Talk:Waterford IT GAA

Gaelic games Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gaelic games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gaelic games 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.Gaelic gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Gaelic gamesTemplate:WikiProject Gaelic gamesGaelic games articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Ireland Low‑importance

	Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland 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.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that an image or photograph of Waterford IT GAA be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Major overhaul, much more to be done

Wow... what a doozie. Sugar-sweet peacock language everywhere, no sources, no commas, no consideration of the fact that time will pass after the article's creation. I try not to be rude, but this article easily surpassed a lot of self-promoting delusional musicians in its inappropriate aggrandizing of the subject.

I've reworked a large portion of the History section to purge the peacocks. Wikipedia is not an appropriate venue to gush about the strength of the club, etc. I tried to leave all potentially factual information, in spite of the fact that zero sources are provided. I did delete a large chunk of potentially-factual information because it simply didn't have enough info for me to verify what the original editor was talking about. The "upcoming book," for example. I did find a book about Waterford IT GAA, and nearly adjusted the section to talk about it before realizing I may very well have found a completely different book (The Ecstasy and the Agony, by Damien Tiernan). Waterford's "upcoming" sports scholarships were another. I see that Waterford offers athletic scholarships, but are these the same referred to in the article? Reworking from a perspective that holds some awareness of time passing after the article's creation will be necessary if details like this are to be included, because as the article stood, there was no practical way to connect the pieces.

Anyway, I think I've left the article in some kind of workable state, and I'm removing the peacock template, as I think that issue has been fixed. If anyone disagrees, I'd suggest simply removing the offending lines, as most of the peacocks I removed had no factual contributions anyway. There is obviously a long way to go here, namely with sourcing.

Thanks! Skeletor3000 (talk) 21:14, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]