Wikipedia:Peer review/Indestructible (Robyn song)/archive1

Indestructible (Robyn song)

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to get it peer reviewed before nominating it for GA status.

Thanks, Pancake (talk) 21:16, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: Looks promising GA material. A few prose issues, mainly minor:-

• In the lead, "becoming her ninth top ten hit in her native country": Grammatically, the first "her" needs to be "Robyn's"

 Done

• Numbers above 10 ("thirteen", "twenty-one") are generally better presented as numerics

I don't know about this, I've seen many good articles with "thirteen", "twenty-one"... Tik Tok (song) for instance.

• The "Composition and critical reception" section contains nothing about the composition of the piece. This has really been covered in the section you have called "Background" . You might consider renaming the Background section "Composition", and calling the other "Critical reception". The Background section could be resurrected if you have any genuine backgound material to incorporate.

I merged "Composition" with "Background".

• In the critical receptions, the various opinions ("sweeping and symphonic", "devastatingly beautiful", "a racing string section with relentless bass and pulsing synthesized chords", etc., need to be attributed as well as cited.

 Done

• "On the chart issue dated 17 September 2010 of the Swedish Sverigetopplistan chart..." Awkward repetition of "chart" - suggest rephrase. Also, suggest "fifty-four" should be numeric per earlier comment (applies also to other numbers in this section).

 Done

• What does "having sex in reverse" mean? (the mind boggles)

Reworded to "The video begins with a reversed scene of a young couple having sex". Better?

• In the short "Live performances" section the word "performed occurs four times, plus one perfprmance. You need to vary the phrasing a little.

✗ Not done Don't know what else to write than "perform". And I'll try to expand the section. Pancake (talk) 20:53, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Brianboulton (talk) 18:56, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments! I'll start working on the issues right away. Pancake (talk) 19:03, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

• Instead of writing the Swedish Sverigetopplistan chart it might sound better writing the Swedish chart "Sverigetopplistan"--Esoderberg (talk) 23:17, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment. I changed it to just Sverigetopplistan. :) Pancake (talk) 20:53, 13 February 2011 (UTC)