Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Frank Barson/1

Frank Barson

 * • Watch article reassessment page
 * Result: Delist. Detailed and undisputed reasoning below. Geometry guy 12:21, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

I believe that the article Frank Barson no longer meets the criteria for Good Article status. Some of the language is sloppy, and a fair few of the statements are unreferenced. At present, I would give the article a C-grade, possibly scraping a B due to the use of images and its broad coverage of the topic. Still, some of the GA criteria are not met, and the article should be reassessed. – PeeJay 02:05, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Any specific criteria? Woody (talk) 11:52, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Criteria 1a and 2b. – PeeJay 20:48, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I dispute 1a: the prose is clear, it is not brilliant prose, but this is not FAC. In terms of 2b, add citation needed tags on any contentious statements which you feel aren't referenced. From my point of view, all contentious statements are referenced. Regards. Woody (talk) 12:34, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Some are not just referenced, but even copied! Geometry guy 17:39, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note that presumed WikiProject ratings have nothing to do with good article status, which is determined by reference to the good article criteria alone. Geometry guy 17:39, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delist. The first source I checked was "50 greatest hard men of football". Although published by The Times, this title does not inspire confidence in its reliability. The sum total on Barson, who comes in at "Number Thirty Five" is:

Compare with the last paragraph of the lead: "Barson was known as one of the most feared players of his era,[4] and had a reputation as a "hard man" of English football.[5] On frequent occasions Barson was escorted out of grounds by policemen to protect him from mobs of angry opposition fans. He was once banned for seven months for a challenge in a match against Fulham." The second sentence is verbatim, and the third sentence barely altered.

The Discipline section has "Barson was regarded as one of the most feared players of his era,[14] and had a reputation as a "hard man" of English football.[5] On frequent occasions, Barson was escorted out of grounds by policemen to protect him from groups of angry opposition fans.[citation needed]... He was once banned for seven months for a violent challenge in a match against Fulham.[5][6]". How ironic that near verbatim copying should have a citation needed tag. The lead is summarizing this by omitting one sentence changing a handful of words.

The second source I looked at was the "Aston Villa database". Clearly it is not a reliable source, but a compilation made by an unidentified author on a webhosting service. Is it used for citations which are needed according to the criteria? Yes, it is the sole source cited for several statistics, including a transfer fee. It also contains the statement "He was later youth team coach, senior coach and head trainer for Aston Villa."

Next up: MUFCINFO, an unofficial Manchester United fansite maintained by Mark Graham used to source Barson's height. Unreliable. Similarly RedNews, where the sentence "It will come as no surprise to hear that the rough, tough Barson was one of the most feared players of his era" can be found. By this point I am no longer surprised to find an extract copied verbatim.

Finally we have a moderately reliable-looking source: The Star, as a Sheffield-based local newspaper. No attempt is made to alter the form of words (the source has "started his working life as a blacksmith", "started his career with Sheffield amateur clubs Albion FC and Cammell Laird's before joining Barnsley in 1911", "Barnsley sold him in October 1919 to Aston Villa for £2,850 - more than the average Sheffield worker earned in a year".) The only time the source is not essentially copied verbatim, it is misrepresented: "is up for sale again - and this time is expected to fetch up to £6,000." gets transformed into "His FA Cup winners medal has been sold twice and fetched £6,000."

The article's main source is an unreferenced opinion piece on an unofficial Aston Villa Fansite, Heroes and Villains. More verbatim copying (e.g. "He maintained a business in Sheffield and refused to move to Birmingham despite the Villa's insistence that he should do so."). More distortion (e.g. "After a very public fall out with the Barnsley directors over travelling expenses, he joined Aston Villa in October 1919.[6]" from "Barson came into conflict with Barnsley over travelling expenses").

The yeoldetreeandcrown reference is broken: here it is on the web archive. And here is the home page: another fansite, this time for Wigan.

I gave up checking at this point. I see that there are two print sources, and one cite to an official website, but basically most of the article is plagiarized from unreliable sources. Likewise no evidence is supplied that the images were published before 1923.

From the failed FAC I see that the main author may have been an inexperienced Wikipedian who did not realise that we don't write articles like this. However, this should never have passed GA, and the copyright violations will have to be removed. Geometry guy 17:39, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delist per Geometry guy. The article relies heavily on self-published sources. Majoreditor (talk) 16:42, 23 December 2008 (UTC)