Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Eric Bickerton

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion 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 Allen3 talk 23:54, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Eric Bickerton

[edit]
(
)

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk), Thine Antique Pen (talk). Nominated by LauraHale (talk) at 22:00, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

  • Are guide skiers usually ranked as being competitors and medal winners? The official Paralympics results site doesn't list him among the participants or medal winners at that event[1], he doesn't have a biography there either, and at Jessica Gallagher's biography on that site, he is listed under the coaches, not as a participant: "Name of coach: Steve Graham [national], Eric Bickerton [guide]". This seems to indicate that officially, he hasn't represented Australia in skiing at the Paralympics (making the hook incorrect), and that he hasn't won a medal either (making the infobox and other parts of the article incorrect). Just like her coach hasn't won a medal as such and hasn't represented Australia as such, her guide also should not be presented as having achieved those things. It's obvious from all sources linked in the article that the focus is on Gallagher the athlete, with mentions of Bickerton the guide, with Gallagher competing and winning the medal, not Bickerton. Fram (talk) 11:04, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Yes, guide skiers get medals if the skier uses the same guide for the whole event. She did. Therefor, Bickerton got a medal. He is part of the team, because Gallagher cannot compete with him. He is listed as the guide on all the members of the team. The hook is correct because he is a member of the team. You can check the sources that name him as a member of the team. --LauraHale (talk) 11:07, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Then why don't the sources list him as a competitor and/or a medal winner? Official sources don't list him as a medal winner, they list him among the coaches. He didn't qualify, he wasn't considered a participant. The sources don't support your hook or your article. Fram (talk) 11:38, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
  • He is listed as her GUIDE. He was considered a participant. Here it says the PAIR is competing. It treats him as a member of the team. here it says "With guide Eric Bickerton, Jessica claimed bronze in the women’s vision-impaired slalom" which yes, supports that the guide gets it. WITH is the important word. Also:


There is his medal that he won. He has a medal. He was a member of the team. --LauraHale (talk) 11:47, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Funny. The flickr photograph (hardly a reliable source) links to an article about the medal winning event, [2]. It seems to agree that Gallagher won a medal, not that Gallagher and Bickerton both won a medal. The "with guide" quote above proves nothing, that would be like an article stating "with caddy X, Tiger Woods won": Tiger Woods won, and X was his caddy. Otherwise, the article would state "Jessica Gallagher and Binckerton won the bronze medal". He is not officially listed as a bronze medal winner, so the article shouldn't made that claim. Fram (talk) 12:01, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Guides are such an integral part of visually impaired skiing, dual medals are awarded. [3] Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:08, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Then why don't the official instances acknowledge this? And why do other sources claim that "This is why at London 2012, the guides who assist blind or visually-impaired athletes to a place on the podium have also been receiving medals for the first time."[4] (emphasis mine). (see e.g. also [5] and [6]) Fram (talk) 09:26, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
That refers to the Summer Paralympics. And, as the articles make it clear, even there some of them had been getting medals for some years. The difference was that in London, all the guides in every sport got medals. The big issue was of course that they are not disabled. However, with the emphasis on sport instead of disability, it has become accepted. Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:16, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
No indication that this refers to the Summer Paralympics only as far as I can see. Anyway, he isn't listed on the official sites, he is nowhere mentioned as a Paralympic bronze medal winner, he is referenced as the guide of a bronze medal winner though. Fram (talk) 10:19, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
Good to go then. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:20, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
not good to go, the article lists him as a Paralympic medal winner, which he isn't (according to official sources). The official Paralympic source doesn't even list him as a contestant, but as a coach. Fram (talk) 08:43, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
He is. You can see the picture, and read the sources. Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
Do not change my posts again[7]. And a flickr post is hardly a reliable source. As for the reliable sources; I have read them, have you? He is not listed as a bronze medal winner. Fram (talk) 10:51, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
New, un-biased reviewer required. I have read the sources. I have been involved in correcting the IPC pages. You have not. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:00, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
  • I was trying to establish that there was not a problem, but I failed--I do have to agree with Fram that the representation issue is indeed problematic. Without exception (correct me if I'm wrong, but I read all the sources) they speak of the guides as guides, not as winners or even competitors. The medal does appear to be the official medal, but I don't think that means representation. One wonders if a New Zealander could be the guide for an Australian skier on the team. No, I think the hook needs to be changed, but that shouldn't be the most difficult thing in the world. It's certainly a lot easier than skiing downhill at breakneck speed without the benefit of vision... Drmies (talk) 20:42, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
    • The guides are subject to all the same rules as other athletes, including national eligibility and random drug testing. The IPC is still cleaning up its records. Opinion is divided as to whether being able to see makes it more or less scary... Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:33, 7 November 2012 (UTC) Still in awe of both of them (here's a nice picture of the two of them on the dais with their medals btw).
      • IBSA rules 1402.1 In all B-classes the competitor and his guide are a team. Therefore, visually disabled competitors and their guides will be trained and entered by their National Federation for Alpine events.
      • The NSIC says: "In the 2002 Paralympic Games Salt Lake City Australian Paralympic Team Media Guide and Alpine Skiing Technical Manual it states “ For the visually impaired classes, the guide is also awarded a medal” p.27
        • Do you have full bibliographical information for "NSIC" (I don't know what that means) or a link? That seems to validate the point of the first hook. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 18:56, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

ALT: *... that blind downhill skier Jessica Gallagher is guided by her ski guide, Eric Bickerton who communicates with her using a headset? 

Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:13, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
          • The NSIC is the National Sport Information Centre. It is a library. They located the book, and gave a page reference number, which is your bibliographic reference. Frankly, the fact that you can see him with his medal makes it hard to argue. Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:36, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Needs review of ALT hook. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:15, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • At about a quarter of the length of the preceding discussion, this article is long enough and is also new enough. The ALT hook is suitably source. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:11, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • No problem with the hook, but the article still claims the medal win, while there are no official sources (or reliable ones) confirming that he is officially considered a medal winner. Fram (talk) 07:40, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
    • But... you are looking at him on the dais with the medal! Hawkeye7 (talk) 07:54, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
      • "Did you know... that despite being given a medal at the medal ceremony, skiing guides were not officially recognised as medal winners at the Paralympics until 2012, and are thus not included in the official lists of medal winners?" Fram (talk) 08:04, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
      • No, that is not true. As the source says, at the 2012 Summer Paralympics, guides were awarded medals in all sports, but had already been receiving medals in some sports. Guides in skiing had received them in Salt Lake City in 2002. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:10, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
  • The source (which isn't available to us) may say that, but in reality, they are not listed as medalists (or even as participants), and the newspaper sources also only have attention for the skier, not the guide (e.g. the ABC article with the photograph: it is an article about her winning a medal, not about them winning a medal, hence e.g. the title of that article). There is some discrepancy, some confusion, as if the IPC tries to send two messages at once: we give you a medal, to recognise your efforts, but we don't consider you to be the medal winner anyway, since the athlete is the skier, not the guide (or since the category is defined by the skier, not by the guide, or whatever reasonnig they use). This is also represented in most newspaper articles, where the full focus is on the skier aone, not on the skier/guide pair: it is considered an individual event, with one winner, not a pair event with two winners, but for some reason two medals are presented anyway. (Note: I'm not interested in a discussion whether they should be regarded as competitors and be listed as medal winners or not, I try to describe what appears to be the actual situation and the source of the mess we are in here). Fram (talk) 12:56, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
there is no problem with the article. It is quite clear in http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-03-15/gallagher-receives-paralympic-bronze/365314 that both received a medal. This means that the article does not have to be changed. In the official reference sources they always say "with the guide" in the mention of winning a medal. eg [8]. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:13, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
That indicates that she won a medal, and that Bickerton was her guide. Note e.g. his page on the same site, which doesn't list him winning a medal, but has statements like "With Eric acting as her guide, Jessica won gold at the 2009 New Zealand Winter Games"; she won the medal, he was her guide. Fram (talk) 10:23, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Note that Gallagher has as career highlight her Paralympics medal[9], while Bickerton has as highlight a 7th place in another Championship where has was the athlete[10].
More compelling may be this official results page from the Australian Paralympic Committee for the 2010 Paralympics: [11]. Gallagher is there, with her medal winning performance: Bickerton is conspiciously absent. The claim by Bartlett above that "In the official reference sources they always say" is hardly correct, "in the official reference sources they sometimes mention" might have been more correct. Fram (talk) 10:34, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • In my view this article passes all the criteria for DYK. If Fram has views on the content of the article he can discuss them on its talk page or make the necessary alterations himself. They are not really a DYK issue. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:17, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Yeah, obviously, an article being correct in its most extreme claim to notability is not one of the core policies of Wikipedia. Who cares whether articles on the front page are correct or not, as long as they are long enough. I have corrected the article, I doubt that people will leave the corrections in it though. Fram (talk) 12:25, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Since some of the people that approved this DYK are the same that reverse corrections to the article (despite their clear COI with the article creator/DYK nominator, putting doubts on their impartiality and objectivity), and since those corrections are about some rather basic and important aspects of the article, not some obscure detail, I can not support this DYK and don't believe that an article which is so wrong should be displayed on the main page. Fram (talk) 12:48, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

  • New, unbiased reviewer required. Would Orlady or Nikki be willing to look at this? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:53, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
What leads you to believe that User:Cwmhiraeth or User:Graeme Bartlett are biased with regard to this topic or with regard to the nominators or authors of the article? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 17:48, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
I might be biased based on my friendly terms with the article writers. If I see a small thing that needs improving I would do it. The ebate is not really down to the people involved but whether we can say that Eric Bickerton earned medals. From what I see in references only the sloppy journalists omitted his name, and the reliable sources said "with Eric Bickerton". Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:24, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • The "non-biased editor" comment was directed at Fram. I trust both of Cwm and Graeme, but it appears Fram doesn't. Nobody could say Orlady or Nikki are biased towards the writer, and even Fram will agree they are both thorough reviewers. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:42, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, but DYK is not Fram's personal playground.
And my apologies to Crisco (and anyone else involved) for my accidentally implying any complicity with, or support for, the mudslinging. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:32, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
Crisco 1492 asks for an unbiased reviewer, and an editor I blocked a few weeks ago comes along and approves this (and starts about "mudslinging" out of the blue)? Way to go, Demiurge. And obviously DYK is not my personal playground, that's why I made fundamental objections which no one has so far refuted. Graeme Bartlett may blame it on "sloppy journalists", but this means that 99% of the journalists and all official sites are sloppy, and only the very few supporting this hook are not sloppy. Seems highly dubious. Not DYK-worthy material. Not surprising that such things get approved anyway, plenty of examples (often involving a number of the same people in this DYK as well), but still disappointing. Fram (talk) 08:00, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Oh for Pete's sake. I'll ping Orlady or Nikki myself. I would not be mistaken in assuming you consider them neutral? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:09, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • No, no problem with either of them (or most other editors), just a bit amazed that after a request for an unbiased reviewer, one of the few biased ones felt the need to take up that role... Fram (talk) 08:33, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Find a damn source that says as her guide he is considered an olympic 'winner' otherwise alter the article to reflect what the sources actually do or do not say. Then everyone can stop arguing. When sources dont support the info, you cant blame them all on 'sloppy journalism'. Either they say he is a winner, or they say he is the guide of a winner. Only in death does duty end (talk) 10:38, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • OK, I came to look at this nom after receiving Crisco's message. Here are my main observations on what seem to be the main points of contention:
  • The assertion (in the lead and in the last paragraph) that Bickerton received a medal in the Paralympics is good; it is supported by at least two sources that I consider reliable. (Mainstream news media are generally reliable as sources for information about results of sports competitions.)
  • I've not seen any sources indicating that Bickerton also "won" in the competition in which he was awarded the medal, so I don't think the "they won" wording in the last paragraph is verified. This could be reworded without much difficulty, but in order to avoid being deemed "biased", I'm not going to do the rewording.
  • The ALT hook is OK, except that the article and sources describe Gallagher as "legally blind", which isn't necessarily the same as "blind". Additionally, the hook would be far more effective if Bickerton's name appeared before Gallagher's. Accordingly, I recommend (and approve) the following revised wording:
Somebody needs to fix the last paragraph of the article, and then this is good to go. --Orlady (talk) 17:12, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. I've re-worded it to "Bickerton was Gallagher's guide when winning a bronze medal in the slalom event..." --Demiurge1000 (talk) 17:21, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Good! --Orlady (talk) 18:39, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Eric_Bickerton&oldid=829802742"