Talk:Daniel Brooks (golfer)
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Daniel Brooks (golfer) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| 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 Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Removal of section on death of caddy edit
I've seen that WilliamJE has removed the sentence on the death which I think was important to give context to the win. Could we not have reworded it so it no longer sounded like an opinion rather than just removing it from the article altogether. It is important in understanding why the win itself did not get much attention. Tracland (talk) 06:22, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
- You would need a WP:RS saying that Brooks win didn't get much attention because of the caddy's death. That isn't very likely because the golf tournament received limited media coverage because 1- The field was weak 2- The tournament was only 36 holes due to weather 3- There was little or no international television coverage 4- Most of the golf world's attention was focused on the Players Championship not what was going on in Portugal. 5- Winners of 36 hole golf tournaments are usually considered fluke winners. For those same reasons, Brooks win didn't get much attention. That's all an opinion but wikipedia is an encyclopedia and articles aren't supposed to state opinions see WP:NPOV unless they are sourced....William 12:47, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
- thanks Tewapack. I will try to make sure to improve my referencing going forwards. ...William thank you for the advice on how to improve this article Tracland (talk) 19:42, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
External links modified edit
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Daniel Brooks (golfer). 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140513021026/http://golfempire.blogspot.co.uk/2009/06/daniel-brooks-claims-maiden-europro.html to http://golfempire.blogspot.co.uk/2009/06/daniel-brooks-claims-maiden-europro.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:05, 6 December 2016 (UTC)