Talk:Big Girls Don't Cry (Fergie song)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale. |
[edit] Different lyrics?
I was always driven up a wall by the line, "like a child misses their blanket..." line. Then today I heard a version that said, "like a child misses that blanket..." (English wins one, yeah)
Can anyone add something about this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pageiv (talk • contribs) 23:03, August 24, 2007 (UTC)
[edit] 9 weeks is massive?
The article reads: "for a massive 9 consecutive weeks"
Massive is usually used to describe the mass of an object, not a length of time. The adjective "massive" is more of a slang term for this and is unnecessary anyway in this context. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.170.8.210 (talk) 17:18, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Official Single Cover
I have seen a picture of the official single cover of Big Girls Don't Cry (Personal). It looks nice, but I have no right to put these pictures on this Wikipedia. (Don't want to be banned) I have seen this on 3 different sites, so I'm guessing its the official. Thank you.
Weirdo1717|3:57, 3 June 2007
[edit] Release Dates
If you don't know when the song is coming out then stop making all there new release dates! Thank You. Viven31|9:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Rating
I've rated this article as start class on the assessment scale - it has an infobox, some references and chart positions. Further information will be necessary about critical reception, chart positions, music video, cover art etc, and this can be added as it becomes available.--Phil500 (Talk / Contribs) 03:27, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
The Jordan Mccoy Thing is unrealible. No one on Fergies press or or side has commented. Only Jordans BLOGS. Blogs are NOT accurate souroce of information. Thank You
The Jordan McCoy controversy should atleast be noted. Even if the record has not been set straight, Jordan has officially recorded a version that you can hear on her myspace, so a note should atleast be made that the song has been recorded by another artist even if you do not wish to get into the controversy. Though, I see no reason why the article can't contain a paragraph stating, "Another version of Big Girls Don't Cry was recorded by Jordan McCoy, signed to Bad Boy Records. Jordan McCoy has claimed that she purchased the song to use on her debut album and as a single, and that Fergie had used it anyway even after selling it to her. This is yet to be confirmed. Her label has said they will probably scrap the song from the album since 'it's already out now'."
I can find the article where the label said that if we are willing to add this into the article. If it's not going to be, then there's no point in me spending time hunting it down on google. - JON
Just so you know, it wasn't only Jordan's "blogs", but Jordan's manager as well. There's an interview here: http://www.badboyblog.com/item/2006/9/21/more-on-fergie-big-girls-don-t-cry.
Are you really that dull?? You just said it wasnt on a blog and yet you gave us a link to a blog. All thats been confirmed is Jordan Mccoy recording a version of it and whining about it on a myspace. And some interview with no sourceful interviewer on a blog. If this was true then Fergie's managment would have been sued.
I'm not "that dull" but one of the people here said the only source of the dispute was Jordan's blogs. That's not the case, since an interview with her management appeared on the bad boy blog. Sure, it's still a blog, but I was merely pointing out the only source to this rumor isn't just a little girl's blogs, but an interview with her management. "If this was true then Fergie's management would have been sued" That's not true at all, they could of just refunded their money and then some. Not everything is done in the public eye and the dispute could of been taken care of quietly between the two camps, thus why we haven't heard anymore about it. I find it INSANE that a testament from the singer herself, posted on her OFFICIAL myspace, plus an alleged interview with her management, doesn't even warrant a "alleged conflict" section with a warning of "this, however, has never been confirmed". This appeared on Kelly CLarkson's "My December" page before adding in the confirmation of it some days later, so I do not see why a rumor of conflict shouldn't be added in here. It has everything to do with the song. There's another version of it out there.
"Another version of the song has been recorded by singer Jordan McCoy. It was intended to be placed on her debut album, but plans have been cancelled after an alleged dispute with Fergie's management over the song." I don't see why that shouldn't be added in. This incident is already recorded on Jordan's wiki page. I didn't even put it there. There's plenty of evidence to warrant it to be included, as others have even realized. I do not understand why we cannot add the quote above onto this page.
Exactly. I can record BIG GIRLS DODNT CRY and put it on my myspace and whine about it on blogs but it has NOTHING to with Fergie's career. It shouldnt be added
[edit] hi
hi i am a big fan i listen to big girls dont cry and shut up and drive 5 times a day here is my e-mail add me:scottish_princess_69@hotmail.com. i will tack to you. my name is shaelyn.bailey i am 9 and i have been waching your videos sinc i was 4.by i will see you l8r(later)bye
Get off the internet shaelyn.--Cjhard 20:14, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
- You're infringing the rules of Wikipdedia's Talk Page. These are just personal matters and has no relevance about the single. BritandBeyonce 09:15, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Ballad of the Year Award goes to...
'Big Girls Don't Cry' was never intended on being a single, but has actually ended up being one of the biggest ballads of the year' This is just opinion so I went ahead and got rid of it. Hope its ok with you guys. :D--Cjhard 20:17, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
-Actually I'm just gonna revert it to the 22:44, 13 July 2007 edit.--Cjhard 20:22, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
theres some definite vandalism under "Song Controversy"
[edit] Commercial
What about the Kohl's Candies commercial? Zchris87v 04:17, 9 August 2007 (UTC) I think that fergie is a good song and big girls don't cry is a proof and I don't belive to girls that said that fergie would forget a world of music. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.20.148.105 (talk) 22:18, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Song sample
I've got the version that Big Boy recorded, can anyone show me how to post it? please come to my talk page, thanks a lot!! Also, This page need some spacing, too much text make it tiring to read.$ą|εɱchat 15:14, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Censorship
Should it be mentioned somewhere in the article that the video is censored on MTV channels? In the part where she's taking down the laundry, the 'Candies' logo is blacked over because MTV doesn't allow music videos to serve as advertisements. KyrieSanctus 03:35, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Chart Performance
I believe that it would be good to have a section on the song's chart performance around the world. This section was created right from the start but then someone deleted it, which I think was a real waste so I re-created a section for it, but then someone deleted it again. So should we have a section on the song's chart performance or not? 220.101.48.181 (talk) 11:06, August 30, 2007 (UTC)
How long has it been in the top 10 of billboard hot 100 becuase i wouldnt be surprised if she is close to beating a record —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.251.116.73 (talk) 11:00, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Here's the chart run: 41-50-52-41-21-8-4-4-3-3-4-3-2-4-2-2-2-1-3-3-4-4 (17 weeks in the top ten) 220.101.48.181 11:16, October 10, 2007 (UTC)
I think it might be; 41-50-52-41-21-8-4-4-3-3-4-3-2-4-2-2-2-1-3-3-4-4-5-9 (19 weeks in the top ten) Yours is not as up to date. --JayJ47 11:24, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] In response to "Messed up chart"
Did it ever occur to you that maybe these so called "impolite" people might not know how to sign their posts because they are unfamiliar to wikipedia? However I do agree with you about the messed up chart at the bottom of the page. 220.101.48.54 (talk) 10:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
-
- You too, an "impolite" user. You've just discussed the signing of post but in the end, it seems that you're the model for them. You also didn't post your post. BritandBeyonce 02:53, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Signing of posts and Chart Performance
That was before I knew how to sign posts. Thanks for mentioning the post thing though; if it weren't you i would never have known about signing posts. Ok, now back to the subject of the chart performance info. I think we need to seriously request for protection. The sections, "Chart Performance" and the "Charts" table both continuously change, and I think its time we put an end to this. It would be best for this article to be under protection for a while. ---- 220.101.48.181 10:19, September 10, 2007 (UTC)
-
- Ok, whatever post is that, again, please, sign your post. How can we know who you are or whose user is saying this. Please be polite, it's in the rules to post you users after you commented. With regards to that charts that must be congested. The section looks a proseline like what happened to Beautiful Liar. It's so messy to look at and the tendency is that searchers will not read it anymore. Ya, i think so, it needs semi-protection to control all the infos we supposed to protect. BritandBeyonce 12:38, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Semi-protection
Thanks to whoever finally managed to put this page under protection. There was a lot of vandalism going on, on this page. ---- 220.101.48.181 9:41, September 19, 2007 (UTC)
-
- Welcome. BritandBeyonce (talk•contribs) 00:16, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Recent edits
Should the recent edits made by User:220.101.48.24 be reverted? This section of the article was cleaned up months ago, but this user has stated in the edit summary that he/she has just "added more chart info" I'm not sure if its appropiate or not. What do you guys think?--JayJ47 11:59, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Messed up Chart
What's up with the messed up chart at the bottom of the page?! I can't fix it!
Allez 14:06, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
My god. The page looks messy. Could someone help me request this page for protection. There is a high level of vandalism by some unidentified contributors. They are so impolite. they didnt bother to sign their posts! BritandBeyonce 02:33, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Remix ft. Sean Kingston
Today i found this on the ARIA Charts, Page, it states that the remix for Big Girl's Don't Cry ft. Sean Kingston charted on the ARIA Charts at peak posistion 49 and its first week. Is this because of its downloading, cause its been downloaded so amny times, or because it was officially release. Please respond to this, and add it on the article if possible. BatterBean 08:15pm, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- The remix also charted on the brazilian chart, Hot100Brasil (http://www.hot100brasil.com/chtsinglesb.html). 189.31.129.250 05:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image for video section
I am asking here for concensus as to which image should be used in the music video section. The old one? Or the one currently being used in the article. Recently the newer image was removed from the article, but I have restored it. It was changed to the older image without a good reason so I restored the image I uploaded, which is of a higher quality, and would contribute well to the article. I'm not saying that the previous didn't contribute as well, but that we might be better off with this image. JayJ47 (talk) 05:31, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- Yours is better but there is a watermark. Kindly remove it. Thanks. --Efe (talk) 07:16, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Netherlands Peak
I noticed that the current peak listed for this chart is #3. However I am unsure whether or not that is the correct peak position as according to this source: [1] it has peaked at #4 and not #3. So which one is the correct position? JayJ47 (talk) 10:00, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
