Template talk:Taylor Swift
 | This template was considered for merging with Template:Taylor Swift songs on 2017 December 1. The result of the discussion was "no consensus". |
 | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
Today Was a Fairytale
[edit]Could whoever keeps changing this song's position to "Other songs" instead of "Singles" please explain his/her reasoning? The song is officially a single, I don't understand the problem here. The Mach Turtle (talk) 18:49, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
Dates and Cottagecore
[edit]@117.4.246.27: Right, it is not uncommon for dates to be included with a book or an album, or, for that matter, a concert. Second, cottagecore is a major theme of the works of Swift in 2020. Therefore, my edits were justified. In fact, the link to cottagecore was there for a while (since May this year) before you decided to remove it. Moreover, just because certain things have been there for a long time does not mean they should stay there. Appealing to tradition is a logical fallacy. Nerd271 (talk) 05:46, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Nerd271: My point is--how would adding subcategories and release dates increase the accessibility (not necessarily what is written, but overall, would it make this template easier to navigate) of this template? I'll leave the cottagecore discussion for other editors as well. 117.4.246.27 (talk) 06:55, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
- Because it makes everything easier to navigate. Things are better defined and organized. Nerd271 (talk) 14:41, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
- If someone wants to know what date City of Lover happened on or what date Taylor Swift was released, they can click on the article. Instead of looking at what studio albums Swift has released, you would be looking at what studio albums she has released and when they were released, and I don't think that information is necessary. Dđ¶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 16:43, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
- What if they do not want to load an entire Wikipedia article for that? Besides, this template is quite literally about her career, so dates are clearly in order.
- Furthermore, my further categorization of the template items has not been addressed. I will bring it back if no one offers an explanation. Nerd271 (talk) 19:31, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
- The categorization is also unnecessary. The navbox is fine as it is currently. Also - loading an article takes two seconds, it's not some big inconvenience. Dđ¶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 19:57, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
- If someone wants to know what date City of Lover happened on or what date Taylor Swift was released, they can click on the article. Instead of looking at what studio albums Swift has released, you would be looking at what studio albums she has released and when they were released, and I don't think that information is necessary. Dđ¶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 16:43, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
- Because it makes everything easier to navigate. Things are better defined and organized. Nerd271 (talk) 14:41, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Nope. The categorization is necessary. How fast an article loads depends on the contents and your Internet connection. Nerd271 (talk) 03:05, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
The repeated use of Taylor's Version
[edit]Taylor's Version does not need to be put after the title of every rerecording. Just once in the list box. It's redundant beyond belief. It would make the template 3 times as large once all of the albums are commissioned. Just once. 130.156.22.252 (talk) 16:16, 9 November 2023 (UTC)