Although a biographical article, this page contains not a word about its subject's birth, parents, siblings, upbringing, etc., a serious lack. If these facts are truly unknown, it behooves the author to say so, otherwise the omission looks like sheer laziness. --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 14:18, 17 September 2015 (UTC)Reply
- Point taken.
- Of course, anyone, even Piledhigheranddeeper could do that. Your WP:Contributions are valued and appreciated. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:53, 17 September 2015 (UTC)Reply
- @Piledhigheranddeeper:: Your comments are disgraceful. Your point may be valid but accusing others of laziness because there is more to add to an article is completely gratuitous. If you don't like it, please just get on and fix it. You also fail to acknowledge what is good about the article which is quite a lot in my opinion. I think you should apologise. Philafrenzy (talk) 16:52, 17 September 2015 (UTC)Reply
- For the record, I did not say anyone was lazy. I said such an omission "looks like" laziness. I am concerned about how Wikipedia appears to its users. And no, I do not know anything more about Owen Swift than appears in this article, so I am not in a position to add, e.g., the name of his mother. --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 16:38, 18 September 2015 (UTC)Reply
- We are all concerned about the quality of the product. We need to not disparage the diligent efforts of our contributors—especially those who created a damn fine article. Sometimes the quality of the article is limited by the available information, and not due to any (perhaps unintentionally) pejorative 'laziness.' 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:14, 23 September 2015 (UTC)Reply
