Talk:Michael Ingham (footballer)/GA1

GA Review

I'll be doing the GA review for this article. Here are some initial suggestions:

Why no subheaders in the career section? It breaks up the text and makes it easier to find the info you are looking for.
- Done Added subheaders. Mattythewhite (talk) 07:16, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Right now, the article fails the breadth requirement. There's going to have to be some information on his personal life. Suggestions include schooling, family, marriage/dating, children, religion, or anything of that nature.
- I've had a little go at expanding this, but it'll be difficult finding information like this on a relatively minor player. Will have a look for some sources, but I'm not sure if a great amount of details on personal life are necessarily required at the criteria. Mattythewhite (talk) 07:16, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'd say it is covered in "broad in coverage". The article is about a person. His career is definitely an important aspect of his life, but so is who he is beyond that. Nikki311 16:01, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Fair enough, but the footnote for criterion 3 (a) notes "it allows shorter articles, articles that do not necessarily outline every part of the topic, and broad overviews of large topics.". As I say though, I'll have a look for some content to include. Mattythewhite (talk) 16:06, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - Included how his family is Northern Irish. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:37, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's it for now. The article will remain on hold for seven days to allow for these initial improvements. Nikki311 23:12, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What all did you add? All I see is that his family is N. Irish. If that's all that has been added, then I separate section would be un-necessary for one sentence. Also, I have this watchlisted, so you can ask me questions or comment here rather than my talk page if that is easier. Nikki311 00:08, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I can't see there being anything else to add to this article, and to be honest I think I did quite well to even find out that his family is Northern Irish. I assume you don't deem this to be sufficient to pass the article. But I disagree that a bulging personal life section is necessary, when I believe everything I'm ever going to find about this side of the subject has now been included in the article. Mattythewhite (talk) 06:48, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I posted a thread on the good article talk page (see Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations#Career and personal lives) and the other GA reviewers who responded seem to agree that at present, this article isn't broad enough to pass. I can, however, ask for a second opinion...but that's up to you...and it might take awhile. Nikki311 22:00, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't say all the replies at that section you started really agreed. But I still believe that footnote [3] of the GA criteria, "This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required by WP:FAC; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not necessarily outline every part of the topic, and broad overviews of large topics.", would allow an article that is not particularly comprehensive in terms of a subject's personal life to be allowed under the GA criteria. Besides, I've seen several articles, like Simon Wormull and Ronnie Wallwork, which have only recently passed as GAs and don't even seem to have the same amount of personal details as the Ingham article. Mattythewhite (talk) 06:53, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2nd opinion

I've asked for a second opinion. For anybody who comes to give one, the issue is whether or not the article needs more personal information to fulfill the broadness criteria of GA. Nikki311 22:38, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is not an official "second opinion" as I am probably an outlier. However, I have passed an extremely comprehensive articles on an obscure Olympic Gold Medal sprinter for which there is almost no Personal information available. And what was available was entwined with his professional life. Even a notorious baseball player like Rickey Henderson has relatively little available about his personal life. Athletes are not movie stars, except for someone like Dennis Rodman. Their personal life is kept relatively private for the most part, in my experience. Why should a description of an athlete's career be considered a "biography" in the official sense? O.J. Simpson's first several arrests for domestic violence were virtually not reported by the press. If he had not been arrested for murder, we probably would never know about them. —Mattisse (Talk) 13:22, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the Ricky Henderson has quite a bit about his early life, personal life, and thoughts about his career. I just want something that makes the article more than a list of stats/wins/losses. I'm not saying that every little detail of his life be included, just a little something more than is there currently. Nikki311 15:20, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but perhaps that's because Rickey Henderson has been given more widespread coverage than Michael Ingham. That kind of information just hasn't been made available. Mattythewhite (talk) 15:31, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

With my experience in writing FAs and GAs, lack of information isn't an excuse. Some articles just don't have the information required to be GA, so they can't be GA. Would a movie article lacking information on reception and sales be a GA even if that information wasn't available? No. Nikki311 18:15, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But I'm sure that's more of a key aspect to that type of article, and one which can easily be sourced. Whereas, I'm not sure if personal info is really that relevant and urgent for a footballer to meet GA requirements. Obviously, more depth and detail is vital for an article to successfully make it through the FA process, but GA allows articles to be more broad and generic in the information they include. Mattythewhite (talk) 18:45, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is required because it is a biography of the person. For the article to be FA, I'd expect very detailed information on his early life, family, relationships, schooling, etc (i.e. comprehensive). For GA, I just expect a sentence or two, which is quite a bit less than comprehensive. At least, can you include some more information on his injuries or some quotes related to his thoughts on major aspects of his career to break up the career stats? I've done some googling just now, so I know the man has talked about things like that. Nikki311 18:50, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a bit of expanding with some non-"statistical" information, but could you provide some of these links that you've found on this Google search? Mattythewhite (talk) 19:10, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Added a few more details regarding injuries. Mattythewhite (talk) 19:34, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aha! Found some info about his education. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:49, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(un-indent) Here's some random stuff, some may be more useful than others:

[1] - about a possibly lawsuit
[2] - article with some quotes about being on loan
[3] - bio with quote and info about football career before turning 18 ("former Northern Ireland Under 18 international")
[4] - could be useful

That educational info looks really good. Look through these and see if there is anything worth adding to the article. Nikki311 04:04, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some good stuff there, I've had a go at including some of it. Mattythewhite (talk) 10:38, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Second opinion'

Concensus seems to be that personal life is not crucial to GA. See discussion at [5]. —Mattisse (Talk) 15:22, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a second look tonight. Nikki311 18:49, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And done. Looks really great. GA pass! :) Nikki311 22:24, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic, thanks for the review and for pushing me to find the info that I was eventually able to access. Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 22:30, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]