Talk:Frenemies (podcast)

This article was nominated for deletion on 1 June 2021. The result of the discussion was redirect.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

YouTube Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject YouTube, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of YouTube and related topics 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.YouTubeWikipedia:WikiProject YouTubeTemplate:WikiProject YouTubeYouTube articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject YouTube To-do:

A list of articles needing cleanup associated with this project is available. See also the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects.

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : see list.
Assess : Apply the assessment scale on Unknown-importance YouTube articles + Unassessed YouTube articles
Cleanup : See cleanup listing
Maintain : This WikiProject
Stubs : Category:Stub-Class YouTube articles
Other :
- Substitute {{WikiProject YouTube/Invite Members}} on user talk pages
- Check out edit requests on Talk:List of YouTubers

Podcasting Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Podcasting, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of notable podcasts and podcast-related information 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.PodcastingWikipedia:WikiProject PodcastingTemplate:WikiProject Podcastingpodcasting articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Too much gossip and Twitter sourcing[edit]

This reads like it should be in a gossip magazine, not an encyclopedia. What would the article look like with strict high-quality RS sourcing, and without swathes of primary sourcing to tweets? - David Gerard (talk) 10:04, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I thought information sourced via tweet was allowed under stringent guidelines which this seems to fit. As far as reading like it should be in a gossip magazine, I’m not exactly sure what you mean by that, I tried to source solely factual neutral information that I could cite via credible sources. Please feel free to let me know what changes you think should be made and what areas you specifically are concerned about Kdog5454 (talk) 07:04, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I should also add, the twitter sourcing is for tweets that were linked in articles, I provided the tweets only when using direct quotes from them. Kdog5454 (talk) 07:05, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]