Talk:Coney Island (Taylor Swift song)

Coney Island (Taylor Swift song) has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: January 6, 2025. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Coney Island (Taylor Swift song) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Songs

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs 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.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong

Taylor Swift Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Alternative music Low‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is part of WikiProject Alternative music, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage of articles relating to alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.Alternative musicWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative musicTemplate:WikiProject Alternative musicAlternative music
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rock music Low‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock 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.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Roots music Low‑importance

	Music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Roots music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to roots, folk and traditional folk 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.Roots musicWikipedia:WikiProject Roots musicTemplate:WikiProject Roots musicRoots music
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Music Low‑importance

	United States portal 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Music portal This article is supported by WikiProject American music.

Women in Music Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Single cover

A single cover for "Coney Island" has circulated the internet. Though the OP of this poster said it is "official", anyone who happens to know the exact source of this cover is very much appreciated. HĐ (talk) 03:38, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HĐ: I googled "Coney Island Taylor Swift single art" and there were no other sources that used this. As well, the song didn't have a separate release from the album, so it shouldn’t have cover art. All of this leads me to believe that this is fanmade. D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 04:06, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. This file was used various sites, in here. Also it is used in Genius. Camilasdandelions (talk) 03:59, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Passed. Locust member (talk) 17:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Coney Island (Taylor Swift song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Medxvo (talk · contribs) 16:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Locust member (talk · contribs) 15:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Medvxo, I'm back to review another one! Locust member (talk) 15:13, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking this on!! Medxvo (talk) 15:17, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

In September 2020, Swift, Antonoff, and Dessner assembled at Long Pond Studio in Hudson Valley to film - "in the Hudson Valley"

The result was Swift's ninth studio album, Evermore, which she described as a "sister record" to Folklore. - "The result was Swift's ninth studio album, Evermore, which she described as a "sister record" to Folklore. It was surprise-released on December 11, 2020, with "Coney Island" appearing as its ninth track. Republic Records released it to US adult album alternative radio on January 18, 2021." would put this at the end of the first paragraph in Background and release

I would make the second paragraph in Background and release a new section titled Commercial performance and put it before Critical reception. Long enough to have its own section, and if the reader were just looking at headings, they wouldn't know its commercial performance was talked about.

I believe the wikilink of Atlanta would fall under MOS:OVERLINKING as it is a "major example" of a municipality, same with London.
- The four points should be done, but the commercial performance and live performance sections usually come after the critical reception section. How do the changes look, Locust member? Medxvo (talk) 17:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, looks good! Locust member (talk) 17:24, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~wikilink Neil McCormick~~ just fixed this myself

Spot check I looked thru as I read mostly, but here's a couple random ones.

9 Y

14 Y

21 Y

22 Y

copyvio high of 31%, passes

Broad, it covers the article's main aspects.

Neutral point of view for sure.

Is stable for the most part, one random deletion in November but nothing in the past 14 days.

Illustrated with images that have the correct licensing.

Overall

I am happy to now ✓ Pass this article! After my original comments there was only one wikilink that was needed but I did it myself as it was a simple change. Nice work on another good article, Medxvo!