Jump to content

Talk:Missy Franklin

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nationality

[edit]

{{Infobox swimmer}} never states that the nationality is reserved for the country for which she competes. Why are we stating that it does? Right now there is a silly edit war that should be discussed here. In addition, we're getting a little bitey aren't we? Ryan Vesey 17:01, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note that I won't be able to discuss for the next hour, but if we do include the nationality, the code should be {{USA}}<br/>{{CAN}} for consistency. Ryan Vesey 17:03, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have reverted this for NOW until some type of consensus is formed either way. How is dual nationality "usually" handled in sports bio boxes? Is there a "standard" and can it be linked to? I claim ignorance here. Usually, both nationalities are mentioned in the lede unless it is very non notable which might be the case here. --Mollskman (talk) 17:07, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
She was born in the United States. Mentioning her Canadian background in the lead and athlete box would be misleading. For precedence, look at the pages Cate Campbell or Michael Klim. Now if she competed for Canada, her page would look like Mihail Alexandrov, who competed for two different countries. 146.7.60.20 (talk) 17:32, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why would it be misleading to mention the fact that she is a Citizen of both countries? These are facts, not opinions. The fact that she is a proud American and competes for the USA does not change the fact that she is dual. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.10.193.23 (talk) 18:19, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No one is denying those facts, as it is stated in the article. But one may assume she competes for Canada if that information was in the athlete box because the box contains swimming-related information, including medals. 146.7.60.20 (talk) 18:26, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

it looks like someone removed the quote about why she chose to swim for the USA instead of Canada. I think this is pretty important in leading off to her international career. Also, let's look to milorad cavic's page for guidance on how to handle Franklin's nationality. We need consistency. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.85.98.46 (talk) 15:22, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit disturbed by the lack of participation on this topic and by the precedent that has been set in all swimming articles. Please note that articles are not only about their swimming career. The section of the infobox with nationality is Personal Information. That means her swimming should be irrelevant to her nationality. The country she competes for appears in her medal record. Ryan Vesey 20:57, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I took the liberty of re-adding the citizenship parameter to the infobox and listing both countries there to clear up any further controversy. There is no dispute regarding which country she competes for, and the citizenship parameter is clearly (per the infobox documentation) needed to make the situation clear. I think this should settle it, but let me know if you have any more concerns. Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 21:21, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The citizenship parameter had actually been removed from the template but not its documentation. I started discussion but hadn't received a response. I reinstated the parameter because you used it here again. We still have an issue about the flag; however, that might be something that needs a wider RfC because it will affect a lot of articles. Perhaps precedence should result in a change in the MOS rather than the other way around. I'll ask some people at Wikipedia:WikiProject Swimming, but if they don't feel like arguing for the change in the MOS, we'll have to modify all of the articles so they are in line with it. Ryan Vesey 21:26, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ryan, please do not re-add the new citizenship parameter to the "Infobox swimmer" template until we have had a week or more of discussion. The template is literally in use on thousands of swimmer articles. Until we have a definitive consensus, we do not need to invite the mindless addition of citizenship information that will be absolutely redundant to sporting nationality in 99% of all cases. Substantively and historically, the "nationality" field has been reserved for the athlete's sporting nationality, i.e., the nation for which the athlete competes. If we decide to use the citizenship field, I believe that its use should be strictly limited to athletes whose actual citizenship and sporting nationality are inconsistent, and the instructional documentation on the template page should be so noted. As for the Missy Franklin article, her dual citizenship is already specifically discussed in the article's text, so there is no urgency to alter the template parameters immediately. We can certainly afford to wait days or even a few weeks for input.
As for the use of flag icons in the nationality field of the "Infobox swimmer" template, this has been done consistently since the beginning of Wikipedia for international sports such Formula 1 racing, golf, gymnastics, swimming, tennis, track and field, and all of the related WikiProjects continue to do so. (The WikiProject for association football, a.k.a. "soccer" to us Yanks, decided to drop the use of the flag icons for reasons peculiar to that sport, i.e., multiple changes of sporting nationality being common, and the infoboxes becoming cluttered as a result). This consistent historical use only applies to sports where the highest level of competition is primarily international, not national, in scope. This usage does not apply to national only sports such as Major League Baseball, the National Basketball Association, and the National Football League; these are American leagues whose athletes are overwhelmingly Americans. The inconsistency between actual usage for athletes in these international sports and the Manual of Style section on point arose when small local consensus altered the original language of the MOS section a year or two ago, but without first soliciting wider input from the dozens of active editors who work on these sports articles. Of course, the dozens of editors who actually work on these articles have consistently told the handful of MOS regulars to go get stuffed and Mexican standoff has ensued. It is a classic example of a LOCAL CONSENSUS purporting to have project-wide authority based on the input of only five or six editors. I have already prepared an RfC on point and plan to post it after the 2012 Olympiad is over, and then to solicit 30 or 45 days of comments from editors project-wide, including the most affected WikiProjects. I have an opinion on this subject, but it needs to be resolved, one way or the other, and I will comply with whatever the actual project-wide consensus is determined to be. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 23:37, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone going to add why missy chose to swim for America and not Canada? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.85.98.46 (talk) 00:14, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Short answer, she's Americanized. She was born in America, and if you listen to any of her interviews, she holds the United States to a high regard. 108.225.117.120 (talk) 01:36, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I know that and that answer along with a quote from her was in the article. I wanted to know why it was taken out. If there was no good reason I'm going to add it back in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.85.98.46 (talk) 00:45, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Has anyone come up with any ideas on how we'll handle her nationality? Calling her a canadian swimmer in the lead could be a bit misleading as it hints that she swims for the canadian team. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.85.98.46 (talk) 14:56, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why not set it to show that she is a dual-citizen, but competes for the US. It already has the information that she competes for the US, but it is hidden by default, but if somebody added a "show-medals = yes", you would know she competed for the US and then you can add the Canadian citizenship. Leaving it as showing only US citizenship is factually incorrect, and the goal should be to be as accurate as possible, and when not possible, not to be misleading. Gedcke (talk) 00:17, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just rewrote the first sentence of the lead ". . . is a Canadian-American swimmer who competes for the United States and is a four-time Olympic gold medalist." Hopefully, that will resolve this issue for everyone. As for the description of "nationality" in the infobox, that field is uniformly reserved for the athlete's sport nationality, i.e. the country for which she competes, not her citizenship. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 00:50, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I still disagree with the above solution because she really doesn't hold any Canadian roots besides her dual citizenship. Again, I feel the mention of her dual citizenship in the personal life section is enough. If one was to read she is a "Canadian-American swimmer" in the lead, one may assume she holds strong ties to Canada or once competed for Canada. In fact, besides her parents, she really doesn't identify herself with Canada. If we were to start this precedence, would we also say Natalie Coughlin is a Filipino-American swimmer? Matt Grevers is a Dutch-American swimmer? Or Ryan Lochte is a Cuban-American swimmer? She was born in America, attended American school, and recognizes herself as an American. I believe putting Franklin is a "Canadian-American swimmer" would be misleading to the the average reader, as they may assume she holds strong Canadian ties. 108.225.117.120 (talk) 01:45, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Missy Franklin ... is an American swimmer who was born in California and lives in Colorado; she holds dual Canadian and American citizenship -- what about that? -- 70.50.151.36 (talk) 08:09, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The latter sounds good to me, but perhaps make it Missy Franklin ... is an American swimmer who was born in California and lives in Colorado; she holds dual Canadian and American citizenship and represents the US in international competition. Then it is factually correct and there can be no confusion whatsoever. Not mentioning a citizenship would be wrong in my opinion. I'm also in favor of adding CAN to the infobox, in particular since in the medal section it is explicitly stated that she represents USA. As for the other swimmers mentioned, if they indeed do have dual citizenship, this should be mentioned in their respective articles. Gap9551 (talk) 10:45, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's factually correct, but then the question is, is it notable enough to be in the lead? I say no. She is known for her Olympic exploits, not her dual-citizenship. Besides the Canadian media, I haven't really heard much of it. In fact, I've heard more about her size 13 feet than her dual-citizenship from online news articles. Should that be in the lead? The main thing I think everyone is missing here is that it's already mentioned in the article in detail. Why are people pushing this to be in the lead? So now she wins a few golds and now people want to declare her Canadian? Philipmj24 (talk) 14:32, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The lead isn't based on what someone is notable for. The lead is a summary of an article. Dual-citizenship is important to someone's biography regardless of how much it is talked about. It would be a violation of WP:LEAD not to include this information. Ryan Vesey 14:36, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How many people with an article on Wikipedia are known for their nationality rather than for their achievements? It is just standard to mention someone's nationality/nationalities in the first sentence. Plus, clearly explaining the situation helps avoiding the potential confusing that could arise if two nationalities are listed in the infobox, which they should. Gap9551 (talk) 14:52, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you check out Canadian news coverage of Olympic swimming, alot of them say she is a dual citizen. So it is something that is out there and in the news. -- 70.50.151.36 (talk) 05:07, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That is mostly because the Canadian media was pushing an idiotic argument that Canada can lay claim to some "credit" for her success. It is basically a manifestation of inferiority complex and is something most Canadians I've spoken to about it find embarrassing. Franklin is an American, whose Canadian dual-citizenship comes by virtue of her parents' birthplaces. I would note in the lead and infobox only that she is American. Her Canadian citizenship and ancestry is interesting, but belongs only in her personal history section. Resolute 14:16, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As there is no consensus, I say we leave the article as is until there is. 108.225.117.120 (talk) 00:01, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wow there's a lot of stupid nationality pushing on here. Saying her only connection to Canada is her parent's birthplaces is absurd. She was on international television last week stating that she spends at least 1/4 of the year in Canada and she considers herself just as much Canadian as American. --24.202.1.112 (talk) 01:04, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nationality again

[edit]

This was discussed extensively, but it seems one user refuses to listen and because of one individual, the whole page is locked down. Your enthusiasm is welcomed, but let's civilly discuss this. First all, her nationality is discussed and there's no conspiracy to hide that fact. Look at the "Personal life" section, there's pretty much a full paragraph talking about her Canadian parents. So the user saying "Any mention of her Canadian nationality is quickly taken off" is completely false. No one is denying that fact. The lead is generally reserved for notable achievements, and Franklin's achievements is competing and winning medals for the United States. It would be misleading to put "American-Canadian" because although that is techinally true, she has competed, lived, went to school in the United States her whole life. If one was to read that, they would assume she has strong ties to Canada. But other than her parents and maybe a couple of visits, that's not the case. In addition, this change would go against the general formatting of all 700+ USA swimmer's bios. I say we keep it the way it was. Philipmj24 (talk) 10:56, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • How shall we describe Missy Franklin in the opening sentence of this article? Generally speaking, the lead serves two parallel purposes per MOS:LEAD: (1) as a statement of the reasons for the subject's notability, and (2) summarize the major points of the article. Per MOS:BIO, nationality is one of the typical descriptors included in the lead section, if not the first sentence. Okay, how shall we describe Franklin's nationality? Let's see----
(1) Franklin was born in Pasadena, California, and she is an American national and a U.S. citizen by virtue of being born in the United States.
(2) Franklin's permanent residence is Centennial, Colorado, a suburb of metro Denver, Colorado. She has lived there since the age of 5. There is no evidence that she has ever had a permanent residence outside the United States.
(3) Franklin attends an American Catholic high school, Regis Jesuit High School, located in Aurora, Colorado. There is no evidence that she has ever attended a high school or grade school outside the United States.
(4) Franklin has accepted an athletic scholarship to attend an American university, the University of California, Berkeley, for which she will compete in American intercollegiate (NCAA) sports.
(5) Franklin has competed in two U.S. Olympic Trials (2008, 2012), qualified to represent the United States in the 2012 Summer Olympics, and won five Olympic medals as a member of the U.S. Olympic team. She has never represented Canada or any other country in the Olympics, nor has she ever attempted to qualify as a member of the Canadian Olympic team or the Olympic team of any other country.
(6) Franklin has previously represented the United States at the 2011 FINA World Championships, where she won five medals as a member of the U.S. National Swim Team, and the 2010 FINA World Short-Course Championships, where she won two medals as a member of the U.S. National Swim Team. Franklin has never attempted to qualify as a member of the Canadian national swim team nor the national team of any other country.
(7) Franklin holds dual United States and Canadian citizenship by virtue of the fact that both of her parents were Canadian citizens at the time of her birth in Pasadena, California.
(8) Franklin consciously and deliberately decided to qualify for the U.S. Olympic swim team in 2008, despite the fact that it would have been easier to qualify for the Canadian Olympic team, and likely would have qualified to represent Canada in the 2008 Summer Olympics had she chosen to do so.
From the foregoing facts, it is pretty clear that Franklin is an "American competition swimmer," i.e., a swimmer who represents the United States in international competition. She is not a Canadian swimmer, having never represented Canada in international competition. I'm not sure what an "American Canadian swimmer" is----the awkward construction that two single-purpose account (SPA) users and probable sock puppets continue to insist upon. At best the meaning of this construction is ambiguous; at worst, it is misleading.
At present, the "personal life" section of the article describes the present citizenship and background of Franklin and her parents, at length, two wit:
"Both of Franklin's parents are Canadian and Franklin has dual citizenship. Her father, Dick, was born in St. Catharines, Ontario. A former All-Canadian football player for Saint Mary's University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, he played briefly for the Toronto Argonauts of the Canadian Football League as an offensive lineman. After an injury ended his football career, he returned to Halifax to pursue an MBA degree at Dalhousie University, where he met his future wife, a medical student. While working for 7-Up in Ontario, Dick was transferred to the United States. Ultimately the family settled in Denver, Colorado, where Dick had a senior position with Coors Brewing Company. Franklin's mother suggested that her daughter consider competing for Canada to ease the pressure of qualifying for the U.S. National Team due to the depth of USA Swimming. Franklin, however, chose to represent the United States, citing her patriotism for her homeland."
The "personal life" text describes Franklin's dual citizenship, and the citizenship of her parents, in detail and nuance. No one has seriously suggested that the article omit the fact that she is a dual citizen of the United States and Canada. Bottom line: Why are we arguing about the need to add an ambiguous/misleading bifurcated adjective to the lead sentence? Everything that needs to be explained about her citizenship in the article is already there, in detail. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 04:24, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Missy Franklin is American. End of story. The dual is something she had nothing to do with, but given the chance to represent Canada, she chose the USA. Dual is common among citizens of both countries- probably one of most unique constructions of citizenship in the world today. It's also representative of the simplicity and ease of the cross border relationship that speaks to how families over generations ended up on different sides of the border, but are still extended families. At some point in the future the dual might be useful to Franklin as a gateway to an opportunity, say as commentator on a Canadian network, and she'd have every right to take it up because she's also Canadian.xyxyxyconsulzephyrConsulzephyr (talk) 00:34, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Convenience break (January 2015)

[edit]
  • @Senorcanadiense: The issue of Franklin's sporting nationality has been raised again by an editor determined to insert Franklin's dual Canadian citizenship into the lead, contrary to the talk page consensus here, and the specific instructions and established practices for Template:Infobox swimmer. As anyone can see, this issue has been beat to death on this talk page on at least three different occasions. Currently, the second paragraph of the "Personal life" section of the article discusses her Canadian-born parents and her dual citizenship at significant length, to wit:
Both of Franklin's parents are Canadian and Franklin has dual citizenship.[6] Her father, Dick, was born in St. Catharines, Ontario. A former All-Canadian football player for Saint Mary's University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, he played briefly for the Toronto Argonauts of the Canadian Football League as an offensive lineman. After an injury ended his football career, he returned to Halifax to pursue an MBA degree at Dalhousie University, where he met his future wife, a medical student. While working for 7-Up in Ontario, Dick was transferred to the United States. Ultimately the family settled in Denver, Colorado, where Dick had a senior position with Coors Brewing Company.[6] Franklin's mother suggested that her daughter consider competing for Canada to ease the pressure of qualifying for the U.S. National Team due to the competitive depth of American swimmers. Franklin, however, chose to represent the United States, citing her patriotism for her homeland.[7]
You can't get much clearer than that in explaining Franklin's dual citizenship. Her sporting nationality is American, not Canadian, and calling her an "American-Canadian swimmer" or a "Canadian-American swimmer" is misleading. Bottom line: Yes, Franklin is a dual citizen of the United States and Canada, but she does not represent Canada in international competition, and never has. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:40, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tangential but apropos given the discussion. I recently removed the flag icon from the infobox, and it was restored. This has always seemed confusing to me and even more so now. We already have a flag appearing with her in the medal record table within the infobox, which states she is a competitor for the United States. Why do we need another flag? If we are to have another flag, the whole nationality bit can be readily sidestepped by including a "Competes for" field in the "Sport" section of the infobox, which makes a hell of a lot more sense than stating (half incorrectly) her nationality as United States in the "Personal Information" (emphasis mine) portion of the infobox , when in fact she carries dual citizenship, regardless of who she competes for. She has a "much-publicized love for Canada", and her favorite place in the world is in Canada [1], yet all we can do is barely mention in one line that she has dual citizenship, and bury that down in the personal life section of her bio? Really? I think the infobox here should be treated like Nick Calathes or Alberto Salazar. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:03, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Hammersoft: "[B]arely mention in one line that she has dual citizenship"? Hammer, there's an entire 150-word paragraph discussing her family's Canadian origins (see above). If you feel you can add something to the content that's already there, please do. But let's be clear: describing Franklin as a "Canadian-American swimmer" or "American-Canadian swimmer" is imply not accurate; she is an American swimmer because she swims for the United States national team, and has never competed for any other country. This entire talk page is related to that one topic. If you want to propose compromise language that recognizes her dual citizenship in the lead, please do, but calling her a "Canadian-American swimmer" (or the reverse) in the first sentence has already been rejected repeatedly on this page. I, for one, am receptive to compromise language, but not words that imply she competes for Canada. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 18:32, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Indeed, let's be clear. I never suggested calling her a Canadian-American swimmer or American-Canadian swimmer. I am not making a claim that she swims for anyone else, period. Now, with that out of the way... what I was actually discussing was recognizing that she has two nationalities, and doing so in the infobox under "Personal information", which seems highly apropos. "Personal information" isn't her swimming life. It's her life. She does have a life outside of swimming, and part of that life is the reality that she is not just American, but also Canadian. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:35, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, we're mostly in agreement. Here's the problem: "nationality" as used in sports articles/infoboxes means "sporting nationality," not citizenship; the 7mm U.S. flag icon means the subject athlete competes for the United States (i.e., the athlete's "sporting nationality") as a member of its national team. Dual citizenship is not something that gets explained in two words in an infobox, and nationality is not the same as citizenship in any event. The best place to deal with Franklin's dual citizenship is in the text, and, if it's important enough, mention it in the lead, too. Personally, I thought the article already did a decent job of explaining her dual citizenship and her family's Canadian origins, but perhaps there is meaningful content that should be added to the text.
The two examples you provided above should be instructive. For completely unrelated reasons, I am familiar with the personal history of both. (I'm an ex-long-distance runner who came of age when Salazar was one of the best marathon runners in the world; and as you know, I also graduated from the University of Florida, Calathes' alma mater.) Alberto Salazar is the easier case of the two; he is a U.S. citizen who was born in Cuba, but left revolutionary Cuba as a 4 or 5-year-old when his parents defected to the United States. He was raised in Massachusetts and competed for the U.S. national team in the Olympics, international marathons, and IAAF events. Salazar is a Cuban-born naturalized U.S. citizen; he never represented any country other than the United States as an athlete, including Cuba. In short, his sporting nationality is not Cuban, and it never has been. Describe Salazar as "an American" or a "Cuban-born American" in the article text, but you cannot accurately call him a "Cuban" in the infobox or otherwise. His nationality is American. As an aside, the Alberto Salazar article is more lacking in family history than the Missy Franklin article is, and when I have some time, I will expand the Salazar family history because it's a very interesting story that's relevant to who and what Salazar became as an adult.
Nick Calathes is the more complicated case because he is a dual citizen of the United States and Greece. (Salazar has never been a dual citizen; he was born Cuban, and became a naturalized U.S. citizen, and legally relinquished whatever claim he had to being a Cuban citizen when he did so.) Calathes' situation is more complicated because he is a native-born U.S. citizen, born to two parents who were also native-born U.S. citizens. Because one or more of his grandparents were Greek citizens, however, he was able to claim Greek citizenship and earn a spot on the Greek national basketball team. Yes, Calathes is a dual citizen who has retained his U.S. citizenship, as many American-born athletes now do when they pursue sports opportunities abroad. He played high school and college basketball in the United States, but he was unlikely to earn a starting roster spot with an NBA team early in his career, so he followed his older brother to Greece to play pro ball there. He is now a member of the Greek national team, representing Greece, and has never represented the United States in international competition. Notwithstanding his dual citizenship, and having been born in the United States to parents who were U.S. citizens, his sporting nationality is Greek. Clearly, his dual citizenship and sporting nationality deserve explanation in the article text, but I would not consider putting a U.S. flag icon in his infobox because he does not represent the United States, and never has.
Logically, I think we are being completely consistent if we say that Franklin and Salazar's nationality is American, and Calathes' nationality is Greek. At the end of the day, in a sports context, nationality is about the country the subject athlete represents in international competition; that's why we don't even bother including a nationality parameter in our baseball and American football player infoboxes. Nationality is rarely relevant in those sports. For notable swimmers, however, the overwhelming majority of them are notable because they have represented their country in international competition, and most of them would not be otherwise notable unless they were members of their national teams.
Anyway, Hammer, I'm not trying to wear you down with a TLDR wall of text, but I thought you should get a decent exposition of nationality vs. citizenship in the sports context, as it is typically dealt with in Wikipedia sports articles. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:58, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...and I don't think we should be using the "Personal Information" section of any infobox to describe someone's sport career. It might be what they are notable for, but people are much more than sport. That section should do something to address who they are, not the country they compete for in sport, which is only part of them. Abstractly, this is a looong standing issue is disconnect within the project. Some infoboxes are restricted from using flags, while other infoboxes that are largely the same are allowed to. The inconsistency is difficult to explain and even more so to justify. I think this is an interesting case worth considering in light of that; should we allow flags within personal information section of infoboxes and only in sport sections of them, or do we just allow a flag whenever someone mentions "<country>" because the person is most notable for their sports career? --Hammersoft (talk) 21:31, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Similar discussion with dual citizenship inspired by Senorcanadiense is at Talk:Steve_Nash#Nationality_in_infobox. My thoughts there seem relevant here too. Per WP:OPENPARAGRAPH: "Similarly, previous nationalities or the country of birth should not be mentioned in the opening sentence unless they are relevant to the subject's notability." Common sense would seem to imply for her inherited citizenship. Her holding a Canadian passport is a technicality. She is mostly mentioned as an American, and he has not represented the Canadian national team, so it seems irrelevant to the lead, or infobox in this case.—Bagumba (talk) 02:39, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • As mentioned before, I have no dispute with her being listed as competing for the U.S. She's never competed for Canada, and even her first international event (which was in Vancouver) was done representing the U.S. Her sporting nationality is U.S. That is 100% clear. But, that is not her entire identity. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:35, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think the encylopedia should either have the infobox and lead for nationality and actually list all of the nationalities the individual possesses or not have an infobox and lead with any nationalities because the editing of it is ridiculous. There are way too many subjective decisions being made instead of objective decisions, which is the whole point of an encyclopedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Senorcanadiense (talk • contribs) 22:30, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that this article exists is subjective to a degree. Subjectivity is not entirely avoidable, which is why we operate on consensus.—Bagumba (talk) 22:40, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I look at definitions of "Nationality" available on the web and here's what I find:

  • "the status of belonging to a particular nation." (Google)
  • "Nationality is the legal relationship between a person and a country" (Wikipedia)
  • "the status of belonging to a particular nation, whether by birth or naturalization: " (dictionary.com)
  • "Membership of a particular nation or state, by origin, birth, naturalization, ownership, allegiance or otherwise." (wiktionary)

Not one of these definitions has anything to do with a person's profession, career, or competitive sport. Yet, we say "Nationality" and have to insist on not listing Canada (in addition to the U.S.) for Missy even though she is, in fact, Canadian. Whether or not she has competed for Canada is irrelevant to her nationality. --Hammersoft (talk) 00:20, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken, Hammersoft. It's a catch-22. If we don't mention Canada, it's technically incorrect. If it's mentioned, it unduly suggests her notability is tied to her being Canadian. The guideline WP:OPENPARAGRAPH suggests mentioning the nationality relevant to her notability. It's not perfect, but the guideline reflects the current consensus.—Bagumba (talk) 00:32, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The guidelines are meant in general to guide. They do not have to be strictly followed under all circumstances. There seems to be consensus here among more than one person that Franklin's nationality should be listed accurately. Also, perhaps the guideline should be updated since nationality is a legal relationship. I still don't understand how one can argue to include a category that is clearly defined legally, and then, when people try to include the legal nationalities of the individual, it's edited out. How can you edit out correct information??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Senorcanadiense (talk • contribs) 06:51, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have restored the U.S. flag icon that is a symbol of Franklin's membership in the U.S. national swim team that is common formatting for Infobox swimmer, Olympic athletes and 600+ members of the U.S. national swim team. I have also restored the pre-existing hidden text comment that explained why "Canada" is not Franklin's sporting nationality. If you desire to add "Canada" or remove the hidden text, please explain why you believe that "Canada" is Franklin's sporting nationality per the instructions for Template:Infobox swimmer, as well as this current and the prior discussions on this talk page, and obtain consensus on this talk page for doing so. A for now, the prior consensus remains. Thank you. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:32, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • And now we're in a slow edit war on the "Nationality" field of the infobox. This is ridiculous. Nobody...nobody...disputes that she is Canadian. The field does not say "sporting nationality". It does not say "Nationality represented in sporting". It says "Nationality". There is no definition in any dictionary in the world which defines "Nationality" as being the country a person represents in sport. To say her nationality is United States only ignores the reality. I don't care if she's an athlete. I don't care if she never represents any other country than the United States in competition, practice or any organized activity with relation to sport. To try to brush this off by saying her dual citizenship is discussed in the article misses a key point; she IS Canadian, and to degrade her status as a Canadian in favor of American is flat out, inexcusably wrong. It does NOT matter who she competes for. Competing for the U.S. does not make her less Canadian and more American. The infobox already clearly delineates who she competes for by way of the medal record box. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:41, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • There are two distinct issues here: which countries to list, and whether flags should be included. I'd consider them mutually exclusive. As for the country question, WP:OPENPARAGRAPH says: "Similarly, previous nationalities or the country of birth should not be mentioned in the opening sentence unless they are relevant to the subject's notability." I'd propose the same logic applies to an infobox. She might be technically Canadian, but her notability stems from being American. There are some who are notable as both, but I see not evidence that she is one of them.—Bagumba (talk) 17:58, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I echo Bagumba’s line of thought. Ignoring she’s predominately known because of her athlete status isn’t wise. At this point, you’re being dismissive with your “I don’t care” attitude. Of course it matters she's an athlete. Of course it matters she has only represented the United States in competition. Also, the Infobox for swimmers is very clear on this as described by Dirtlawyer. Philipmj24 (talk) 18:50, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Hammersoft: Template:Infobox swimmer includes the following hidden text: "Only for the country (or countries) represented in international competition." Furthermore, he instructions for the template parameter state: "The swimmer's sporting nationality, i.e., the nation that the swimmer represents in international competition. Please note that sporting nationality may differ from legal citizenship; if the swimmer has dual citizenship, only the sporting nationality should be included in this parameter. Complicated situations of nationality and multiple citizenship should be explained in the main body text of the article, if relevant, not in the infobox." It's pretty clear that the flag icon is intended to represent her membership of the U.S. national team, not her legal citizenship.
Now, that having been said, I would be receptive to accommodating your larger point about her legal citizenship in the lead, wiht something similar to either of the following
1. "Franklin is a dual citizen of the United States and Canada who represents the United States in international swimming competition . . . ." or
2. "Franklin is a Canadian-American who is a member of the United States national swim team . . . ."
Hell, Hammer, I'm not trying to be unreasonable. I proposed something similar two years ago (see above discussion in 2012), but my attempt at compromise was shot down by several participants in that discussion. Those folks are not here now, but we are. Does either of those ideas, or something similar of your own devising, work for you? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 18:09, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would not support the proposed solutions Dirtlawyer. As Bagumba mentioned, per WP:OPENPARAGRAPH, "previous nationalities or the country of birth should not be mentioned in the opening sentence unless they are relevant to the subject's notability." And her notability of course is for being an athlete. Philipmj24 (talk) 19:02, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Philipmj24:, I am familiar with OPENPARAGRAPH; please note that it refers to "previous nationalities or countries of birth" in the "opening sentence," not the lead section. Also, we are not discussing a previous nationality (citizenship, actually); we are discussing her current citizenship. This could easily be handled in the second or third sentence of the lead; for example:
Melissa Jeanette Franklin (born May 10, 1995) is a competition swimmer, four-time Olympic gold medalist, and current world record-holder. Franklin is a dual citizen of the United States and Canada who has chosen to compete for the U.S. national swim team . . . ." And so on.
Certainly, her notability is not primarily based on her Canadian dual citizenship, but it has tangentially contributed to it, and we can find plenty of examples discussing it in both the Canadian and American online media. Enough to justify a mention somewhere in the lead section, if not the first sentence, and put this Groundhog Day argument behind us. Remember not only is the WP:LEAD supposed to be a succinct statement of the reasons for a subject's notability, the lead is also supposed to fairly summarize the major subtopics of the article, and I think her dual citizenship and family background is self-evidently a significant subtopic within the present article.
Let's find a compromise we can all that a strong majority of us can live with, and be done with this endless debate. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:23, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If there are plenty of sources discussing her Canadian background (leaving it to others to evaluate this), then there is merit to presenting it somewhere in the lead, but probably not at the expense of removing "American" from the opening sentence.—Bagumba (talk) 19:43, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Dirtlawyer1: Thank you for the explanation. If I had to choose between the editing war that is taking place and what you have proposed, I would certainly choose the latter. But as Bagumba as said, the opening sentence should remain "American". Philipmj24 (talk) 19:48, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, guys, I can certainly live with describing her as "an American competition swimmer" in a modified version of what I proposed above:
Melissa Jeanette Franklin (born May 10, 1995) is an American competition swimmer, four-time Olympic gold medalist, and current world record-holder. Franklin is a dual citizen of the United States and Canada who has chosen to compete for the U.S. national swim team . . . ." And so on.
Please note I am not wedded to the present phrasing, but if everyone agrees we're not going to get our first choice, then I think there is room for a reasonable compromise wording that addresses Hammersoft's primary concerns and which most of us can live with. I'll wait for Hammersoft to respond before commenting further. I've already pinged him on his talk page regarding the proposed compromise. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:58, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In an ideal world, the dual citz part would not be in the opening paragraph of the lead, which IMO should be limited to her chief claims to fame. In a more developed lead/article, it would be near the beginning of where the timeline of their life begins (2nd para?). At any rate, can table it for an FA.—Bagumba (talk) 22:29, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Bagumba: Hammersoft responded on his talk page; as of now, he does not want to discuss any of the compromises proposed above (or on his talk page). He's hung up on the infobox "nationality" field being solely "American"; I don't want to speak for him, but he believes that omitting "Canadian" from the infobox's nationality field is insulting, demeaning, etc., to Missy Franklin's Canadian heritage. I also think more than a little of this is being driven by the presence of the hated flag icon in the infobox, but I'll let him speak for himself. Something like 60 to 70 percent of the articles on which I work are sports-related, so the concept of "sporting nationality" is second nature to me. And there are multiple guidelines that reference sporting nationality as described above, as well as the generic nationality descriptions which I believe support the status quo. I am inclined to let this sit for a day or two to see if Hammer circles back around to the discussion. If he does not, then I would propose to implement the proposed compromise, plus an explanatory footnote regarding her sporting nationality and her dual citizenship attached to U.S. sporting nationality in the infobox. We shall see. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 00:27, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm ambivalent. Only wanted to make sure there was consensus to IAR if Canada was going to be listed prominently.—Bagumba (talk) 01:00, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As discussed above, I have added a mention of her American-Canadian dual citizenship to the second paragraph of the lead and and explanatory footnote regarding same to her sporting nationality shown in the infobox. Hopefully, that will settle this matter for some time to come. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:03, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Honda award

[edit]

She just won the Honda Award, see Honda-Broderick Cup, I'm not sure how best to integrate into article.--S Philbrick(Talk) 16:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Sphilbrick: Please see any of the listed swimmers in the Honda-Broderick Cup article for examples; all of the past Honda Award swimming winners include specific mention of it. Be careful to distinguish between the Honda Award for the individual sport, and the award for all sports, and please include an inline footnote reference. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:28, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I understand I think. I did include an in line citation. While the mention did not explicitly say Honda Broderick cup, it noted that Breanna Stewart was up for the award and Breanna Stewart had already won the Honda for basketball and was in the running for the Honda Broderick cup. It was a basketball writer making the statement which was as much letting the audience know that Stewart did not win as that Franklin did win. I suspect there is probably a clearer citation in existence.--S Philbrick(Talk) 16:39, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
this Is also supportive. She won the Honda award for swimming back in April this is the overall female athlete award.--S Philbrick(Talk) 16:42, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Here's the official webpage for the swimming award -- not yet updated for 2015: [2]. That's what I used when I added it to the other swimmers' articles several months ago. Cal's athletic department probably had a press release when she won it. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:47, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Eureka! Here's the CBS Sports article covering the 2015 all-sports award: [3]. CBS Sports hosts Honda Award official website, so I kept nosing around until I found the article. CBS will probably update their lists of past winners in the near future. Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:12, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 22 external links on Missy Franklin. 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) 12:54, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Missy Franklin. 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) 15:27, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting issue

[edit]

Starting at the records section, all of the sections and subsections are shifted right. I can't quite figure out how to fix it but thought it was worth noting. Procyonidae (talk) 23:21, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Name change on marriage

[edit]

I undid the name change in the infobox and also the article name that was based solely on the fact she got married. I checked the reference for her marriage and saw nothing that indicated she changed her name on marriage. Name changes on marriage for women are not automatically done in modern times as it was in the past. For women who have notable accomplishments previous to marriage many choose to not change their name from the one they were most known as. If she has actually changed her name we need a reference that she did so and also what she changed it to - we can't assume she just tacked her husband's surname to the end of her birth name, there are a lot of options. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:07, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also this reference in the article:

"Retired Olympian Missy Franklin Says She Can Barely Swim Today: 'My Shoulders Are in So Much Pain'". PEOPLE.com. Retrieved 2020-10-22.

Dated a year after her marriage refers to her as Missy Franklin indicating she did not change her name on marriage. Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:25, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Missy_Franklin&oldid=1207290605"