Talk:Vince Young

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
This article has an assessment summary page.
Vince Young was a good article, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Delisted version: October 13, 2006
Archive
Archives


Contents

Picture

How is this picture of VY? The user who uploaded he image listed it can be used under the Creative Commons - Attribution rule. --Blueag9\talk 08:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Nice image, but no good for us unfortunately unless they are willing to change the license. The Attribution rule is OK, but they also specify "no derivative works". We would probably want to crop it at a minimum, which counts as a derivative work. Also, we try to enable downstream use and that could include anything. They might be willing to relicense it to allow derivative works if you contact them. Johntex\talk 08:51, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

2006 NFL Draft

The last part of the first paragraph is inaccurate, McNair was traded after the draft and Drew Brees signing with the Saints is irrelevant since Young was never a likely choice for them. I did not want to just remove that part since it has been that way almost a year and I have no prior edits. Manic000 16:01, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

VY's baby

I'm not doubting that VY has had a child, but is this website, MediaTakeOut.com, a reliable source? I did a Google News search and this website was the only one that mentioned the baby. Nothing from a Houston paper (VY's hometown) or an Austin paper or a Tennessee paper. With all the issues surrounding WP:BLPs lately, I think we should err on the side of caution and remove this claim until a better, verifiable source can be found. If anybody disagrees, then revert my change and let me know what you think.↔NMajdan•talk 17:52, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Madden NFL 2008?

What about Young being the Madden 08 cover athlete? Should we mention that? I mean, it's official; EA even said so.Bobman123 18:47, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

It is fine to mention it in the article. However, if you add the box cover to the article, it can't be the top image in the infobox. That needs to be a free picture. Johntex\talk 17:38, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Vince Young Career Highlights

The message on top is starting to get annoying. Has there been a consensus yet whether to merge his highlights or not? I think a separate article is appropriate for the sake of making this article smaller in size. BlueAg09 (Talk) 03:52, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Went ahead and removed the merge template. Moved article to Vince Young career highlights due to a naming convention problem. BlueAg09 (Talk) 08:11, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
  • There is a template at the top of the new article to discuss a merge back into this one. Has anyone comment on this? Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  15:07, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
  • I think most of it needs to be deleted and very few should be merged back. Most of his college achievements are UT records he set, and I dont think they're worth mentioning and is trivial information. The awards are already covered in here, so that should be good. I think the question should be, are there "significant coverage from independent sources" about Vince's career accomplishments? Corpx 15:55, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
  • I would be against losing the information because the records are important. They are easily verified through record books, newspaper reports, etc. I have no strong opinion at this point whether it is better to have them in this article or a separate article. I'm happy either way as long as we retain the information here. Johntex\talk 18:37, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Statistics

Per WP:NOT and WP:EL, it is generally recommended that statistics are conveyed through ELs. This is already done here. If there is some particular reason why Young's college stats must be included, I'd be curious to know why. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  05:23, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

  • I fail to see how WP:EL comes into play at all here. WP:EL deals with external links and the content in question has nothing to do with external links. The statistics part of WP:EL is referring to adding links to 20 sites, which all provide the same statistics. As for WP:NOT, "Long and sprawling lists of statistics may be confusing to readers and reduce the readibility and neatness of our articles." - This is not long and sprawling, nor is it confusing. In fact, I'd say its short and concise. WP:NOT goes on to say that "In addition, articles should contain sufficient explanatory text to put statistics within the article in their proper context for a general reader". This table does exactly that, by putting the statistics in context with his achievements in college. Corpx 05:29, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Also, you should not have restored my revert of your removal, per WP:BRD Corpx 05:31, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
  • From WP:EL#What should be linked "Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) or other reasons." Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  05:33, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Nothing is being linked to here - The stats are in the article, not at an external link. WP:EL does not apply at all to this situation. Unlike NFL stats, copyrights are not an issue for NCAA stats. Corpx 05:34, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I'm not following you. The point of that section is that stats are generally left to external links and not to articles. This is pretty consistent over most athlete articles. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  05:37, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Those copyright concerns are about his professional statistics, not college statistics. The two other QBs in the draft that year, Matt Leinart and Jay Cutler both have college stats on there, so it is not "the norm". Corpx 05:42, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Actually, they should be removed as well. If you have an issue with this, you should take it up at a community talk page like WT:EL. WP:EL speaks exactly to this point and supports removing the content. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  05:49, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I've asked for comment from there, but you've yet to establish exactly where this consensus was developed regarding college stats. Corpx 06:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
  • WP:EL is a subsection of WP:MOS. These are guidelines of wikipedia established by community consensus. You can see WP:PG for more info. If you want to take this beyond this discussion, by all means, but I doubt there will be much support for the inclusion of statistics. It's a pretty well established point at WP:EL and there is significant discussion on the current WT:EL page and that pages archives. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  06:04, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Out of all those pages, where does it say that college statistics should be removed? Corpx 06:05, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
  • College statistics are not a separate issue from professional sports statistics. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  06:07, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Corpx asked for comments on WT:EL, so I've dutifully turned up to put in my two cents about WP:EL I hope it's useful. The external links guideline does not say that no "athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts" should be included in articles. Only that when inclusion is undesireable because of copyright or level of detail concerns etc. an external link can be a good thing. I don't believe copyright concerns apply to statistics (though I'm not an expert on such things), but level of detail is always an issue and not one which has a clear cut line to draw.
This conversation here would probably be better focused on what content is appropriate for the article for most readers. You might try collaborating on what information to present and see if you can agree on the appropriate amount of detail rather than thinking of it as an either/or issue. If not, since you're the only two who seem to be discussing it and you have opposing opinions you may be better off asking for further input from a sports Wikiproject or someone who reviews good articles to see what others think of the content from a reader perspective. -- SiobhanHansa 13:32, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
WP:EL says stats should be linked, it does not say that the stats should not be then listed in the article. WP:NOT says stats should be related to the text when possible and put into a table for easy readability. I again find JMF's actions detrimental to the article and the fact we are an encyclopedia. A sports person's stats are an important part of their career. Could you accurately and completely talk about John Elway without listing his statistics? Including statistics are valid to a sports article, as long as it's not the sole item in the article. Further, the copyright status is irrelevant, because it is data; the phonebook analogy applies. MECU≈talk 13:38, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I am in complete agreement with MECU's comments above. The statistics should be included in the article. ~ João Do Rio 02:53, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Nobody is saying that stats are not appropriate for articles, there is a difference between incorporating stats into the text of articles and providing a list of stats in that format. Career stats (especially for a current athlete) are most often left out of athlete articles. WP:EL speaks specifically to the stats issue and point blank mentions that articles should rely on ELs for this type of information. There is an aritcle about his career achievements and such and if you guys feel strongly about this, go put the stats table there. As MECU says, copyright is not the issue here. I looked at the few FAs that I could find from Baseball, Basketball, and Football - none of them had full stat tables in them. They were Jim Thorpe, Moe Berg, Sandy Koufax, Bill Russell, Ted Radcliffe (I don't think i missed anyone, but i might have). Koufax has a one line career stats table, which is a big difference from a season by season recount. Radcliffe played in the Negro Leagues, so it's fair to assume that he should even be considered (since there are no records for that). It gets back to one point - this is supported by WP:EL and has been discussed ad nauseam on that talk page. If you guys want to start a movement to have that information "reworked" or "removed", there are ways to do that. Consensus can change, but I don't think this one will. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  19:24, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
  • All the people you listed quit playing a long time ago. On the other hand, if you look at Wayne Gretzky, you'll see a career stat table. Same for Martin Brodeur, Tom Pryce, Alain Prost, as well as most of the cricket & soccer players there. Steve Dalkowski, a baseball player has a stats table. It looks like you conveniently picked examples without stat tables to make your point. You are saying there's a consensus to remove these tables, but you've yet to point out specifically where this consensus was discussed and agreed upon Corpx 19:51, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I simply went to the three most popular sports in the United States and looked for featured articles. I never said statistics prevented articles from reaching FA. Again, this is referenced specifically in WP:EL and as the article is very long in nature AND as Vince Young is still an active player, I removed the content. It is supported by wiki documentation, where as leaving the stats in is not. It's a personal preference. If you want to have the WP:EL ammended or outright overturned, I will gladly listen to the discussion, but this has been widely discussed again and again and again. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  23:59, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I do not think that this stat box adds too much detail and it looks like the consensus reflects it, from the comments of the 2 other people who replied here, so I'm going to re-add it. I went and looked at Wikipedia_talk:External_links/Archive_12#Stupid_question and while discussed, there is no consensus as to how minimal stats like this should be handled Corpx 01:42, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Re-adding the information because of a consensus that does not exist is not appropriate. You should remove that information so that we don't get into an edit war. Again, if you want to have the language adjusted at WP:EL, then please pursue that avenue. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  02:54, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
  • It is really not about WP:EL. If the community deems it appropriate to have stat tables in featured articles, I'd say there is a consensus for these tables to stay. So far, you're the only one person objecting to these. Corpx 03:17, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
  • It is absolutely about ELs, and you can say there is consensus all you want, doesn't make it so. If you want to address the issue with changes to WP:EL, I will absolutely respect a community agreed upon change. Beyond that, I'm not sure what to tell you. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  15:23, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
You are misunerstanding WP:EL - there is nothing in this page that is intended to be a guide on the suitability of statistics in the body of the article. It simply says that when statistics are inappropriate an external link to them may be a good thing. WP:EL as a guideline does not cover, nor should it, when statistics are appropriate to be included in the article. You'll need to look elsewhere for guidelines supporting your position. -- SiobhanHansa 15:58, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
I agree that WP:EL doesn't seem to apply here. However, the lack of a cited source for these stats is definitely a detriment... --ElKevbo 02:43, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
  • 04 and 05 stats can be sourced from here and here, 03 from here and 02 from here. These are easy to verify Corpx 03:18, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I agree with Mecu completely. The stats definitely belong in the article. Johntex\talk 23:25, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Correct Draft Prediction

Sports Illustrated for Kids' May 2006 issue predicted that the Titans would draft Vince Young. The prediction became true in April 2006. Never Trusted 18:35, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Madden 08.jpg

Image:Madden 08.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 20:27, 6 November 2007 (UTC)