# Talk:D.S. (song)

Image:History album cover.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 ensure 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 23:28, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

This edit by Pawnkingthree (talk · contribs) with summary (but image can only be used on the HIStory album article) removed the image again, despite the presence of a rationale for D.S. (song) on the image description page. Was there a point? --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 23:07, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps your argument that "Fair use is also claimed mutatis mutandis for articles about songs from the album that did not have their own single cover art" isn't considered valid? I can't seem to find the exact part of WP:NFCC that discusses this, though. It might be wise to conduct further discussion at User talk:Pawnkingthree and/or Image talk:History album cover.jpg. 131.215.159.175 (talk) 05:58, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
I translated the Latin into English, which should make it clearer for human editors. (The link to each article satisfies the bots.) --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 17:33, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Well ,okay. I'm not going to take it out again, but it doesn't add much to the article for me. I don't think it "significantly increases readers' understanding of the topic" (WP:NFCC number 8). Pawnkingthree (talk) 21:18, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Agree, if it needs to be removed to pass GA then I will remove it. — Realist2 21:21, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about this, Realist2, but the whole Background section doesn't really say much about the song, and reads like a cut & paste job. The sentence, "Many believe that the "cold man" of this song's lyrics is Sneddon, as when sung, "Dom S. Sheldon" sounds very close to "Thomas Sneddon", is close to libel, IMO (ouch!) --andreasegde (talk) 15:48, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
1993 child sexual abuse accusations against Michael Jackson looks more like a GA.--andreasegde (talk) 15:53, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I gave the attributions of the claims, no libel on us now. How could I expand the background? The only reason the song was written was because of the 1993 allegations, any ideas how I can expand it, while still keeping it relevant to this song? Help :-) — Realist2 17:22, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
It's difficult, as I do believe (my POV) that it was written directly against Sneddon, or whatever his name is, but Jacko protects himself by not stating publicly that it was. Sneddon would run straight to the courts, of course. It gives you the impossible task of second-guessing, which is not allowed on these hallowed pages... If you can find any link from Jacko that he wrote the song because of being bodily 'inspected', then you can go ahead with full steam. Sorry I can't help any more.--andreasegde (talk) 15:45, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:D.S. (song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Hmm... this is a tough call. I can see that a lot of effort has been put into trying to make this article good, but I think it isn't quite pulling it off right now.
Basically, there are two issues with the page. The first is that it reads very disconnectedly, since it never quite manages to bring together the Jackson arrest with the writing of the song (presumably because Jackson never admitted to it being true), and hence isn't particularly well-written. The second is that a lot of the information in the page has little to do with the song itself. For instance, the themes section mostly just describes the themes of other songs on the same album, and the part about Ghost is never clearly connected back to D.S. either. So, while you've put in an admirable effort, I don't think this article meets the GA criteria.
I apologize if this seems unfair, since judging by the talk page the problem is not with the article editors but with reality (and the NOR policy), but after careful consideration, I'm treating it the same way I did an article I once reviewed where the majority of the references were stripped out due to copyvio issues: even if the problem preventing it from reaching them is beyond the editor's control, a page that doesn't meet the GA criteria cannot be passed.
Sorry, and better luck next time. --erachima talk 05:27, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct: 

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation: 

Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline: 

B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose): 

C. It contains no original research: 

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic: 

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style): 

Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each: 

Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute: 

Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content: 

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 

It passed. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 18:59, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

"D.S." is a interesting rock song, it is OK, but "D.S." is specifically a hard rock song. In his HIStory album review, Entertainment Weekly's Jackson Browne says  that Jackson's effort to create solid hard rock in this song is not enough.
THIS IS THE LINK:
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,297730,00.html
--Alexanderfriend (talk) 02:38, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Hard rock is a style, not a genre. Also, the source says that he didn't have much luck trying to make it a hard rock song. Entertainment Weekly don't believe it to be a hard rock song, instead that he tried to make a hard rick song. — R2 02:39, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Does anyone know exactly where the personnel information came from?  I know the "HIStory" booklet contains the album credits but they are not listed individually for each song.  If anyone knows the answers to these, please let me know.  Luminoth187 (talk) 04:15, 19 August 2010 (UTC)Luminoth187