Talk:Alessandro Hojabrpour

Reverts
Hi User:Ronnnaldo7, I see you've now reverted my edits twice claiming I "removed information", when the reverts removed more of the information. The only things I “removed”
 * Redundant sentences like “He was nominated for an award. He won the award.” The He won the award covers that he was nominated. “They reached the finals. He scored in the finals”. He scored in the finals covers that they reached the finals, so I felt it was unnecessary to mention nominations (had he not won, obviously the nomination would be worth including).
 * A style of play section that basically only says he plays as a midfielder. I didn’t think it was necessary but since it only really mentions his position and not really anything else but I’m fine to leave this if you really want it.
 * Original research: A couple sentences mentioning assists with references that source1 and source2 that do not mention that fact at all (and actually do not even mention Hojabrpour at all in the article) another that is just a random twitter lineup which does not confirm the facts either. I’m not opposed to this information being included in the article, it just needs proper sourcing, which it does not have. The sources don’t mention what the sentences claim, so it is WP:SYNTH. I tried to find sources that stated those things, but couldn't, which is why I added the sentence later that confirmed he had two assists (which you removed). That's really the only information that was removed, because there was not any proper sourcing for them. Also, the source for his Forge debut was a random boxscore that doesn't confirm that either, but I replaced it with an actual source that mentions it and that was reverted too.

However, in doing these reverts, you removed the following (all sourced material)
 * Correct information in the infobox re number of games played for Pacific (we don’t include playoff games there). He played 56 regular season games (1 goal) and 2 playoff games (1 goal), so it should say 56(1) not 58(2) per WP:FOOTY
 * Correct years for the U17, he only played matches in 2017 not in 2016, so it should only display 2017
 * Content about his youth career, including his first club Ital-Canadian SF (now not mentioned at all in the article), going from Whitecaps Prospects, to Coquitilam, back to Whitecaps (Coquitilam in the infobox is now completely unsourced as a result, plus the to and from Whitecaps not mentioned)
 * Additional expanded details about how he joined Lokomotiv Plovdiv were removed
 * Details about holding an Italian passport were removed
 * Removed an improved stats table, with correct numbers, notes which detail the specific matches, team totals, and removed the 2023 stats (and restored an error which lists his playoff games twice – in league matches and other matches)
 * Information about time with Canada U15 removed
 * Removed multiple valid sources that cover him in greater detail.
 * Re:Formatting: Anything before their senior career is supposed to go in the early life section, not the club career section, which is where I put it. Several references had been improved to add authors, source site, etc and those now removef. Subheadings are used to separate large chunks of prose. The international section does not need a subheading since it is only one section (no senior). The club subheadings I had taken out because it seemed like a short enough section where they weren't needed: two paragraphs - one per club, but I'm fine with re-adding those.

Looking to work collaboratively to improving the article. RedPatch (talk) 14:42, 11 May 2023 (UTC)


 * You need to do your due diligence and see what you are removing before stating “not sure what was deleted” in your last reversion. Also, you are incorrectly formatting as we use – and not - when listing scores. Furthermore, sentences such as “On October 30, 2022, Hojabrpour scored in the final for his second consecutive championship-winning goal of the Canadian Premier League Finals and thereby helping Forge win the 2022 championship” are far more descriptive and accurate than the sentence you changed it to: “On October 30, 2022, he scored the winning goal in the CPL Championship Final for the second consecutive year, in a 2-0 victory over Atlético Ottawa.” There is no need for you to remove already existing sources and sentences in order to feel the need to insert your own sentences, which as I mentioned, have incorrect formatting. Your sentences are far too choppy and are removing vital information; for example, the sentence “In January 2022, Pacific announced Hojabrpour would be departing the club“ does not need to be changed to “After the season, he departed the club.” You’ve also removed the wp:link by changing another sentence to “On December 5, 2021, he scored the winning goal in a 2-0 victory in the CPL Championship Final to win the title for Pacific against two-time defending champions Forge FC.“, as well as “After the 2021 season, he won the CPL Best U21 Canadian award“. Feel free to make any other useful additions as you did with his 100th appearance: “On April 22, 2023, he made his 100th career professional appearance. across all competitions.“, which another user improved yet again to “On April 22, 2023, Hojabrpour made his 100th professional appearance in a 1-1 league draw against HFX Wanderers: in the process, he became the third player (behind Dominick Zator and Terran Campbell) to ever hit the 100-game milestone in all competitions for multiple CPL clubs“, and which I re-added. My suggestion is to leave sentences alone that are already well-structured and sourced, but you can add other information in other sentences as well as improving sources as you’d like. Ronnnaldo7 (talk) 16:23, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Some of the sentences I changed were just because I ended up doing a bit of a re-write as it was easier when combining several brand new sources and additional details (but I’ll admit, I could’ve looked at it better to see what was already there - I do admit that) – this article was already in much better form than a lot of the other re-writes I did (many of which were bare-bone stubs, so I just got in the habit of re-writing from scratch; so I could've kept more than I did keep, I do admit that, although most of the stuff did remain with minor changes), but I don’t see how I removed “vital information". The example differences state are basically the exact same with very subtle differences. Basically I only had removed things like the stadium names which I had felt were a bit excess, but I'm fine with keeping those.
 * However, like I mentioned the sentences I removed had improper sourcing (ie. they used sources that did not state what the sentence claiming they were referred to claimed), so that’s the only reason I removed them, because unfortunately they do not pass No original research, thus should not be included in the article without proper sourcing (as I did in fact do my due diligence in trying to find sources that confirmed the fact prior to removing them). The straight revert removed several improvements (such as correct stats, youth details, international details, source articles, improvements to sources already there, etc) which are now entirely missing from the article, and which you did not acknowledge in your reply, which is why I decided to reach out.
 * I meant no ill-intent when I re-wrote the article (I had been going player-by-player on the team, the majority of which were a couple sentence stubs, so I developed a routine in re-writing). Since I made the original edit months ago, I didn’t remember making those minor wording changes to the various sentences (and some weren't changed at all) and saw the revert as a removal of the multiple improvements and corrections, which were not re-added or maintained. I feel we have the same goal and hope you don’t view these messages as me being confrontational – I hope we can both view this as a minor misunderstanding.RedPatch (talk) 20:28, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I've made some new updates with some improvement in sourcing (ie. removing sources that did not match with the sentences - ie. not comfirming something as his first xyz, providing some extra sources and details, but keeping the majority of what was there with some minor alternations. RedPatch (talk) 21:06, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Looks okay but you need to learn to use the "better source needed" tag rather than deleting already-existing sources and inserting the "source needed" tag, especially when the article does mention the subject/event that is being referred to. Also, again you are not taking my suggestions into consideration by removing the already-existing WP:LINK that I was mentioning. You are basically still copy-editing the whole article to your liking when there really wasn't a need in most of the article. Otherwise, you've made some good contributions in the early life and international career section. Cheers Ronnnaldo7 (talk) 17:57, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
 * deleting already-existing sources and inserting the "source needed" tag, especially when the article does mention the subject/event that is being referred to I think you need to re-look at those articles you re-added and re-read them. In link 1, where does it mention he recorded an assist? It does not (in fact, it does not even mention the player at all). In link2, again it does not mention an assist or the player at all. As for link3, it is simply a line-up card, and while it does show him in the lineup it provides no proof for the claim that it was his first start at all. It is a clear example of original research, and if you look at WP:VERIFYOR, it clearly states “Wikipedia's content is determined by previously published information rather than by the personal beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it.” None of those three sources provide any verifiability whatsoever. Hence, all three sources are fully inadequate. So, it’s not so much a “better source needed”, there is “no verifiable source at all”. And yes, I most definitely did take your considerations into account, but again do seem to be ignoring the original research added to the article. RedPatch (talk) 19:02, 13 May 2023 (UTC)