This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
A fact from Samuel Iling-Junior appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 13 March 2023 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
ChrisTheDude, I don't want to be arrogant but please, explain me the reason. I want to say that he started playing with Chelsea with whom he stayed for nine years and that he then moved to Juventus in 2020. I am not saying you're wrong. DrSalvus08:33, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm taking over this review: this is my first one, and I hope I'll do everything right. Still, the article already looks in good shape, so I'm not too worried. Let's take a closer look! Oltrepier (talk) 16:13, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
– First, I think the leading phrase could be re-structured a bit, like this:
"A youth product of Chelsea and Juventus, Iling-Junior made his debut for Juventus U23 in the 2021–22 season, while reaching the UEFA Youth League semi-finals with the club's under-19 squad. He was then promoted to the first team, having made his debut in December 2022. [Enter] Iling-Junior has represented England at various youth international levels, having won a UEFA European Under-19 Championship in 2022."
Done
– According to this interview, he started playing football at the age of four: plus, he decided to join Juventus after rejecting a scholarship deal, which is commonly offered to under-18 players by professional clubs in the UK. You can add that, too, if you'd like to.
Done
I also think it would be clearer to write "attracting the interest from various high-profile European clubs", without specifying too much.
Not done, then they could put the [by whom?] template.
– "Triennial" should be replaced with "three-year", in my opinion.
Done, it's just my passion for English words coming from Latin or Greek.
– The Guardian's mention might fit more in the "Style of play" section, or even as the last line of the page's introduction.
Not done, it does not at all! I forgot to say this at Valentin Carboni.
– The Mulazzi mention isn't so necessary in that context, to be honest.
Not done, not so unncessary either.
– I don't know if the phrase starting with "Prior to his first-team debut [...]" is really necessary, either: that data is already available through the statistics, and adding another reminder could be too redundant and confusing.
Not done, I've added the info after his first-team promotion, not unnecessary.
– "with Juventus trailing 4–1" is a surplus, as well: I would just add "as Juventus eventually faced a 4–3 loss" at the end of the following phrase.
Not done, the fact he was about to save Allegri's ass is notable.
– Was it a "blunt trauma" or a "sprain trauma"? Just to clarify.
Done, sprain, clarified.
– "On 19 December, Iling-Junior renewed his contract with Juventus until 2025 and was subsequently promoted to the first team."
Done
– The Bonatti mention doesn't look so useful to me...
Not done, style of play also talks on how coaches exploited him.
– Finally, here are some more sources you might add to the page (aside of the one I already included): The official transfer report by Juventus; one more source about the Youth League achievements; a match report for his first-team debut against Empoli; one for his Champions League debut.
@Dr Salvus Alright, I just took some time to make a few more adjustments by myself, but thank you for your fixes.
The only issue I've got left with the article is that it could be even more focused: that's why I originally pointed out at some of your "fringe" mentions, like the one about Mulazzi, because I thought they would be kind of a distraction from the main topic (which is, of course, the career of Iling-Junior himself). Still, the rest looks pretty fine to me.
However, since it's my first review and I want to make sure I haven't missed anything, I think I could use a second opinion. An extra pair of eyes always helps... Oltrepier (talk) 14:09, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Right, I think the article is ready to get promoted now.
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
Overall: Article is new and long enough (GA yesterday), sourcing and prose is good. Earwig shows no issues. Hook isn't the greatest IMO; it is a little confusing, changes from past to present tense, and has an potential inaccuracy (readers may think that he entered, scored, and assisted within a span of two minutes based on how the hook is worded, which is incorrect according to the article). The assist on Fagioli's winner after 41 seconds is a much better hook fact in my opinion, and more easily digestible. QPQ also still needed.
I agree that the hook needs to be changed or reworded. Even assuming most of the world is a football fan, it's hard to find the main idea here since the hook meanders and doesn't get to the main point clearly enough. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:56, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We understand what the hook means, it's just not that interesting or broadly appealing. "Super sub scores game winning goal" is one thing but "super sub almost makes his team not lose a game that isn't really all that notable" is another. Also, again, the hook is poorly written, so even if this fact were the one that ended up getting a tick, it will have to be reworded for grammar and brevity. I am happy to recommend better hooks from the article if you'd like, or even a reword of this one. Like this:
Something like that. Much more concise and doesn't give a ton of unnecessary information that isn't directly relevant to the fact itself; that information is, however, still in the article and will be available to readers if they find the hook interesting and click through to the article. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 21:43, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not being able of differentiating a goal from an assist is a blasphemy for us football lovers... But no, yours has too little content and it's horrible. I do want to point out that he was subbed in when the coach thought: "we've arleady lost, what risks can a youngster like him create at this moment?" And yet, he almost saved the team from losing in his CL debut. DrSalvus21:56, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we have two opinions that your proposed hook will not work, so I'm not going to give it a tick. I'm sorry that you think my alternate proposal is terrible. Unfortunately none of us, not even you, know exactly what the coach was thinking at the time he decided to sub on Iling-Junior, and "almost saved his team from losing" really is not an interesting fact in and of itself. Please propose another hook or allow me (or somebody else) to come up with some alternates or we'll have to give up on this DYK. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 00:04, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WP:DYKCRIT may be of interest: The hook should include a definite fact that is mentioned in the article and likely to be perceived as unusual or intriguing by readers with no special knowledge or interest. WP:DYKSG states: Don't assume everyone worldwide knows what country or sport you're talking about. Football may be the world's most popular sport, but not everyone is well-versed in it, and hooks need to ensure that even people with no knowledge or only passing knowledge about a topic (football in this case) can still understand it. We are writing for general readers, not solely for football fans, and so the hook has to appeal primarily to the first group and perhaps only secondarily to the second.
@PCN02WPS: I admit to not being a huge football fan (more of a casual fan of the sport at most), but making two assists withing 8 minutes of entering a game isn't as impressive as scoring two goals within 8 minutes of a game is it? I don't think the hook fact itself is unsalvageable but perhaps it could be worded better? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:10, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: you are correct in that if he had scored 2 goals in 8 minutes rather than 2 assists in 8 minutes it would have been much more impressive. Or if he had assisted a game-winning goal. Something other than "his team almost didn't lose", which sounds sort of pathetic to me. I proposed an alternate way to word the ALT0 hook fact but it was shot down by nom as "horrible"; there are plenty of other facts in the article suitable for a hook (one of which I suggested) but nom doesn't seem interested. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 06:56, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Dr Salvus: I will be away from Wikipedia until later tomorrow afternoon; please provide a reworded ALT0 that follows DYKCRIT and DYKSG as noted above or an alternate hook/hook fact by then. If this has not been done when I log back on I will be marking the nomination for closure and we’ll wrap this up. Thank you! PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 14:32, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ALT2: ...that Samuel Iling-Junior(pictured) became a Juventus first-team player in December 2022 when he had played only nine matches with their Juventus Next Gen reserve-team in more than a year?
Want to add that this happened although Juventus' coach Allegri is one who does not trust youngsters at all (he hasn't played much for the first team).
@Dr Salvus: Thanks for your work on this article. I have some ideas for more ALT hooks, but wanted to ask... When Iling-Junior made his Champions League debut, was that with the NextGen team, or was he like a special NextGen sub for the Juventus first team? cc: PCN02WPSCielquiparle (talk) 08:27, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What do you think? I know it seems simple, but think it's worth explaining the bigger picture, which I think sounds impressive even if you don't closely follow football. Cielquiparle (talk) 13:52, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Cielquiparle Sorry, don't get this wrong but the hook is unwatchable. It's very reductive and this does not show anything special. Could be a hook for a mediocre player. DrSalvus22:20, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I did advise on the GA review for this article, but I will give some views here. I feel I might be too involved to do a review, but 3O should be fine. I think alt0 is too wordy and particular; I think alt1 is fine - I specifically reject the ideas that it has too little content and that it paints the subject or his team negatively. I think alt2, as well as being fairly poor English that would need a rephrase anyway, isn't particularly interesting for anyone who isn't a Juve fan - it needs the context that the coach did not often include young players at that point in time to be remarkable. Alt3 similarly presents nothing remarkable. I believe I did mention when I commented on the GA that there obviously wasn't much content there - he's a young player. I suppose there are some questions, then: will the nominator accept alt1, or do we ignore nominator wishes, as is acceptable; or are there other alt hook proposals? Kingsif (talk) 13:16, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree ALT1 has potential if we just add more detail. I like ALT1b...not sure if "involved in" or "assisted" is better. The other possibility is to add his age, so:
@Dr Salvus: You are right, we do need to reword it since the second assist wasn't officially recognised, but just so you know...in the UK, the Evening Standard reported: Samuel Iling-Junior’s two assists in 43 first-team minutes at Juventus have alerted the world to his talents and sent a tinge of regret toward Chelsea...Almost immediately after his introduction, he set up a goal for Arkadiusz Milik and two minutes later laid one on for Weston McKennie, without officially getting an assist.Cielquiparle (talk) 06:43, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1e: ...that Samuel Iling-Junior(pictured) was involved in two goals for Juventus within eight minutes of debuting in the UEFA Champions League, although only one was officially recognised as an assist?
Cielquiparle No, it wasn't Iling who passed the ball to Milik, who scored the second goal, so it should not be considered an assist. Can't we just say that he was involved in two goals? DrSalvus19:53, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Dr Salvus ALT1e is correct in that regard as far as I can tell - if we want to simplify we could also go with this one:
Restoring green tick, only ALT1f is approved per consensus. Have struck the other hooks (including one I suggested). Someone other than me, please promote. Personally I think it's a rather eye-catching picture. ;) Cielquiparle (talk) 12:55, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]