Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hard (song)/archive2


 * 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 not promoted by SandyGeorgia 19:51, 9 November 2011.

Hard (song)

 * Nominator(s): Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!  00:00, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because... only three people commented last time, and the FAC was closed due to not enough people casting a vote or posting a review of things to do after only 6 days. Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon! 00:00, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Calvin, for future reference. Transcluded as of this time stamp. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:41, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks not done. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:55, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Check consistency of wikilinking in footnotes
 * Done Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!
 * FN 9: URL?
 * A consensus was reached that the URL should not be included at Reliable sources/Noticeboard Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!
 * Do you happen to have a link to the specific discussion? Nikkimaria (talk) 15:20, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 56, thread 15. Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!  15:24, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
 * FN 50: is that the correct capitalization?
 * Done Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!
 * Compare formatting for FNs 59 and 60
 * Done Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!
 * What makes this a high-quality reliable source?. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:55, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I thought only one case of About.com could be permitted in an article. I saw the discussion between you and someone else on your talk page about 2 months ago. Also, there would be practically no reception section if that was removed. Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!  14:41, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I didn't say anything about number of cases in the discussion you mention - what I said was it can be used in limited circumstances where it is clear that it's the author's opinion and where the author can be considered an "expert" on the topic, per WP:SPS. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:20, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Is Bill Lamb not a qualified reviewer then? I don't want to have to remove it because it will drastically shorten the Music video section. Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon!  15:24, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Copyscape review - No issues were revealed by Copyscape searches. Graham Colm (talk) 21:04, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Oppose Comment - There have not been many changes to this article since its last nomination. Some of the problems with the prose that were pointed out last time are still present such as "with Rihanna commanding an army". This should be "with Rihanna's commanding...", but this does not flow well and the sentence needs to be completely recast. And we still have "changes to daytime desert scene with Rihanna walking...", which should read "changes to a daytime desert scene as Rihanna walks...". Quotations should be chosen for their quality; this is rubbish, "fishnets, boots and a reggae-inspired leather playsuit with go faster stripes in red, green and yellow and a hood". I am not going to oppose because I am fed up with coming across as the FAC bastard. But this is still not up to FA standards. Calvin, this not personal, I admire your commitment and perseverance – there must be a lot of Rihanna's fans here on Wikipedia; have you asked around for help? At least read this.Graham Colm (talk) 21:31, 7 November 2011 (UTC) And I have done your changes. Calvin  &bull; Na Na Na C'mon! 14:41, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
 * PS. I have made some edits (suggestions) that might improve the Lead and give a clearer understanding of the problems I see with the prose. Having not heard the song or seen the video, I might have introduced inaccuracies; so please do not accept these edits as given. Graham Colm (talk) 22:56, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Extended discussion moved to talk. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:20, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Oppose --Efe (talk) 14:59, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Agree with Graham: "coming across as the FAC bastard". I had opposed several of Calvin's nominations, but his perseverance has been amazing and noteworthy (at least in the WikiSong Project). Anyway, here's my review as basis of my opposing:

From that alone, it seems the article has still so much to improve. Thanks. --Efe (talk) 14:59, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Poor usage of quotes. For example, the information regarding the development of song in which Rihanna is quoted as saying this and that. Doesn't flow well, and aside from the non essential commentaries of the artist, the whole quotation can be paraphrased. --Efe (talk) 14:59, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. Or do you want me to paraphrase ones in the Critical reception section too? Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * Unclear words / jargon. What do you mean by pin-sharp beats? --Efe (talk) 14:59, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Done Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * Loose prose such as "'Hard' incorporates musical elements of hip hop". What other elements are we talking about? --Efe (talk) 14:59, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Hip Hop is the only genre that was written by reviewers. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * Very technical phrasing: "the song is written in the key of B minor and is set in common time with a Pop and R&B groove and a tempo of 100 beats per minute" the average reader can't even understand that. --Efe (talk) 14:59, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Vast majority of articles are written like this. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * "low note of G3 to the high note of B4" If Rihanna's vocal range in a song is G2-B3, would you still say "high note of B3"? From what note in an octave should "high" starts? --Efe (talk) 14:59, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * You mean G3-B4, not G2-B3. Well, you need to have a low and a high in order to have a range. A high note depends on the singer. For Rihanna, a B4 is moderately high. But for Mariah Carey for example, she can knock out E7 is considered high for her. So it depends on the singer. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * The incorporation of reviews in a section intended to present the song's composition (i.e. music) is very lousy IMO. The use of this does not connect with the rest: "Ailbhe Malone of NME stated that although Jay-Z was not involved in the production of Rated R, "his influence is tangible."[9] and that Rihanna adopts Jay-Z's vocal style in the lyric "Brilliant, resilient, fan mail from 27 million.""
 * Done? Tell me what you think. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * There are stray punctuation marks "'his influence is tangible.'[9] and that Rihanna" and should that be the stop, the following sentence starts with a non capital letter. --Efe (talk) 14:59, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. Removed the sentence. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk
 * Lol, thaks for the compliment in the Oppose haha. I will do this in a few hours. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  15:23, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Done/responded to all. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  18:12, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Comment: I endorse what Efe says about the need to paraphrase. Take this: ""When I first heard the song, I was in Paris, Dream and Tricky, they flew out and played me the record. They played me a few [songs], but this one stuck out to me. It had such an arrogance to it, which is so far from who I am ... which is part of why I wanted to do it. It was fun. It was bragging. A lot of attitude. Young Jeezy was the perfect person for the topic of the song. Just the vibe of the song. I love, love, love his verse. He added so much more to the record." It's OK to use direct quotes for short, pointed comments, but not for this sort of showbizzy over-the-top venting. She wanted to do the song because it was a chance to do something different from her normal output; that's pretty well all you need say. Brianboulton (talk) 16:01, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I've changed the quotes in the Background and composition section to prose instead, what do you think? Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk  17:55, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Are you actually having a laugh? It was only transcluded 2 days ago. I thought it was unfair that the first one was closed in less than 6 days, but less than 2 days is really taking the piss. I am not impressed at all. You are not giving my FACs any time to get any form of notice, yet for some reason, other FACs get to to stay for weeks and weeks, even if no one has commented for over a week. I'm so angry and annoyed right now. Calvin  &bull; Talk That Talk 20:01, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.