Talk:Jordan Love
Latest comment: 3 months ago by Spf121188 in topic References f contract extension
 | Jordan Love has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: October 31, 2023. (Reviewed version). |
| 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 sourced must 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: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
 | This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened: |
 | A fact from Jordan Love appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 11 December 2023 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
Love extension
editLove's one year extension offers no long term notability and shouldn't be there. Comparing Lamar's extension being in the intro is an odd one considering his made him the highest paid player. Yankees10 23:52, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Yankees10. Do you mind pointing out in MOS:LEAD or some other policy/guideline where it says that something cannot be included if it
offers no long term notability
? My understanding of MOS:LEAD is that the lead should adequately summarize, with appropriate weight, the key topics covered in the article. Seeing as the most recent and notable things about Love in the news over the last 6 months is his new contract (they extended him, providing some commitment to him over the next 2 seasons) and him being named starter for the 2023 season, I think these are appropriate for the lead, since they are covered in the body of the article. Obviously, him being named starter in 2023 doesn't offer longterm notability and will likely be removed at some point in the future as he has more content added to his article.
- On that note, my mention of the other articles in the edit summary was more to note that there doesn't appear to be a hard or fast rule about extensions. I will also note that compared to his peers, Love's article is relatively short (1429 words, versus 4771 words for Lamar and 3985 words for Joe, as an example). Thus, the lead is likely to include details that maybe aren't included in longer articles.
- All that said, I see the inclusion of this as clearly not against any policy/guideline and falls within a clear reading of MOS:LEAD. Less on a policy/guideline side, I just happen to be the editor who significantly expanded the article and am bringing it to WP:GAN right now. So although I definitely don't own this article, on items like this, that at best are grey areas or areas that are often left to editorial discretion, I think it would be respectful to leave the editorial discretion to the editor who put the time and effort into greatly expanding and improving the article. I am happy to discuss rewording or even expanding the body a bit to describe the importance of the contract extension. Let me know what you think. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 00:26, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
- There is no policy that says something like this can't be included, it's just my personal opinion on the matter. "Offers no long term notability and shouldn't be there" admittedly comes off too strong. Your reasonings for keeping the extension are sound, tho I am still curious on what others think. The last paragraph is a bit sketchy tho. I've seen other editors make these types of comments and it sometimes ends up turning into a bit of an "ownership of article" issue.-- Yankees10 00:40, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
- I appreciate your response Yankees10 and insight. I see it more as stewardship when an editor takes on the grunt work of sourcing and expanding an article, then taking it through at least a few review processes. Obviously, if the article doesn't follow a specific policy or guideline, then it needs to be fixed. But as you note, when two editors have two opinions on how an article is written, I typically try to differ to the editor who has worked to expand the article. Cheers, « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 03:00, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
- Gonzo_fan2007 and Yankees10, I'm going to add my $.02, though it isn't of as much value :) I don't necessarily see issue with his extension being in the lead, but given the relative insignificance (compared to Burrows/Jackson, etc,) of the extension given that it's one year, at very low market value, it seems sufficient to mention it later in the article in his "transition to starter" section. However, I wouldn't remove it myself, rather replace it with a potential long term extension in the near future if/when that occurs, since it will (likely) be more significant, depending on obvious factors. I guess I really don't have a position here lol just some new thoughts on it.SPF121188 (talk this way) (my edits) 18:41, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
- I appreciate your response Yankees10 and insight. I see it more as stewardship when an editor takes on the grunt work of sourcing and expanding an article, then taking it through at least a few review processes. Obviously, if the article doesn't follow a specific policy or guideline, then it needs to be fixed. But as you note, when two editors have two opinions on how an article is written, I typically try to differ to the editor who has worked to expand the article. Cheers, « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 03:00, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
- There is no policy that says something like this can't be included, it's just my personal opinion on the matter. "Offers no long term notability and shouldn't be there" admittedly comes off too strong. Your reasonings for keeping the extension are sound, tho I am still curious on what others think. The last paragraph is a bit sketchy tho. I've seen other editors make these types of comments and it sometimes ends up turning into a bit of an "ownership of article" issue.-- Yankees10 00:40, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Jordan Love/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk · contribs) 20:17, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
I will review this shortly. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 20:17, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Early life
edit- You mention his father a lot (understandably) but do we know anything about his mother? If you can find her job, you can add it after
His father, Orbin Jr., was a police officer for the Bakersfield Police Department
- I haven't seen anything about his mom other than what is in there right now about her helping to convince him to not quit football. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:50, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- His mom
worked as an officer for the California Highway Patrol. She took care of Jordan and his three sisters Kami, Emily, and Alexis after Orbin's death.
[1] HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 20:58, 25 October 2023 (UTC)- Not thrilled with Sportskeeda as a reliable source. That said, the "In the name of Love" article actually does mention her career. I added it here. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:58, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- His mom
- I haven't seen anything about his mom other than what is in there right now about her helping to convince him to not quit football. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:50, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
His only scholarship offer came from Utah State
The reference doesn't say that. It just says:or earn a scholarship to Utah State
.
Other
edit- If you're interested, Ronika Stone might qualify for a Wikipedia article given her collegiate accomplishments [2]
- That's why I red linked it, but volleyball isn't my cup of tea for writing articles. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:50, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
HickoryOughtShirt?4, did you have any other comments? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:48, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Ya, I just like to split them up so people don't get overwhelmed. I am a bit busy today but I will add more soon. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 18:41, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- No worries, thanks. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:55, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
HickoryOughtShirt?4, I have a number of GAs under my belt and have done a ton of reviews. If you are ok with it, I would prefer to just have all your comments to address at once, instead of splitting them up. I am fine to wait for you to complete your full review and then address any comments. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 22:02, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Ya, of course sorry. I felt bad not being to get it all done in one go. If you don't mind waiting a couple days, I can get it all done at once. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 23:17, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Yep, no rush :) « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:17, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
Review cont.
edit- It's crazy that a rookie can sign for a $12.3 million with a signing bonus of over $6.5 million! That's more than Connor McDavid.
It was the first time a quarterback received a fully guaranteed contract since the rookie pay scale was changed
. The reference doesn't say this. It says:It's the first time the No. 26 pick has received a fully guaranteed deal under the current rookie contract system
. It's interesting but I find it funny how specific this "first" is.- Just an option, you don't have to, but it may be a good idea to explain why Love jumped to Number 2. I assumed it was because Boyle left/was injured but it looks like it was also bc Rogers didn't report for offseason workouts.
replacing Aaron Rodgers
don't need his first name here.Love relieved Aaron Rodgers
please remove the Wikilink and his first nameThe Packers would finish the year 8–9, missing the playoffs for the first time in three seasons.
- The reference saysThe Packers (8-9) missed the playoffs for the first time in Matt LaFleur's four seasons as coach.
So wouldn't it be four seasons?the Packers completed a trade sending Aaron Rodgers to New York for draft picks
please remove the Wikilink and his first namethird different quarterback to start week 1
, I think week should be capitalized here- HickoryOughtShirt?4 I believe I have addressed all your comments in these edits. Thanks. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:25, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Did you know nomination
edit- 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.
The result was: promoted by Bruxton talk 15:47, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
( )
- ... that after starting the first game of the 2023 NFL season, Jordan Love became only the third quarterback since 1993 to start Week 1 for the Green Bay Packers, following Brett Favre and Aaron Rodgers? Source: "Love is the third different starting quarterback for the packers in week 1 since 1993. Brett Favre started against the St. Louis Rams, Aaron Rodgers against the Minnesota Vikings. Both won those starts. Love gets the Chicago Bears."
- Reviewed: Jim Hobbins
Improved to Good Article status by Gonzo fan2007 (talk). Self-nominated at 15:51, 31 October 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Jordan Love; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
- I'll review this. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:55, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
|---|
|
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: Appears to meet all the criteria. Nice work. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:54, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Special Date Request: if this could be placed on the main page on a Sunday when the Packers play, that would be great (Nov 5, Nov 12, Nov 19 all would work). « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 19:39, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Special Date Request: Nov 23 and Dec 3 are the next scheduled games. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:14, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
- Special Date Request: After that we have games on Dec 11, Dec 17, Dec 24, Dec 31 and Jan 7. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:18, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
- Special Date Request: Nov 23 and Dec 3 are the next scheduled games. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:14, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
- @BeanieFan11 and Gonzo fan2007: The hook checks out and is interesting. I like this for Prep 1 which is December 11. However there seems to be a high earwig score (56%) and I do not know if they copied us or we copied them. Bruxton (talk) 14:57, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
- Bruxton Factsnippet.com releases their text under Creative Commons, safe to assume that they mirrored Wikipedia. In fact, there whole site looks like they just pull facts from Wikipedia. The other site looks like the same thing, pulling facts from Wikipedia. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:45, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
- @BeanieFan11 and Gonzo fan2007: The hook checks out and is interesting. I like this for Prep 1 which is December 11. However there seems to be a high earwig score (56%) and I do not know if they copied us or we copied them. Bruxton (talk) 14:57, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
New photo?
editIsn't it time for a little less goofy looking main photo? 2603:6000:A602:121D:4D4:F88E:3247:E94D (talk) 23:40, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, its the best free photo currently available. If you have a better, free alternative, then please upload it and add it to the article. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:21, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
References f contract extension
editthis edit is per the discussion here, in an effort to make sure citations for this page don't become excessive, especially for one straightforward piece of information that isn't controversial. SPF121188 (talk this way) (my edits) 16:11, 2 August 2024 (UTC)