Talk:Alicia Sacramone

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Alicia Sacramone article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Alicia Sacramone has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 19, 2008	Good article nominee	Not listed
August 25, 2008	Good article reassessment	Listed

Current status: Good article

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 GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Sports and Games

	Biography portal 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 articles
	Sports portal This article is supported by the sports and games work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Gymnastics Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gymnastics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gymnastics 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.GymnasticsWikipedia:WikiProject GymnasticsTemplate:WikiProject GymnasticsGymnastics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Olympics Mid‑importance

	Olympic Games portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Olympics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Olympics 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.OlympicsWikipedia:WikiProject OlympicsTemplate:WikiProject OlympicsOlympics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

Women's sport: Gymnastics Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's sport (and women in sports), a WikiProject which aims to improve coverage of women in sports on Wikipedia. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Women's sportWikipedia:WikiProject Women's sportTemplate:WikiProject Women's sportWomen's sport articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Women's gymnastics task force.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

GA Review

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

The lead is too long per WP:LEAD but otherwise there are only minor changes needed, which I've done anyway. Peanut4 (talk) 12:34, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help and for reviewing the article! I've made a few changes to the lead and tried to cut it down to two paragraphs. DanielEng (talk) 15:44, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Everything looks fine. My only concern is that while this page is stable now, I'm not sure it will be for the next week or two because of the Olympics. How do you feel about me keeping this on hold until after she competes in the Olympics? Peanut4 (talk) 18:13, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's an excellent idea. The page will have to be updated during the week for the Olympics, so it makes a lot of sense. I don't mind it being on hold at all until she's finished competing. Thank you! DanielEng (talk) 16:55, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There was quite the sea of vandalism the other night after Sacramone's poor performances in the team all-around. It's up to the initial reviewer, of course, but there's quite a bit of precedent to outright fail an article because of lack of stability. Nosleep (talk) 08:55, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hence, why I'm waiting for the Olympics to finish. If I don't think it's still stable, I will fail it. But I'm giving a good article chance to stabilise. There is no upper limit for how long to hold an article. Peanut4 (talk) 22:19, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've just noticed the "neutrality dispute" tag on the 2008 Olympics section, and obviously I already had concerns regarding the stability before. So unfortunately like the Nastia Liukin article, I'm unfortunately going to have to fail it per the stability criteria of GAN. Everything else was fine before, and the only thing I haven't read through is the new "2008 Olympics" sub-section. My suggestion would be to wait for the dispute to be resolved, and give it say a two-week breathing space for the article to become clearly stable again, and resubmit at GAN. Peanut4 (talk) 00:51, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is really not cool, and I'm confused as to why you're failing these instead of holding on until the end of the Olympics, as you said you would. Please re-read the criteria for stability: good faith page improvements and IP vandalism do not count. As with Nastia Liukin, this fail is not correct, and I am submitting it for reassessment. DanielEng (talk) 01:15, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some reason why the current developments keep getting reverted?

They're pretty huge developments, and will be properly sourced in time. If that's your concern, you're really wikilawyering and taking WP:RS way too seriously; this is live on worldwide TV and she is blowing it. Nosleep (talk) 04:04, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see there's a sea of other vandalism. Never mind then; once this article stabilizes something about her poor performances from tonight can be written and sourced. Nosleep (talk) 04:08, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2008 Olympics

Basically is the only reason why the US lost in the Beijing Olympics. Even shawn johnson couldn't help her out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nitemare120 (talk • contribs) 04:52, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually Sacramone's errors amounted to one and seven-tenths points (eight-tenths for each fall and one-tenth for stepping out of bounds on the floor). China's margin of victory was over two points. So it's factually incorrect to lay all the blame at Sacramone's fault. Nosleep (talk) 05:05, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. USA generally also had lower A-scores across the board than China (on UB, for instance, USA had 7.70, 6.80 and 6.10--China had two 7.70s and a 7.10) and was working with a depleted team so even with hit routines they probably would have ended up with silver unless China really screwed up. Saying this is Sacramone's fault is just not okay. At any rate, after event finals/after more news sources come out about tonight, the article will be updated with factual material.DanielEng (talk) 05:31, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree with the statement above about her errors NOT being the only reason they lost the gold. Second of all, they got a silver. Is that such a bad thing? At least they won a medal! It's not like they placed 4th or lower. A silver medal was a wonderful accomplishment for them. Wow, some people need to change their perspective on measurement of success.--Slayergenxxx (talk) 17:07, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe in Alicia Sacramone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.227.165.39 (talk) 07:08, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I, too, believe in Alicia Sacramone.--98.233.88.166 (talk) 06:57, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's difficult to regard Sacramone as anything less than a huge failure and a disgrace to American athletics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.0.15.134 (talk) 01:51, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spoken like a true armchair wannabe who knows nothing about gymnastics! Well done, sir! 69.86.96.214 (talk) 20:13, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to thank the people who have written the 2008 Olympics part of this page for Sacramone. Although she did make some big errors that cost the USA team a lot, she was not the only one who made errors, and several authoritative people have pointed out that, going into the competition, the Chinese had a big advantage, anyway, with their superior scores for difficulty. It's very important to present this information in a fair and balanced manner, and you guys have done a good job with that. It's important to be fair and balanced, especially when we're talking about the spirit of a hard-working young lady. Her teammates seemed to not have such a problem with silver, so neither should Martha Karolyi. Besides, they went into this knowing they weren't the favourites, anyway.Miloluvr (talk) 15:49, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Plus silver is first loser, and it's nice to be first! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.204.164.155 (talk) 01:53, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I personally think at the top of the page should be a note telling people its mathematically impossible that Alicia cost the US the gold medal. Perhaps that would slow and/or stop the vandalism. 67.171.238.225 (talk) 22:49, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Having long arguments about whether she was or was not responsible for the loss is inappropriate in Wikipedia. Leave that sort of analysis/argument to blogs, forums, John R. videos, etc. We should take a "just the facts, ma'am approach". Also the section is both too long and too defensive.TCO (talk) 15:34, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and I've cut it down to one paragraph. I do think it's important to have something about this though, because in part of the comments above--the fault/no fault debate is something that unfortunately has been in the media and is following her right now. DanielEng (talk) 02:26, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Boston is not in Middlesex County

At the bottom of her page, she has a tag that says Persons from Middlesex County, but there is nothing in the article that says she is currently living in Middlesex County. Boston is a part of Suffolk County.--C.J. (talk • contribs) 17:01, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It says her hometown is Winchester (look to the box on the right), which is in Middlesex. Judicata (talk) 02:22, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Video punch-out

I think it might be appropriate to mention something about the video that leaked of her (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QA6s7p-zU8), since it's gained some notoriety around the Boston area. But, I don't want to just write it up for fear it might be seen as vandalism. So, I'm curious if everyone thinks it's relevant or not? Gabefarkas (talk) 13:55, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the video has been out for two years or so (it's from her first year @ Brown, IIRC). I don't think it's really notable, it's just her having fun at school, and there haven't been any actual articles, etc. about it (aside from something on TMZ, right?). I say nay, but let's see what others thing.DanielEng (talk) 17:16, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO, I don't think the video is relevant to the article. First, it was made some time ago. Second, it really doesn't involve anything worth note as it relates to her career (which the article is mainly about).--Slayergenxxx (talk) 23:56, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a minor personal incident. I would leave it out.TCO (talk) 15:35, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should be "Girl who made horse-trotting noises"

Should be "Girl who made horse-trotting noises" not clopping Mikebeachnd (talk) 23:27, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Raisman

We need a page started for mini Asac. I can't since I am an IP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.246.145.33 (talk) 04:43, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

unprotect and add content from recent Cover Girl Classic competition

She was first on beam and vault. USAG site has results link and it is reported in sports papers (NYT etc.) She was also name USA Today's athlete of the week. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.127.138.199 (talk) 04:45, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Alicia Sacramone. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090224095336/http://www.missiong.com:80/video/The-Quest-for-G to http://www.missiong.com/video/The-Quest-for-G

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:03, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Alicia Sacramone. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090223054300/http://www.designedbytim.com:80/gymnstands/music2.htm to http://www.designedbytim.com/gymnstands/music2.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:42, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Alicia Sacramone/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Needs a more encyclopedic style, sections, and referencing. ssepp^(talk) 22:08, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 22:08, 7 June 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 07:18, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Alicia Sacramone. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 10:11, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Alicia Sacramone. 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/20120707011254/http://www.fig-gymnastics.com/vsite/vnavsite/page/directory/0%2C10853%2C5187-188452-205674-nav-list%2C00.html to http://www.fig-gymnastics.com/vsite/vnavsite/page/directory/0%2C10853%2C5187-188452-205674-nav-list%2C00.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nbcolympics.com/gymnastics/news/newsid%3D138473.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nbcolympics.com/gymnastics/resultsandschedules/rsc%3DGAW400101/index.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nbcolympics.com/gymnastics/resultsandschedules/rsc%3DGAW499000/standings_apparatus.html

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) 15:29, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Alicia Sacramone. 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) 20:12, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]