# Talk:Wet (Nicole Scherzinger song)

source  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathiassandell (talk • contribs) 20:43, 22 October 2011 (UTC) 

That is NOT a source it is a single. It said it was supposed to be released on August 29th. If you can find me a source that it WAS actually released on that date then it was a single. If not, it wasn't. — Status {talkcontribs 20:53, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
link 2

"From the Album Killer Love" That is not a single release. — Status {talkcontribs 20:59, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
look at original release date: 26 august  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathiassandell (talk • contribs) 21:01, 22 October 2011 (UTC) 

Yeah, that date is used for EVERY song on the album. The first source you showed me says the song was supposed to be released on August 29th. — Status {talkcontribs 21:03, 22 October 2011 (
marry the night has the same link to digital spy to confirme its a single!!??
--Mathiassandell (talk) 21:05, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Marry the Night hasn't been released yet. The August 29th date of "Wet" has expired, and no sign of a release has been found. — Status {talkcontribs 21:06, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
sources that say that the edge of glory is a single is the same sources i have given!!??  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathiassandell (talk • contribs) 21:19, 22 October 2011 (UTC) 

Oh really? — Status {talkcontribs 21:21, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
look at the sources click on them!! then you see
--Mathiassandell (talk) 21:23, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
last friday night source
this is the source to say its a single, the same thing i haved!!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathiassandell (talk • contribs) 21:23, 22 October 2011 (UTC) 
Every example you are giving me right now are incorrect in this situation. Each of them are released by THEMSELVES with "- Single" at the end of them on Amazon and/or iTunes, and also have a CD single release. This does NOT have any of that. If you don't get what I mean, I'm sorry, but there's nothing else I can say to make you understand. Just know that if you persist, you could be blocked from editing. — Status {talkcontribs 21:36, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

You need a source from a store offering the download as a single. The aforementioned sources are okay for sourcing future events, but the event has passed and there is no evidence everything went according to plan. | helpdןǝɥ | 22:25, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Here is an list of songs that have already been released as CD single's by digital spy. It it wasn't released, it would not be on this page, which has past dates. http://www.digitalspy.com/music/sitecomponent/a37650/singles-release-diary-200910-archive.html  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.79.88.109 (talk) 02:27, 24 October 2011 (UTC) 
This it silly, it is a single, numerous sources say it's an official single from the album.....i don't see anyone calling Moment 4 Life a promotional single....Tara1717 (talk) 20:56, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

I see source for australian radio release, so now I agree - 'Wet' is a single. If song was officially cent to the radios - it's single. Rihanna's 'Raining Men' has nothing but radio release and it's single. 'Wet' has way more things like music video, cover etc. The only thing I don't like is 'Format: Digital download', because there are no sources foe digital release.--demistalk 21:48, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
Sent to radio in Australia =/= Single status because ARIA, unlike the US, does not count airplay while compiling its charts. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 02:34, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
I think i will have to take back my words because of what i read here. It seems "Wet" is really a single. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 14:05, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
It is a single, there is the exact same discussion going on in Lady Gaga's Dance in the Dark, it was changed to single because of the radio adds in Australia, look at the discussion here . So, enough. this conversation is over.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.216.148.120 (talk) 18:32, 25 November 2011 (UTC) 

who removed the cover art, and replacet whit a fake one, please change back!!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathiassandell (talk • contribs) 12:52, 23 October 2011 (UTC) 

Please, look this source: [1] and then answer which cover was actually released. --demistalk 13:19, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
anybody who has an acount there can put the cover, its not real, its from a maxim magazine shoot.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.154.104.57 (talk) 15:51, 23 October 2011 (UTC) 

However, official sources has this cover--demistalk 16:07, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Official sources? Here's her Maxim cover from March that uses the exact same picture. And here is where the cover was first shown in March via a fanmade single cover blog. — Status {talkcontribs 16:47, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Seeing how that source uses a fake cover, I don't see how we can use it for a source for its release. If it was really released digitally in Australia, it would be available on iTunes, but it isn't. And this is different from "Unusual You", because we don't have exact sources to CD singles. — Status {talkcontribs 16:51, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, 4th singles (or rather all the singles after the album's release) not always have its own iTunes page. For example there is no iTunes page for "Last Friday Night", "If U Seek Amy", "Radar" and many other singles.
Status, I can't understand your logic. Do you remember when you assure me that Discogs is realible source? Now you know: it's unrealible. Now story is repeating with another site. The only source for Unusual You is 'australian-charts', which says that Unusual You has CD release. No more sourcers, no digital release, no video, but Unusual You was identified as full single after the long discuss. With the only one source — 'australian-charts'.
That site doesn't tell anything about digital release, it tells about promo-CD release. It's different things.
Ok, let's imagine that 'Wet' is regular song. But I can't understand how usual song begins to climb the charts without any perfomances. Only support is video, which is 2 month old... Doesn't it seems kinda strange, huh?--demistalk 17:23, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
P.S: Australian-charts is officialy reliable (for charts and releases, not for covers):
Wikipedia:CHARTS#Recommended charts look Australia - "Hung Medien" (link goes to australian-charts). Hung Medien described as "All charts on this site are official and properly licensed". Hope next time you will look for sources' realiability by yourself without that polemic.
Wow, I only changed it because reliable sources like this and this had the cover. But now I see it was from a magazine cover. And we can't use Hung Medien websites such as Australian-charts.com for cover arts. See S&M and Fly have fake covers. Oz talk 23:15, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
If you guys are using Hung Medien to make "Wet" a promo single, isn't it logical to also upload the cover art found there? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 11:51, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
The cover was fake Jivesh because it was from a magazine cover (as mentioned above). A lot of users on there upload fake covers. But Hung Medien is still reliable for chart positions, release dates, etc. Oz talk 11:58, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Ahh okay. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:10, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Wet (Nicole Scherzinger song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Freikorp (talk · contribs) 01:10, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

I will review. I tend to make minor fixes myself instead of bothering to tell you to do it. If you are unhappy with any changes I make feel free to revert them and we will instead discuss the issue. Also please be advised this is my first GA review for an article about a song; it may be a bit of a learning curve for me. Freikorp (talk) 01:10, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm passing this now. Article was very well written and layed out. I made many small changes and fixes while the nomination was open; you can see the majority of them here: [1]. Well done. Freikorp (talk) 04:26, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors: 
I stopped checking for close paraprhasing/copyright violations after the first column of references as there were no signs of any. 
The only thing i'm still unsure of is the lead sentence "The dance-pop and pop song speak of Scherzinger singing that her body is aching for a man's touch." I don't think it's appropriate. "Aching for a man's touch" is a direct quote from one source only. Suggest complete rewording, or somehow attribute the words as a direct quote. I'm unsure of the best way to do this, so i'm going to leave it with you. 
 Fixed
B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists: 
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section: 
B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary: 
Current ref 15 (UK Singles Chart) links to the current chart, not an archive featuring this song. Accordingly it doesn't back up the assertion.
Also searching for 'Nicole Scherzinger' at said website [2] indicates the song peaked at No. 21 in the UK, contradicting the article.
 Fixed Alex talk page! 03:41, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
C. No original research: 
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects: 
B. Focused: 
Is it neutral? 
Fair representation without bias: 
Is it stable? 
No edit wars, etc: 
No ongoing disputes since 2011, and that one has long been resolved. 
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic? 
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: 
B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 
Overall:
Pass or Fail: