Talk:Michael Gomez

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleMichael Gomez is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 3, 2009.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 14, 2007WikiProject peer reviewReviewed
July 3, 2008Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

Peer Review[edit]

Nice work with the article so far! It looks like this have been overall a solo project. You've done well. I'll try and come up with a brief list of things that would help out. This article is (as you'd probably guess) very near to being a GA.

  • Why was he forced to change his name?
  • Where does Gomez live now? What is he doing now?
  • "Arthurs trainer, Freddie Roach, was criticized for not being at ringside because he remained in America as the fight clashed with that of, Manny Pacquiao, another fighters in his stable who was fighting Marco Antonio Barrera, in San Antonio." is an awkeard sentence, is there any way to re-word that?
  • Is there more intended for this section: "Another chance at a rematch with Arthur."?
  • I've tagged several statements that would need to be sourced to hold up.
  • It would be really helpful to have half a dozen appropriate images.

Let me know when the above stuff is sorted out, and I come back and see if it's GA ready. Best of luck! Nswinton\talk 16:19, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copy editing notes[edit]

  • As I've mentioned on VK's talk page, quite a few sentences have more than three references; this is generally seen at FAC as a distraction at minimum. I'll streamline them as best possible as I go along. It may result in an "other reading" section, if some good sources are identified that aren't strictly needed in the article.
  • I've placed all the refs in numerical order. A later check should ensure that the cite info is moved to the first use of each ref; as the article has been built some of the refs have been used in sections that appear earlier in the article. (This is just standard Manual of style cleanup.)
  • Very first sentence - was he born in Dublin or in Longford?

More notes to follow. Risker (talk) 15:26, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1. I have tried to trim down the references used - I always think that its better to provide too many rather than not enough - a bit like the reverse of a hair cut - you can cut more off if you want but you cant stick it back on.
2. Thanks for putting them in order and I have tried to continue that as I reshuffled the refs - its not something I thoguht about before but I will try and ensure I do that from the start in future articles.
3. Actually born in Longford but then sometime shortly (exact timescales unknown) after that the family move to Dublin. As they are a gypsy family in the Irish traveller sense of the word then they could have moved at days/hours notice.--Vintagekits (talk) 17:49, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • No worries about reordering the refs, it may need to be done more than once as things get adjusted during the copy edit. I've smoothed out the opening paragraph in keeping with current FAs to reflect the birth info.
  • The BoxingWriter reference used in the third para of the lead ( http://boxingwriter.co.uk/2007/06/05/the-michael-gomez-story-the-movie/ )is not functioning right now. This may be a temporary situation; however, since it's the only place where this ref is used, I've commented it out for now, and may remove it entirely.
  • "within the distance" is probably common boxing slang, but since that term isn't mentioned in the knockout article, it is probably best not to include it.
  • How authoritative is www.braggingrightscorner.com ? Is it well known and respected? A standard reference? is the publisher easily identified? (Better to get this worked out now, because there's a top-notch reference checking person at FAC who will query this.)

More to come. Risker (talk) 21:02, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1. cool.
2. I dont think the BoxingWriter refs covers anything that other refs dont so its wont be the biggest loss.
3. Yeah its a common term for a knockout of stoppage - see here
4. braggingrightscorner.com is no The Ring but its pretty well known, mostly used by promoters to for press releases but also have plenty of decent articles.--Vintagekits (talk) 22:55, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More CE questions[edit]

  • "with sixteen of his last seventeen fights ending in knockouts"
  • the reference sources for this statement are dated 2003 (needed for the Johnny Tapia statement) and 2005, so are obviously not current. Since the 2005 ref isn't used for anything else, I've commented it out for now. I've inserted the BoxRec reference, please verify that it agrees with what has been written in the article. (I'm not quite sure what "PTS" stands for).
  • Since the article needs to remain stable, I've added dates for that 16 of 17 fights.
  • I think the lead is pretty well cleaned up, I've added a few dates for reading ease; as well, I've gone through a bunch of the personal life stuff and it's close to done.

Things for you to work on

  • Quotations, per the WP:MOSQUOTE principle, should not be italicized, and only ones longer than 4 lines should be block-quoted. It would be good if you could handle that.
  • The sections about the fights look relatively good, and just need a breeze-through. Take a look at the references to make sure they are needed.
  • Several of the reference sources are websites that will be unfamiliar to the folks at FAC, so you must be prepared for questions on some of them (this can sometimes take more time than all the rest of the issues). If you go to the WP:FAC page and search for Ealdgyth, you'll see the kinds of questions and comments that are made about sources; she's the resident checker, and she is very thorough. Any reference sources you think might have trouble being subjected to such scrutiny should be replaced or eliminated.
  • I hope to finish up tomorrow (I'm verifying quite a bit of the sourcing as I go along, to eliminate that problem at FAC). You might want to line up a peer reviewer for Thurs/Friday; check Wikipedia:PRV#Everyday_life for potential candidates. Once through PR, go straight to FAC.

Off to bed now...you're probably just about to get up! Risker (talk) 06:09, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Elopement[edit]

Vk has queried on my talk page whether we should use (as the sources do) the term "elopement" to describe the subject's mother going off to live with another woman. As the definition of elopement says that it involves marriage, and as two women cannot legally get married in the UK, I feel we should not use the word, although I understand Vk's concern that we remain true to the sources. I feel in this case that the sources have employed a tabloidese that would not really be acceptable to us here. I don't feel all that strongly on the subject and would yield to a consensus here if one was apparent. What do others think? --John (talk) 17:32, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I dont feel strongly on the issue either. I suspect you are right and its a case of tabloiding. But maybe they didnt get married in the UK - maybe they got "married" elsewhere where it is legal. Also "elope" is the term that Gomez himself uses to describe what happened and the term the sources use.
ALso the "common-use" of the term in Ireland and the UK doesnt just refer to when a couple go off to get married its common use and a way that I also use it is for any couple that "run off together".
I think we should use the term "elope" for those reason but like i said its hardly the a central issue of the article.--Vintagekits (talk) 17:45, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think "eloped" can be used for any two lovers who go off together, so long as the running off is clandestine. Giano (talk) 08:02, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I changed the wording to live with for the reason given by John and felt that at FAC a request would be made for the change anyway but see Vk's point. Bill Reid | Talk 09:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pre-FAC check[edit]

Risker asked me to take a look at this article, specifically the referencing and sourcing, saying ya'll wanted to take it to FAC at some point, and hoping I'd do a "pre-FAC" check so things go smoother. First time at FAC is always daunting enough, best to make sure things go as smoothly as possible.

With that in mind, I've looked over the sources for this article. To determine the reliablity of the site, we need to know what sort of fact checking they do. You can establish this by showing news articles that say the site is reliable/noteworthy/etc. or you can show a page on the site that gives their rules for submissions/etc. or you can show they are backed by a media company/university/institute, or you can show that the website gives its sources and methods, or there are some other ways that would work too. It's their reputation for reliabilty that needs to be demonstrated.

First, what makes these sources reliable, per WP:RS? Keep in mind what I said above about determining reliablity here, and keep in mind I'm not a boxing fan, so some of these probably are reliable, I just am not familiar with them.

Other questions:

  • Is Boxing Monthly a published magazine?
  • The Tomas Rohan "Gomez - I'm happy with my decision" Irish-boxing.com is a dead link.

The other concern was that you're piling up footnotes on footnotes on footnotes. Pick at most the two most reliable sources for the statements, and use just them. Anything more than two just looks like overkill. (There are a few exceptions to this rule, but they aren't very common).

Another thing that will get you tripped up at FAC is the quotations in italics. Per the WP:MOS, quotations should be in regular typeface.

Try to combine your short stubby paragraphs of one or two sentences into paragraphs with a few more sentences. Too many short paragraphs gives the prose a choppy feel. Make sure that the lead section conforms to WP:LEAD and is a summary of the article and doesn't contain any information in the lead that isn't in the body of the article. Image placement is great except for the "Padwork with Bobby Rimmer" picture, which should probably be aligned on the other side so that the action is moving into the article. Your captions on the photos need to make either full sentences or drop the periods from the end.

I'm a horrid copyeditor, so I didn't really read the prose for flow/redundancies/etc. Probably not a bad idea to have someone go over it, you might check out WP:PR, where they have a list of volunteers that like that sort of thing.

Hope this helps! It was a neat article, and I look forward to seeing it at FAC soon. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:29, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review, Ealdgyth. I've been holding back on some of the standard copy editing issues because I wasn't sure how many of the references might need to be re-sourced, or if there were chunks of content that might need to be rewritten because of reference issues. I can answer to the validity of some of the sites mentioned above:

Some of the other sites above are "extra" sources that can be eliminated. I'll work with Vintagekits, the primary author, to sort out any remaining reference source concerns. Risker (talk) 03:22, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't a bother at all. When I have time, I'm always glad to help folks out, don't hesitate to ask again. I'm going to go ahead and take this article off my watchlist, but if you need me for something, drop a line on my talk page. Ealdgyth - Talk 03:26, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Boxing Monthly[edit]

Is a published magazine, its been going about 20 years and all the articles have the details of the journalists that wrote the articles. http://www.boxing-monthly.co.uk/index.htm --Vintagekits (talk) 22:01, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eastside Boxing[edit]

Eastisde is on the Telegraphs "Top Ten Boxing sites" it has a policy of correcting mistakes and states "If you detect any issues with the legality of this site, problems are always unintentional and will be corrected with notification. The views and opinions of all writers expressed on eastsideboxing.com do not necessarily state or reflect those of the Management. Copyright © 2001- 2008 East Side Boxing.com" on the front page. Articles each credit their authors. Trainer Joe Rein seems outlines that this is one of the sites he writes for here. Its a suggested link at the Wayne McCullough page as does Gary Shaw who is a big time promoter. The WBA have it as a link.--Vintagekits (talk) 22:14, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Saddo Boxing[edit]

Quote from Saddo boxing used here at Dailylife.com. Boxingsearch.com provide it as one of there links here as do Heavyweights.co.uk as do the Boxing Writers of America. Its listed on the Telegraphs "Top Ten Boxing sites".

Proving they are reliable source[edit]

How exactly do I go about proving they are reliable?--Vintagekits (talk) 21:44, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at the home pages, the "contact us" pages, any legal notices etc. The key issues would be whether they list their contributors, whether the contributors are credited (e.g., "story by Joe Smith, photos by John Brown" etc), and whether or not they have a policy somewhere that says they will correct any inaccuracies. Identifying who owns or is responsible for the site is also important and can often be found on the same pages.
As well, their reliability can be shown by demonstrating that other mainstream sources use them as references. For example, secondsout.com is listed as a suggested link by the WBA; that gives them credibility. Try doing limited google searches like "Eastsideboxing" +news +manchester , or something to that effect, to eliminate a lot of the extraneous google hits. From that search, look for a google hit for a published boxing magazine, or a mainstream news source, or a noteworthy boxing organization. These sites get tens or even hundreds of thousands of hits, so it may be a bit of a challenge. Risker (talk) 21:55, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nationality

This guy is not completely Irish. If Michael Katsidis is Greek as well as Australian, even though he was born in Australia, then the British flag should come after, if not before the Irish flag for Gomez given that he has lived in Manchester since he was twelve.

Young boxer of the year[edit]

No online confirmation of the name of the organisation awarding this title could be confirmed for the year that Michael Gomez was the recipient; however, the title was handed out by the British Boxing Writers' Club in both 1995[1] and 2007[2]. It is probably reasonable to assume it was given out by that organization when Gomez won it. Risker (talk) 18:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commonwealth title[edit]

He's up for his second go at this in a few days time (at superfeatherweight this time), but it's not clear from the article how he's eligible. Hakluyt bean (talk) 17:33, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poor article[edit]

The article is mainly a stilted description of several boxing matches. Nowhere is this more apparent than around the "Peter McDonagh controversy". He let himself get knocked down, then walked out of a fight; to say this is highly unusual would be an understatement. Why did he do it? No clue. The article jumps straight from the end of the match in January 2006 to a fight between Alex Arthur and Carl Johanneson which inspired him to fight again (when did this happen? how long did he take to get bored of gardening? no clue) and then to his next fight in May 2007. Surely he must have been swamped by journalists asking him why he'd done it, and then again to ask him why he'd returned? No clue. (And where does the proposed rematch with McDonagh, suggested before he returned to the ring, fit in?)

At this point I was wondering if perhaps there just weren't many reliable sources on the man outside the ring, in which case there's not much Wikipedia can do - I do realise featured articles are judged mainly against a hypothetical perfect version of themselves (could this article be any better?) rather than more subjective criteria. I started to think that maybe someone should make a film or write a book about this guy which could fill in the gaps. Oh wait, here we go, right at the end - "In 2007, a film of his life entitled Gomez: A True Story began production... The film is set to open in cinemas in November 2008." Well? Did it? I'm fairly sure we're in 2009 now. And did it provide anything that could have been used to flesh out the article beyond a summary of archived news reports?

I can see that this article may have been up to scratch (hah) when it was promoted, but it should have been brought up to date before putting it on the main page now. --86.154.1.217 (talk) 07:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying your assessment is incorrect, but the effort you spent typing your opinion could have been used towards improving the article. G'day. APK that's not my name 07:47, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Provenance[edit]

It would be interesting to know how an Irishman, and Irish traveller in particular, came to have a surname like "Gomez" and the nickname "The Irish Mexican". I was surprised that the Background section had no account of this – is the information not publicly known?  Skomorokh  08:23, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It says at the very top of the article that his real name is Michael Armstrong.

 AuthorNeubius  08:23, 3 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.185.133.255 (talk) [reply]

Read the "early career" section. All explained there.--Vintagekits (talk) 15:36, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Michael Gomez. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:19, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Michael Gomez. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:24, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Michael Gomez. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:54, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Michael Gomez. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:39, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Michael Gomez. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:05, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Michael_Gomez&oldid=1214075185"