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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football 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.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball
Perhaps 1 million footy articles are sourced wrong! This is no excuse to not correct this one if in fact references belong under a list of references as I have been told.My76Strat (talk) 05:01, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I apologise, I know, a million "wrongs" doesn´t make one "right", it was a childish argument... I´ll try to explain myself, I undersand you quite well, but unfortunatelly, this is how most of the short footy biographies look like this days. Much has been debated in the project page regarding this, and this "formula" of short biographies has been, lets say, addopted. The attention is mostly given to the fact if the article have, or not, any sources (there is a decalared war to all unsourced articles), and if it has, that the sources are reliable (there is a list of footy sources on one of projects sub-pages). Since this page is quite a basic info biography (only containing basic info), the fact that it has 4 reliable sources can be considered quite an archivement... If the article is expanded, starting to contain perhaps more polemical info (personal life...) obviously the info must be properly sourced, but since it contains only simple information like, birth place, birth date, height, position and club career, the vast majority of articles have only a few sources mentioned, mostly "External sources", where this info can be confirmed. I think that also another reason of not having all info sourced is because the short articles start to look like this: [1]. It could be necessary, but since all info is almost repeated in each source, it is enough to simply check one of the sources. Mostly, the articles, in this cases have one, maximum two, sources, but since I am a bit perfectionist, I insist in having listed all sources that have specific info, using the 4, as complementary for all basic info mentioned on the article. FkpCascais (talk) 06:53, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
