Talk:Bud Dunn

Recent reverts
Can you please explain your recent reverts? As I explained in my edit summaries,
 * 1) Discussion at Template talk:Infobox person has concluded that just because something is sourceable does not mean it warrants inclusion in the infobox. In particular, cause of death is usually included only if significant, and children are usually only named if notable. In this case, there is evidence of notability only for Steve.
 * 2) Multiple discussions at WP:RSN and elsewhere have concluded that Find a Grave is not a reliable source. See WP:EL/P and related guidelines. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:20, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * , this article is a GA and all sources passed inclusion during the review. Cause of death and children are listed in several thousand other articles. In this case, I think that it warrants saying he died of natural causes because a lot of people are convinced that all horse trainers eventually get killed by their horses. I listed the children because, to my way of thinking, listing them keeps people from wondering about who they were and having to look it up on another website. I guess I think that the article should answer all potential questions a reader may have about a person. I get that Find a grave is not a really good source, but without finding anything else it's the only birthdate source I have. I spent a solid week working on this article to get it to GA status, and part of the problem was that it was fairly short, so it doesn't need anything removed. White Arabian Filly  ( Neigh ) 15:33, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * That the article is a GA does not mean the article is perfect as it is, no matter how much effort you put into it unfortunately.
 * No one is arguing that we remove the children or cause of death from the article, simply from the infobox - there's no reason to think that would lead people to go to another website. The article still answers the questions - but that doesn't mean that all possible answers belong in the infobox.
 * Just because a bad source is the only source for a particular detail, doesn't suddenly make it a good source. If you have no reliable source for the birthdate, you shouldn't include it. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:48, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I found a book to source the birthdate and cited it, getting rid of the find a grave thing altogether. The book is published by a mainstream company and not self published, so it should meet RS. It's true that GA doesn't mean an article is perfect, but it does mean it has undergone work and review, and doesn't have major issues like copyvio or incomprehensible format. One of the biggest issues with horse articles is that it's hard to find sources, mostly because a lot of coverage is in old magazines and stuff that's not online. However, in this case, at least there are newspapers that have been scanned and are available. White Arabian Filly  ( Neigh ) 19:15, 21 February 2016 (UTC)


 * In many cases (though not this one), Findagrave has headstone photo, and in such cases it is quite reliable, and when the information is comprehnsive, it actually is reasonably reliable overall. As for infoboxes, there are no hard and fast rules, only various consensus of editors, which can change at any time.  You know that, Nikki, and deprecating infoboxes until there is no content at all is really quite a waste of time and effort. Persondata needs to be completed.   Montanabw (talk)  06:29, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Of course consensus can change, but there's no indication it has in this case, regarding either the two infobox parameters at issue or Find a Grave as a source - you're welcome to test that at Template talk:Infobox person or WP:RSN if you suspect otherwise. I'm not sure what you refer to in your last sentence: persondata actually has been deprecated, and even when it was in use it did not include either of those two parameters. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:26, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, and persondata now needs to be in infoboxes. Guess we are on the same page on that one? Montanabw (talk)  01:14, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Er...the whole point of deprecating it was to move the data to Wikidata, but why is that relevant here? The data we're discussing would never have been in persondata. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:31, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, got sidetracked. Originally I was just irritated because I thought your dislike of infoboxes was making you bite a newbie. Never mind, I got off the topic. Just try not to be so doggone pedantic about data in an infobox, OK? The wiki won't break if people list children's names. Montanabw (talk) 23:12, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Image
As GA reviewer says, images are not mandatory for GA status. What the criterion (6.) actually says is: "Illustrated, if possible, by images". Then, we need to first ask: "Is it illustrated?". If it is not, we proceed to inquire: "Why is it not possible to illustrate it?" Can the reviewer or the nominator answer this question for me. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 09:43, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, there are apparently no free images of Dunn available on the internet. If somebody cares to find a picture of him and upload it using fair use rationale, since he's dead, they can (there's a fairly decent picture at the source about the Muscle Shoals sports hall of fame). I can't do it because my phone is my only internet connection, and it won't lift pictures from other sites. I've tried multiple times (even with public domain pictures) before and always failed. Therefore, it's possible for somebody else to add one picture. White Arabian Filly  Neigh 14:41, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I can upload it for you, if you can point me to the the exact source, . It was the answer I was hoping to hear – but this isn't the first time I've seen the criteria being passed of as a tautology (whether or not there are images -> images are not required -> the criterion is always "met"). – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:05, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * , there are a couple to choose from at this site: Any of them are good, especially because he's riding a horse named in the article
 * I wonder how many people either don't know how to upload pictures or can't because of their computers? A smartphone is like a mini touch screen computer, and I know of at least 3 other editors who say that's all they edit with. Who knows how many more do but don't declare it? Or how many good articles are about living people or other subjects where fair use rationale won't be accepted? It makes you wonder, although it does seem like the reviewers would say so.
 * White Arabian Filly Neigh 15:31, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I found some closeups here and here. What do you think, ? (I love Google's newspaper search. Thank you for generously using this underutilized resource in this article.) – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:49, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I really don't care, they all look good, although one of the advantages of the riding picture is that it can be used here too, since it includes the horse. I saw a picture of him standing by his second winner, RPM, too, but I can't find it right now. Yes, Google newspaper archive is one of my favorite sources. They are a good place to find reviews of older books and movies too. By the way, you don't have to ping me; I watch this page and all of the other articles I've created, plus a couple of others of interest. (The horse articles tend to attract vandalism, whitewashing, and all that kind of thing.) White Arabian Filly  Neigh 20:39, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * The newspaper photos are of extremely low quality. IF someone can to photoshop magic and clean them up a bit, it would be cool.   Fair Use rationales work just fine, I've used them a ton of times, they just have to be kept tightly constrained to the topic; for example, I used more than one at Bazy Tankersley, which is a featured article.   Montanabw (talk)  21:14, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

I've uploaded one of the newspaper images. It's not perfect, but I think this article is better with it than without. You are free to either keep it or replace it with a suitable alternative. Good luck with the FA! – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:32, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Any picture is better than nothing. White Arabian Filly  Neigh 21:36, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Short and missing info
This is ridiculously short. For example, it jumps from his "teens" to about age 30. What happened during this time? Did he serve in WWII? How did this become and FA? 2600:8805:5800:F500:9C9D:6AB3:CBF8:A317 (talk) 00:39, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
 * If you don't like it, go write an FA and go through the process yourself to see how hard it is. He didn't do anything particularly notable during that period, and as far as I know, he had no military service. White Arabian Filly  Neigh 20:53, 26 October 2016 (UTC)


 * We have to work with the sources we have. Also, you can create a user name and edit, rather than trolling.   Montanabw (talk) 06:15, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

World War II
He was of military age during World War II. Why no mention of what he did during the war? The article reads like a one-note hagiography.68.146.140.188 (talk) 00:59, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Totally agree. See my post above. This should fail being an FA on lack of completeness.2600:8805:5800:F500:9C9D:6AB3:CBF8:A317 (talk) 01:06, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
 * An article can only include information if there are sources. If there's information in biographies or newspapers about parts of his life that are not covered in this article, that's certainly a flaw, but there may be no such sources. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 01:12, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Then it shouldn't be an FA due to lack of completeness! This is GA level at best. There are multiple large time gaps in this article! By your logic an article only one paragraph long could be an FA. 2600:8805:5800:F500:9C9D:6AB3:CBF8:A317 (talk) 11:49, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
 * There's no minimum size for an FA, though practically speaking if you could only find two or three sentences on a topic it probably wouldn't be notable enough for a separate article in the first place. There are certainly some very short FAs -- see this list of FAs by length. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 13:51, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
 * There's no record of him serving during WWII that I can find anywhere. If there had been, I would have included it. I included virtually everything I could find. This is a horse trainer, not a pop singer. He didn't have the paparazzi writing up every single thing he ever did. White Arabian Filly  Neigh 20:57, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
 * If you'd bother to read the thread above, you'd see I'm not just talking about WWII. WWI is just part of about a 15 year gap of a crucial time in his life and career. I've talking about HUGE gaps in coverage. You two are basically arguing "if there's no source for something/a big time frame, we can ignore that and make it an FA anyway." Hogwash. It can't meet the FA standard of "comprehensive" that way. The argument that there are other short FAs is a red herring. I'm sure most of them aren't comprehensive either. This sounds like another case of wiki making rules up to suit the insiders. Feel free to explain how this article is comprehensive. It isn't. 2600:8805:5800:F500:9C9D:6AB3:CBF8:A317 (talk) 01:17, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

I could just make up info about what he did and add it then, except it'd get removed. We can only write what we have sources to support, and we're only supposed to cover notable parts of a career anyway. Becoming a good horse trainer is a long, hard road, and most of them spend years exhibiting in little saddle club shows that might have only 50 horses competing, and work up to larger regional shows, then state-level, then finally national. The tiny local shows aren't notable, even by the standards of the local media, and the horses shown in them are soon forgotten. Feel free to criticize all you want to. I did literally hours of work on this, and included every scrap of info about Dunn I could find without going into trivia. White Arabian Filly Neigh 20:03, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

The article meets the FA criteria, which you can read here. If you want to argue that the criteria are wrong, and should exclude articles such as this, post a note here. It's been discussed before, and there's never been a consensus to specifically eliminate articles on the grounds of length. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:58, 28 October 2016 (UTC)


 * The article not only meets the FA criteria, it did so with a lot of searching for very difficult to find sources. To have anonymous IP posts here smacks of trolling.   Montanabw (talk) 06:16, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Possibly, but it could just be ignorance. Such a short article can "seem" incomplete to an outsider, especially one who hasn't read WP:RS or WP:V (which is virtually everyone). Curly "the jerk" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 06:24, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Bud Dunn image
I emailed the owner of this webpage to release the image of Bud Dunn to the public domain. Just keeping this link here for future reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Icebob99 (talk • contribs) 17:58, 26 October 2016 (UTC)


 * That one might pass muster, but the other two may still have copyright held by the photographer.  Montanabw (talk) 06:11, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
 * According to the pages on Commons, the same person took them and released them to us. White Arabian Filly  Neigh 21:04, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm willing to AGF, they are nice to have!  Montanabw (talk) 06:36, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Wives
Was [Elaine McCarley https://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=33195693] his first wife, or she the third wife? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 22:16, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
 * She seems to have been his third and final one. In his obit, she's listed as surviving spouse and quoted about his career. White Arabian Filly  Neigh 20:38, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Was McCarley her middle name or had she been married before she married the jockey? The Wikipedia article says her maiden name was Lewis.
 * The obituary says: "stepdaughter, Billy Ann Yeomans" no wonder that I can't find her in the birth index. Did the family change her from stepdaughter to daughter? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 21:14, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't know about the McCarley name; I guess either way, middle name or previous married name, is possible. The source just gave Lewis as her maiden name and didn't say she was divorced or a widow. I have no idea about Billy Ann. The Burgess book lists her as Dunn's daughter, but she may have been adopted by Elaine. Or the book could be wrong, and she was the daughter of one of Dunn's wives by a previous husband and Dunn formally adopted her. By the way, he was a show horse trainer, not a jockey. Jockeys ride only in horse races and tend to have fairly short careers, partly because wrecks are common and partly becaus they must be as light as possible, which gets harder after a certain age. ☺  White Arabian Filly  Neigh 21:04, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bud Dunn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161221005110/http://www.twhbea.com/pdf/FacingTheFutureWithPride.pdf to http://www.twhbea.com/pdf/FacingTheFutureWithPride.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160918214155/http://www.twhbea.com/News/11FunShowRelease.php to http://www.twhbea.com/News/11FunShowRelease.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:35, 30 September 2017 (UTC)