Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Diamonds (Rihanna song)/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by User:Ian Rose 10:03, 15 August 2013 (UTC).

Diamonds (Rihanna song)

 * Nominator(s): — Tomíca (T2ME) 17:56, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because... I have worked on the article, since the song was released. Constantly editing it, made me creating what I created today. I believe the article is detailed enough, precise and shows the main impact the song had on the music. Again thanks to who helped me with the prose. For all the users who decide to oppose, please provide the issues you found so I can fix them. Cheers! — Tomíca (T2ME) 17:56, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments from Cassianto
 * "The single topped music charts in more than twenty countries and was a top ten hit in over thirty countries." — Two "countries" in close proximity.
 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 23:51, 18 July 2013 (UTC)


 * "Some critics believed that the heavily tattooed man intertwined with Rihanna's arm in the video resembles Chris Brown."— We slip from past tense (believed) to current (resembles). I would say: "Some critics believe that the heavily tattooed man intertwined with Rihanna's arm in the video resembles Chris Brown."
 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 23:35, 18 July 2013 (UTC)


 * First mention of Rihanna in the body needs to be linked.
 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 23:35, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Down to critical reception, more to come. --  Cassianto Talk   23:09, 18 July 2013 (UTC)


 * "...and felt that it has the potential to be another hit for Rihanna." —Time travelling again: "has" should be "had" if we are using "felt" and not feels.
 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 13:40, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * "According to James Montgomery of MTV News, "Diamonds" is a more positive than previous singles..." —A more positive what? Either that, or we have a stray "a" lurking within the sentence.
 * Removed the 'a'. — Tomíca (T2ME) 13:40, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * "In the US, "Diamonds" debuted at number 16 on the Billboard Hot 100 and sold 133,000 copies in its first week. In its fourth week, "Diamonds" climbed to number eight on the chart and became Rihanna's twenty-third top-ten single. For the week ending December 1, 2012, "Diamonds" became..." — I don't think we need to keep mentioning the single by name: a pronoun would suffice on the second and third mention.
 * Copy-edited. — Tomíca (T2ME) 13:40, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * "On the Radio Songs chart, "Diamonds" debuted at number 28. In its fourth week, "Diamonds" climbed to number ten..." — Again here.
 * Copy-edited. — Tomíca (T2ME) 13:40, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * "...one on the chart. It remained atop the chart for four consecutive weeks." — repetition of "the chart"
 * Copy-edited. — Tomíca (T2ME) 13:40, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * "Photographs of the production were leaked on..." — "leaked to the press" I would say (if it was indeed the press).
 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 13:40, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Down to Live performances. --  Cassianto Talk   08:28, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * "...she wore a black lingerie" →"....she wore black lingerie"
 * Done.— Tomíca (T2ME) 00:12, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * "The show was aired by CBS on December 4. On November 10..." – Is there a reason as to why this is not chronological? Also, these two stubby sentences can be combined in my opinion to make for a smoother flow.
 * This isn't chronological, because it was shot earlier and aired the next month. I combined the sentences though. — Tomíca (T2ME) 00:12, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * "Joe Reid said that her performance was the highlight of the show's episode and was more favorable of the digitized background..." — Who was more favourable? Was the digitized background more favourable than the show itself? I think I know what you mean, in which case may I suggest: "Joe Reid said that her performance was the highlight of the show's episode and favoured the digitized background in particular...."
 * Done.— Tomíca (T2ME) 00:12, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * "Tess Lynch of Gratland was impressed by Rihanna's exceptional singing ..." — slipping into POV territory there.
 * I put quotation marks. — Tomíca (T2ME) 00:12, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * was "astonished viewers" part of the quote? See above re POV if not.
 * Same as above. — Tomíca (T2ME) 00:12, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * "On November 25, Rihanna performed the song on series 9..." — pronoun preferable.
 * Done.— Tomíca (T2ME) 00:12, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * "Hayes of Irish Independent praised the performance and wrote that it..." — Watch the prose, can you think of another word other than "wrote"?
 * Changed it to 'stated'. — Tomíca (T2ME) 00:12, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * ""Diamonds" was remixed by rapper Flo Rida, whose version was premiered on November 12..."
 * Done.— Tomíca (T2ME) 00:12, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * "He also makes raspy-voiced shout-outs to the Illuminati and Tay Zonday..." -- I don't get this. Who were the "Illuminati"? what was he shouting out?  Who is Tay Zonday? The reader will be forced to use these links to find out.
 * I removed the vague part of the sentence. — Tomíca (T2ME) 00:12, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Without wishing to sound crass, is "on his Brad Pitt" Rhyming slang for something?
 * Tbh, I don't have an idea lol. — Tomíca (T2ME) 00:12, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

That's it, a good job as always Tomica. I will leave the tables to the technical persons looking in but your refs look OK too. --  Cassianto Talk   19:20, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Support – per resolved responses. Nice article! --   Cassianto Talk   09:59, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * "It was written by Sia Furler and its producers, Benny Blanco and StarGate." — At first I didn't get that "its producers" meant "the song's producers." Is there anyway to make it sound clearer?
 * I adjust it a bit. Is it more clearer now? It's better like this than writing, It was written by Sia Furler, Benny Blanco and StarGate, while the production was done by the latter two. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Sounds clearer now.  Snap Snap  19:12, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * "...and said that it will first be played on American radio..." → "...and said that it would be first played on American radio..." (since the song has already been played)
 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * "seventh number one single in the country" → seventh number-one single in the country
 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

As you can see, it's mostly nitpicking.  Snap Snap  17:28, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Support.  Snap Snap  19:12, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Most, if not all of the issues I noticed beforehand have been picked out above by other users. Things I will say though.
 * Comments by Et3rnal
 * MOS:ALBUM states that track listings should generally be formatted as a numbered list, unless in more complicated situations. Personally I think this one can be written the latter form. Doing this also removes the large amount of space leftover from using the Track listing template, especially when viewing on wide screen monitors or in larger resolutions.
 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:54, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Shouldn't the year-end charts be formatted like the weekly charts and certifications (WP:ACCESS).
 * I can't see the difference tbh. Can you please point it out? — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:54, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Besides that, the article is written well and covers the topic in lots of depth.  Et 3  rnal  18:39, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries, I've done it, and with that in mind, I'll now Support.  Et 3  rnal  19:37, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Comment from Adabow
The following part of the 'writing and production' section is extremely confusing: "According to Blanco, he and StarGate went into the studio with an idea to create something "Kanye [West] could rap over" and that was not Rihanna's usual sound: "We weren't thinking of Rihanna at all and then it's the one that we weren't thinking Rihanna, is the one that turned into the Rihanna record ... But that's how it always happens like with me, when I'm really thinking, 'Yo, you got to make this hit right now, we got to make the first single right now.'"[1] They made the record first, followed by its beat.[1]"

Paraphrasing could help, IMO. Was the track originally designed for West? Say that! I can't decipher the quote at all. What does it mean by making he record first and then the beat? Adabow (talk) 23:04, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * It's done. Is it okay now? — Tomíca (T2ME) 13:29, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The quote "It's the one that we weren't thinking Rihanna ... that turned into the Rihanna record ... But that's how it always happens like with me". Is it really necessary? I can't see what info it gives the reader. I still don't understand how the beat could have been made after the music, considering it is part of the music. I would suggest removing this sentence. 00:13, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I don't agree with you. Yeah I think it's necessary. It's paraphrased and people can understand what's the point of the sentence. — Tomíca (T2ME) 10:11, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

OK. I'm not going to oppose on this, but in my opinion it is unclear. Adabow (talk) 10:17, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Comments from Status
— Statυs  ( talk,  contribs ) 23:06, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * We got a few dead references in the release history (Australia, UK, to name a few). I suggest replacing with Amazon or 7digital links; we've spoken about the use of iTunes before.
 * Done. Replaced them. — Tomíca (T2ME) 13:29, 1 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Support. Everything looks good to me! Great work! — Status  ( talk  ·  contribs ) 00:16, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Media check
Media check - all OK mostly OK (fair-use, own work, Flickr-images with no signs of problems). Only one minor issue:
 * File:Diamonds_video_shoot.png - please provide a more detailed "Purpose of use" in the fair-use template: what exactly is illustrated (context between image and article text) and why is this illustration needed to significantly increase the reader's understanding? (note: fair-use is OK, just the argument for it should be a bit more detailed ).
 * Fair-use for images and sound sample is OK aside from the minor issue above. GermanJoe (talk) 11:48, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you Joe. I believe it's okay now. — Tomíca (T2ME) 13:29, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Done Status updated, thanks. GermanJoe (talk) 14:37, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Comments from Colonies Chris

 * Emeli Sande should be Emeli Sandé. Dave Aude should be Dave Audé.
 * The article titles for well-known cities such as New York City, Los Angeles, and Atlanta are not qualified by the state name; there's no need for "New York City, New York"; "Los Angeles, California", "Atlanta, Georgia". Why would any reader care that Los Angeles in California (in the unlikely event they didn't know already)? There's no other Los Angeles it might be confused with. Only the city is important here, the state has no value.
 * Many citations have superfluous publisher parameters (e.g. work=Billboard|publisher=Prometheus Global Media, work=New York Times|publisher=The New York Times Company). These have no value at all to anyone checking references, and in fact Template:Citation recommends omitting publisher for periodicals. (And in the case of most US newspapers, the legal owner (e.g. The New York Times Company) is different from the publisher (Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr.), so it's not only useless but inaccurate too.) Colonies Chris (talk) 13:25, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 13:29, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Sources review: I have so far checked out the first of the three columns of refs:
 * Ref 14: Date in source is September 25, 2012, not October 2
 * Fixed it. — Tomíca (T2ME) 08:37, 9 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Ref 21 returns "Page Not Found"
 * Removed it. — Tomíca (T2ME) 08:37, 9 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Ref 22 requires purchase after first page
 * All the information that is present in the article is visible so that's not really an issue. — Tomíca (T2ME) 08:37, 9 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Ref 24: How is "The Marquee Blog" connected with the BBC?
 * It's CNN actually, fixed it :). — Tomíca (T2ME) 08:37, 9 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Ref 36: The source is "Independent Woman.ie" which I believe is a website rather than a print source
 * Yeah, but it's published by the Irish Independent, so I adjusted it. — Tomíca (T2ME) 08:37, 9 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Ref 41: Again, I don't think the Irish Independent' is the source. It may be the parent organisation, but the source here appears to be the Enniscorthy Guardian.
 * Same as above. — Tomíca (T2ME) 08:37, 9 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Refs 59 and 60 appear to be identical
 * No they are not, they just have a different title. — Tomíca (T2ME) 08:37, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

I'll add more when I can Brianboulton (talk) 18:47, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Sources review continued (second column)
 * Ref 80: source is dated 12.8.13 not 22.7.13
 * Fixed. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:45, 11 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Ref 82 and other MTV: a note should be added, that MTV sites are not generally available to users outside the US
 * Tbh, I live in another country and continent from the US, but I can still visit the sources (apart of one note that says maybe I would like to see MTV Europe), so I think the note will be useless.


 * Ref 93: "Latin Times" or "Los Angeles Times"?
 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:45, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Ref 98: Beth Graham is the author, not the publisher
 * Done. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:45, 11 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Ref 124: Source does not appear to be informative
 * There is a problem with the singleschart, it will be fixed soon. — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:45, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Finish soon! Brianboulton (talk) 23:38, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Sources review concluded (third column)
 * 124 and 125: Instructions required for use (I know they're Hungarian, but...)
 * As I said above, this is an issue with the template, I can't do nothing about it, a friend of mine will hopefully fix it. — Tomíca (T2ME) 00:07, 13 August 2013 (UTC)


 * 136 returns "page not found"
 * Fixed it. — Tomíca (T2ME) 00:07, 13 August 2013 (UTC)


 * 138 returns "not found"
 * Fixed it. — Tomíca (T2ME) 00:07, 13 August 2013 (UTC)


 * 141 returns "page not found"
 * Fixed it. — Tomíca (T2ME) 00:07, 13 August 2013 (UTC)


 * 142 returns "page not found"
 * Fixed it. — Tomíca (T2ME) 00:07, 13 August 2013 (UTC)


 * 157: I can't see where this source confirms the statistic cited to it.
 * Removed it. — Tomíca (T2ME) 00:07, 13 August 2013 (UTC)


 * 169 goes to a blank page
 * Fixed it. — Tomíca (T2ME) 00:07, 13 August 2013 (UTC)


 * 170: I failed to find mention of either Rihanna or Diamonds on this source.
 * Done, added a note in the reference. — Tomíca (T2ME) 11:26, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm not an expert on the sourcing of pop music articles, but the sources used here look broadly what I would expect to see. Certainly the article has been most thoroughly cited. I have checked every link, identifying those not working and raising queries on a few more, which you seem to be addressing. This has been a marathon - I apologise for the time taken. I hope not to do another like this for a while. But good luck with the article. Brianboulton (talk) 19:58, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you Brian! I really appreciate your help. — Tomíca (T2ME) 00:07, 13 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Support: I've gone through the whole article. It's an easy, interesting read that is definitely FA material. Great work! Ar  re  10:41, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you Arre! — Tomíca (T2ME) 10:55, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Delegate comment -- pls review duplicate links with this script. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:22, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I installed and run the script. I believe there are no more WP:OVERLINKS on the article. Thanks — Tomíca (T2ME) 14:33, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 14:48, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.