Talk:Erynn Chambers

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:43, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

( Comment or view )

( Article history links:

• Erynn Chambers
• Beer Beer, Truck Truck

)

• ... that the country song "Beer Beer, Truck Truck" was based on a viral TikTok video by Erynn Chambers intended to satirize country music? "My first reaction was like, 'Yeah, she makes a really good point,' " he says. "But my second reaction was kind of like, 'OK, it'd be fun to take this as a challenge and see if I can write a legitimate song using her hook up at the top.' "

• ALT0a: ... that a viral TikTok video posted by Erynn Chambers intended to satirize country music led to the creation of "Beer Beer, Truck Truck"?
• ALT1: ... that social media influencer Erynn Chambers is listed as a co-author of the country song "Beer Beer, Truck Truck" due to a viral video she made intended to satirize country music? It wasn't until after it went viral that he recorded a full demo, and got in touch with Chambers to make her an official co-writer on the song. She's officially an ASCAP member now, so her credit is legit.
• Reviewed: Darby Camp, John Olson
• Comment: My first double nomination!

Created by Theleekycauldron (talk). Self-nominated at 09:55, 21 September 2021 (UTC).

• Both articles:

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Epicgenius (talk) 13:33, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

• The nomination was pulled from the main page 47 minutes after it was posted due to an Articles for Deletion nomination of Erynn Chambers. Reopening the nomination, but putting it on hold until the AfD is settled; should the article survive, it should then be eligible for a full run on the main page given how briefly it was on the main page. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:24, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

• @BlueMoonset: looks like the discussion was closed as keep theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 07:31, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

• Thanks, theleekycauldron. The AfD has indeed closed as a snow keep. Restoring Epicgenius's earlier approval tick. (I haven't checked the article myself; this is just a procedural restore.) I expect this will be promoted in due course. Sorry for the delay! BlueMoonset (talk) 23:41, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

T:DYK/P1

Contested deletion

The page is neutrally worded. We have several articles on TikTok personalities, all of which can be found at Category:TikTokers. What exactly is the issue here? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 00:03, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Lead

• User:Beccaynr Why are you deleting my work from the article? You have removed my links from the lead. Every article on Wikipedia has references in the lead - but you have left it unreferenced. You also removed my reference for the song signing of George Binge, and placed it where it suited your preference. This seems like WP:OWN behavior. I encourage you to allow others to improve the article. You have undone and moved all of the work I have done. Lightburst (talk) 16:33, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

I did not undo or move all of the work you have done [1], [2], so I would appreciate it if you would strike this allegation from your comment. To answer your question, in the first edit summary, I stated, "ce WP:LEADCREATE, rm unnecessary links, move link to text it supports", and in the second edit summary, I stated, "rearrange text, emphasize notability of Chambers."

To explain further, the American Songwriter link did not support the text in the lead about Chambers being credited as a co-writer, and the NBCNews link both seemed like insufficient support and unnecessary for the lead text it was added to, given the broader support available from the collection of sources in the article, and per the WP:LEADCREATE explanatory supplement, e.g. Keeping references out of the lead makes it easier to read, and keeps it free of clutter and easier to edit. [...] While not usually required, we often include a few references with any controversial content in the lead to prevent edit wars. A link that does not fully support the lead text does not seem helpful if the purpose is to help prevent an edit war, despite the content otherwise being supported in the main article. Per MOS:LEADCITE, e.g. Because the lead will usually repeat information that is in the body, editors should balance the desire to avoid redundant citations in the lead with the desire to aid readers in locating sources for challengeable material.

I also made a slight move of new text about Birge (which may or may not be a WP:COATRACK issue, because this article is about Chambers and there is a separate article about the Beer Beer, Truck Truck song) to help keep the emphasis on the notability of Chambers and her accomplishments, while preserving the new content added. Having the paragraph end with a focus on Birge seemed to distract from what is notable about Chambers, so I moved it. Per the Writing about women essay, we are encouraged to be mindful about the balance of the notability of a woman's own accomplishments and her relationships. I hope this helps clarify my edits, but please let me know if you have any further questions or concerns. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 18:09, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

It is a really long answer to say your way is the right way. You omitted this from the lead guideline: There is no rule forbidding references in the lead, And the rest of your wall of text just justifies editing the article to suit your preferences. I was actively editing and improving the article. My next move would have been to use the shorter ref in the infobox and the lead. Rather than stepping on your edits or editing to my preference I came here. Lightburst (talk) 18:30, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

I think making this discussion about me is not helpful for discussing the content of the article. I have tried to provide further explanation for why I made the changes, with a focus on the specific content and my interpretation of how the MOS supports the change, and I would appreciate it if further discussion here would focus on the content. It does not seem necessary to add references to the lead because the information does not appear to be controversial or subject to edit-warring, and the specific references added do not appear to fully support the text. The newly-added text was slightly moved at the end of the article because it seems helpful for keeping the focus of the article on Chambers. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 19:32, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi, @Beccaynr and Lightburst! Seems we have to clear a few things up. First, Lightburst, I know that it can be frustrating to have edits reverted, or moved around, when they're made in good faith to make the article better. However, I would encourage you both to keep an open ear for what the other has to say. Also, i appreciate you adding the infobox, it's a good addition—I was fiddling around with the colour, but that didn't seem to work out.

As for the policies at play here. I do think that the article should mainly focus on Chambers and her work, and while I'm sure no one meant to take attention away from that, I think that information about Birge should probably be included somewhere in the middle of the paragraph, as an aside, instead of being the concluding point. The reason that Beer Beer, Truck Truck has a section here is because Chambers was involved with its creation—so ideally, the article should focus on how the song relates to Chambers.

Second, to talk about citations in the lead. It is a balancing act, and while there isn't a rule forbidding citations in the lead, it's true, I don't think that the lead is likely enough to be challenged that it's necessary to include a citation there. Plus, given the rather small size of the lead, citations can give the lead a cluttered feel. It is a stylistic choice, and there's no hard and fast rules on this—but I think the correct choice would be to include Lightburst's work in the body, instead of the lead. Lightburst, I really appreciate you taking this to the talk page—there's plenty of contributions you've made and can still make to the article, so I wouldn't get discouraged. There's always much to do, and i hope to work with you to do it! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 21:05, 10 October 2021 (UTC)