Talk:Te Amo (Rihanna song)/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Jivesh boodhun (talk · contribs) 12:30, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Media Review

 * An ideal length for the music sample will be 21 second. (Just a suggestion, not necessary).
 * File:Rihanna te amo video.jpg >>> I believe this one is fine.


 * ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:38, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Infobox

 * Why is Rihanna credited as Robyn Fenty? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:59, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
 * That's what it says in the album booklet. Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!  14:34, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Lead

 * The song was co-written by Mikkel S. Eriksen, Tor Erik Hermansen, James Fauntleroy II and Rihanna, and was produced by the former two, under their stage name Stargate.

>>> The song was co-written by Mikkel S. Eriksen, Tor Erik Hermansen, James Fauntleroy II and Rihanna, and was produced by the former two, under their stage name Stargate.
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!

>>> Lyrically, the song conveys Rihanna's struggles to deal with being the object of another woman's desires. As the song progresses, she discovers that she does not share the same feelings as the other female.
 * Lyrically, the song speaks of Rihanna's struggles to deal with being the object of a woman's desires, and discovers that she does not share the same feelings as the other female as the song progresses.
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!


 * The term Te amo is Latin, Spanish, or Portuguese for 'I love you'. >>> Is the word translation missing?
 * What do you mean? Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!
 * The phrase does not look good to me. Re-write it using the word translation. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:52, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll re-word it. Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!  18:47, 7 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Mention why the song was not released in the United States.
 * Is there any need to? I don't know why the song was specifically not released in the US. Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!
 * There is a reason behind this. Search for it on the web. I think it has something to do with encouraging lesbian relationships. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:52, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I've never heard ot that before. Te Amo was released as the European single, Rockstar 101 was the US single. Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!  18:47, 7 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "Te Amo" garnered positive reviews >>> received
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!


 * peaking inside the top ten in France >>> peaking inside the top ten on the charts in France
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!


 * Link UK R&B Chart
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!


 * featured French supermodel Laetitia Casta >>> features French supermodel Laetitia Casta
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!


 * in the video. >>> redundant
 * Re-worded. Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!


 * Rihanna performed the song for the first and only time live at >>> Rihanna performed the song live for the first and only time at
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!


 * Link set list
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!


 * Rated R, as well as songs from >>> Remove comma
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!


 * The song was also included >>> Redundant.......... Use "Te Amo" again
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!


 * If you add the years next to the tours, also add them next to all songs in the entire article.
 * Removed date.

- ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 13:04, 2 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I will continue soon. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 04:59, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Background and composition

 * Link Rated R
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!
 * was solicited >>> was released
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!
 * Do not link countries.
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!
 *  In Germany on 
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!
 * The song was not released first, the written and produced. So re-arranged this section.
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!
 * "Te Amo" was co-written >>> written
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!
 * , with production of the song >>> while production of the song was handled
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!
 * incorporates the elements of Latin >>> Latin what???
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!
 * the song the song the song the song >>> REPETITIVE
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!
 * Link key
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!
 * whilst lyrically, the song is about the relationship between two women, with one realizing that she is falling in love with Rihanna, proclaiming "Te Amo" throughout the song, which is Latin for "I love you" >>> Re-write. Very often, non-native speakers of English like me get lost in such long sentences.
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!
 * Rihanna realized >>> use present tense. The lyrical reference of the song has never changed.
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!
 * Ailbhe Malone of NME described the meaning of the lyrics in her review of Rated R, explaining
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!


 * ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:05, 7 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I will complete this on Thursday. Right now, i have exams. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 07:31, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay. I won't be on until Wednesday anyway. Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!  22:01, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

When Will I Continue >>> After November 16, 2011
★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:59, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * OKay. I hope this doesn't get closed because of no activity though :/ Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!  19:12, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It may be worth pinging Jivesh to remind him/her. Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:47, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I have. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  12:31, 17 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Calvin, before i (re-)start the review, i suggest you find some time and go through the article again. The errors to which i pointed out above have nothing to do with wrong formatting etc. You just need to read the article again. Tell me when you finish. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:40, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * What? Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  12:44, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Look Calvin, this is a short article, in fact a very short one, yet there are too many errors. Please read it again. I am sure you will find some errors yourself. Fix them and then inform me and i will in turn go through the article and point out the grammatical errors you did not see. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:47, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I've gone through it. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  14:52, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Second Round

 * I only asked you to go through the article for grammatical errors but it seems you have done considerable modifications in the lead. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 16:51, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Lead

 * Re-arrange. A GA's lead cannot be like that. It looks very bad.
 * It's in the same organisation as S&M, which is more than a GA. People on the FAC have no problem with it, so technically the lead is FA quality. I will do the rest of the points in about 12/18 hours. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  02:20, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Still, you need to organize the lead. I have told you countless times before. You have to lay emphasis on presentation. And please Calvin, this is nowhere near FA quality. This is a short article and it can be balanced. If it had a story like "Single Ladies", i could have understood but still, "Single Ladies"'s lead is not unbalanced because of composition but because of the cultural impact. Please balance it, the article is already in a bad shape. Arguing won't help here. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 04:18, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not arguing Jivesh, I'm just saying that I have written the lead of Te Amo in the same format as S&M, which no one at the FAC has a problem with, and the lead of Te Amo is a lot shorter than S&M. I'll do the below points in a minute. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  16:33, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Do you realize how massive the first paragraph looks? There is detailed excessively. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 16:43, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * No, it doesn't look big to me at all. You must have a smaller screen than me. I know when I use my Mac, even the shortest of Leads or sections looks massive. But on this laptop, which I use all the time, I don't notice if something might appear bigger than it does for you for example. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  16:50, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Frankly, this article should have a one-paragraph lead only, at most two. The article doesn't even have 10 KB of prose, and you would need well above 15 KB to have three paragraphs of that size. Your S&M (song) argument is ineffective here, because that article is much longer. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  16:51, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Let me tell you this well now. The first paragraph of the lead in comparison to the second and third is too big. Okay now? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 16:52, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Penguin, thanks for jumping on board. Lol. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 16:52, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Calvin, frankly the lead looks bad. It is not even balanced and it is too long, over-detailed. Come on, this is such a short article. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 16:54, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * What am I mean't to cut then? What about the whole WP:LEAD thing, about not mentioning something in the Lead but in the rest of the article? Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  16:55, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * A lead similar to this will be fine with me. They are both at 31 KB. Read the lead loudly (again). You will yourself get a very good idea of what to remove. If you don't, i will tell you. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 16:57, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  16:59, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Good. Horrible. Lol. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:00, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Fixed. You see how easy it was. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:09, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Good work Jivesh. If you don't mind, I have cut it down further and made some prose corrections to the lead. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  17:11, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Penguin shortened it further. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:10, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * It does no matter Penguin. You know how obsessed i am with having symmetrical paragraphs. Lol. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:12, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It looks so short now. And the third paragraph reads like a list of hard facts with such short sentences. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  17:22, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It's a lead. It's supposed to read as a brief (and I mean brief) overview of what the article has to offer. Anymore is simply redundant. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  17:28, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * To be honest, it looks basically the same as what I originally wrote. I don't get what the big deal was. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  17:34, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Response

 * Critical reception
 * Is that the appropriate name? I don't think so.
 * What???? Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * Response??? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:37, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll change to "Reception" and "Critical response" then. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * Upon the release of Rated R, several music critics commented on the song as part of their album review, as well as when "Te Amo" was released as a single. What makes this sentence a necessary addition?
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * As part of his review for Rated R is getting repetitive. Too close.
 * Repetitive? I only use this once. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * You use it twice. Should i show you the lines? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:37, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * You just remove it (as i told you to do), should i show you the diff? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:37, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * And it is quite silly to mention this As part of his review for Rated R as all reviews are part of the album, aren't they? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:38, 19 November 2011 (
 * Yeah I know I removed it, you told me to. I just didn't get how it was repetitive because I only said it once. And no, it's not silly. Not all reviews are from albums. You Da One, for example, has single and album reviews. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * This is "Te Amo" not "You Da One". "Te Amo" did not premiere before the release of the album nor was it a single before the release of the album. I am saying it again. Stick to "Te Amo". ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:47, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * And yes, i told you to remove that. You know it and yet you post : Repetitive? I only use this once. Wasn't it repetitive when i did the review? What are you trying to imply Calvin? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:49, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm was just using it as an example in answer to your point. And I'm not implying anything Jivesh, I just don't understand how one instance of something is repetitive. That's all. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * BBC music reviewer Jude Rogers >>> Wrong format. It should always be BBC's critic Jude Rogers
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * less futuristic >>> A quote?
 * No. If it was, then it would have been quoted. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * on the albums
 * , as they do not >>> is the comma needed?
 * Read the sentence without a comma, it would be very long without a break. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * We do not use commas to break sentences when we want. A comma is a punctuation that should be used appropriately. Id the sentence is too long, break it in to two or more sentences. That's it. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:44, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * We do not use commas to break sentences when we want. A comma is a punctuation that should be used appropriately. Id the sentence is too long, break it in to two or more sentences. That's it. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:44, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * heavy electronic influences  >>> A quote?
 * No. Again, if it was, I would have quoted it Jivesh. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * heavy electronic influences which >>> comma after influences
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * awarded the song four out of a possible five stars >>> awarded the song a rating of four out of five stars.
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * The song... the song... the song >>> repetitive
 * It only says "the song" twice in the whole section. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * It does not matter how many times you use it. What matters is how close they are. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:42, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * They aren't close at all. "Robert Copsey of Digital Spy awarded the song a rating of four out of five stars and noted that Rihanna had progressed from singing about a male interest in one of her previous singles, "Rude Boy", to fantasizing about women, saying "After the rather explicit 'Rude Boy' campaign, Rihanna's taking a well-deserved break from titillating the blokes here – only to find herself the object of another lady's affections. One of her Rated R LP's less menacing moments, 'Te Amo' finds La Fenty grappling with her sexuality over some irresistible, Latin-infused Stargate beats."[10] Fraser McAlpine of Daily Reviews also awarded the song four out of five stars and also commented on the theme of lesbianism, saying "It's that old, old story: Girl meets girl. Girl speaks different language to girl. Girl loves girl. Girl doesn't love girl. Girl sad. We’ve all been there, right? And Rihanna’s captured that feeling beautifully (she actually has, even though I sound incredibly insincere about it)."[13]"
 * Do you know you mentioned "Rude Boy" before? The reader might think you are still referring to "Rude Boy". This is what i always tell people: Do not edit under the false impression that only the fans of the singer will read this article. Anyone can read it and our aim is to facilitate the reading. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:55, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Rude Boy is mentioned in a quote far before it. But I'll change it for peace sake. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  17:58, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * stars, as well as observing that Rihanna had progressed from singing about a male interest in one of her previous singles >>> is that comma needed? And observing???
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * ''observing that Rihanna had progressed from singing about a male interest in one of her previous singles, "Rude Boy", to fantasizing about women" >>> A quote?
 * NO. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  17:50, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't use saying. Haven't i told you this before?
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * Fraser McAlpine of Daily Reviews >>> What is that?
 * A newspaper. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * also awarded the song four out of five stars and also commented on the theme of lesbianism, saying >>> also also also ... repetitive and again using saying
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  17:50, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Question: Did you really go through the article? I can fail it for the amount if mistakes it contains, especially taking into account it is a short article. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫)


 * Please read the remaining sections before i continue. There are too many grammatical errors for such a short article. Really too many and i am serious. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:01, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Read the article again. The references formatting is choppy. Please do what i am telling you. This review is getting giant. This article is under prepared and has been rushed to GAN.  ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:57, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The references look fine to me. I can't see any problems. And I am doing what you're telling me. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  18:04, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Does that mean you have already read the article again? And have you really gone through the references? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:05, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * No I haven't read through the other sections yet, but I have gone through the references and I can't see any problems. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  18:07, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Allow me to cite all the references that need attention

 * 1
 * BBC should not be italicized. This was far too obvious. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * 4
 * R&R should be linked. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * 5
 * ✅ All I could see wrong was that I hadn't included Apple after iTunes Store.0
 * Exactly, that's indeed a choppy formatting. Keep in mind your are working for GA not B-class. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:37, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * ❌ It should be Apple Inc. And don't forget to link Apple Inc. Same for the others. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I've been told not to include Inc., but to save aggravation...✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * 6
 * ✅ All I could see wrong was that I hadn't included Apple after iTunes Store.
 * 7
 * ✅ All I could see wrong was that I hadn't included Apple after iTunes Store.
 * 8
 * Do you want Amazon.com instead of amazon.de ?
 * Yes + Amazon Inc ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:37, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, I think this ref is fine. Amazon.com publishes its own site. Plus, using "Inc" is frowned upon in ref publishers. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  18:40, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually I agree. After all, Germany is not .com Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * 9
 * Do you want Musicomnh instead of Musicomnh.com ?
 * Copy and paste that to your search bar. It has an article on Wikipedia. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:37, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Not that I could find. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * It should be Music OMH. And i know what i am talking about. I think the article has just been deleted. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 13:14, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * That's not what I said Jivesh, I never said you didn't know what you are talking about. I simply said I couldn't find it. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * Here. Jivesh 1205 (talk) 17:57, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Please correct it. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 13:01, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Here. Jivesh 1205 (talk) 17:57, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Please correct it. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 13:01, 2 December 2011 (UTC)


 * 11
 * Since when is Musicnotes.com getting italicized? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * 13
 * Won't you add the publisher/owner? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I had Daily Review down as the publisher. ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * 14
 * Do you want the "...charts" sources to be changed to Hung Median ?
 * Yes. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:37, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * Should be swedishcharts.com. Hung Medien .... And it is Hung Medien. Use same format and correct everywhere (19 - 27, 50, 53, 57). Endings should be .com Jivesh 1205  (Talk) 13:01, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * Should be swedishcharts.com. Hung Medien .... And it is Hung Medien. Use same format and correct everywhere (19 - 27, 50, 53, 57). Endings should be .com Jivesh 1205  (Talk) 13:01, 2 December 2011 (UTC)


 * 19
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * 20
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * 21
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * 22
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * 23
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * 24
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * 25
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * 26
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * 27
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * 29
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * Find a replacement. That site is black listed. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 13:08, 2 December 2011 (UTC)


 * 30
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * Find a replacement. That site is black listed. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 13:08, 2 December 2011 (UTC)


 * 31
 * Use cite web Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 13:08, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Acharts.us cannot be used for GAs. Use Billboard. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 13:08, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * 32
 * ❌ ? Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * 40
 * ❌ ? Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * BBC is linked again. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 13:08, 2 December 2011 (UTC)


 * 43
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * Accessdate? And link IFPI. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 13:08, 2 December 2011 (UTC)


 * 48
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * 49
 * ❌ It's a pre-coded reference, I can't change it. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * 53
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * 55
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * Link FIMI. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 13:08, 2 December 2011 (UTC)


 * 57
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * 58
 * ✅ Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * 59

★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:13, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Because that is really helpful. I still don't see what is wrong with them. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  18:17, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Calvin, there has already been too much of spoon feeding. You have done 14 GAs, right? You should have learnt something from them, right? Listen, take the references one by one, analyse them one by one. If you still do not find anything wrong, put a ❌ next to the reference. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:22, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It is so hard to believe that you found nothing wrong. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:23, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * To be honest Jivesh, I don't think there has been any spoon feeding. And okay, I'll go through like how you suggest. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  18:24, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * To honest Calvin, all you have seen above has been spoon feeding minus the references. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:26, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It depends on what your definition of the term is then. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  18:28, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Not really, it depends on the definition in the dictionary and specially the context. Calvin, you are tired. Go to bed and come back tomorrow because you have lost your sense of humor and cordiality. This is a friendly advice. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:30, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I will continue soon and don't worry, i won't fail this but the process will be long. :D Jivesh 1205 (talk) 17:41, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not worried about you failing it, I'm worried about it getting failed by someone else. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  17:49, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Rest assured. That won't happened. Jivesh 1205 (talk) 17:57, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I have done all the ref fixes i can, but the Czech Rep. one is pre-coded. I've done all the others. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 13:15, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

As it currently stands

 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:


 * I suggest you read WP:NUMBERS and read through the other sections again to fix some of the prose by yourself. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 13:16, 21 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Per WP:ALBUMCAPS in Spanish-language "Te Amo" would need to be "Te amo" in the article body. Best, Jona yo!  Selena 4 ever  16:04, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Based on the number of problems remaining after two months, this should probably failed, and it can be renominated after everything's addressed. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 17:48, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * A lot of the time was due to the reviewer not being able to review. That's not my fault. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 19:07, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I see that now; just saw the October cmts on first skim. i won't worry about this for a couple weeks in that case. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 15:15, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Trying to finish this today

 * Chart performance
 * Read WP:NUMBERS and apply it where necessary. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 13:09, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Some choppy prose:
 * Upon the release of the album, "Te Amo" made its first chart appearance in Sweden, debuting at number 52 on the Swedish Singles Chart on December 4, 2009, and stayed on the chart for one week.
 * After being released as a promotional CD in Sweden on May 5, 2010, the song re-entered the chart at number fifty-three on July 7, 2010 and reached its peak of number 48 two weeks later on July 30, spending a total of six non-consecutive weeks on the chart.
 *  As the song was officially released in the United Kingdom > Why this mention?
 * and peaked at number five weeks a month lateron May 29.
 * entered ... entered... entered... > Try something else for a change.
 * in its sixth week >>> in its sixth charting week
 * Please don't compare here >>> but was more successful in Switzerland, where it peaked inside the top ten at number nine for one week. as you could have chosen any other country. So it seems like a personal opinion.
 *  "Te Amo" debuted and peaked at number 11 in Austria on June 25, 2010, falling to number 15 on July 2, and re-peaking at number 11 again on July 9
 * In the Flanders and Wallonia regions of Beligum, the song debuted on both charts on the same week and both spent a total of thirteen weeks on both charts; the song debuted in both regions on June 19, 2010, at numbers 29 and 28, respectively.
 * ''Elsewhere in Europe, the song debuted on the Italian Singles Chart on July 15, 2010 at number nine and peaked at number seven for two weeks, however the song was less successful in Denmark, Finland and Norway, peaking at numbers 22, 14 and 12, respectively.'
 *  In Germany, "Te Amo" became Rihanna's first song since "Hate That I Love You" in 2007 not to reach the top ten,[28] and debuted on the German Singles Chart at number 13 on July 26, 2010, and fluctuated in the top twenty before reaching its peak of 11 on July 24, 2010.
 * and reached a peak at number eighteen on July 17, 2010.
 * on the Canadian Hot 100 for the week ending July 3, 2010 >>> on the Canadian Hot 100 chart issue dated July 3, 2010
 * 8, despite not being officially released as a single, and reached a peak of number 66 on July 17, 2010


 * Too many long and choppy sentences. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 13:21, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Done 95% of them, apart from the German one. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 13:36, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * 35% satisfied. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 10:43, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * ✅ chart performance for you. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 10:43, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * ✅ music video for you. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 10:43, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * ✅ the rest. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 10:43, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I have done copy-edits, applied WP:LQ and WP:NUMBERS. I feel quite confident passing the article. Please be more careful next time and learn form your small mistakes. Cheers. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 10:45, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh thanks. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 14:29, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * You are welcome my friend. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 15:37, 7 December 2011 (UTC)