Talk:Bad Girl (Rihanna song)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Bad Girl (Rihanna song) has been listed as one of the Music 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
Date Process Result
May 12, 2012 Good article nominee Listed
Did You Know
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Rihanna (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rihanna, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rihanna on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Songs (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.

DYK nomination[edit]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 03:58, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Bad Girl (Rihanna song)Bad Girl (Chris Brown and others) – This song is not, in any unique way, Rihanna's. The version that she sang on was released as being by "Rihanna Featuring Chris Brown". She did not compose the song: Brown and others did. She has no residual rights in regard to the song, Brown and others have. The version recorded by the Pussycat Dolls, by virtue of being featured in a film, recieved far greater exposure. I'm not necessarily tied to the target mentioned here, but Rihanna as the disambiguator seems wholly inappropriate. Kevin McE (talk) 09:34, 17 March 2012 (UTC)


Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.


Any additional comments:
  • Oppose That's how it has always been done. We write "A song (Main singer's name song)". It has always been like this. I can list several examples if you want. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 09:54, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
But on what basis do you determine that the singer of the lower profile version of the song is the "main singer"? Kevin McE (talk) 10:47, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Well, by simply seeing what critics write. Or by seeing the liner notes of the album / soundtrack... Jivesh1205 (Talk) 12:11, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Well, I mean well... You should familiarize yourself with music articles or at least do a small research before proposing such things. :) Jivesh1205 (Talk) 12:13, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose How is it "Chris Brown and others"? Rihanna is the main artist, Brown appears as featured. The Pussycat Dolls then covered it. It's Rihanna's song. I don't think I have ever seen such a ridiculous and thoughtless proposal. What a joke. AaronYou Da One 12:09, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
You need to look at WP:AGF, and actually read the proposal. It is Chris Brown and others because there are 6 composers credited, and it seems inappropriate to name all of them. As I have stated, I'm not so much focussed on that specific new destination, as on moving it from the POV title that it currently has. It is not true to say "Rihanna is the main artist" of this song, only that she "is the main artist on one version of the song"; the Pussycat Dolls were the artists on a far better known version of the song. To allocate the song to either recording is POV. Kevin McE (talk) 12:35, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
LOL so much. You really don't have a clue about music articles. You write the main singers name who sings the song only. It doesn't matter that the PCD verison got more exposure, you always list the singer who did the song first. End of discussion, you clearly do not understand. AaronYou Da One 12:38, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
And you still haven't actually responded to the point that I made. Rather than assume an insulting tone, that only reflects badly on yourself, stop shouting rules that you are not referencing, and consider the point. To declare that this is a Rihanna song is to promote the POV that her version is the main one. You have no meaningful evidence for this assertion. There is no wikipedia policy that determines the first person to record a song as the name by which it should be disambiguated. Kevin McE (talk) 17:42, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
PCD covered the song. Read cover version please. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 12:40, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Don't be so patronising. I've read that article, and it says nothing relevant to this discussion. Kevin McE (talk) 18:29, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
PCD didn't cover this song. Their version was officially released, whilst Rihanna and Brown's only leaked and was probably just a demo, so this article should be named Bad Girl (The Pussycat Dolls song), but I don't think this song is notable at all with only 5 sources. Pancake (talk) 12:50, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
The PCD version would fail notability Pancake. It's Rihanna's version which charted on the US R&B/Hip Hop chart. AaronYou Da One 12:51, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Trust me Kevin, it's definitely not me who looks bad here. You clearly have no idea about music related articles. I do have the information sourced in the article, but you have dug a hole so deep for yourself (which you are probably aware of) that you have no choice but to follow through with your unwise proposal. The song was written for Rihanna, she recorded it, it leaked, then the PCD covered Rihanna's original version. This is how we do things. End of. Your proposal is simply ridiculous. Rihanna's version charted on the US R&B/Hip Hop chart = notability. AaronYou Da One 17:57, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
So still no policy to refer to? I have: WP:NPOV. Kevin McE (talk) 18:29, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose - we have a Billboard source stating that this song is by Rihanna featuring Chris Brown. However, the song may more appropriately titled (Pussycat dolls song) since their song was legally released. This however, is not Chris' song and we do not use a writer in the title. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 23:19, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Not quite: you have a Billboard source stating that one version of this song is by "Rihanna featuring Chris Brown". The very fact that two editors have expressed an opinion that it ought to be disambiguated as a Pussycat Dolls song proves that disambiguation by artist is a matter of opinion. So what is suggested as an NPOV disambiguator? I can only suggest composer, but if people have better ideas, please let's hear them. Kevin McE (talk) 12:09, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Rihanna's is the original though, and we always include the origina first. There is no point moving it to "Bad Girl (The Pussycat Dolls song) as it didn't chart anywhere. No chart, no article. Simple. Another thing you have clearly not researched. AaronYou Da One 12:13, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
I'm losing count of how many times you have repeated that assertion without backing it up by any reference to any policy, but you seem to believe that belittling me somehow exempts you from an expectation of being able to do so. There is clearly no consensus in this discussion that Rihanna is the appropriate disambiguator. Kevin McE (talk) 17:08, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

GA Review[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Bad Girl (Rihanna song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hahc21 (talk · contribs) 04:57, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Round 1[edit]

Ok, i've started reviewing the article. I'll be reviewing it for the next 7 days, so i'll give my verdict by Friday May 11th, 2012. --Hahc21 (talk) 04:37, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

  • Ok, i've seen the article has been recently the subject of some controversy over the ownership of the song, and the page has been moved 2 times in the last 60 days. So, i'll ask: a consensus over this has been reached? If not, this article automatically fails the review process. --Hahc21 (talk) 19:51, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
    The article was moved without consensus, and so was moved back to the original article name as a result of vandalism. So there is no issue here. AaronYou Da One 10:51, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Also, all information about the song is in here? So there's nothing out there left that should be here? I'm only asking.. Just in case =).. --Hahc21 (talk) 19:51, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
    Yes. AaronYou Da One 10:51, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Finally... Until i wait for the answer, i'll be checking the references and that stuff. --Hahc21 (talk) 19:51, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Round 2[edit]

I've roughly checked the reference, syntax and semantics, but still have the issue about the consensus in mind. I'll give it a few days to decide what i'll do with it. I haven't received no response from the contributors of the article as of May 6. I wrote on their talk pages to see if they take a look at the page. --Hahc21 (talk) 06:06, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

The discussion to move was closed as there was no clear consensus. Seeing as how more sources discuss Rihanna and Chris Brown's version and they had a bigger contribution towards the production of the song, I think keeping it as is is not a bad idea. The discussion can always be reinitiated after the article passes as a GA. The decision of this GAN remains up to you however. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 12:11, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
  • I really appreciate that both of you guys answered me the question. I will continue with the review, i think that if it was moved without permission or consensus, then i can move on with it and make my review. Please be in touch! and thanks! --Hahc21 (talk) 17:13, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Round 3[edit]

  • Would it be possible to add a music sample and a picture to the article? I fell it needs that to be more complete. --Hahc21 (talk) 03:41, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
    Yeah I'll get on it. AaronYou Da One 10:48, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
    I found the song. I'll be making the sample. --Hahc21 (talk) 18:01, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
    I've already asked someone with specific times. AaronYou Da One 19:08, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
    Ok, i'll continue with the review then. The sample can be added later. --Hahc21 (talk) 11:42, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
    I added a pic. As soon as the sample is done I will add it in. AaronYou Da One 13:17, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
    Perfect =). --Hahc21 (talk) 03:30, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Round 4[edit]

Section scan:

  • Lead section:
    • "Hollywood Records' decision to not include Rihanna and Brown's version was criticized by Ryan Brockington for the New York Post. But Michael Quinn for BBC Music was complimentary of The Pussycat Dolls cover." what if we make these two sentences as only one?
    Done AaronYou Da One
  • Background and development
    • Checked
  • Composition
    • Checked
  • Reception
    • Checked
  • Charts
    • Checked

Reference scan: I verified all references and everything is ok. --Hahc21 (talk) 18:29, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Round 5[edit]

Another day, another round.

  • Well, i've red the article four times in a row and i believe it's ready. I've comprehensively checked all sections and i found no issues on everyone of them. I'll wait for te contributors to see if they want to comment something to make my final read and give my decision. --Hahc21 (talk) 18:45, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Ok i found some minor issues:
  • Composition and lyrics
      1. "Producer of the song, Polow da Don, stated..." - shouldn't that be "The producer...."?
        1. Then it would read "The producer of the song...", changed reworded it. AaronYou Da One
      1. "stated in his interview with MTV News that Rihanna vocal performance was "unique"..." - shound't that be "that Rihanna's vocal performance..."?
      1. "saying how Brown delivered his rap with a high amount of energy and conviction." - wouldn't that be "deliveres his rap verses..."?
        1. delivers, yes. AaronYou Da One
        2. haha sorry i put an "e" that wasn't supposed to be there XD --Hahc21 (talk) 03:13, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
      1. "Rihanna's vocals "meshed" with the lyrics perfectly." - I think it should be better written as "Rihanna's vocals "meshed" perfectly with the lyrics."

After those minor issues are fixed or resolved, i'll make my final read. --Hahc21 (talk) 18:59, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Final round[edit]

OK, now i think almost has been done. I'm ready to give my verdict.

The verdict[edit]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):
    b (citations to reliable sources):
    c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):
    b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:

Final comments:This article was already in good shape at the beginning of the review. Only minor details were handled during the review process, like some grammas corrections, adding an image, a music sample. Finally, it is ready and it passes all the criteria. So, it is promoted.

Another comment: I was reading the move request and i don't get it yet. What a stupid proposal? Who the hell was this user? hey i'm not insulting him but please, it is a ridiculous idea. --Hahc21 (talk) 03:33, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Lol, thanks. AaronYou Da One 11:59, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.