Talk:Erynn Chambers

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, , 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, ! 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)