Would this still qualify for deletion to quality despite that the person who nominated it for deletion was the FL nominator?
48JCLTALK20:50, 13 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Swift's sixth studio album, Reputation (2017), was supported by negligible television performances -- suggest an alternative wording for negligible, or perhaps since she did little TV performances, you can lead into the Reputation tour directly.
It is the first concert tour in history to surpass $1 billion in box score revenue. -- maybe some wording here can be piped to
List of highest-grossing concert tours, since it is a notable record and one she currently tops.
In the "Concert tours" table, I don't think we need to link the countries/territories (per
MOS:OL)
In the reference column for all your tables, I would update the abbreviation to "Ref(s)" since it is written as "Reference(s)" when hovered.
Hi @
Pseud 14: I've addressed all of your comments except the links to countries. I think while it makes sense to not link "common" countries like U.S., England... there are also "lesser-known" ones like Wales, Northern Ireland... so I decide to link them all to avoid potential demographic biases.
Ippantekina (
talk)
06:13, 19 June 2024 (UTC)reply
For the lead's first sentence, shouldn't it be (American singer-songwriter
Taylor Swift) rather than (The American singer-songwriter
Taylor Swift)? Something about the use of the determiner seems off to me, but I could be wrong though.
For the lead's second sentence, I do not think "various" adds much and can be cut as the focus seems to be more on the different venues where she has performed.
This is super nitpick-y so apologies in advance but I would use "television" rather than the acronym in this part (as well as on TV and radio). I would do the same for the "TV shows and specials" section heading.
The lead makes a point that
The Red Tour was her last tour as a country artist, but it does not specify what genre she transitioned to after that for her subsequent tours.
I doubt that the countries need to be linked in the tables as most readers would be familiar with these areas. This kind of thing is brought up in
MOS:OVERLINK. Also, since the table is sortable, there are instances where the first time the country appears is not linked. I would limit the links more so to cities and more specific areas like that. I respectfully disagree with your above "potential demographic biases" argument.
While thinking this over further, this should not be a big deal since it was not a major concern for any of the other reviewers here.
Aoba47 (
talk)
14:31, 26 June 2024 (UTC)reply
The linking for the tables is inconsistent. The award shows, such as the
American Music Awards, are linked in every instance, but the television shows, like Good Morning America, are only linked on the first instance. On top of that, since the table is sortable, readers may encounter an unlinked term before getting to the actual link. To account for that, I would think that everything would need to be linked. Other examples of this would be
Rascal Flatts being only linked once in the "As opening act'" table or the song titles only being linked once.
Apologies for that, and thank you for your clarification. I should have checked the awards links more thoroughly. That being said, my other point still stands. Since the tables are sortable, it cannot be controlled which entry a reader may encounter first. Things like songs are currently linked on only the first instance if no sorting is done, but if a readers does sort, they may through multiple, unlinked entries before getting to the link. As I said above, I would think that every item would have to linked in each instance to account for this.
Aoba47 (
talk)
18:55, 21 June 2024 (UTC)reply
For the One World: Together at Home part, I would include a note that it was done virtually and also include where she filmed her performance if it is known.
Citation 27 (
here), Citation 28 (
here), Citation 31 (
here), Citation 32 (
here), Citation 33 (
here), Citation 35 (
here), Citation 49 (
here), Citation 138 (
here), Citation 227 (
here), Citation 255 (
here), and Citation 265 (
here). are no longer active. The
CMT ones in general seem to have issues as most just redirect to the home page.
Citation 121 (
here), Citation 123 (
here), Citation 133 (
here), Citation 154 (
here), Citation 220 (
here), Citation 247 (
here), Citation 248 (
here), and Citation 275 (
here) are missing the authors. I would honestly check all of the citations without author credits for this. I also believe that Citation 275 should be
Time not Time Magazine.
Citation 163 (
here) is still active for me so I do not think the archived version needs to be used. Same for Citation 166 (
here) and Citation 274 (
here).
The archive for Citation 224 (
here) does not support the information provided. Also, the song title should be in single quotation marks as it is presented in the citation title.
Citation 231 (
here) requires a subscription. That should be noted in the citation template. I would make sure any other instances of this are noted as well.
I am sorry, but I oppose this list for promotion, primarily because of errors in the citations. I have also noticed inconsistencies with how linking is handled in the tables, which would not be as big of an issue by itself. Apologies again, and I would be more than happy to revisit this review once my comments are addressed. You have always done great work so I hope that this does not come across as too harsh or anything overly negative.
Aoba47 (
talk)
18:22, 20 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Apologies for not including this earlier. I honestly did not think of doing that, but it makes sense as things will likely change during revision. I believe
this version was what I was looking at during the time of this review.
Aoba47 (
talk)
15:25, 24 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Thank you for responding to everything. It all looks good to me. My only remaining point is that the citation for the first
Nova's Red Room performance does not support the songs. The archived citation (at least for me) goes to an overview of different articles on the site. I do see a link to an article about her performing "
We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together" there, but that does not appear to be archived. Once that has been addressed, I will be more than happy to support this FLC for promotion.
Aoba47 (
talk)
16:26, 1 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Unfortunately, I had a feeling that would be the case. I tried to either get access to a better archived version of the original source or to find a different citation, but I did not have any luck with either. Removing it would be the best option. I approach this kind of list as containing all of the notable live performances of a particular artist, rather than being an exhaustive list so since I think that it is okay that this performance does not make it due to a lack of a citation. I did not look through newspapers so maybe that would help, but I think this is the right choice for now.
Apologies for the long response, but I do support this FLC for promotion based on the prose and I have struck my oppose.
Aoba47 (
talk)
17:34, 4 July 2024 (UTC)reply
I did look through Newspaper.com, ProQuest for potential news sources to no avail. I'll try to continue looking for a replacement ref anyways. Thanks so much for your constructive feedback :)
Ippantekina (
talk)
04:01, 5 July 2024 (UTC)reply
I am just glad that I could help. Thank you for your patience with my review. Best of luck with finding a replacement reference.
Aoba47 (
talk)
14:51, 5 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Comments (ec with last editor)
"She has additionally performed in various festivals, awards shows, benefit concerts, and sporting events" - unless usage in US English is different, I would suggest this should be "She has additionally performed at various festivals, awards shows, benefit concerts, and sporting events". Certainly in the variety of English spoken in my neck of the woods, one does not perform "in" a music festival. But, as I said, maybe US usage is different......?
Any particular reason why the first three tables have the name of the event first and the dates second, and then suddenly it switches to the other way round?
I followed other examples like
List of Lady Gaga live performances, and if I rationalize that myself, each concert tour (the content of the first 3 tables) is a combination of various concerts and hence the tour names being listed first makes more sense; plus dates are presented in rage so including them first is confusing imo. Meanwhile other events (TV, radio, awards) are one-off events so it makes more sense to sort it chronologically by including the event date first.
Ippantekina (
talk)
03:48, 27 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Did she not perform any songs at "Trails West!" and some of the others, or is it just unknown what she performed? If the latter, I would suggest putting "unknown" or similar, as the dash honestly looks like it means "none"
Is there any value in that songs column being sortable given that it will only ever sort based on the first song listed?
I can think of the number of songs but that is not the most helpful. Do you think the "Performed song(s)" column should be unsortable?
Ippantekina (
talk)
13:42, 27 June 2024 (UTC)reply
TV show titles starting with "The" should sort based om the next word in the name
Why are some of the benefit special titles in italics and others not? For example, Children In Need (a UK telethon) is in italics but Stand Up to Cancer (also a UK telethon) is not
Apologies, one thing I missed. TV show titles should also sort based on the next word if they start with "The". Currently this seems to be the case for some but not all --
ChrisTheDude (
talk)
10:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Most sources in the article are reliable. Some are acceptable primary sources (i.e.
iHeartRadio source to confirm a show at the
iHeartRadio Music Festival). Some are long-established local newspapers related to the city where Swift played. However, there are some sources that don't appear to be reliable at a first glance.
Thanks, I'll get back to you asap. My preliminary comments are that while Bustle, Us Weekly are not the most reliable for BLP or commentary, in this usage as reports of popular culture they should suffice.
Ippantekina (
talk)
03:05, 12 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Since Skyshifter didn't do spotchecks, I used a random number generator to check 10, and found some consistent problems:
23, 67, 218, 236 - good
72, 125, 155, 189, 248 - does not explicitly state the date
48 - does not explicitly state the date, does not say it's part of the Fearless tour, implies she sang more than the two songs listed
I do believe that the information given is accurate; why wouldn't it be. But over half of the randomly selected refs don't actually say the date for the event they're citing, as far as I can see, which I feel is problematic. Please see what you can do to address this in general (presumably this is an issue for more than just these specific refs). --PresN00:28, 20 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Generally news coverage of awards shows/TV like 72, 125, 155 are published pretty much immediately after the events happen; of course articles that explicitly mention the dates do exist so I hope to find alternatives asap. 48 does imply she sang more than the 2 songs listed but since it doesn't say more, why would we include more; plus the "Part of the Fearless Tour" is cited by ref 35.
Ippantekina (
talk)
16:54, 20 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Would this still qualify for deletion to quality despite that the person who nominated it for deletion was the FL nominator?
48JCLTALK20:50, 13 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Swift's sixth studio album, Reputation (2017), was supported by negligible television performances -- suggest an alternative wording for negligible, or perhaps since she did little TV performances, you can lead into the Reputation tour directly.
It is the first concert tour in history to surpass $1 billion in box score revenue. -- maybe some wording here can be piped to
List of highest-grossing concert tours, since it is a notable record and one she currently tops.
In the "Concert tours" table, I don't think we need to link the countries/territories (per
MOS:OL)
In the reference column for all your tables, I would update the abbreviation to "Ref(s)" since it is written as "Reference(s)" when hovered.
Hi @
Pseud 14: I've addressed all of your comments except the links to countries. I think while it makes sense to not link "common" countries like U.S., England... there are also "lesser-known" ones like Wales, Northern Ireland... so I decide to link them all to avoid potential demographic biases.
Ippantekina (
talk)
06:13, 19 June 2024 (UTC)reply
For the lead's first sentence, shouldn't it be (American singer-songwriter
Taylor Swift) rather than (The American singer-songwriter
Taylor Swift)? Something about the use of the determiner seems off to me, but I could be wrong though.
For the lead's second sentence, I do not think "various" adds much and can be cut as the focus seems to be more on the different venues where she has performed.
This is super nitpick-y so apologies in advance but I would use "television" rather than the acronym in this part (as well as on TV and radio). I would do the same for the "TV shows and specials" section heading.
The lead makes a point that
The Red Tour was her last tour as a country artist, but it does not specify what genre she transitioned to after that for her subsequent tours.
I doubt that the countries need to be linked in the tables as most readers would be familiar with these areas. This kind of thing is brought up in
MOS:OVERLINK. Also, since the table is sortable, there are instances where the first time the country appears is not linked. I would limit the links more so to cities and more specific areas like that. I respectfully disagree with your above "potential demographic biases" argument.
While thinking this over further, this should not be a big deal since it was not a major concern for any of the other reviewers here.
Aoba47 (
talk)
14:31, 26 June 2024 (UTC)reply
The linking for the tables is inconsistent. The award shows, such as the
American Music Awards, are linked in every instance, but the television shows, like Good Morning America, are only linked on the first instance. On top of that, since the table is sortable, readers may encounter an unlinked term before getting to the actual link. To account for that, I would think that everything would need to be linked. Other examples of this would be
Rascal Flatts being only linked once in the "As opening act'" table or the song titles only being linked once.
Apologies for that, and thank you for your clarification. I should have checked the awards links more thoroughly. That being said, my other point still stands. Since the tables are sortable, it cannot be controlled which entry a reader may encounter first. Things like songs are currently linked on only the first instance if no sorting is done, but if a readers does sort, they may through multiple, unlinked entries before getting to the link. As I said above, I would think that every item would have to linked in each instance to account for this.
Aoba47 (
talk)
18:55, 21 June 2024 (UTC)reply
For the One World: Together at Home part, I would include a note that it was done virtually and also include where she filmed her performance if it is known.
Citation 27 (
here), Citation 28 (
here), Citation 31 (
here), Citation 32 (
here), Citation 33 (
here), Citation 35 (
here), Citation 49 (
here), Citation 138 (
here), Citation 227 (
here), Citation 255 (
here), and Citation 265 (
here). are no longer active. The
CMT ones in general seem to have issues as most just redirect to the home page.
Citation 121 (
here), Citation 123 (
here), Citation 133 (
here), Citation 154 (
here), Citation 220 (
here), Citation 247 (
here), Citation 248 (
here), and Citation 275 (
here) are missing the authors. I would honestly check all of the citations without author credits for this. I also believe that Citation 275 should be
Time not Time Magazine.
Citation 163 (
here) is still active for me so I do not think the archived version needs to be used. Same for Citation 166 (
here) and Citation 274 (
here).
The archive for Citation 224 (
here) does not support the information provided. Also, the song title should be in single quotation marks as it is presented in the citation title.
Citation 231 (
here) requires a subscription. That should be noted in the citation template. I would make sure any other instances of this are noted as well.
I am sorry, but I oppose this list for promotion, primarily because of errors in the citations. I have also noticed inconsistencies with how linking is handled in the tables, which would not be as big of an issue by itself. Apologies again, and I would be more than happy to revisit this review once my comments are addressed. You have always done great work so I hope that this does not come across as too harsh or anything overly negative.
Aoba47 (
talk)
18:22, 20 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Apologies for not including this earlier. I honestly did not think of doing that, but it makes sense as things will likely change during revision. I believe
this version was what I was looking at during the time of this review.
Aoba47 (
talk)
15:25, 24 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Thank you for responding to everything. It all looks good to me. My only remaining point is that the citation for the first
Nova's Red Room performance does not support the songs. The archived citation (at least for me) goes to an overview of different articles on the site. I do see a link to an article about her performing "
We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together" there, but that does not appear to be archived. Once that has been addressed, I will be more than happy to support this FLC for promotion.
Aoba47 (
talk)
16:26, 1 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Unfortunately, I had a feeling that would be the case. I tried to either get access to a better archived version of the original source or to find a different citation, but I did not have any luck with either. Removing it would be the best option. I approach this kind of list as containing all of the notable live performances of a particular artist, rather than being an exhaustive list so since I think that it is okay that this performance does not make it due to a lack of a citation. I did not look through newspapers so maybe that would help, but I think this is the right choice for now.
Apologies for the long response, but I do support this FLC for promotion based on the prose and I have struck my oppose.
Aoba47 (
talk)
17:34, 4 July 2024 (UTC)reply
I did look through Newspaper.com, ProQuest for potential news sources to no avail. I'll try to continue looking for a replacement ref anyways. Thanks so much for your constructive feedback :)
Ippantekina (
talk)
04:01, 5 July 2024 (UTC)reply
I am just glad that I could help. Thank you for your patience with my review. Best of luck with finding a replacement reference.
Aoba47 (
talk)
14:51, 5 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Comments (ec with last editor)
"She has additionally performed in various festivals, awards shows, benefit concerts, and sporting events" - unless usage in US English is different, I would suggest this should be "She has additionally performed at various festivals, awards shows, benefit concerts, and sporting events". Certainly in the variety of English spoken in my neck of the woods, one does not perform "in" a music festival. But, as I said, maybe US usage is different......?
Any particular reason why the first three tables have the name of the event first and the dates second, and then suddenly it switches to the other way round?
I followed other examples like
List of Lady Gaga live performances, and if I rationalize that myself, each concert tour (the content of the first 3 tables) is a combination of various concerts and hence the tour names being listed first makes more sense; plus dates are presented in rage so including them first is confusing imo. Meanwhile other events (TV, radio, awards) are one-off events so it makes more sense to sort it chronologically by including the event date first.
Ippantekina (
talk)
03:48, 27 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Did she not perform any songs at "Trails West!" and some of the others, or is it just unknown what she performed? If the latter, I would suggest putting "unknown" or similar, as the dash honestly looks like it means "none"
Is there any value in that songs column being sortable given that it will only ever sort based on the first song listed?
I can think of the number of songs but that is not the most helpful. Do you think the "Performed song(s)" column should be unsortable?
Ippantekina (
talk)
13:42, 27 June 2024 (UTC)reply
TV show titles starting with "The" should sort based om the next word in the name
Why are some of the benefit special titles in italics and others not? For example, Children In Need (a UK telethon) is in italics but Stand Up to Cancer (also a UK telethon) is not
Apologies, one thing I missed. TV show titles should also sort based on the next word if they start with "The". Currently this seems to be the case for some but not all --
ChrisTheDude (
talk)
10:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Most sources in the article are reliable. Some are acceptable primary sources (i.e.
iHeartRadio source to confirm a show at the
iHeartRadio Music Festival). Some are long-established local newspapers related to the city where Swift played. However, there are some sources that don't appear to be reliable at a first glance.
Thanks, I'll get back to you asap. My preliminary comments are that while Bustle, Us Weekly are not the most reliable for BLP or commentary, in this usage as reports of popular culture they should suffice.
Ippantekina (
talk)
03:05, 12 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Since Skyshifter didn't do spotchecks, I used a random number generator to check 10, and found some consistent problems:
23, 67, 218, 236 - good
72, 125, 155, 189, 248 - does not explicitly state the date
48 - does not explicitly state the date, does not say it's part of the Fearless tour, implies she sang more than the two songs listed
I do believe that the information given is accurate; why wouldn't it be. But over half of the randomly selected refs don't actually say the date for the event they're citing, as far as I can see, which I feel is problematic. Please see what you can do to address this in general (presumably this is an issue for more than just these specific refs). --PresN00:28, 20 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Generally news coverage of awards shows/TV like 72, 125, 155 are published pretty much immediately after the events happen; of course articles that explicitly mention the dates do exist so I hope to find alternatives asap. 48 does imply she sang more than the 2 songs listed but since it doesn't say more, why would we include more; plus the "Part of the Fearless Tour" is cited by ref 35.
Ippantekina (
talk)
16:54, 20 July 2024 (UTC)reply