Wikipedia:Peer review/Cool Girl/archive1

Cool Girl edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because I want to nominate it for FA. It has been already reviewed at GOCE but I consider a more in-depth review is needed.

Thanks, Paparazzzi (talk) 02:21, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think you did a great job on this. It's well-written, comprehensive and sourced appropriately. The only thing that threw me off was the organization of the content. Not sure if it's standard structure, so please forgive me if it's how things are done. But, it was awkward to see "Background and development", then read about it's release, then go back to "Composition and inspiration" etc. Maybe a more logical structure would work? Also, I think some sections could be combined, or at least have sub-headings underneath major headings. Example, "Background and development" and "Composition and inspiration" seem very close, so I'd combine these (with subheadings as appropriate ). I'm also a fan of having the commercial performance section at the end—basically, write about the work itself then have the reception (commercial/critical) discussed after its release. Obviously this is only personal preference, so if you have your reasons, then that's fine! Journalist . talk 17:56, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! --Paparazzzi (talk) 04:23, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Aoba47 edit

I would put the "Release" section after the "Composition and inspiration" section. This kind of structure is seen in both Baby Boy (Beyoncé song) and S&M (song), and although these are both old featured articles, I think this kind of structure is a better way to convey the information to the reader. Done
I would make this part, (which was inspired by a monologue spoken by the character Amy Elliott-Dunne in the 2014 feature film Gone Girl.), into its own sentence, and clarify that this inspiration applies to the lyrics to avoid any misinterpretation that it may extend to the sound instead. Done
I would just say "film" as opposed to "feature film". Done
For this part, (The song is a downtempo electropop work with elements of techno and house music), it may be better to say something like, ("Cool Girl" is a downtempo electropop song...), as I could see some pushback on the "work" word choice in a FAC. Done
I am uncertain if the quote is needed in the lead (and I'm curious on whether or not it could be paraphrased instead), but I will leave that up to other editors/reviewers as I do not have strong feelings about it. Done
What is the difference between a casual relationship and a commitment-free relationship? This part, (its themes of casual and commitment-free relationships), makes it seem like they are separate things to me at least. Done reading more about it, they are basically the same thing. --Paparazzzi (talk) 05:11, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would avoid this wordage, (a moderate commercial success), because "moderate" is really up to interpretation and unless a critic or publication used that specific word, I would avoid putting up something that could be contested based on personal opinion. Done
For the "certified" sentence in the lead, I'd use a link to the music recording certification article. Done
I do not think "accompanying" is needed in this part, (An accompanying music video for), as it is already clear in the rest of the sentence that the music video is for this particular song. Done
For this part, (which features some songs), I would use the exact number of songs rather than "some". Done
I have a question for this part, (and writing on top of a glass coffin in a desert), specifically the "writing" spelling. I have seen it spelled as "writhing" for this kind of action, but that could be an Americanism. Done You are right, it's "writhing". Sorry for that. --Paparazzzi (talk) 05:11, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
For this part, (during her Queen of the Clouds tour), the "Tour" part should be capitalized. Done
I think this part, (and began to analyze a monologue), could be made more concise by just saying "analyzed a monologue" instead. I also think it should be "the monologue" instead as you are referring to a specific one. Done
The word "monologue" is used three times in a short succession in the "Background and development" section's first paragraph. I think the last instance could be changed to avoid this. Done
For this part, (Lo and The Struts reunited in Stockholm to finish the song), I am uncertain about the "reunited" word choice as they were not together when Lo wrote the song or when The Struts made the bass line. Comment: As for what I understand, The Struts send Lo the track in 2015, she wrote the lyrics and then they reunited in Stockholm in 2016 to finish the track.Paparazzzi (talk) 05:11, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think for me at least, the word "reunited" suggested that they were in the same space before, but that was not the case. Aoba47 (talk) 06:10, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think you mean "that included" in this part: (posted several pictures the included the lyrics). Done
I was somewhat confused at the first mention of Republic Records as only Island Records is mentioned in the infobox. I'd mention both record labels in the lead to clarify this. Done
I am a little confused on how the Gone Girl monologue inspiration is scattered between two separate sections (i.e. the "Background and development" and the "Composition and inspiration" section). I think it would be stronger to keep all of this information in one section so it tells more of a concise narrative. I think it would make more sense (at least to me) to put this in the "Background and development" section). I would keep the minimal techno raves part, but I'd incorporate it into the first paragraph instead. Done
I'd also recommend combining the "Composition and inspiration" and "Lyrics and meaning" sections into a "Music and lyrics" section, particularly if the monologue inspiration information is moved up to the first section. Done
Since casual dating is linked in the lead, I would also link it in the body of the article. Done
I am uncertain if the music video screenshot would be considered absolutely necessary to illustrate a point beyond the prose. The minimal use of non-free media is strongly encouraged, and I do not necessarily see how either of the two screenshots say anything that is not already conveyed in the prose Comment: maybe using only the picture of Lo writhing on the top of the coffing would be enough? --Paparazzzi (talk) 05:40, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It could be, since that scene did receive quite a bit of critical commentary. If you make the connection between the screenshot and critical commentary clear, then I think it should be appropriate. Aoba47 (talk) 06:10, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The word "bridge" is linked twice in the article. Done
I am not sure if the 7.4 Idolator score is notable enough to be included in the prose. Done

Apologies for all of the comments. You have done great work with the article. I did a thorough review up to the "Critical reception" section, and addressed some points from that point onward. I will do a more thorough review of the rest of the article, but I did not want to overwhelm the peer review with just my comments. I hope this is helpful for you. Have a great week! Aoba47 (talk) 21:42, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

- @Aoba47: Thank you so much for your review! I have addressed all of your points, and left a couple of comments. Regards, Paparazzzi (talk) 05:40, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad I can help. I will look through the rest of the article tomorrow. It's crazy how I feel like I heard this song so recently, and it was put out almost four years ago now. Time can be so weird lol. Aoba47 (talk) 06:10, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Could you explain how you structured the "Critical reception" section? Comment: I included the positive reviews first and the mixed/negative at the end. I guess I could order them differently.Paparazzzi (talk) 06:59, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'd put the release year in parenthesis after "Moments". Done
If "family-friendly" is linked in the body of the article, I would do the same in the lead for consistency. Done
I would add the year that "Life Itself" was released. Done
For this part, (The artist sang "Cool Girl" at the Osheaga Festival 2017 in Montreal, Canada, on 4 August.), I would use "She" instead of "The artist". Done
For this part, (saying he "could barely see" Lo's face.), I think you can remove the quote and paraphrase the information. Done
For this part, (sang she brielky), it should be "briefly". Done
I think you meant to link something here, (touched her crotch]]), because there is only the ending marks. Done
I must admit that I am not super familiar with Michael Jackson's music. How is touching her crotch a homage to him? Does she explain this any further? Comment: I guess it was part of his dancing routine. I have specified that in the prose.Paparazzzi (talk) 06:59, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Great work overall with the article. I'm only focusing on the prose btw, and not looking through the sources as I am not super experienced in that area. If possible, I would greatly appreciate any feedback for my current FAC. Either way, I hope my comments are helpful. Aoba47 (talk) 00:02, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your comments! I'm going to address them as soon as possible. I left some comments on your FAC. Regards! Paparazzzi (talk) 05:35, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Take as much time as you need. And thank you for the help so far with my FAC! I hope you are having a great weekend so far! Aoba47 (talk) 03:20, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]