Talk:Bro-country

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Country music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to country music 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.Country musicWikipedia:WikiProject Country musicTemplate:WikiProject Country musicCountry music articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Music/Music genres task force

Bro-country is within the scope of the Music genres task force of the Music project, a user driven attempt to clean up and standardize music genre articles on Wikipedia. Please visit the task force guidelines page for ideas on how to structure a genre article and help us assess and improve genre articles to good article status.Music/Music genres task forceWikipedia:WikiProject Music/Music genres task forceTemplate:WikiProject Music/Music genres task forcemusic genre articles

Flags

I have added some warnings to the page, as it does not appear to meet Wikipedia standards. If the term is pejorative, it should be noted as so. Otherwise, a fair/balanced discussion of the term should take place. I'd almost like the set the page for deletion, as this term could really just be defined inside of Country Pop's page under Criticisms, rather than having its own page.

The page is definitely written subjectively. The reception section talks only of criticism despite that music being popular (the whole story obviously isn't being told here). The reception section is comprised about 1/3 of a quote, the author of which is name is spelled wrong. Unless if he is the definitive voice on the reception of this "genre," then I doubt that this is adequate.

Furthermore, it was a good try to source information on this, but the opinion/editorial articles chosen provide objective basis for a discussion of this term. I would be in support of marking this page for deletion, but will leave that decision in the hands of another editor. 159.153.138.99 (talk) 16:55, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I fail to see how this page is not properly balanced. It presents opinions as opinions, and notes how the subgenre is informally defined by default, and opinions from both sides are presented. It's not complete, sure, but there is certainly something here. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 22:31, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not going to add the tags back, though I'd prefer if someone other than yourself removed the tags for the sake of objectivity. I mean, you totally ignored what I wrote, failing to even correct a simple spelling mistake. Clearly we have different feelings about whether this article (stub?) meets wiki quality standards. Though, I'd maintain this is more of a resource for Urban Dictionary rather than Wikipedia. "having something here," doesn't really speak to whether or not if something belongs on wiki. 159.153.138.99 (talk) 17:53, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bro-country. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140924132328/http://roughstock.com/news/has-the-bro-country-backlash-begun-/ to http://roughstock.com/news/has-the-bro-country-backlash-begun-/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:47, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Synthesis

Most of the sources in this article don't contain the term "bro-country" at all, or if they do, it's only in reference to Jody Rosen's article. For instance, the EW article in citation 4 just quotes her directly without supporting the term "bro-country" in the body of the article. To wit:

1. Valid, discusses the use of the term

2. Only uses the term as a callback to Rosen

3. Valid.

4. Only uses the term in a sidebar, not in the text itself, and even then, the sidebar only calls back to Rosen

5, 6. Listicle from EW, doesn't support the term

8-10: Only support facts on the song's success, don't mention "Bro country" at all

There are also several sources pertaining to a mashup of country songs, none of which uses the term "bro-country" to describe said mashup. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 02:09, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Had a look at the sources, it doesn't look like you looked at them properly. For example, the title of source 4 indicate that the article is about the rise of Bro-Country and the term is mentioned in the text (I counted 7 times), so how you can claim that it is not in the text itself is frankly bizarre. The wordings in 5 also indicate it is about assessing songs in terms of how bro "bro country" is, and if you think scoring 10/10 on the bro scale doesn't make it bro country would suggest that the problem is not the source. Source 6 says "That’s My Kind of Night" typifies "bro country" and country rap, but the content that it purported to support (a list of artists criticising bro-country) has since been deleted, so that is irrelevant. The articles that support the facts don't need to mention bro-country, only that they support the facts (you also ignore source 7, which mentioned the success of bro-country). You need better examples to criticise the article or claim that it is synth when only really one sentence since deleted was problematic (and the problem was that the list of names people added was unsourced rather than synth). Hzh (talk) 11:49, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]