Talk:Byron Harrison/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Sarastro1 (talk · contribs) 23:00, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid that I must fail this article entirely on sourcing concerns. Although the prose looks fairly good and the article seems to be comprehensive, the sourcing looks to be completely unreliable. I read just over half-way through the article before I gave up having found too many problems to make it worth continuing.

Two minor prose issues in the lead:

"and had a hugely fruitful 2006–07 campaign": Informal and POV language in the lead
"and made over hundred appearances for the club": Timespan?

External links:

All Staines News links are dead. (see tools at the top of this page)

Sourcing (up to first paragraph of Carshalton Athletic):

"A week later, he scored his first professional goal, scoring twenty minutes after coming on a substitute in Havant's FA Cup tie against Cirencester Town.": Ref says he scored in 89th minute in a match against Cirencester. Also supports the competition, but not that it was his first professional goal, that he was a substitute or that it was 20 minutes after coming on. I think you need a double ref to what is now ref 4, his appearances. This would cover it all.
"sporadic substitute appearances": A little close to the source. Suggest something like "played intermittently for the club as a substitute."
"all of which were from the substitute's bench": The source shows one starting appearance.
"Harrison started the 2006–07 season playing for Worthing of the Isthmian League Premier Division, having signed for the club on a free transfer in July 2006": Three refs seems a little excessive: but none of the refs support July 2006 or it being a free transfer.
"In January 2007, Harrison suffered a leg injury that ruled him out for six weeks. On his return from injury, on 3 March": No ref for this in the following citations.
"He added another goal to his tally in a 2–0 away win at Margate": I can find no reference to this in the sources cited.
"Harrison ended the 2006–07 season as Boreham Wood's top goalscorer, having scored 13 times in 21 appearances.": Source simply says "Leading Goalscorer still at the club: Byron Harrison"
"In September 2007, having failed to find the net once, he was demoted to the substitute's bench for Boreham Wood's game against Harlow Town.": Source supports demoted to bench, but it only says "Byron Harrison has been a little subdued of late" to support the rest.
"Despite making several starting appearances, Harrison failed to find the net once during the first two months of the 2007–08 season."" Source says: "Striker Byron Harrison was released by the club before this encounter, leaving Wood with just three players on the bench." Nothing about appearances or failing to score.
"He was released by Boreham Wood on 30 October 2007": No. This is the date of the newspaper report, which states he was released before the match it was reporting.
"Following a short spell at Harrow Borough,": The two refs given: the first says he played for Southend and Ashford, the second says that he played in one particular match for Harrow.
"Harrison signed for Ashford Town (Middlesex) in January 2008, making his debut in a match against Kingstonian." The ref says he played in the reported match against Kingstonian, but nothing else.
"In March 2010, Harrison signed for Isthmian League Premier Division side Carshalton Athletic, rejecting contract offers from Staines Town and Margate respectively.": Unless I am missing something, the ref given only says about his run of form in the team. It does not mention who wanted to sign him.
"Harrison made his debut for Carshalton in a 0–0 home draw against Hendon, a game in which he hit the crossbar in the second-half.": Ref does not mention his debut.
"He scored his first goal for the club in a 1–1 draw away at Margate, and also scored in Carshalton's 2–2 home draw with Harrow Borough in April 2010. Ironically, Harrison's hat-trick on the final day of the season in a 4–1 away win at Wealdstone meant that Carshalton stayed up, thus relegating his former club Ashford." I cannot check ref 27 which seems to be about Ashford's defeat and not about Harrison. The other ref mentions his hat-trick but nothing about the other facts in the sentence. Also, the "ironic" (POV) fact seems to be synthesis as the source on the 4-1 win does not mention this and it is unlikely the other source does, although I cannot check.

Although I did not check the rest of the article, I noticed that the career refs section has references for the teams and years played which are cited to match reports used earlier in the article. His statistics seem to be completely unreferenced. I assume they are not made up, so where did they come from?
Also, Findmypast is not a reliable source and really should not be used.

Aside from minor glitches, there were no obvious problems in the rest of the article, but given that there are so many problems with sourcing, I have to fail this article. I am not quite sure what has happened here. I assume that everything is correct and the information must come from somewhere, unless it is OR. If it is correct, it MUST be cited correctly or it cannot be a GA. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:49, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
A few minor issues spotted but nothing serious that could not be easily fixed.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
Serious issues here. Facts are either not cited, or the citations do not support the article. The sources used seem to be fine as far as they go, although FindmyPast is used and this in not a RS. I cannot be certain that the article contains OR, but it certainly appears that way.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
No obvious problems from a first reading. It would need looking at more carefully once sourcing is sorted out.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
No problems that I saw.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
No images
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it have it reassessed. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:49, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]