Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Taylor Swift singles discography/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:27, 4 January 2021 (UTC).

Taylor Swift singles discography

 * Nominator(s): HĐ (talk) 13:07, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Split from Taylor Swift discography, this list compiles the singles and charted songs by American singer-songwriter Taylor Swift. I think it's ready for FL, as it is a comprehensive, meticulously referenced list that does not omit anything within its coverage. Thanks, HĐ (talk) 13:07, 2 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Support - suggest it might be worth having a discussion at WT:CHARTS about UK chart positions 101-200 and how to handle them...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:13, 5 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I got a 404 error when checking the file source for File:Taylor Swift 1989 Tour at Ford Field in Detroit, 5-30-15.jpg. That makes it harder to verify the image was properly licensed. If you can't fix/replace that URL, then just get another image.
 * I replaced it with a more recent image from the Reputation tour. I believe that it's self-published, HĐ (talk) 15:41, 3 December 2020 (UTC)


 * The lead feels overly US-centric. I realize she's had lots of success there and that a few other places do get mentioned, but I feel you could discuss more like how "Love Story" went number one in Australia or how three songs from 1989 topped the charts there as well as in Canada.
 * I think it's because Swift's strength primarily lies in the States where she's a media darling... I'll try to incorporate more info wherever possible though, HĐ (talk) 15:41, 3 December 2020 (UTC)


 * "Hit" isn't very professional tone. There are multiple instances where that should be changed.
 * Changed at some places. Kept at others (i.e. "Shake It Off" can be naturally described as a "hit" imo), HĐ (talk) 15:41, 3 December 2020 (UTC)


 * When not credited as a lead or featured artist, I don't see any point in including songs where Taylor was only a songwriter.
 * Removed, HĐ (talk) 15:41, 3 December 2020 (UTC)


 * For the ref#109 bundle, I recommend putting in some title for those links on Scottish numbers like you have with ref#108 and its Australian peaks.
 * Done, HĐ (talk) 15:41, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

The above should be manageable, and media review is currently pending until the image concern is addressed. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 18:53, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I have no qualms with File:Taylor Swift Reputation Tour1 (cropped).jpg, so good job with the image replacement :). Now passing media review. As for the lead, you could replace "hits" in "five top-10 hits" with "songs" or "entries", and SIO can be "biggest success in the United States" (based on time spent at its summit) in place of "biggest hit". Something I forgot to bring up earlier is that "several" is an ambiguous term that's best avoided when specifics are known and that you should signify that Billboard Hot 100 pertains to the US upon its first mention there. While both of us clearly know that already, not all readers are familiar with chart names and affiliations. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 21:14, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think "hit" is unencyclopedic tone, as defined by the Oxford dictionary as "a person or thing that is very popular", which is identical in meaning as "success" (both of which are rather neutral tone instead of POV imo). Though I have reduced the instances of "hits" to one, which I think is acceptable. Agree that "several" is a vague term. Specified that the Billboard Hot 100 is a US chart. Thank you very much for your comments :) HĐ (talk) 04:06, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome, and I now support following the improvements made to this list. SNUGGUMS (talk</b> / <b style="color:#009900">edits</b>) 18:51, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Comments from SatDis

Great work, here are a few suggestions:
 * For the Australian charts references, there are a few floating references in the chart (obviously because they're from below #50). However, could you put these in the reference at the top as a note? I have done it here Noah Cyrus discography, if you look at ref [7]. I believe it looks neater.
 * I bundled the refs altogether, HĐ (talk) 09:06, 12 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I can tell you've gone for the method of linking the publisher's first mention, but ARIA is linked in both [32] and [36].
 * I linked them all, HĐ (talk) 09:06, 12 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Can I ask why "Beautiful Ghosts" is the only main single that has a citation next to it?
 * There is a rule of thumb that singles which did not chart on any chart should have a citation next to it.. Or that's what I've been told, HĐ (talk) 09:06, 12 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Why are the songs from the 2007 Christmas single all listed separately? Could you list them all as one single or somehow put it into a note? Just interesting!
 * I merged the chart and sales column and added a note, HĐ (talk) 09:06, 12 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I noticed only 59 references are archived, but 114 listed. Are these able to be archived as well? Asking because I've suffered from links going dead before!
 * I'm having a problem with IAbot... I'll check it later, HĐ (talk) 09:06, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, SatDis (talk) 06:36, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comments, ! HĐ (talk) 09:06, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Fantastic, the references look great... and that makes sense re "Beautiful Ghosts". Christmas single looks good. I will support the list on the basis of excellent referencing and ease of reading. I just recommend checking out the citation archives for your own sake. I didn't know bots could do it so I ended up doing it all manually for my articles, haha! Well done on the article. SatDis (talk) 09:42, 12 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Source review – To confirm what the previous reviewer said, the reliability and formatting of the references look okay, and the link-checker tool shows no problems. This source review is a pass. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 23:24, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the source review. HĐ (talk) 02:55, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Giants2008 ( Talk ) 22:22, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.