Jump to content

Talk:1+1 (song): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎Am i dreaming?: new section
Line 129: Line 129:


[[User:Jivesh boodhun|Jivesh<font color="green">1205</font>]] ([[User talk:Jivesh boodhun|Talk]]) 11:13, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
[[User:Jivesh boodhun|Jivesh<font color="green">1205</font>]] ([[User talk:Jivesh boodhun|Talk]]) 11:13, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

== Critical Reception or Reception ==

'''PMA’s 100 Best Songs of 2011'''
'''At number 01 - BEYONCÉ – “1+1″'''
Beyoncé has hits to spare. Her two biggest rank among the last decade’s best. Confetti cannons heralded her 2003 debut single “Crazy in Love,” and her arrival as a solo artist. Her dominance was undeniable by 2008, thanks to an inescapable anthem (do really I need to name it?) and its instantly iconic music video. '''“1+1,” the shiniest jewel in Beyoncé’s''' (not Sasha Fierce’s) tiara, was somehow met with a shrug. It reached #57 on the Billboard Hot 100. Time will no doubt rectify this injustice.

'''Oft-repeated comparisons to Sam Cooke and Prince are apt, but they miss the point. “1+1” is an achievement of Knowles’ own. Beyoncé may not know much about algebra, but taken together, the song’s 3/4-time arpeggios, tender strings, howling electric-guitar solo, and superb vocal performance yield a deeply affecting four-and-a-half minutes of pop balladry. That The-Dream gave this song away is insane, an example of artistic generosity (or maybe regret) on par with “Because the Night” and “Nothing Compares 2 U.”'''

Beyonce’s version, so far superior to The-Dream’s demo, only confirms her own talent. Its definitive version was taken backstage and was recorded on a phone. No sampled horns or elaborate choreography were needed: '''just a pop star with an insanely good song. Or better put: an artist with a classic.'''

http://prettymuchamazing.com/feature/best-songs-2011/3

Revision as of 12:56, 8 December 2011

Good article1+1 (song) has been listed as one of the good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 6, 2011Articles for deletionKept
November 1, 2011Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article

For Future Expansion

Jivesh • Talk2Me 13:39, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Promo single or Single?

I ask because why would she film a video for a promo single 3 months after it was released? Surely it is an official single now? Calvin • NaNaNaC'mon! 12:35, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't released for radio or CD. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 12:46, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Because of the statement in the source below (http://www.beyonceonline.com/us/news/watch-11-video-premiere-tonight-e) we can now close this issue. I Help, When I Can.[12] 15:01, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Calvin, Beyonce has videos for nearly still songs and YES, i have written SONGS ant NOT SINGLES. Read, the background section, you will understand why it is not a single. If not, feel free to tell me. I will give you very reliable links. Jivesh • Talk2Me 15:18, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Jivesh, I'm not saying that I don't believe you or what you have written. I just wanted to know why she filmed a video for a promo single (as it says in the Info box) 3 months after it was released and after 4 was released 2 months ago. That's why I asked if it has been released as the third official single. Calvin • NaNaNaC'mon! 15:30, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
But Calvin, we cannot decide for her. She filmed it because as she said, the videos will "will tell the story of 4", meaning there will be videos for all songs on 4. And see her articles classified as "other songs" in her single template. She has videos for all of them. I think she loves doing videos. Jivesh • Talk2Me 15:37, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not saying that we are deciding for her. I just thought that it was strange to shoot a video for a song which was released 3 months previous and isn't impacting charts, so I assumed that it was going to be released as an official single. What I am saying just isn't being understood, I don't know how else to plainly say it. Calvin • NaNaNaC'mon! 15:54, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why the hell is there argument? Drop the issue! I Help, When I Can.[12] 15:44, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There isn't an argument? Calvin • NaNaNaC'mon! 15:51, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There is no argument. I was just explaining it to Calvin. In fact, we are both very good friends. Lol. Jivesh • Talk2Me 16:00, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not to forget

Another artist has covered the song. Tiffany Evans. There is a source at Rap-Up. Jivesh • Talk2Me 09:02, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Music Video

The "1+1" video is the story of love at its best. It's about commitment and fulfillment and it's Beyoncé at her most beautiful. The video experiments with psychedelic visual effects and innovative lighting that gives the clip a cinematic feel. "1+1," which Beyoncé first performed on the season finale of American Idol, is not an official single but it's the first song on the album and it's the first of many videos which will be released to visually tell the story of 4. The dress rehearsal clip backstage at AI, "Pregame" became an instant viral hit as soon as it hit the web. http://www.beyonceonline.com/us/news/watch-11-video-premiere-tonight-e — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.168.195.60 (talk) 23:31, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Let's wait 'till it's up on the web, around 8PM EST. This is the only source I found about this topic, so I think it's better to wait. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 23:34, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I just want to inform you all that a singer's official website can be used for such things. But you cannot use it to inflate sales and add certifications. Jivesh • Talk2Me 08:03, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Should I add these in reception part: PopCrush and Idolator. I know that they aren't highly reliable. My love is love (talk) 11:11, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You may use them for reviews and composition unless you want to make an article a FA. For now, you can use them. I assure you. Jivesh • Talk2Me 15:19, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:1+1 (song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Wikipedian Penguin (talk · contribs) 19:08, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from CallMeNathan • Talk2Me and TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)
:Wow. It is such a great honor. Jivesh • Talk2Me 15:12, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hehe, oh stop it! :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 17:55, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • References and media
  • There are several errors. Many works/publishers are not linked first time. That is how it should be. Please go over them.
  • Several sources do not use the cite news template, even though they are newspapers; #s 7, 13, 15
 Fixed Jivesh • Talk2Me 11:05, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Others, use the cite news when they shouldn't; # 11
 Fixed Jivesh • Talk2Me 11:05, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
To tall you frankly, i did not know about these cite web and cite news issues. Jivesh • Talk2Me 11:05, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I question the reliability of a few sources; What makes PopCrush reliable?
I really do not see why it is unreliable. It contains so much information the composition of songs. Jivesh • Talk2Me 09:51, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry Jivesh. That is not a reliable source. I'm sure you can replace the information from another source.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 08:12, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I will try. Jivesh • Talk2Me 08:24, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why is Rap-Up missing a publisher sometimes?
I saw it missing at only one place. Jivesh • Talk2Me 09:51, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • 17 should be Wenner Media
Why? I see it as Jann Wenner here. The thing you mentioned is the name of the company, right? Jivesh • Talk2Me 09:50, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It should link Jann Wenner and appear Wenner Media.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 08:12, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Jivesh • Talk2Me 08:24, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why is #19 different from the usual?
 Fixed Jivesh • Talk2Me 11:05, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • What's with #24?
 Fixed Jivesh • Talk2Me 11:05, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • For #s 25 and 26, when the publisher is the owner or writer, we usually don't mention them at all. Only when its an actual publishing company
I think it is the owner. Nathan, please do mind me asking, but are you sure, i mean this has never been raised in my GANs before. On the contrary, i was told to add that. Jivesh • Talk2Me 09:50, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am sure. Unless the publishing company is a corporation, we don't. For example, we don't list names of editors or owners.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 08:12, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The sample needs a better description; preferably one that is sourced
Have a look at other articles of 4. I did it for all of them but could not find a suitable one for "1+1". Jivesh • Talk2Me 09:55, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to do one. Please have a look. Jivesh • Talk2Me 11:21, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Cite work??? Jivesh • Talk2Me 08:24, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Work on these for now, and I'll go into prose in do time. Good luck :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 01:04, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Nathan. Jivesh • Talk2Me 09:53, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Prose
Lead
  • The "opening ballad" makes it sound as though the album is comprised only of ballads.  Done Jivesh • Talk2Me 08:52, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • American recording artist Beyoncé Knowles and it serves as the opening ballad for her fourth studio album -> Knowles, serving as the  Done Jivesh • Talk2Me 08:52, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The song was debuted by Knowles -> Knowles debuted the song  Done Jivesh • Talk2Me 08:52, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Better -> The finale of the tenth season  Done Jivesh • Talk2Me 08:52, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The song was written and produced by Terius "The-Dream" Nash, Knowles and Christopher Stewart -> I really question this. How did Knowles write the song if it was already written and composed by and for the Dream? Maybe this can't be changed, as she is officially credited, but it shows that she really doesn't write her own material, and just changes minimal things in order to obtain co-production credits.
She most certainly changes one or two words. But you cannot be sure that other artists also write their material. Jivesh • Talk2Me 08:52, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Have a look please. Jivesh • Talk2Me 08:52, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can you not give us some negative critical insight as well?
No there are only two negative mixed reviews. Why should i mention them when the song has over 50 positive reviews although (i listed only 20 or a little more in the critical reception section). I normally do it for other songs, example Run the World (Girls)" but for this one, i simply won't because of two mixed reviews. Jivesh • Talk2Me 08:41, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's alright. Didn't realize it was such a critical success. Leave it then.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 08:46, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Premiered on August 26, 2011, the accompanying music -> that doesn't work grammatically
  • The footage was a different direction for Knowles, far from the heavy dance routines for which she is known for. -> this sentence needs significant re-writing  Done Jivesh • Talk2Me 08:52, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • give it a cinematic feel -> I'm not really sure about this? How does that give it that kind of effect? Is that a quote?
Not necessarily. Jivesh • Talk2Me 08:52, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It was a free concert. Jivesh • Talk2Me 08:52, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • held at Roseland Ballroom, New York City -> its not a city -> held at the Roseland Ballroom in  Done Jivesh • Talk2Me 08:52, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Knowles' live performances of "1+1" have received acclaim, as critics called them "epic" -> How many critics called it epic? You are generalizing far too much. It would be better for you to write; Jon Stamos of The New York Times described her GMA performance of the song as "epic"
I changed it because you told me. Actually i believe you should read the response the live performances section to see the response they received. Not all of them called it epic but it is near to that word. Anyway, i have changed it. And to be frank, i do not feel that when some is performing something, all reviewers will use the word epic in their reviews. Lol. Jivesh • Talk2Me 08:52, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Jivesh, there are far too many prose issues to review. Please have someone (if I wasn't the reviewer I'd do it for you :)) read through it and make prose fixes; as of now, look how many I've pruned from the lead.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 08:31, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Jivesh • Talk2Me 08:32, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And Nathan, trust me, i know how kind you are but i totally understand that you are the reviewer and that you have to abide by certain rules. Jivesh • Talk2Me 08:42, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Glad you understand :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 08:46, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please explain how i will do this? What will i do with the live performances section then? Jivesh • Talk2Me 10:32, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am very busy in real life., Give me time till Monday please. I will not be able to look at anything during the week-end. Jivesh • Talk2Me 09:16, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the album opens with its most tender ballad, a slow-burning number that calls back to both Sam Cooke's "Wonderful World" and Prince's "Purple Rain" without sounding like a retread of either tune [...] it sounds best in the context of the album, where its slow, steady build to a cathartic guitar break is the perfect introduction to a set of mostly low-key tracks about love and heartbreak."-needs the quote within a quote single quote marks.
  • criticized the song's lyrics, and wrote - no comma--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:54, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note - Tony, what do you mean you have "agreed" to review this article? You are allowed to give suggestions, but I am the reviewer. Also, Jivesh, you don't have to answer to anyone's concerns other than my own; I decide if the article passes or fails.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 00:57, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okay Nathan. I have no one who can do a c/e. I have asked around 20 people or more. Most of them did not even care to reply. Can you please suggest someone? Jivesh • Talk2Me 04:43, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have never copyedited, but am willing to make suggestions. Many of my suggestions were grammatical copyedit type things. What exactly do you want me to do?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:17, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted some-one to copy-edit it. But it does not matter. You may continue. Leave your suggestions. Jivesh • Talk2Me 10:25, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Although, I generally only use it for high importance articles (Last used for United States Declaration of Independence and Bill Clinton) or explanation of a 2nd opinion request, GA noms have notes fields which flag attention for specific requests. I don't think every pop single should use the notes field in this way, but there may be more important things in the future where you can use this feature.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:36, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Been doing some light copyediting.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 08:30, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Don't start a sentence with "It was added,"--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:04, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As Nathan is on a break, I'll be reviewing this article. Novice7 (talk) 04:36, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unresolved comments from TonyTheTiger
There is no specific mention in the review. Jivesh 1205 (talk / Make sure you give 4 a try!!!) 19:48, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I just want to let you know that a friend of mine has copy-edited the article and i believe it is free of these issues now. And what is runon? Jivesh 1205 (talk / Make sure you give 4 a try!!!) 04:41, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
see Run-on sentence.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:58, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
query
Judging from the amount of media attention it gained, YES. Jivesh 1205 (talk / Make sure you give 4 a try!!!) 18:29, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The reviewer below already mentioned this and i do not even know how t o upload a sample. So i will ask my friend to reduce it. Jivesh 1205 (talk / Make sure you give 4 a try!!!) 18:29, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What is going on with this?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:56, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Novice7 (talk)
Let's begin:

Media review

I do not know how to do that. Jivesh 1205 (talk / Make sure you give 4 a try!!!) 07:28, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'll reduce it. - Saulo Talk to Me 15:16, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Jivesh 1205 (talk / Make sure you give 4 a try!!!) 15:41, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Will continue later. Novice7 (talk) 07:19, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First review

Lead
  • "1+1" is a song by American recording artist Beyoncé Knowles, serving as the opening track for her fourth studio album, 4 (2011). Knowles debuted the song on May 25, 2011, during the finale of the tenth season of American Idol. I don't why "serving as the opening track" part is needed. There's already a tracklisting present, which shows "1+1" is the opening track.
Mags, i kind of believe that it should be left like this for a simple reason. If you read the critical reception or try to search for the hype that surrounded the release 4, you will practically everywhere see the group of words, "'1+1', the opening song of the ....". I think that's why Nathan did not mention anything about this. But still, if you think it is unneeded then i will remove it. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 15:30, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's okay. At first when I read it, I felt that flow was broken. Maybe you can rearrange it? Novice7 (talk) 16:03, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 16:14, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Originally titled "Nothing But Love", The-Dream planned to include it on his second studio album, Love vs. Money (2009). – capital B or small b? Also, I think it's The-Dream "had" planned, right?
It is indeed capital as seen in the source. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 15:32, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I was talking about Wikipedia MoS. "B" of But should be small. Novice7 (talk) 16:03, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done but personally i feel Wikipedia has no right to do that. A song's title should be kept the way it is. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 16:12, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • A down-tempo power ballad, "1+1" draws from the styles – draws what? Influence? Also, keep in mind that influences are not genres. You know that.
A down-tempo power ballad, "1+1" draws from the genres of contemporary R&B and soul music. Is it good now? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 15:34, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please tell me how i can re-phrase this? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 15:23, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It looks fine now. Novice7 (talk) 16:03, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes!!! Lol. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 16:09, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The lyrics make sweeping statements about the power of the relationship. – whoa, sweeping is definitely not neutral. Also, is this sentence needed?
I did not understand this one. Please tell me how i can re-phrase this? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 15:23, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You can remove the "sweeping" part. Maybe, "strong" would work? Novice7 (talk) 16:03, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 16:09, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Will continue soon. Novice7 (talk) 11:42, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:40, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The video was a different direction for Knowles who is normally known for her heavy dance routines in her clips. → did critics label the video 'different'? Then, add that please.
 Done but can you please explain why it should be like this? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:40, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The video was a different direction for Knowles who is normally known for her heavy dance routines in her clips. The video for... The video – repeats in a close proximity.
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:40, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The video met with generally positive reception from music critics, who described it as "sell[ing] sex as art" and claimed that it will be remembered as one of Knowles' most iconic visual work. → maybe I'm wrong, but, how is "selling sex as art" positive? Can you explain? Also, the last sentence must be sourced in the lead too.
The review is here and to be frank while reading it, it does not seem negative. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:40, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Inconsistency: Knowles' and Knowles's. The latter is preferred, I think.
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:40, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Background
  • The two images may be free, but are they needed? Maybe The-Dream's image only?
Yes, they are free and they serve as identifications. As far as i know, FAC encourages the use of images. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:40, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Nothing But Love" --> small 'b'.
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:40, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Shortly after "1+1" was released online, Knowles debuted the ballad – do you mean released as a promo single? Or, any leak? Please include that.
I believe it was leaked. It was not accidentally (in my opinion). ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:40, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Towards the end of the performance, she fell to her knees and shook the hands of audience members. - is this needed?
Why should it be removed? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:40, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Composition
  • This section could use a quick copy-edit. Removing unnecessary information, grammar fixes etc.
It has already been copy-edited twice. I don't see any unnecessary information. Honestly. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:48, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I meant rearrangement. There are lots of comparisons like Alicia Keys.. so, if you could rearrange them to give a better flow... You can remove the "xyz of abc.com said... pqr of def.com noted" etc. parts. I hope you get what I mean? Novice7 (talk) 11:16, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I understand by Legolas and Nathan (while reviewing my GANS) tell me that i have to state who wrote so and so. I remember some someone even placed by who and of which templates on "Run the World (Girls)" because of this. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:33, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you should! I felt that could give a better flow to the comparisons sentence, but that's up to you. Novice7 (talk) 11:37, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • According to Michael Cragg of The Guardian, "1+1" demonstrates Knowles's raw vocals, reminding the listener that she has a "jaw-dropping voice" - is the underlined part needed?
I also think it is not needed. Actually, the one who copy-edited the article for the second time, put it there. So, i should remove it, right? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:48, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it would be nice if you could. Novice7 (talk) 11:16, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
minus Removed ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:34, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Critical
  • Jivesh, three paragraphs!? Try to reduce the number of reviews. Remove a few lesser notable websites (Prefixmag, Idolator etc.) as there are many superior reviewers here.
Mags, this what i cannot understand. What's the harm of having so many reviews. We cannot do anything if the song got so much attention critically. I mean, read the reviews, you will perhaps understand what i am trying to say. And the article has already been copy-edited twice. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:43, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I already read the reviews. The reason I ask for trimming and reduction is that we have to be consistent throughout the article. Giving undue weight to a certain section can be called fancruft by other editors. We need to keep a balance. Compare the chart section with this section. Or, Background with this section. I know you're trying to keep a neutral point of view, but trust me. Novice7 (talk) 11:16, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Mags, we are friends and i know you mean good. So do you mean that the CR section should be o the same length as the background section. If yes, i rather prefer this article to be failed. Background information should not be compared to CR. The best example is "Single Ladies". You know the amount of coverage it received, right? But have you seen the background. It is simply nothing when compared to the others sections. This is what i HATE about Beyonce. She does not say anything about her songs. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:23, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mean it should be the same size as BG section. It should be comparable. That's why I asked you to trim the quotes (that big blockquoted analysis!). If you trim the quotes, remove redundant information etc., the section would look amazing. Novice7 (talk) 11:27, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think i will remove the quote then. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:30, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The quotes need to be trimmed down too.
  • Redundant information: like comparison to Whitney Houston which appears in the Composition section.
Okay, i will remove it. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:43, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I had a look again and now i have a question. Is it necessary to do so. Actually, i tried to used the information present at best. I made it fit in both composition and CR. This is what i have always been doing but if you still think it is wrong, tell me. I will remove it then. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:45, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid you have to, please. Novice7 (talk) 11:16, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
minus Removed ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:25, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Will review this section after the fixes.
Chart
  • Can you include how may weeks it stayed on the Hot 100?
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:52, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • UK chart: the source shows #76?
It works correctly for me. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:52, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Music video
  • Statements like 'A quick shot of the "IV" tattoo inked on Knowles' left ring finger is shown (a reference to her album's title, 4) need a source. Also, imo, this sentence is not needed at all. It does not give anything extra to the readers. Maybe you can trim this section too.
Sourced + i will not removed ti because it is clearly a reference to her album 4. Many fans will notice that. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:40, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The reception section, is again, too long. Try reducing it. Trim quotes, remove duplicate reviews etc.
It has already been trimmed for what it was before. Is there anything wrong in having a long reception section? There were 62 reviews if i remember well, i only selected the best ones. Now i know you will perhaps think that by best, i mean positive. Well no. The video only has three negative reviews. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:40, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Responded above. Novice7 (talk) 11:16, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Will review this section after the fixes.
Okay. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:40, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Live
  • She has her eyes shut, standing in front of a mirror, singing the song, while members of her family and some friends look on quietly. - remove this.
Why? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:40, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's irrelevant to the article IMO. We don't have to provide such intricate details. Novice7 (talk) 11:16, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
minus Removed ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:25, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Joycelyn Vena of MTV News commented that on "1+1", Knowles' vocal abilities "outshined it all." - outshines what?
Well, that's why i put it in quotes. I think she means the heavy dace routines she did for the other songs. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:40, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okay then :) Novice7 (talk) 11:16, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Other versions
  • Nothing about the leak's music? Its difference with Knowles's version?
It did not receive enough coverage. Nevertheless, since you asked, i will search more. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:40, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is all i could find: Same lyrics, different vocals. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:59, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ooh. Novice7 (talk) 11:16, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Lol. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:25, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Charts
  • Please try to format the table per WP:ACCESS.
Okay. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:40, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:56, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Great! Novice7 (talk) 11:16, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is a quick look at the article. I'll post a second review soon. Novice7 (talk) 07:08, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Revised

Me and Novice7 had a discussion and he asked me to take over as the reviewer, because he is currently busy. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 19:08, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OVERLINK check

The following are repeatedly linked throughout the body of the article (note that the lead is not taken into consideration).

Please check. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:34, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Good. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 17:40, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Lead
  • Merge first two sentences.
This is what i don't like. One reviewer tells me A and another tells me Z. (No offense intended). Lol. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:37, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Lol, did I ask to split the sentences? Sorry if I did :) Novice7 (talk) 11:49, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think it was you Mags. If not, it should have been Tony. Lol. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:54, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The release date should not be there? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:06, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The sentence is saying that the song was debuted and released the same day. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 12:39, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " The song was written by Knowles, Terius "The-Dream" Nash and Christopher Stewart and produced by the latter two under their stage names, The-Dream and Tricky Stewart, respectively. " — It was actually produce by all three.
Nice catch +  Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " Originally titled "Nothing but Love", The-Dream " — The-Dream was originally titled that or was the song?
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " The-Dream had planned to include it on his second studio album, Love vs. Money (2009) " — "had" to "had initally"
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge next two sentences
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " The lyrics make strong statements about the power of the relationship. " — Not necessary.
I have the habit of explaining the lyrical content in all my GAs. I remember once not doing it and the reviewer asked for it. I did not do it at that time because i had no source explaining the lyrical meaning of the song.
  • " Despite being a promotional single, " — Cut.
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " The video was a "different" direction for Knowles who is normally known for her heavy dance routines in her clips. " — Source to quote?
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think we only need one sentence discussing the synopsis of the video.
Hmmm, synopsis? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You have two sentences summarizing the video: " The video was a "different" direction for Knowles who is normally known for her heavy dance routines in her clips.[1] It experiments with psychedelic visual effects and innovative lighting, which give it a cinematic feel. " — Reduce this to only one. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 12:39, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " The video met with generally positive reception from music critics, who described it as "sell[ing] sex as art"[1] and claimed that it will be remembered as one of Knowles' most iconic visual work. " Shorten this and make it more general.
I need help here. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
" Critics praised the music video for its aesthetic and sexual theme. " Something like that. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 12:39, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it's true but i will remove it. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Can i use "very positive"? What's wrong in calling it acclaim when it is so evident? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Simply "positive" suffices. "Acclaim" can sound a bit exaggerated, even though I know that critics LOVED the song. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 12:03, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " with some lyrical modifications "
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Background
  • " she sang the song surrounded by smoke and red lighting, and declared, "This is my favorite song" " — Too many "and"s.

 Fixed ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:57, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • " Knowles's " → " Knowles' "
 Fixed + I did not do that. The copy-editor(s) did that. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:57, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " 1+1" was not sent for airplay, with "Best Thing I Never Had" favored as the second single from 4, following "Run the World (Girls)".[10] " — Relevance?
This era is a PERFECT MESS. People outside Wikipedia call this a single/buzz single. It should be here to avoid confusion. We should facilitate everything for people who visit Wikipedia. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:57, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Composition
  • " slow tempo of fifty beats per minute. " — Use numerals (50 vs. fifty).

 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:05, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • " allows Knowles's voice " → " allows Knowles' voice "

 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:05, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • " demonstrates Knowles's raw vocals " — Add [sic] after "Knowles's" because this is incorrect grammar.
    Comment: Sorry for butting in, but both Knowles' and Knowles's can be used. Both are permitted. However, I agree that the former is common among people. Novice7 (talk) 04:25, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:05, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mags, you don't have to be sorry. You know how much you are appreciated by me and everyone. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:05, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " Knowles sings to the former " — Who is the former?

 Fixed ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:05, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • " Contessa Gayles from AOL Music wrote " — Comma after "wrote".

 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:05, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Critical reception
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:17, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • After "wrote", we use a comma, not a colon, unless it is a highly formal quote, which this article does not have.
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:17, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " "1+1" was acclaimed by music critics " — "praised" is a better word.
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:17, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " "the only recent pop ballad that comes close to the power of '1+1' is Adele's stunning 'Someone Like You'." " — Write in your own words.
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:17, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Joanne Dorken quotes need to be reduced to just one average size quote.
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:17, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " Praising Knowles's vocals "
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:17, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do not see the need of a blockquote, as most parts of that quote can be put in your own words.
If so, can you please help? I am not very good at converting quotes (especially when they are giant) in my own words. Lol. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:17, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done. :) —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 13:13, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " Andy Kellman of the Allmusic "
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:17, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Background and synopsis
  • Recording or filming a new music video?
That's how music websites report it. Filming is like Beyonce is holding a camera. Lol. I think recording is also in the same boat. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:24, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Knowles's" to "Knowles'" (3)
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:24, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " official website " to simply "website" (2)
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:24, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " The song's video features several close-up shots of Knowles "
minus Removed ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:24, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " as though it has been coated with a honey-like and glittery substance. " — Personal interpretation.
Should i source it? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:24, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Source it, or remove it. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 12:56, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " the video begins the use of " — " the video begins to use "
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:24, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " several scenes of Knowles are shown, as she is engulfed " → " Knowles is seen engulfed "
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:24, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look at the rest of the sections soon. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 19:08, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reception
  • A giant WP:QUOTEFARM, so try paraphrasing some of the quotes.
I did my best. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:54, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do not link in quotes.
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:54, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • You quote The Atlantic a bit too much.
Lol +  Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " Yoü and I " → [[You and I (Lady Gaga song)|You and I]] Per consensus.
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " She added that, " — No comma.
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " L Magazine's Mike Conklin was unsatisfied with the video[,] stating "
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly, this article was well underprepared, and even after two rounds of prose checking, it still looks like it needs work. I will try my best to pick out the issues of the article, because I understand how much effort you have put into this, Jivesh. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 11:16, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Awww thanks for this. I just saw it. I love such messages. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:10, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I did not know we are not supposed to link something more than once. I always happened to think that something should be linked once in each section. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Lol, no. That's not how it works. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 12:44, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
All done now. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 13:00, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. All done. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 13:22, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Live performances
  • Remember, after "wrote", we use commas, not colons.
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 09:12, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now that blockquote shouldn't be hard to paraphrase. At least if you do, you will be allowed to wikilink Vincent Moon's Take-Away Shows.
You already removed one, why can't this one stay?
  • " Knowles later sang "1+1" live on August 14, 2011 " → " She sang "1+1" on August 14, 2011 "
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 09:12, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " with her band and orchestra watching on " — Sorry but what does to "watch on mean"? Plus, do not use "with" to connect ideas, because it reads sloppy. Second, a noun followed by an "-ing" reads ungrammatically on Wikipedia.
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 09:12, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " and sang sitting on her knees "
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 09:12, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Other versions and usage in media
  • " leaked onto the internet in late May 2011 " — Capitalize Internet here.
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 09:12, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " posted a video of herself singing " — Comma after "herself".
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 09:12, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • " while seated at her computer " — In front of her computer you mean? Lol.
 Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 09:12, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
References
Are you sure? I mean i have been using it for two years. I thought cite news is for magazines and newspapers that are published. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:13, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am sure. :) —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 15:11, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck! —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 17:40, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. From where do you get all that patience? You are the epitone of P.A.T.I.E.N.C.E. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 09:43, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Lol, I don't think I am even near User:Nikkimaria's level yet, ;). And trust me, I am sure of everything here! Let me go through the article quickly. I'll pass it soon. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 09:53, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nikki is the best. She cannot be compared. She is so nice. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:14, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
All  Done ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 15:23, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I will be passing it then. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 20:16, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 03:19, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links

We use links that are directly related to the song. How is her official site related? It's related more to her than the song. I Help, When I Can.[12] 21:42, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Did you visit her official site lately? Jivesh • Talk2Me 04:01, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just because the official site redirects to a splash page (1+1 video), doesn't mean we should really have it. I think the YouTube link will suffice. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 11:20, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I was talking about the 4 countdown. Jivesh • Talk2Me 11:24, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I guess it has been removed. Anyway, all Beyonce-related articles have that link. So should i go and remove it on all her pages then? Jivesh • Talk2Me 11:26, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You should. External links should be directly related to a song in one way or another. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 11:43, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Now, since the 4 countdown material is more static than the little splash pages. I think that we could use them for the album article. I Help, When I Can.[12] 12:41, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The word "track"

Why can't it be used? I Help, When I Can.[12] 12:44, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On what instance? --Efe (talk) 13:36, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Bingo! --Efe (talk) 13:42, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think this was mentioned in the first FAC of "Single Ladies". Jivesh • Talk2Me 18:32, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I found no such thing, in either of the FAC's. I Help, When I Can.[12] 23:30, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry. I cannot remember but i am sure i found it somewhere. Jivesh • Talk2Me 04:15, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Found or not found, what is the reason then? --Efe (talk) 14:17, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Henri-Georges Clouzot's "L'Enfer"

This may eventually become a news story. It's pretty obvious that she was "inspired" when creating this video as well. This is not an edit request, this is just me letting the editors of this page know that with the recent discussions surrounding "Countdown" it's likely that this may pick up steam. Or maybe not. Just putting it out there.--mikomango mwa! 16:59, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

With all respect i owe to you, there is not need to post such things. None of those sources are reliable. Moreover, they are all over one month old. Furthermore, did Beyonce raise her voice when everyone was imitating her SL choreography? Last but not the least, you cannot copyright dance moves. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 08:54, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


With the utmost respect, the date of these links are not at issue here. What is at issue here is the "inspiration" behind these videos and the likelihood that they may be exposed. I did NOT ask for an edit request, I was merely bringing them to the attention of the editors, as it seems they had not been. Whether you choose to use them or not is entirely up to you. Because (according to your talk page) you see Beyonce as the Queen of all things who is incapable of a misstep, perhaps this does not make sense to you. I can only assume a more objective editor will understand my choice to bring this to everyone's attention. Furthermore, her SL choreography was an interpretation of the work of Bob Fosse and was not Beyonce's original work, just in case you didn't know. Again, I did NOT ask for an edit request, I was just bringing this to everyone's attention. These videos do not explore dance moves (I see you are still smarting from the "Countdown" video fiasco, I'm sure you hated having to report that on her Wiki page) but instead video treatments. You obviously did not click on any of the links. The Vimeo link is highly reliable and you know it (otherwise, the Youtube link of the Countdown video would not have been accepted so widely by many news outlets). You do NOT need to be disrespectful to me, I was merely bringing this to everyone's attention, not asking for an edit. Please take your over-zealous Beyonce defenses and poor attitude regarding any Beyonce-related topics elsewhere. If you do not find my post to be helpful, ignore it. Have a blessed and wonderful day.--mikomango mwa! 16:16, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I present you my sincere apologies if you think i was too sensitive. My main concern here was how you put the word inspired between quotes and that's what websites do to show sarcasm sometimes. I never said you were asking for an edit. And yes, i admit i do not like the controversy "Countdown" received but at the end of the day, it is there on the article. Since the most reliable websites in the world are not over-exposing this ("1+1"), i do not see the need for Wikipedia to do so. I clicked the links. Vimeo is reliable indeed but if you click the link again, you will see there is no text there. It is two months old. If a video posted by YouTube (about "Countdown" controversy) gained coverage after only 30 minutes following the post, i cannot understand why this one will get coverage if nothing happened in two months. And you wrote so much about me. And what about you when it comes to Rihanna's articles, for instance: They were a bunch of Rihanna haters posing as seasoned and sensible editors Does this make you different from me? And wow, i am being disrespectful? I wonder what you will write when someone here will be really disrespectful to you someday. And thanks for these honorable labelings: your over-zealous Beyonce defenses and poor attitude... I am also not an objective editor from your point of view. That was all i needed to know whether you are a true friend or not. Finally, i saw your true colors. Better be late than never. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:04, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


We are not on Wikipedia to find husbands, wives and people to officiate our weddings. We are here to edit and be civil. If you do not think the links are significant, then ignore them. Every other editor of this page has done the same, and the silence, to me, speaks volumes. That in itself lets me know that these links are wholly irrelevant. However, you deciding to tell me "there is no need to post such things" because "you cannot copyright dance moves" lets me know that you are entirely too personally connected to the subject matter to be able to speak about this objectively, and your attitude is completely unnecessary, since the links do not discuss dance moves or anything of the sort, but instead, video treatments. At the very least I thought someone may notice that the video treatments were a part of a longer, perhaps historical and/or teleological advancement in lighting and shading. Your personal attacks all over Beyonce articles or any time anyone mentions Beyonce anywhere on Wikipedia are just unnecessary and frankly, I'm tired of it. I do not run around policing Rihanna articles the way you run around policing Beyonce articles. If someone is just bringing something to our attention while not asking for an edit request in any way, and I don't think it's relevant, I just ignore it, I don't act a fool about it. Good day to you.--mikomango mwa! 18:07, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Personal attacks??? Goodbye!!! ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:09, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


You are totally biased and out of control!!! You had absolutely no reason to be disrespectful in the first place but I guess you always get your way that way! God be with you!--mikomango mwa! 22:22, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you keep replying then? Don't you see you are wasting your own time, Mr Know It All. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 03:46, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Director's Cut

★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:06, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Am i dreaming?

Jivesh1205 (Talk) 11:13, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Critical Reception or Reception

PMA’s 100 Best Songs of 2011 At number 01 - BEYONCÉ – “1+1″

Beyoncé has hits to spare. Her two biggest rank among the last decade’s best. Confetti cannons heralded her 2003 debut single “Crazy in Love,” and her arrival as a solo artist. Her dominance was undeniable by 2008, thanks to an inescapable anthem (do really I need to name it?) and its instantly iconic music video. “1+1,” the shiniest jewel in Beyoncé’s (not Sasha Fierce’s) tiara, was somehow met with a shrug. It reached #57 on the Billboard Hot 100. Time will no doubt rectify this injustice.

Oft-repeated comparisons to Sam Cooke and Prince are apt, but they miss the point. “1+1” is an achievement of Knowles’ own. Beyoncé may not know much about algebra, but taken together, the song’s 3/4-time arpeggios, tender strings, howling electric-guitar solo, and superb vocal performance yield a deeply affecting four-and-a-half minutes of pop balladry. That The-Dream gave this song away is insane, an example of artistic generosity (or maybe regret) on par with “Because the Night” and “Nothing Compares 2 U.”

Beyonce’s version, so far superior to The-Dream’s demo, only confirms her own talent. Its definitive version was taken backstage and was recorded on a phone. No sampled horns or elaborate choreography were needed: just a pop star with an insanely good song. Or better put: an artist with a classic.

http://prettymuchamazing.com/feature/best-songs-2011/3

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:1%2B1_(song)&oldid=464759940"