Hollaback Girl has been listed as one of the good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: No date specified. To provide a date use: ((GA|insert date in any format here)).

Hollaback Girl received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Template:FACfailed is deprecated, and is preserved only for historical reasons. Please see Template:Article history instead.

This article (or a previous version) is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination did not succeed. For older candidates, please check the Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Archived nominations.

I don't know if this is what "Hollaback" actually means--or what Gwen means it to mean--but my wife came up with my favorite defintions. She thinks it means the singer has spine, back bone--she's not "hollow-backed". It makes a lot of sense in the context of the song.

I personally don't think that word "s**t" should be used in this article. There are several children on the site, me being one of them. Besides, I didn't even realize that that word was in the song in the first place. Steveo2

The word is used so frequently in the song that I'm shocked you didn't realize it... well, generally speaking, we don't like to censor things much. We sometimes draw a line when it comes to explicit images, but this is just a word. Everyking 17:14, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's just a word; no harm no foul. --Madchester 01:03, 2005 May 17 (UTC)

OK. I understand. (By the way, I thought it said, "It's bananas, B-A-N-A-N-A-S.) Steveo2 10:55, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is probably because you've been listening to the watered-down MTV or radio-friendly versions. Barneyboo 11:06, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia doesn't censor profanity. Free speech is teh secks. :P --Kross 13:54, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

In the article, it says ""Hollaback Girl" managed to do this by becoming one of the first records to break down racial and genre barriers in the 2000s. " I'm not so sure about this, as I think that "Hey Ya!" is a better example, since it did get a lot of airplay on alternative rock and hot adult contemporary stations, certainly more so that this song. ErikNY 01:58, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

That's quite true, but "Hey Ya!" is an urban song. There has been an ongoing battle between urban and rock music for a long time now. However, in most cases, both urban music and rock music lovers tend to be able to agree on pop music, as it can be described as a cross between two in some terms.

You are correct, but "Hollaback Girl"'s genre is what secured it of this title. Thank you for your input though. DrippingInk 16:14, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I found something very wierd when I was doing a Google search on "this shit is bananas" and I found a flash animation: www.funfreepages.com/flash/this_shit_is_bananas.php, and there was these two women, and one was pooping bananas and they were flying at the other woman.

I'd like to know WHAT a Hollaback Girl is to begin with? (I'm writing from Europe)

Its supposed to be someone who "hollers back": someone who relies purely on shouting back but never actually fights back and stands up for herself. When Gwen Stefani says "I ain't no hollaback girl", it means she does not have to shout back and that she will be ready to fight her enemies. This meaning has not been proven, according to my knowledge. Ultimate Star Wars Freak 09:43, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you want a laugh, check out this over-earnest explanation of the song. RMoloney 00:54, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at a previous edit of the "George Washington Bridge" article, someone vandalized the page by putting in some of the lines from this song. Why did that person do that?

I'd commented out a passage of speculation, asking for citations; it's been uncommented, but without citations. I've moved it here in the hope of enlightenment:

It is also rumored that Stefani wrote the song to confront Courtney Love, who disparaged Stefani as the music industry's "cheerleader". Some of the confrontational lyrics are:

both of us want to be the winner, but there can only be one

so I'm gonna fight, gonna give it my all, gonna make you fall, gonna sock it to you

that's right, I'm the last one standing, another one bites the dust

are said to be speaking directly to Love.

Rumoured where and by whom? Said by whom? If there's a reputable source, I'm sure that it can be given, and the section replaced. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:41, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You were given a source a few months ago, which you disgustingly called "gossip", despite the fact that you did not and still do not know whether this is true or not. I have restored the information, as it plays a major role in "Hollaback Girl"'s writing. --Winnermario 13:05, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'm not going to get into a rv war over this. But what's wrong with the link to the Greg Stacy piece? --fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 16:11, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I gave it in my edit summary; hang on, I'll just go and dredge it from the history...

Ah, here it is: "rm link to facetious, sub-Pete-&-Dud piece". That sums it up, I think. It doesn't belong here; it contains nothing that we'd like to have gone into the article but couldn't find room for. It's not that I find it unoriginal and unfunny (I mean, I do, but that's not the point), just that it's not suitable for the links section of an encyclopædia. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:23, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately OmegaWikipedia doesn't have the courtesy or the patience (or the understanding of Wikipedia) of MarkGallagher, and reinstated the link with an edit summary that merely referred to my reason for removing it as "questionable". If it's questionable, could it be questioned please? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 14:08, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I wanna know what's the meaning of the expression: This shit is bananas. Why bananas, what does it represent? I'm from Brazil.

I don't know for sure in this case, but "bananas" is a (slightly old-fashioned) slang term for "mad", "crazy". --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:18, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hollaback = Houellebecq ? Has anyone thought about this?

It seems to me that this song was written with the intention of becoming a football stadium anthem (along the lines of, say, Song 2), both lyrically and musically (and even in terms of the video). Not being American, I wouldn't know if this is accurate, or if whoever it is that play music at games have picked up on the song. Any ideas? RMoloney 01:10, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What is a "hollaback girl"? Is it a piece of American football cheerleading slang? Don't answer me here, put it in the article. Although the video features cheerleading equals Toni Basil's "Mickey", the drumbeat seems closer to Cameo's "Word Up". Five years from now this article will consist of a paragraph in the article about the album from which the song came; five years after that the article on the album from which it came will be a paragraph in the article about Gwen Stefani; and five years after that the article on Gwen Stefani will be a paragraph in the article on No Doubt. -Ashley Pomeroy 20:05, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Now that Cool (song) has earned featured article status, this is the next Gwen Stefani song that will be aiming for the very same honour. I will begin work on the article as soon as possible. --Winnermario 02:27, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If User:Mel Etitis continues to remove my notes or parts of quotes from the critics, I will be filing a complaint—you don't just go and remove something when you feel it does not look appealing to an article. --Winnermario 23:35, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm correcting the appalling English, and I removed criticisms that added nothing to the article (being either nothing more than descriptions – and not very informative descriptions – of the music, or references to the producers' style). File a complaint. The nature of Wikipedia is that anyone can "just go and remove something when [they] feel it does not look appealing to an article", and others can re-add it. That's why I changed what you'd added instead of complaining that you'd added it. If you can't cope with the fact that others can and will edit what you write, Wikipedia may be the wrong place for you; you seem to need our own Web page. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:33, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mel, although I agree with your edits (and Winnermario, you are free to "file a complaint", but keep in mind Mel's one of the people you might consider filing one with), I don't think it's particularly helpful to invite good editors to leave. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 11:44, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Appalling English? Excuse me? There is no such thing as perfect English, so don't think you're anymore a better contributor to Wikipedia than I am.

And don't bother using cover-ups like "I removed criticisms that added nothing to the article (being either nothing more than descriptions – and not very informative descriptions – of the music, or references to the producers' style)." Criticism is most certainly welcome, but that is besides the point. You went and removed the entire Critical Response section. Unacceptable. --Winnermario 19:24, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bravo, Winnermario... wherever you have gone. --Hollow Wilerding 20:32, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone specify where Greenwood is from, make the first ref to him its own para, and properly represent things? In a copyedit earlier I made his comments an indented citation because they were long enough but I notice now we have " on top of ", which isn't how it should be. Marskell 22:15, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You changed:

Internationally, reaction to "Hollaback Girl" was generally positive, but not as overwhelming as it had been in the US.

to

Worldwide, reaction to "Hollaback Girl" was generally positive, but not as overwhelming as it had been in the North America.

That is not accurate on both counts. International, in this usage, means OUT OF, as in "domestic trade" versus "international trade". Worldwide means ALL OF THE WORLD, so here, it would mean the US included. Internationally (out of the US), the song didn't do as well as in the US. Using "worldwide" means: "Around the entire world (which includes the US), it didn't do as well as in the US." International may not be the most precise word here, but worldwide isn't BETTER, it is worse. If you're going to change something, you shouldn't make it less precise than it was to begin with.

Second, North America vs US. The Chart performance section deals with the US only. Billboard is US figures. North America includes the US, Canada, and Mexico. There is a difference. --Tsavage 03:49, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent points. However, I'd point out that "worldwide" and "outside the US" are generally preferable to "internationally" – comparing "international" and "domestic" figures is taking a US POV, and we've got more than enough of that on Wikipedia without insisting on its correctness. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 05:29, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"international" and "domestic" figures is taking a US POV - Yes, precisely. To risk putting too fine a point on it, the paragraph these changes refer to is the last, in effect, footnote entry in an extremely overlong, absolutely US-centric discussion of the song's performance, based on (except for a sentence or so on another US chart) the numerous different charts of Billboard, which is absolutely the "Voice of America" (as in, America=USA) in the major label music industry. Intentionally or not, the section concerns business in the USA, capped by a few words on the rest of the world. The way it's all written, "internationally" is absolutely clear and appropriate. It should properly be titled, "Chart performance in the US". That's why the section needs a rewrite, as I noted in the FAC talk page... But, yes, I agree with you: "outside the US" would be better still, and in this context would still only highlight the imbalanced US POV (I mentioned above: International may not be the most precise word here, I guess the reversion of the change, which I did, was also a point here...) ;) --Tsavage 15:24, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Canada isn't in the article and I'm Canadian. Wow. Impressively stupid of me, I'd say. Pardon while I include its position. --Hollow Wilerding 20:46, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Took this out and replaced with a verse that better illustrates the point of being made that Stefani is addressing Love:

"Both of us want to be the winner

But there can only be one

So I'm gonna fight, gonna give it my all

Gonna make you fall, gonna sock it to you

That's right, I'm the last one standing

Another one bites the dust"

--Tsavage 22:50, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And I just reverted, as the above lyrics are a better example. --Hollow Wilerding 23:42, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I won't change it again at this point, but for comparison's sake, and future use, the more illustrative (since it also has one of the 37 "shit"s, and a reference to the cheerleading theme) quote is:

I heard that you were talking shit

And you didn't think that I would hear it

People hear you talking like that, getting everybody fired up

So I'm ready to attack, gonna lead the pack

Gonna get a touchdown, gonna take you out

That's right, put your pom-poms down, getting everybody fired up

--Tsavage 00:31, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Point well made. I will revert to the lyrics you chose, User:Tsavage. --Hollow Wilerding 02:05, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I replaced the section. Apart from the fact that this article needs a section about the actual music (a song starts with MUSIC, after all, the chart positions and videos come later...), this contained new information, like the fact that there were guitars and trumpets... --Tsavage 04:41, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Since "shit" is so prominently mentioned as a song feature in this article, there should be a description of how "shit" was replaced in the clean versions and video. --Tsavage 04:41, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I replaced the additional Mickey information. Hollow: Please think a minute before reflexively changing so much stuff back. I'm obviously working on the article, not trying to destroy it. Here, MAYBE everyone in the world but me instantly remembers "Mickey". In case not, it is probably useful, interesting background in an article that's supposed to be COMPREHENSIVE, to point out the cheerleading connection. Especially in a paragraph about "pop culture references". Or maybe you don't know the song/chant? It was HUGE... And in the 1980s, an apparently favorite Stefani haunt. So, making that connnection explicit (FA's or any good article should be reasonably self-contained) perhaps sheds some light (duh) on why "Mickey" is echoed/tributed/whatever in the cheerleader-themed "Hollaback". No? --Tsavage 04:56, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, here's what we'll do: I'll attempt to research why the word "shit" appears in the song so frequently, and attempt to locate information on the structure and music. However, as per present time, I must replace the musical structure back into "Composition and meaning" as it is a stub. --Hollow Wilerding 17:55, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll leave it out for now, provided you note your intentions as above on the FAC page as well... --Tsavage 18:59, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get the Highlander reference. On the LP version of Hollaback, I don't hear any musical indication of Highlander. I suppose one could make a connection like this: the complete line in question is, "All the boys want to be the winner, but there can only be one", which does summarize the Highlander series plotline (immortals kill each other off till only one remains), and contains an approximation of the "there can be only one" signature line from the movie (lyrics: "there can only be one"), and the original movie had a Queen soundtrack, and "Another One Bites the Dust" (Queen song) is musically referenced (trumpet stabs) at the end of the same verse, with the lyric "another one bites the dust", and Stefani does seem generally to "reference the 1980s" (Highlander is 1986), so some enterprising music analyst could cite a Highlander connection -- and it's as like as not "true" -- BUT, unsupported, it's complete speculation, and too much of a stretch (ie. original analysis by the editor) the way it's presented here. Might as well have the editors speculate on the meaning of "hollaback girl" as well. IMO, of course... Please correct me if I missed something! --Tsavage 20:09, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Unless some source is provided which shows that this is more than idle speculation this probably doesn't belong in the article. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 20:14, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would also agree, because I never inserted the information into the article (it was added long before I signed up on Wikipedia). Check the history for evidence. --Hollow Wilerding 21:24, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No-one is out to get you here, Hollow :) Tsavage is just trying to improve the article, regardless of who contributed individual segments of it. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 21:26, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

she doesn't know that.

I do now. --Hollow Wilerding 03:04, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

From the time I first heard this song, I felt "hollaback girl" was a reference to the automatons in the stands at a high school sporting event. Gwen's declaration of "I ain't no hollaback girl" is a shout out to those of us who refused to give up the "s" when those vapid, bubbly, perfect jumping girls demanded that we do so. Paralyzed by shyness or defiance - that's our shit. shsq

Could you provide a source or reference for your claim? —Hollow Wilerding 21:13, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]