# Talk:Jim Baxter

Hi anon, I reverted from 3-2 "defeat" (or whatever it was) to 3-2 "hammering". It is a reference to a (humourous) comment by Bobby Brown, that no team ever took such a hammering in a 3-2 defeat. 
Cheers Neil Leslie 08:33, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Changed 'hammering' to 'defeat' Cjam74 14:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Do Baxter's 34 international games really merit roughly double the coverage of his club career? Seems imbalanced to me. --Jameboy (talk) 22:38, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
I know it looks odd, but there are reasons:

It's what the sources focus on.
Until Celtic won the European Cup in 1967 Scottish Clubs achieved little in international club competition.
That's the way Scottish football fans and officials thought at the time - beating England was easily the top priority. The Association Game (see refs) pp 166ff comments on this, and other books I didn't cite make the point more strongly. --Philcha (talk) 23:25, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
It is imbalanced, yes. If that's because the sources focus on his international career, then we need some new sources. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 20:18, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Until you find and cite them, that's just your opinion, and inadmissible. --Philcha (talk) 21:22, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

I like some of the changes, but IMO others are mistaken, in one case seriously. For ease of reference here are the 2 most recent versions:

Some of the re- wording of individual sentences is nice, e.g. "Born and educated  in Fife, Baxter started his career at ..."
But some of the omissions distort the meaning, some in small ways and some seriously:

See answer to previous discussion, Baxter's fame was mostly based on his international performances - in modern slang, he pwned the World Cup winners every time except 1965. If you check the obits and other comments cited in the main text, that's what they focus on. And one book cited and 2 others that I found but did not cite (they said more about 1960s Scottish football than about Baxter) emphasise that beating England was the supreme ambition of Scottish football at the time. So reducing the part of the lead about his international performances to 1 short sentence is a serious mistake. --Philcha (talk) 21:14, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Omitting the leg fracture in Dec 1964 is also a serious mistake, because it's a causal sequence: fracture -> lay-off -> drinking -> decline. When Baxter returned to competition, he was no longer Slim Jim. --Philcha (talk) 21:14, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Less seriously, splitting the sentences about his pub management and continued heavy drinking obscures another causal link - some of the sources comment that it was the wrong job for a problem drinker. --Philcha (talk)
"becoming known for drinking himself unconscious the night before a match and playing well the next day" was another aspect of the problem - fans, journalists and managers in those days paid little attention to off-the-pitch conduct if their man was performing well on it. It really was a different world then. --Philcha (talk) 21:14, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
PS the new lead also omits the end of his playing career! --Philcha (talk) 21:19, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
I can't take the credit for the Fife bit, I'm afraid; I cribbed it out of a commented-out line in the body. :) However, on the rest:
I won't tell if you don't :-) --Philcha (talk) 22:01, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
While his most memorable moment might have been in an England match, this does not mean that his international career should be assigned more weight that his entire club career. As a biography and not a newspiece, we need to be careful not simply to focus on the most newsworthy moments of his career. As one of the most prestigious members of the Rangers Hall of Fame, he is one of the most notable domestic footballers of that decade, in addition to his international success. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 21:42, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
It's not just 1 memorable momemt, see 1962 & 1963. Q: "what is Baxter best remebered for?" A: "owning England". Re " As one of the most prestigious members of the Rangers Hall of Fame", can you cite a source for that? --Philcha (talk) 22:01, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Again, "best remembered for" does not mean "only remembered for". Assigning two games more importance than his entire club career is inappropriate. For sources, there are various sources which describe him as Rangers' best ever player, or amongst them. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:34, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
The best one I found was Waddell's "best left half Rangers produced". By comparison with the other assessments, based on B.'s internationls, that's pale stuff. Have you found anything better re his club career? --Philcha (talk) 10:10, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm not in front of sources right now, but I'm sure his entry in the Rangers hall of fame lists him as one of the half-dozen best Scottish footballers ever or somesuch. it is certainly the case that he was revered at Rangers, and won a very notable set of trophies. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:57, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
B's entry in the Rangers HoF says "There is little argument that Baxter was the most incredibly gifted player to pull on the blue shirt of Rangers", and has the pretty good line "There are a multitude of footballers who have been described as world class over the years but most of them would have not been fit to lace Baxter's drinks, never mind his boots", but bases its comments on Old Firm and international games. The Scottish Football HoF says "One of Scottish football’s greatest ball players ... wayward genius", but that's a govt-related health-promotion site.  Jim Baxter already summarises his playing record w Rangers. But remenber that football fans who are not Rangers fans will think mainly of the internats. -Philcha (talk) 11:40, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
By that logic, practically any distinguished international should have most of his article devoted to international football. I don't buy that. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 16:55, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Pele, George Best and Paul Gascoigne all give a bit more space to the internat careers - it seems the consensus at soccer articles is that internat carreers carry more weight. These are all B class - do we have any other soccer player GAs or FAs besides ]Jim Baxter?  --Philcha (talk) 19:18, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
I would imagine there are dozens. Try asking at WT:FOOTY - I don't keep track of my GAs and my watchlist is a little unmanageable to go trawling it for examples of my own, unfortunately. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 23:59, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm okay with the leg fracture going back in.
He wasn't notable for having a pub; it's an incidental and somewhat ironic end to his career, but it wasn't an important part of his life. I only left it in because it seemed odd to say nothing of a man's life after the age of 31. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 21:42, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
"wasn't an important part of his life"? The way I read the sources, pub -> continued boozing -> 2 x liver transplant. You could argue that the pub he managed played no part in the part of his life that made him notable, but then you come up against the biography mavens. This has been discussed as WT:GAN at least once in the last 3 months. IMO personal bio is not absolutely essential except so far as it influences the career that made a subject notable, but I wouldn't go to the other extreme and exclude bio details. --Philcha (talk) 22:01, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Well, that's why I didn't exclude it. :) Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:34, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
As the rest of the article explains, this was not unique to Baxter at the time. The article body devotes only two sentences to the issue; having one in the lede, minus the anecdotes, seems appropriate. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 21:42, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Matter of opinon, but not worth fighting over. --Philcha (talk) 22:01, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Are you sure? The final sentence of paragraph 2 covers Sunderland, Forest and his transfer back to Rangers. Paragraph 4 states that he retired in 1971. I don't think it's very likely that the reader will consider there to be much of a gap there. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 21:42, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
You've highlighted another issue - the previous version had one para about his club career from start to finish, so the chronology was easy. I'd go back to the original structure. It wasn't an accident - although this is my first and possibly only football GA, I've taken some articles about chess champions to GA and I know what works for people whose fame is based on winning contests.  --Philcha (talk) 22:01, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
But it is in one paragraph; his retirement isn't really part of his career. "Decline" usually belongs in one paragraph, starting with falling from grace and retirement and ending with death. That's the current layout. The old one jumped about a little too much chronologically, partially due to having retirement in the second para (above national career) and partially through adding trivial detail (his love life) out of order in the last para. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:34, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
This may be a matter of taste. In other competitors' bios that I've taken to GA, I've placed the personal parts of the lead separately unless they affected the notable career, and reviewers have been happy with that. The original placement of retirement and the leg fracture makes the arc of B's career clear - the 1967 Eng-Scot internat being the exception. --Philcha (talk) 10:10, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
I think there's a pretty compelling case to be made for the career and the personal life to be intermingled a little here. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:57, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
So state your "pretty compelling case" :-) --Philcha (talk) 11:40, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
His early retirement was partially brought on by the loss of form caused by his alcoholism. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 16:55, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
The previous version of the lead made that connection fairly obvious - by design, as that's an aspect of the personal life that impacted the careere - unlike his family life. --Philcha (talk) 19:18, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
I don't see that the reordering has had a particular negative impact here. Regardless, I'm still unconvinced that retirement is a more logical fit for the "career" paragraph than the "post-career" one. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 23:59, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
I've put in a new version that is more concise than the one before our discussions, but makes the arc of his career clear and IMO makes him come to life a bit more than your suggestions. --Philcha (talk) 14:24, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jim Baxter. 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/20050518091028/http://www.lda.gov.uk/server/show/ConWebDoc.1071 to http://www.lda.gov.uk/server/show/ConWebDoc.1071
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.westminster.snp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1378&Itemid=40
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) 10:55, 25 November 2017 (UTC)