Talk:Paddy Bradley

Latest comment: 7 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Former good article nomineePaddy Bradley was a Sports and recreation good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 2, 2009Good article nomineeNot listed


Teaching

edit

Paddy now teaches maths at St Mary's Collage, in Clady. Should this be added? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.205.164 (talk) 17:54, 17 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Londonderry

edit

Was Londonderry written just to annoy people, i say put it back to the original way, when has Derry been called Londonderry in GAA circles? Frainc 17:23 16 September 2006.

I agree. (Derry Boi 18:12, 16 September 2006 (UTC))Reply

Its been changed back, this gonna turn into a silly argument, lets have 24 hour vote on it? Write agree near your preferred choice. Frainc 2145 16 September 2006

Derry

Agree

Agree (Derry Boi 21:23, 16 September 2006 (UTC))Reply

Londonderry It's got nothing to do with GAA circles. I am aware that the GAA calls its couty team County Derry, and that's perfectly fine. However what was changed is the fact it was referring to a county and country of birth. This has nothing to do with the GAA hence it uses the standard geographical terms as per the WP:IMOS. Ben W Bell talk 21:30, 16 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

WP:IMOS is the biggest load of crap 5 people agree on something and its a wiki wide policy bull !. Common naming as per all other articial should prevail so Derry and Irelad are fine (Gnevin 02:08, 17 September 2006 (UTC))Reply

GA Review

edit
This review is transcluded from Talk:Paddy Bradley/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Start of review

edit

Hi, I'll be reviewing this article. The rules for GA reviews are stated at Good Article criteria. I usually do reviews in the order: coverage; structure; detailed walk-through of sections (refs, prose, other details); images (after the text content is stable); lead (ditto). Feel free to respond to my comments under each one, and please sign each response, so that it's clear who said what.

When an issue is resolved, I'll mark it with   Done. If I think an issue remains unresolved after responses / changes by the editor(s), I'll mark it   Not done. Occasionally I decide one of my comments is off-target, and strike it out

BTW I've occasionally had edit conflicts in review pages, and to reduce this risk I'd be grateful if you'd let me know when you're most active, so I can avoid these times. --Philcha (talk) 18:41, 13 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Coverage

edit

I think there are some significant gaps:

  Done *School & college / university - apart from academic aspects incl qualifications gained, that may have been where he found he had an aptitude for Gaelic football, or some other sport at which he was good but gave up to pursue Gaelic football. --Philcha (talk) 19:09, 13 May 2009 (UTC)Reply


Re the bio stuff:

  •   DoneThe items you've added need citations. If they're covered by a ref already used in the same para, the usual convention is that the ref goes at the end of a block of text that it supports, within the same para, until you use another citation - e.g. sentence 1, sentence 2, [ref A], sentence 3, sentence 4, [ref B] sentence 5, [ref A].
  • (comment) If sources are in short supply, you have to squeeze dry the ones you have - e.g. Bradley played half-forward at school, acording to Irish Indep.
  • (comment) You may well need to try approaches other than Google (BTW there seem to be a heck of a lot of Bradleys in Ireland) E.g. contact Bradley's club and see if they can give you leads; and supporters' clubs, if they exist; libraries, don't just visit or search online catalogues, ask librarians, as finding stuff is what they do and they're usually delighted to get a break from all the "housework"; contact newspapers that cover the sport and / or the area where Bradley lives and plays (e.g. "births, marriages and deaths" columns); explain the types of source you need for WP (e.g. newspapers and books preferred; blogs & forums not accepted as refs but might be useful as leads). I realise this will take time. --Philcha (talk) 06:49, 14 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Structure

edit

  Done Based on competitor bios I've edited (chess; 5 GAs) and a sportsperson article I reviewed for GA a while ago (it passed), I suggest:

  • "Early life" section first, covering birth, family, hometown(s), school(s), possibly his start in the game.
  • Football career.
  • Personal life, taking up where "Early life" left off.
  • Style, strengths & poss weaknesses as a player, and his personality as a player - e.g. easy or hard to manage, placid or fiery on the field, attitude to training, anything you find that's relevant while looking for the other things.

However if you know or discover anything that makes this structure look wrong for this article, let me know. --Philcha (talk) 19:09, 13 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Since my comments so far imply quite significant changes, I'll hold off the section-by-section walkthrough until the existing issues are resolved. --Philcha (talk)

Early and personal life

edit

Playing career

edit
  •   Done Overall the structure looks odd to me. In other team games of which I know a little, players are included in regional & national teams after proving their worth at club level, so it's logical to cover club record first, see, e.g. articles about soccer or rugby or American football players. If Gaelic football works differently, that would have to be explained - I notice Bradley played his 1st Derry game at the age of 18. --Philcha (talk) 09:09, 14 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
  •   Not done (mainly to remind reviewer!) Gaelic football seems to have its own conventions for player's performance statistics. The first instance needs an explanation, includng why the leading zeroes, probably as a footnote. I'd use a separate "Notes" section for this rather than an ordinary ref, as I suspect most readers don't read refs. See [[2]] for techniques. The right place for such a note depends on whether the section gets re-ordered. BTW IS see 2 separate formats, e.g. "2-38 (44)" and "2-07" - both need explanation. --Philcha (talk) 09:09, 14 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
  •   Not done It would be helpful somewhere to include how big Bradley is (Derry profile) - even the less tall players are pretty solid hunks, and that gives the impression that it's quite a physical game; for instance the Derry profile shows a lot of players in the 13-14st range, and in soccer teams usually only goalies and the occasional centre-back are in that range. BTW you should also give metric equivalents -{{convert}} is a tool you should learn to love (I do, I do, I do), as it formats per WP:MOSNUM as well as doing the arithmetic. --Philcha (talk) 09:09, 14 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
    • You mean weight? I thought there was a consensus somewhere not to include weight in sports articles as it can constantly change (I may be wrong on this)? I can include it if you want though. I'll also have a go later at editing the infobox so that height can be converted to metric units. Derry Boi (talk) 10:34, 14 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
      • I'm not a sports specialist, so I don't know whether there is a consensus somewhere not to include weight in sports articles. "as it can constantly change" applies to boxing and possibly to other low-frequency combat sports, but for adult male competitors in other sports significant weight change is usually a sign of trouble, see e.g. Jim Baxter - especially in games like soccer and Gaelic football, where play is once or more a week during the season. Note "male" - anorexia is common among female competitors because their higher natural subcutaneous fat % and the top-heaviness of even A-cup boobs are handicaps, see e.g Dying To Win and this Google search. Check with the sport Wikiproject if you like, but I think it's valid and makes a point here. --Philcha (talk) 11:05, 14 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Club

edit
I copyedited. --Philcha (talk) 19:17, 4 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Inter-county

edit
edit

(to be done when any issues in the main text have been resolved) link checker

edit

(to be done when any issues in the main text have been resolved) shortcut for en.wikipedia.org with redirected and disambig page options selected

Use of images

edit

(to be done when any issues in the main text have been resolved)

Lead

edit

(to be done when any issues in the main text have been resolved)

  • I think this should be passed/failed soon as it doesn't look like much is being done. Spiderone 15:25, 29 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
    Philcha has been more than patient with the reviewer. Nearly four months after the GA review began, there are still outstanding textual issues, that he has been reminded about on the talk page. I'm failing this myself, even though I'm not the reviewer. This will give you an indefinite amount of time to finish all the issue and re-nom. Wizardman 18:12, 2 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

- - - - - please add review comments /responses above this line - - - - -
If you want to start a new section of the Talk page while this review is still here, edit the whole page, i.e.use the "edit" link at the top of the page.

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Paddy Bradley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:55, 31 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Paddy Bradley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:41, 4 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Paddy Bradley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:12, 4 June 2017 (UTC)Reply