This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Brandon Brown (racing driver) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
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 sourced must 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. |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Let's recap the situation: starting in September 2021 or so, crowds at various sports games in the US began to chant "Fuck Joe Biden". That's what some in the crowd were chanting when Brandon Brown did his post-victory interview at the Sparks 300 race in Alabama on October 2. The NBC interviewer, probably just in an attempt to keep things classy, claimed that what they were yelling was actually "Let's go, Brandon". "Let's go Brandon" was then quickly picked up as a way to express the phrase "Fuck Joe Biden" without having to swear, i.e. a minced oath; or maybe, for some, just an in-joke. So now Brandon Brown has become, at least for a brief period of time, unwittingly involved in a political epithet. (Though he doesn't seem too bothered by it.) All of this has been covered by reliable sources, but at least one editor has been trying to keep this information out of this article, for no obvious reason. Can anyone explain why this shouldn't be here? Korny O'Near ( talk) 02:48, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
{@ Cable10291: You're missing the point entirely. Can you answer any of the questions I asked earlier? It is an insignificant, unencyclopedic occurrence that so far has had no effect on his career and, as Mrschimpf points out, could have happened to anyone in that field. Wikipedia is not a soapbox. If Fuck Joe Biden isn't worthy of an article, then this article has no business including it. GhostOfDanGurney ( talk) 06:23, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
So far the only argument you guys have presented lies somewhere between WP:ILIKEIT and WP:USEFUL. GhostOfDanGurney ( talk) 15:06, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
It's clear this is going nowhere, so I have opened a RfC below. GhostOfDanGurney ( talk) 16:58, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
One user continues to remove this content under pretenses that it’s not from a reliable source or that it’s contentious material about a living person. There’s enough evidence that this situation happened to convince a jury of it, if necessary which, is well beyond Wikipedia’s standards. There’s no reason we can’t cite the fact of what happened. Wikipedia should be a place where people come to find out what happened and then they can form their own opinion as to whether what happened was good or bad. There’s no legitimate contention about whether this happened.
Bagofscrews (
talk) 23:25, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
There are some reliable sources such as BBC which have covered the story. Haris920 ( talk) 07:09, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
BBC article entitle, "How Let's go Brandon became an anti-Biden conservative heckle" [1] Jd1schroeder ( talk) 18:46, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
@
Korny O'Near: Thank you for making the blurb more concise without removing the sources. :]
GhostOfDanGurney (
talk) 17:18, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Should the article about NASCAR driver Brandon Brown include a paragraph about the "Let's go Brandon"/"Fuck Joe Biden" meme such as this? [1] GhostOfDanGurney ( talk) 16:57, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
This situation is gaining Notoriety by the day and really up to be on the page. user: bagofscrews
This situation is gaining Notoriety by the day and really up to be on the page. Bagofscrews ( talk) 23:28, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
An article should not give undue weight to minor aspects of its subject, but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight proportional to its treatment in the body of reliable, published material on the subject. For example, discussion of isolated events, criticisms, or news reports about a subject may be verifiable and impartial, but still disproportionate to their overall significance to the article topic. This is a concern especially in relation to recent events that may be in the news.This appears to support excluding this minor recent event from this BLP at this time. In addition, the WP:BLP policy includes,
it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives; the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment.This minor event only appears to be tangentially related to the subject of the article, and seems more related to the apparent behavior of the crowd and the resulting internet reaction to it, and thus appears sensationalist in the context of this article. In addition, the inclusion seems to risk creating a WP:COATRACK article, i.e.
that gets away from its nominal subject, and instead gives more attention to one or more connected but tangential subjects.If sufficient independent and reliable sources exist, it may be possible to create encyclopedic content elsewhere on Wikipedia, but our policies do not appear to support inclusion here. Beccaynr ( talk) 01:54, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
The idea expressed in Eventualism—that every Wikipedia article is a work in progress, and that it is therefore okay for an article to be temporarily unbalanced because it will eventually be brought into shape—does not apply to biographies.Beccaynr ( talk) 06:04, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
The anti-Joe Biden phrase "Let's Go Brandon" spawned from a 2021 interview of Brown whereby the interviewer said "Fuck Joe Biden" chants by NASCAR spectators were "Let's Go Brandon" chants.) Brandon Brown himself contributed nothing much to the phrase, which was said by the interviewer, and then spread by people who oppose Biden. The chant is not support for Brandon Brown, it's a mockery of the media and Biden. As such it has little to do with Brown himself, and deserves small weight. starship .paint ( exalt) 15:21, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
To all the other Brandon’s out there, You’re welcome! Let’s go us- Brandon Brown. He's acknowledged it in a positive way. starship .paint ( exalt) 09:22, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Certainly Brown is part of the story of the meme but it's not, so far, part of Brown's story. -- Asartea Talk | Contribs 17:04, 26 October 2021 (UTC
I think this adds support for not including this content in his article, including per WP:BLPBALANCE, and how it states,And as for the real Brandon, things haven’t been so great. He drives for a short-staffed, underfunded team owned by his father. And while that win — his first career victory — was huge for him, the team has long struggled for sponsorship and existing partners have not been marketing the driver since the slogan.
Given their potential impact on biography subjects' lives, biographies must be fair to their subjects at all times.Beccaynr ( talk) 15:53, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
must be written conservatively. Beccaynr ( talk) 17:42, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
Let's keep US politics out of itis an WP:IDLI argument. feminist (+) 14:45, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
Beware of claims that rely on guilt by association, and biased, malicious or overly promotional content, including because the sources indicate this is not similar to a candy bar; in my later review of sources in the Stavast AfD discussion [7], this appears related to "Fuck Joe Biden" chants, also previously discussed in the Fuck Joe Biden AfD that closed as a snow delete on September 27, 2021. Due to this context, I am also concerned about how WP:AVOIDVICTIM may be implicated if this article becomes a WP:COATRACK for tangential and contentious recent content, as well as the care we need to take for people who
are not well known, even if they are notable enough for their own article, because WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE states,
In such cases, exercise restraint and include only material relevant to the person's notability, focusing on high-quality secondary sources. [...] Material that may adversely affect a person's reputation should be treated with special care [...], which may apply particularly to Kelli Stavast. Beccaynr ( talk) 14:53, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
clear that he was a bystander to the whole thingseems like support for exclusion per the WP:MINORASPECT and WP:COATRACK discussions above. To clarify how I think WP:BLPBALANCE applies, the sources presented across multiple discussions currently pending, including at Redirects for discussion, seem to indicate a form of 'malice', e.g. "Fuck Joe Biden" chants, and 'promotional content', e.g. the recent meme/minced oath and song, with which Brandon Brown is only associated with as a bystander, not as an active or voluntary participant in "Fuck Joe Biden" chants nor as an active promoter of the political meme, the song, or the POV about Stavast's role in the event. I think this would be a different discussion if he was more than a bystander to the tangentially-related content, but as a bystander, WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE also seems to apply to him, if his BLP becomes a hook for WP:SOAPBOX political and commercial activity he has not actively or voluntarily engaged with or accepted. Overall, because this is a BLP, my view is informed by how WP:BLP policy states,
Biographies of living persons ("BLPs") must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy.Beccaynr ( talk) 19:29, 20 October 2021 (UTC) And more specifically, the related statement in WP:BLPBALANCE that includes
Given their potential impact on biography subjects' lives, biographies must be fair to their subjects at all times.Beccaynr ( talk) 19:43, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
And now a U.S. Representative,
Bill Posey, has used the phrase "Let's go Brandon" in a speech on the house floor, which has led to
coverage in Mediaite, which remarked that Brandon Brown "has unwittingly become one of the most well-known athletes in the country". Leaving this information out of this article looks increasingly untenable.
Korny O'Near (
talk) 15:18, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
There is some consensus that Mediaite is only marginally reliable, and should be avoided where better sources are available. Editors consider the source to inappropriately blur news and opinion, and due weight should be considered if no other reliable sources support a given statement.But per the discussion at the Let’s Go Brandon redirect, after WP:COPYVIO was removed [8], information has been added to Public image of Joe Biden. To be clear, my concern here is focused on Wikipedia policy, including how the WP:BLP, WP:NPOV and WP:NOTNEWS policies apply to this article for a recent contentious event, and the general design of Wikipedia as an encyclopedia. Beccaynr ( talk) 15:47, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
Articles and content about living people are required to meet an especially high standard, as they may otherwise be libellous. My concern, as I have also discussed in the Kelli Stavast AfD, is that "Let's Go Brandon" isn't simply about Biden, it is also making allegations that disparage Stavast, who is entitled to protection by WP:BLP policy. Beccaynr ( talk) 01:43, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
Given their potential impact on biography subjects' lives, biographies must be fair to their subjects at all times.His BLP is focused on his racing career, with no sourcing I have seen about political activity - I think decisions like this are case-by-case, and in this context, policy does not seem to support adding the content here. Beccaynr ( talk) 03:26, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
@ GhostOfDanGurney: @ Beccaynr: Given the vastly increased reception, the page views remaining in a totally different dimension and the 100% "Support" quote in the last 10 days, do you still uphold your opposition? -- KnightMove ( talk) 10:43, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
Was going to suggest a change that his degree be shown as in "Communication Studies" a more specific academic discipline that "Communication"...but I get that there's a lot of attention being given to the "LGB" thing, so I understand — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.83.250.169 ( talk) 18:31, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
@ Frank Anchor, Korny O'Near, Alternative Ultimate Dragon, and HeroicSSD: Stop edit warring and collaborate.
Didn't one of you call for me to receive a topic ban here? |
- "Ghost of Dan Gurney" 15:30, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
|
My concern is that Korny O'Near decided upon himself to add irrelevant and minor information in his edit when HeroicSSD's version said the same things, but more concisely and without disclosing Brown's affiliations. I disagree that Korny O'Near's version is from a neutral point of view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alternative Ultimate Dragon ( talk • contribs) 15:50, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
It appears to celebrate the party affiliation disclosure. Why other reason did it have to be added? It was a very very minor aspect of the article. Irrelevant. Previous version before you touch it more concise. Alternative Ultimate Dragon ( talk) 16:06, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
Honestly, I struggle to see what relevance any of this political stuff has to do with a section entitled "NASCAR" to begin with. Alternative Ultimate Dragon ( talk) 04:27, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
Potential COI: I just recently made the connection that I was a childhood friend of Brandon.
Humblebrag aside, before I realized I knew him, the lead seemed to me not to suffice as a summary of the article. It is clear that Let's Go Brandon makes a reasonable fraction of his notability and has its own section. Omitting it from the lead seems outright misleading. Although it was not his intention to be associated with a political chant, it should at least be mentioned with something like "An interview after his 2021 Sparks 300 win gave rise to the political slogan Let's Go Brandon", maybe with more context. 93 ( talk) 05:42, 28 December 2021 (UTC) edited for spelling 15:40, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
Also, speaking of encyclopedic, I feel I need to point out that on Wikipedia, we have "lead" paragraphs, not "lede" paragraphs ( WP:NOTLEDE). Use that info how you please. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" 14:59, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
News is still moving fast on the whole topic and I'm sure it'll need to settle down before there's a long term consensus, but I had some thoughts on things to keep an eye on. The big one is the timing of the NYT/Newsweek pieces relative to when the LGBCoin deal was done, and whether those were meant to provide cover for the upcoming announcement of the deal. The coincidence of the use of "Let's Go America" by both Brandon in these articles, and the LGBCoin website (which changed to remove a number of political references around the time the sponsorship deal was announces) could be easily interpreted as a smoking gun. Not a lot of reliable sources making this connection yet (we can't and shouldn't go WP:OR with this), but Nick Bromberg touched on it in this article. As is this note that BMS has retained the services of LEVICK crisis management PR (also worth pointing out, this article quotes Koutoulas as the timing being the opposite direction, reaching back out after the NYT piece). I think there's going to be something worth mentioning about all of this to make the article complete and neutral (which also means not solely written from Brandon's perspective, WP:NOTPR), but I tend to be cautious where WP:BLP is concerned and wanted to solicit some other thoughts to build consensus for what (if anything) is notable and neutral for addition. Bakkster Man ( talk) 16:20, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Brown’s extensive search for a willing sponsor concluded(sourced to the team's own release, not an independent source) is an example of how this all relates to what reliable sources are saying about what actually happened with this sponsor deal. And I know this will all be contentious, hence coming here to gauge consensus (Edit: and gather WP:BESTSOURCES) first. Bakkster Man ( talk) 18:16, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Brown is clearly choosing to get political and let the side of his car speak now. And it's now hard to go back and read the Times article with a straight face. It's very unlikely that negotiations for this sponsorship materialized out of nowhere over the holidays in less than two weeks after the article was published.But just as we shouldn't repeat Bromberg's statement at face value, we can't take the team and sponsor's statements at face value either. We will need to address the controversy at some point: why was the sponsor announced and then unapproved? And the better, more reliable sources we have to cite such a description (may not exist yet) the better. Bakkster Man ( talk) 19:26, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Brandon Brown (racing driver) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
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 sourced must 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 rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Let's recap the situation: starting in September 2021 or so, crowds at various sports games in the US began to chant "Fuck Joe Biden". That's what some in the crowd were chanting when Brandon Brown did his post-victory interview at the Sparks 300 race in Alabama on October 2. The NBC interviewer, probably just in an attempt to keep things classy, claimed that what they were yelling was actually "Let's go, Brandon". "Let's go Brandon" was then quickly picked up as a way to express the phrase "Fuck Joe Biden" without having to swear, i.e. a minced oath; or maybe, for some, just an in-joke. So now Brandon Brown has become, at least for a brief period of time, unwittingly involved in a political epithet. (Though he doesn't seem too bothered by it.) All of this has been covered by reliable sources, but at least one editor has been trying to keep this information out of this article, for no obvious reason. Can anyone explain why this shouldn't be here? Korny O'Near ( talk) 02:48, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
{@ Cable10291: You're missing the point entirely. Can you answer any of the questions I asked earlier? It is an insignificant, unencyclopedic occurrence that so far has had no effect on his career and, as Mrschimpf points out, could have happened to anyone in that field. Wikipedia is not a soapbox. If Fuck Joe Biden isn't worthy of an article, then this article has no business including it. GhostOfDanGurney ( talk) 06:23, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
So far the only argument you guys have presented lies somewhere between WP:ILIKEIT and WP:USEFUL. GhostOfDanGurney ( talk) 15:06, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
It's clear this is going nowhere, so I have opened a RfC below. GhostOfDanGurney ( talk) 16:58, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
One user continues to remove this content under pretenses that it’s not from a reliable source or that it’s contentious material about a living person. There’s enough evidence that this situation happened to convince a jury of it, if necessary which, is well beyond Wikipedia’s standards. There’s no reason we can’t cite the fact of what happened. Wikipedia should be a place where people come to find out what happened and then they can form their own opinion as to whether what happened was good or bad. There’s no legitimate contention about whether this happened.
Bagofscrews (
talk) 23:25, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
There are some reliable sources such as BBC which have covered the story. Haris920 ( talk) 07:09, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
BBC article entitle, "How Let's go Brandon became an anti-Biden conservative heckle" [1] Jd1schroeder ( talk) 18:46, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
@
Korny O'Near: Thank you for making the blurb more concise without removing the sources. :]
GhostOfDanGurney (
talk) 17:18, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Should the article about NASCAR driver Brandon Brown include a paragraph about the "Let's go Brandon"/"Fuck Joe Biden" meme such as this? [1] GhostOfDanGurney ( talk) 16:57, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
This situation is gaining Notoriety by the day and really up to be on the page. user: bagofscrews
This situation is gaining Notoriety by the day and really up to be on the page. Bagofscrews ( talk) 23:28, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
An article should not give undue weight to minor aspects of its subject, but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight proportional to its treatment in the body of reliable, published material on the subject. For example, discussion of isolated events, criticisms, or news reports about a subject may be verifiable and impartial, but still disproportionate to their overall significance to the article topic. This is a concern especially in relation to recent events that may be in the news.This appears to support excluding this minor recent event from this BLP at this time. In addition, the WP:BLP policy includes,
it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives; the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment.This minor event only appears to be tangentially related to the subject of the article, and seems more related to the apparent behavior of the crowd and the resulting internet reaction to it, and thus appears sensationalist in the context of this article. In addition, the inclusion seems to risk creating a WP:COATRACK article, i.e.
that gets away from its nominal subject, and instead gives more attention to one or more connected but tangential subjects.If sufficient independent and reliable sources exist, it may be possible to create encyclopedic content elsewhere on Wikipedia, but our policies do not appear to support inclusion here. Beccaynr ( talk) 01:54, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
The idea expressed in Eventualism—that every Wikipedia article is a work in progress, and that it is therefore okay for an article to be temporarily unbalanced because it will eventually be brought into shape—does not apply to biographies.Beccaynr ( talk) 06:04, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
The anti-Joe Biden phrase "Let's Go Brandon" spawned from a 2021 interview of Brown whereby the interviewer said "Fuck Joe Biden" chants by NASCAR spectators were "Let's Go Brandon" chants.) Brandon Brown himself contributed nothing much to the phrase, which was said by the interviewer, and then spread by people who oppose Biden. The chant is not support for Brandon Brown, it's a mockery of the media and Biden. As such it has little to do with Brown himself, and deserves small weight. starship .paint ( exalt) 15:21, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
To all the other Brandon’s out there, You’re welcome! Let’s go us- Brandon Brown. He's acknowledged it in a positive way. starship .paint ( exalt) 09:22, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Certainly Brown is part of the story of the meme but it's not, so far, part of Brown's story. -- Asartea Talk | Contribs 17:04, 26 October 2021 (UTC
I think this adds support for not including this content in his article, including per WP:BLPBALANCE, and how it states,And as for the real Brandon, things haven’t been so great. He drives for a short-staffed, underfunded team owned by his father. And while that win — his first career victory — was huge for him, the team has long struggled for sponsorship and existing partners have not been marketing the driver since the slogan.
Given their potential impact on biography subjects' lives, biographies must be fair to their subjects at all times.Beccaynr ( talk) 15:53, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
must be written conservatively. Beccaynr ( talk) 17:42, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
Let's keep US politics out of itis an WP:IDLI argument. feminist (+) 14:45, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
Beware of claims that rely on guilt by association, and biased, malicious or overly promotional content, including because the sources indicate this is not similar to a candy bar; in my later review of sources in the Stavast AfD discussion [7], this appears related to "Fuck Joe Biden" chants, also previously discussed in the Fuck Joe Biden AfD that closed as a snow delete on September 27, 2021. Due to this context, I am also concerned about how WP:AVOIDVICTIM may be implicated if this article becomes a WP:COATRACK for tangential and contentious recent content, as well as the care we need to take for people who
are not well known, even if they are notable enough for their own article, because WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE states,
In such cases, exercise restraint and include only material relevant to the person's notability, focusing on high-quality secondary sources. [...] Material that may adversely affect a person's reputation should be treated with special care [...], which may apply particularly to Kelli Stavast. Beccaynr ( talk) 14:53, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
clear that he was a bystander to the whole thingseems like support for exclusion per the WP:MINORASPECT and WP:COATRACK discussions above. To clarify how I think WP:BLPBALANCE applies, the sources presented across multiple discussions currently pending, including at Redirects for discussion, seem to indicate a form of 'malice', e.g. "Fuck Joe Biden" chants, and 'promotional content', e.g. the recent meme/minced oath and song, with which Brandon Brown is only associated with as a bystander, not as an active or voluntary participant in "Fuck Joe Biden" chants nor as an active promoter of the political meme, the song, or the POV about Stavast's role in the event. I think this would be a different discussion if he was more than a bystander to the tangentially-related content, but as a bystander, WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE also seems to apply to him, if his BLP becomes a hook for WP:SOAPBOX political and commercial activity he has not actively or voluntarily engaged with or accepted. Overall, because this is a BLP, my view is informed by how WP:BLP policy states,
Biographies of living persons ("BLPs") must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy.Beccaynr ( talk) 19:29, 20 October 2021 (UTC) And more specifically, the related statement in WP:BLPBALANCE that includes
Given their potential impact on biography subjects' lives, biographies must be fair to their subjects at all times.Beccaynr ( talk) 19:43, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
And now a U.S. Representative,
Bill Posey, has used the phrase "Let's go Brandon" in a speech on the house floor, which has led to
coverage in Mediaite, which remarked that Brandon Brown "has unwittingly become one of the most well-known athletes in the country". Leaving this information out of this article looks increasingly untenable.
Korny O'Near (
talk) 15:18, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
There is some consensus that Mediaite is only marginally reliable, and should be avoided where better sources are available. Editors consider the source to inappropriately blur news and opinion, and due weight should be considered if no other reliable sources support a given statement.But per the discussion at the Let’s Go Brandon redirect, after WP:COPYVIO was removed [8], information has been added to Public image of Joe Biden. To be clear, my concern here is focused on Wikipedia policy, including how the WP:BLP, WP:NPOV and WP:NOTNEWS policies apply to this article for a recent contentious event, and the general design of Wikipedia as an encyclopedia. Beccaynr ( talk) 15:47, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
Articles and content about living people are required to meet an especially high standard, as they may otherwise be libellous. My concern, as I have also discussed in the Kelli Stavast AfD, is that "Let's Go Brandon" isn't simply about Biden, it is also making allegations that disparage Stavast, who is entitled to protection by WP:BLP policy. Beccaynr ( talk) 01:43, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
Given their potential impact on biography subjects' lives, biographies must be fair to their subjects at all times.His BLP is focused on his racing career, with no sourcing I have seen about political activity - I think decisions like this are case-by-case, and in this context, policy does not seem to support adding the content here. Beccaynr ( talk) 03:26, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
@ GhostOfDanGurney: @ Beccaynr: Given the vastly increased reception, the page views remaining in a totally different dimension and the 100% "Support" quote in the last 10 days, do you still uphold your opposition? -- KnightMove ( talk) 10:43, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
Was going to suggest a change that his degree be shown as in "Communication Studies" a more specific academic discipline that "Communication"...but I get that there's a lot of attention being given to the "LGB" thing, so I understand — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.83.250.169 ( talk) 18:31, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
@ Frank Anchor, Korny O'Near, Alternative Ultimate Dragon, and HeroicSSD: Stop edit warring and collaborate.
Didn't one of you call for me to receive a topic ban here? |
- "Ghost of Dan Gurney" 15:30, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
|
My concern is that Korny O'Near decided upon himself to add irrelevant and minor information in his edit when HeroicSSD's version said the same things, but more concisely and without disclosing Brown's affiliations. I disagree that Korny O'Near's version is from a neutral point of view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alternative Ultimate Dragon ( talk • contribs) 15:50, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
It appears to celebrate the party affiliation disclosure. Why other reason did it have to be added? It was a very very minor aspect of the article. Irrelevant. Previous version before you touch it more concise. Alternative Ultimate Dragon ( talk) 16:06, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
Honestly, I struggle to see what relevance any of this political stuff has to do with a section entitled "NASCAR" to begin with. Alternative Ultimate Dragon ( talk) 04:27, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
Potential COI: I just recently made the connection that I was a childhood friend of Brandon.
Humblebrag aside, before I realized I knew him, the lead seemed to me not to suffice as a summary of the article. It is clear that Let's Go Brandon makes a reasonable fraction of his notability and has its own section. Omitting it from the lead seems outright misleading. Although it was not his intention to be associated with a political chant, it should at least be mentioned with something like "An interview after his 2021 Sparks 300 win gave rise to the political slogan Let's Go Brandon", maybe with more context. 93 ( talk) 05:42, 28 December 2021 (UTC) edited for spelling 15:40, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
Also, speaking of encyclopedic, I feel I need to point out that on Wikipedia, we have "lead" paragraphs, not "lede" paragraphs ( WP:NOTLEDE). Use that info how you please. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" 14:59, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
News is still moving fast on the whole topic and I'm sure it'll need to settle down before there's a long term consensus, but I had some thoughts on things to keep an eye on. The big one is the timing of the NYT/Newsweek pieces relative to when the LGBCoin deal was done, and whether those were meant to provide cover for the upcoming announcement of the deal. The coincidence of the use of "Let's Go America" by both Brandon in these articles, and the LGBCoin website (which changed to remove a number of political references around the time the sponsorship deal was announces) could be easily interpreted as a smoking gun. Not a lot of reliable sources making this connection yet (we can't and shouldn't go WP:OR with this), but Nick Bromberg touched on it in this article. As is this note that BMS has retained the services of LEVICK crisis management PR (also worth pointing out, this article quotes Koutoulas as the timing being the opposite direction, reaching back out after the NYT piece). I think there's going to be something worth mentioning about all of this to make the article complete and neutral (which also means not solely written from Brandon's perspective, WP:NOTPR), but I tend to be cautious where WP:BLP is concerned and wanted to solicit some other thoughts to build consensus for what (if anything) is notable and neutral for addition. Bakkster Man ( talk) 16:20, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Brown’s extensive search for a willing sponsor concluded(sourced to the team's own release, not an independent source) is an example of how this all relates to what reliable sources are saying about what actually happened with this sponsor deal. And I know this will all be contentious, hence coming here to gauge consensus (Edit: and gather WP:BESTSOURCES) first. Bakkster Man ( talk) 18:16, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Brown is clearly choosing to get political and let the side of his car speak now. And it's now hard to go back and read the Times article with a straight face. It's very unlikely that negotiations for this sponsorship materialized out of nowhere over the holidays in less than two weeks after the article was published.But just as we shouldn't repeat Bromberg's statement at face value, we can't take the team and sponsor's statements at face value either. We will need to address the controversy at some point: why was the sponsor announced and then unapproved? And the better, more reliable sources we have to cite such a description (may not exist yet) the better. Bakkster Man ( talk) 19:26, 5 January 2022 (UTC)