Talk:Hawk Tuah

3RR

@MarksmanRifle: you've already violated 3RR, which you were warned about, and now you're edit-warring about the spelling of the subject's last name, despite the sources in the article proving you are incorrect. Please discuss. Seasider53 (talk) 18:52, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

@Seasider53 Her name is confirmed to be Haliey Welch, which has been subject to some dispute from different editors. However, this is her name, as her own websites and social media accounts confirm this in addition to these references. [1] [2] [3] I think that changing the good faith vandalism back shouldn't constitute as edit warring, as the edits made by @MarksmanRifle were simply just justified as 'Google said it's spelled this way' despite Welch saying herself that it's the contrary. I was simply removing content that was poorly sourced. Should my previous edit be reimplemented, I will add these references to prove her name, which has been controversial among other editors. BullDawg2021 (talk) 21:48, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

What's 3RR? 2A00:23EE:1390:3EFA:E8DE:8752:892E:9002 (talk) 10:44, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

WP:3RR. Seasider53 (talk) 10:51, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Animal shelter information

I tried to add this information about her and the animal shelter, but I was unable to do so, as I encountered an error that said an automated filter prevented me from adding it:

On July 12, 2024, she posted a video that showed her purchasing various animal care products from a PetSmart store and donating them to an animal shelter that was nearby with the song "9 to 5" by Dolly Parton playing in the background. In the video, she also showed a dog named "Blondie" that was in the shelter for 130 days, saying that the dog needed to be adopted. After the video was released to the public, Rolling Stone called her a "charming Gen Z Dolly Parton." Teal Lobster (talk) 16:20, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

References

Says she is 21 on instagram video

In a video posted on instgram with Matt Rife she tells him she is 21. https://www.instagram.com/whitneycummings/reel/C959LZCy3kp/?hl=en Fruitloop11 (talk) 03:30, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Haliey Welch

This should be the title to the article. Something more nice and respectful.

Hawk Tuah Girl (section)name change to a cleaner name like

Wikipedia's neutrality guidelines prohibit the use of profanity as a method of labeling a subject or namecalling.

Automated internet error when you try and add in Hawk Tuah Girl within the PHP

this is the error message

Your changes have not been published. In response to an ongoing pattern of abuse, an automated filter has prevented this edit.

Don't worry, your work has not been lost! The full content of this edit has been saved, but it will not be visible to readers unless you take further action.

Please go to the report page and follow the instructions. An experienced editor will review your changes, and provide assistance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.10.199.23 (talk) 02:21, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Haliey Welch

Profanity and pejorative terminology ..Hawk Tuah Girl Now that Haliey Welch is famous .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monica_Lewinsky

in comparison Monica_Lewinsky is just Monica_Lewinsky.. and not the .......... Wikipedia is not censored. Yes, profanity is found on Wikipedia sometimes. But it is only used in articles when it is really appropriate. For example, profanity is found in articles about the words themselves, in titles containing those words, and in quotations. But Wikipedia's neutrality guidelines prohibit the use of profanity as a method of labeling a subject or namecalling. A more neutral term should be substituted in these situations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.10.199.23 (talk) 04:08, August 15, 2024 (UTC)

Haliey ... "My mom a crack head you don't want her ... I'm a crack baby"

Edit ...

Haliey ... "My mom a crack head you don't want her ... I'm a crack baby"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9Xm0u75uLM ... at minute 25 76.156.161.247 (talk) 04:39, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Is this article really necessary?

OK, so she's known for a catch phrase. Is this really enough to guarantee a person an entry on Wikipedia? Her 15 minutes of fame was up before the Olympics. Right now Raygun's in the spotlight. At least she's got more a bit more to her than Welch. 13Sundin (talk) 14:58, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

This article was previously nominated for deletion, with a consensus to keep. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Haliey Welch. 162 etc. (talk) 15:09, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Explanation of Notoriety

Can we please explain what she is famous for a bit better in the article? The only part of this article outside the led which explains her notoriety is as follows:

During the video, she was asked a series of not-safe-for-work questions including, "What’s one move in bed that makes a man go crazy every time?" Welch's reply, using her Southern accent, was, "You gotta give 'em that 'hawk tuah' and spit on that thang."

Previously the article explained what "Hawk" and "Tuah" meant as well as the "act" which Welch was referring to (please don't make me write it here).

Most of this is not encyclopedic and reads like a PR piece. I'm ok keeping it this way but I personally believe Philanthropy, In popular culture, and Personal life should be deleted or consolidated. ReidLark1n (talk) 15:54, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

I'll add that this is an article about the Hawk Tuah Girl meme, not a biography of Haliey Welch. See the AFD discussion. I agree that some of the more biographical content should be deleted. 162 etc. (talk) 16:30, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

“Hawk Tuah” [i]s the onomatopoei[a]...of spitting “before—or during—f******* to increase ... lubrication.” See, https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattsalyer/2024/07/08/hawk-tuah-girl-the-obscure-whose-story-is-the-hawk-tuah-meme/; https://slate.com/life/2024/07/hawk-tuah-girl-video-what-is-haliey-welch-meaning.html.

This seems to be to be a sufficient explanation, although the current state is also sufficient (I will note that an IP deleted the explanation of "hawk tuah" stating "The previous statement “added that she was spitting on the man’s p**** for f******* [sic]. I removed “for f*******” [sic] because that’s only an assumption by the viewer. What she said was “spit on that thang” however never suggests what her next action was."). That IP does not appear to understand WP:SOURCEDEF.

I agree with 162 etc.. Moreover, I believe everything below the first paragraph under "viral video" should be deleted per WP:NOTPROMO. ReidLark1n (talk) 21:51, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Rename to "Hawk Tuah"

"Hawk Tuah" is the notable part of the name, the "Girl" afterwards is unnessecary. I think we should rename it to "Hawk Tuah", and change the wording in various places to make the article less about the woman herself and more about the catchphrase. Cereally8 (talk) 08:32, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Almost all of the sources refer to her as the "Hawk Tuah Girl." The page is currently set up to really be about Haliey Welch, not the internet meme (however, I disagree with that decision).

Per my last note, I believe the page should be about the meme, but it is likely a separate Haliey Welch page would survive WP:SIGCOV.

However, this page has risen to the point of violating WP:NOTPROMO.

I would like to open a discussion on whether the aftermath section should be removed as it currently violates WP:NOTPROMO. ReidLark1n (talk) 23:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Self identifies as a "crack baby"

Change this ...

Welch lives with her grandmother in Belfast, Tennessee.

To this ...

Welch lives with her grandmother in Belfast, Tennessee, and self identifies as a "crack baby" due to prenatal cocaine exposure.

See ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Hawk_Tuah_Girl#Haliey_..._%22My_mom_a_crack_head_you_don't_want_her_..._I'm_a_crack_baby%22 98.46.116.255 (talk) 14:01, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: "Welch lives with her grandmother in Belfast, Tennessee" is not mentioned in the article. M.Bitton (talk) 22:23, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

References

expectoration? really?

I get it's a particularly gross sexual act and you want to keep an encyclopedic tone, but expectoration is a stupid, hard to understand word to use there and the article blurb you get hovering on it is exactly zero help. change the wording there to something that's actually intelligible. Duenine (talk) 03:12, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

The word is, handily, linked for the uninitiated. Seasider53 (talk) 03:29, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 5 September 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.

The result of the move request was: moved. WP:RMEC-WP:SNOW. This is a change of subject from person to phrase and meme. Absence of opposition for multiple days in the aftermath of the AfD that also extensively considered subject formulation is evidence of this proposal's non-contentiousness so there is clearly no need at all to prolong the discussion further. The matter of Tuah (it could be that "Tuah" would better match the primary subject being the notable meme) or tuah (it could be that "tuah" would better match the primary subject being the phrase-notable-as-a-phrase) can be further discussed in the coming eons. WP:BLP1E is a very serious consideration here, as has been noted by editors, who find that the subject formulated as the person is inappropriate, which takes precedence of further discussing "Tuah" vs. "tuah" in this RM. (non-admin closure) —Alalch E. 20:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

---

Hawk Tuah Girl → Hawk Tuah – The closure of the previous AfD stated we should make it primarily about the meme rather than the person, and the corresponding discussion was clear that the article should not exist to cover only Haliey Welch because of WP:BLP1E but should instead focus on the event. The current title was chosen unilaterally and I think fails to orient the article towards the meme/phenomenon/video, and instead continues to orient the article around the individual. I am therefore proposing the article be renamed to simply Hawk tuah (capitalisation up for discussion) in similar fashion to other articles that discuss viral phrases, see You think you just fell out of a coconut tree?. This would also address several of the concerns raised on this talk page about the unusual/informal current page name. EoRdE6^(Talk) 01:43, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

i agree with this (see previous comment on the talk page), and also think Hawk Tuah would be the correct capitalisation. Cereally8 (talk) 12:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

• Support The rename and editing to make the article less about the individual and more about the meme. AusLondonder (talk) 14:24, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
• Support I agree with everything said so far in this discussion.El monty (talk) 14:38, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

• Strong Support The current state of this article not only violates the AFD but also WP:NOTPROMO. The description should also be changed to internet meme. The entire aftermath section should accordingly be deleted.

ReidLark1n (talk) 15:26, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Here's what the article should look like. I imagine it looking like Star Wars Kid after we synthesize the aftermath section to be WP:NOTPROMO compliant.

{{Short description|Internet Meme}}

Hawk Tuah is a phrase from a viral video posted in 2024, in which during an interview, Haliey Welch (/ˈheɪli/; born 2002 or 2003) used the catchphrase, "hawk tuah", an apparent onomatopoeia for expectoration on a man's penis during oral sex.

History

On June 11, 2024, a man on the street YouTube channel, Tim & Dee TV, released a video featuring an interview with Haliey Welch in the Broadway district of Nashville, Tennessee. During the video, she was asked a series of not-safe-for-work questions including, "What’s one move in bed that makes a man go crazy every time?" Welch's reply, using her Southern accent, was, "You gotta give 'em that 'hawk tuah' and spit on that thang," referring to spitting on a man's penis during oral sex. The original video went viral, receiving millions of views across TikTok and Instagram, spawning remixes and remakes of the original audio, and gaining Welch the nickname Hawk Tuah Girl. ReidLark1n (talk) 23:22, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Strong support as per nom. Lewisguile (talk) 18:37, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Strong support per User:ReidLark1n. Reads very much like a promotional article in its current state, and would be far better off being about the meme itself instead of the advertisement for the WP:BLP1E case it currently comes off as. JeffSpaceman (talk) 15:14, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

• Support The AfD consensus was very clear. This article should be about the meme/phrase. This was discussed already, and I find the closer's decision very odd as the current name has an identical scope to the previous, equally problematic name, which is why the page is still in the same unacceptable state that it was when it was brought to AfD. This page shouldn't just be a bullet-point list of every time Welch got to hang out with larger celebrities. That's the clearest example of WP:NOTNEWS (4. Celebrity gossip and diary) I've seen in all my years on this site. I'd delete the infobox and at least two thirds of the Aftermath section. The meme is notable. The person behind the meme is not.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 21:22, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

References

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.

expectoration

We should replace the word expectoration in the introduction with a simpler word like "spitting", to make the article more accessible. 88.212.130.115 (talk) 18:01, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Incorrect. Seasider53 (talk) 20:19, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

I agree with this, actually. Not because it's simpler, but because it's more correct. This article used to say that the "hawk tuah" catchphrase referred to expectoration after oral sex, which is doubly wrong. It's referring to spitting before or during it. At least the latter part has been fixed. Expectoration is just not correct. I mean, the other half of the catchphrase is literally "spit on that thang", it's not ambiguous.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 18:48, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

The problem is that the phrase is contradictory or misleading to some extent. 'Hawk' alone refers to expectoration (and indeed our sources do too). 'Tuah' alone refers to spitting. Welch herself says "spit."

Expectoration is most in line with what our sources say and, for the avoidance of doubt, the sentence is self-explanatory to the extent necessary for a reader to understand.

I think it is inconclusive that "spit" is more correct. ReidLark1n (talk) 22:43, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

We don't need to speculate about what she meant because she tells us. She doesn't say "expectorate on that thing", she says "spit". There is no contradiction. Colonwqbang (talk) 22:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

1. It doesn't really matter what she said because we aren't journalists but we say what the sources say (and they say expectorate).

2. Even if it did matter what she said, think about what the onomatopoeia "Hawk" means - it means expectoration. If you still don't believe me, read Loogie: "Hocking a loogie, inhaling hard to force nasal mucus to collect at the back of the throat, then spitting it out, typically resulting in a loud throat-clearing sound." ReidLark1n (talk) 22:47, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

"Spitting" it out 208.117.117.12 (talk) 05:07, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure that your comment added anything. Please reread points 1, 2, WP:SOURCEDEF, and WP:TASTE. ReidLark1n (talk) 13:59, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

ReidLark1n, you're not representing the sources fairly. Only one source (Rolling Stone June 26, 2024) appears to use the word "expectoration". I get the sense that the word is used there in a joking manner (as in, an overly formal word is being used to describe something vulgar), but I may be wrong. Later, on July 11, 2024, Rolling Stone instead describes a "spitting noise".

In any case, I think the current wording "spitting or expectoration" is a fair compromise. Colonwqbang (talk) 17:00, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

One source says expectorate and that's why expectorate is used. I changed it to the current state which is a compromise. ReidLark1n (talk) 03:36, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Name sourcing in the article

The current version of the (8th source) Washington Post article does not support the claim that her name was changed for SEO (or any other reason), there is a correction that suggests that information was removed.

The (1st source) Rolling Stones article also states that she was born "Haliey" which contradicts the note itself Dragoonic123 (talk) 16:17, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

I've removed the note. Her name is Haliey. That's it. 162 etc. (talk) 22:44, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

This article reads way too much like an Urban Dictionary entry. "Hock tua" is a onomatopoeia for a human summoning up sputum or phlegm and spitting *in general*. There are probably hundreds of reason why a person would do this. A fairly frequent one is getting rid of phlegm from a productive cough. _There need not be a penis involved in this._ Another reason people do this is to show disdain. You hock to gather up a more emphatic amount of spit and tua to spit it out. This article is badly conflating the memetic/viral event, which may or may not remain notable (time will tell) with documenting a well-known onomatopoeia for a physiological behavior that is probably as old as homo sapiens. If you want to write an article about the Hock Tua woman, own up to it and do it. Don't try to launder her story (which I'm a fan of!) as a page about this ancient noise. And if you want to write a page about the hock tua sound, please do it better justice than defining it as "the sound you make when spitting on a penis", because that's some urban dictionary "Texas Crab Dangler"-tier memery; it is not up to the standards of Wikipedia. 161.97.193.2 (talk) 02:24, 14 September 2024 (UTC) me

Yeah I agree with all that. Definitely something to work on. —Alalch E. 16:50, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

I hate that we literally just moved the article but the IP is semantically right.

1. We could change the article to "Hawk Tuah Meme" which was discussed on previous AfD.

2. Alternatively, I think we should change the phrasing of the led to ""Hawk tuah" is an internet meme originating from a viral video..." ReidLark1n (talk) 22:42, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 September 2024

Change "The sound of spitting on a man's penis during oral sex." To "The sound of spitting on a penis during oral sex." As this could and has been used to refer to women's penises as well 97.122.195.65 (talk) 00:29, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

If nothing else, the question she was asked was specifically about men. Crossroads ^-talk- 06:30, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

To repeat myself for the umpteenth time: Wikipedia is not (edited) a newspaper. Wikipedia articles repeat information from WP:RS. ReidLark1n (talk) 14:26, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

To be fair, Wikipedia is not a newspaper, and WP:NOTNEWS is Wikipedia policy. But you are correct about the underlying point: we are an encyclopedia, not a publisher of original thought; we simply compile information as presented in reliable, secondary sources. Just wanted to clear that up because I think many editors would take issue with the sentence "Wikipedia is a newspaper."  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 17:43, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Sorry I meant "not a newspaper." I edited my comment a few times and the "not" must have gotten removed. ReidLark1n (talk) 17:47, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

No worries, happens to me all the time  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 19:52, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Why was the following removed from the article?

On July 5th, 2024, a Fox News guest referred to Kamala Harris, then running for Vice President of the United States as “the original Hawk Tuah girl.” These comments were widely criticized online, especially after they resurfaced later that month, when Harris began her presidential campaign following President Joe Biden's withdrawal. Bte3000 (talk) 23:24, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

The better question is why do you think this is notable? Just because someone said her name doesn't mean it must be included in this article (which, please read above, is about the meme and not Haliey Welch).

The first source is a soundbite. The third source doesn't mention Hawk Tuah at all so is irrelevant. The second source really isn't enough coverage nor is it really reliable for an encyclopedia. ReidLark1n (talk) 21:29, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

It should be included because it is a high profile use of the phrase concerning a notable political figure. Bte3000 (talk) 01:42, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Let me give you a hypothetical where your section would be permissible for inclusion.

A Fox News guest calls Kamala Harris the original Hawk Tuah Girl and CBS News, The New York Times, The Hindustan Times, and the Independent each write full length articles discussing and criticizing that comment for XYZ reason. ReidLark1n (talk) 14:19, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I don’t think you understand. Why would the article being about the meme and not Welch matter when I never mention Welch? Bte3000 (talk) 12:25, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Here is what you say based on your sources:

1. A Fox News guest (who you do not name but call high profile) called Kamala Harris the original Hawk Tuah Girl - source: The Independent.

2. The Fox News guest was criticized for calling Kamala Harris the original Hawk Tuah Girl - source: The Hindustan Times (you say "widely criticized" but cite only one source)

3. If Joe Biden steps down from the presidential election, Kamala Harris could take his place - source: CBS News

You have strung together unrelated sources to create this paragraph of facts.

This is a violation of WP:INDISCRIMINATE: [M]erely being true, or even verifiable, does not automatically make something suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Please read MOS:MISC for guidance.

Lastly, this is an article about "Hawk Tuah," not the "Hawk Tuah Girl." This further weighs against inclusion of indiscriminate mentions of the Hawk Tuah Girl. ReidLark1n (talk) 14:13, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

No one is mentioning “the Hawk Tuah girl” Just because Harris and Welch are both women does not mean this has anything to do with Welch. You are the only one bringing her up. This is solely about a high profile usage of the term concerning a major event. Bte3000 (talk) 13:34, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Let’s ignore Welch for a moment. The problem is your sources and coverage. Like Voltaire said of the Holy Roman Empire: this is neither high profile, widely reported, nor a major event. ReidLark1n (talk) 19:52, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

References

Misrepresentation of meme's unironic popularity.

I and many others only became aware of the meme via a post on Twitter that read like "Hawk Tuah is dominating pride month", leading to an ironic popularity and memes which involve trying to weave the phrase into sentences that at first seem normal. There's not much to suggest it was actually viral prior. Some millenials and boomers seem to find it genuinely funny. AlenaEK (talk) 14:05, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 28 September 2024

Hawk Tuah → Hawk tuah – Unnecessary capitalization. Article is no longer about the "Hawk Tuah Girl" (where title case would be necessary). The RM above was closed without really addressing the captalization. C F A 💬 21:49, 28 September 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. estar8806 (talk) ★ 02:31, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Support per WP:NCCPT: "Hawk tuah" and "tuah" are not proper nouns, and should be capitalised accordingly. pluckyporo ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:56, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Support as title is not a proper noun. — Dan Leonard (talk • contribs) 23:03, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

I agree, and the meme itself is not a user/nickname. Tonkarooson • (📭|Edits). 11:57, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose and reconsider a move to Haliey Welch. Now that Talk Tuah has established notability, this is no longer a case of WP:BLP1E. See Cash me outside / Danielle Bregoli, Chocolate Rain / Tay Zonday. 162 etc. (talk) 16:43, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

  I don't think opposing the move is right. The move is technically better than the current state ("Hawk Tauh" is not a proper noun), but "Haliey Welch" may be an even more appropriate target. seefooddiet (talk) 21:50, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

  Well, this is an improvement for now. Whether 1E is applicable anymore is a separate discussion that shouldn't happen in an unrelated RM. C F A 💬 01:14, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

  Most reliable sources do capitalize "Hawk Tuah", so I disagree with the proposed title. No objection to discussing the "Haliey Welch" idea in a different thread. 162 etc. (talk) 02:49, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

  You may be right; I'll withdraw my vote below. Most of the capitalization uses come from the proper noun "Hawk Tuah Girl". However, there are a good number of sources that capitalize it anyway. seefooddiet (talk) 19:56, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

  I don't think Haliey Welch can be compared to Tay Zonday or Danielle Bregoli. One has 40 + sources and the other has 100 +. She just made a podcast with Logan Paul which is not the same as being on Jimmy Kimmel and the Billboard 100. ReidLark1n (talk) 19:00, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

  Notability shouldn't be gauged by a comparison to other sources or to the state of sourcing. If the article meets notability guidelines, then it is notable regardless of other, similar articles. pluckyporo ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:21, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

  I don’t disagree but the above comment said Haliey Welch supersedes WP:BLP1E and cited those articles and, like you, I agree that we shouldn’t compare articles. ReidLark1n (talk) 21:38, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

  I like this, but I'm also fine with the title as it is. Tonkarooson • (📭|Edits). 12:02, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Support per my comment above. Edit: Actually I'm not sure, per exchange above with 162 etc. Also, "Hawk tuah" should be italicized, as it's an article about a phrase. I'll go ahead and make those changes. seefooddiet (talk) 01:20, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Weak Oppose because it is unclear whether it could become a proper noun. Some of our sources capitalize both.

ReidLark1n (talk) 19:04, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

We generally default to sentence case when it is unclear. Most sources only use "Hawk Tuah" in reference to "Hawk Tuah Girl" (a proper noun) or her products (also proper nouns). C F A 💬 20:29, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Not going to fight this one. ReidLark1n (talk) 21:39, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Oppose and consider a move to Haliey Welch. LucarioJapans (talk) 11:34, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

I oppose a move to Haliey Welch per WP:BLP1E and the previous AfD. We can't repeatedly have this discussion with different editors until we get a different answer. ReidLark1n (talk) 22:48, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose per 162 etc. Where it's used it often refers to the girl and as a proper name, so capitalising it is correct. A move to Haliey Welch might well be appropriate though.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

  Preserving my above objection - I oppose a move to Haliey Welch per WP:BLP1E and the previous AfD. We can't repeatedly have this discussion with different editors until we get a different answer. ReidLark1n (talk) 22:49, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

  Consensus can change. There has been one discussion, the AfD you linked, and there has been a new development since. I'm not sure what your point is. C F A 💬 01:37, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

  No, there has not only been one discussion. This is the third discussion regarding what the article should be about. And the "new development" is the article which you created and have been arguing meets notability and reliability guidelines. The point is that the consensus has been clear and can't be unilaterally changed. ReidLark1n (talk) 23:05, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

  It can't be unilaterally changed, but that's what consensus is for. C F A 💬 01:10, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

  I guess my problem is that, when I look at the sources used to justify expanding this article, or to create offshoots of this article, I see Vulture, Newsweek, Buzzfeed, the Express Tribune, Kotaku, Her Campus, the Hollywood Reporter, etc. Of course, there is also the occasion article by Forbes or Billboard.

  I see a major drop in the quality and reliability of the sources being used whereas this article was created, upon some opposition about notability, because of the reliability of sources like the Washington Post, Rolling Stone, the Guardian , The New York Times, etc.

  So, when we have the discussion in the future about moving this article for the umpteenth time, I would be much more likely to agree if the subsequent developments were not mostly blog or tabloid posts, but instead classic reliable sources.

  My point is, we haven't really seen a second peak when it comes to reliable sources: it's just been a bell curve. Thus, Welch still, more or less, falls under WP:BLP1E because she's really only been heavily reported about once. While I think the hybrid of Forbes and Billboard along with the less reliable sources may justify Talk Tuah, I really don't think we are yet at the point of superseding WP:BLP1E and there have been some pretty serious concerns about WP:NOTPROMO when it comes to Welch. ReidLark1n (talk) 14:28, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

  All of the publications you've listed are considered generally reliable, except (from least reliable) Her Campus, Newsweek, and BuzzFeed. C F A 💬 15:20, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

  Per WP:RSPSS:

  1. Vulture - GS, but used only to support the statement "Talk Tuah is an American podcast starring Haliey Welch, the subject of the viral internet meme "hawk tuah"";

  2. Newsweek - not generally reliable WP:NEWSWEEK;

  3. Buzzfeed - highly inconsistent WP:BUZZFEED;

  4. Express Tribune - not listed;

  5. Kotaku - not listed;

  6. Her Campus - not listed; and

  7. Hollywood Reporter - GS, but used only to support the statement "Talk Tuah is an American podcast starring Haliey Welch, the subject of the viral internet meme "hawk tuah"".

  So there's a small increase in GS reporting, but I still feel that, at most, it justified Talk Tuah but not Haliey Welch per WP:BLP1E since the articles only talk about her in relation to her WP:BLP1E event. ReidLark1n (talk) 18:20, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

  I got the rest of the reliability assessments from WP:NPPSG, in case you're wondering. But that's besides the point: Notability is not based on the presence of reliable sources in an article (or the statements they verify); it's based on the mere existence of significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. There is plenty of in-depth coverage of the podcast in independent, reliable sources, so notability there is not an issue. Whether or not that "additional" notability still falls under the "single event" is what we're discussing now. C F A 💬 03:46, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

  I still don't see reliability in express tribune and kotaku articles. Moreover significant coverage in unreliable sources doesn't establish notability.

  But let's look at these sources even further: are they talking about Haliey Welch? Or are they talking about Hawk Tuah, the Hawk Tuah Girl, or Talk Tuah? That's just the problem I'm running into. When we get down to it, won't an article on Haliey Welch be so paltry as to beg the question: why are we here? When was she born? Where was she born? Where did she go to high school? Who is pookie (this is a joke from her podcast - yes, I listened to it). Here's what it will be: (based on what the Hawk Tuah Girl article was before we moved it) a list of celebrities she met, donations she made, her podcast deals, her sponsors and brand deals, mentions of her on Fox News in relation to Kamala Harris, etc. It will constantly be running afoul of WP:NOTPROMO because that's all we know about her

  At most, maybe this gets moved to Hawk Tuah Girl with Haliey Welch in parenthesis. But still, she's the Hawk Tuah Girl or it's the Hawk Tuah meme - this is the essence of her WP:BLP1E conundrum.

  I propose because there is no deadline we wait and see if more reliable sources justify this move - if there is more than a bell curve in reliable reporting. I really don't think we should supersede WP:BLP1E because of a bump in, at most, barely reliable sources which aren't even talking about Haliey Welch. ReidLark1n (talk) 15:22, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

  Per the above, it might be worth creating a new discussion regarding a potential move to Hailey Welch. It seems this would be more likely to achieve consensus. pluckyporo ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:14, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Relisting for further discussion estar8806 (talk) ★ 02:31, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose and rename the page to Haliey Welch. She is notable in her own right, and it would make more sense for Hawk Tuah to be linked under her name. LivelytheTrain (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 17:36, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

  I disagree. The meme is infinitely more popular than her and would help more people find the page Driestbrick (talk) 17:48, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

  The Talk Tuah podcast has become quite notable in its own right, and it massive features Haliey. It would make a lot more sense for everything to be lumped together in one name. LivelytheTrain (talk) 15:38, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

  I disagree that a podcast can become notable just because it is being made no matter who is on it (if that is what you are saying). I want to see reliable reporting done on it to justify creating not only Talk Tuah but also a Haliey Welch article. I oppose moving this article altogether beyond for grammatical purposes (i.e. there should still be a page for the internet phenomenon). ReidLark1n (talk) 14:37, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

• Support This article is either about the term she used, which per the linked quote was said in lowercase, or about her. Per the AfD and the previous RM it's about the term, not the person, so we should reflect that and not try to use capitalization as some sort of weird half measure - we've made a choice, so stick to it. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:32, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Support this was my original intention with the previous move request. This article remains about the term. Any article about the person should be created separately and discussed separately. EoRdE6^(Talk) 15:13, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 10 October 2024

change "man's" to "person's" in the first introductory sentence of the article to be more inclusive to other gender identities. Hawktuahtruther (talk) 02:46, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

not done. she was talking specifically about a man Rainsage (talk) 06:09, 10 October 2024 (UTC)