Jump to content

Talk:Carrie Underwood

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 8, 2005Articles for deletionMerged
July 23, 2006Peer reviewReviewed

devAstated

[edit]

Correct: "devestated" to "devastated". 79.54.226.50 (talk) 10:03, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done Biofase flame| stalk  12:30, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 16 May 2023

[edit]

Carrie plays guitar piano drums and harmonica. You incorrectly state that her instrument is vocals. go on youtube to see i am rugjt. She plays many instruments. 24.194.246.209 (talk) 01:53, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nfl

[edit]

Why is there no mention of Carrie Underwood doing Thursday night football for over a decade now? DreamCrushr (talk) 10:09, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not a vegan

[edit]

Carrie Underwood is not a vegan [1]. Her diets includes dairy and plenty of eggs, she claims to be "95% vegan" [2]. The article needs to be updated. Psychologist Guy (talk) 18:16, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 23 September 2024

[edit]

Source: Billboard (11/4/23)

“Carrie Underwood was among the stars who took the stage at the 2023 Rock & Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony, delivering a scorching tribute to inductee George Michael by singing ‘One More Try’ in his honor. The country superstar delivered a note-perfect rendition of the powerful ballad, which served as the fourth single from Michael’s landmark 1987 album, Faith. Underwood gives a tightly controlled, but emotionally vulnerable performance. Alexdbart (talk) 13:48, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Per WP:NOTNEWS we can't cover every performance by an artist, and it's not clear why this one is especially notable. The language is also unencyclopedic, please see MOS:PEACOCK. Jamedeus (talk) 15:38, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Performance at the second inauguration of Donald Trump (misc. topic discussion)

[edit]
  • Per WP:CITEKILL it examples up to fifteen citations for the overkill of citations, however does not explicitly state how many is an overkill. As such, in the 2020–2021 for example, another sentence does feature three inline citations, and not once was it changed, citing CITEKILL. Nor was any other section including more than one singular citation. Why would this situation be any different? All three citations included are reliably sourced, with archival URL (for dead link/link rot purposes). It could hardly to be seen that three, reliable in-article citations would be seen as CITEKILL.
  • WP:ROLLINGSTONEPOLITICS states: there is unanimous consensus among editors that Rolling Stone is generally unreliable for politically and societally sensitive issues reported since 2011 (inclusive). While the consensus was unamious, it also states it is "generally unreliable" and, the case for which its included, it is reliable. In example: the inclusion of Rolling Stone in the context of the article is not one of political stance or political opinion piece. It is one mentioning Underwood's performing of "America the Beautiful" at the inauguration. In addition to speaking on her performance, it as well as cited the discussions of Underwood's inclusion in the event, which was largely covered by press media in the past week, as a secondary portion of their article. However, it did not express their own political opinion. It isn't a political piece of journalism. It's a piece about a performance, which so happened to be at a political event; it's inclusion does not violate the previously-linked discussion piece.