Wikipedia

Talk:Lexi Thompson

Latest comment: 5 years ago by WilliamJE in topic Discuss including table of professional results while not affiliated with a Tour
Learn more about this page

Proposed Name Change

edit
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

I propose that the name of this article be changed to Lexi Thompson to reflect the more common use of her name as seen on her official web site -- http://lexithompson.com/ --Crunch (talk) 01:25, 13 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

There has been no comment for three weeks. The change will be made. --Crunch (talk) 10:57, 5 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Discuss including table of professional results while not affiliated with a Tour

edit
Latest comment: 5 years ago12 comments7 people in discussion

Please give your opinion on this table:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lexi_Thompson&oldid=451662818#Professional_record_and_earnings_outside_of_Tour_membership

I believe it provides a useful way to summarize the career of the handful of professional golfers who play for a year or more not affiliated with any tour. These include Thompson, Michelle Wie and Tadd Fujikawa. Because they are not affiliated with a major tour, the information can't be found easily anywhere else. --Crunch (talk) 21:24, 22 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Question - To those editors that oppose inclusion of this table: what is the objection? Is the problem that the table contains "minor" tournaments? Or that the table is too large? --Noleander (talk) 22:21, 22 September 2011 (UTC)Reply
Comment - I'm not sure what the question is either. I don't have a problem with the table per se, however the information still needs to be referenced. If the table is felt to be too long, it could always be spun out to a separate article. --Deadly∀ssassin 23:41, 22 September 2011 (UTC)Reply
  • Keep table - Most other articles on golfers to have similar tables, so I see no harm in including this table. If her career goes on, and the table gets too large, the minor/amateur events can be moved to a subarticle, or whatever. But that is way off in the future. So, unless someone points out a strong reason to delete the table, I think it should stay. --Noleander (talk) 23:45, 22 September 2011 (UTC)Reply


  • Delete table:::The table in question is either trivia or already covered in other parts of the article.
1 Approximately half the results are minor league golf tournaments. Minor league sports results aren't notable with the exception of Thompson's one victory which is listed in her professional wins section.
2 Thompson's LPGA Tournament results are included in her LPGA Summary box or her win box. Active pro golfers have a box where there results are summarized, plus boxes for wins and playoff results(A playoff loss is notable). Golfers from Tiger Woods down to the journeyman pro with one career PGA Tour win don't have their results listed from week to week event to event etc etc. A win and playoff box and a yearly summary is considered sufficient by golf editors not just myself. The narrative parts of the article can be used for pointing out other noteworthy happenings that the other boxes don't sufficiently provide for. I add things to golfer articles all the time things like- He was the 18 and 36 hole leader at the 19?? PGA Championship before going on finish tied for 19th. See Gary Hallberg and Jeff Mitchell for examples
Crunch will raise the point that this kind of table is present in articles on Michelle Wie and Todd Fujiawra. I'll argue they shouldn't be there either. Is a golfer missing the cut notable? 70 or so golfers have this happen to them at most PGA Tour and LPGA Tour events. Is a golfer finishing T31st or 10 shots back notable? It's all WP:recentism or sports results which I'll get to in a moment. Ms. Thompson is a celebrity because of the golf talent she has at her age. She has one major league professional win, there are hundreds of golfers with just as many or more and some of them are quite young also Do they all warrant coverage in such minutaie?
Thompson's overall results are covered in the other sections of the article and in the long narrative, mostly written by Crunch.
2 The strongest argument against the table is WP:What wikipedia is not or namely the section on an indiscriminate collection of information. A table of all golf results fits the build. Where do we say enough is enough? When Ms. Thompson retires?- William 13:51, 22 September 2011 (UTC)Reply
William: Why do you call sports results of an athlete "trivia"? Her childhood spelling bee results might be trivia, but not golf results. Why do you say the contents of the table are "not notable"? The WP notability requirement applies only to entire articles, not to individual sentences or paragraphs within an article (see WP:NNC for details). --Noleander (talk) 00:10, 23 September 2011 (UTC)Reply
  • Keep table, on the condition that it is sourced. I don't think her professional golf results can reasonably be said to be trivia, and I support the inclusion of the table. I was going to say that it could be collapsed to improve readability, but actually I see this is discouraged as per WP:COLLAPSE. I agree with Noleander, if it gets too big in the future, the thing to do might be to move it to a sub-article. However, it really needs better sourcing, and I will note that any results not sourced can be challenged and removed per Wikipedia:Verifiability. Regards — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 05:18, 26 September 2011 (UTC)Reply
  • Comment - The table's info should absolutely be sourced if it is to stay. A lighter background color for the 2011 records would be really helpful on the eyes, I might add. I am reluctant to outright oppose the exclusion of minor league scores for golfers of note, but it most certainly shouldn't be a requirement (not that anyone's advocating that). Enderandpeter (talk) 22:42, 18 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
  • Keep if verifiable - the details are significant to the subject of the article. Rich Farmbrough, 15:14, 22 October 2011 (UTC).Reply
  • Conclusion. After two months of discussion, the consensus seems to be Keep. The section has been re-added and I am working to add complete citations. Please be patient while we complete the citations. To Enderandpeter's point, each year is in a separate color. Is this what you had in mind or something else? --Crunch (talk) 04:30, 23 November 2011 (UTC)Reply
Also, to William who asked, "Where do we say enough is enough? When Ms. Thompson retires?" This table specifically documents results in tournaments played outside of Tour membership. Results as an LPGA, or other Tour, member are listed separately and as a result, this table will have few additions fro this point onward. --Crunch (talk) 05:12, 23 November 2011 (UTC)Reply
Where are all those vital results now, @Crunch:...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:28, 27 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

Preposterous

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A table half consisting of minor league golf results. Can anyone besides myself see how truly insignificant this is? A table on Tiger Woods making over 140 straight cuts, Jane Blalock's 299(!) tournament streak, Byron Nelson's 11 consecutive tournament winning streak, golfers who won 10 or more tournaments in a year. Now those would be worthwhile for what was done was momentous unlike finishing 10 shots back in a minor league golf tournament. If someone would step back and weigh what the Thompson chart denotes and look at golf historically instead of being focused on recentism, well they'd see how absurd the chronicling is.- William 19:12, 26 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Lexi Thompson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:46, 21 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Lexi Thompson. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 08:05, 22 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lexi_Thompson&oldid=1209112356"