Talk:Love Sex Magic

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Love Sex Magic article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Love Sex Magic 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
March 11, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

Songs

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.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

Pop music Mid‑importance

	Pop music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music 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.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

R&B and Soul Music Mid‑importance

	R&B and Soul Music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of R&B and Soul Music articles 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.R&B and Soul MusicWikipedia:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicTemplate:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicR&B and Soul Music articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Justin Timberlake (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Justin Timberlake, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Justin TimberlakeWikipedia:WikiProject Justin TimberlakeTemplate:WikiProject Justin TimberlakeJustin Timberlake articles

Women in Music

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music 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.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Article Style

How do we get an administrator to approve the new article and remove its "written like an advert" tag??? (Lil-unique1 (talk) 17:05, 3 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Done. I've created a new section below to draw attention to the removing of tags, per the discussion here. I realise you're aware of this now, but I'll comment for later readers (summarising the issues discussed at WP:Help desk): anyone can remove tags if they feel the issues have been addressed, and it's probably a good idea to leave a note on the article's talk page (here!) explaining that that's been done. Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 10:36, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio and advert tags removed

I've removed the {{copyvio}} and {{advert}} tags, as it looks to me like the issues have been addressed.

Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 10:32, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

UK Charts

Why is the midweek chart position for this song on the page? It may be No.7 now but it may be No.22 by Sunday. Plus, the reference included only says "Love Sex Magic will break into the Top 10". It doesn't actually mean No.7. Am I right or wrong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.71.57.231 (talk) 12:46, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd guess simply because the full-week charts aren't yet available, and that the editor who added the mid-week chart position plans to replace it when the full-week charts are available. My preference would be simply not to list the UK until the single has listed - properly - in the UK charts, but I don't feel strongly enough to remove the mid-week listing (so, basically, yes, I think you're quite right!) Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 13:05, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Instruments

Does anybody know what instrument that is in the background through the whole song? Thanks. Andrew R (talk) 09:59, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Love Sex Magic/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 13:46, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found.

Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:48, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
~~The article is not well written:~~

the lead single in international countries "international countries"? What other kind are there?

The song sees a complete departure in Ciara's previous style of music "departure in"

Thus it embraces more of a dance-pop sound, "Thus" is unnecessary here

as well as Ciara performing choreography with dancers "performing choreography"?

For its routines it was nominated for ?

Ciara praised her time with Timberlake "praised her time".

She also complimented how passionate Timberlake was about his work, as well as his humbleness and attitude. "complimented"?

~~This is badly written, should never have been nominated in this state. Please get it copy-edited by someone with a command of good plain English. The WP:Guild of copyeditors may be able to help.~~
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
References appear to be reliable, article is adequately referenced
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Good coverage, but is there nothing about the actual recording sessions? The credits section does not list any musicians?
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
This article is not well written and needs copy-editing. There are also points about coverage above. On hold for seven days. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:29, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The copy edit has taken place. Candy o32 00:35, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Really? The specific problems that I noted above remain. I suggest that you find someone who can actually read and write good plain English. The WP:Guild of copyeditors may be able to help. Jezhotwells (talk) 06:09, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I took your first suggestion and went to the Guild and posted my request, and someone from there was the one who did it. Just so you know, I am an intelligent native English speaker. Candy o32 22:36, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I see that some work has been done, but as I say many of the points i mentioned have not been addressed, so maybe you need to find someone else. I have noted before that not all members of the Guild of copyeditors are actually very good at copy-editing, and sadly this seems to be a nother instance of that.

Another edit has taken place another person. Candy o32 23:03, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I think that the prose is now improved sufficiently. I made further copy-edits. better luck with finding a copy-editor next time. Listing as a Good Article. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:42, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Love Sex Magic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:27, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Love Sex Magic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110717092556/http://morawin.jp/package/80312140/884977086744/ to http://morawin.jp/package/80312140/884977086744/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:09, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]