This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Bud Light boycott article. This is
not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been
designated as a contentious topic.
This article should adhere to the gender identity guideline because it contains material about one or more
trans women. Precedence should be given to self-designation as reported in the most up-to-date reliable sources, anywhere in article space, even when it doesn't match what's most common in reliable sources. Any person whose gender might be questioned should be referred to by the pronouns, possessive adjectives, and gendered nouns (for example "man/woman", "waiter/waitress", "chairman/chairwoman") that reflect that person's latest expressed gender self-identification. Some people go by
singular they pronouns, which are acceptable for use in articles. This applies in references to any phase of that person's life, unless the subject has indicated a preference otherwise. Former, pre-transition names may only be included if the person was notable while using the name; outside of the main biographical article, such names should only appear once, in a footnote or parentheses.If material violating this guideline is repeatedly inserted, or if there are other related issues, please report the issue to the LGBT WikiProject, or, in the case of living people, to the BLP noticeboard.
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been
designated as a contentious topic.
A fact from Bud Light boycott appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 14 June 2023 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Discrimination 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.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all
LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the
project page or contribute to the
discussion.LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT articles
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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
sociology 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.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
business articles 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
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
Bruxton (
talk) 02:20, 9 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Passerby comment (this is not a review, others should still feel free to grab this as a review). Given that there's plenty of sources on this topic and that it's pretty controversial, I'd suggest removing Newsweek as a reference from the article and from any proposed hooks without a truly powerful justification for why any specific Newsweek story is reliable. See
WP:NEWSWEEK, that publication has gone downhill since 2013 or so and just makes stuff up these days, and is considered a suspicious-if-not-entirely-deprecated source. While here, I'd check the sources against
WP:RSP in general -
WP:FORBESCON suggests that using the hook referenced to a Forbes contributor is also not great and should be replaced if possible, unless there's an independent case to be made that the specific author is reliable.
SnowFire (
talk) 03:28, 15 April 2023 (UTC)reply
an active merge discussion and three maintenance tags are all disqualifying – it'll need to come off before a review.
theleekycauldron (
talk •
contribs) (she/her) 16:52, 15 April 2023 (UTC)reply
Note We need to avoid redirects from the Main Page as per
WP:MPNOREDIRECT. [[Bud Light]] is a redirect and that needs fixing before this gets promoted (eventually). Schwede66 04:28, 4 June 2023 (UTC)reply
New enough, long enough. No neutrality problems found, no copyright problems found, no maintenance templates found. QPQ unnecessary. ALT0 is the only usable hook, as Newsweek, Forbes and BusinessInsider are all yellow on
WP:RSP, ALT1 is additionally too long, and ALT1 and ALT3 are not in the article. Otherwise good to go.--Launchballer 08:02, 7 June 2023 (UTC)reply
I feel like ALT0 gives attention to Kid Rock and also misidentifies the weapon he used. The press also often confuses assault weapons (which are aggressive looking military style semi-automatics) and machine guns. KR used an actual machine gun which has an
auto sear. I confirmed that ALT4 is cited and in the article and I have removed the Bud Light redirect as @
Schwede66: has suggested. The Newsweek reference about the boycott is not the only one in the article supporting the ALT4 hook - I checked. It seems the most accurate and sober choice.
Bruxton (
talk) 02:19, 9 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Requested move 13 May 2024
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Oppose - that sounds too generic of a title for a specific point in time event. I think more commonly we would instead rename it to
2023-2024 Bud light Boycott. But before going there, are we really certain that as an event this is warranted? The stock recovered at the end of 2023 and beyond normal other economic fluctuations that beer companies are subject to, I think we’d need some stronger reason to even make that rename as I don’t think those two articles make a strong enough case to warrant it.
Raladic (
talk) 20:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose - On the contrary, the page seems to indicate most activity took place in 2023. The proposed name is too generic IMO, the current fits and unless major activity takes place in the future "2023" should be fine.
glman (
talk) 13:20, 20 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Support: As the news articles indicated, this boycott is still on-going, and it may never end. This is the only Bud Light boycott to date that has any significant impact, therefore it does not needs to be given a specific date.
Hzh (
talk) 14:27, 21 May 2024 (UTC)reply
No, the two news articles speculate on a multitude of reasons, while also acknowledging that other reasons like general sales across the market shifted, and we don’t use speculation and
WP:CRYSTALBALLs on Wikipedia for editing.
Raladic (
talk) 19:00, 28 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Support per the nomination; I don't think any other particularly meaningful boycott relating to Bud Light has happened.
Neo Purgatorio (
talk) 14:00, 28 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The discussion above 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.