, according to a Billboard article about the song being certified Diamond in the US. The song even sounds more like dance-pop than "Just Dance" does. CB19 (talk) 00:42, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 17 external links on Poker Face (Lady Gaga song). 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://radioinkmedia.intertechmedia.com/nielsen.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100604034607/http://communities.canada.com/montrealgazette/blogs/wordsandmusic/archive/2009/11/28/concert-review-lady-gaga-romances-bell-centre-crowd-nov-27.aspx to http://communities.canada.com/montrealgazette/blogs/wordsandmusic/archive/2009/11/28/concert-review-lady-gaga-romances-bell-centre-crowd-nov-27.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100312073955/http://www.rockband.com/news/lady-gaga-eric-cartman-dlc to http://www.rockband.com/news/lady-gaga-eric-cartman-dlc
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/music/delta-goodrems-talents-top-the-charts/story-e6frfn09-1225816830674
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120117125212/http://www.rianz.org.nz/rianz/chart_annual.asp?chartYear=2008&chartKind=S to http://www.rianz.org.nz/rianz/chart_annual.asp?chartYear=2008&chartKind=S
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100211201846/http://www.telegrafonline.ro/1262901600/articol/search/108139/rockul_cenzurat_de_posturile_romanesti_de_radio.html to http://www.telegrafonline.ro/1262901600/articol/search/108139/rockul_cenzurat_de_posturile_romanesti_de_radio.html
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Faustriancharts.at%2F2009_single.asp&date=2011-10-02 to http://austriancharts.at/2009_single.asp
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.hitlisterne.dk/yearlist.asp?list=download%2050
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130921054646/http://www.snepmusique.com/fr/pag-259376-Classements-Annuels.html?year=2009&type=1 to http://www.snepmusique.com/fr/pag-259376-Classements-Annuels.html?year=2009&type=1
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100123194509/http://www.fimi.it/dett_ddmercato.php?id=47 to http://www.fimi.it/dett_ddmercato.php?id=47
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100522101206/http://www.rianz.org.nz/rianz/chart_annual.asp?chartYear=2009&chartKind=S to http://www.rianz.org.nz/rianz/chart_annual.asp?chartYear=2009&chartKind=S
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5qK6BF6vi?url=http://www.promusicae.es/files/listasanuales/canciones/Top%2050%20Canciones%20Anual%202009.pdf to http://www.promusicae.es/files/listasanuales/canciones/Top%2050%20Canciones%20Anual%202009.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719010043/http://www.hitlistan.se/netdata/ghl002.mbr/lista?liid=43&dfom=20090001&newi=0&height=420&platform=Win32&browser=MSIE&navi=no&subframe=Mainframe to http://www.hitlistan.se/netdata/ghl002.mbr/lista?liid=43&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
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150117070449/http://www.ifpi.dk/?q=content%2Fguld-og-platin-i-august to http://www.ifpi.dk/?q=content%2Fguld-og-platin-i-august
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131015183035/http://gaonchart.co.kr/digital_chart/download.php?nationGbn=E&current_year=2011&chart_Time=year to http://gaonchart.co.kr/digital_chart/download.php?nationGbn=E&current_year=2011&chart_Time=year
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131014202328/http://gaonchart.co.kr/digital_chart/download.php?nationGbn=E&current_year=2012&chart_Time=year to http://gaonchart.co.kr/digital_chart/download.php?nationGbn=E&current_year=2012&chart_Time=year

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:54, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Vocal range
The range should be from F♯3 to B4 to match the song's key of G♯ minor. CB19 (talk) 14:19, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

US sales stats
According to List of best-selling singles in the United States, "Poker Face" is the 12th-most downloaded song of all time, the third-most by a woman, and the most by an American woman. CB19 (talk) 17:32, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Musicfan122's continuous disruption and removal of images
explain yourself why you are continuously removing image from the article when there is absolutely clear indication that image is important to the article. RedOne literally became famous for songs like "Just Dance", "Poker Face" etc and was even Grammy nominated for three categories. WP:IDHT applies and seeing your contributions there is no WP:AGF I can seriously consider other than the numerous warnings for WP:EW on your page. your thoughts. — I<b style="color: #FF033E;">B</b> [ <b style="font-family: Tempus Sans ITC; color: #1C1CF0;">Poke</b> ] 18:29, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * RedOne's image is provided in both The Fame and "Bad Romance", placing it here or in the "Just Dance" article is simply redundant. Musicfan122 (talk) 18:33, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * No its not, when he was nominated for three Grammys for the song. Talk about valid reasoning and not WP:IDLI. Images are not decorative and hence should not be used in every possible song article that's true, however when the said song is literally the most awarded/critically lauded production of a musician, then that person's image is justifiable in the said article. — I<b style="color: #FF033E;">B</b> [ <b style="font-family: Tempus Sans ITC; color: #1C1CF0;">Poke</b> ] 18:36, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

An image of him is provided in the song's album article with a fitting and informative caption that is not stated in the article's body. Placing another image of him in the song's article with a caption that's stated in the beginning of the section is redundant. Musicfan122 (talk) 18:50, 25 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Given there's a sentence or 2 on him I don't see why this shouldn't be included here, Also Musicfan122 as per BRD the reverting IP (and you) need to get consensus for its removal, Anyway Idon't see a valid reason to remove thus far. – Davey 2010 Talk 18:53, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Musicfan122, first of all please indent your responses for the sake of readability. Secondly you absolutely make no sense at all. Stating that RedOne produced the song is redundant? You are removing the inclusion of the image and now you are diverting your train of thoughts to the caption. So what is your problem? — I<b style="color: #FF033E;">B</b> [ <b style="font-family: Tempus Sans ITC; color: #1C1CF0;">Poke</b> ] 18:54, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Um, when did I say that him producing the song is redundant? All I said was that placing his image in every single song he produced is, even if they're one of his most well-known, as long it's provided in that song's album article. If the majority think that the image should stay, fair enough, I guess... Musicfan122 (talk) 19:06, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Again, can you not indent your comments properly? Its not really difficult and should be done per WP:INTERSPERSE. — I<b style="color: #FF033E;">B</b> [ <b style="font-family: Tempus Sans ITC; color: #1C1CF0;">Poke</b> ] 10:58, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Why would I indent my comments if the above comment is? the whole purpose of indenting comments is to give a neater visual. Musicfan122 (talk) 22:25, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Read above, you are supposed to indent your comments. Stop being a prick and stick to guidelines. — I<b style="color: #FF033E;">B</b> [ <b style="font-family: Tempus Sans ITC; color: #1C1CF0;">Poke</b> ] 09:20, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Quote
I replaced the image with a quote. Far more useful and informative to the reader than an picture used in other Gaga songs/albums and a caption stated both in the infobox and the background section. Musicfan122 (talk) 22:28, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
 * If you go against consensus once more and edit the image I will report you Musicfan122. You literally added the comments above "If the majority think that the image should stay, fair enough, I guess" and then chose to go ahead with a change without discussing it. what are your thoughts on Musicfan122's actions? — I<b style="color: #FF033E;">B</b>  [ <b style="font-family: Tempus Sans ITC; color: #1C1CF0;">Poke</b> ] 09:18, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

I did not propose the quote argument in the previous discussion, it is far more informative to the reader and fits better in the section than the image and its caption, which is stated numerous times across the article. Musicfan122 (talk) 16:15, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Consensus is against you. WP:LETGO and stop disrupting. — I<b style="color: #FF033E;">B</b> [ <b style="font-family: Tempus Sans ITC; color: #1C1CF0;">Poke</b> ] 12:26, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Song of the year nomination
The article says this song was nominated for song of the year at the Grammys. But the list at the song of the year article doesn't confirm that. I'll try to remember to look this up later to confirm which article is in error. But, for now, I'm posting in case someone else can check on this in case I forget. † dismas †|(talk) 11:41, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay. I see now that it was nominated for the 2010 Grammys. I don't understand how when it was released in 2008. But I'll have to figure that one out later. † dismas †|(talk) 17:18, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Cover
Well, article uses original cover, however I think that this cover can be added as an alternative, because it's different that original. infsai (dyskusja) 20:24, 24 November 2019 (UTC)