Jump to content

Talk:Beth Mead/GA1

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

GA review

[edit]

Summary

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
  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, as shown by a source spot-check.
    a (reference section): b (inline 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Hi Spiderone, I saw the nom at women's football task force so thought why not, will make a start on this soon. I'll be way less critical than Keira Walsh GA though, I'd like to think I've learnt a lot since then. I'll start with sources then move to content. CNC (talk) 14:57, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Content

[edit]
Early life checkY

A few issues with section that needs proper summarising, I'm hoping/expecting the career sections aren't the same.

  • Mead grew up in Hinderwell, a small village near Whitby, which she described as: "a fishing town in the middle of nowhere, with a population of about 2,000. [The] sort of place where the people are outnumbered by sheep. You know the type: loads of fields, two pubs, a hairdresser and about a mile away from the local shop.", I think this could be trimmed to the first sentence, the second doesn't appear to provide any encyclopedic value, or otherwise summarised and attributed etc generally.
  • He said to her and her mother, "It's fine that you're coming down to get involved but you will be the only girl here. They are quite rough so will she be ok?" Her mother replied, "She'll be fine.", again this can be summarised to something like "her mother was ok with her being the only girl in a rough game", no need for quotations, likewise with the following sentence that could be summarised into it.
  • I loved what I was doing on the pitch and had no other worry in the world — nothing else mattered except me kicking that football. Football is my first love; my one true love. It still breaks my heart sometimes, but that's part and parcel of the game. That's still my way of switching off now: just running around on a football pitch and loving what I'm doing. That's never changed, from the six-year-old kid to the 27-year-old who's running around now., unnecessary long quote. If it were due, it should be a quote box, but assuming it's not, it should be summarised into wikivoice.

CNC (talk) 19:45, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, I'll get to reviewing this over the weekend. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 21:25, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good to know. I'll carrying on reviewing content in the meantime, though probably won't get it all done by this weekend as will be quite busy, so will take me a bit longer to do a proper job. I'm assuming we're not in a rush here anyway. CNC (talk) 12:37, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the quotes were excessive. I've trimmed and reworded a bit so hopefully it reads better now. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 11:18, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for edits, looks much better now. Apologies for delay in reviewing further content, have been meaning to but keep forgetting. Will try prioritise going forward, or otherwise pass on review to another editor if unsuccessful. CNC (talk) 18:06, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, there's no rush. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 11:36, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Youth Career checkY
Sunderland
  • "Mead scored 23 goals in as many games, and ended the season with 29 in all competitions" - not doubting this, but it's missing a citation. fulltime.thefa.com should have the stats though.
@CommunityNotesContributor: I've been searching for ages and can't find anything. Soccerway and GSA don't go far enough back. I can't find any page for on fulltime.thefa.com - it seems to only cover amateur, local leagues. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 12:04, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @Kingsif, as needs a link similar to this or this, but have no idea how to find it due to lack of search function and lack of personID for url. Kingsif found it somehow though I think. I searched for "Mead, Beth" "Sunderland" and it came up blank. The link otherwise covers non-league stats for players going back to 2003/04, so it should be there. CNC (talk) 12:18, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did manage to find Mead on that, eventually. Unfortunately, 2014 isn't covered as it's a WSL2 season and The FA doesn't seem to have any records for WSL2, probably because it's run by a separate organisation. I've had to use a Her Football Hub reference for 2014 as I really couldn't find anything else. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 13:34, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great work, but how did you find those links though? It remains illusive to me. WSL2 is supposed to be here alongside WSL, where it all was before transfering non-league stats to fulltime (as far as I understand). But instead it's disappeared which is nothing more than a bad joke. I should really write to FA about it as it's getting ridiculous at this point and affects WP:V for hundreds of players now. But I digress. To give you a heads up, career stats will need further work similar to hideous sitaution with Walsh see note. As there are league stats and cup stats but lack of clarity on WSL/League Cup and FA Cup, and seemingly no record of these statistics beyond manual counting per note on Walsh's page :/ CNC (talk) 13:59, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
From your link, I was able to go back to the league page and then change the season to 2011-12. Luckily, as Mead was top scorer that season, I could then go to her page directly and access the 12-13 stats too. I'm dreading the work to be done for Mead's career stats. That'll have to wait for another day, though, as I've spent way too long on this article today already! Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 14:42, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Even fulltime seems to have purged a significant amount of women's competition stats from/prior to 2013, I echo your sentiments about this being a ridiculous situation. If you guys still need help with Mead's stats, I'll try my best to help. Kingsif (talk) 22:59, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Mead followed by 30 goals in 28 matches" - same again it seems
It's taken me a fair while but I reckon I've sorted this now. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 13:31, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Mead was the top scorer for the team." - same again
It's taken me a fair while but I reckon I've sorted this now. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 13:31, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Mead ended the 2015 season as the leading goalscorer in the WSL with 12 goals in 14 appearances. At the age of 20, she became the youngest WSL Golden Boot winner ever." The BBC 2022 ref doesn't to verify any of this content, it's the other refs at the end of the paragraph from arseblogs it seems. This cite could just do with removing unless it serves any purpose there.
Removed but replaced with a FourFourTwo source as this source is also used to cite one of her honours. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 23:27, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In 2022, Defoe wrote an afterword to Mead's autobiography, Lioness: My Journey to Glory." - presumably there's a citation that goes here.
Added one Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 23:36, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "scoring 77 goals in 78 games" - this is duplicate info based on opening sentence. The quote is solid content, so maybe just first line can go.
Removed the duplication Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 23:36, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]

Sources look good, was expecting a lot more broken ones based on early content. The only marginally reliable source I came across was WP:DAILYMIRROR, but the claims aren't outrageous and is backed by other source as well so looks fine.

The only other questionable or broken sources were:

CNC (talk) 16:35, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CommunityNotesContributor: many thanks for the source review! I've made some amendments on each of the points. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 19:32, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great work, will get to work reviewing content next. CNC (talk) 13:20, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Kingsif (talk) 11:58, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Other comments

[edit]

Hi @CommunityNotesContributor and Spiderone:, after being pinged above I did look at the club career stats table, specifically for the domestic cups, and so far these are my findings: Kingsif (talk) 23:37, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Soccerway supports the League Cup stats for 2014, 2015, 2016. It does not have stats before that, and does not have FA Cup stats.
  • As Soccerway doesn't have league stats before 2015, it is not possible to use WP:CALC attribution for the earlier stats (i.e. with no sources relating to the seasons, we can't even do [the FA's total overall appearances] - [Soccerway's league appearances]), and separate sources are needed. If Sunderland AFC Ladies has good archives, looking through them could help, otherwise individual match reports and counting is the way to go.
  • Insofar as checking through the sources available at Wikipedia articles, in 2011–12, Sunderland did not compete in the League Cup. Same the next season... I get the sense that these stats relate to the then-Women's Premier League Cup instead, since Sunderland was in the National League. This competition should be noted in the table's footnote, and as long as you have an older archive link for the fulltime player stats page (before they condensed it to total appearances and goals, rather than separating by competition) or the link for the team's overall season stats (which still seem to separate them), one ref might do it all.
  • Soccerway's lack of FA Cup stats is total, i.e. we will also need separate sources for her Arsenal appearances and goals.
  • Arsenal also only has inconsistent player stats for the FA Cup... and for 2017 she apparently played 2 games (our table says 0)
  • The FA (fulltime) does have some FA Cup stats for National League teams (I just discovered this! No option to just look at the FA Cup, but once you're in the league results, they're present...) 2011–12 and you can change season by drop-down. That link is showing a Premier League Cup game.
  • This link is showing all of Sunderland's detailed results for the 2011–12 season, and can be used to source that. Mead's stats are WPL Cup: 4 app. 5 goals – League: 19 app. 18 goals.
  • FA Cup archives tool - It has all the fixtures and outcomes, but not player/goal stats, so it's not actually useful.
  • 2012–13 season includes FA Cup (4 appearances, 5 goals) and so could be used to source that row.
I'm happy with that. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 19:22, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh good I was about to close the GA. I'll get back to reviewing asap then. CNC (talk) 19:29, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@CommunityNotesContributor, any updates on this? IntentionallyDense (Contribs) 03:37, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@IntentionallyDense @Spiderone Sincere apologies, I haven't managed to find any time for this as editing history shows... life has caught up with me for now despite best intentions to get this finished. Should I post on talk page to see if anyone else can continue it, or just close this one for now? Sorry CNC (talk) 10:18, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would ask WT:GAN to see if anyone can pick up where you left off. Life happens, but the important part is that you're willing to say you can't finish this which will allow someone else to finish the review. IntentionallyDense (Contribs) 17:29, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OK have posted there. CNC (talk) 21:36, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Spiderone and CommunityNotesContributor: If my participation is not considered disqualifying, I could take on seeing out this review. I can see the approach so far has been to take it section by section, covering all criteria for each section at once - I can continue with this review style if that's good with Spiderone (and, CNC, it's quite helpful to see how far you've got!) Let me know, Kingsif (talk) 21:03, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm happy with this! Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 22:10, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds great, thanks a bunch Kingsif. CNC (talk) 13:49, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • A read through and there's a lot of too-long quotations which should be addressed either by original phrasings/cut quote down to key parts/quote boxes and blocks where appropriate. There's also a lot of single-line (on my not-that-wide display, at least) paragraphs, which make the article look messy (and is an indication of info being poorly incorporated). Kingsif (talk) 12:04, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • In general, the "She did X, A said Y about it" (or, in places, "She did X, and said Y") is a writing style that seems to be talking to the reader - and, worse, can seem to be trying to convince the reader of Y - rather than just presenting information. While there should be overviews and descriptive info rather than just a list of stats, this isn't that (indeed, this is almost "stat, A said Y" over and over). And while there's definitely space to feature attributed reactions, especially to exceptional things, it shouldn't be the default way of writing. I think this is one reason there's so many long quotations, but it's something that needs work in and of itself. I also know the desire to include every cool quote or emphatic statement, but we first consider how useful it is for a reader's understanding. Like, would instead writing "critics were unanimous in their praise" or something with a multi source ref be better? Which quotes are useful to highlight in boxes to paint an accurate picture for the reader? Kingsif (talk) 12:14, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Kingsif I agree with moving notable (weighted by RS usage) quotes to quote boxes, where they are lengthy, ie have been referenced by multiple sources, or from an expert in the field, and therefore deemed due, maybe there is a handful of those. Otherwise summarising praise as described with multiref, this would do well to trim content to summary style per mos. CNC (talk) 13:09, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is this review still happening? No comments since early May and it's the oldest active review by a considerable margin. Wizardman 21:14, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Waiting on editing to address proseline concerns mentioned directly above (ping @Spiderone:?) Kingsif (talk) 22:44, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Given my lack of edits on this, I'm happy for this GA to be failed for now. I'll get back to it in the future. The prose needs a lot of work. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 23:15, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, will fail this for now with hope it gets re-nominated in future :) May work on it to help, too, but no promises, it's hard enough to keep up with other articles (though GAs do not insist on frequent completeness updates like FAs, still). Kingsif (talk) 23:38, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Beth_Mead/GA1&oldid=1298008105"