Template:Did you know nominations/Tommy Ball

Tommy Ball

 * ... that Tommy Ball was the only Football League player to have been murdered?
 * Reviewed: To follow

Created/expanded by Daemonic Kangaroo (talk). Self nom at 06:20, 5 November 2011 (UTC)


 * The article was originally a re-direct. --  Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 06:22, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

An interesting article. The hook fact is stated in the article and backed up by a reliable source (the Birmingham Mail, a leading newspaper for the city). The article date and length are fine, and I didn't spot any inappropriate uncredited lifting from the sources used. However, I'm concerned about the use of captions to Flickr photographs here and here to source parts of the article (I'm not concerned that a photograph of the grave is used as a source for what the grave stone says) because without knowing more about the person who wrote the information on that Flickr page I can't be sure that he's a reliable source. Similarly, this is a fanzine and this is a blog. As I don't particularly want to be pilloried at WT:DYK for supporting a promotion to the main page of an article using unreliable sources, can these be replaced, excised or shown to be reliable after all? BencherliteTalk 08:24, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comment - I suspect that the contents of the Flickr captions and both the "Heroes & Villains" fanzine and the blog are taken originally from the book by Paul Lester mentioned at the end of the article. (The Flickr contributor is holding a copy of the book in one of the photos.) I couldn't find a copy of the book when I wrote the article, but I have now tracked one down which I have ordered. Hopefully, it will arrive shortly and I can then reference to the book instead. As these sources were used mainly for the funeral and for Stagg's later life, they don't materially affect the article, although I would be reluctant to take them out entirely at this stage. Are you able to pass this for DYK on an AGF basis? --  Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 20:27, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd be reluctant to pass this for main-page exposure with unreliable sources, and also as they don't impact upon the hook, they are for a not insubstantial part of the article. Why don't we leave this on hold for a little while to see if your book arrives, and then you can rejig the contents?  If someone else thinks the nomination is getting stale, then you can decide whether to take out temporarily the offending passages or whether to leave them in in the hope that someone else takes a different view (or I change my mind!) Is that a plan? BencherliteTalk 10:49, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
 * That's fine by me - it's not that stale yet, so there's plenty of time for the book to arrive. I'll get back to you in due course.  Cheers. -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 10:51, 10 November 2011 (UTC)