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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gymnastics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gymnastics 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.GymnasticsWikipedia:WikiProject GymnasticsTemplate:WikiProject GymnasticsGymnastics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's sport (and women in sports), a WikiProject which aims to improve coverage of women in sports on Wikipedia. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Women's sportWikipedia:WikiProject Women's sportTemplate:WikiProject Women's sportWomen's sport articles
This is an opinion. One of the sources that contains this line is an obituary from 2007; the obit is not credited to an author. The exact same line was lifted, word-for-word, for a college thesis paper in 2016 by a student at the University of Ljublani. (Some might say plagiarized). I don't believe those two sources qualify as being reliable enough to include such a line in the lead. Even mentioning it in the body is problematic, as we don't have the name of the author who originated the line - what do we say? "The anonymous author of her obituary called her...."? Seems like overkill to include it. Benicio2020 (talk) 16:12, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Specifically, it's the line "najpomembnejša ženska slovenske telesne kulture", translated as "the most important woman of Slovenian physical culture", that is identical in the anonymous obit and then in the student's college paper 9 years later. Benicio2020 (talk) 18:58, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I could have very easily quite some time ago said that the 5 words bandied about so commonly these days, "The Greatest of All Time", are also opinion. Yet those 5 words, or often abbreviated/truncated into the term "GOAT", are often applied to the leaders in so many Wikipedia bio articles to athletes and other classes of individuals. So any argument based merely on "this is an opinion" to remove a laudatory statement for an individual on their Wikipedia bio leader is not sufficient, in and of itself, to stand as a reason for removal of that content.
You also say, Benicio2020, regarding these 5 words, "najpomembnejša ženska slovenske telesne kulture", "The exact same line was lifted, word-for-word, for a college thesis paper in 2016 by a student at the University of Ljublani". You state that as if it was a fact, yet you offer absolutely no proof, whatsoever that this is the case. So, that is yet another strike against your reasoning for removal of this content.
It is true that those 5 words are technical and more unique than merely "The greatest of all time", however they are also much more specific and constrained to make a specific point, and are nowhere near as overlooming and laudatory as the 5 words "the greatest of all time", so that makes challenging them as something to be included in a leader more questionable because it is not such a huge claim.
Even if the 5 words in question were from the same author...so what? Even just including one of those 2 sources should still be permissable, as it is appropriate content for a leader in a biographical article. But you don't even agree on keeping just one of them in the leader.
***Probably most important of all these points***, if you have a problem with the author of the diploma (you refer to it as a thesis, and I did use the thesis reference template for citation, however it is actually self-referred to by its author as "diploma") and are calling their integrity and qualification into question, you are not only discounting them, you are also discounting their advisors and the department and the university from which they graduated because those individuals and groups put their mark of approval on the diploma and allowed the student to graduate and for the diploma to be published. So, not only are you calling into question the authority and/or integrity of Sanja Vreča , you are also calling into question the authority of Dr. Ivan Čuk and Dr. Tomaž Pavlin who both presided over the approval of this diploma, as well as the "Fakulteta Za Šport" (Faculty of Sport) of the "Univerza v Ljubljani" (University of Ljubljana) and the University of Ljubljana, itself, which is the largest and oldest university in its nation. I would also add that Drs Čuk and Pavlin also presided over the publication and graduation of the Thesis (more prestigious/authoritative than an undergraduate diploma presentation) cited so many times in this article - Bogomira Brložnik's "Jelica Helena Zoe Vazzaz: Legenda Slovenske Gimnastike", so apparently, Drs Čuk and Pavlin have approved Vazzaz as a subject most worthy of study and publication from their students. You could proceed to question the authority they have to back the importance of Vazzaz and for whatever oversight they might have in noticing or not or approving or not the usage of the 5 words in question, "najpomembnejša ženska slovenske telesne kulture" and them being aware or not (or even having a hand in it or not) of the possibility of those 5 words having been lifted by Vreca from the previous newspaper article, but if you do so, your issue is with them, not with my including the fact that Vazzaz has been called those 5 words and that the stamp of approval of those 5 words has been applied by multiple professors, and their academic department, and their university. And to top it all off, if you are arguing with the integrity of this 5-word statement and paper and authorship, as I said before, you are arguing with Dr. Ivan Čuk, a highly respected university professor and specialist in his field evidenced by the fact that he has, in the past, been the head of his academic department, and is and has been for all of its publishing history the Editor in Chief of "Science of Gymnastics Journal" which is a professional academic journal, with its own registered issn number, that is currently in its 14th year, and has a diverse international editorial board that also includes prominent officials from within the FIG (International Gymnastics Federation), itself, which is THE international governing body of the sport of gymnastics.
In summary, the issue of authority over the usage of these 5 words as has been applied to Vazzaz goes way higher-up in a chain of responsibility than just one undergraduate's diploma presentation. The authority comes from multiple university professors (one of them being a very highly-respected specialist in his field), their academic department, and a university that is the largest and oldest university in its nation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by QuakerIlK (talk • contribs) 08:25, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
