Talk:Guy Lafleur

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

[edit] Name

Just in case people wonder, I moved the page from "Guy LaFleur" to "Guy Lafleur" because, in the French language, in Quebec or France, names like "Lafleur" do not take a second capital letter. Despite the fact that it seems widespread (probably based on the celtic Mc and Mac), the American custom of putting a second majuscule on the name of Franco-Americans, people with Quebecois descent, is not correct, at least not in the original French speaking context. --Liberlogos 00:48, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Article seems to have partiality problems

Hey there, sorry to do this anonymously but this is the first time I've ever made one of these comments. I was reading this article was troubled by some comments and lack of professionalism. For example, from the introduction "one of the greatest and most popular players ever to play professional ice hockey"; I just read the Gretzky article and the contributor there (eventually) admirably refrained from making hyperbolic comment like this. This also sets the tone for the rest of the article, with "he played with a thrilling style that marked him out as the most exciting professional hockey player of his era and, arguably, of all time". I think you guys call this a POV problem, implying that the author's Point Of View is interfering with imparting a neutral tone. Even if it's not, the subjectiveness of the statement makes it nearly impossible to prove one way or another. I would suggest either mediating the enthusiasm of these lines or simply removing them entirely.

The statistical and historical breakdown is fine, I have no problem with that, and for the most part it's a good, descriptive article.

In terms of lack of professionalism I think the line "he borrowed it for the weekend without telling anyone to show his friends back home in Thurso where he set it out on his front lawn for all his neighbors to see!" is at fault. I'm trying to think of any cases in an encyclopedia that would require an exclamation mark (outside of a quote) and can't think of a single one. Would remove the bang and potentially reword the sentence so it's a bit less admiring.

One last thing that someone might consider adding is Guy's attempts to re-enter the public consciousness with endorsements (some kind of juice) and maybe mention the "flower power" phenomenon.