- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 05:05, 21 August 2017 [1].
- Nominator(s): Hmlarson (talk) 17:11, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This article is about American soccer icon Mia Hamm. It recently passed GAR and was suggested as a FAC. It is a level-4 vital article in People. Hmlarson (talk) 17:11, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comments. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. - Dank (push to talk)
- This edit is fine, as long as you put the "and" back before "Texas". Some copyeditors call this "cannabalism"; one necessary "and" has eaten the other necessary "and". Does that make sense? - Dank (push to talk) 22:50, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- "In addition to the 34,148 fans in attendance being greater than any MLS game that weekend, the Turner Network Television (TNT) broadcast reached 393,087 households: more than two MLS games broadcast on ESPN and ESPN2.": ?
- "that kept her out for the first half off the pitch": ?
- "World Football Hall of Fame" (linked to es.wiki): Create a stub here on en.wiki, if there isn't one already, and link to that.
- Is there a guideline you can provide to support this? Hmlarson (talk) 17:12, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Support on prose per my standard disclaimer, with the caveat that I stopped near the end, at Personal life; my wrist is bothering me and I'd like to stop here. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 14:53, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- ((u|Dank)) Thanks for your review and copyediting. I've added a few comments/questions above. Hmlarson (talk) 17:12, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for you work. See my standard disclaimer, which is more relevant now that I've hurt my wrist. - Dank (push to talk) 19:07, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Support I reviewed this at GAN and feel it satisfies FA criteria on comprehensiveness and prose. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:31, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Images are appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:43, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for reviewing. Hmlarson (talk) 16:29, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Source review:
- There were a few news articles that are now deadinks. I linked to the archived versions.
- I don't know that you need that many citations in the lede if the information is cited in the main text. That said, it's not disqualifying to have them there.
- Spotchecked fn 22, 85, and 107. Material cited was fine, but the title was off on 107 (I fixed it).
- Everything else being in order, I think this is good as far as sources go. --Coemgenus (talk) 13:11, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for reviewing. Hmlarson (talk) 16:29, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comments – This is from reading about halfway through the article.
From a grammar standpoint, I'm not sure "the" is helpful in "She is a co-owner of the Los Angeles FC."
- In general, I find the lead section here to be a bit oddly constructed. Usually in FAs, authors see the lead as a summary of the article to come; some try to ensure that every section is represented in some way. Instead, this just feels like a listing of significant accomplishments and milestones. For example, a list of TV programs in which she appeared is probably too much detail for a lead section; it is enough to have a more general statement, with the details in the body of the article.
1996 Atlantic Olympics: "The U.S. won their first-ever Olympic gold medal". Of course it was the first one; they couldn't have won it before, as the women's soccer event didn't exist before 1996. Maybe "The U.S. won the first-ever Olympic women's soccer gold medal" would work?
I do think we need to say something in the body about Hamm being iconic, since we make that claim in the lead. My expectation was that I would see something related to this in the section about the 1999 World Cup, since that's when the U.S. women's national team really became well-known to the general population. Instead, this is a straight retelling of what happened in the tournament. For an FA on this player in particular, I feel like we need to have some mention of her popularity/the team capturing the attention of the country. That team became cultural icons for a time, and she was the leader.
- Added to end of 1999 section. This is also reinforced in the In Popular Culture section. Hmlarson (talk) 02:01, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
To further the point about how the 1999 section was a straight retelling of events, this book has the interesting point that Hamm was initially unsure about taking a penalty in the China shootout. Perhaps that's worthy of a sentence. That excerpt also had some details that might fit in the playing style section, on her emotions and leadership qualities.
- Added dehydration element + aftermath. Feel free to add specifics as you see fit. Hmlarson (talk) 02:01, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I understand why you based the USWNT sections around the various major tournaments, as they are when women's international soccer players like Hamm get the most coverage, but there are a few gaps that result from this structure. The 108th international goal is tucked in the Honors and awards section, when it isn't really an honor or award, but a notable statistical record. The third paragraph of this section also includes statistical accomplishments, and her 100th career goal (which strikes me as significant) isn't mentioned at all. Also not mentioned is her competition-winning extra time goal in the 2002 CONCACAF Women's Gold Cup, which is probably worth mentioning somewhere even if it wasn't a World Cup or Olympics. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:48, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Moved 108th + 150th goals; added 100th. Hmlarson (talk) 23:59, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
A couple of quick sourcing comments from the last part of the article. First, reference 139 is to a book by Lulu Press, a self-publishing company that would only be considered a high-quality reliable source if the author was considered an expert on the subject (if he had previously published books, for example). I don't know anything about the qualifications of Tim Nash, but if he doesn't have any you'll probably have to replace this cite. Second, IMDB (ref 145) isn't a reliable source for much of anything, much less an FA. You should try to find other sources for her TV appearances; if any can't be sourced by higher-quality references, then they likely aren't notable enough to warrant mention anyway. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:33, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Tim Nash bio. I own the It's Not the Glory book - it's pretty good, though I most often recommend Beyond Bend It Like Beckham: The Global Phenomenon of Women's Soccer by Tim Grainey. Hmlarson (talk) 02:01, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Refs added to shows. Hmlarson (talk) 02:29, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: I'm recusing as coordinator for this one, and I'm afraid I don't think the prose is up to FA standard as we have a lot of redundancy and other prose issues. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:48, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Why do we have references in the lead? They are usually not required as everything should be cited in the main body. The only exception is usually for direct quotations, and when we have a statement "Hailed as a soccer icon" which requires 4 references in the lead, alarm bells should start ringing.
- There are references in the lead per the fourth paragraph of WP:LEAD and previous GA reviews of this and other articles where they were requested. Hmlarson (talk) 22:47, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- "Hamm held the record for international goals, more than any other player, male or female, in the history of soccer until 2013, when she was passed by Abby Wambach (the current recordholder, as of 2017).[5][6] Her 275 international caps rank third on the U.S. national team, behind former teammates Kristine Lilly (354) and Christie Pearce (311). Her 144 international career assists rank first in the national team record books.[7]": This could be cut right back. "Hamm held the record for most international goals—for both men and women's soccer— until 2013, and she remains in second place as of 2017. She has the third most international caps for the U.S. national team, and the most international career assists (144)."
- "Twice named FIFA World Player of the Year in 2001 and 2002 (the first two years that the award was given to women players)": Could be simply "Named FIFA World Player of the Year in 2001 and 2002 (the first times that a woman received the award)". Also, this has no connection to the rest of the sentence.
- The connection is FIFA. I removed the references to women players completely. Hmlarson (talk) 22:47, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- "Hamm and her teammate Michelle Akers were hailed by Pelé as two of FIFA's 125 greatest living players when he included them in the FIFA 100 to celebrate the organization's 100th anniversary": Aside from needing to say a word or two about who Akers and Pele are, there is just too much going on here. The only relevant information is that Pele chose her as one of the 125 best living players. The rest is not relevant for the lead.
- "In 2005, The Washington Post columnist Michael Wilbon called her "perhaps the most important athlete of the last 15 years"": Why is this important? Some context is needed; is he a renowned expert, or just some chap with no real standing in sport?
- See Dank's comments above about "icon" Hmlarson (talk) 22:47, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- "She was the first woman
player inducted into the World Football Hall of Fame." Redundancy
- I would expect the lead to summarise her career much more than we do here. The lead should summarise all the main content, but we learn nothing other than her records and awards.
- See fourth paragraph of WP:LEAD. I don't agree. We learned who she played for, what she won (a lot), about her status in sports history, etc. Is there something specific you want to mention? Hmlarson (talk) 22:47, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- "The family moved many times and resided in several places including San Antonio, Texas, and Italy.": Why chose these specific places? Why not "The family moved several times, including overseas".
- "Florence, Italy, is where Hamm was first introduced to soccer. Soon her entire family became involved in the sport": Sounds a little too like a magazine article and not an encyclopaedia. Could just be "Hamm first played soccer in Florence, Italy, and her entire family quickly became involved in the sport."
I'm stopping there for now, and these are samples only from the lead and first section. I suspect the whole article may need a going over, and just correcting these issues would not necessarily lead to me striking my oppose. If the nominator has no objections, I may be able to tackle the copyedit myself in the next few days, but in any case I hope to switch to support once the article has had a bit of a polish. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:48, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for taking a look. Comments inline above. Hmlarson (talk) 22:47, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Sarastro, please ping me after you've finished your copy-editing because I'd like to take a second look at the article. For now, Hmlarson, I wanted to quickly say that I am in strong agreement with Sarastro about the lead section. I felt uneasy about supporting the article because I had a few misgivings, which have been brought up by Sarastro. In particular, the lead section struck me as not covering the whole article. In fact, it just struck me as I was reviewing the responses to my previous comments that we don't even mention the years of her teams' World Cup and Olympic wins in the lead, when her performances in those tournaments form the heart of the article. I won't speak for what Sarastro would like to see, but I personally prefer the second paragraph of Abby Wambach, a GA you worked on, to what exists here. That article mentions the major competitions she played in and the major events her teams won, a style that goes a long way towards providing a good summary; perhaps the first two paragraphs here could be combined to make room for such a paragraph. Please consider giving this some more consideration, as I am itching to support this article but understand Sarastro's concerns. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:35, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
More comments: Like Giants, I'd really like to support this, but I'm still finding issues. I've done a bit of copy-editing, but there are some things I'm still not sure of. First, we spend a lot of time describing team results in the sections on 1991, 1995 and 1996 tournaments. But other than the goals she scored, are there any comments anywhere on the effectiveness of her performance. I'm assuming she played well, but there is nothing in the article to tell me that. It's also disconcerting that in 1998 she scored 20 goals including her 100th international goal; we've only heard about the World Cups and Olympics; presumably she played games other than these, but we hear nothing about them. When did she first play for the US? When was her first goal? We only seem to be getting part of the story: what were these other games? Tournaments? Friendlies? I'm afraid we need more detail here about her, and less about the team results. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:27, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks again for your review. I find these comments rather subjective and vague, however. WP:FA? I see you both appear to be men's baseball and American football contributors. Any involvement at all in articles related to soccer? Hamm scored 158 goals in 275 appearances. If you have some specific ones in mind to highlight without writing a new book to add to the reference section, by all means go ahead. Hmlarson (talk) 23:13, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmmm. Ok then, I consider that this does not meet criteria 1a and 1b for the reasons stated above; and I have specified what I feel should be included. And for what it's worth, both Giants and I have been reviewing sports articles at FAC, including soccer, for many years; and I have never contributed to men's baseball or American football, as even a cursory check would reveal. But that is not relevant, and nor is questioning the ability of the reviewers to review. Sarastro1 (talk) 10:37, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- In fairness, part of the issue is that the World Cup and Olympics are the two big events in international women's soccer for the U.S., and not much of note happens in the two years out of four that they aren't held (the European teams have a continental championship to contest, but ours isn't anything to write home about). Also, the USWNT wasn't heavily covered by the sports media for much of Hamm's time with the team. I've seen stories about how the players weren't even recognized on the plane ride home after winning the first Women's World Cup. Even in the late 1990s, when the team was receiving coverage, the level of soccer knowledge in the U.S. press was not strong, so I'm not sure how much deep analysis they were doing about Hamm's game at the time. With that said, I do think that some additions could be made to make the article more comprehensive. I would suggest adding (assuming good sources exist) info on her first appearance and first goal for the national team, and looking at the USWNT media guide for ideas. I see a year-by-year stat breakdown there, which may be helpful; even simple facts such as her scoring 18 goals in 1997, or having 20 goals and 20 assists in 1998, help fill the perceived gaps the other reviewers spotted. Her scoring four goals in one 1994 match may also be worthy of mention. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:56, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I agree with you, Sarastro, that the article reads as a list of her (admittedly, many) achievements rather than exploring her skill and experience as a player in the sort of depth that a featured article should. I don't see as many prose problems as you do from a cursory read, but I don't think this is quite ready yet, as it doesn't seem fully comprehensive for one of the most iconic soccer players of all time. Hmlarson, what's here is certainly good; it just needs to be fleshed out and expanded. ceranthor 14:02, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Update Gentlemen, here's what's been added:
- first international cap
- first international goal
- another summary to lead into international section
I'll defer any year-by-year table to you Giants2008 or any other simple facts you think are pertinent to add. You too Ceranthor. I'd like to challenge you to seek the information you think I should include. Hmlarson (talk) 01:42, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll keep an eye on the FAC to see whether the other reviewers are satisfied with your additions, as that would push me in the direction of supporting since my concerns when reading the article were basically the same as theirs. I don't think a full stat table is needed in the article, so I won't be adding one. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:17, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- That seems fine to me. ceranthor 02:30, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- the inaugural 1991 in China, 1995 in Sweden, 1999 and 2003 in the United States. - just listing the year doesn't work grammatically here
- She completed her international career having played in 42 matches and scored 14 goals at these 7 international tournaments. - use of at is awkward, maybe over the course of is better?
- She currently ranks third in the history of the U.S. national team for international caps - what does that mean? link or explain
- She was inducted into the National Soccer Hall of Fame, Alabama Sports Hall of Fame, Texas Sports Hall of Fame and was the first woman inducted into the World Football Hall of Fame.[8] - grammar; should be and Texas
- Hamm has been featured in several films and television shows, including the HBO documentary, Dare to Dream: The Story of the U.S. Women's Soccer Team. - no comma necessary after shows
- Hamm played sports from a young age and excelled as a football player on the boys' team at junior high school. - should clarify whether american or international football
- During her tenure with the national team, she competed in four FIFA Women's World Cup tournaments: the inaugural 1991 in China, 1995 in Sweden, 1999 and 2003 in the United States. - same issue as in the lead
- She completed her international career having played in 42 matches and scored 14 goals at these 7 international tournaments. - same issue as lead... try to avoid reusing the same sentence in the lead and main text
- Hamm held the record for most international goals scored—by a woman or man—until 2013 and remains in third place as of 2017.[5][6][25] - I tend to think place implies a competition; I'd just say she was ranked third
- international caps - link or explain again
- She also scored once in their second group stage match when the defeated Brazil 5–0.[30] - grammar
- During the quarterfinal match, the U. S. defeated Chinese Taipei 7–0. - should use a non-breaking space for US
- this was the first Olympic tournament that women's soccer was included.[41] - grammar
- In 1998, Hamm's 20 goals marked her annual high during her international career.[51] - annual high? Rephrase
- served an assist to Julie Foudy in the 73rd minute - Can you serve an assist? awkward phrasing
- head coach Tony DiCicco - linked twice; only link it once at first mention
- Hamm collapsed in the locker room from severe hydration - dehydration?
- SARS outbreak.[72] - should clarify its location I think
Prose is almost there, but needs a little more work. ceranthor 16:51, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I think we are moving in the right direction, but I notice that a few points that Giants made have not been addressed yet. One of the problems seems to have been that, with little information available, the article has been padded out from match reports. But we really need to see more about what Hamm did. Were there really no features on her, or comments about her performances? If she was so acclaimed after these tournaments, how do we know? We currently simply state, for example, that "Her leadership and performance at the 1999 World Cup cemented Hamm as a soccer icon". But... how? What did people say? And she was carried off in one final and ended up on a drip after another; this is huge, she is obviously incredible, so someone must have said something at the time. Can we not give some reaction rather than just baldly stating what happened? I still see quite a lot to do here, and I do wonder if it is achievable in the timescale of this FAC. But I'm willing to help and see how far we can get, whether it is at this FAC or at a future one, for I think there is a FA in here, certainly. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:31, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Coord note -- with no response to Ceranthor's comments after almost two weeks, and other outstanding issues, I'm tending to agree with the above suggestion that further work on this article might best take place outside the FAC process, ideally in conjunction with some of the reviewers who've expressed concerns; I'm therefore going to archive this nom. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:05, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.