This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Taylor Swift(pictured) is the first act to have three albums with opening week sales of one million copies in the US?
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taylor Swift, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Taylor Swift on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Taylor SwiftWikipedia:WikiProject Taylor SwiftTemplate:WikiProject Taylor SwiftTaylor Swift articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Country Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to country music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Country MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Country MusicTemplate:WikiProject Country MusicCountry Music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
This article was copy edited by Twofingered Typist, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on August 19, 2019.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles
Previous copyedits:
/
This article was copy edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors on 12 December, 2015.
This article was copy edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors on August 31, 2016.
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
Track 5 (Taylor Swift) was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 6 March 2021 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Taylor Swift. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
I know this has been discussed many times previously but it makes no sense to not have a "personal life" section here. It's commonplace for almost all celebrity profiles. I understand this potentially makes this rife for gossip, however that then makes the article bias for protecting the subject. It seems the only reason a personal life section doesn't exist here is because fans are running the article and deciding how it portrays the subject, thus making is a completely biased and useless article to have an on encloypedia.
The argument that her personal life is scattered throughout the career timeline doesn't make sense, in theory then all information should be one single block without accordions put upon the reader to decipher what to ingest. The omission of this section seems to compromise the entire legitimacy of the article as a whole. 109.255.14.34 (talk) 16:11, 15 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This! No one wants to do anything about the fact that this article is literally reads like a fan-made biopic. She’s untouchable. No one can say or write anything critical of her. 2601:C6:8301:84B0:C071:5E18:217D:F88D (talk) 18:44, 18 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Long time reader etc etc. I only came here to read the "Personal life" section as finally I gave into my curiosity on how this larger than life artist life is. And I came to this very comment section to see why it was missing... I wasn't after gossip or anything but the regular Wikipedia write up destilled through the process. 2A02:1406:5:DC19:4D70:CF0D:89CC:118E (talk) 17:39, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
no, you're wrong and have a lame justification for not having a Personal Life section that summarized but links to that biased and poorly written page. Really wrong how the Wikipedia police pick and choose their little biases. The favoritism and bias in how this site is moderated is misguided at best. (2603:90D8:440:CB:AD8F:7ED0:10A6:6B98 (talk) 20:44, 27 January 2024 (UTC))Reply[reply]
Fortunately, this is the site that anyone can edit, and that includes making suggestions. So let's hear how you think the article should be improved and how to go about it. Would be far more productive for you to offer a plan, unless your goal here is to rant about Wikipedia being "biased" just because something does not match with your worldview. Acalamari 10:01, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think there should be a section that includes a link to Public image of Taylor Swift but then also abridges that article for those who do not want to look further. Jwilli39 (talk) 15:10, 14 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Those links do not lead to a full personal life section, I think it's clear someone should make a personal life section that is respectful.
If a celebrity is trending on social media constantly, it's rather embarrassing for Wikipedia to not have a complete article.
I searched a few other names of major celebrities, and I couldn’t find another that was exempt from this. Nate Rybner 08:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naterybner (talk • contribs)
Witchcraft Allegations
Why haven't the witchcraft allegations surrounding Taylor Swift been addressed yet on Wikipedia? 76.64.181.63 (talk) 01:48, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Cause that's dumb….. Johnsosd (talk) 20:29, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Because they are patently false. Please read the news for once. Jwilli39 (talk) 15:03, 14 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Alleged “hobbies” that appear to have a single source as a joke are not Wikipedia material. Nate Rybner 07:53, 31 January 2024 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naterybner (talk • contribs)
New image
What do you all say about changing the infobox image to one of the Golden Globe ones?
Taylor's Verison vs. Taylor's version (MOS:MUSICCAPS)
Per MOS:MUSICCAPS, it states: For titles of works and releases, descriptive phrases in parentheses or after dashes, such as "remix", "acoustic version" and "remastered", should not be considered part of song titles and should not be capitalized. So, per this, shouldn't the re-recordings be credited on Wikipedia as Taylor's version vs. Taylor's Version? livelikemusic(TALK!) 15:19, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"Taylor's Version" is not a descriptive phrase like "remix" or "acoustic version". Rather, it is a part of the title. glman (talk) 15:30, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Criticism section
I believe there have been enough third party reliable sources criticizing her carbonemissions to warrant a discussion if such a section should be included in the article. Seems to be signifigant as there is now a legal battle related to her jet useage. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 20:35, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
New article for Area which made the jeans that Swift wore at this years Super Bowl
I just created an article for Area which designed the jeans that Swift wore at the Super Bowl this year. She has worn other clothing by the brand as well. Any help with expansion would be appreciated. Thriley (talk) 19:52, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Proposal for TFA
Hello everyone. I would like to inform you that I am planning this article for WP:TFA again. The page appeared on the Main Page last August 23, 2019 coinciding with the release of her album Lover. The TFA rule states that five years must pass from the date featured on TFA before having a re-run. This makes five years from that date be on August 23, 2024, and now's the time I propose the TFA to be featured on her 35th birthday (December 13, 2024). What do you guys think? And does the article still meet the Featured Article criteria? ScarletViolet (talk • contribs) 04:22, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
According to WP:FACR, is this page fully neutral? Some biased language can be seen in this page. But overall, I think it still meets the FA criteria.
P.S. I'm new to Wikipedia, so correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks! Cineyas (talk) 12:20, 20 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think some additions to the article lately have been on the WP:RECENT side, which is somewhat inevitable due to the amount of news articles and such published about her daily, but I also applaud the good work moving them to other pages like her cultural impact or her political impact as appropriate, or removing them in other cases. I think with continued effort, there's no reason why we cannot maintain the FA status. Incidentally, last time I proposed a Taylor-Swift related article to Did You Know, there were complains that the Main Page had too much Taylor Swift. I hope it wouldn't be the case with this TFA. Shuipzv3 (talk) 15:03, 20 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Don’t listen to them buddy. (we need more TayTay on the Main page) Brachy08(Talk) 03:58, 21 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think this article should be excessively worked on should we decide to feature it as TFA. This page has changed tremendously since its FA promotion in 2016, so I can see that the prose is occasionally plagued with recentism and puffery. Ippantekina (talk) 02:14, 22 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
When I have sought to reduce the TFA re-running period, it's so that FAs like this one can appear more often. This article will be significantly more to Main Page readers than most of what appears there.
I did a thorough read of this article in January, and can confirm that it was up to current FA standards (the same as I would use reviewing at FAC) at that time. It's had lots of editing since then, but it also looks like there is a group of experienced editors watching it. Sdkbtalk 23:00, 1 March 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
RCA Records?
Swift did sign a deal with RCA Records but it was a "development deal" and not an official record deal. Based on this information, Swift was not an artist officially signed with RCA, so this label should be removed from the infobox. Ippantekina (talk) 02:12, 22 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Do you have a source for this information that I could look at? Jwilli39 (talk) 05:23, 22 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's in the article: "After performing original songs at an RCA Records showcase, Swift, then 13 years old, was given an artist development deal and began making frequent trips to Nashville with her mother."
Also, according to a source that I found, NBC: (Swift) "I played [RCA] a few songs. And they said that they wanted to sign me to a development deal. A development deal is an in-between record deal. It's like, a guy saying that he wants to date you but not be your boyfriend. (laugh) You know, they don't wanna sign you to an actual record deal or put an album out on you. They wanna watch your progress for a year." Ippantekina (talk) 06:35, 22 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hey @Ronherry! I'm not sure why you think the claim that flight data is public is "improper synthesis". The first article from Rolling Stone, in the body, not quoting Sweeney, says "Taylor Swift’s lawyers sent a cease and desist letter to a college student who uses public flight data to track private jet usage, suggesting his social media accounts were aiding Swift’s stalkers and threatening her safety." The second, from BBC, says "Jack Sweeney uses publicly available data to track the take-offs and landings of planes belonging to the wealthy and posts them one day later." These are reliable sources, stating that the data is public. Please, explain why you feel it shouldn't be included? It seems rather POV to not include it. glman (talk) 01:51, 5 March 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm not Ronherry, but I agree that calling the data "public" here is a glaring overstatement. If it was so public and so available, then Sweeney would not be drawn to collate it and post it. He's posting the flight info because the public does not generally know how to process the data. Binksternet (talk) 03:07, 5 March 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Binksternet - Two reliable sources plainly call it public. Do we have sourcing to indicate it is not private? glman (talk) 04:57, 5 March 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
level-4 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.svg){kind=small}
