Talk:Freddy Shepherd
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | 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] | ||
I challenge the factual basis of this article over the following paragraph.
In a speech at a 2004 Football Association conference Shepherd defended the distribution of profits from the sale of television rights, causing widespread outrage when he stated that that the 'elite clubs' such as Newcastle, Manchester United, Chelsea and Arsenal owed little to the lower leagues. The only problem with this is that the words 'elite clubs' and 'Newcastle United' should not be used in the same article, let alone sentence.
The final sentence is presented as a fact when it is only an opinion. This sentence implies that two things mentioned earlier in the paragraph are factually true when they are matters of contention. Firstly that elite clubs owe little to lower leagues, a matter which divides opinions in the English football community. Secondly, that Newcastle United is not an elite club, a fact that is impossible to prove since deciding what makes a club elite is very subjective.
This whole paragraph should be revised.
- I have put an NPOV tag on the article as it currently reads like a rant against Shepherd. Yes, Shepherd is unpopular among large sections of the Newcastle support, but that's no excuse for this heavily biased article. Oldelpaso 09:56, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
- It's not biased, he has done all of those things and no negative points are made that aren't either justified or tempered with a word such as "alleged". If you can think of anything positive to say about him, add it in. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lawsonrob (talk • contribs) .
- The article has several examples of weasel words used to disguise critical statements. e.g. "Bruce, also an NUFC board member, is widely believed by many to be the driving force behind the family's business success." Who are the many? On what basis do they hold this belief? Phrases like "Past experience, however, should have told him that this is not always the case in football. Many Newcastle United fans believe this statement holds some personal irony for Shepherd, alleging that he and deputy chairman Douglas Hall pay themselves Rolls Royce salaries for unsatisfactory performances as club directors" sound very much like soapbox statements. Is it really necessary to state every epithet beginning with "Fat" that Newcastle supporters have used to describe Shepherd? While all incidents involving (often deserved) negative press for Shepherd are included, basic biographical details (even date of birth and nationality) are missing. There must be plenty of information in the Newcastle press about how Shepherd made his fortune, details of the takeover which led to his seat on the board, etc. With this in mind, I am restoring the NPOV tag. Oldelpaso 16:20, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
- It's not biased, he has done all of those things and no negative points are made that aren't either justified or tempered with a word such as "alleged". If you can think of anything positive to say about him, add it in. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lawsonrob (talk • contribs) .
