Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Halo (Beyoncé Knowles song)/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by Laser brain 22:50, 22 December 2010 [1].

Halo (Beyoncé Knowles song)

[edit]

Halo (Beyoncé Knowles song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 23:21, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because I feel it meets the FAC criteria. Overused. Better. I am nominating this for featured article because I've been working on it by many months. "Halo" is my favourite song and I want it to be my first featured article after my year and a month I've been here. It is well written, well-organized and after a GAN and two PRs, I believe it is ready. Thank you, Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 23:21, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Resolved comments from Adabow (talk · contribs) 03:24, 10 December 2010 (UTC)|content=[reply]

Adabow (talk · contribs) 00:19, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP Beyonce Knowles participant. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:33, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Any admin can deleted anytime, per the template itself, it have to wait a week. Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 18:58, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Already done by Courcelles (talk · contribs) Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 00:32, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The FUR uses {{Album cover fur}}, which is used on most, if not all single and album covers. If you have an issue with its wording I suggest you take it up at the template talk page. Adabow (talk · contribs) 21:38, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am only interested in the editorial decision to use this text in a FU rationale for this FA Candidate being reviewed, and I was interested in what the concerns were regarding people mistaking this article for the one about the Armored Shrew, and why the concern is so great that it requires non-free content Fasach Nua (talk) 15:56, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
FA Criteria 3 pending Fasach Nua (talk) 06:50, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You have ignored the rest of the rationale: "The image is used for identification in the context of critical commentary of the work for which it serves as cover art. It makes a significant contribution to the user's understanding of the article, which could not practically be conveyed by words alone. The image is placed in the infobox at the top of the article discussing the work, to show the primary visual image associated with the work". Are you suggesting that we demote every FA song or album article that uses this FUR template? Adabow (talk · contribs) 07:32, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am only interested in the FA candidates in process at the moment, and am trying to understand the editorial decision to add this rationale, and an answer would be appreciated Fasach Nua (talk) 19:23, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As Adabow stated that rationale is not a cause of my decition. If you want to change it, go to the template itself. Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 19:28, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose insufficient information has been provided by reviewers to judge whether the criteria have been met Fasach Nua (talk) 19:34, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK, now go to delist all FAs albums and song, because "they not meet the criteria" Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 19:40, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - Well I pretty much fully dissected the article and tried really making it perfect. Let me know when you've fixed these issues and you'll have gained my support :)

Resolved comments from --CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 06:40, 12 December 2010 (UTC) |content=[reply]

  • released the song, the fourth single of the album, -> would be better; Serving as the fourth single from the album, Columbia released the song
    Not done, see PR
  • "Halo" was written in three hours in Tedder's studio -> During an interval of three hours, "Halo" was recorded in Tedder's studio
    Semi-done, you are changing active voice to passive voice, anyway reworded.
  • the track was inspired on "Shelter" by Ray LaMontagne -> I don't understand what your trying to say
    fixed
  • The single, originally written for Knowles, was rumored to be intended for Leona Lewis -> It was written for B, then considered for Leona, then again for B?
    Read article.
  • It has been modified twice -> You should specify that it was modified in live versions, not studio or recorded versions
    Done
  • Chris Martin from Coldplay on the piano -> something else would be better
    Done?
  • The track topped the charts of -> The singles charts
    Done
  • on iTunes Store -> On the
    Done
  • it describes -> Its a video, it portrays not describes. That would be the lyrics
    Done
  • An alternative music video was leaked on May 2010. On it, Ealy is shown escaping from the police through a forest -> Would be better as one sentence, with some better writing
    Done?
  • As for the "Musicnotes.com" site, it wpuld be best if you provide the exact url, as there are various different pages for that song
    According to many articles, which don't link it, it must not be linked (redundancy), maybe it is an unreliable source, I don't know.
  • Knowles' vocal -> vocals
    Done
  • aTnd Beyoncé Knowles -> Knowles is fine
    he first (not quoted) time she is mentioned. See comments above (with Adabow)
  • and produced by the last two -> better wording would be nice
    Done?
  • of the instruments -> Instrumentals
    Done
  • vocal recording -> s -> were in the hands
    Done
  • Better wording for the latter as well
    Done
  • Tedder, with assistance from Christian Baker, was in charge of the instruments, arrangement and recording of the single; vocal recording was in the hands of Jim Caruana; and Mark "Spike" Stent, helped by Matt Green, mixed "Halo" -> This sentence in general needs allot of clean-up, and stops
    Done
  • in France through digital downloads on March 20, 2009 -> So it wasn't released for radio airplay in France?
  • Same with Germany
  • It wasn't released to radio or digital download in Canada?
    The three points above have any sense?
  • created the song for the British singer -> remove the
    Done
  • However, Tedder commented that Cowell, who represented Lewis' camp, was upset that single's writing was intended for Knowles, and she eventually claimed the song -> Not clear what your trying to say
    Done
  • of the website Digital Spy -> Better wording would help; "David Balls, editor of the British media website Digital Spy, interviewed
    Done
  • Should be named "Critical reception and accolades"
    Done
  • A writter of Billboard -> typo, writer and from sounds better
    Shame, done
  • You calling them a writer, so you should address their opinions as wrote. A writer from Billboard wrote, not said
    Done
  • Digital Spy said -> WHo from DS? Balls?
    Done (x2)
  • If no specific author, it would be better "In their review for I Am Sasha Fierce, Digital Spy wrote regarding the song "
  • The Boston Globe said that the song -> Again, who from The Boston Globe?
    Done
  • in the category for -> category of
    Done
  • winning the second -> Using words such as "latter and former" would be more appropriate
    Not done, does not sound proper, it is grammatically correct?
  • The track debuted on the Billboard Hot 100 on the issue dated February 7, 2009, at number ninety-three -> The song debuted at number ninety-three on the Billboard Hot 100 issue dated February 7, 2009
    Done
  • It peaked at number five on May 23, 2009 -> Could use a better introduction
    Done
  • With this -> With this feat
    Done
  • among female artists -> among any other is more clear
    Done, it is redundant, though
  • it was last seen on August 29, 2009 -> it last charted
    Done
  • 2× Platinum -> spell it out, double-platinum
    Done
  • In New Zealand, "Halo" debuted at number forty on the New Zealand Singles Chart on February 2, 2009.[32] Later, the track peaked at number two on February 23, 2009.[33] -> "Halo" debuted at number forty on the New Zealand Singles Chart on February 2, 2009, peaking at number two three weeks later
    Done
  • the ARIA Singles Chart.[34] and peaked at number three on March 29, 2009 -> remove sentence
    Done
  • It was last seen on the chart on August 11, 2009 -> Its final week on the chart
    Done
  • The song -> Don't begin two consecutive sentences the same
    Done
  • but fell out of the chart -> falling out
    Done
  • on iTunes Store -> on the
    Done
  • The video begins with Knowles up against a wall with a window behind her with light shining -> re-write
    Done
  • and only their faces are shot for the scene -> with only their faces visible
    Done
  • Throughout the video various scenes -> Throughout the video,
    Done
  • original video are shown -> original version are shown
    Done
  • The song later was added -> The song was later added
    Done
  • encore of the concert -> concert's encore
    Done
  • On June 25, 2009, Michael Jackson died while Knowles was touring.[55] She paid a tribute to Jackson at some of the venues of the tour -> On June 25, 2009, Michael Jackson died while Knowles was touring, prompting her to pay tribute to him
    Done
  • and she included "Michael I can see your Halo. I pray your music won't fade away" -> and substituted the lyrics for
    Done, altough the lyrics were mentioned on a previous section.
  • Also the song was blended -> Additionally, the song
    Done
  • Australian Singles Chart and was certified gold -> , being certified gold or where it was certified gold
    Done
  • In 2010, the song was performed by Westlife on their Where We Are Tour -> The Haiti version, or the original?
    Done
  • "Halo Live Version" which is this? You already list the "Hope for Haiti" one
    I really don't know which live version reached that chart.
  • There you go--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 06:40, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    All(most) done, some questions. Thank you. Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 04:49, 13 December 2010 (UTC)}}[reply]
WP Beyonce Knowles participant. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:33, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment In terms of 1s, a bit of huff-n-puff needs to be done.

lead and infobox
  • Columbia Records released the song, the fourth single of the album -> Why the unnecessary stopping? You can directly say " Columbia Records released the song as the fourth single of the album, to mainstream radio of United States on January 20, 2009"
  • "Halo" was written in during an interval of three hours, in Tedder's studio --> There's no mention of any preceding or succeeding job that BK was doing, hence the usage of the word interval is wrong. Say directly " Halo was written in an interval of three hours at Tedder's studio".
  • inspired by the song, not on.
  • Better would be "According to Bogart, the track was inspired by Ray LaMontagne's song "Shelter". A pop-R&B song written in the key of A major, "Halo" includes a moderate tempo of eighty-four beats per minute." You need to always prune the snake lines
  • The single, originally written for Knowles --> Wrong usage, since "Halo" was decided as a single written. Any single is written as a song first.
  • claimed that he used the same musical arrangement as that of "Halo" on her song "Already Gone", released in 2009 --> claimed that he used the same musical arrangement of "Halo" in her song "Already Gone", released in 2009
  • The next part somehow loses my interest because it is not chronologiucally correct as per the article. You are goling from the critical reception to the promotion, then back again to the commercial reception, then to the music video. In the body of the article you have it in a different sequence. Try to rearrange, it looks better.
  • It has been modified twice in live versions --> modified?
  • which featured the vocalist of British band Coldplay, Chris Martin, on the piano -> Person name before. "which featured Chris Martin, lead vocalist of British band Coldplay, on the piano"
  • "and was mashed-up with "Walking on Sunshine", by Katrina and the Waves, on the television show Glee." Make a different sentence.
  • is currently nominated --> rephrase such WP:RECENTISM like prose
  • the fictional relationship --> The fictional here implies that there is a fictional relationship betweek BK and Ealy, which is untrue. Change to a.
  • This link of "(New York, New York)" in the infobox is a classic example of wp:overlink. Why not just New York City?
  • You can remove the tag from File:Beyonce - Halo.png, since the size problem no longer exists.

This is just from the lead, if the nominator wishes, I can continue further. Also there are some things I noticed. Check the italicization and the non-italicization of the printed and online sources, respectively. A personnel section is needed. Another quick note, File:Flickr - gillyberlin - Beyonce I am... Tour 2009 Live in Berlin (14).jpg, is basically a far away image of the stage, where it is impossible to make out what is exactly happening. It is only looking at the backdrop of the performance that one can make out Bey. I suggest that the image be checked for WP:FOP. — Legolas (talk2me) 15:10, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All done, you know you not need my permision for continue, you can. For the other comment, the personnel section, as well the release dates, were merged into prose to avoid many tables. Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 20:48, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
For the image, maybe? Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 22:46, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I will come up with the review of the article body. As for the FOP, it is still better that you consult an image related editor. Maybe Stifle or Jappalang? — Legolas (talk2me) 04:39, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
According to User:Soundvisions1 Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 06:25, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
background
  • In an interview with HitQuarters, Evan "Kidd" Bogart said one of the original inspirations for the song was the singer Ray LaMontagne. At the writing session he had said to Ryan Tedder, the lead vocalist of OneRepublic, "We should write a Ray LaMontagne 'Shelter' kind of song for Jay-Z and Beyoncé". The song was composed in Tedder's studio and completed within three hours — Replacing this whole chunk, In an interview with HitQuarters, Evan "Kidd" Bogart said that one of the original inspirations for the song was singer Ray LaMontagne. During the writing sessions, he said to Ryan Tedder, the lead vocalist of OneRepublic, "We should write a Ray LaMontagne 'Shelter' kind of song for Jay-Z and Beyoncé". After the lyrics were done, the song was composed in Tedder's studio and completed within three hours. Let's emphasize what is obvious from the source.
  • "Halo" was written by Bogart, Tedder and Beyoncé Knowles, and produced by Tedder and Knowles -> Make it the first line of the section, doesnot flow well when you aren't even mentioning the name of the song in the first para.
  • Billboard commented: "'Halo has a mainstream pop sound --> quotes around Halo
  • and in Germany by CD single only --> as CD single only
    All done Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 01:33, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Controversy
  • I generally do not endorse section names as controversy as it feels like you are already establishing that there was a controversy, rather than reporting what happened in the neutral way. Hence I have always avoided the term and rephrased it. I will leave that upto you to decide for "Halo".
    1, then 2 and later 3. Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 01:33, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Again, the beginning of the para fails to mention the word "Halo" instead referring to it as "the song". The converse is always true.
  • However, Tedder commented that Cowell, who represented Lewis' camp, was upset that single's writing was intended for Knowles, and she eventually claimed the song --> However, Tedder commented that Cowell was upset that single was written for Knowles, who she eventually claimed the song. You have already established that Cowell is Lewis' agent, that of course means he is from her camp.
  • Clarkson accused Tedder of using the same arrangement on both "Already Gone" --> Clarkson did not accuse at the time of recording, it was only after "Halo" was released. Hence rephrase it as "Clarkson later"
  • All done (except the header) Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 06:23, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Critical reception
Chart performance
  • With this feat, Knowles has the most top tens --> Since you are saying feat, the verb should be likewise, so say "With this feat, Knowles achieved the most top tens..."
  • The song was certified double-platinum in the United States on May 1, 2010. --> By who, how much shipment etc.
  • No peak for Australia is mentioned. And no commentary on Canada too.
  • Halo" debuted at number forty-five on January 25, 2009, but falling out of the chart the following week --> fell out
    All done Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 06:23, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Music video
  • Knowles appears driving in a car --> Knowles appears driving a car
  • alternative version surfaced --> alternate version surfaced
    All done Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 06
    23, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Promotion
  • Later, she performed the song at The Late Show with David Letterman after an interview on April 22, 2009 --> Thats not exactly later is it? She performed it after two months.
  • The song was later added to the setlist of her I Am... Tour in 2009–2010.[52] On it, the track is performed during concert's encorea --> Whats encorea? And make 2009-2010 to 2009–10 per mos date range. There must be some description of the performance. Her tour was widely reported.
  • Reference 53, 54 needs rearrangement, dont use references on two consecutive words like that.
  • During the tribute, an image of Jackson appeared on the main screen—replacing "Michael" instead of "Baby", and adding "your music" between "you" and "won't"— --> Wrong usage of em-dash. Its two separate sentences, not a continuation. Try "During the tribute, an image of Jackson appeared on the main screen. She changed the lyrics, replacing the word "Baby" with "Michael", and adding "your music" between "you" and "won't"—
  • Because of this, many artists participated in a charity telethon, Hope for Haiti Now: A Global Benefit for Earthquake Relief, on January 22, 2010, including Knowles --> This doesnot sound right. Why not make it simple like "A charity telethon called HFH was organized, where many artists participated, including Knowles."
  • The single was included on her CD/DVD live albums I Am... Yours: An Intimate Performance at Wynn Las Vegas on 2009,[67] and I Am... World Tour, on 2010 --> Move it to where you talk about Knowles' tour. Here it appears as if the Westlife tour is called I Am.. Yours.
    All done (excepting the description of "Halo" in her tour, searching info)Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 06:23, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Charts
  • Consistency in chart names please, sometimes its Austrian Singles Chart, sometimes Austrian Top 75 Singles... same for ARIA charts
References
  • As pointed above, check the italicization of printed vs online sources
    All done (I think). Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 06:23, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Replace normal dashes by en-dashes
    {{confused}} How I can differentiate them? Should I use "-" or "–"?
    • Endash is of course "–" compared to "-". A quick way to replace is to copy the whole article code in MS Word, then press Ctrl+H and give replacing " - " with " – ". You have to give the spaces before and after. — Legolas (talk2me) 05:21, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know if you have any questions. — Legolas (talk2me) 08:26, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dab/EL check - no dabs or dead external links. --PresN 00:13, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sources comments:-

  • Can you say why the following should be considered high quality, reliable sources? I'm not saying they're not, merely requesting information:-
    • 21 BuzzSugar
    • 36 Zobbel
    • 39, 60 Chart Stats
    • 44 Philip Andelman
    • 46 Toyaz-World
    • 50 Mahalo
  • Many of the sources are not in English. You should be comsistent about stating what languages are used in foreign sources, e.g. 85, 90, 94 and others
  • Italicisation: Rap-up (43 and others) is I think a print journal so the title should be in italics. BBC News (58) is not printed, so should not be in italics.

Otherwise, sources and citations look OK Brianboulton (talk) 23:39, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, here we go. In that order. BuzzSugar removed; Zobbel is reliable since they have archives of the UK, as well as it is used in many pages; Charts stats, as zobbel, is (I think) published by the Official UK company. It is in fact used at Template:Singlechart; Andelman website is reliable because is Andelman website, either way removed; Toyas removed; Mahalo.com seems to be reliable. For the non-English sources, added; for Rap-up italics, it is self-published, to avouid "Rap-Up. Rap-Up." is in that way;] fixed for BBC. Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 00:12, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Tbhotch. There is an easy fix to the ChartStats thing. So I needed a ton of refs for AIWFCIY, because it charted like 10 separate times in the UK. So I went to the ChartStats page and looked at the date of the peak I wanted. Then I went here and put in the year and date and voilaaa :) I'll make it extra easy for ya, here is the "Halo" peak in the UK on the official charts.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 00:57, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Nathan but either way I have to use Chart Stats, it debuted at number 98 and disappeared at number 85, OCC only use the top 40. Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 01:05, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
NP, yes I just thought of that as well. Well as I think of it, what makes a website not reliable? When its been proven wrong of faulty. If something has always been right on the dot, and no one has ever found a mistake, then why isn't it a reliable source? It might not be an official source, but its definitely reliable. That site has never been wrong.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 01:19, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. This is an article about a song and there is absolutely no analysis of either the music or the lyrics. Listing the meteronomic marking, the tempo, the time signature, and the key is not musical analysis. Is the song written in an ABA form? Or AABA? Or ABACA? Or what? What about phrasing, dynamics, etc. Does the song begin pianissimo and crescendo to a fortissimo in the 4th bar? We're not told. Meter and rhyme scheme in the lyrics? At the FA level, an article about a song needs a thorough analysis. Also, lotsa little bugs such as "double-platinum" and "double Platinum", things like "setlist" should be linked or explained, Knowles' should be Knowles's, and India – A love Story --> Love. God, there's lots more but I'm not going to take the time to list everything. "Controversies"? LOL. More like Tempests in a Teapot. Most of the "quotations" in this section are insignificant and should be paraphrased. No need for a quote box either. This article needs an extensive and ruthless ce, and an analysis of the music and lyrics. If an analysis cannot be found in a reliable source then the article should be withdrawn. As far as I'm concerned, a musical analysis is absolutely necessary at FA level. As it stands, this article is far from FA and I cannot support it. 56tyvfg88yju (talk) 17:34, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree comments - I'm sorry, but I find your comments a bit absurd. Your asking for info that I doubt you would find in any Wikipedia article. We aren't musical engineers, and I doubt neither are the readers of the article. Next, your looking for things to critique on, first Knowles' is correct, you do not put Knowles's, this is ungrammatical FYI. And yes, they are controversies, aside from plagiarism, what kind of controversy do you expect on a song article? alien activity? Area 51? Give me a break.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 18:18, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I will echo the same sentiments from Nathan, but for different reasons. Yes, I admit that those instances of musical criticality that you concerned on, would be beneficial to the article, however, if that information is not found, then it cannot be added can it be? Its quite easy to point out errors, but there is a method and a way in expressing it. Comments like "Controversies"? LOL. More like Tempests in a Teapot" really do not place my faith in you as a good content editor either. As the above user pointed out, we are not music engineers and neither are you. Overusage of technical jargon, will make the article a big BORE. — Legolas (talk2me) 05:21, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree. The musically literate would find this interesting. If you're not musically literate, skip it. But this is an article about a piece of music and there's absolutely no musical analysis. Lots about chart rankings, "Controversies", and other nonmusical stuff but virtually nothing about the music! What is the song about anyway? We're not even told that! Check "Hey Jude" (an FA article) for an example of a musical analysis or even Symphony No. 41 (Mozart), though this article is neither a GA or an FA. I've tightened the "controversies" section to eliminate some of the unencyclopedic celebrity gossip aspects of the original:

While Knowles was making a decision upon "Halo", Tedder offered it to Leona Lewis with the understanding that it would be hers if Knowles declined it. Knowles however claimed the song.[1][2][3] Soon after, Tedder and Kelly Clarkson composed "Already Gone" for her fourth studio album. Clarkson expressed concerns that Tedder used the same musical arrangement for both "Halo" and "Already Gone", and feared she might be perceived as a plagiarist.[4] Tedder however made it clear he would never practice any sort of duplicity upon the two artists and the songs were entirely different "conceptually, melodically, and lyrically".[5] Clarkson was not convinced and tried to discourage RCA from releasing "Halo", but was unsuccessful.[4]

I hope this criticism is helpful but I cannot support promotion to FA at this time because of the article's many and significant deficiencies. 56tyvfg88yju (talk) 13:57, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So you are opposing because this article is not full of original researches. All the info about musical arregments is in the musical sheet. If you are asking me to take musical classes to understand this, please and sorry, don't be ridiculous. Also, many users which know more about musical background always change things to their self thoughts including 1 or 2 and I won't waste my whole life reverting them until I get blocked for "own an article". I'm not asking you for support, who cares I have already one for a stupid rationale, yours is almost for the same. Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 03:23, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, your oppose is groundless and baseless for so many reasons. You are vehemently proposing that we add our own original researches into articles, when information about recording is not found. Do I sense something similar? Yes, I do know of a certain user who was going on adding the same comments. Info pieces about chart ranking, crtical reception and any controversial reception are equally important as is the technicalities, if they are available. I strongly suggest you take these issues with WP:SONGS and not cloud the nomination. And please don't start the same things about calling others musically literate. WP articles are not only for them, but for the whole world to see. If you want, why don't you go and read the sheet music of the article? I'm sure you will find it more interesting, no? — Legolas (talk2me) 04:57, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
  1. ^ Carter, Mitch (November 5, 2008). "Beyonce Steals Songwriter From Leona". Yahoo! Music. Yahoo Inc. Retrieved November 20, 2010.
  2. ^ Cite error: The named reference hitquarters.com was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  3. ^ Balls, David (December 1, 2009). "Music – News – Tedder: 'Halo wasn't written for Leona'". Digital Spy. Hachette Filipacchi (UK) Ltd. Retrieved February 4, 2010.
  4. ^ a b Liss, Sarah (July 27, 2009). "American Idyll". CBC News. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved May 19, 2010.
  5. ^ Vozick-Levinson, Simon (July 29, 2009). "Ryan Tedder responds to Kelly Clarkson/Beyoncé controversy". Entertainment Weekly. Time Warner. Retrieved May 19, 2010.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Halo_(Beyoncé_Knowles_song)/archive1&oldid=1136097512"