Talk:Te Amo (Rihanna song)

Untitled

Before you even think about deleting this article, you cant because:

1) It has been confirmed as a single! 2) It has charted on 1 chart 3) If you delete this then you have to delete this >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alejandro_(song) because that page has exactly the same things Te Amo has.

Thankyou.

But Te Amo has not had enough 'hype' to create an article about. If it has charted in one country, then it goes into Rihanna discography to Other Charted Songs! Alejandro was confirmed as the third single from the start, however Te Amo has only recently been 'confirmed' which may change like Photographs did. Wait a few weeks okay?Jagoperson (talk) 09:16, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Delete ASAP! Rockstar 101 is the official single not Te Amo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.64.15 (talk) 02:12, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Leave this page alone! the Music video has already been shot. It will be released as a single. No confirmed dates at the moment. But further information will come as the days pass. Leave this page alone.

NOW it has been confirmed as an international single and it is jumping up the UK charts so DO NOT delete this article! The video is on the way, release date is already set, so leave this be! It is well sourced so keep it! Jagoperson (talk) 20:15, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Didn't this chart atop the Brazilian Singles Chart as well? --Aquabender (talk) 02:21, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Reason why this page should not exist

For a song to be notable for its own page it needs:

• to have charted on one national chart (at least)
• have extensive independent coverage from critics etc.
• have a confirmed release date (i.e. when you can actually purchase the song)
• have a single cover

Since this song has none of those and there is only one source stating its release as a single (allegedly it was confirmed on american idol though there are no sources to confirm this the page has been redirected to it's album. Any reversion of this edit would be in breach of WP:crystal, WP:notability (music) and lack verifiable information. Lil-unique1 (talk) 20:35, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Reason why this page SHOULD exist

• It has appeared on three national charts - UK Singles Chart, UK R&B Chart and Swedish Singles Chart.
• It has a confirmed release date from two reliable sources
• It has a music video which has been shot
• It is playing on radio stations in the UK and France

Why is there this article then http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alejandro_(song)#Radio_and_release_history when that has 1 source which comes from the same place as Te Amo's but this article has 2. But how can you not delete Alejandro when this article has 2 and that has 1??

I rest my case! Iluvrihanna24 (talk) 08:30, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Now that it has recieved extensive coverage it will be left. simples! Lil-unique1 (talk) 14:50, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

I have used proper citations now so therefore i have deleted the sign at the top. :) Iluvrihanna24 (talk) 07:45, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Sources

The sources for Te Amo will change (ie they are playlists or charts), so they are okay for now but in a few weeks they will not be useful. I am trusting the Wikipedians working on this article to change the sources over time!! Jagoperson (talk) 09:07, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Latin Genre

This song is not Latin at all the song is more Pop/R&B but doesn't have nothing influenced on Latin Pop, why? cuz she says Te Amo? so why Alejandro from Lady Gaga is not Latin too? she says Alejandro/Fernando/Roberto, and yes is the same, the song is Pop/R&B as latin person I feel insulted that you guys put Latin Pop to a song that is not even close of our Pop music.

Have u even heard the beat to the song?? the song has Latin influences and I am also Latino. Don't be a drama queen. The song has influences from parts of Brazil, Argentina, and Spain. Spain is in Europe but Latin music is inspired from there. So yes.. Latin Pop. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.236.17.27 (talk) 14:41, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

The song is latin pop/R&B but an user creates drama and removes the pop genre. It's unfair to leave R&B and remove pop. Charmed36 (talk) 19:23, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

This song is definately "latin". The first time I heard this song, my first thought was "cool, she makes Zouk music these days?". It has a typical Zouk-style 1-3-4 beat and ethnic instruments (typical for that kind of music). People saying this is not latin need to broaden their knowledge on music styles before they blabber nonsense. What I don't get, however, is where the discussion about it being "R&B" comes from. What even makes this R&B? The fact that she made other songs which can be classified as R&B? The fact that it's slow? So is Mozart. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.98.245.68 (talk) 16:18, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Can someone add the single cover to the page? I'm sure it used to exist beforehand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.36.36.98 (talk) 20:28, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 123.176.32.132, 29 May 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} Te Amo has reached at #48 in Europe Hot 100 in Billboard charts. Why isnt that mentioned in the charts and peak positions section. 123.176.32.132 (talk) 12:44, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Not done: Welcome and thanks for wanting to improve this article. The editsemiprotected template is intended to allow non-autoconfirmed users to edit a semiprotected article using an autoconfirmed user as a proxy. It requires a specific request with a 'please change X to Y' degree of detail and reliable sources for any factual changes. Please be specific about what you would like to change and include a reliable source. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 15:38, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 219.90.141.48, 31 May 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} The split screen of the music video is labelled incorrectly as Rockstar 101 instead of Te Amo. Please change the description to Te Amo

Thankyou :)

219.90.141.48 (talk) 13:11, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Already done (I think!) haz (talk) 13:42, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Top 40 R&B singles

Te Amo has reached #9 on UK R&B singles chart. The link is [[1]] Please add it to the charts position. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.123.250.36 (talk) 10:14, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Polish Music Charts

http://zpav.pl/rankingi/listy/nielsen/top5.php "Te Amo" is 3rd in Polish Airplay Chart (it's a good chart). Please add this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.23.184.111 (talk) 16:01, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

links

both video links at the bottom of the page are not working —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.169.251.74 (talk) 14:20, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

To the chart perfomance:

Please add this:

"In Germany, the song is the first single of Rihanna, not to reach the top ten, since Hate That I Love You in 2007. source It debuted at No. 13 and reached it's pole position, No. 11, in it's 5th week on the German Singles Chart source." --79.216.189.122 (talk) 10:35, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Temo

"Temo" is not only the word for fear in Spanish, it is also the word for fear in Portuguese. 189.63.141.152 (talk) 00:41, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

No relevance... this song is called Te Amo... meaning I Love You. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 00:57, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jivesh boodhun (talk · contribs) 12:30, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Media Review

• An ideal length for the music sample will be 21 second. (Just a suggestion, not necessary).
• File:Rihanna te amo video.jpg >>> I believe this one is fine.

★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:38, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Infobox

• Why is Rihanna credited as Robyn Fenty? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:59, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

  That's what it says in the album booklet. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 14:34, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Lead

• The song was co-written by [[Mikkel S. Eriksen]], [[Tor Erik Hermansen]], [[James Fauntleroy II]] and Rihanna, and was produced by the former two, under their stage name [[Stargate (production team)|Stargate]].

>>> The song was co-written by [[Stargate (production team)|Mikkel S. Eriksen, Tor Erik Hermansen]], [[James Fauntleroy II]] and Rihanna, and was produced by the former two, under their stage name Stargate.

•  Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• Lyrically, the song speaks of Rihanna's struggles to deal with being the object of a woman's desires, and discovers that she does not share the same feelings as the other female as the song progresses.

>>> Lyrically, the song conveys Rihanna's struggles to deal with being the object of another woman's desires. As the song progresses, she discovers that she does not share the same feelings as the other female.

•  Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• The term Te amo is Latin, Spanish, or Portuguese for 'I love you'. >>> Is the word translation missing?

  What do you mean? Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

The phrase does not look good to me. Re-write it using the word translation. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:52, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

I'll re-word it. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:47, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

• Mention why the song was not released in the United States.

  Is there any need to? I don't know why the song was specifically not released in the US. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

There is a reason behind this. Search for it on the web. I think it has something to do with encouraging lesbian relationships. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:52, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

I've never heard ot that before. Te Amo was released as the European single, Rockstar 101 was the US single. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:47, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

• "Te Amo" garnered positive reviews >>> received

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• peaking inside the top ten in France >>> peaking inside the top ten on the charts in France

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• Link UK R&B Chart

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• featured French supermodel Laetitia Casta >>> features French supermodel Laetitia Casta

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• in the video. >>> redundant

  Re-worded. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• Rihanna performed the song for the first and only time live at >>> Rihanna performed the song live for the first and only time at

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• Link set list

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• Rated R, as well as songs from >>> Remove comma

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• The song was also included >>> Redundant.......... Use "Te Amo" again

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• If you add the years next to the tours, also add them next to all songs in the entire article.

  Removed date.

- ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 13:04, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

• I will continue soon. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 04:59, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Background and composition

• Link Rated R

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• was solicited >>> was released

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• Do not link countries.

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• In Germany on

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• The song was not released first, the written and produced. So re-arranged this section.

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• "Te Amo" was co-written >>> written

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• , with production of the song >>> while production of the song was handled

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• incorporates the elements of Latin >>> Latin what???

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• the song the song the song the song >>> REPETITIVE

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• Link key

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• whilst lyrically, the song is about the relationship between two women, with one realizing that she is falling in love with Rihanna, proclaiming "Te Amo" throughout the song, which is Latin for "I love you" >>> Re-write. Very often, non-native speakers of English like me get lost in such long sentences.

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• Rihanna realized >>> use present tense. The lyrical reference of the song has never changed.

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• Ailbhe Malone of NME described the meaning of the lyrics in her review of Rated R, explaining

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:05, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

I will complete this on Thursday. Right now, i have exams. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 07:31, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Okay. I won't be on until Wednesday anyway. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 22:01, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

When Will I Continue >>> After November 16, 2011

★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:59, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

OKay. I hope this doesn't get closed because of no activity though :/ Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 19:12, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

• It may be worth pinging Jivesh to remind him/her. Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:47, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

• I have. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 12:31, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Calvin, before i (re-)start the review, i suggest you find some time and go through the article again. The errors to which i pointed out above have nothing to do with wrong formatting etc. You just need to read the article again. Tell me when you finish. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:40, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

What? Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 12:44, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Look Calvin, this is a short article, in fact a very short one, yet there are too many errors. Please read it again. I am sure you will find some errors yourself. Fix them and then inform me and i will in turn go through the article and point out the grammatical errors you did not see. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:47, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I've gone through it. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 14:52, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Second Round

• I only asked you to go through the article for grammatical errors but it seems you have done considerable modifications in the lead. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 16:51, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Lead

• Re-arrange. A GA's lead cannot be like that. It looks very bad.

  It's in the same organisation as S&M, which is more than a GA. People on the FAC have no problem with it, so technically the lead is FA quality. I will do the rest of the points in about 12/18 hours. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 02:20, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Still, you need to organize the lead. I have told you countless times before. You have to lay emphasis on presentation. And please Calvin, this is nowhere near FA quality. This is a short article and it can be balanced. If it had a story like "Single Ladies", i could have understood but still, "Single Ladies"'s lead is not unbalanced because of composition but because of the cultural impact. Please balance it, the article is already in a bad shape. Arguing won't help here. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 04:18, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm not arguing Jivesh, I'm just saying that I have written the lead of Te Amo in the same format as S&M, which no one at the FAC has a problem with, and the lead of Te Amo is a lot shorter than S&M. I'll do the below points in a minute. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 16:33, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Do you realize how massive the first paragraph looks? There is detailed excessively. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 16:43, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) No, it doesn't look big to me at all. You must have a smaller screen than me. I know when I use my Mac, even the shortest of Leads or sections looks massive. But on this laptop, which I use all the time, I don't notice if something might appear bigger than it does for you for example. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 16:50, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Comment Frankly, this article should have a one-paragraph lead only, at most two. The article doesn't even have 10 KB of prose, and you would need well above 15 KB to have three paragraphs of that size. Your S&M (song) argument is ineffective here, because that article is much longer. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 16:51, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Let me tell you this well now. The first paragraph of the lead in comparison to the second and third is too big. Okay now? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 16:52, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Penguin, thanks for jumping on board. Lol. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 16:52, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Calvin, frankly the lead looks bad. It is not even balanced and it is too long, over-detailed. Come on, this is such a short article. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 16:54, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

What am I mean't to cut then? What about the whole WP:LEAD thing, about not mentioning something in the Lead but in the rest of the article? Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 16:55, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

A lead similar to this will be fine with me. They are both at 31 KB. Read the lead loudly (again). You will yourself get a very good idea of what to remove. If you don't, i will tell you. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 16:57, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

 Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 16:59, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Good. Horrible. Lol. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:00, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Fixed. You see how easy it was. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:09, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Good work Jivesh. If you don't mind, I have cut it down further and made some prose corrections to the lead. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 17:11, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Penguin shortened it further. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:10, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

It does no matter Penguin. You know how obsessed i am with having symmetrical paragraphs. Lol. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:12, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

It looks so short now. And the third paragraph reads like a list of hard facts with such short sentences. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 17:22, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

It's a lead. It's supposed to read as a brief (and I mean brief) overview of what the article has to offer. Anymore is simply redundant. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 17:28, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

To be honest, it looks basically the same as what I originally wrote. I don't get what the big deal was. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 17:34, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Response

Critical reception

• Is that the appropriate name? I don't think so.

  What???? Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

  Response??? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:37, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

  I'll change to "Reception" and "Critical response" then. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• Upon the release of Rated R, several music critics commented on the song as part of their album review, as well as when "Te Amo" was released as a single. What makes this sentence a necessary addition?

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• As part of his review for Rated R is getting repetitive. Too close.

  Repetitive? I only use this once. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

You use it twice. Should i show you the lines? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:37, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

• You just remove it (as i told you to do), should i show you the diff? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:37, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

  And it is quite silly to mention this As part of his review for Rated R as all reviews are part of the album, aren't they? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:38, 19 November 2011 (

  Yeah I know I removed it, you told me to. I just didn't get how it was repetitive because I only said it once. And no, it's not silly. Not all reviews are from albums. You Da One, for example, has single and album reviews. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

This is "Te Amo" not "You Da One". "Te Amo" did not premiere before the release of the album nor was it a single before the release of the album. I am saying it again. Stick to "Te Amo". ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:47, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

• And yes, i told you to remove that. You know it and yet you post : Repetitive? I only use this once. Wasn't it repetitive when i did the review? What are you trying to imply Calvin? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:49, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

  I'm was just using it as an example in answer to your point. And I'm not implying anything Jivesh, I just don't understand how one instance of something is repetitive. That's all. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• BBC music reviewer Jude Rogers >>> Wrong format. It should always be BBC's critic Jude Rogers

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• less futuristic >>> A quote?

  No. If it was, then it would have been quoted. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• on the albums

   Done

• , as they do not >>> is the comma needed?

  Read the sentence without a comma, it would be very long without a break. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

We do not use commas to break sentences when we want. A comma is a punctuation that should be used appropriately. Id the sentence is too long, break it in to two or more sentences. That's it. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:44, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

• heavy electronic influences >>> A quote?

  No. Again, if it was, I would have quoted it Jivesh. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• heavy electronic influences which >>> comma after influences

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• awarded the song four out of a possible five stars >>> awarded the song a rating of four out of five stars.

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• The song... the song... the song >>> repetitive

  It only says "the song" twice in the whole section. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

  It does not matter how many times you use it. What matters is how close they are. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:42, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

  They aren't close at all. "Robert Copsey of Digital Spy awarded the song a rating of four out of five stars and noted that Rihanna had progressed from singing about a male interest in one of her previous singles, "Rude Boy", to fantasizing about women, saying "After the rather explicit 'Rude Boy' campaign, Rihanna's taking a well-deserved break from titillating the blokes here – only to find herself the object of another lady's affections. One of her Rated R LP's less menacing moments, 'Te Amo' finds La Fenty grappling with her sexuality over some irresistible, Latin-infused Stargate beats."[10] Fraser McAlpine of Daily Reviews also awarded the song four out of five stars and also commented on the theme of lesbianism, saying "It's that old, old story: Girl meets girl. Girl speaks different language to girl. Girl loves girl. Girl doesn't love girl. Girl sad. We’ve all been there, right? And Rihanna’s captured that feeling beautifully (she actually has, even though I sound incredibly insincere about it)."[13]"

  Do you know you mentioned "Rude Boy" before? The reader might think you are still referring to "Rude Boy". This is what i always tell people: Do not edit under the false impression that only the fans of the singer will read this article. Anyone can read it and our aim is to facilitate the reading. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:55, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

  Rude Boy is mentioned in a quote far before it. But I'll change it for peace sake. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 17:58, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

• stars, as well as observing that Rihanna had progressed from singing about a male interest in one of her previous singles >>> is that comma needed? And observing???

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• observing that Rihanna had progressed from singing about a male interest in one of her previous singles, "Rude Boy", to fantasizing about women" >>> A quote?

  NO. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 17:50, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

• Don't use saying. Haven't i told you this before?

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• Fraser McAlpine of Daily Reviews >>> What is that?

  A newspaper. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• also awarded the song four out of five stars and also commented on the theme of lesbianism, saying >>> also also also ... repetitive and again using saying

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 17:50, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

• Question: Did you really go through the article? I can fail it for the amount if mistakes it contains, especially taking into account it is a short article. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫)

Please read the remaining sections before i continue. There are too many grammatical errors for such a short article. Really too many and i am serious. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:01, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Read the article again. The references formatting is choppy. Please do what i am telling you. This review is getting giant. This article is under prepared and has been rushed to GAN. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:57, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

The references look fine to me. I can't see any problems. And I am doing what you're telling me. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 18:04, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Does that mean you have already read the article again? And have you really gone through the references? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:05, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

No I haven't read through the other sections yet, but I have gone through the references and I can't see any problems. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 18:07, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Allow me to cite all the references that need attention

• 1

   Not done

  BBC should not be italicized. This was far too obvious. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• 4

   Not done

  R&R should be linked. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• 5

   Done All I could see wrong was that I hadn't included Apple after iTunes Store.0

  Exactly, that's indeed a choppy formatting. Keep in mind your are working for GA not B-class. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:37, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

   Not done It should be Apple Inc. And don't forget to link Apple Inc. Same for the others. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

  I've been told not to include Inc., but to save aggravation... Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• 6

   Done All I could see wrong was that I hadn't included Apple after iTunes Store.

• 7

   Done All I could see wrong was that I hadn't included Apple after iTunes Store.

• 8

  Do you want Amazon.com instead of amazon.de ?

  Yes + Amazon Inc ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:37, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

  Actually, I think this ref is fine. Amazon.com publishes its own site. Plus, using "Inc" is frowned upon in ref publishers. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 18:40, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

  Actually I agree. After all, Germany is not .com Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• 9

  Do you want Musicomnh instead of Musicomnh.com ?

  Copy and paste that to your search bar. It has an article on Wikipedia. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:37, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

  Not that I could find. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

  It should be Music OMH. And i know what i am talking about. I think the article has just been deleted. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 13:14, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

  That's not what I said Jivesh, I never said you didn't know what you are talking about. I simply said I couldn't find it. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

Here. Jivesh 1205 (talk) 17:57, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Please correct it. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 13:01, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

• 11

   Not done

  Since when is Musicnotes.com getting italicized? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• 13

   Not done

  Won't you add the publisher/owner? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

  I had Daily Review down as the publisher.  Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• 14

  Do you want the "...charts" sources to be changed to Hung Median ?

  Yes. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:37, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

Should be swedishcharts.com. Hung Medien .... And it is Hung Medien. Use same format and correct everywhere (19 - 27, 50, 53, 57). Endings should be .com Jivesh1205 (Talk) 13:01, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

• 19

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• 20

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• 21

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• 22

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• 23

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• 24

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• 25

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• 26

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• 27

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• 29

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

Find a replacement. That site is black listed. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 13:08, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

• 30

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

Find a replacement. That site is black listed. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 13:08, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

• 31

Use cite web Jivesh1205 (Talk) 13:08, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

• 32

   Not done ? Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

Acharts.us cannot be used for GAs. Use Billboard. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 13:08, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

• 40

   Not done ? Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

BBC is linked again. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 13:08, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

• 43

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

Accessdate? And link IFPI. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 13:08, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

• 48

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• 49

   Not done It's a pre-coded reference, I can't change it. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• 53

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• 55

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

Link FIMI. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 13:08, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

• 57

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• 58

   Done Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

• 59

★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:13, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Because that is really helpful. I still don't see what is wrong with them. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 18:17, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Calvin, there has already been too much of spoon feeding. You have done 14 GAs, right? You should have learnt something from them, right? Listen, take the references one by one, analyse them one by one. If you still do not find anything wrong, put a  Not done next to the reference. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:22, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

It is so hard to believe that you found nothing wrong. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:23, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

To be honest Jivesh, I don't think there has been any spoon feeding. And okay, I'll go through like how you suggest. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 18:24, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

To honest Calvin, all you have seen above has been spoon feeding minus the references. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:26, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

It depends on what your definition of the term is then. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 18:28, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Not really, it depends on the definition in the dictionary and specially the context. Calvin, you are tired. Go to bed and come back tomorrow because you have lost your sense of humor and cordiality. This is a friendly advice. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:30, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

I will continue soon and don't worry, i won't fail this but the process will be long. :D Jivesh 1205 (talk) 17:41, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm not worried about you failing it, I'm worried about it getting failed by someone else. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 17:49, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Rest assured. That won't happened. Jivesh 1205 (talk) 17:57, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

I have done all the ref fixes i can, but the Czech Rep. one is pre-coded. I've done all the others. Calvin • ^{Watch n' Learn} 13:15, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

As it currently stands

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:

   Pass/Fail:

I suggest you read WP:NUMBERS and read through the other sections again to fix some of the prose by yourself. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 13:16, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Per WP:ALBUMCAPS in Spanish-language "Te Amo" would need to be "Te amo" in the article body. Best, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 16:04, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Based on the number of problems remaining after two months, this should probably failed, and it can be renominated after everything's addressed. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 17:48, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

A lot of the time was due to the reviewer not being able to review. That's not my fault. Calvin • ^{Watch n' Learn} 19:07, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

I see that now; just saw the October cmts on first skim. i won't worry about this for a couple weeks in that case. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 15:15, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Trying to finish this today

Chart performance

• Read WP:NUMBERS and apply it where necessary. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 13:09, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
• Some choppy prose:
• Upon the release of the album, "Te Amo" made its first chart appearance in Sweden, debuting at number 52 on the Swedish Singles Chart on December 4, 2009, and stayed on the chart for one week.
• After being released as a promotional CD in Sweden on May 5, 2010, the song re-entered the chart at number fifty-three on July 7, 2010 and reached its peak of number 48 two weeks later on July 30, spending a total of six non-consecutive weeks on the chart.
• As the song was officially released in the United Kingdom > Why this mention?
• and peaked at number five weeks a month lateron May 29.
• entered ... entered... entered... > Try something else for a change.
• in its sixth week >>> in its sixth charting week
• Please don't compare here >>> but was more successful in Switzerland, where it peaked inside the top ten at number nine for one week. as you could have chosen any other country. So it seems like a personal opinion.
• "Te Amo" debuted and peaked at number 11 in Austria on June 25, 2010, falling to number 15 on July 2, and re-peaking at number 11 again on July 9
• In the Flanders and Wallonia regions of Beligum, the song debuted on both charts on the same week and both spent a total of thirteen weeks on both charts; the song debuted in both regions on June 19, 2010, at numbers 29 and 28, respectively.
• Elsewhere in Europe, the song debuted on the Italian Singles Chart on July 15, 2010 at number nine and peaked at number seven for two weeks, however the song was less successful in Denmark, Finland and Norway, peaking at numbers 22, 14 and 12, respectively.'
• In Germany, "Te Amo" became Rihanna's first song since "Hate That I Love You" in 2007 not to reach the top ten,[28] and debuted on the German Singles Chart at number 13 on July 26, 2010, and fluctuated in the top twenty before reaching its peak of 11 on July 24, 2010.
• and reached a peak at number eighteen on July 17, 2010.
• on the Canadian Hot 100 for the week ending July 3, 2010 >>> on the Canadian Hot 100 chart issue dated July 3, 2010
• 8, despite not being officially released as a single, and reached a peak of number 66 on July 17, 2010

Too many long and choppy sentences. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 13:21, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Done 95% of them, apart from the German one. Calvin • ^{Watch n' Learn} 13:36, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

35% satisfied. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 10:43, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

•  Done chart performance for you. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 10:43, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

•  Done music video for you. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 10:43, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

•  Done the rest. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 10:43, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

I have done copy-edits, applied WP:LQ and WP:NUMBERS. I feel quite confident passing the article. Please be more careful next time and learn form your small mistakes. Cheers. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 10:45, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Oh thanks. Calvin • ^{Watch n' Learn} 14:29, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome my friend. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 15:37, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Second Round

• I only asked you to go through the article for grammatical errors but it seems you have done considerable modifications in the lead. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 16:51, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Lead

• Re-arrange. A GA's lead cannot be like that. It looks very bad.

Response

Critical reception

• Is that the appropriate name? I don't think so.
• Upon the release of Rated R, several music critics commented on the song as part of their album review, as well as when "Te Amo" was released as a single. What ,makes this sentence a necessary addition?
• As part of his review for Rated R is getting repetitive. Too close.
• BBC music reviewer Jude Rogers >>> Wrong format. It should always be BBC's critic Jude Rogers
• less futuristic >>> A quote?
• on the albums
• , as they do not >>> is the comma needed?
• heavy electronic influences >>> A quote?
• heavy electronic influences which >>> comma after influences
• awarded the song four out of a possible five stars >>> awarded the song a rating of four out of five stars.
• The song... the song... the song >>> repetitive
• stars, as well as observing that Rihanna had progressed from singing about a male interest in one of her previous singles >>> is that comma needed? And observing???
• observing that Rihanna had progressed from singing about a male interest in one of her previous singles, "Rude Boy", to fantasizing about women" >>> A quote?
• Don't use saying. Haven't i told you this before?
• Fraser McAlpine of Daily Reviews >>> What is that?
• also awarded the song four out of five stars and also commented on the theme of lesbianism, saying >>> also also also ... repetitive and again using saying

• Question: Did you really go through the article? I can fail it for the amount if mistakes it contains, especially taking into account is it a short article. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Te Amo (Rihanna song). 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://cclamp.radioandrecords.com/RRWebSite20/Members/Formats.aspx?FormatId=15

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:08, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Te Amo (Rihanna song). 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://cclamp.radioandrecords.com/RRWebSite20/Members/Formats.aspx?FormatId=15
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110121160735/http://www.fimi.it/dett_ddmercato.php?id=73 to http://www.fimi.it/dett_ddmercato.php?id=73
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130604153636/http://www.riaa.com/newsitem.php?content_selector=riaa-news-gold-and-platinum&news_month_filter=5&news_year_filter=2013&id=C19496E7-CEC0-C453-D8A1-BD80E56E610F to http://www.riaa.com/newsitem.php?content_selector=riaa-news-gold-and-platinum&news_month_filter=5&news_year_filter=2013&id=C19496E7-CEC0-C453-D8A1-BD80E56E610F

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 05:32, 21 May 2017 (UTC)