Talk:New Year's Day (Taylor Swift song)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: TheSandDoctor (talk · contribs) 04:05, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

It's the new year...and this is about a new year...so I guess I'll review it because why not? . Review inbound, starting within 24 hours. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 04:05, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Lead

• The lead looks good.

Production

• "that do not filter out the clicking sounds" -- could this be clarified/explained further in prose? I understand what you mean as I do have some recording experience, but a brief explainer or rewording would probably help general audiences.

• Reworded... but I hope it doesn't read awkwardly, HĐ (talk) 13:01, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

My apologies, but this is going to have to wait until tomorrow to go further. Tonight didn't work out. Apologies for making this multi-day, but I must head off for the evening. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 05:48, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

It is completely fine! Just take your time and don't feel the need to rush, HĐ (talk) 05:53, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Composition

• I am conflicted as to whether New Year's Eve should be wikilinked; it seems like a glaring overcite not to do it, but also like it might fall under WP:OVERCITE...but also the "However, try to be conscious of your own demographic biases" line sort of leans towards linking it once somewhere...hmmm. What are your thoughts? I don't think if it was linked that it would be raised as an issue at FAC.

• I have no issue to link New Year's Eve... because it is arbitrary to identify whether it is overcite or not. HĐ (talk) 13:01, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Release

• "...in tribute host Jimmy Fallon's recently passed mother" is missing a word. Perhaps "... in tribute to host Jimmy Fallon's recently passed mother"?

•  Done

• "Swift performed the song on piano in a mash-up with "Long Live"..." -- Where? This seems a bit disjointed flow wise.

•  Done

Critical Reception

• "...who highlighted its acoustic production contrasting with the synth-heavy production of Reputation" -- seems to be missing a word and could probably use some rewording. Perhaps "...who highlighted its acoustic production which contrasts with the generally synth-heavy production of Reputation" or something of the like?

•  Done

• "...for highlighting Swift's vocals unburdened by heavy electronics..." is appears to be missing a comma. Should it be "...for highlighting Swift's vocals, unburdened by heavy electronics..." or something similar?

•  Done

Commercial performance

Did it chart in any other markets? If so, these should probably be mentioned here in some form?

No, as it was released only in the U.S. (and probably because Reputation was filled with bombastic-sounding songs), it did not chart very successfully, HĐ (talk) 13:01, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Conclusion

Overall, this is a well written article that I don't think it that far off from being ready for FAC. I am placing it  On hold for the time being though whilst the above are addressed. Thank you for your understanding in this review being slightly more delayed than I had anticipated/intended, HĐ. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 04:48, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the review! I have addressed your concerns as above :) HĐ (talk) 13:01, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

@HĐ: Looks good to me,  Passed! I would highly encourage sending this to DYK and then FA. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 14:17, 7 January 2021 (UTC)