Talk:Fredy Montero

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Loan?[edit]

What proof is there that Fredy is on a loan? I'd love to see some. In Seattle, the speculation about Montero's status is that he is part owned by Sounders FC, and part owned by somebody else. Musskel (talk) 16:39, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

It's right there on Seattle's website: http://www.soundersfc.com/Team/Players/Freddy-Montero.aspx. "Signed on loan". --JonBroxton (talk) 16:44, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Good call! Updated. Musskel (talk) 16:56, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Honors[edit]

Would it be appropriate to put in "Honors"? If so, his Spanish article has the mention but I would hate to screw up the translation: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fredy_Montero . Looks like he was the highest scorer in a couple competitions which sometimes gets mentioned.

Distinción Año
Goleador del Torneo Apertura (13 goles) 2007
Goleador del Torneo Finalización (16 goles) 2008

Cptnono (talk) 04:48, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

It's already mentioned in the prose. Having a table saying it as well is a bit repetitive. --JonBroxton (talk) 18:07, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Aha! So it is. I noticed most Articles on the English Wikipedia format it as bullet points (Alan Shearer#Honours). I think it is better aesthetically than the table but I don't want to be repetitive.Cptnono (talk) 18:15, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Alleged Crime[edit]

2 anonymous sources say there is an investigation and it is alluded to but to save any confusion I changed it to ".. woman has accused...". Investigation has not gotten far for assault and "no crime was commited" regarding the stalking but did not want to clutter the article with too much preliminary info.Cptnono (talk) 17:51, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Should have looked here before I rewrote the section, but I removed the stalking allegation since the police determined no crime was committed. As you noted adding in the "no crime was committed" to the stalking part gives the allegation a bit too much weight, but leaving it out gives the false impression that he's still under investigation on the stalking charge. --Bobblehead (rants) 22:46, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
I put in the Times source in since it was updated. It states the "stalking" was in Bellevue when the other sources said it was in Sammamish during the host family's kids soccer game. Doesn't sound like it is being pursued, though. Times is good about updating though so whichever one is correct will be in the source soon enough. I hope this is garbage and won't need expansion.Cptnono (talk) 23:00, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
After reading WP:BLP and WP:SOURCES I question whether or not it's even appropriate to have this mentioned on Wikipedia. At this point the only facts are that a police report has been filed. No charges have been made and the investigation is ongoing. To try to post "facts" on Wikipedia in real time about alleged crimes committed by a living person seems reckless to me. I think it should be removed until some real "facts" are available.--SkotywaTalk 04:32, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not for news and it is not a crystal ball and blah blah blah but this is obviously noteworthy and a single line does not overweight the article. I'm sure we can keep it in check and update it as appropriate. Already we have made sure to not add paragraph after paragraph (haven't checked in the last couple hours) so I see no concerns.Cptnono (talk) 05:26, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Just as an update. No charges are to be filed.[1] --Bobblehead (rants) 00:21, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

FFS, you're like lightning bobblehead! I think I got the edit first but you got the link here first!Cptnono (talk) 00:22, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Heh. I was just going to update the article to show no charges were to be filed. I wasn't going to delete it. I think this falls into a bit of a BLP grey area. The fact that he was under investigation for rape is easily verifiable and it was fairly well covered in Seattle and Toronto news sources as well as the MLS, so one could argue that it should be included on verifiability grounds. --Bobblehead (rants) 00:30, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure of the notability guidelines but it was definitely covered enough in the media. It kind of sucks for the guy if he didn't do it to be tarnished (1 line is all it takes sometimes) but thats the way it is. I don't mind reinclusion with a line follow-up.Cptnono (talk) 00:32, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Notability isn't for determing content of articles, just whether the article should exist at all. Content of the articles is covered by WP:BLP and WP:Verifiability. Problem is, anyone can file allegations against smoeone and then run to the press with the allegations. one could argue that including the allegations in a single sentence section gives them undue weight and therefore should not be included. I'm fairly sure that few people will even remember the allegations in a few years, so leaving them out is also an option. --Bobblehead (rants) 00:42, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
I think what I was trying to get at with "notability" is that this allegation is verifiable but is it important enough to go in. Agree with the weight issue but if this allegation was that important I think we could allow for the potential balance concern. I'm on the fence. Either way is OK with me so maybe some others will chime in and help find consensus. As long as it isn't obvious inserting of headlines I'm fine if someone really really wants it in.Cptnono (talk) 03:44, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
I don't think the notes about allegations should stay in the article. What's verifiable about this is a bunch of information about something he didn't do (or wasn't charged for at least). I would say the only reason to keep this around (or more likely add it back later) is if he has a later pattern of behavior that could be tracked back to this notable event. For now I'd say remove it. It'll always be in the article history and mentioned on the talk page in the event that this was just a harbinger of further bad behavior. For now though, can we give him a vote of confidence and remove it? It would be a shame if Wikipedia is partly responsible for unnecessary and unwarranted "haunting" from this event after he has moved on with his life and doesn't have repeated investigations or offenses. This, I think, is part of the spirit behind some of the guidance in WP:BLP. --SkotywaTalk 06:04, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
well said.Cptnono (talk) 06:29, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

SI Article[edit]

SI article says Seattle's breakout star Fredy Montero admits he's using MLS as a stepping stone with the quote "I'd like to play internationally for Colombia, and also on a club in Europe,". It is important enough to go into the professional section but I am a little biased and am having a hard time coming up with an appropriate line. Anyone else want to?Cptnono (talk) 04:27, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Expanded content[edit]

The recent edit by Sid1977 is pretty badass. However, it is an awful lot of information that may not have great historical value. I am also concerned that upkeep will faulter sooner or later throughout his career giving undue weight to a few single games. Is there a way to paraphrase the first half of the season in a more concise form? Kind of a crappy of me to ask with the massive amount of work the additions must have taken. Also, some fo this info would be great in the '09 season page where such a focus would be better. I also won't change a thing since I may be concerned for no reason and this detailed content may be a good thing.Cptnono (talk) 04:17, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Now in '11. Yeah, time to rework everything at the end of the season.Cptnono (talk) 04:57, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Signed?[edit]

The report of him being signed and no longer being on loan is speculation. Lets give it a little bit of time until making the change.Cptnono (talk) 14:28, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. This article implies that we really don't know anything about the details of his contract even with the recent revelations. Right now the team site indicates that he is "signed on loan" still, so until that changes that's the official word. --SkotyWATalk|Contribs 03:44, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
I wish people would read the talk page. The original news was poorly worded speculation on a foreign source. The recent story mentions that the team does not comment on "rights". That doesn't sound like a transfer to me. Don't even bother with the Examiner. The news will come out soon enough. Until the, wikipeida is not for speculation on breaking news.Cptnono (talk) 22:13, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
I know it doesn't count as a reliable source, but one of the announcers for the U.S. Open Cup Finals broadcast on FSC yesterday said quite clearly that MLS had aquired him from Deportivo Cali. I still can't find a good source for it though. By the way, is this (original, in Spanish) the speculation article you're speaking of? I thought it was pretty clear about the MLS acquiring him, though Google's translation is hilarious: "As for his football future, Freddy is very comfortable with the militant Seattle Sounders in MLS, yet does not neglect to act sometime in European football." ← George [talk] 12:25, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
There's been enough speculation in the press lately about his loan status (or lack of) that I'm giving up on the pushback to the IP editor who insists on removing the "on-loan" info for Montero in the team page. We still don't have official word from anywhere, but I'm getting tired of this IP editor's persistence. For me, at this point, it's enough to say that it's probably true. --SkotyWATalk|Contribs 04:16, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
The translation could be better but it mentions his rights and MLS. Unfortunately, the commentators during a game (1 or 2 ago?) said the same thing. Is he on loan but MLS makes the money on shirts? Also, is he an MLS or Sounders asset on the books? Also, does the source say his rights were successfully negotiated or did they just hold negations? I can't even speak English half the time :) Cptnono (talk) 10:48, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Also, I just saw that MLS owns the contracts of most players so it makes a little more sense.Cptnono (talk) 17:44, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
Sigi Schmid recently did an interview in which he stated that Montero was still on loan. The video can be found here (the discussion about Montero starts about two minutes in). ← George talk 09:43, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Well that is why we are cautious (since we were right we can brag but :) ). Nice find.Cptnono (talk)
Well, since the season is over and MLS purchased his rights, would that mean that his loan period is over and that he's now with the Sounders on a permanent basis? – Michael (talk) 15:44, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
I would think so. Find a source. Last source we have has Sigi saying he is still on loan. The Spanish peice also did not clarify if the negotiations were succesful. I'm sure there will be something out there source wise with the pending moves coming up but we need a concrete source. If it means anything, he was on the list of players protected from the expansion draft. Cptnono (talk) 19:30, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Aha! "As for Montero, his contract status is much murkier. It's believed that the MLS/Seattle Sounders own his rights at this point. The details of the deal have never been publicly clarified, despite attempts to do so.[2]"Cptnono (talk) 01:25, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Follow-up: I see that it was changed in the infobox. I don't really mind it but I almost want to clarify it with a "?/unknown status/something". That would look really crummy, though. Unfortunately, a reliable source has not said that he is for sure not on loan and Sigi said he was on loan still. We just need to make sure we are not making any definitive claims here. We an keep it as is but keep on looking for sources and be ready to switch it back if it is contradicted.Cptnono (talk) 02:05, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

← I don't believe Montero has been signed by the Sounders for the 2010 season yet. Despite the news reports at the time saying Montero's rights had been purchased by MLS, they apparently were not true. All of the news reports were based on a single news article from a Colombian newspaper that was running on rumors and then an echo chamber was established and after awhile it was accepted as true. One of the Seattle bloggers talked to Hannauer about the sale and he said it wasn't true. I'll see if I can scare up a link, but it won't be anything resembling a reliable source. --Bobblehead (rants) 20:36, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Good enough for me. We can remove the '10 until more is known. I think the prose are clear on the situation (unless they have been changed recently). Also, Sigi saying "NO" should be good enough.Cptnono (talk) 00:32, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Oh snap: "The Seattle Sounders FC has signed forward Fredy Montero to a contract extension and completed the permanent transfer of his contract to the club and Major League Soccer..."[3] So was he on loan the whole time?Cptnono (talk) 21:00, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

International caps citation[edit]

I'm not familiar with where to get info on South American players, but I've asked for a citation for the caps. This is because the previous figure of 4(1) appeared to include the match against Catalonia, which was not a full international. I've reduced his caps to 3 matches with no goals, but I'd still like to see a citation for this: for all I know, other non-full internationals might have been included in this figure. Pretty Green (talk) 07:08, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Dude, we have plenty sites that show how many matches he's played and how many goals he's scored. His profile says 4 caps but it doesn't say anything about him scoring for Colombia. So, we're just gonna go with 4 (0) for right now. – Michael (talk) 14:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Full name[edit]

Is there any indication that "Jr." is part of his full name? "Jr." is not common in spanish naming customs, at all. The spanish equivalent is "h.", but that can only happen if he and his dad share all four names, which in turn can only happen if his father's mother's first surname is also Munoz (like Fredy's mom). That seems very unlikely. Digirami (talk) 07:00, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Good inter-wiki example is José Francisco Cevallos, who has a son with the same given names and, obviously, the same first surname. Because of that, his son is commonly referred to as José Francisco Cevallos, Jr. But legally, neither have Sr. or Jr. as part of their name since they do not share the same second surname. Digirami (talk) 19:47, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Fredy Montero. 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.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:05, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Fredy Montero. 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.

YesY 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:33, 7 October 2017 (UTC)