Talk:Sexy! No No No...

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sexy! No No No... 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

Sexy! No No No... 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
January 13, 2013	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

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.

Radio Premiere

In case people are wondering where i got the date of the radio premiere from The Chris Moyles Show's producer Rachel Jones said they were playing the new Girls Aloud song tommorrow in the last 5 minutes of today's (19 July) show. Unfortunately there's no other evidence apart from this yet although i assume the Girls Aloud website will post a comment before the end of today telling people to listen to the show. At the moment you can listen again to the show to hear the message (skip to the end) http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/aod/radio1_aod.shtml?radio1/moyles. Hope that helps. Winterspell 13:41, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On seconds thoughts that doesn't really work either, i've just checked and that listen again function is having technical difficulties so you can't hear today's show Winterspell 13:44, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dog Without A Bone

An entire section on the b-side was unnecessary and only cluttered the page. The information was featured in the tracklistings section too, which was pointless. I deleted the "B-Side: Dog Without a Bone" section and kept the information in the tracklistings section, cleaning it up a bit too. XL XR2 01:47, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Charts

To the deluded fans out there, note you can't just add something this charted where it hasn't, because one look at the official sites just show you are wrong. Lol, why bother anyways? It's not like adding it on here is gonna make them chart in America. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.34.104.236 (talk) 14:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:SexyNoNoNo.jpg

Image:SexyNoNoNo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 06:40, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just an FYI this song has been released on USA Itunes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.125.49.252 (talk) 19:44, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Sexy! No No No.../GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 22:16, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A few thoughts-

Seeing as GA are a British band, British spelling would probably be better- "favourable".
Fixed - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"The production and songwriting began with each group member meeting with producer Brian Higgins and discussing what had happened with them since the release of the Chemistry (2005)." Meeting individually? Also, what was there to discuss? What had happened? I'm not really clear about this sentence
I got a bit confused while paraphrasing this also. The quote from the website says "It starts with a chat with songwriter Brian Higgins. One by one, we go to his house-cum-studio and tell him all about what’s been happening since our last album. We talk relationships, feelings, you name it." - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Bandmate Nicola Roberts explained that Higgins take inspiration from those discussions" This makes no sense. I can't fix it, because I'm not sure what you're trying to say.
He takes inspiration to write new tracks. Shoud I completely re-write this or just added "to write new tracks" after discussions? - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"as a two-part CD singles" Needs sorting
Fixed - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Rephrased as "made available on two different CD single formats." I can revert if needed. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 00:47, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What's a middle eight? That's a bit jargony without a link/explanation
Linked. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"The track opens with Cole's distorted vocals singing over a "spooky" instrumentation,[6] "Cause I've been sitting back, no chance of rolling / Hoping that nothing ever blows, no no / Boy, did you ever think that loving would be / Nothing more than walking me home, no no."[17]" This doesn't read well.
Take a look and see if it reads better now... - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, you've made this mistake in a few places, and it goes completely against MOS:LQ. You should only put punctuation inside quote marks when it's in the original quote. If it isn't, it should be outside. Please double-check this.
Checked the sources and Fixed - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"While reviewing Ten (2012), David Edwards of Drowned in Sound," What's going on here?
Removed - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The review section is a little quote. quote. quote. but I'm happy to let that slide at GAC. It'd be picked up on heavily at FAC, though.
Being a GAC or FAC, the article has to be consistent. To you have any sugestions to make this section better? - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"British tabloids" - DM isn't the most tabloid-y of tabloids, but the real problem is that you've said "tabloids" and only cited one!
Replaced British tabloids with Daily Mail. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"It opens with Cole then singing the introduction, as she and the group are seen wearing PVC catsuits while standing in front of a red material." Poorly worded

The CD single part one and two thing- are they two separate releases? Or were they sold as a pair? I'm not quite clear on that point
Separate releases, I added to the lead that it was released as "a two-part CD single sold separately". I can reword if needed. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Rephrased. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 00:47, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Has the song appeared on any compilation albums? I feel like that belongs in the article. (Now I've said that, is it common practice to leave it out of articles about songs?)
It has, but as far as I'm concerned, it usually isn't noted on articles. At least many GAs like ...Baby One More Time and Toxic for example do not include the compilations the song has appeared. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Girls Aloud (2007). Tangled Up (Liner Notes) (Compact Disc). Girls Aloud. London, England: Fascination Records." Perhaps format this as "Girls Aloud (2007). Tangled Up (liner notes). Girls Aloud. London, England: Fascination Records."? Either way, try to format it the same way as the booklet you cite?
Take a look. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I like that it's described as electronic rock, when this is cited to a student newspaper. Having read a few student newspapers, they're generally terrible. It's described as "electro-punk" and "pop" by more reputed sources- perhas go with that and drop the student newspaper altogether?
Allmusic is more reliable so I replaced with electropunk and sourced. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Laurence Green is not a professional reviewer, nor is he "of The Guardian"- that's basically just a reader's letter. That source needs to be cut.
Removed - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Girls Aloud (24 July 2007). "Girls Aloud Update - 24th July". Bebo. Criterion Capital Partners. Retrieved 9 January 2013." That's not a source by Bebo, it's just on Bebo. Should probably be reformatted to something like "Girls Aloud Bebo blog"
Reformatted. Criterion Capital Partners stays or it has to be removed? - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Paul Caslin (2009) [2009] (in English) (Colour, PAL). [Out of Control Tour: Live from the O2 Arena] (Liner notes). London, England: Universal Music." Formatting is odd. Some information there that just isn't needed.
Take a look. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a few tweaks. This is actually a really strong article- the effort you've put in is clear. A little tweaking here and there, and the removal of those problem sources, and you've got a very strong good article here. J Milburn (talk) 23:02, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I've made a few tweaks. The writing's still pretty choppy in places, but this is just GAC; I'm not going to demand perfect prose. This may actually have a shot at FAC, but, if you are going to do that, it's probably best to try to get in a copyeditor. A few quick thoughts, other than the general need for a prose smoothing-

As I said before, be aware of just throwing in quotes for the sake of quoting. That's not a great writing style. In the review section, for instance, try to discuss it thematically.
I'll try to paraphrase this section. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 01:50, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Do we know what studio this was recorded?
The booklet does not state the location. I'll search for it. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 01:50, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Have another look through the references; while they all seem reliable, the formatting isn't perfect in places. Note 32, as you asked, "Criterion Capital Partners" should go. "Booklet" needn't be capitalised.
Removed and Fixed - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 01:50, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Album cover fur would be nice on the image
Done - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 01:50, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As I say, these aren't necessary at this point- while it isn't perfect, I'm happy to promote to GA status. Great work! J Milburn (talk) 19:39, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking your time. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 01:50, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]