Template:Did you know nominations/Let There Be Love (Christina Aguilera song)

Let There Be Love (Christina Aguilera song)

 * ... that Sarah Rodman for The Boston Globe labelled the Christina Aguilera song "Let There Be Love" as a "Rihanna or Katy Perry leftover"?
 * Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Kim Wyman

Created/expanded by Calvin999 (talk). Self nom at 12:28, 27 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg Meets all requirements for DYK. Is good to go. Miyagawa (talk) 18:05, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. AARON &bull; TALK   21:32, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol possible vote.svg In point of fact, while Rodman did include the "leftover" line about some songs on the album, it was not specifically attributed to "Let There Be Love", which was instead in the sentence about sedentary listening songs that might improve on the dance floor. A new hook will have to be supplied, and the article will have to be edited so Rodman's quote about leftovers is removed, as it does not apply to this particular song. I'd like to suggest that hooks not be of the form "X for media Y said/wrote the following about song Z"; these hooks have very limited interest as one person's (perhaps wacky) opinion. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:31, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
 * ALT2 ... that Andrew Hampp for Billboard compared the instrumental of "Let There Be Love" to Usher's song's "DJ Got Us Fallin' in Love" and "Scream"? AARON &bull; TALK   12:42, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I find ALT2 quite uninteresting, but am also puzzled as to why, after I've pointed out that the original hook had incorrect information in it, that information remains in the article in both "critical reception" and the lead. (Only one other review mentions Perry and Rihanna, so it seems a stretch to add that characterization to "most others", which means a clear majority.) I randomly checked one further review, and noted that Maerz was not only mischaracterized but misquoted: she does not spell out "dick" in her review. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:05, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't find it uninteresting that Framp further says in support of this that Aguilera was probably aware that Max Martin also produced the Usher song's and that she over sings the last part of the song to try and make it more different, but obviously that's too long to say for DYK. It's not a misquote, I know she doesn't outright spell it, but some people might not know what "d---" is, and we don't censor either. The original hook isn't incorrect either, he says it about multiple songs, which includes this one. Someone else also likened the song to Rihanna, Katy, kesha and Britney too, so:
 * ALT3: ... that for Christina Aguilera's performance of "Let There Be Love" at the 2012 American Music Awards, she wore an outfit designed by The Blond's, famed for creating outfits for Lady Gaga? AARON &bull; TALK   17:15, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I've labeled ALT3 for you, and it's the most interesting presented yet despite the odd possessive. (The word "famed" may run afoul of WP:PEACOCK.) The sentence in the article that supports this is properly cited, but it's frankly a mess grammatically; also the quote, which faithfully reproduces a typo from the source, manages to give a wrong impression by starting a word too soon; this should be paraphrased instead. As for "dick", it is a misquote: if you want to include it, you need to indicate that you're filling in something she didn't actually write, as in "d[ick]" or "[dick]". Alternatively, you can remove it from her quote and quote the lyrics separately. We don't censor, but we don't misrepresent, or obscure the fact that someone has self-censored. For the Framp quote, his comments are definitely of interest, but it's the hook that's in question here, and what's left in ALT2 unfortunately doesn't convey the necessary interest. Finally, if you read the Rodman review again, her final paragraph has two sentences: the first talks about missteps such as Autotune and the Rihanna/Perry leftovers. The second sentence talks separately about several dance tracks with "Let There Be Love" as the exemplar. There is no explicit or implicit connection between the two sentences that I can see and thus no justification for retaining the sentence in this article. It's fine for the album article, but not in one about the specific song. The original hook has been struck; the article will not pass DYK if that sentence remains. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:41, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * How does the stricken ALT1 have anything to do with the DYK now passing? I've removed it anyway. AARON &bull; TALK   23:25, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The stricken ALT1 had nothing to do with it; the incorrect article sentence that had "supported" it was what would have kept the article from being approved. Once an error has been pointed out in the course of a review, it needs to be fixed whether it affects the hook or the article. Just as the highly problematic sentence supporting ALT3 still needs to be fixed, and prevents the DYK from moving forward. I don't believe I'm being unclear; is there some reason you wish me to repeat my requests for fixes? (BTW, I've just discovered that the designers are properly called "The Blonds"—they're Philippe and David Blond. The cited article spells their name both ways.) BlueMoonset (talk) 04:37, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
 * You haven't pointed out any issue with ALT3?? How is it problematic? Okay, I've removed the "e", but they are still known as The Blond's, not by their individual names. AARON &bull; TALK   14:33, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I did point it out, you're just not reading at all carefully. What I said was, "The sentence in the article that supports this is properly cited, but it's frankly a mess grammatically; also the quote, which faithfully reproduces a typo from the source, manages to give a wrong impression by starting a word too soon; this should be paraphrased instead." Here's the article sentence on which you're basing ALT3: The errors are numerous: You cannot have a hook based on such a sentence without fixing the sentence. Furthermore, as I look at it, there is nothing in the source that says The Blonds are "famed for creating outfits for Lady Gaga", just that they are Gaga's "favourite designers" (which may or may not be completely accurate). Where their fame comes for is not established here, so using such a WP:PEACOCK word is inappropriate; I suggest something more like "who create outfits for Lady Gaga" for the hook.
 * "She wore a 'figure chooising cinched in corset' designed fashion designers The Blonds, who often design outfits for Lady Gaga."
 * First, "chooising" is not a word. If there's a phrase that is not in proper English, it behooves you to paraphrase rather than quote it, or if you absolutely cannot avoid the quote, to use the highly unfortunate "[sic]".
 * Second, your sentence isn't much better: "designed fashion designers The Blonds" is also not proper English. If I say a sentence "is a mess grammatically", there's no excuse for you failing to revise it. (Note: they are indeed "The Blonds", not "The Blond's"; ALT3 is still incorrect with its added apostrophe.)
 * Third, your quote breaks the "fuller figure" unit of the original, giving a false impression. What it said in full was "Christina did not try to hide her fuller figure chooising a cinched in corset by Gaga's favourite designers The Blondes to perform in"
 * Fourth, I'm not sure "often design outfits for Lady Gaga" is sufficiently supported by this article: "favourite designers" is not quite the same thing. I'd feel more comfortable with "also" rather than "often".
 * And finally, the reference does not give a link to the article in question, which is on line (here), and misspells the author's first name.
 * It did says The Blonds, not The Blond's, in the article. Also, I don't see how you can say there is no link to the article in question, because I use it several times. It's there, you must have missed it. ALT4 ... that Christina Aguilera wore a "cinched in corset" designed by The Blonds, who also create outfits for Lady Gaga, for her performance of "Let There Be Love" at the 2012 American Music Awards? AARON &bull; TALK   16:24, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol possible vote.svg Aaron, right now, as I'm striking it, ALT3 says "The Blond's". Look at it. It's been wrong since you wrote it. Not the source, but your ALT. I'm also correct about the link: The reference to that source article, reference 21, has no url field linking to the source—I just looked, and you have two "title" fields and no "url" field—and the first name of the author is spelled "Lead" when it's really "Leah". You should really fix these. In addition, ref 24 is a bare link, which is not allowed under DYK. This is also my last review on this nomination; someone else will have to take over, as I've spent far too much time having to ask more than once for frankly simple fixes. Someone else can check ALT4 once you've made the fixes I've requested this time, assuming they can find it buried in the middle of the text. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:42, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Fixed both on 21. 24 is not bare, I just clicked it and it took me to the review. Another reviewer is needed for ALT4 please. AARON &bull; TALK   19:00, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
 * It was bare, and still is now that new refs have been added and it's number 30. The last ref, currently. Just look for the bare ref in the ref list. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:47, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Bare URL is fixed. Can another reviewer please review ALT4 please. AARON &bull; TALK  21:31, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Hook ALT4 is short enough at 196 chars, in the article, referenced, and confirmed by the reference. Assuming earlier article assessment, good to go. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:29, 29 December 2012 (UTC)