Talk:Scott Carson

	Scott Carson was one of the Sports and recreation good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result September 6, 2008 Peer review Reviewed November 5, 2008 Good article nominee Listed March 27, 2025 Good article reassessment Delisted A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on September 3, 2019. Current status: Delisted good article

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Sports and Games This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by the sports and games work group (assessed as Low-importance). England Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Football: England / Liverpool / Sheffield Wednesday Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the English football task force (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by the Liverpool task force (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by the Sheffield Wednesday task force (assessed as Mid-importance). Lancashire and Cumbria Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lancashire and Cumbria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Lancashire and CumbriaWikipedia:WikiProject Lancashire and CumbriaTemplate:WikiProject Lancashire and CumbriaLancashire and Cumbria Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

For the February 2005 deletion debate, see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Scott Carson. The decision was to keep the article. jni 12:48, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

At which club did Leeds spot him? The article says Workington Reds AND Cleator Moor FC. I don't know which is right. --Slumgum 22:36, 8 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

The official FA website says he was "picked up from local club Cleator Moor Celtic". [1]. The Workington Reds link is referred to on the Leeds United webpage and by the BBC. [2]. What is clear is that Carson started his career playing for Cleator Moor. Average Earthman 11:30, 9 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Before editing the infobox to have a link for every instance of "Liverpool", please see WP:MOS-L.

An article is overlinked if "a link is excessively repeated in the same article; however, duplicating an important link distant from a previous occurrence is appropriate".

cheers, aLii 18:10, 8 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

All clubs in the player infobox should be linked as per WikiProject Football style guide. I also agree with Slumgum; partially linked lists look messy, so it benefits the article to include the link in the infobox. See Wikipedia:Ignore all rules. --Dan1980 19:32, 11 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Or one could choose to agree with this football player infobox style guide. I personally think that linking every instance looks messy, and that having the current one not linked highlights it in a way. I'm not going to revert you again, but I just want to point out that you aren't correct :)

It's something that really needs looking at and sorting definitively. It's no good having three different style guides. aLii 19:42, 11 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, i accidentally messed up Carson's stats table (put leeds on again) i cant fix it, very sorry

As Carson never played for England and is not listed on any of the statistics sites as an England international, is it correct to include him in the "England international footballers" category? Daemonic Kangaroo 05:39, 4 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

How about this:

as an argument? The prose of the article talks about it somewhat too. aLii 13:09, 4 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

I don't deny that - my point is that he is the only player included in the category who has never made a single appearance for England. Perhaps in time he'll finally get the chance to put this right! Daemonic Kangaroo 16:58, 4 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Well now he has, against Croatia on November 21st, 2007. Although I still support him taken off as an England international - he let in three goals (two due to horeendous errors, and all due to lack of confidence). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.166.244.101 (talk) 21:42, 21 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Sounds like Villa sent him packing, reality is that Liverpool and Villa were poles apart in their valuation of the player. Language used certainly wants attention.Londo06 15:13, 18 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

I have changed his place of birth to Whitehaven. This is supported by the following sources:

• Soccerbase [3]
• Liverpoolfc.tv [4]
• Englandstats.com [5]
• 4thegame.com [6]
• Yahoo Sport [7]
• Sky Sports [8]
• FA.com [9]
• Sky Sports football yearbook 2008-2009 p490
• Football Manager 06 to 09 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.173.16.78 (talk) 14:30, 10 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Only one source, a local news article,[10] has his birthplace as Cleator Moor. --Jameboy (talk) 16:08, 24 September 2008 (UTC)Reply

This review is transcluded from Talk:Scott Carson/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

I read through this article and did some copyediting. I have a short list of concerns:

1. "Carson made only four appearances in the 2005–06 season, all in cup competitions, and in March 2006, was allowed to move to Sheffield Wednesday, who had a goalkeeping crisis, on loan to gain more first team experience, and to him help challenge for a place in the England 2006 World Cup squad." - this would probably be better split into two sentences in order to avoid six commas in one sentence.
2. "However, with Carson the second choice to Reina and the signing of Charles Itandje in August 2007, Carson was loaned out again, this time to Aston Villa at a cost to Villa of £2 million." - this is a little awkward because of the lack of parallel structue between "Carson the second choice to Reina" and "the signing of Charles Itandje" - is it possible to reword one of those sections to make the sentence flow better?
3. Some of the print newspaper sources are missing page numbers. Is it possible to find them?

Other that these issues, the article is very well-written. I will place the nomination on hold for a week to allow these concerns to be addressed and/or discussed. Any questions and/or comments can be left here, as I have placed this page on my watchlist. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 17:49, 30 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Have attempted to address 1 & 2: let me know if further tweaks are required. Not sure about 3, as although my contribution was not insubstantial, User:Malcolmxl5 did the majority of the work on the article, and I think he added the print sources. I've dropped him a note to see if he is able to provide this info. --Jameboy (talk) 21:30, 30 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

He hasn't edited since 15 October, so I'm not quite sure what to suggest. --Jameboy (talk) 15:37, 5 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'll see if any of the printed references can be replaced with web ones. --Jameboy (talk) 15:52, 5 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

I have looked over the citations in question. A few things I want to note about them: Because they are print sources, a reader would have to be in possession of the original source to verify them — the ability to verify them does not depend on the page number, although it would be helpful. Quotations have been provided from each of the print citations. An assumption of good faith may also come into play here, as a Wikipedia administrator is unlikely, although certainly not unable, to provide false information. Finally, the information cited is not contentious or defamatory. If Malcolmxl5 returns and is able to provide page numbers, that's great. As it stands now, though, I don't believe that their absent detracts substantially from the verifiability of this article.

With that said, I believe that the article meets the six GA criteria, so I am promoting it. Congratulations, and thanks for your hard work.

If you are able to review an article in return to help reduce the backlog at WP:GAN, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, GaryColemanFan (talk) 15:57, 5 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Apologies if this is not the appropriate place to discuss this but… Does this article really need to still be protected from vandalism? It has been protected since November 2008 and I guess that many of the issues that it was encountering by way of vandalism have either been forgotten about or may have moved elsewhere. I think there is little further need to protect this one. I would be surprised if it received more undue attention than any other article if protection were removed. Of course, if I'm wrong, it could always be reinstated following reversion. Of course, it may be wise to wait until after the 2010 World Cup has finished before removing protection.IrishPete (talk) 02:18, 14 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Congratulations on "protecting" this article, and the incorrect/vandalised information which it contains. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.203.220.18 (talk) 15:50, 17 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

The Honours section needs to be updated.—indopug (talk) 11:52, 18 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

It's unclear if he was given a winner's medal for a single appearance. He said he would take one if he was offered it (who wouldn't?) but I think it would be up to the club.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:19, 6 April 2022 (UTC)Reply