Talk:Raining Men (Rihanna song)

Single

I know in some discussions at WP:SONGS, it was concluded that radio add dates determined US only singles, even if they do not have single covers or have music videos (i.e. Like a Surgeon, Love in This Club Part II, and Until the End of Time (Justin Timberlake song)), Slow Dance (song). Shouldn't this be as well? Candyo32 - Happy New Year :) 02:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Update here are some of the discussions Talk:Bionic_(Christina_Aguilera_album)#.27You_Lost_Me.27_next_single.2C_Not_.27WooHoo.27, Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Songs/Archive_4#Singles_release_date_is_when_FIRST_being_SOLD_as_a_Single.2C_NOT_Radio_Airplay, I know there were some more, because it was a big debate issue on the musicscape of Wikipedia around last year this time. Candyo32 - Happy New Year :) 02:58, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Agree -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 17:00, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm unsure. I mean, this could be the same situation as "Hard". I say we should call it a single, until we have proof otherwise. ℥^nding·start 16:05, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

If the song had blown up on urban radio and made the Hot 100, people would be rushing to label it a single. But when a song doesn't chart well people think it should be make it a promo or a just a song just because it wasn't a hit, and that's not justice. Candyo32 - Happy New Year :) 23:23, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Well since our friend Nicky88 hasn't responded I'm going to propose its changed back to single. There is no evidence to say its a promo single. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 16:08, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I strongly believe that releasing a song to radio does not make it a single. The best example is Put It in a Love Song, which is also qualified as single in Wikipedia. Airplay is not a suitable format. Jivesh • Talk2Me 17:42, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Jivesh... that deosn't make sense because that song was sent to radio! -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 19:35, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Agree It is definitely the only way to tell if a song is released in the US. --Cprice1000talk2me 17:52, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Not when it's only sent to "Urban" stations. Rihanna is not some everyday artist, she is one of the hottest artists out there and Nicki is up and coming as well. Thus it makes no sense this "single" was only sent to a specialized station.Cazxiro (talk) 00:27, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

*yawns* It's because it is an urban-based song. That's just like saying "Only Girl" wasn't a "single" because it was only sent to Top 40 & Rhythmic. If this song blew up on urban radio and made the Hot 100, you Rihanna fans would be rushing to call it a single. Don't think we are stupid with these arguments just because it hasn't charted yet. Candyo32 - Happy New Year :) 00:36, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Except "Only Girl (In The World)" had: a video, a single release, AND cover art. Which of these does "Raining Men" have? Oh right, NONE. It also doesn't have a separate download page on iTunes. For the record, your argument is stupid and faulty due to the fact that it charting doesn't make it a single. If that was the case then "Speakerphone" was a single for Kylie's X. Cazxiro (talk) 18:16, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm confused. Wasn't Wait_Your_Turn a promotional single? And it had cover art and a music video...?--mikomango (talk) 18:22, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Which is my point. How is "Raining Men" counted as an official single on wikipedia but "Wait Your Turn" is not. Cazxiro (talk) 04:23, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Not Single

Raining Men is not a single it is a promotional single. The third single from Loud is S&M —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.188.132.87 (talk) 04:37, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

SynthMonster (talk) 13:26, 27 January 2011 (UTC)This song isn't released as a digital download, Rihanna isn't going to shot a music video for it. This song was just sent to radio to promote the album. No one is going to pay money to download it digitally. This makes this song a promotional single. The main point about a promotional single is that it's not released to earn money on it, it is released just to promote an album. Single is released for both aims. So, it's apparently, that "Raining Men" is a promotional single and poor charting and absence of a music video are not the points to regard it. This song is not for sale, that's all.

Bored... where is the source to say its promotional? Read the post above and links to previous discussions. *yawn*, -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 04:43, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

LOL Unique. Comments like this from IP users annoy me as well. :L ℥^nding·start 17 January 2011 (UTC)

SynthMonster (talk) 13:26, 27 January 2011 (UTC)Why then the "Loud" page, which is semi-protected, says that "S&M" was released as the album's THIRD official single? Then maybe "Only Girl (in the World)" is a promotional single?

There is no artwork, no music video, and no other charts. Besides that was it even released as a digital download? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MichaelB722 (talk • contribs) 19:32, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Attempt to read the previous discussion and those archives before you come blabbing about what isn't. Candyo32 - Happy New Year :) 19:36, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Rihanna said her "third" single from her album Loud will Be S&M with an unexpected music video,not her forth Single. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apple48 (talk • contribs) 01:35, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Lady Gaga also said that '['[The Fame Monster]] was her second album. Candyo32 - Happy New Year :) 01:55, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

If she intended it to be her third single then why did she send "Raining Men" to radio before "S&M". The facts speak for themselves. Its more likely that "Raining Me" was released and because it stalled on the airplay charts plans were pulled before any further promotions were planned. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 02:33, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Same that happened to Woohoo. --ĈÞЯİŒ 1ооо 02:41, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Looks like the label is doing what they were trying to do originally and have dual urban/top 40 singles with S&M and Raining Men, as they are re-sending it for urban radio again. With that said, its a good thing they are, because it has rebounded on urban. Candyo32 - Happy New Year :) 22:35, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

It is not a single. A US radio release date is the same as an iTunes digital release date AND club release date yet both "Wait Your Turn" and "Breakin' Dishes" (both of which actually charted) are only included as Promotional Singles. Like what someone said above, there must be justice. If THIS single counts, so do those other two. Afterall, there are promo copies of both aforementioned songs sent out JUST like this song. ust because it was released in the US, does not make a difference.Cazxiro (talk) 00:23, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Singles do not get "club" release dates. However, they do get radio add dates. "Breakin' Dishes" and "Wait Your Turn" did not get radio add dates, "Raining Men" did. And "just because it was released in the US" does make a difference. It was just a US single then. Candyo32 - Happy New Year :) 00:30, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Exactly, neither "Wait Your Turn" or "Breakin' Dishes" were sent to US radio. "Raining Men" was and will in fact be sent to radio again. Sending a song to radio is the label telling stations ..."hey this is the next single". Just because a song doesn't become successful and then people decide not to give it a video etc. doesn't mean its not a single. Songs like "There Goes My Baby" by Usher were only sent to radio and never received an iTunes date. This is a classic case of people not wanting to admit that not all of Rihanna's singles were successful. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 00:43, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Raining Men is the Urban single only. Her label already stated prior to the album's release that they want to get Urban on board with Rihanna and S&M isn't going to get any Urban spins. Raining Men wasn't a single to go to #1 for 7 weeks on the Hot 100, Urban stations are album buyers and that's what this is for. It's not that hard to understand. RM wasn't doing well on Urban because What's My Name? was killing it on Urban, but now WMN? is peaking and RM is picking up. Urban isn't Rihanna's main format so they're not going to give her the special treatment of having multiple songs smashing as Pop would. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.5.79.82 (talk) 00:24, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Is this an IP that completely understands the gist of things? Kudos to you! Candyo32 - Happy New Year :) 00:55, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

That would essentially make it a promotional single, not a real single. This is another case of pompous users dictating what makes a single in the US. If it's a single, then where's the official cover art? Where's the press release? That's right, there isn't. Lack of success does not mean it's not a single, lack of a real campaign does, especially for an artist like Rihanna.

Also, for the record, a RADIO single counts as much as a CLUB single and, especially, a DIGITAL single. Cazxiro (talk) 18:25, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

This has been discussed a million times over... a single cover is not needed for radio singles. The idea with urban singles (which rely more on airplay than sales) is that you request it at radio thus why do you need a single cover? A promotional single has to be in promotion of something. The argument that promotional singles are there to promote the album doesn't fit because that's what all singles are there for. A club single is a single which didn't do well on main charts so the label attempts to demote its status. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 18:33, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

You just stuck your own foot in your mouth. A promotional single is a single. SO then a Club single is also a single. It's put out there for promotion. "Breakin' Dishes" was put out there to promote the album, as was "Wait Your Turn" AND "Raining Men". They weren't meant to be anything more. However, all of the MAIN singles actually had a campaign AND were all sent out to be remixed. None of those three (excluding the first two, since the albums they came from had a remix counterpart) were pushed. You're also thinking outside of the box, a single not only has to sell the album. A single, especially in this digital age, also has to sell itself. Rihanna hasn't even mentioned "Raining Men" as a single, she's only mentioned three so far: "Only Girl", "What's My Name" and, even before it's release, "S&M". Rihanna herself only counts three singles, so why should the wikipedia page count a promotional single? Cazxiro (talk) 04:29, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Urban singles don't require a separate digital release. You still seem incapable of understanding that all singles are in promotion of the album. There has to be something specific which makes a song a promotional single. "Wait Your Turn" was initially the lead single from Rated R before being used to promote her new website and statements were released that it was only a promo single. "Breaking Dishes" was played by clubs that has nothing to with the label or being sent or not as a single. Any song (literally any song) could chart on Hot Dance/Club Songs because its purely down to DJ choice. Who says that single covers, music videos and digital releases are essential elements of being a single. You are WP:ORing here... cus you're speaking of the digital age etc. well in the digital age songs chart from an album without even being released. Urban singles often have less importance placed upon digital releases as airplay counts for more. Rihanna might have said "S&M" is her third single much like Gaga said The Fame Monster is her second studio album. However per the reality of studio standards, The Fame Monster is an EP in technicality much like "Raining Men" is a single as it was sent for radio airplay which is a single indicator in the US (the music market where airplay has the heaviest importance compared to other markets). Singles are decided not by who says what but by what actually gets released. Another example would be Fresh Out the Oven by Jlo which is always referred to as a single and Lopez herself even said it was one of two required releases before her contract with Sony Music expired. "Fresh Out The Oven" even had a video and single cover yet its not an official single because it wasn't released to radio or to digital download. its an industry given/standard. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 05:12, 23 January 2011 (UTC) Also think of it this way... since when have you ever seen the music video for a song before its sent to radio? songs are always sent to radio first (or in some cases iTunes) and if its doing ok then a video is filmed. But notice its never the other way round? -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 05:23, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

I just want to know what a club single is? Actually I do know what it is, WP:OR. Songs are just played in clubs, and then chart on the Hot Dance Club Play. They are not comparable to singles. Candyo32 - Happy New Year :) 18:44, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

So then why was Wait_Your_Turn listed the way it was by Wikipedia?--mikomango (talk) 20:14, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Because it was released on iTunes to promoted Rated R. Candyo32 - Happy New Year :) 23:17, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

AND WHERE IS THE SOURCE THAT RAINING MEN IS AN OFFICIAL SINGLE FROM RIHANNAS ALBUM, OMG ITS NOT A SINGLE IS THIS SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND, IF WE ASK RIHANNA AND HER PRODUCTION TEAM ABOUT THIS IM 100% SURE THAT THEY SAY THAT S&M IS THE THIRD SINGLE!!!YOU REALLY THINK LOUDS THIRD SINGLE HAS NO MUSIC VIDEO NO ARTWORK, HAS ONLY BEEN RELEASED TO URBAN RADIO, R HASNT EVEN MENTIONED THIS SONG, AND NOT EVEN PROMOTED THE SONGS LIVE, TELEVISION!! YOU REALLY THINK A HOT SINGER WOULD SAY THAT THIS IS HER THIRD SINGLE, PELEASE GIVE A FU##ING SOURCE PEOPLE, GET A LIFE. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.154.98.39 (talk) 15:20, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

*Yawn* *yawn* *yawwwnnnn* Lady Gaga also said that The Fame Monster was her second album, when in fact it is an EP. RM got a radio add date, making it a single in the US. Raining Men is a single. Read the above statements and previous discussions before you yell. Candyo32 - Happy New Year :) 15:22, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

so why is xtinas song Express listed as a promo, it has been released digitally and to radios, and charted in various countries (inc UK,US,AUS) and its not listed as an single, Raining men only release to urban radio, is listed right away as a oficcial single!!?? whats the difference? why is express listed as a promo --91.154.98.39 (talk) 15:39, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

The "Express" page is inaccurate. It was not released to radio. It wasn't even released digitally, it the link on the article leads to the song as an MP3 download from the Burlesque soundtrack. It only charted as an album track, so technically it is just an song not a promo single. But the "Express" article is not a FA or GA article, so its nothing go by anyway. "Raining Men" is a single, you can't say its not one just because it hasn't charted well. "Hot Tottie" only got a radio add date, and you can't say that wasn't a single. Candyo32 - Happy New Year :) 15:51, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes it was released digitally!! --91.154.98.39 (talk) 15:59, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

No it was not. The link on the page is from the song's Mp3 download as part of the Burlesque soundtrack. That's why its cover is the Burlesque soundtrack. It was just a part of the album. You can pull off that page with any track from an album. Candyo32 - Happy New Year :) 16:01, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

and how can you proof it wasnt release digitally...Link --91.154.98.39 (talk) 16:12, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Did you read anything I said. IT WAS RELEASED AS PART OF THE SOUNDTRACK. Which is why the soundtrack is in parentheses – Express (Burlesque Original Motion Picture Soundtrack). Any song from the soundtrack can be pulled up like that I guess you'd say all of these were singles too [1] [2]? Candyo32 - Happy New Year :) 21:19, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

IT IS NOT A F*CKIN SINGLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!F*CK STUPID WEKIPEDIAApple48 (talk) 05:27, 7 February 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.188.121.242 (talk) 05:25, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Can't believe you guys are calling "Raining Men" the third single. If this is true, then it doesn't make sense to release "S&M" as the fourth single shortly afterwards. This truly shows why Wikipedia isn't perfect. You guys are so blinded by your own rules and agendas...--z33k (talk) 13

14, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Have you never heard of urban and pop singles? Queue Beyonce with "Halo" and "Single Ladies" almost released simultaneously... — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 16:49, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

You forget that "Halo" and "Single Ladies" both received an official music video + Beyonce performed the songs on various TV shows, which is what artist do when they promote an official single. Big difference between your example and "Raining Men". No music video, no promotion. Everything points towards "Raining Men" not being an official single.

If a song is released independently of its parent album, regardless of whether it has a single cover or music video, it is nearly always a single. Performing songs doesn't make them singles. Lots of singles are released without TV performances. If "Raining Me" is not a single, what is it? It was sent to radio twice (at the expense of the label...) — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 19:25, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

A US radio add date means it had an official single release. --ĈÞЯİŒ 1ооо 20:02, 9 February 2011 (UTC)IT NEVER GOT A RADIO ADD DATE.

I agree 100%, you wikipedians have these stupid rules and things...you people just go and see every little detail and not look at the hole picture, its not a single..just because it was released to a radio station doesnt mean its a single, you people have no friends or a life, just sitting on you fu#king computer and just messes whit the pages, maybe your rules sy its a single, BUT IF THE ARRTIST HASNT ANNONCED THAT ITS A SINGLE THEN ITS NOT, YOU CANT JUST PUT IT AS A SINGLE BECOUSE IT WAS RELEASED TO URBAN RADIO, OMG FU#KIN PEOPLE DONT GET DONT YOU, IF WE ASK RIHANNA WE ALL ARE PRETTY SURE SHE SAYS ITS NOT A SINGLE, she hasnt said this is a single, how can you then put it as a single, a single is a song that has been promoted has a music video, art...raining men has none of those things it hasnt even been released to billboard hot 100...ITS A SINGLE. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.154.97.58 (talk) 15:22, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

LMAO songs don't get released to the Billboard Hot 100 ... they chart if they are popular enough. It amazes me how much people don't know. Where does it say singles need cover-art and music videos? Especially when individual songs from an album can chart as soon as an album's released, thus iTunes removes many of the individual single listings. After "Raining Men" was released, has Rihanna said anywhere that "S&M" is the third single? No! She said "S&M" would be the third single, before "Raining Men" was sent to radio... She obviously wasn't aware of the label's plans. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 15:30, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

And the cursing IP address who can't coherently or logically put together an argument should read WP:DUCK — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 15:32, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Artists don't select singles; record labels do. They may have much input, but it is ultimately up to the label they are signed onto. Yves (talk) 17:12, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Okay, can you just cut the crap and the analogies.. Raining Men is NOT an official single.. There. This page should be deleted... --Aquabender (talk) 22:14, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Article Necessary?

Other then one chart and the critical reception, this page does not provide any other information. I think it could be summed up on Loud's page rather then it's own. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MichaelB722 (talk • contribs) 19:57, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Not really. The song has charted, gained notable coverage, meeting WP:NSONGS Candyo32 21:30, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

I disagree - I don't see anything here that establishes notability for this song. It gained some US Urban airplay, but that's it... hardly given a push by the label. All "press" for the song is within the context of reviewing the entire album. I think this one fails WP:NSONGS completely. - eo (talk) 20:42, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

The song did not just "gain some US urban airplay" is was released as a single from the album. Candyo32 21:37, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Where? I see no proof of this in the article, just a table with radio add dates. Regardless, I still don't see how this song is in any way notable, other than it appears on her album. The reviews of the song were taken from reviews of Loud. Was it released as a promotional single or on 12-inch vinyl? - eo (talk) 11:56, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Per consensus at WP:SONGS a US radio add date signifies as single release in the United States since a song after an album release cannot be re-released for download and CD singles are rarely released in the US. See the discussion on this page and other discussions linked. Candyo32 14:44, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Today I did a small research and found this: Roman's Revenge by Nicki Minaj is labeled as promotional single, despite the song was sent to urban radio February 8, 2011 Knockout by Lil Wayne and Nicki Minaj is labeled only as "song" despite the article says: Format Digital Download, Airplay I'm back by T.I. is labeled as promotional single despite the article says: Format Digital download, Airplay Under My Skin says: "He Wasn't" was the fourth single from the album written and produced by her and Chantal Kreviazuk. It was not released in the United States, instead "Fall to Pieces" was released, but was only a radio single....I didn't find Fall to Pieces article and it is not included on Avril Lavigne discography page Touchdown by T.I. ft. Eminem article says: The song was only released as an airplay single in 2007, and not as an official single. The song is labeled as "song"...it is not included on T.I. discography page among other singles Labels or Love by Fergie article says: The song was officially released on USA and Australian radios on June 3, 2008 as the latest single from The Dutchess. However on Fergie discography page, the song is listed only as a promotional single Finally article says: Released February 26, 2008 (Radio)...however the song is labeled as promotional single and on Fergie discograpy page, it is listed among promotional singles. Shone by Flo Rida article says: Length 4:24 (Album Version) 3:25 (Radio Mix)...so this means the song got special cut for radio. Howevwe the song is only listed on Flo Rida discography page as a promotional single. I Don't Need It by Jamie Foxx says: The song was released as a radio-only single in May 2009. However the song is labeled as "song" and on Jamie Foxx discography page, the song is listed among "Other Charted songs" You Ain't Got Nuthin by Lil Wayne says: Although not released as an official single, the song was released as a promotional recording to radio stations and peaked at number 81 on the Billboard Hot 100. It is labeled as "song" and listed among "other charted songs" Reverse Cowgirl article says: Released February 2, 2010 (Radio). However it is labeled as promotional single. So there are many examples that the song which was only sent to radio is not the single. I think that Raining Men should be considered as the promo single and it should be delete off the singles discography and merge to other charted songs or promotional singles ...Sorry for my english —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.31.45.42 (talk) 09:31, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

With all that you right, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Examples we brought up were examples of GA-class articles. If some of these songs were actually sent to radio, then they are incorrectly listed as promotional singles, because a radio add date in the US is a single release not a promotional release. Candyo32 13:32, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Relevance?

In how far does this article fulfill Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Albums.2C_singles_and_songs? The whole "Reception" part is made of critics of the album "Loud" and not only the song. --Christian140 (talk) 13:59, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Because it has charted, the song meets WP:NSONGS Candyo32 00:45, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Not a single nor a promotional single

This song is not an official single nor is it a promotional single. Where is the source saying it was a FOR SURE single? Just because it charted does not make it a single. If this artice remains to exist, just make it a Song page instead of Single page. --Sdoo493 (talk) 22:57, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

It's a single because it was SENT to radio. Twice actually. ℥^nding·start 07:33, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it was released as a radio single. Just because it hasn't been performed live, has no music video, and didn't chart on the Hot 100, doesn't mean it's not a valid single. Calvin • ⁹⁹⁹ 11:42, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Being released makes it a source. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 18:47, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Just because it was added by radios has nothing to do whether it was a single or not... ;; - --Aquabender (talk) 20:17, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

In the US, it does. Radio impressions can make a song chart in the US without a single download. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 20:35, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Source for future use, if needed.

MTV Buzzworthy Calvin • ⁹⁹⁹ 15:09, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

GA1

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 01:15, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. 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:

2. 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:

3. 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):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

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

6. 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:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Infobox

• Add a reference in the article that supports the year the song was recorded

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• Reference 6 says that the label is Def Jam/IDJMG

  What do you want me to do?! Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• Add a reference in article that supports who wrote and produced the song

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• I am not sure if there is artwork, but since it is a single.

  Artwork was never released, if any.

Lead

• "The song was solicited to urban radio on December 7, 2010, as the third United States single." – "as the third United States single" needs to be "as the third single from Loud"

   Done It was a US only single, not international, that's why US is there. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

Background and release

• Double quotes (") need to be around both indented quotes

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• "...she continued, with a giggle." – Remove this because this was not part of what she said

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

Critical reception

• "August Brown of theLos Angeles Times said..." – Add space between "the" and "Los"

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

Charts

• No issues

References

• Reference 3 & 4 – "Viacom" not needed as publisher

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• Reference 6 – Publisher is Radio & Records

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• Reference 7 – Publisher is The New York Times Company

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• Reference 16 – Add "language=" parameter and put "Dutch"

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

Overall review

After thoroughly reviewing this article, I have decided to put this article on hold at this time. Here are the two main issues keeping this article from good article status:

• Citation of reliable sources where necessary: There are some spots where specific facts aren't supported by a reference in the article.

   Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• Major aspects: I think this article can be expanded a bit. Here is what you can do with it:

– Since there is a little information on this song, rename the "Critical reception" section to the "Composition and critical reception" section where critics could describe the song while still reviewing it. Also, if possible, try an add an audio sample (this is not required for GA status, but it adds better clarity to the article).

 Done Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

– Put in a "Credits and personnel" section in to support the claims in the infobox about the writers and producers of the song.

 Done, but it's not very big though. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

– I have researched this song and found information about a music video. Add a music video section in this article with informaton like release date, producer(s), film location, and synopsis.

Really? That's news to me. I can't find anything. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

I will give you the general seven days to address these issues and/or debate the items you believe do not affect good article status. Please indicate on each issue when you have addressed it by using the {{done}} or {{done-t}} template. If you have any questions or need help with something, please feel free to ask. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 05:41, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Done/Answered all. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 11:58, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Since all of the issues have been addressed, I feel confident passing this article. Keep expanding this article if information becomes available. Congratulations and keep up the good work! - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 18:48, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!! Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:59, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by GA bot (talk • contribs) 01:21, 31 July 2011‎ (UTC)

Genre

This is not hip hop music! This is pop! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.120.183.130 (talk) 14:50, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

(Sign off comments by typing four of these: ~). It's a hip-hop song, hip-hop is a combination of sung vocals and rap vocals, mixing the two together, like with Love the Way You Love (Rihanna sang, Eminem rapped) and Fantasy (Mariah sang, O.D.B rapped). You need a critical source when talking about genres, and there aren't any that say Raining Men is a Pop song or an R&B song. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 14:56, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

There aren't any source that say Raining Men is a hip hop song either. Rakim, Mos Def, KRS-1, A Tribe Called Quest, MF Doom = hip hop. It doesn't sound like hip hop music. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.120.183.130 (talk) 15:35, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Hip Hop is sourced. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 16:46, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Cover image

Is there not an image for the cover of this, like all her other (official) singles have? Best, --Discographer (talk) 12:45, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

I am afraid not Discog. This was only US radio single (that by my theory is not single at all) and didn't received larger commercial coverage or some artwork. — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 14:51, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm... so, this isn't even an official single then? Best, --Discographer (talk) 15:03, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Kind of. It was only sent to US radios, however, by Wikipedia policy, it counts as a single. — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 15:44, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Best, --Discographer (talk) 15:51, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

It was officially released as the third single. Just like Cheers was the official seventh single. Calvin • ^{Watch n' Learn} 15:58, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

There is only a radio source for the song, nor remixes, nor digital, nor physical. It is a radio single, no video. Even, it doesn't have a cover! "Cheers" had everything I said above. Rihanna even didn't tweet about the release. For me its promotional single, but when songs are sent on radios, they are singles by Wikipedia policy. — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 16:03, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

America does have radio singles though. I've heard Princess of China and Talk That Talk since I've been here. And I remember hearing Raining Men when I was here last year. Calvin • ^{Watch n' Learn} 16:11, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Sources

http://rapfix.mtv.com/2011/01/21/nicki-minaj-rihanna-raining-men-duet-written-in-bed/ Aaron • ^{You Da One} 22:22, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

R&B Charting

• Debut: http://www.billboard.com/#/charts/r-b-hip-hop-songs?chartDate=2010-12-25&order=gainer Aaron • ^{You Da One} 21:48, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
• 14th and 15th weeks positions: http://www.billboard.com/#/charts/r-b-hip-hop-songs?chartDate=2011-04-02&order=drop Aaron • ^{You Da One}

DYK nomination

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Calvin999 (talk • contribs) 17:56, 2 May 2012‎ (UTC)

Requested move (September 2014)

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Andrewa (talk) 18:32, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

---

Raining Men (song) → Raining Men – Neither of the other two things are called Raining Men. Unreal7 (talk) 13:21, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

• Comment - to be honest (song) doesn't achieve much here since the item it is being disambiguated is the much better known "It's Raining Men" song which the Rihanna song cites and samples. This should be Raining Men (Rihanna song) if anything. The "It's" would be sufficient for Rihanna fans, for those who know the original song in its many versions may be misled by the current (song). In ictu oculi (talk) 23:28, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose the primary topic is It's Raining Men, for which "Raining Men" is a used variant title. -- 65.94.171.225 (talk) 06:35, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Oppose. A Rihanna fan may well know the correct title of her song, but for the rest of humanity we could land on either song or the disambiguation page. As a man of a certain generation I might well land on (song) when looking for the Weather Girls. I certainly can't conceive of any "Raining Men" being more notable than the Weathergirls version. Others may say the Geri Halliwell version - and they would not be wrong either. Perhaps it is the Rihanna song, again I would not argue. So the question is does "It's" clarify significantly the different songs. If the answer is yes, then there is little point in moving any article (or more to the point, we could have numbers for URLs!) including this one. If the answer is no, then we need to move this song to Raining Men (Rihanna song) and stop avoiding the logical conclusion of having 4.5+ articles on Wikipedia. --Richhoncho (talk) 05:24, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose Proper names for proper titles and both articles have proper hat notes. No reason to change and add to confusion. Trackinfo (talk) 10:32, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move (October 2014)

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 00:29, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

---

Raining Men (song) → Raining Men (Rihanna song) – In the last move it was suggested that some people might think the other song is also called "Raining Men", so this will be more of a help than the current title. Unreal7 (talk) 21:05, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

• Support per Requested Move 1; "Raining Men (song)" should redirect to Raining Men -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 00:14, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
• Support significantly more helpful. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:13, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
• Reluctantly Support just because some people are stupid. So this will save them 5 to 10 seconds of painful reading to realize they are not finding the Weather Girls and have to look around to find the hat note to maybe figure it out. Trackinfo (talk) 06:41, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
• Support Clear case where following the guidelines might not indicate it, but readers are better served with a title that does not lead to confusion with the far better known song.--Yaksar (let's chat) 17:44, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
• Support. Thanks for the nom, Unreal7, it makes sense, anybody looking for the Rihanna song will find it easier and anybody NOT looking for it will benefit too. --Richhoncho (talk) 17:47, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose. We already have a hate note for this. This is the only song named "Raining Men" - any additional disambiguation is unnecessary. --В²C ☎ 21:19, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose. Per Born2cycle's comment. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 21:22, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose. As per Born2Cycle. Only article with this name.  — ₳aron 21:29, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose completely unneeded when there is no other song article with this title. Snuggums (talk / edits) 13:35, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose per comment by Born2Cycle. IPadPerson (talk) 15:09, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Suggested move (October 2014)

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move the page to Raining Men (Rihanna song), per the discussion below. The plain title is not a redirect to this page, indicating that many editors believe this song is not the primary topic for the phrase. The preponderance of the input here expressed acceptance for this title, and hopefully the move will end the list of requests. Dekimasuよ! 02:11, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

---

Raining Men (song) → ? – OK, I know this doesn't seem like it's helping anyone, me making a third move request in the space of a month, but the current title is not appropriate. One of the following two things needs to happen:

1. If you DON'T think there is potential confusion with It's Raining Men, then (as there are no other articles is nothing else specifically called "Raining Men") move the page to Raining Men.

or

2. If you DO think there is potential confusion with It's Raining Men, then (given that that's a song too) move the page to Raining Men (Rihanna song). --Relisted. Dekimasuよ! 03:40, 30 October 2014 (UTC) Unreal7 (talk) 22:36, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

• Support Raining Men (Rihanna song) - there clearly is confusion because sources refer to both songs as "Raining Men" and what article titles we have is irrelevant. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:39, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
• Support either option. The nomination is correct that the current state does not fit our standards. But, I'm not sure how we can successfully say we've found a consensus unless this gets a more active participation, given that both options were literally just rejected in much larger recent move discussions. So a conditional oppose for me until more people have weighed in.--Yaksar (let's chat) 05:19, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

• Per User:Status, I'm gonna say I now support just Raining Men, as this is a pretty perfect use of "not to be confused with".--Yaksar (let's chat) 16:06, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

• Support a move in general per nom and specifically support a move to Raining Men. There is no other entity with that title and the hatnote that is already at the top of the article can direct any wayward "It's Raining Men" seekers to the correct article just as easily as an unneeded DAB page can. This way, the majority of users seeking the Rihanna song don't have to click twice while there is no added inconvenience to the Weather Girls' fans. —  AjaxSmack  02:34, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
• Support Option 2 above. There is nothing to change my mind. It's a Rihanna song and it helps people to call it that. In real life i.e. speech, nobody would say, "What do you think about Raining Men?" but we would say "What do you think of Rihanna's Raining Men? or similar. My comments at the previous two RMs apply here more so. --Richhoncho (talk) 14:58, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose - Both proposals have been opposed once, and they will be opposed again. Scrapping out "(song)" won't make the song the primary topic. Adding "Rihanna" won't ease matters either. --George Ho (talk) 16:53, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose. Per the comment above. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 16:58, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
• Support Raining Men (Rihanna song) and turning that page as the REDIRECT destination for Raining Men - The confusion we are dealing with is an inability to read. We can't exactly put up a flashing red light. Raining Men is a properly attributed song title for Rihanna. When they search for that name, they should get to the song. Putting Rihanna's name in the title makes it as clear as we can make it within the MoS of this encyclopedia. If they are mistakenly looking for the Weather Girls, they will eventually find the hat note under the title to direct them to the correctly named It's Raining Men and they might (ouch) learn something in the process, which is why wikipedia exists. Trackinfo (talk) 19:11, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose unnecessary DAB when no other song article has the exact title "Raining Men" Snuggums (talk / edits) 19:39, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

  Do you also oppose moving it to just Raining Men? Unreal7 (talk) 10:51, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

  I believe he opposes moving it to Raining Men (Rihanna song), aren't you @SNUGGUMS:? — Tomíca^(T2ME) 11:05, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

• Yes, Tomica- that is what I meant. Snuggums (talk / edits) 18:50, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

• Support move to Raining Men or leave as is. The "not to be confused with" hatnote exists for a reason. — Status (talk · contribs) 21:21, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

• For some reason I actually never considered that. Also, searching for the song without allowing the word "it's" also shows there isn't as much confusion as I'd initially expect.--Yaksar (let's chat) 16:10, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose - 2 different songs and nothing to get confused about, I hope this request is the final one now...... –Davey2010 • (talk) 04:07, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
• Comment - Honestly I think this is one of those cases where the best solution would have been to have a non standard move discussion, one of those where there are 3 options and you indicate which you find acceptable or order based on preference. As it stands, what's probably going to keep happening is we're going to end up with a result that in fact the least people are happy with.--Yaksar (let's chat) 05:05, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

• Strong oppose "Raining Men", that proposal was rejected in September 2014 #Requested move (September 2014) -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 05:30, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
  • COMMENT the nominator of this proposal is the same as the one for September 2014 and the earlier October 2014 proposal, so I think a procedural close is in order, as the nominator has suggested the same moves again as part of this proposal. -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 05:32, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
    • If a move is to be performed, the procedurally, only Raining Men (Rihanna song) is viable, per WP:PRECISE, as the other name "Raining Men" was rejected, and no policy based move is available to overturn that decision. However, PRECISE can be used to fix the bad disambiguator, which is imprecise. -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 05:43, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

....Exactly as 67.70.35.44, the same problem "Raining Men" still being used without "It's" for some cover versions and refs to the much more famous non-Rihanna song quoting the original still applies. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:58, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

• Support move to Raining Men (Rihanna song). Including the artist name in the title is helpful to readers, and there's more than one song that may be referred to as "Raining Men". —BarrelProof (talk) 16:32, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
• Update: "Raining Men" became It's Raining Men (disambiguation). --George Ho (talk) 01:14, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

• Support as per BarrelProof's comment; I agree calling it [[Raining Men (Rihanna song)]]; it's much helpful and less confussing someone might think they were going to the Weather Girls page but came to Rihanna's and also add that "for the Weather Girls song of the same name see It's Raining Men. Rihanna-RiRi-fan (talk) 08:25, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

• Support move to "Raining Men (Rihanna song)". I agree that it's hart to determinate what the correct title should be, but it is obvious that the current title is not correct. Current title disambiguates this song from other similarly titled songs by adding "(song)". That is a pure nonsense. I also support a move to "Raining Man", but i prefer "Raining Men (Rihanna song)" because the songs' titles are too similar, and easy to confuse, so the disambiguation is useful. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:31, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
• Support move to "Raining Men (Rihanna song)" I agree with Vanjagenije; it stops those who liked The Weather Girls/Geri Halliwell version of the song getting effed off for clicking on Raining Men (song) to be redirected to the Rihanna song of the same name; also what is The Weather Girls one saved as? Just It's Raining Men or It's Raining Men (song)? I'm pretty sure that some old pervy looking men went on Britain's Got Talent under the name of It's Raining Men; wouldn't that confuse people thinking they were looking on their page and went to The Weather Girls song page. 5.81.198.219 (talk) 21:55, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

• Comment - now that the disambiguation page is It's Raining Men (disambiguation), what happens to Raining Men if this isn't moved to that title? Unreal7 (talk) 22:37, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Nothing. It is not otherwise under discussion, since that title was rejected in September for this article, and is not listed at RFD; and regardless of what happens to this article, there's nothing to do there. -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 04:59, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Tally

• Supports for Raining Men (Rihanna song) - 5 [Later updated to 6 by 5.81.198.219 at 21:56, 2 November 2014‎ (UTC)]
• Supports for Raining Men - 4
• Opposes - 4

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Unreal7 (talk • contribs) 17:37, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

IMHO, a "tally" is not especially helpful. This is a matter of determining consensus based on relevant policies and guidelines – not a matter of mere popularity. —BarrelProof (talk) 13:08, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

• Note: This tally is incomplete/outdated. Dekimasuよ! 02:06, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Raining Men (Rihanna song). Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.allaccess.com/urban/future-releases

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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} 07:35, 31 March 2016 (UTC)