Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:17, 3 October 2010

Kim Sears was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 11 July 2009 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Andy Murray. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Biography: Sports and Games This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages'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 This article is supported by the sports and games work group (assessed as Mid-importance). Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Tennis Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tennis, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that relate to tennis on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TennisWikipedia:WikiProject TennisTemplate:WikiProject Tennistennis Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Tennis To-do: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Cleanup : Take an item off the Cleanup listing Copyedit : Roger Federer, Leander Paes, Rafael Nadal, Justine Henin – to be used as examples for ideal page structures Expand : Grab a Start article and expand it, or peruse the List of articles. Photo : Add photos to Tennis or Tennis people articles Stubs : Bring a Stub up to our standards. Other : *Sign up as a member of the project. Tag more articles with our standard project template. Help with the creation of yearly main articles and drawsheets for every Open Era ATP and WTA tournament. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Scotland High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. [REDACTED] Olympics Low‑importance [REDACTED] This article is within the scope of WikiProject Olympics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Olympics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OlympicsWikipedia:WikiProject OlympicsTemplate:WikiProject OlympicsOlympics Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. United Kingdom Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

ANDY Scottish or British ???

I think it should say "British", He plays for Great Britain, If he wins any competion he will show off a "Union Flag" (the symbol of the "British). Me being Scottish would not have any problems with that saying British, Does anyone disagree ? ScoBrit (talk) 18:56, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

There is long-standing consensus on Misplaced Pages, reached after much metaphorical bloodshed, that Britons who strongly identify with one of the constituent nations should be described as such. Hence, Murray describes himself as Scottish, and therefore so do we. Rodhullandemu 18:59, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I dont think andy has came out and said that he does not want to be called "British", The reason for it being "British" is because the fact that he plays for "Great Britain" and not "Scotland" is clear. Murray has also made is clear that he is British on a number of interviews that I could post here on wiki. If he played for Scotland then yes it should say "Scottish" but no he plays for team "Great Britain" so that makes him British.ScoBrit (talk) 19:11, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

See also WP:UKNATIONALS. This article has had its fill of circular editing on the issue, please, no more, even though it is Wimbledon fortnight.--♦IanMacM♦ 19:13, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Many of us are unhappy with WP:UKNATIONALS which of course is just advice and not actual policy that must be followed. This debate will continue to come up here and on other articles because Wikipedias policy of not having a policy on all this is a joke.

Andy murray is Scottish and British. He plays for Britain and is known for being Britains number 1 there for he should be called British in the introduction. A footballer should be called Scottish, a tennis player should not. BritishWatcher (talk) 19:18, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

The intro to the article has a hidden comment regarding this, stating This is, as Misplaced Pages guidelines suggest, as he self identifies and by long term consensus but with the continuous subsequent warring on this matter it is unclear whether the this referred to is British or Scottish. I've seen this war resurface in this article several times and I dare say I might be able to work out from the copious talk page archives if there is a consensus and what it is. Life's too short and this is wasting editors' time that could be more usefully expended. Threads are archived after 60 days so any previous decision, consensus or whatever on the matter is not immediately visible to new combatants, possibly unknowingly reviving this war. Can someone clarify in the hidden comment what the consensus was and (if it's possible to put a link in a hidden comment) link to the relevant section of the talk archives? Mutt Lunker (talk) 20:46, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

"as[REDACTED] guidelines suggest", that term is rather misleading because this whole area is simply covered by advice, which does not have to be followed and can be viewed in different ways anyway. As far as im concerned that UKNATIONALS page justifies using British not Scottish here.

• He plays for Great Britain.

• He is the British number one.

• He does not reject being British.

• Almost every time he is in the media it is British sport related.

• There are a huge number of sources calling him British.

There is certainly no overwhelming case for this article to start by calling him Scottish like there would be for Alex Salmond or Sean Connery. The default position of all articles regaring British citizens should be that they are called British unless there is justification for it not being British, like the two people i mentioned above or those who only play for Scotland at sport.

Of course a compromise could be that we simply remove "Scottish" from that first sentence but put that he was born in (Edinburgh, Scotland) straight after when he was born. That would stop people changing it between Scottish/British all the time. BritishWatcher (talk) 08:34, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

This has been discussed previously at exhaustive length and it re-appears like clockwork every Wimbledon. Please refer to many, many, many previous discussions. The consensus is, as is usually the case, a compromise. It doesn't necessarily delight everyone, but it's the closest we've got. This consensus balances him being Scottish with being British and works like;

• The info box says Great Britain, because that is who he represents in competition as a tennis player.
• The lead says 'Scottish' because it is what he has personally self identified as, as an individual, as WP:UKNATIONALS suggests. It also is more specific terminology, as MOS:IDENTITY suggests. Yes, he also identifies as British, but if we don't say 'Scottish' here, where else can it go? If it is removed, you can be sure it will be re-added and no consensus will ever be reached.
• The lead also says he is British #1. This emphasises his position as a British tennis player.
• There is no "default position" for British citizens, as BritishWatcher claims. Guidelines specifically say; "Do not enforce uniformity. It is not possible to create a uniforming guideline, when such strong disagreement exists on the relative importance of the labels."

--Escape Orbit 11:14, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I understand this has been gone over many times in the past, the fact it still comes up highlights the present situation may not be the best option. I will reply in more detail to your points later on, focus should be on the matter below and the possibility the article has incorrect info on his birthplace, once that is resolved one way or another can return to this. BritishWatcher (talk) 13:20, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I never claimed the default position was to put British, that is the reason why i reject the UKNATIONALS advice because it fails to accept someone is a British citizen/national and there for that should be the default position unless there is specific reasons to list them as Scottish or English... Like being a separatist or being famous for playing a sport for Scotland / England.

"Andy is a Scottish professional tennis player " is how the introduction starts, yet he plays for Britain in his capacity as that professional tennis player. Thats why it makes sense to say "Wayne Rooney is an English football player", it makes less sense to say Scottish professional tennis player. The article has a section on his national identity so there is no reason why the introduction could not have a single sentence on how he identifies himself and we could also add the fact he was born in Scotland after his birthdate. You say if we removed it someone is bound to come and re add it, yet we saw endless changes when he played the other day as well so that problem applies no matter what is said.

The fact the introduction clearly says he is British number 1 does make this whole thing less of a concern, if that was not there i would have a much bigger problem with the introduction. BritishWatcher (talk) 10:47, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

If you have a problem with WP:UKNATIONALS advice you should pursue the matter there. Otherwise I'd say we follow it, as it has been discussed at great length and is proving a successful reference point for many articles. There is nothing special about Murray that he needs to be treated differently.

Unfortunately your example of Rooney is not a good one. Rooney is both English, and plays for the English national team. It may be different if Rooney played for the British Football team.

Murray, for the most part, plays tennis for himself. His nationality in most matches is largely irrelevant. So nationality shouldn't be over-emphasised in relation to his tennis. Don't forget the article is about a person, not just a tennis player. He is a Scottish person, who is a professional tennis player. If Murray self-identifies as Scottish the article should reflect this, no matter what his status is as a tennis player.

It is rarely acceptable to have birth place act as a stand-in for nationality. There are too many cases where they are unrelated and misleading. I'm also not keen on having the issue of how he self-identifies feature in the lead. Just because various Misplaced Pages editors make a big deal of it, doesn't mean it's that important to the article. Murray doesn't make a big deal of it himself and it isn't why he's important.

It's true we're going to see edits in the coming days over this, we always do. But I still say that what's there has worked over some while as a consensus, and you haven't suggested any improvement other than effectively removing the word "Scottish". I see that as guaranteed to make things worse. --Escape Orbit 13:00, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

I believe saying British is fully in line with UKNATIONALS and i have debated the flaws in the advice that page gives before. He is Scottish but he is a British professional tennis player there for it would make more sense to call him British. The example of Wayne rooney perfectly fits in with my point, of course he must be called English because he plays for England. As the infobox correctly shows Murray plays for Great Britain.

I agree it is not a big deal for him as he accepts both identities, but both sides of editors on[REDACTED] make it a big deal by demanding that Scottish or British must be in the first sentence. It is certainly not one sided. I am simply supporting the suggestion that he is a British professional tennis player and that the wording in the introduction should reflect that. I offered the suggestion that considering there is a whole section on national identity it might be justified for a single line on how he identifies himself. BritishWatcher (talk) 13:21, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

And everything you are saying would be just as valid if we were to say "he is a Scottish professional tennis player". He is a Scottish professional tennis player, who plays for the Great Britain team. He is a Scottish professional tennis player, who is the British male #1. The lead and info box covers all the bases in a balanced fashion, in line with all agreed protocols created exactly for complicated issues like this.

The point is he has self identified as Scottish, just as much as British, yet you want to remove all mention of his Scottish identity from the lead paragraph. Every guideline on Misplaced Pages agrees that Misplaced Pages editors can split as many hairs as they like, it's what the subject self-identifies that counts.

My concern about it not being made a big deal of is only in so far that the lead shouldn't start to reflect even a tiny fraction of the debate that the issue provokes on the talk pages. The reader has all the info they need to understand he is both Scottish & British. They don't need to read by what process Misplaced Pages editors have reached consensus on this, how its should be presented, or be lead into the debate. It's all a side issue covered more than adequately in the section further down the article. --Escape Orbit 13:49, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

I never said it should not mention the fact he is Scottish in the first paragraph, i just think that its more in line with the advice to say hes a British professional Tennis player in the first line. There is clearly not going to be consensus here to change it to British, but such a change would be just as valid.

In a way this is the same problem as on many articles which the current advice provide little help in resolving, simply comes down to who had enough numbers and previous consensus. BritishWatcher (talk) 14:30, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

If you want to remove "Scottish" from the first sentence, yet still have it in the lead paragraph, where would you put it without it sounding like it's been added as clumsy compensation? How are you going to mention the question of his nationality in the lead, without it appearing that Misplaced Pages has settled it for him by not mentioning "Scottish" in the lead sentence? Do you not think that having Scottish in the lead sentence, alongside British, offers the reader more information that repeating of "British" wouldn't? Is it not accurate? Is it not self-identified? Is it not more precise? --Escape Orbit 17:23, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

"where would you put it without it sounding like it's been added as clumsy compensation? " It probably would be seen as there just for the sake of it to appease people although considering national identity has a whole section in the article there is no reason why a sentence wouldnt be justified which could cover it.

I agree at the moment it being able to mention both Scottish and British in the first sentence does provide the reader with both bits of information, but there is no reason why it couldnt be handled in another sentence. Bottom line is he is a British professional Tennis player, and as he identifies as also being British and is a British citizen it should take primacy over anything else. It could say he was a "British professional tennis player born in Scotland". There are many articles which currently start with Scottish or English that could also mention British for fairness, but do not. This is the whole problem with that UKNATIONALS advice, it is clearly flawed and still leaves open huge room for dispute and interpretation. The articles should clearly state citizenship and allow a way of mentioning Scottish / Welsh / English etc.

Anyway i can see we are not going to agree on this and there is little chance of the current wording being changed so we can leave the debate there. Maybe same time next year when Wimbledon is on we can see if views have changed then :) BritishWatcher (talk) 17:44, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

• This whole 'he self identifies as Scottish' assertion is a load of balls tbh. What do people expect him to say? That he's martian? It's just a fact, it's not some philosophical statement. As far as I can see, the evidence backing this assertion up to show it is some sort of ethno-political standpoint is as weak as piss, because not only does he immediately follow it up with 'I'm also British', he seems to spend most of his time in the press fauning over how much he loves the English, especially after that remark, and how he loves all things British, even after the latest bowing to the Queen will he won't he palaver - he couldn't have made it clearer in those statments that he thinks of himself as British as a bulldog, a loyal subject of her maj. Frankly, if Murray is an example of someone who primarily identifies as Scottish, in an ethno-political capacity, as people seem to be suggesting, then the SNP are fucked for life (although even they have recently backtracked it seems and now want equal status under the Crown - what would Mel have said to that I wonder). If people have better arguments than this that I've not seen, I suggest they create a FAQ for the article, because the current position does not look justifiable, and using British in the lede seems eminently supportable by his almost total lack of rampant, or even what would classify as average, level of Scottishness. Frankly, he's a pretty poor tennis player and has the most boring voice I've ever heard in my life, so it's beyond me why people want to claim him as a perfect example of all things Scottish at all, although the idea that Scots are rubbish at sports is a common comic stereotype I guess. MickMacNee (talk) 22:45, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Lmao i always love reading your contributions :) BritishWatcher (talk) 22:48, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing. Fortunately personal opinions on an article's subject do not determine what should be in the article. But I'm glad you are agreed that Murray being Scottish is 'just a fact'. That's what a lead should concentrate on; facts. (BTW, HRH is half Scottish and Queen of Scotland, so your observations on Murray's royalist position is doubly irrelevant). --Escape Orbit 22:58, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

What a rubbish reply. Yes it is a fact, but you know fine well that that is not how nationality for all UK nationals is dealt with in Misplaced Pages, and the 'self identification' concept is not about basic FACTS!. Deciding uk leads would would be a piece of piss if it were. Yes, I gave you my opinions, but I also refereed to the sources apparently used to back up the assertion that he self-identifies as Scottish for the purposes of UKNATIONALS. Something you just ignored. If you can't respond to people's entire posts, or think that this sarcastic garbage is remotely acceptable as a way to debate, and you just want to answer what is convenient for your position, which you can take as read is already known, then frankly, don't waste my time or anyone else's by even replying. And don;t even start with the 'Queen is Scottish' bollocks, she's also part-German, and Queen of Canada, and a whole load of things that are, for this issue, total irrelevant crap. MickMacNee (talk) 23:32, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Although the idea that he felt supremely honuored to be bowing to her maj at Wimbledon because she's Queen of Scotland is freaking hilarious. yes, that's my personal opinion. But if this notion appears anywhere in souces either, I've yet to see it. MickMacNee (talk) 23:38, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

This whole debate is almost entirely irrelevant. It mentions both Scottish and British in the first line. Andy is both Scottish and British. So this is what an encyclopaedia should say, and it does. --Pretty Green (talk) 08:27, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

The fact it mentions he is British number 1 reduces the need for change but it does not change the fact he should be described as a British professional Tennis player and not a Scottish one. British should be the default term used unless there is specific reason not to say it for example (Scottish/English footballers or separatists). Whilst the current wording is able to mention both pretty well, do not dismiss this as an irrelevant issue. This is a[REDACTED] wide serious problem. BritishWatcher (talk) 08:32, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Why ? --Pretty Green (talk) 08:35, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Because in many other cases the person does not happen to be "British number 1" there for there is no British in the first sentence at all. I accept in this case it is helpful to the reader to be able to state Scottish and British in the first sentence, if only that was the case across[REDACTED] articles i would not consider it a serious problem.

Almost all people articles state the persons nationality which is also their citizenship. UK people are British nationals and have British citizenship, the fact they also consider themselves Scottish, Welsh etc can be mentioned but British should be there too. Today that is simply not the case. BritishWatcher (talk) 08:42, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough; sorry if my comments were a bit facetious. I do get your point but equally think that as long as we can cheat our way out of situations (Scottish tennis player and British number one) then we should, and that this issue should be a case by case thing. --Pretty Green (talk) 14:48, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I won't be replying to MickMacNee in future until he reads WP:AGF, WP:CIVIL and WP:TALK and follows them. No one is interested in his opinions of Murray and this talk page is not the place to air them. If he can't learn to discuss improving the article with peppering his contributions with his own personal thoughts on the subject, then he has no right to demand others sort out the wheat from the chaff. And there is a lot of chaff there. --Escape Orbit 12:56, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Another pointless reply. You are suggesting I need to AGF with someone who just cherry picks others people's words? Do me a favour. I don't care if you want to ignore me, my post is there for all to see, everyone can see how truthfull your asessment of what I said is. If you've got nothing to say other than to waste peoples time with this pathetic tantrum when you are called out on your twisting of other people's words, then just don't say anything. Nobody has to seek your permission, or specifically engage with you, in order to be allowed discuss this article. MickMacNee (talk) 13:23, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Birthplace

Article says he was born in Glasgow and that it should not be changed because it is said on his bio. His website says his birthplace is Dunblane. BritishWatcher (talk) 12:24, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I did just change it to Dunblane considering two of the 3 sources no longer exist and his site says its Dunblane now but i have reverted so we can get agreement here and be sure its accurate. Need to check for some other reliable sources. BritishWatcher (talk) 12:43, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm reverting this - please see discussions about this in the AM archives. Although we're onto a new talkpage it doesn't mean we can ignore previous conversations - and on this issue there have been many, However, I agree that it is extremely misleading that his own website is saying one thing while others are saying something else (although it should be pointed out that this isn't the first time that's happened). Personally, I think it's possible that as his website has been put together by a 3rd party they may have taken a standard line in his bio (something like "Andy Murray is from Dunblane" and taken that to mean he was born there too.

To anyone who wants further discussion on this can you please look through the archives first, and raise your concerns here and get consensus before changing anything. Thanks. David T Tokyo (talk) 12:57, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Sorry British Watcher - just noticed you've decided to wait rather than revert - thanks. David T Tokyo (talk) 12:59, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes I misread the Scottishroots source thinking it backed up using Dunblane, didnt notice the following sentence saying about Glasgow so i reverted after i saw that because i am less sure. and back up Dunblane. I would trust the BBC and fan site and his own site over that scottish roots site, unless there are other sources backing it up as Glasgow. It is pretty scary when you think about how easy it is for[REDACTED] articles to potentially be wrong on something so big as where he was born. :\ We need a volunteer to go to Wimbledon and try and get to his mother and ask her, she is the only one who must know for sure. :) BritishWatcher (talk) 13:11, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Unless it was a home birth, he is far more likely to have been born in Glasgow. There is no hospital in Dunblane. His website definitely also used to have a bio by Murray himself that said Glasgow. --Escape Orbit 22:30, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

And indeed his website still says this; http://www.andymurray.com/about/biography. Born 15th May 1987, in Glasgow, Scotland Think that's Glasgow Royal Infirmary pictured. --Escape Orbit 22:38, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Ok ive removed the two dead links and replaced it with the one to that biography. BritishWatcher (talk) 10:16, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Andy Murray Photo

We need a photo of Murray in 2010 (Wimbledon?) wearing his new adidas gear instead of older shots of him wearing Fred Perry clothes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.221.113.223 (talk) 17:18, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

As ever this comes back to WP:NFCC. There is a 2008 image on Commons here, and I am not a great fan of the current infobox image. Not much choice, though.--♦IanMacM♦ 19:03, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

You can take a pick from the pictures on commons. My favourite 2010 picure is this Someone needs to crop it though so that Andy's in the middle, if you are a perfectionist KnowIG (talk) 22:37, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

This is the cropped 2010 Australian Open photo. Anyone prefer this to the current infobox image?--♦IanMacM♦ 05:53, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

I like it. Good work. More upto date as Murray is wearing the correct gear. Can get one of him smiling later. But it's nice to have an 'action' shot KnowIG (talk) 16:27, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

I have been WP:BOLD and added this, because it gives a clearer view of his face and has a less distracting background than the previous image.--♦IanMacM♦ 06:50, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

1.1 Dunblane massacre

I'm not quite Misplaced Pages literate but I personally do not believe this is a huge significant factor of his Early days and should be blended with the rest of the heading 'Early Life' .

I agree it was pretty significant but not to the extend that it needs it's own mini heading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.221.113.223 (talk) 18:53, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Latest changes

Im not sure i agree with the latest changes, especially : "Murray has often seen to be moody and has been a source of fun early in his career. Murray early in his career was often prone to PR gaffes" I do not think that belongs in this article. BritishWatcher (talk) 20:07, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

I do not believe some of the latests additions are appropriate for this BLP. Does the fact a source or two say "he is moody" mean it should be in this article? BritishWatcher (talk) 16:20, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Agree, BLPs are not magazine profiles, and should stick to factual material as far as possible.--♦IanMacM♦ 16:25, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Can someone please remove - "Murray has often seen to be moody and has been a source of fun early in his career. Murray early in his career was often prone to PR gaffes." -, its not even backed up by solid sources saying this. Ive already undone a couple of edits on this page in the past 24 hours, dont want to be accused of edit warring. BritishWatcher (talk) 16:35, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

OK, I've removed this, as it is not well worded BLP material. Please establish a talk page WP:CONSENSUS before adding this in a similar form.--♦IanMacM♦ 16:52, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks BritishWatcher (talk) 17:08, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Are you stupid I'm reverting saying that it's not backed up by a solid source is poor. It's written by a jounalist for a broadsheet paper. If you don't like it rephrase it, don't delete KnowIG (talk) 17:46, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages articles about a living person are ultimately guided by WP:BLP. The phrase that was removed contains sweeping statements of POV that are against the spirit of WP:BLP. This does not really need to be in the article, and it seems to have become a test of will to prevent other editors from removing it.--♦IanMacM♦ 17:56, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Get a solution then wise guy! OH WAIT you haven't got one...APART FROM delete which leaves everyone going what is image all about. Sort it out instead of deleting.KnowIG (talk) 17:59, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

When the problematic bits are deleted its left with a blank space. BritishWatcher (talk) 18:01, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Agreed, there are clear WP:BLPSTYLE issues here, whatever the sourcing says.--♦IanMacM♦ 18:07, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Agh! Edit conflict, lol! Look I don't have an issue with the sentence I have an issue with the deletion and therefore inadaquate section, as I feel Identity and controversies or what ever I called it needs to be in one section, as IT STANDS IMAGE WITH the REMOVAL of the sentence THUS does not make sense nor does it support it. WHat I am annoyed about is you 2 blindly walking in and not coming up with a solution, so come on lets get a solution e.g. come up with a new section heading! KnowIG (talk) 18:11, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

(ec with above) This is poorly sourced (in fact, almost unsourced) and negative information on a BLP. Per WP:BLP, contentious and poorly sourced information should be removed immediately from a BLP without waiting for discussion. If consensus goes for it, it can go back in, and not before. I would note that I have warned KnowIG of 3RR on this page. Pfainuk talk 18:12, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Writing things like that doesn't make for a consenus as people won't go there if your adding to an arguement. Next time keep your comments to your self they can see what you've done on my talk page KnowIG (talk) 18:16, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

• Biography articles of living people
• All unassessed articles
• C-Class biography articles
• C-Class biography (sports and games) articles
• Mid-importance biography (sports and games) articles
• Sports and games work group articles
• WikiProject Biography articles
• C-Class tennis articles
• Mid-importance tennis articles
• WikiProject Tennis articles
• C-Class Scotland articles
• High-importance Scotland articles
• All WikiProject Scotland pages
• C-Class Olympics articles
• Low-importance Olympics articles
• WikiProject Olympics articles
• C-Class United Kingdom articles
• Low-importance United Kingdom articles
• WikiProject United Kingdom articles