Wikipedia:Peer review/Irresistible (Jessica Simpson song)/archive2

Irresistible (Jessica Simpson song)
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to correct any issue that the article has, and re-nominate it for an FA. I believe it is now good enough for an FA. Thanks, Novice7 (talk) 09:43, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Previous peer review

Finetooth comments: It appears that the article did not achieve FA on the first go-round because not enough reviewers took part. I don't see any major problems with article, but I think the prose could be a bit snappier in places, and that might attract more reviewers on the next round. Generally, I'd suggest looking for passive-voice sentences that could be made slightly more punchy by conversion to active voice. I wouldn't attempt to change all passives to actives or tie myself in knots trying to do this, but I think that selective flipping from passive to active would help. I have made a few specific suggestions about doing this in the lead, and I think you can find similar sentences elsewhere in the article. Look for places in the article where several passive-voice constructions appear in a row; those would be the best places to make an adjustment. Here's an example of a string of passives from the "Music video" section:

"The music video was directed by Colombian film director Simon Brand.[65] Cinematography was done by Daniel Pearl,[66] and post-production processes were supervised by Felipe Nino.[67] The video was choreographed by Dan Karaty.[68] The video was shot in a set with futuristic backdrops, and Simpson assumes the role of a spy."

Lead


 * "The lyrics are more mature and suggestive than those of Simpson's previous songs." - I'm not sure "mature" is quite the right word. Would this be any better: "The lyrics are more sexually suggestive than those of Simpson's previous songs"?


 * "The instrumentation includes strings, and lyrically, the song discusses some very feminine views referring to an imminent sexual compromise." - This is a little too vague, I think, and I don't think there's a logical connection between the use of strings and the idea of sexual compromise. Maybe this would work better as two sentences, one that elaborates a bit more on the instrumentation and another that is more explicit about the kind of sexual compromise. Maybe "The instrumentation includes strings, synths, percussion, and acoustic pianos. The lyrics center on the tension between a young woman's sexual desires and her inhibitions."


 * A So So Def remix of the song featuring Lil' Bow Wow and Jermaine Dupri was recorded that incorporates samples of Club Nouveau's 1987 song "Why You Treat Me So Bad" and Kool & the Gang's 1973 song "Jungle Boogie". - This would be a bit punchier in active voice, I think. Maybe: A So So Def remix of the piece features Lil' Bow Wow and Jermaine Dupri and incorporates samples of Club Nouveau's 1987 song "Why You Treat Me So Bad" and Kool & the Gang's 1973 song "Jungle Boogie".


 * "Irresistible" received mixed to negative reviews from critics." - Perhaps: "Critics gave "Irresistible" mixed to negative reviews"?


 * "A music video for the So So Def remix was created with Lil' Bow Wow's and Dupri's scenes inter-cut with Simpson's." - Perhaps, "A music video for the So So Def remix featured scenes by Dupri and Lil' Bow Wow inter-cut with scenes by Simpson."


 * "The song is featured on the soundtrack to the Disney Channel Original series Lizzie McGuire (2001)." - Maybe: "The Disney Channel Original series Lizzie McGuire (2001) uses the song as part of its soundtrack."

Composition
 * But its time to stop this emotion / Right now I'm gonna say no. - I think "its" is probably "it's" (or should be) in the original.

Critical reception
 * Cashbox Canada ranked the song at number ten on "Top 10 Love Songs: The Crush", writing the song is a great ode to love "at step one". - This sentence slowed me down a bit because I thought at first that "great ode to love" must be a quote, and I wasn't quite sure what "writing" was attached to. Maybe this would be a bit more clear: Cashbox Canada, ranking the song at number ten on "Top 10 Love Songs: The Crush", praised it as an ode to love "at step one".


 * "Peter Marsh of the BBC gave a similar review, stating that the song was digitally rendered." - This sentence stopped me too, because I don't know whether digital rendering is common or uncommon, good or bad. Since Marsh's review is being used as an example of a negative review, I have to assume that digital rendering is something he considered bad in this case. But why?
 * Simpson's vocals were praised before for its rawness. But, this song is over-produced, which Marsh felt was disappointing. Maybe, I should remove the review? It's just two words.

Chart performance
 * File:Jessica Simpson side.jpg is a directional image looking to the right out of the page. Generally, it's better to position directional images to look into the page. I would move this image to the left. If you're concerned about keeping a balance between left and right-sided placements, you might move the slightly directional Christina Aguilera to the right side.

Music video
 * "They felt that Simpson needed to make some changes to her image." - Columbia Records is an "it" rather than a "they". I think I would use "The company felt that Simpson... ".

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider commenting on any other article at WP:PR. I don't usually watch the PR archives or make follow-up comments. If my suggestions are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 19:43, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches. (This is a general warning given in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)
 * Thank you so much Finetooth. I'll get on the article soon. Novice7 (talk) 03:10, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I fixed a few instances of passive voice. Thank you for your comments, again. Novice7 (talk) 17:01, 27 March 2011 (UTC)