Jump to content

Talk:Fred Vehmeier

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sourcing is still overly primary/non-independent

[edit]

Much of the article is still based on things like vital records, wedding announcements, student newspapers (never independent, rarely RS), a police blotter, raw statistics, PR from his own college, criminal proceedings related to wife abandonment (not actually discussed in the article) etc. Nearly 100% of the material from before and after he was a coach is from such sources or from utterly trivial hyperlocal "news-around-town" items like "Fred Vehmeier, Jr., who is attending school in Dixon, spent Saturday and Sunday at home." There isn't a single source demonstrating he received any notice outside of the towns he lived in or outside of the two months he was the coach of a small university that wouldn't even join the NCAA for another 10 years, wouldn't join the College Division/D-II for 40 years, and wouldn't become D-I FCS for another 100 years.

Of the material that isn't objectively trivial/non-independent, the plurality derives from brief blurbs--a laudatory hiring announcement, routine recaps of the five matches under his tenure, and other run-of-the-mill contemporaneous news--over a two month period in one tiny local newspaper. We know that several of the reporters for that newspaper--including one author cited in the article--during and around that time were simultaneously students of the college he coached at, and several more had been students there at some point prior, so we don't even have a guarantee that the regular sports reporter at the Grand Forks Herald was actually independent.

To comply with NPOV, the article needs to drastically reduce the routine trivia and flowery content sourced to approbatory news articles from overtly biased hyperlocal newspapers. JoelleJay (talk) 00:42, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
Passed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:25, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion 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.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Fred Vehmeier/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Gonzo fan2007 (talk · contribs) 16:44, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


I'll review this. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:44, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):
    b (citations to reliable sources):
    c (OR):
    d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):
    b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. 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):

Overall:
Pass/Fail:

· · ·


Comments

[edit]
  • Question about the image: are you sure this is the right guy? The source of the image is FindAGrave, which isn't necessarily reliable.
  • I did a light copyedit here.
  • The last section, on Family and Later years, just combine all the sentences into one paragraph.
  • I understand the desire to add a table for his coaching, but with one season and nothing of note, I don't really feel like it contributes to the article much.
  • Source spot checks: 1 and 2 I don't have access to. Checked #5, #9, #13, #16, #21, #23 and #28
    • Ref #28, does that need "url-access=subscription" or can you clip the specific article? The article isn't accessible to me.

Looks good, putting on hold. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 22:44, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Just letting you know it'll probably take a few days for me to get to any of these good article nominations - hope that's alright. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:36, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • No worries. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:14, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • Still working on it; by the way, I found a quote from the 1914 UND yearbook that might be able to add some more to the article: a special coach was hired, Vehmeier of the University of Illinois. He with the assistance of "Gullie" gradually whipped the team into shape, and by the time of the A. C. game could well be proud of his efforts. That game was an epoch-making game in the annals of U. N. D. We won, 3 to 0; but the mere winning is not the big thing, not the thing to be remembered. The college spirit that had long seemed slumbering, suddenly awoke and proved its existence and mighty powers. The team back ed by such support was almost omnipotent. Each on-looker was lifted out of himself and forgetful of all save his institution and the glory of his team. The air was electric with tense loyalty and all conquering patriotism. Whenever our goal was endangered, the crowds unconsciously arose and with head s uncovered sang Alma Mater as it was never sung before, or followed "Andy" Seymour in cheering, that no one will ever forget. And the band rushing down to the goal line would play Alma Mater, again and again, till the yellow and green were beaten back and our goal again in safety. That day, November 6, 1912, was the most memorable day in our foot ball history; and in the remembrance of it, the thrills and college enthusiasm aroused there, are felt anew. Long may its memory live to be an encouragement and inspiration in future gridiron battles! Do you think any parts of that should be added? BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:45, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up comments

[edit]

I think there are two outstanding questions BeanieFan11:

  • The source of the image, is it reliable?
  • The necessity of the table?

Let me know what you think. Neither item is a fatal flaw for passing the article, but would be good to have some responses to those items before moving forward. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:16, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Lightburst talk 16:16, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
  • ... that of newly-hired coach Fred Vehmeier, one newspaper said "Any candidate for the university football team who gets a bit sassy can count on a beating, if this new coach is the man he looks to be"? Source: Grand Forks Herald

Improved to Good Article status by BeanieFan11 (talk). Self-nominated at 17:19, 14 September 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Fred Vehmeier; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: @BeanieFan11: Good article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:30, 25 September 2023 (UTC) Onegreatjoke, there are still substantial issues noted on the talk page, although I recognize DYK doesn't really evaluate NPOV, breadth, or notability. JoelleJay (talk) 23:21, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone explain how this article meets notability criteria. It seems so insignifiant that I though it was a joke. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BobBadg (talk • contribs) 18:57, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vehmeier was the head coach of a team that's now a Division I football program, has several decent pieces of coverage (WP:NBASIC/WP:GNG), and was previously brought to AFD, where there was no consensus to delete. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:00, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
...for 4 games, in 1912. This is trivia. BobBadg (talk) 21:10, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What matters is that he has sufficient coverage to pass WP:NBASIC, which allows articles to be kept if they can be improved to a decent size by combining sources (and this clearly passes considering that there was enough to develop this into a good article); the fact that he coached what is now a Division I football program only adds to his notability. BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:23, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Division I football" - means nothing, I would suggest, to anyone outside the USA. In the UK, for instance, it would mean that the team played in the highest level of professional soccer. But this article refers to an amateur college team, that played other regional teams (was it even in a league at that time?). I can see how this article would be of great interest to fans of the history of American Football, and from that point of view it is an interesting and well-researched bit of trivia. For everyone else (i.e. the vast majority of English speakers globally),it's the sort of thing that makes Wikipedia an irrelevant joke rather than a serious attempt at being an encyclopedia. BobBadg (talk) 05:30, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The thing is, the US is one of the largest and most influential countries in the world, so you can't say that "Vehmeier is from the U.S. and only known there so that means he can't have an article" - in fact, its ridiculous to suggest that any topic should be removed because its from a certain country. But we're getting besides the point - what matters is that he passes the relevant notability criteria. BeanieFan11 (talk) 12:50, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Two points: (1) of course the US is important, but the point is that American Football isn't that important a sport globally; for instance, in the Wikipedia article on Sport it doesn't make the top 10 in terms of popularity. (2) The notability criteria state '...Wikipedia's concept of notability applies this basic standard to avoid indiscriminate inclusion of topics. Article and list topics must be notable, or "worthy of notice"'. This article is a good example of such indiscriminate inclusion, as it just isn't 'worthy of notice' except to an exceedingly specialist readership. BobBadg (talk) 10:14, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Two points: (1) of course the US is important, but American Football isn't that important a sport globally (I realise that this is difficult for Americans to comprehend) - in the Wikipedia article on Sport it doesn't make the top 10 in terms of popularity. (2) The notability criteria state '...Wikipedia's concept of notability applies this basic standard to avoid indiscriminate inclusion of topics. Article and list topics must be notable, or "worthy of notice"'. BobBadg (talk) 10:14, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Suggesting that a sport enormously popular that receives extensive coverage should not have their figures receive Wikipedia articles – even when those figures pass WP:GNG and WP:NBASIC (which, actually, are the only things that matter here) – because the sport is not globally popular (just in a few major countries like US/Canada...) is ... ridiculous. BeanieFan11 (talk) 13:56, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, your arguments that American football is not globally popular is completely irrelevant as the notability guidelines do not say anywhere that "those not from the most well-known sports do not receive articles". BeanieFan11 (talk) 13:58, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
QED BobBadg (talk) 15:54, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image

[edit]

I don't think the image is of the right guy. It doesn't look like the Fred Eldon Vehmeier pictured in a U of Illinois yearbook and at FamilySearch.

I suspect that the photo in question is from the 1870s, before Vehmeier was born. Note that the original uncropped photo from FindaGrave is captioned "Ormsby, Chicago". Other antique photographs with this caption, printed in the same font, have an address on the back: 309 West Madison St., Chicago.[1][2][3] This address corresponds to the studio of photographer Elon D. Ormsby, who worked in California for most of his career and was in Chicago for only a few years in the 1870s.[4] -- T. Cadwallader Phloog (talk) 21:51, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Fred_Vehmeier&oldid=1207338780"