Talk:Brandon Brown (racing driver)

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Should the article about NASCAR driver Brandon Brown include a paragraph about the "Let's go Brandon"/"Fuck Joe Biden" meme such as this? GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 16:57, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• No. This is an entirely WP:MINORASPECT of subject's career as a racing driver. Additionally, per @Mrschimpf: in the above discussion, the fact that it was this subject in particular was entirely coincidental. Wikipedia is not a tabloid, nor is it a soapbox for the latest political slogans. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 17:25, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

"1) If it is a minor aspect, why do you seem to be commenting on multiple locations about it. Obviously there is something here, even if you don;t like it. 2) Please stop misrepresenting policies and guidelines on talk pages (maybe stop edit warring, too). "An article should not give undue weight to minor aspects of its subject", not "It can't be mentioned at all because I don't like it." Unintentionally or not, you are harming the project. This is about the reader, not your political beliefs. It may go away on its own, but it is not your job to facilitate that... or is it?Globgenie (talk) 05:42, 25 October 2021 (UTC) Blocked sock. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 18:44, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Because you're a single-purpose account using Wikipedia as your personal soapbox to promote a forced meme, in multiple places. That's not a hard question at all, and if you think I'm edit warring, please feel free to go to the proper channels to report it. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 15:57, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

• Weak include (invited by the bot) It seems to be a promine'nt and widely covered element of the story of this person. I added "weak" because the degree of WP:Relevance is arguably only medium, and being a nasty profane political statement to me raises the bar for inclusion. I also have a non-policy-compliant argument against inclusion which is that coverage in media in many cases is not a good arbiter for inclusion in an encyclopedia. North8000 (talk) 18:24, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• Weak oppose Even though this phrase has certainly made the rounds and is notable (as phrases go), it seems not terribly impactful for Brown's career or life. This seems like it would be most appropriate an a Criticism of Joe Biden article, but somehow that doesn't exist yet. Fun side fact: I had seen this phrase a handful of times on Reddit, but was clueless about what it meant or referred to until I happened upon this discussion. -- Fyrael (talk) 19:05, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• Yes - whether or not it belongs in any other article (I agree that it probably does), it belongs here as well, because this is a notable fact about Brandon Brown: his name has become part of a minced oath that has gained significant currency both online and in real life. The fact that he really had nothing to do with it is irrelevant: you could say the same about every "In popular culture" section of a Wikipedia article, for example. Korny O'Near (talk) 21:14, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Weak Oppose. I believe that the chants are notable, because it brought about a relatively high amount news coverage in reliable sources. I assume that most people outside of the specialized NASCAR audience (including me) have never heard of Mr. Brown until the chants began. Also, a song about the chants is relatively high on the iTunes charts (see the comment by Korny O'Near below). However, this information is already present in the Public image of Joe Biden article. The chants are not very closely related to Brown's career or life, and it would be better for the information to be in the public image article. Bwmdjeff (talk) 00:05, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

There's no need to choose, of course. Korny O'Near (talk) 00:14, 25 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)

• Oppose In the WP:NPOV policy, the WP:MINORASPECT section states, 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)

Comment My comments were moved by another participant to the discussion section below, but please consider my additional comments as part of my oppose reasoning. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 00:50, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose per statement already above. Per Beccanyr, the issue is about something that the anonymous crowd did, and which didn't affect the subject or the reporter in any manner outside a 'welp, that happened' moment and will not affect his actual driving or career. Nate • (chatter) 05:07, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose for now. It's possible this will get sustained coverage and end up being an important part of Brown's biography. Currently, the reliable sourcing isn't there to demonstrate that this material is due for an article about a living person. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 04:59, 19 October 2021 (UTC) - striking vote 13:10, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Changing my !vote to support a brief mention. In deciding how much weight to give this phenomenon, we should be looking at sources that give in-depth treatment to Brown himself. So far, there has not been a showing that such sources frequently mention the chant. Some of the sources about the chant give Brown more than just a passing mention, e.g. USA Today, enough I think to justify something short (about a sentence) with a wikilink to Let's Go Brandon. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 13:10, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
• Yes This event has brought Brandon to attention and brought him to the public spotlight more than any other racing driver in recent memory. Most of us wouldnt have heard the name Brandon Brown if it wasnt for this to happen. I think that it is best to add it to a personal life section. Haris920 (talk) 07:06, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

If it was going to be added, that seems like the least logical place for it. This phrase has nothing whatsoever to do with his personal life. -- Fyrael (talk) 15:42, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose per the points raised by Beccaynr Sea Ane (talk) 11:00, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
• Support If lame articles like Covfefe exist, then it shows a pretty clear precedent that the massively popular and viral cultural event of "Let's go Brandon!" should also be noted. Innican Soufou (talk) 11:48, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

• Yes - I just run into this meme trending and can't find any mention in Wikipedia. I had to dig outside sources to get an idea what is this about. --Mikko Paananen (talk) 22:19, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Strong Support - it is exhausting seeing all the left-leaning phenomena being reported as if they are facts, while stuff like "Get Woke, Go Broke" which has entered common vernacular is scrubbed from WP because it doesn't match the prevailing ideology. WP should be neutral. If FJB is being reported by reliable sources, it should be at least mentioned. If it is "recentist", that can be adjusted in future.174.0.48.147 (talk) 05:54, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Per WP:BLPBALANCE, 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)

• Strong support - apart from NASCAR enthusiasts, nobody would know who Brandon Brown even is, if not for "Let's Go Brandon", especially outside of the USA (like me, as I am from Europe). Wiki pageviews reflect this: , as well as Google trends: (let's not kid ouselves, it is not because of his victory in the race :) ,as this comparison with Jeb Burton, who also won his first race this season, shows: ). From what I get, NASCAR Xfinity is a sort of a minor league in NASCAR racing and Mr. Brown is sort of a "solid, but not among the leaders" driver in that "league", and certainly wouldn't be as famous if "Let's go Brandon" didn't happen. I think it is logical to include the "incident" that contributd most to his popularity in his biography. StjepanHR (talk) 14:08, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
• Support, well, at least a line. A whole section may be warranted but weight should be kept in mind. Simply removing any mention is a disservice to the sources available and the reader.Globgenie (talk) 05:48, 25 October 2021 (UTC) Blocked sock. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 18:44, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
• Yes but just a short mention, at most two sentences (e.g. 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)
• Oppose per the idea that weight doesn't have reciprocity. Brown and his win are clearly a significant part of the story of the meme but what does this meme tell us about Brown? This isn't about Brown, rather Brown just happened to be there. Consider a hypothetical, Brown is a big Biden supporter and is horrified he was somehow involved with this. Would this be something Brown would want in his BLP? Certainly Brown is part of the story of the meme but it's not, so far, part of Brown's story thus this doesn't need to be included and could be viewed as an anti-Biden COATRACK. Springee (talk) 15:04, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Is that the rule, that we only allow information in the articles about living people that they want to have there? Korny O'Near (talk) 15:58, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

No, but I think DONOHARM does apply. The idea isn't that he does or doesn't want it. Rather, he was basically an innocent bystander in the situation. Absent some strong actions on his part to involve himself with the meme it's really not about him. It's about sports casters trying to cover for a situation. Anyway, in the spirit of do no harm, unless he has tried to get himself involved in what is likely to turn into a highly political story about a meme, it's probably best to err on the side of no including it. Springee (talk) 17:34, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

I think this information satisfies all the criteria for inclusion laid out in WP:DONOHARM. Korny O'Near (talk) 19:01, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

@Springee: - 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)

If, hypothetically, Brown were a big Biden supporter and came out to condemn the slogan, Wikipedia would mention both the slogan and Brown's condemnation. feminist (+) 14:47, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose It's really nothing to do with Brown himself and thus not worth mentioning in his biography.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 15:16, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose, Beccaynr states it incredibly well; this meme is about the crowd, not about the racer. As far as I can see a reporter said something about a crowd, in an otherwise totally unrelated interview with Brown. Is it connected to the phrase? yes. Is it connected to the reporter? Maybe. But it isn't connected to a race car driver who happened to be interviewed at that time. Or as Springee says above 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
• Do not include in this article, but do include in Kelli Stavast: This is notable within the Kelli Stavast article, since she is the one who made the mistake (be it intentional or not). It is therefore not notable within Brandon Brown's biography. Banana Republic (talk) 18:30, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Support - Until he acknowledged it, I would have !voted to oppose as he was not involved with it. But once he acknowledged it (and the acknowledgement was picked up by sources independent of him), he became involved, so it became appropriate for the article to mention that he is the Brandon of Let's go Brandon. Banana Republic (talk) 21:16, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
• Support, he is now more well known for this than for his driving. Other articles about people also include the fact when their name was incorporated into a viral phrase. But it should be limited to a few sentences.--Nordostsüdwest (talk) 20:52, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
• Support - it's not undue weight to mention the meme, so long as it's one or two very well sourced sentences. The reader, whom we serve above all else, is not as informed as he would otherwise be should the meme not be mentioned. More to the point, this is much as part of Brown's biography now as his Talladega win. schetm (talk) 06:46, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
• Support, Now that there is an article Let's Go Brandon, there should be a quick link from this article to that one, and nothing more.MorganDWright (talk) 13:10, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
• Comment An AfD is now open at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let's Go Brandon. Beccaynr (talk) 16:14, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
• Support, Let's go Brandon has made Brandon Brown the most famous NASCAR driver in the world, so of course it should be mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.117.150.182 (talk) 16:36, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
• Strong Support -- I support that this should be included. Without a doubt this has caused a huge surge in pageviews for this article. However, this is recent news and it likely holds the LEAST amount of weight when it comes to Brandon's bio. Therefore, while I strongly believe it should be included, I believe it should be far shorter than it currently is. TiggerJay (talk) 19:19, 27 October 2021 (UTC) (Emphesis on shorter added 19:04, 29 October 2021 (UTC))

I think that would be acceptable also. At this point , it does have to be linked or explained somewhere. It would help the BLP problem if there were a reliable source we could use that actually says that he personally is apolitical. DGG Oct 28

If you now think that "Let's Go Brandon" should be included in this article, maybe you should change your "Oppose" vote? Korny O'Near (talk) 13:51, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

• Strong Support Since this is literally, by far, the most notable thing that has ever happened to Brandon, it should definitely be included. Nate Hooper (talk) 12:51, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose It wasn't he that said it. It therefore should not be associated with him. I haven't seen any evidence presented he's notable as a Trump supporter or even a political conservative (am I wrong there? -- I'm not an expert), and putting it in the article implies he is . The basic rule is do no harm. It could be included it an article about anti-Biden slurs, where it would be in context., and there could be a redirect to that DGG ( talk ) 17:35, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

  @DGG: I have often respected your positions and your well thought out statement is causing me to question my own opinion on this matter. I think you are correct in your assessment that he is apolitical, and there is no sign that he supports any specific party or platform. He is mostly just a bystander where something happened adjacent to him. While this issue has made him significantly more famous or infamous for the moment, unless he does something to provoke his involvement moving forward, the world will go on with the meme, chant, song, etc., and leave Mr. Brown (the individual) in the wake of it. The challenging bit is that it is his "name" being used in the euphemism. Which is the natural reason to support inclusion. Resulting in my belief that while a mention should be included in this article, it should be a far shorter mention of the issue, perhaps as some articles do "in popular culture" with a link, or perhaps just "see also". Thoughts? TiggerJay (talk) 21:16, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

  Comment From the AP today: How ‘Let’s Go Brandon’ became code for insulting Joe Biden

  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.

  I think this adds support for not including this content in his article, including per WP:BLPBALANCE, and how it states, 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)

Actually, I think this add a lot of support for including the content. There is a nationally-known slogan/epithet that is not only named after Brandon Brown but has now begun to affect his career as well. Keeping this information out of his article feels ridiculous. And no, there's nothing "unfair" about including it. Korny O'Near (talk) 00:53, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

• Support: It's a silly meme, but it does seem to have achieved notability (there was an article in my local paper's website today about it) and thus became part of this guy's "claim to fame" in these bizarrely stupid times. Thus there should be a mention. *Dan T.* (talk) 22:09, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
• Strong Support -- There should be not even be any debate about this! "Let's Go Brandon" is beyond notable, has quickly become a cultural artifact, and absolutely should be at least briefly mentioned here, as well as on Kelli Stavast's article. - JGabbard (talk) 03:54, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

  Is there a BLP policy that supports this position? That is the reason for the debate that you think should be suppressed. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 06:58, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

• Support obviously he is central to this notable meme, and the meme is asking to his own notability. Don't understand how this is even a question.--Ortizesp (talk) 06:00, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
• Strong support - The LGB phenomenon is quite notable, and has brought lots of attention to Brandon Brown that he woudln't have gotten otherwise. As StjepanHR and TiggerJay noted above, the page views for his article exponentially exploded following the incident and the meme achieving fame. Brown wasn't even particularly famous outside the core Nascar fanbase before this happened - he certainly wasn't a household name, like Dale Earnhardt (Sr. or Jr.). Frankly, most of the objections strike me as WP:IDONTLIKEIT....I get that people might not like it for various reasons - maybe they like Joe Biden, or just don't like that spots has gotten so mixed up with politics, or whatever. It ultimately doesn't matter though, as it objectively IS now a big part of why he's notable, whether one likes that or not, similar to Colin Kaepernick. Of course unlike with Kaepernick, it wasn't Brandons own activism which led to this notability, but simply a reporter's misrepresentation of an FJB chant, followed by people turning it into a meme. But it's centered around him, so he's notably associated with it, wittingly or not. Omission at this point would really be doing the readers a disservice, and probably cause a fair bit of confusion, as a lot of people are gonna be looking up his article *specifically because of* the LGB meme, and when it's not discussed at all in the article, they're gonna be wondering if it's the same Brandon Brown, or if there's another Nascar driver with that name! -2003:CA:8729:C30:DC1B:ED67:936B:EEC (talk) 12:00, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
• Strong support I am in total misbelief that this is even discussed in any way. After his win, article views skyrocketed by a factor of ~100. While in the very first days after his win this is certainly mainly attributed to the win as such, this does not explain a further strong increase in views a month later. Those many readers (like me) who just wanted to have a look who this Brandon guy from the meme even is are left in confusion "Did I get an article about the wrong person?" This is one of the worst examples I have ever seen for withholding information from the interested audience just for pharisaical interpretation of rules. --KnightMove (talk) 20:15, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Addendum (and being more mildly than yesterday): By the mid of October, it may not have been that obvious where the phrase would go. In the meantime, virtually all relevant media have added explanations in the last days, CNN, ABC, USA Today, Dallas News... there really shouldn't be any more doubt. --KnightMove (talk) 07:09, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

• Support per the arguments made above. His Racing career section isn't that long to begin with and this Let's Go Brandon slogan/meme is the most notable thing that has happened to him thus far in his career; he has also acknowledged it. Some1 (talk) 00:48, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
• Support this is an important aspect to his article notability. Swordman97 ^{talk to me} 23:44, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
• Support It is sourced and notable. There is a way to do it without being undue weight. Just include passing mention to it, like a sentence or two with the proper reliable sources.JMM12345 (talk) 05:13, 8 November 2021 (UTC)JMM12345
• Support Brandon Brown being the source of the phrase that continues to grow adds to his notability and celebrity. The phrase has gained enough notability to now have its own Wikipedia article. Whether anyone supports or agrees with the political viewpoint of the phrase doesn't matter. The point is that the phrase has become notable on its own right, and Brandon being the source of it should be at least mentioned in an article about him. Perhaps a section of "In popular culture" could be added to his article that could include a snippet of it with a link to the main article of the phrase. Sf46 (talk) 19:50, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Comment Brown did not create the meme, the meme is not about him, and as noted above, the AP indicates the association is harming his career. While the meme currently has its own Wikipedia article, the AfD closing statement specifically invites revisiting whether a standalone article is warranted in the future, and that seems to be an indication of questionable ongoing notability and that we should at minimum wait to determine whether to include the meme in Brown's WP:BLP, which must be written conservatively. Beccaynr (talk) 17:42, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

So has "support" won yet? Nate Hooper (talk) 01:25, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

I do hope an admin comes by soon to put this RFC out of its misery... the tide has clearly turned on this one. Korny O'Near (talk) 15:26, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose - He's a Nascar driver. Let's keep US politics out of it. GoodDay (talk) 01:35, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Sports in the US has a long history of involvement in politics; prominent examples include U.S. national anthem protests (2016–present) and 1968 Olympics Black Power salute. Let's keep US politics out of it is an WP:IDLI argument. feminist (+) 14:45, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
• Support some mention given how the phrase "Let's Go Brandon" has so significantly elevated Brown's profile. I'm not sure it has to be an entire paragraph, but Let's Go Brandon should be linked. feminist (+) 14:45, 15 November 2021 (UTC)