Talk:Andrew Madley

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Football

	Association football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football 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.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Referees Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of the Referees WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Referees. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.RefereesWikipedia:WikiProject RefereesTemplate:WikiProject RefereesReferees articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

West Ham VAR Controversy

I understand that not everyone agrees with the recent edit that I made to the career section, hence why it was reverted. As I stated in my edit summary, if reverted, I’d be open to discuss this on the talk page.

There is no problems with reliable sources covering this, with a simple search on Google providing us with a fair few sources. If the ‘controversy’ (probably a better word to describe it) is deemed notable, then the career section in my opinion would be the best place for it.

In regards to the controversy sections in bios are not a great idea statement, I’d politely disagree with this. It just has to be done carefully and correctly. I don’t want to necessarily compare this to any other pages, but other pages on Wikipedia have controversy sections that are carefully worded.

In any case, I think the main problem is a case of WP:TOOSOON, at least this is the indication I got from the edit summary. Pinging @Aircorn to elaborate further. Fats40boy11 (talk) 11:50, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would go more UNDUE than TOOSOON, but that does apply here as well. It is undue to focus on one decision in one game (with obligatory quote from disgruntled coach) in a referees bio who has refereeed professional football for 14 years. It is pretty routine for a losing coach to blame the loss on the referee and if we include minor incidents like this then the article will just consist of so called controversies (it is not even clear that they made a wrong call - and even if they did it wouldn't matter much as we don't include every little mistake made by a player in their bio). If it has a long term effect (rule changes, impact on their career etc) then there might be a case for including it. Failing that, articles on the game or season are much better fits for this than the referee BLP. Aircorn (talk) 01:21, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]