Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/S&M (song)/archive5


 * 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 19:22, 23 January 2012.

S&M (song)

 * Nominator(s): Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 16:09, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because... I think it's as close to FA standard as it has ever been. Kinda expecting the worst though, as this is it's fifth nomination. So hopefully if it is promoted, I can be pleasantly surprised and ecstatic! I really believe in this article and have spent about 6/7 months working on it. Plus, I really don't want to have the record for most failed nominations! Lol. Calvin  &bull; Watch n'  Learn 16:09, 14 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This is a WikiCup nomination. The following nominators are WikiCup participants: Calvin999. To the nominator: if you do not intend to submit this article at the WikiCup, feel free to remove this notice. UcuchaBot (talk) 00:13, 15 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: You're a long ways from the record: Talk:Real Madrid C.F..  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 14:54, 21 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Question (aside from wondering about your particular interest in this song :P ). You say there are five writers for a song barely over 4 minutes in length. What did each of the five contribute? How was the writing session conducted? Did one of them write the words and the others contribute to the music? Did one write the chorus and another write the verse? Were any of the "writers" just honorary additions? My background is in jazz, so I know that Donna Lee, although written by Miles Davis, is credited to Charlie Parker. The writing stuff is a key bit of information, IMO, if this were to be featured. Also, when was it written? It could've been from years earlier. --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 16:57, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Lol. Who wrote which line is not available. I've never seen an article on here, or more specifically popular/mainstream music, which states who wrote which line. And it was written in 2010. It says in the article. Ester Dean conveived the idea and wrote the hook and some of the chorus. But that's it. That's in the quote. I'll see what I can do with the credits. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 17:03, 14 January 2012 (UTC) Stargate composed the instrumentation.  Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 17:13, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Nah, I didn't mean who wrote each line, but some semblance of how the collaboration worked would be good. The "Background and conception" didn't say anything about the song being written in 2010, that's where I was looking. The infobox says it was recorded at "Roc the Mic studios", among other places, but the article doesn't back that up anywhere. The article also says "It was produced by Stargate and Vee, and was composed by Stargate." But then Ester Dean is the one who conceived the idea? In music, the person who conceives the idea and hook is the person who generally composes it. As a composer myself, I find this confusing and contradictory. --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 20:13, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * There isn't any information about how they came together. Have added year recorded and recording locations to the Background and conception section, with sources. Have changed to "It was produced and instrumental composed by Stargate and Vee." Composer is the same as a writer, as they created it, so technically all four composed it. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 21:42, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, composer is one who does the music. If one of them did lyrics but not the music, then they're not technically a composer. --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 22:38, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, so Stargate and Sandy Vee did the music. Lol. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 22:40, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Wait, I'm confused. You said there were four composers, but you say three did the music. Also, for this sentence - "It was produced and instrumental composed by Stargate and Vee" - do you mean "instrumentally composed"? That could be written better, if so. --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 22:45, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Ester Dean came up with the concept and some of the lyrics (stated in the interview). Stargate, Dean and Vee co-wrote the song. Stargate and Vee provided the instrumental. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 22:46, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Oppose - sorry Calvin. The prose is still below the required standard. We have, "It was produced and instrumental composed by Stargate and Vee." What does this mean? Does it mean arranged? Why do we have brackets here, "Chris Ryan of MTV wrote that the singer "[hollers]" the chorus." And, spot the grammatical error here "Interspersing scenes show Rihanna and other people in dominatrix clothing, implying various explicit acts with the singer wearing a feather boa and a top with the word "censored" across it." There is redundancy here, "On its release, the video was immediately banned in eleven countries due to its overt sexual content." In the chart performance section, most of the details are already in the table below, why repeat it all here? It makes very dull reading. I don't like having to repeatedly oppose this article's promotion because of the prose, but, despite numerous copy editing, it is still does not satisfy the very high standards required of a Featured Article. Graham Colm (talk) 23:10, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I have changed "instrumentally" to "who also arranged the instrumental". And "hollers" is in brackets because the critic said "hollering", which doesn't fit there. I can't see a gr error in that sentence? Removed "On its release". Well, if I remove the details of chart performance, where would be no need for that section, right? Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 23:27, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * "arranged the instrumental" might be vernacular English, but it's not polished prose. Why not just say "produced and arranged". Regarding the grammatical error, may I remind you again of fused participles? I don't always object to their usage, but the sentence in question is ambiguous as a result. Graham Colm (talk) 23:41, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I know what arranged means, but some people who aren't musically inclined might not know. I'll just wiki-link it. Okay, I will re-word that one. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 23:42, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Never underestimate the intelligence of our readers and avoid overlinking. Graham Colm (talk) 23:47, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I think it's best if it is linked here though. And I have re-worded that sentence. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 23:51, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I disagree. And the problem wording in that sentence is "with the singer wearing", the edit has not solved this. The Chart Performance section suffers from proseline, which is fact after fact that lacks flow and is boring to read. Graham Colm (talk) 00:07, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Unlinked and removed. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 00:17, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * There was no need for the talkback template that was posted on my user page because I watch all FACs that I review. But I guess it was meant to elicit further comments, so here are some. Spot the error here, "The songs conception was initiated by Dean", and here "The lawsuit resulted with Rihanna being ordered to pay LaChapelle an undisclosed sum of money." (We have discussed the problem in the second sentence numerous times before, in this and the previous FAC, but I can't get you to understand the error. My concerns regarding proseline have not been addressed or commented on. The article is still riddled with redundancy, for example, "these remixes were released as a digital remix package". And, how can reviewers consider this article for promotion when it now has a section that "is in the middle of an expansion or major restructuring". The article falls far below FA standards and I will not be withdrawing my oppose until I see a radical improvement in the quality of the prose throughout. Graham Colm (talk) 21:25, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I have fixed those three points. And these is an under construction banner because a reviewer has said I should include a release section. Thus, instead of having a one line section, I have put the banner there so people know I haven't left it like it on purpose. And I left you a TB because I didn't know if you knew I had addressed your points. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 22:01, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The edits have not solved the problems. All that was needed here was an apostrophe as in "The song's conception was initiated by Dean", (but this is still an odd-sounding phrase). And here, another one "The lawsuit resulted with Rihanna's being ordered...". But your text now reads "The lawsuit resulted with Rihanna ordered to pay", which is not English". But, you could have written, "as a result, Rihanna was ordered to pay", which is much better. The redundancy here, "these remixes were released as a digital remix package" was only the repetition of "remix", but you seem to have deleted the whole sentence. Redundancy does not mean unnecessary facts – it means unnecessary words. A sign of professional prose is when every word is the right word and every word is in the right place, and when sentences carry no passengers. In essence, these are the problems that are constantly preventing the prose satisfying criterion 1a. Graham Colm (talk) 22:29, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Then why didn't you say only change one word? Writing the whole line implies that the whole line is not needed. Anyway, have fixed these points again. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Because I asked you to spot the errors in an attempt to encourage critical self-editing, which, and has been lucidly pointed out by Oran below, is something you need to nurture. Graham Colm (talk) 22:59, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, well I've done everything you have asked to be changed. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * No you haven't, not by a long chalk. My comments are generic, not specific. I gave you examples only. Graham Colm (talk) 23:32, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't know what you expect me to do then. Examples are specific, not generic. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 23:36, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Study this, which is the best guide to professional prose-writing on the Internet. Graham Colm (talk) 23:52, 17 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment
 * "With the release of the remix single, digital sales pushed the song to the top of the chart for one week gave Rihanna her tenth US number-one single on the Hot 100 chart and Spears her fifth."--Run on sentence.
 * Split into two sentences. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * "It reached number one in Australia, Canada and Poland, and on the UK R&B Chart. The song attained top-five positions in Germany, France, Ireland, and Spain as well as the UK R&B Chart."-- Did it peak at #1 or the top five on the UK R&B chart?
 * This was a mistake, I mean't to write Singles. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * "Due to its content, was banned in several countries and restricted to nighttime television in others"-- Missing an "it" or "the video" right before "was banned...".
 * Added "the video". Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * "The resolution of the lawsuit was announced on October 19, 2011, with the outcome that Rihanna was ordered to pay LaChapelle an undisclosed sum of money."--Repetitive and poor structure.
 * Re-worded. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * "Rihanna performed the song for the first time at the 2011 BRIT Awards at London's O2 Arena on February 15, 2011, as a part of a medley with "Only Girl (In the World)" and "What's My Name?""-- This sentence directly follows the mention of the lawsuit, and is jarring and non-linear.
 * Where else do you suggest I put it? Or make it flow better? Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * This is just the intro! I'm not going to oppose. I'm tired of opposing. Calvin, the article has potential. But you need to write more carefully. These aren't mere grammatical errors. You just aren't being careful with what/how you write. Stop looking for the errors--your eyes are going to keep filling in the blanks for you. You need to read the article out loud to yourself, and you'll hear the gaps. Good luck. Oran e   (talk)  19:53, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'm pleased you said that because quite a few people have told me this won't become an FA. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 13:26, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * "The songs conception was initiated by Dean, who first developed "S&M"'s hook, "Na, na, na, c'mon.""...yeah, this sentence is not working. Needs to be restructured or removed altogether. The intro is better. Thanks for addressing my suggestions. The problem that I'm still having with "Rihanna performed the song for the first time at the 2011 BRIT Awards at London's O2 Arena, as a part of a medley..." is that it's just so non sequitur. Articles on pop songs/albums now seem to follow this template of stuffing the intro and an entire section in the article with info about when and where a song was performed. And the major problem is that it's often not properly contextualized. So here's a suggestion: remove that last bit from the intro and put it in the second paragraph. Then begin the sentence with something like "To promote the song, Rihanna performed it on this show and that show ..." That way, the info is at least placed within a promotional context and linked to the song's chart performance.
 * Rest of the article still needs copy-edit. I see you working on it. Good job and good luck! Oran e   (talk)  21:24, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Done all. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn

--->>> Prose and a few queries (From lead only)
 * Leaning to Oppose Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 18:50, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 *  It was released on January 21, 2011, as the album's fourth US single, and third international single - So this leads me to think that it was released both in the US and other countries on January 21, 2011
 * Have moved down and changed the international release date. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Still confusing, on February 11, 2011, as the third international single ---> on same date worldwide? That's why I understand from the way you have phrased it. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 04:53, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * US and worldwide were released on different dates. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * I know that. You did not understand my question. Was S&M released worldwide on February 11, 2011 itself? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:13, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * No, I never said worldwide on that one day. I said that it received international release on that day, meaning that from that day it was internationally released.
 * So you are leaving readers to interpret the information now? Is that what an FA is supposed to be? Do you think the way you worded that sentence will lead people to think that meaning that from that day it was internationally released? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 06:13, 19 January 2012 (UTC)


 * "S&M" is a Eurodance and dance-pop song - That's all you will mention about the composition in the lead?
 * Included sample and instruments. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Since when is keyboard sounds an instrument? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 04:53, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn


 * I see a major E in Eurodance in the lead but what happened in composition?
 * De-capitalised. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn


 * Don't you think it is necessary to briefly mention what motivated the development of the song in the lead?
 * Included. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * The songs conception was initiated by Dean <--- However, I asked what motivated its development, not who. Do you mean the song was inspired by Ester Dean? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 04:53, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Have added more. Tell me if this is what you want. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * No, it's worse now. My question / what I am asking for is simple? I want you to say how the song came about? But say it briefly without going into too much details? What was she thinking before starting to write? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:13, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, I have. I've said how the song came about. She thought of the hook first, then the chorus. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * You think the sentence sounds good? The song's conception was initiated by Dean, who developed "S&M"'s hook, "Na, na, na, c'mon." You are in fact telling who initiated the song's conception and not what motivated its development. I know Dean is directly linked to its conception but try to lay more emphasis on what I have asked for. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 06:13, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Have completely re-worded. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn


 * From lead: Critical reception of the song was mixed, as some reviewers criticized the song's overtly sexual lyrics, while others called it one of the best tracks from Loud.
 * From critical reception: "S&M" garnered positive responses from music critics.
 * Now you have to explain this to me.
 * Changed. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn


 * reviewers - Do you think reviewers is good enough? I would have written music critics
 * Changed. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn


 * Did you realize how many times you used the song in the first paragraph of the lead?
 * Have changed to "S&M" and It more. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn


 * In April 2011, the song was re-released to digital outlets as a remix single, featuring guest vocals by American recording artist Britney Spears. This sentence can be a simple one and yet be miles better. Read it aloud five times and tell me if it sounds good.
 * Have reworded. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * It seems you did not understand. Now you have removed that Britney Spears feature on it? She is an A-list artist. Why did you remove that? We are not talking about a remix done featuring a DJ here. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 04:53, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * No I haven't. It's at the bottom of the third paragraph. This makes the lead the same order as the body. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * If that's the case, the order of the body itself is wrong. How is the remix mentioned after the chart performance when it pushed the song higher on the charts? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:13, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * How? The Remix section is the last, and it is now last in the lead. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Oh my goodness. My point is that it looks awkward to mention that the remix pushed the song up to number one and then only later write that "a remix" was released on this or that date. It does not flow neither here in the lead nor in the body of the article. Don't just pay attention at the article. Pay attention to the order of the events. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 06:13, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * It is back in the first paragraph. Now, this is mentioned first, then how sales affected chart positions in the second paragraph. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn


 * A whole paragraph for chart performance in the lead? I know the song was successful but you dedicate a whole paragraph to it? And it's even comparable to the size of the fist and last paragraph. Do we need details like "S&M" debuted at number 53 on the US Billboard Hot 100 chart upon the album's release, and peaked at number two. With the release of the remix single, digital sales pushed the song to the top of the chart for one week. This gave Rihanna her tenth US number-one single on the Hot 100 chart and Spears her fifth. The song also peaked at number one on the Billboard Hot Dance Club Songs chart and Pop Songs chart?
 * Yes, the Hot 100 isn't the only chart worth mentioning. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Again, you did not understand. Do we need to know  "S&M" debuted at number 53 on the US Billboard Hot 100 chart upon the album's release?
 * Yes, because it charted on the strength of downloads alone. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * So what? Why should this be mentioned in the lead? You are now even going to say where it debuted in the lead itself? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:13, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay I've removed it. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * And " digital sales pushed the song to the top of the chart for one week"?
 * Why should we know it peaked at number one for one week? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:13, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * And pushed?
 * Do you have an alternative for push? As I told, we are not working for GA standard here. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:13, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Have changed pushed. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * This gave Rihanna her tenth US number-one single on the Hot 100 chart and Spears her fifth. can be joined with the previous sentence if you remove the unnecessary details. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 04:53, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Have put a colon there. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * A colon does not help. It is till not good. "With the release of the remix single, digital sales pushed the song to the top of the chart for one week; this gave Rihanna her tenth US number-one single on the Hot 100 chart and Spears her fifth." What do you mean by that? It did not have digital sales before? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:13, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * You could only buy the remix digitally Jivesh. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Of course I know that. :P My point is that why you say With the release of the remix single, sales placed the song to the top of the chart for one week. That leads me to think that the song started selling only when the remix was available. I am beginning to think that you do not pay attention to what we tell you; I mean you do not make an effort to understand what is being dawn to your attention. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 06:13, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I put that digital sales placed the song at #1 because it was only realeased digitally. It's rather simple. But have now said "placed" instead of "pushed", as you said to change it. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Do you realize the way you have worded it gives the impression that only digital sales from the remix took the song at the summit of the chart? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 15:34, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Exactly. The week the remix was released, it went to #1 Jivesh. This is 100% accurate and what happened. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * You are wrong again. Downloads from the remix alone did not take the song to number one. Downloads from the album version when combined those from the remix helped it top the Hot 100 chart. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 15:40, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm wrong that the week the remix was released it went to #1? No, I'm right Jivesh. But yes, combined sales made it number. But what I was saying was that with the sales of the remix, that was what made the song number one. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Did I say that? That was your interpretation and that does not surprise me at all. And if you are still arguing, then let me tell you that this not how you will get your FAC passed. We are all trying to help you here. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 17:54, 19 January 2012 (UTC)


 * The song attained top-five positions in Germany, France, Ireland, and Spain as well as the UK Singles Chart. - Why that wording? And attained top-five positions in... the UK Singles Chart?
 * Fixed. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * It reached number one in Australia, Canada and Poland, and on the UK R&B Chart. --> still bad. And why the extra and? Didn't you read my previous comment? What about It reached number one on the singles chart in Australia, Canada, Poland, and on the UK R&B Chart.?
 * I thought I had changed that. I did the other one. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * No you haven't. Did you read my suggestion? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:13, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * "It reached number one on the singles chart in Australia, Canada, Poland, and on the UK R&B Chart." Why say single chart, which is singular, then list countries, which is plural? Have included it anyway. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Why? For consistency my dear. You list a number of countries, then suddenly write chart? That looks bad. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 06:13, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Changed to the country then which component chart. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn


 * The third paragraph of the lead needs a complete make over. It is good to join short sentences but join the appropriate ones together.
 * Doing. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * It's shaping up well but still not very good. Repetitive use of video at close proximity. Nothing about critics? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 04:53, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * How else am I mean't to write "video" ? Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * By replacing the video with it. Alternate the wordings. Is that asking for too much? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:13, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I only say video twice Jivesh. I use "it" a lot more.
 * My point is the proximity at which you are using those words. "Due to its content, the video was banned in several countries and was restricted to nighttime television in others. The video spawned a lawsuit when photographer David LaChapelle alleged that it used imagery from his photo shoot for Vogue Italia." You need to examine what is being told to you. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 06:13, 19 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Does the reader need to know in lead that "S&M" was performed as a medley? You even add the date. I don't see how that performance was iconic / special enough for you to give all these details here.
 * Yes, because she didn't performance S&M in it's entirety.
 * Really? Why do we need to know the date and the location in the lead? Was it an iconic performance? I doubt it was. Again, I feel like you did not read and understand my comment properly. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 04:53, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Remove the date. That was the performance Jivesh. It's no different to saying that an entire song was performed. It's misleading to write that she performed it for the first time when it was less than 1 minutes worth. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * I still not see why we need all that detail in the lead? And if I had to choose the most notable performance, it would be the Billboard one. That would save you from adding unnecessary details or clarifications that the song was performed as a medley. Frankly, should we really know it was a medley wit h"x" and "y" songs? This is only a lead. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:13, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Not saying it was a medley is not providing accuracy. I'm not budging on this one. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * I am not the only one who pointed this. Now it depends on you if you want to "budge or not". Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 06:13, 19 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Most importantly, how did critics receive the video? You must let the reader know since you clearly indicated that it was a response to critics.
 * Doing Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn

Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 18:50, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay. I see you are working on this. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 04:53, 17 January 2012 (UTC)


 * and restricted to nighttime television in others - Spot the error
 * Added was. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn

--->>> Infobox
 * I see over-linking of writers and producers
 * Unlinked Stargate and Sandy Vee. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn

--->>> Background and conception
 * Link all the writers / producers again.
 * Linked. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * The first sentence is confusing. You write "under their stage". Well, writers do not write songs under their stage name. They produce songs under their stage name. If you can make a good sentence with the appropriate words, you may be able to combine the first and second sentence. Try something. If you are not able, I will do it for you.
 * Have written: with production helmed for the former three. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Still bad. I suggest, "S&M" was composed by Sandy "Vee" Wilhelm, Ester Dean, and Stargate, a duo consisting of Mikkel S. Eriksen and Tor Erik Hermansen. Link where appropriate. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:13, 17 January 2012 (UTC)


 * You should make the first paragraph connect to the song. As it is now, it seems like you are talking about Rihanna's fantasies.
 * Doing. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * an interview for Rolling Stone... an interview with Gail Mitchell for Billboard... an interview for The Boom Box ... in an interview for Spin magazine ---> Be consistent, will you give the author's name or not? If there is one, I see no harm in adding it.
 * Rolling Stone there wasn't one. Billboard there was. The Boom Box there wasn't. Spin there wasn't. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * The Boom Box is a magazine.
 * Italicised. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Rihanna has an "alter ego"? If yes, don't put it in quotes. However, I am surprised. she never talked about it, right?
 * Perhaps it is one that isn't very public. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * That's funny. She is the most public person I know. Lol. But this won't be a problem. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:13, 17 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Dean spoke about the process of writing songs for Rihanna in an interview for The Boom Box, and explained that she wanted to channel Rihanna's "alter ego" and use it as inspiration for writing "S&M"'s lyrics. - Extremely long.
 * Split into two sentences. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * She explained that she wanted to channel Rihanna's alter ego and use it as inspiration for writing "S&M"'s lyrics. - Very verbose structure. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:13, 17 January 2012 (UTC)


 * "S&M" is the fourth single from Rihanna's fifth studio album, Loud, and was sent to US Top 40/Mainstream and rhythmic radio station playlists on January 25, 2011.[7] Why is it here? We are working for FA, right? I think everything should be put in an appropriate section.
 * You have enough material here to write a decent release section.
 * Okay. Will do. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * On a general note, the Background and conception seems like a quotefarm. I suggest paraphrasing where possible.
 * Paraphrased the Spin quote. Now there is only one quote per paragraph.
 * I appreciate your effort but it's isn't quite to the level of the prose to be in an FA. The singer continued to say that the songs message is a way of saying that people can talk about something a person has done, that they will always find something negative to say and it cannot be helped. Read it yourself. Read it aloud. Does it sound good? And spot the mistake(s). Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:13, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Reworded again. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * All I can say is that the overly verbose structure does not look good. It may be good for a GA. But this is an FAC. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 06:13, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 08:49, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

--->>> Composition
 * That music sample caption is a repetition of what is in the background section. So you are using a music sample to show what Rihanna feels about the song?
 * Re-wrote. Included info about the sample, hook and instruments. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * The correct word it uptempo.
 * Corrected. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Why is groove linked to tempo?
 * Changed to beat. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Still bad. Groove should be linked to groove. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Linked. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn


 * If you are linking sheet music, why not link instrumentation as well?
 * Linked. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * What is "ear-frotting"?
 * It's the description given by the critic. Frotting is a sexual term, so I guess he is relating to that in a weird way. Removed it anyway. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * You did well by removing it but add it in the CR. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)


 * A hook is not an instrumentation.
 * I know. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * So why did you construct such a sentence previously? Lol. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Same for beat.
 * This is the second instance now. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * And even after x number of instances, it is still wrong: The instrumentation of "S&M" consists of synthesizers, pounding beats,[9] and keyboard sounds. Since when are keyboard sounds instruments? And pounding beats are instruments as well? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * No, you don't link the second instance in the body Jivesh. You know this. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Pardon? Why are you telling me this? I was talking about the instruments. And bass beats is instrument? Where was beat linked before? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 06:13, 19 January 2012 (UTC)


 * So, this sentence is totally wrong - The instrumentation of "S&M" consists of "ear-frotting" hooks, synths and pounding beats.
 * Removed: "ear-frotting" hooks, Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * However, keyboard is an instrumentation and I cannot understand why it isn't here.
 * It is there, look at the next line. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * It should not have been in the next line. It should have been in the previous line. That was my point. Group the instruments appropriately. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Grouped. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn


 * "ominous and snarling" - I think this needs an attribution.
 * Removed. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Move it to CR. I mean the "ominous and snarling". Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Ryan continued, writing that "S&M" was similar to "Only Girl (In the World)" - What aspect?
 * Added in. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Really? For me, it is till the same. Ryan continued, writing that "S&M" was similar to "Only Girl (In the World)"'s production, the lead single released from Loud, which was also produced by Stargate. - What was he comparing? Which aspect? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Theeeee production? Which is why I said production. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Did he really compare the production? I don't see that here. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 06:13, 19 January 2012 (UTC)


 * The organisation of the content is pretty award. You speak about vocals, then move to similarities, and then to lyrics all in one paragraph?
 * Lyrics is by itself now. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Rihanna sings about sex and BDSM related acts on "S&M".[14] <--- What about this then? I don't see it grouped with the lyrics. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Moved. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn


 * However, she explained that the song should not be interpreted literally, but rather, metaphorically. I can no longer count the number of says this sentence has been used though re-written.
 * Removed. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Close repetition of chant/chanting.
 * There is no repetition of those. I use chant once and chanting once. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Chant and chanting is the same as singing and singing. Why don't you use alternatives? Or at least do not use chant and chanting so close. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Singing. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn


 * During the chorus, the singer "frostily chants" the lines "Cause I may be bad, but I'm perfectly good at it / Sex in the air, I don't care, I love the smell of it."[16] After chanting the lines "Cause I may be bad, but I'm perfectly good at it / Sex in the air, I don't care, I love the smell of it," Rihanna sings the line "Sticks and stones may break my bones / But chains and whips excite me."[17] James Skinner of BBC Music described her delivery of the line as "forced", criticizing her for not projecting a "daring" sound. - What is this?
 * What do you mean? Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Are you asking me now? Lol. Did you read what you wrote? Read it aloud. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes. "What is this?" is not constructive. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * I am telling you for the last time. Read it aloud and pay attention. "During the chorus, the singer "frostily chants" the lines "Cause I may be bad, but I'm perfectly good at it / Sex in the air, I don't care, I love the smell of it."[15] After singing the lines "Cause I may be bad, but I'm perfectly good at it / Sex in the air, I don't care, I love the smell of it ...". How can you be so ignorant? This is the limit. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 06:13, 19 January 2012 (UTC)


 * James Skinner of BBC Music described her delivery of the line as "forced", criticizing her for not projecting a "daring" sound.[17] Nathan S. of DJ Booth echoed Skinner's opinion of the line, writing that Rihanna delivered it in an "un-sultry" manner and "light pop voice".[18] Meg Sullivan of The Music Magazine criticized the hook, "Na na na, c'mon," citing it as "a classic sign of 'I had nothing else decent to write'."[19] - Wait, is this composition or critical reception? As far as i see, you are not explaining, you are quoting the description / remarks of critics. This is purely critical reception. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 09:05, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * They are talking about the lyrics I have written about. And I have expanded upon what they have said.
 * I write it again, this is pure critical reception. James Skinner of BBC Music described her delivery of the line as "forced", criticizing her for not projecting a "daring" or convincing sound.[16] Nathan S. of DJ Booth noted that Rihanna delivered it in an "un-sultry" manner and not committing to what she is singing about.[17] Meg Sullivan of The Music Magazine criticized the hook, "Na na na, c'mon," citing it as a line which was included in order to fill a gap. And you tell me the contrary? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 16:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Have moved, as much as I disagree. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Anyway, your choice of words proves that was critical analysis. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 06:13, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

--->>> Release and reception
 * In the United States, "S&M" was the fourth single to be released from Loud, and was made available to download on January 21, 2011 This sentence can be much better --> "S&M" was released digitally, as the fourth US single from Loud, on January 21, 2011.
 * US Top 40/Mainstream - Why not change it to contemporary hit radio? It is the same thing and this will let you not use the x/y format. Actually Top 40 and mainstream are the same thing. Same for rhythmic. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 07:22, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 *  It was sent to US Top 40/Mainstream and rhythmic radio station playlists on January 25, 2011.[18] The song was sent to US urban radio station playlists on March 8, 2011. - Can easily be one sentence if you choose the correct words and clauses.
 *  to download digitally - I know we download digitally, so please reword.
 * What is the sentence doing here? On April 11, 2011, the remix single featuring Spears was made available to download digitally worldwide.[22] You have not even talked about the remix yet in the body of the article. So, you will need to re-arrange the whole article / move some sections.
 * Outside of the United States, the song was the third single to be released from the album. It was released on February 11, 2011, in Spain to download digitally[20] and was released on March 18, 2011, in Germany as a CD single. - Repetitive
 * "S&M" garnered mixed responses from music critics. Sal Cinquemani of Slant Magazine, and Thomas Conner of the Chicago Sun Times wrote that "S&M" was reminiscent of Rihanna's previous album, Rated R (2009). - Did they discuss any aspect?
 * Precisely by divesting sex of emotion and re-imagining violence as fetish ("sticks and stone may break my bones / but chains and whips excite me") can fit in composition.
 * The entire quote? Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Well, I am not telling you to quote. Try to write in try own words. Paraphrase. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 14:05, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One 14:11, 20 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Repetitive use of the song.
 * Why is beat linked again?
 * Forgive me for this but the critical reception is a QUOTEFARM. A critical reception section is normally supposed to made up of quotes but this one is the limit. Every single line has been quoted here. Please attempt to paraphrase some of them. And some of the quotes are simply giant (if I can use this word).
 * In the UK, "S&M" was deemed too explicit for daytime airplay, was edited to remove all references to sex, chains, and whips, and was renamed "Come On" for BBC Radio 1. - Bad sentence. Reword and break it into two or use a semi-colon.
 * Is there anymore information about the daytime ban? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 07:22, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * No, that's all there is. It was just banned from radio. Well I say banned, whenever I heard it they just removed half of the chorus and bleeped out those three words. And I have address all other points for this section. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One 14:00, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

---> Second review by Jivesh
 * I will check each and every change you brought or did not brought about very soon. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 14:20, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * You did well by removing this because that was clearly WP:OR and WP:SYN. We do not interpret instruments used. And to think we argued on that. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 04:12, 21 January 2012 (UTC)


 * This time I will only quote the bad prose / structure of sentences and you see the changes you should bring. I think i have explained enough now.


 * 1) Lead
 * on February 11, 2011, as the third worldwide single. - Again same thing. Was it released on that date itself in all countries outside the US. I won't come on his gain. You have to be more careful. This should be the fourth of fifth time I m pointing at this sentence.
 * Reworded/disambiguated "worldwide". Yes, everywhere but the US on Feb 11. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * It is worse. A lead is not supposed to be detailed that much. The correct sentence will be and as the third single to international markets from February 11. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 05:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Inspired by channelling Rihanna's alter-ego, Dean conceptualized and developed "S&M"'s hook, "Na, na, na, c'mon."
 * Removed alter-ego. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Inspired by channelling Rihanna sounds awkward. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 05:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * up-tempo dance-pop and eurodance song - Spot the mistake. You have to learn from your mistakes. I see you instead repeat them.
 * I don't see a mistake. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * It is uptempo and I had already told you this in my first review but you have repeated your mistake instead of learning from it. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 05:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * "S&M" was re-released as a remix single, and featured guest vocals by American recording artist Britney Spears. It was made available to download digitally worldwide on April 11, 2011. - Find a better place for this information
 * It has to stay here because I talk about how the remix helped it peak at #1 in the second paragraph. In the third wouldn't make sense. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Can I know why you have removed the information? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 05:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Critical reception of "S&M" was mixed, as music critics criticized the song's overtly sexual lyrics, and others called it one of the best tracks from Loud.
 * Replaced "and" with "whilst". Plus reworded the first clause. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Upon its release as a single - Necessary?
 * Removed. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * With the release of the remix single, combined sales placed the song to the top of the chart for one week - Unnecessary detail. I can no longer count the number of times I wrote this. And combined sales of what?
 * Reworded. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 *  However, with combined sales from a remix version featuring guest vocals by American recording artist Britney Spears, "S&M" became Rihanna's tenth US number-one single on the Hot 100 chart, and Spears fifth - This sentence is imply bad. The previous one (though it was not good) was better. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 05:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * It peaked at number one on the Billboard Hot Dance Club Songs chart and Pop Songs chart. - Billboard or US? Think well before replying. Don't be in a haste.
 * I've put US. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * It reached number one on the singles chart in Australia, Canada, Poland, and in the United Kingdom on the R&B Chart. - Something here reads awkwardly
 * Really? Have reworded it.
 * Yes, it really did or lease I would not have written here. The song peaked at number one on the US Hot Dance Club Songs chart and Pop Songs chart, and also reached number one on the singles chart in Australia, Canada, Poland, and on the UK R&B Chart. is long and over-detailed. Do we need to know about Billboard component charts in the lead now? That's too much. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 05:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * The song attained top-five positions in Germany, France, Ireland, Spain, and in the United Kingdom. - Read and look for the correction to be made.
 * Removed UK. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * There is frankly too much about the Chart performance in the lead. Too much.
 * I disagree. It became her 10th #1, the shortest time ever for an artist to get as many. This is a very important detail. The rest is a mere overview. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Do we need to know about Billboard component charts in the lead now? That's too much. Disagreeing on nearly everything will bring this article nowhere. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 05:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * To promote the song, Rihanna performed the song at the 2011 BRIT Awards at London's O2 Arena, as a part of a medley with "Only Girl (In the World)" and "What's My Name?". - For the last time, this is only a lead. We do not need details like it was performed as a medley or anything else. There is not anything which makes this performance iconic, so please stop with these details. And that sentence itself is not a good one.
 * Well, we will have to agree to disagree! Because technically, she didn't sing S&M, only a verse and chorus. No one else see's this as a problem. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Respected Graham does. Do you ant a third opinion. Someone I can ask to come here? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 13:05, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, I think you have agreed to agreed with me as I see you have shortened the sentence. Be careful with what you write here and what you do on the article. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 05:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 *  It spawned - Please find a better word that spawned
 * "It initiated". Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * The third para looks good. Graham's suggestions always help. I see you used them as he posted. Good. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 08:55, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

2) Background and conception
 * Ester Dean did additional writing. - It does not connect well with the previous sentence and it is rough as User:Adabow said.
 * Actually, it wasn't me who wrote that. Rather, someone who commented on this review. But have changed anyway. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * It does not matter who wrote it. I am sure his intention was only to help. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 05:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * The song was recorded in 2010 during Rihanna's Last Girl on Earth Tour, at Roc the Mic Studios in New York City, Westlake Recording Studios in Los Angeles and The Bunker Studios in Paris - Was the tour taking place at the "at Roc the Mic Studios in New York City, Westlake Recording Studios in Los Angeles and The Bunker Studios in Paris"? That's the impression you will givea reader who does not know Rihanna.
 * Made clearer. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 *  In an interview for Rolling Stone, Rihanna spoke about her interest in bondage and other S&M activities, saying: "I like to take charge, but I love to be submissive ... being submissive in the bedroom is really fun. You get to be a little lady, to have somebody be macho and in charge. That's sexy to me."[2] Lindsay Goldwert of Daily News felt that Rihanna's comments on the types of sexual activity that she enjoys may be part of a healing process, after she was assaulted by her former-boyfriend Chris Brown in February 2009. - I will request you for the last time to make this connect to the song.
 * Done. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * "I wrote it, Father forgive me, on a Sunday. The track was already there. The first thing that came to me was 'Come on, come on.' I'm thinking, 'I don't know what in the hell this is about to be.' And I remembered I'd seen something that said, 'Sticks and stones may break my bones.' Then came 'But chains and whips excite me.' And I'm like, 'Oh, my God, I got to write that.' I'm in the studio with the engineer and just kept looking at him, asking, 'Is that OK?' And he says, 'I like it.' When people have a great track that speaks to me, it feels like it already has a story in it." - Will you put that in an encyclopedia or should i say an FAC?
 * Have shortened the quote. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Dean spoke about the process of writing songs for Rihanna in an interview for The Boom Box. She explained that she wanted to channel Rihanna's alter ego and use it as inspiration for writing "S&M"'s lyrics.[5] Dean praised Rihanna for her ability to take risks with her music, saying: "Rihanna will say things that other chicks won't say. That's Rihanna. Music is about fantasy. This is what people want to do, but are afraid to do." According to the interview, all this is about "Rude Boy", nor "S&M".
 * This was given to me by Orane at the last FAC. It still relates to S&M, as she wrote both. It still applies. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Why did you remove it then? What's the point of arguing and then removing it without letting the reviewer know. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 05:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Because it's obvious that you wanted it removed! Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * You should have written Removed then. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 18:30, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The singer continued to say that the meaning behind the song was inspired by how people can talk about something a person has done, but they will always find something negative to say, concluding that it cannot be prevented. Avoid verbose structure (I am telling this for the sixth or seventh time).
 * Done? Lol. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * I see you have re-written it. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 05:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeppp. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One

3) Composition and lyrical interpretation
 * I am happy you used one of the compositions I have written as a model.
 * I don't think the length of a song is required here but I won't argue if you want to leave it.
 * The music sheet says guitar not guitar strings.
 * The guitar doesn't produce the sound Jivesh, it's the strings attached to the guitar which creates the sound. Instruments with strings on them are collectively known as string instruments anyway.
 * That's WP:SYN. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 05:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Bass beats is not an instrument and it is not sourced. Did you mix up the sources?
 * Bass is created by using a keyboard and string instruments, which are both used. Have removed anyway. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Oh yes you did well by choosing to reword because you were wrong and accept it. Bass beats is not instrument. Bass instrument is the instrument. You can still add bass instrument there. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 05:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Stargate and Vee arranged the songs instrumental - What is this sentence doing here?
 * Because they did? I'll remove it then. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Because they did? That's your explanation? Oh my goodness, that's supposed to be in the background section. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 05:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Chris Ryan of MTV Buzzworthy compared "S&M" to "Only Girl (In the World)"'s production, the lead single released from Loud, which was produced by Stargate. - How did you reach to the conclusion that he was referring to the production?
 * Because he as talking about the production. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Again, this is kind of WP:SYN or WP:OR. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 05:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * a sexually aggressive tone in her vocal performance - Looks like a bad sentence
 * How? Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Tone in her vocal performance? Plus having this in one line makes it look worse. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 05:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Unlink sadomasochism in second paragraph.
 * Unlinked. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * The lyrics of "S&M" revolve around sex, sadomasochism, bondage and BSDM fetishes, as Rihanna describes her sexual fantasies and turn-ons. - Re-write or cut in to two.
 * Used a semi-colon  Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * It was described by Meg Sullivan of The Music Magazine as a case of "I had nothing else decent to write." - Isn't this CR?
 * I haven't said criticized or used any word indicating that it is being critical. So no. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Frankly, you think that this fits in composition? Did you read and understand the sentence? It's clear the reviewer is reviewing it negatively. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 05:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Rihanna provides the juxtaposition that although she acts in a non-conservative manner, implying she is "bad", that is not the case in the bedroom, confirming that she is "good" at performing sex. - Hmm, I think you know by now what is to be done.
 * Hmm, reworded a bit. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * You rewording did not improve it. Please work more on it. Jivesh 1205 (Talk)


 * After singing these lines, Rihanna sings the line
 * Changed to chants. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * The singer proposes her fantasies and turn-ons to the listener - Isn't this a repetition?
 * Removed. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Can you write a better music caption? Are you sing it to demonstrate that "S&M" features the sampled synth line from Depeche Mode's song "Master and Servant"? If yes, let me tell you, it won't work. As that can perfectly be expressed into written words.
 * The other line also does not work though I think it is much better than the previous one. You need a good caption.
 * Doing. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * You have done it, right? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 05:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

4) Remixes
 * Is that a block-quote? Sorry, but it's difficult to know with an image to the left. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 12:06, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * An official remix of "S&M", featuring rapper J. Cole, was released on January 17, 2011. - Was it really released as you wrote?
 * An official remix of "S&M", featuring rapper J. Cole, was released on January 17, 2011.[17] It was remixed by DJs Dave Audé, Sidney Samson and Joe Bermudez; these remixes were released as a digital package. Read this, does it sound good? I feel like you want to say "[The remix of "S&M"] was remixed by DJs Dave Audé, Sidney Samson and Joe Bermudez; these remixes were released as a digital package.]
 * Compare this from the composition section: ""Cause I may be bad, but I'm perfectly good at it / Sex in the air, I don't care, I love the smell of it." to this from the remix section: "Shut me up, gag and bound me/'Cause the pain is my pleasure/Nothing comes better", and correct your mistakes.
 * In a radio interview - Name of radio?
 * I asked my fans last week who they wanted me to collaborate with, and Britney was one of the most popular names. is a repetition of what has already been written. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 12:06, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

5) Release look good now. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 12:06, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * "S&M" was the third worldwide. US also forms part of the world, so change world to international.
 * Consider linking iTunes


 * (From lead)  It reached number one on the singles chart in Australia, Canada, Poland, and in the United Kingdom on R&B component chart.  - This is what you told me on the a GA review today. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 13:21, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS ;) haha. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One 13:24, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh you better apply it when you yourself told me this on a GA review. The other stuff existing is linked to you. "S&M" is an FAC. :) So be careful. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 05:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Reliability "We're being questioned as a high quality source? I'm actually offended. DJBooth has been active for over six year, becoming one of the premiere destinations for urban music and averaging over 1 million unique visitors a month. Part of the Complex Media Network, DJBooth is also a digital distribution company that has exclusively released Yelawolf's "Trunk Muzik" (Interscope), Big K.R.I.T.'s "KRIT Wuz Here" (Def Jam) and many more. We are also a privately owned company headquartered in Brooklyn, with offices in Chicago in L.A. Hope that helps, really appreciate you fighting to get Wikipedia to include that link Aaron.
 * Sources--minus spotchecks--and media
 * Please establish the high quality reliablity of these sources: Boombox, DJ Booth, Masterbeat (possible dead link), Allaccess
 * The Boom Box (was given to me by Orane in the last FAC) and is owned by AOL, and owns the trademark. DJ Booth: "© The DJ Booth LLC. Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.". I don't know about Masterbeat, apart from the owner worked for IBM. Allaccess: "AllAccess.com is owned and operated by All Access Music Group, Inc, a privately held corporation formed in 1995, by President/Publisher Joel Denver and his wife and partner, VP/CFO & Operations Ria Denver." Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * That doesn't quite explain what makes these high quality reliable sources. What are the article authors' qualifications? What about the experience and bylines of the author, publisher and editor-in-chief. Have highly reputed sites cited these web sites? Sure Boombox is published by AOL, but that does not quite explain why it is reliable. Urlesque and PopEater (both published by AOL) are not quite high-quality-reliable, so what makes this one different? Take it from this approach. In place of AllAccess, you can try Radio and Records and see if they have the information. Regarding DJ Booth, just because the content is free does not make it reliable. Again, look at the background of the authors, editors and publishers to see what kind of fact-checking they do. — WP: PENGUIN   · [ TALK ]  21:50, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Removed Masterbeat and replaced with iTunes. The Boom Box interviewed Dean herself, so they must be pretty reliable to get an interview with her. Nathan S is a paid employee of DJ Booth, I have emailed him asking for his qualifications. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Nathan from DJ booth replied to me:

Peace, Nathan"
 * Okay, but with all due respect to Nathan, he didn't explain his qualifications or the site's fact-checking etc. It sounded more like promoting tbh. This does not look promising either. You're on the right track though. Plus, just because Boombox did an interview does not mean it is a high-quality reliable source? What kind of fact-checking does the site do? Author qualifications? — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  18:39, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Boombox and DJ Booth were removed after extensive discussion on my talk page. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  03:08, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Italicization Publisher notation General inconsistencies and errors in refs Media Oppose for now. Please address issues so that I can strike out my oppose. Article may need some copy editing per above reviewers, but not opposing based on this. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  20:25, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I might be wrong, but I'm not quite sure about the reputation of Justia.
 * It's the official court documentation. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Check italicization of websites (CBC News, Reuters)
 * Removed italicisation. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Check italicization of magazines (FMQB)
 * Italicised. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Check for consistency in how publishers of magazines are notated (brackets or no brackets).
 * Not done I see. Some have brackets (NME, EW, etc.) whereas others do not. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  21:50, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Fixed NME and EW. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Check for consistency in how publishers of web publications (e.g. MTV UK, Reuters) are notated (brackets or no brackets).
 * None of the MTV sources are in brackets as it is not a publication or newspaper. Removed brackets from Reuters. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Check for consistency in Entertainment Weekly publishers, and Rolling Stone publishers.
 * They are fine, not sure what you want here. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Check for inconsistencies like Jann Wenner vs. Wenner Media and "Time Inc" vs. "Time division of Time Warner" (the former of which is probably best). — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  21:50, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Done, Jann Wenner. And Time Inc. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Repetitive: "Justia.com Dockets and Filings. Justia.com Dockets and Filings."
 * Removed the work parameter. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * "Inc", "Ltd", "Co.", and "Publishing" are omitted from publisher names in refs. Time Inc. is an exception to this.
 * Removed all instances. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Check again FN 85. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  03:08, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Removed. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Just a suggestion, but you could be more specific on the MTV refs (MTV News, etc.).
 * Been more specific with them. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Check FN 34. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  03:08, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Be consistent in how notes like (To access certification, or type xxxx into search, etc.) are written: italics or no italics, parentheses or no parentheses
 * I can only see one? Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Compare FN 103 and 130. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  03:08, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Check placement of where the note is. (before retrieve date, after publisher, etc.) — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  15:22, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * FN 29–38 are the same as the ones under Singlechart. Hence, ref names should be there and not just same refs used twice.
 * I used proper formatted references in the Chart performance section, but the tables chart has pre-coded ones. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * There is a way you can re-use the pre-coded refs. Use Alternatively, you can fill in a "|ref name=" parameter in the Singlechart template and use that ref name for a chart reference. — WP: PENGUIN   · [ TALK ]  21:50, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Still not done. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  03:08, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Are you sure FN 37 has the right title?
 * Removed anyway.
 * Check for consistency in wikilinking, like Ryan Seacrest.
 * Linked. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Works and publishers should be linked on first occurrence. Check again. For example, compare FN 20 and 65. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  21:50, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * More inconsistencies. MTV News is not linked, and refs should be linked consistently on first, every or no occurrence. Please check again. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  03:08, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Not quite. I don't see first occurrence. Check BBC, EW and Rap-Up. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  15:22, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Have a second look for inconsistencies in general.
 * Please check Arizona Republic ref for publisher notation inconsistency. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  03:08, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Not done. Brackets or no brackets? — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  15:22, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Could the caption of the sound sample focus a bit more on the musical composition? Lyrics are okay, but some detail on the "thundering dance beat" and sampling?
 * I second. I don't see how the music sample is necessary based on the current caption. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 05:18, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Done already. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * The summary in the File:Rihanna - S&M.ogg page says that the "Source" is S&M, when it should be the album, Loud.
 * Okay. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Music video screenshot caption needs a period (full stop).
 * Added. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * It looks as though it has been reverted. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  03:08, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Added back. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Music video scrrenshot fair-use rationale needs to explain how it in particular adds to the article and is crucial to the understanding. What's the importance about this image?
 * Okay. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Better, but not quite there yet. Say in the rationale what the image depicts. More detail than just "Rihanna under a plastic wrap." And instead of under Licensing, this is probably better off in the table of the FUR, in "Purpose of use". — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  21:50, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Gave a description. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Meh, good enough. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  03:08, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Captions of File:Rihanna, LOUD Tour, Oakland 1.jpg and File:Spears FFT SM Detroit.jpg are not a sentences and should not have periods/full stops.
 * Removed.
 * Thanks for commenting Penguin. I'm at uni all day tomorrow but will try and get some of these done in my breaks. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 00:53, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * You need to have a better look for inconsistencies in the references. Take your time however. I'd also like to add that that you can't just have a under construction in a featured article candidate. The article was supposed to have been complete and ready before FAC. But I hope what you're doing at this stage is drastically going to improve things. Thanks and cheers, — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  21:50, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I removed the banner, I didn't make a dedicated section, not enough info. It's in with the reviews. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 23:23, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, issues still lie throughout. Not striking my oppose yet. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  03:08, 22 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment - the iTunes references [93] and [149] are dead. You should replace them. Plus, I think that S&M was also released in other teritories via iTunes. You can expand the Release section. — Tomica1111  &bull;  Question Existing?  12:49, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Replaced. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * Don't see how. You didn't change the digital download for Ireland (which is dead link) and you replaced for United Kingdom with the Loud Ireland iTunes release. Quite illogical. — Tomica1111  &bull;  Question Existing?  15:06, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * 93 was the UK Tomica. Ireland can't be dead because I was just on it. And I replaced Masterbeat with the iTunes remixes, which are the same. Again, can't be dead as I was just on it. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn
 * How its okay when the Ireland digital download opens Loud from IE iTunes? — Tomica1111  &bull;  Question Existing?  15:16, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Look at the URL. It has S&M in it. It re-directs there. So it's not dead. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 15:17, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Still not good. From where we know that S&M was released in February 2011 when the release date for the album stated there (but still wrong) is 19 August 2011. Why for instance you don't use this one? —  Tomica1111  &bull;  Question Existing?  15:23, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Used. Ireland doesn't have that I can see. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 15:26, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * You are right. It was probably removed from the Irish iTunes. Further fix the reference and change Ireland with Spain. — Tomica1111  &bull;  Question Existing?  15:27, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I already had. Calvin  &bull; Watch  n'  Learn 15:28, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Oppose I'll have a more thorough look in a couple of hours. —  Andrew s talk  06:13, 21 January 2012 (UTC) I'm going to have to oppose on prose quality at the moment. See WP:1A for advice and exercises on how to improve prose quality. —  Andrew s talk  07:07, 21 January 2012 (UTC) Further comments I'm sorry, but I can't list every prose issue. I suggest printing a copy of the article out and taking a pen or highlighter to it. Have a few looks at it, with substantial breaks in between. Fresh eyes are better at spotting mistakes. Read the article aloud to yourself, too. —  Andrew s talk  04:09, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * File:Rihanna S&M.jpg needs a specific source
 * Done. Can't get much better than the photographer's lawsuit of that specific copied image. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * No, not done. You didn't edit the file page at all. —  Andrew s talk  04:09, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh i thought you mean't the picture in the article. Done. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * MOS:CAPTION issues, especially in relation to full stops/periods.
 * Done. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * The first "sentence" of the audio caption is not a grammatically complete sentence, so a full stop is out of place here. Either reword it into a full sentence or rewrite the whole caption into one incomplete sentence. The music video screenshot needs a full stop. —  Andrew s talk  04:09, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. And I need to rewrite the audio sample anyway. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * The two image in the 'Reception and ban' section aren't aligned properly.
 * They are now. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * WP:ORDINAL issues in 'Chart performance'
 * Fixed one issue. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * There are still inconsistencies. ""S&M" debuted on the Danish Singles Chart on February 11, 2011, at number 34 and peaked at number two." ""S&M" ranked at number 15 on Billboard magazine's best-selling top 50 Pop Songs and number two on the top 50 best-selling Dance/Clubs Songs of 2011." —  Andrew s talk  04:09, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't see what is wrong. Single digits are written as a word and double digits are written numerically. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Some tables should be made sortable
 * Which ones? Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Certifications and year-end charts. —  Andrew s talk  04:09, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * A bit of overlinking in Radio and release history table. Why is the 'r' in 'rhythmic radio' capitalised. Also the link to the book should be moved to the 'See also' section
 * Should I unlink Remix single then? And I have moved down. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Yes; I don't see why not. —  Andrew s talk  04:09, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Unlinked. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * "Inspired by channelling Rihanna's alter-ego" - explain. What alter ego; what are the alter ego's characteristics?
 * Removed. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * I second this. In fact, I brought this point above. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 06:26, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The theme of the song is absent from the lead
 * Added. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * "Critical reception of "S&M" was mixed, as music critics criticized the song's overtly sexual lyrics, and others called it one of the best tracks from Loud." - "music critics" implies all of them, which makes "others" a bit confusing
 * Has been reworded. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * " It reached number one on the singles chart in Australia, Canada, Poland..." - implies there is one chart for all these countries
 * I know WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS will probably be thrown back in my face, but this is actually the same to a recently appointed Rihanna FA.
 * "Ester Dean did additional writing." - sounds rough
 * Has been reworded. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * "former-boyfriend" - why the hyphen?
 * Removed. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Is the "I wrote it, Father forgive me, on a Sunday." part of the quote really necessary in an encyclopaedia?
 * Yes. "S&M" is a sexually provocative and blasphemous song. The fact that Ester Dean started writing it on a Sunday of all days (I'm sure you understand why, Christianity and all) is an important point. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Yes, as a practicing Catholic I understand the significance of Sundays, but I disagree that the day of writing is important. —  Andrew s talk  04:09, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Removed the first sentence. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * "The lyrics of "S&M" revolve around sex, sadomasochism, bondage and BSDM fetishes." - a few redundant words here, considering what BSDM stands for. Perhaps simply remove "BSDM"?
 * Removed BDSM. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * In the 'Radio and release history' section, what is the point of lumping several references into one inline citation when the citation is repeated for each country? Either separate the references or place the joint citation in the format cell, spanning several countries. Adding onto that, why are references #12 and #27 not merged (if you choose to stick with that format)?
 * What do you mean "place the joint citation in the format cell". I don't understand. And what do you mean about 12 and 27? 12 Is the album version single released in South America on Feb 11, 2011, and 27 is the remix single ft. Spears released worldwide on April 11, 2011. They aren't the same. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * OK, so all the February 28, 2011 remix package releases use the same inline citation, right? Why repeat that citation for every country? Why not place the citation next to "remix package"? And no, both #12 and #27 are for the February 11, 2011 digital download. —  Andrew s talk  20:28, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Done both. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One 21:38, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Is the 'See also' list in any particular order? Alphabetical would be the way to go, I think.
 * Have put in order or country, then by component chart (if applicable). Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * In the 'Copyright infringement lawsuits' section, why is the first letter of the blockquote bracketed?
 * Probably because it was lower case to start with. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * "Rihanna opened the Billboard Music Awards, with a performance of the "S&M" remix..." - misuse of comma
 * Removed. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One
 * Thanks Andrew. Aaron  &bull; You  Da  One 14:25, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Comments
 * Infobox
 * Why is Rihanna wikilinked twice? (single by... and chronology)


 * Lead
 * "It was released on January 21, 2011, as the album's fourth United States single". Why not just abbreviate United States with US?
 * It should be written in full in its first occurrence. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 04:48, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Instrumentation should be un-linked, everyone knows what is a "instrumentation" esp knowingly that "S&M" is a song.
 * I told the nominator to wiki-link it for consistency. If he unlinks this, there will be countless other terms he will have to unlink. And the sentence "everyone knows what is a "instrumentation" is an assumption of yours, right? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 04:48, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Can you explain why all the other instruments are wikilinked but synthesizers isn't?
 * "The song attained top-five positions in Germany, France, Ireland and Spain" --> changed it to "It attained..."
 * Sadomasochism is wikilinked twice in the lead
 * Why is Sexual fetishism wikilinked at the second occurrence in the lead?


 * Background and conception
 * Why not just place Ref#1 at the end of the first sentence?


 * Composition and lyrical interpretation
 * Not sure why this "(Some Great Reward, 1984)" is even needed?
 * I second this one. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 04:48, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * sadomasochism is wikilinked three times in the article body (once in the previous section, once in this section, and once in the critical reception)
 * Consider un-linking Instrumentation.
 * As I explained above. Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 04:48, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Again not sure why all other instruments are wikilinked and not the synthesizers, guitar is a very common word btw.
 * "Only Girl (In the World), - is missing the end quote.


 * Remixes
 * Why isn't Spears' wikilinked here? She is only wikilined in the "Live performances" section.


 * Critical reception
 * hook (music) is wikilinked twice in this article (once in composition and once in this section)
 * Why isn't USA Today wikilinked?


 * Reception and ban
 * YouTube is wikilinked twice in this article (once in the previous section and once in this section)
 * I'm not sure if its okay to wikilink all relevant information if its already wikilined in the article. Can someone explain?


 * Copyright infringement lawsuits
 * "LaChapelle alleged that the video infringed upon eight of his photographs published in GQ, i-D, Australian Vogue, and elsewhere between 1997 and 2010." - However, the lead says Vouge Italia not Australian Vogue.


 * Live performances
 * Only Girl (In the World) is wikilinked twice in this article (once in the composition section and once on this section)
 * "received following the final of the seventh series of The X Factor, on December 11, 2010. " - do you mean "finale"?
 * We know who is Spears by this time, removed the wikilink and just write Spears

Hope for the best, Jona yo!  Selena 4 ever  02:34, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

This is an extremely long FAC, with multiple opposes on multiple issues and no support after almost ten days. This article will have a better shot if it comes back fresh in a couple weeks, after all of the current opposers are satisfied. Good luck! Sandy Georgia (Talk) 19:20, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.