Talk:WAGs

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Melanie Slade

Hi there. Having looked at the article for Melanie Slade, and after some discussion on the talk page of the article, there is a suggestion that her article be merged with this one as she is not notible enough to have her own article. Comments? Lynnathon 11:23, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Oppose - Melanie Slade is certainly notable enough. She's a regular in the British tabloids. Robwingfield (talk) 07:59, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose merging Melanie Slade. The WAGs article was substantially re-written about a week ago. I do not think the article about Melanie Slade should simply be deleted, but it should not be merged with this one either. I have added a ref to MS.--IXIA 16:49, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia mention?

I'm a little cautious of mentioning that there's a debate on wikipedia about Melanie Slade's article. I tend to think wikipedia should avoid mentioning wikipedia unless it would be odd not to. Plus whether or not she ends up getting a wikipedia article will be evident on this page without a mention. If she doesn't her link will go red, and if she does it will stay blue. How into keeping that sentence are you? Vickser 22:40, 8 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] There is a reason!

I'm not that committed. The point being made is that, in a short space of time, someone has gone from being virtually unknown to being the subject of much attention and debate. I'm not drawing attention to the W article as such - indeed I avoided putting a link to MS myself (someone added that), but included a few sentences about her, which I think are nevertheless worthwhile, mainly to help avoid the article about her being dumped here! (In fact, poor though it is, it's been retained for now.) The ref seemed to me a good (attestable!) illustration of Andy Warhol's point about people being famous for 15 minutes and what it might mean. But if you feel strongly, I'll take it out .. Thanks for your thoughts. Best wishes--IXIA 09:47, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

However, on reflection, I think the Slade section does stick out a bit; and there is still an article elsewhere. So I've merged it with the earlier section about who the Wags were - and taken out the Wikipedia ref.--IXIA 13:15, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gazeta Esportiva

I'm not entirely sure the following belongs: "Brazilian newspaper Gazeta Esportiva described the WAGs as 'anorexics addicted to shopping with hollow lobotomised heads'." First of all, there's no citation. Second, I think it's sort of unnecessary. If a source is found, I think we should probably at least rephrase it. Vickser 19:19, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jamelia Categorization

I think that the Jamelia section is original research and should probably be edited out. Any thoughts/objections? Vickser 22:30, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes I do object. It's based largely on reported statements. It could be re-cast though. Why take it out without waiting for a response?!--IXIA 21:29, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Just to clarify, I put the note up and waited over 24 hours. After no response, I proceeded, noting in the edit summary that I was still open to discussion on talk. Vickser 20:48, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I have taken the liberty of re-instating a shortened and revised version that omits what might have been seen as original resaerch. I think there is a distinct angle here to be recorded. --IXIA 21:43, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

That new version looks fine to me. Vickser 14:00, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks - and sorry if my note yesterday seems a little brusque. Grateful for your advice. I think this one is now nearing its natural end for the time being! Best wishes--IXIA 19:58, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Not a problem, and no hard feelings. As I've just written, I put it up for discussion, waited 24 hours, and when I didn't hear anything, took action. I'd still like to talk about whether or not Melanie Slade should have her own section. Also, I spotted a mirror article on CHAPs (Celebrity Husbands and Partners) and was planning on putting them in later. It mentioned "SWAGs" for summit wives and girlfriends, but I can't find an original article for SWAGs. Any chance you've spotted one? Vickser 20:49, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
I have added SWAGs, etc and also removed the separate para on Melanie Salde which largely dated back to a time when it was being debated if there should be an article about her. I've shifted a sentence or two earlier on so that there's a x-ref and moved some of the residual material to the Slade article. A ref to her is needed also to make sense of the "Father ..." quote later on. IXIA 18:53, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Other useage of WAGs that isn't soccer

There seem to be no mention of WAGs in other sport as one of the ealier useage of term was also at golf's Ryder Cup which according to the press some times ago, they reported that it wasn't just the golfer's that are being competitive and getting some media space, it was the WAGs as well...

...all you have to do is wait for the forthcoming tournament for that to happen

Willirennen 13.42 28 July 2006

Thanks. Have added a short ref to Ryder Cups of 2002 and 2004. But, as you say ...IXIA 18:31, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Somebody has removed the Ryder Cup ref and a rather vague sentence was inserted in its place. Have now taken out completely to avoid to-ing and fro-ing. --IXIA 20:52, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for putting it in, I only found out it was removed yesterday by these non-golfing people and placed it into a new section so that it cannot be removed, you can chect it out in this bit...WAGs in other sports

Willirennen 14.18 1 September 2006

Quite right. Thanks.IXIA 21:24, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Cricketing WAGs

The following sub-paragraph:

Cricketer's WAGs": Minki van der Westhuizen - aka Slinky Minki - topped a poll of fans’ favourite Cricket Wives And Girl friens conducted by the cricket game website Stick Cricket. “Minki is a cricket fan’s dream woman. She’s sleek, sexy and with a successful career to boot,” Chris Berry, Stick Cricket’s director said. “Cricketers attract a finer class of WAG. While football is a game for chaps copping off with Chavs, cricket is a game for gentlemen going out with goddesses” [56];

does not really fit the "tone"of the article and is placed in the wrong section anyway. Does anyone disagree with the proposition that it would be better accommodated under the very brief article on Minki van der Westhuizen? IXIA 20:39, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Have moved this paragraph to the article about Minki van der W. IXIA 22:09, 9 November 2006 (UTC)