Talk:Dejan Lovren

Semi-protected edit request on 28 July 2014

"before moving to Olympique Lyonnais in January 2010"

Please change 2020 to 2010, It's an error, now it's 2014... Ashkeloona (talk) 04:41, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for pointing that out - Arjayay (talk) 08:58, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Tone and style of article

Many of the recent edits to the Liverpool section are poorly formatted and/or show a non-neutral point of view.

1. Unless the Liverpool section becomes very large, I see no reason to have sub-sections for each season.
2. If the sub-sections are kept, the headings should be re-styled as "2014–15" and "2015–16" rather than "2014–2015" and "2015–2016".
3. The article is written in British-English. Thus "defense" should be amended to "defence".
4. The expression "season's end" is poor English and should be changed to "the end of the season".
5. Numbers less than ten should be spelled out – thus "seven points" not "7 points", "six goals" not "6 goals".
6. The tone of the section appears to blame Lovren for all of Liverpool's poor results; as football is a team game, the whole team is responsible for defeats and takes the credit for victories. Lovren may have missed his spot-kick in a penalty shoot-out, but I'm sure that was not the only reason Liverpool lost.
7. Likewise, his goal against Swansea City didn't "win the match" on its own.
8. The second sentence of the second paragraph of the "2014–2015" section ("However, following his poor performance in a league defeat to Manchester United Lovren was dropped from the first team.") needs citation.
9. I'm not sure of the relevance of the word "routinely" in the first sentence of the last paragraph of the "2014–2015" section. This sentence also needs separate citation.

As a non-registered user (who has no intention of becoming one), I cannot make these edits myself, so can someone take a look and, if you agree, make them for me. Thanks. 92.26.166.26 (talk) 14:18, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

p.s. Why is this article still protected from editing?

Partly done: I took out the subheadings (rendering #2 moot), and also corrected 3-5 and a couple of other things I noticed. I have not completed 6-9 – while you have valid points, I don't know enough about the sport to know where to look for citations, or the wording to use for a rewrite. Please feel free to provide more specific requests here on the talk page and reopen the request as needed. The page is currently on a six-month semi-protection due to persistent vandalism over the course of the last few years. If you check out the page's protection log you can see exactly what's gone on there. If you think the page should be unprotected, you'll need to contact the protecting admin and make the request. Thanks, ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 14:51, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

 Done. I removed/edited points 6 & 9. Added citation for 8. Point 7, I changed to game-winner, not that controversial and a goal scored in injury time of a tie game is routinely referred to as the game-winning goal. I think most of the points are negative because he had a pretty poor season. Even this season he started the first 3 games and then was dropped again. If you're performing well then you are not dropped. I'm only adding info to the season as it happens.--Shreerajtheauthor (talk) 22:45, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

I've removed thesportbible.com, which isn't even remotely a reliable source, let alone for critical material in a BLP, and rewritten the bit about worst signings with clear attribution to the Telegraph website feature. The LFC fanblog used for the next para isn't exactly RS either, nor does it verify all the content, but that content isn't as problematic, so I've left it for now and hopefully someone with more knowledge of the subject can replace it with something more reliable. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:15, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Interview with background about his childhood

This article on Joe.co.uk gives a bunch of information about his childhood, leaving Bosnia, moving to Bavaria, then to Croatia. It might be useful in expanding the "Early life" section. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 19:53, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dejan Lovren. 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/20140316063138/http://www.premierleague.com/content/dam/premierleague/site-content/News/publications/squad-lists/Premier-League-Squad-Lists-January-2014.pdf to http://www.premierleague.com/content/dam/premierleague/site-content/News/publications/squad-lists/Premier-League-Squad-Lists-January-2014.pdf

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) 08:12, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dejan Lovren. 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/20090825183856/http://sport.dnevnik.hr/clanak/champions_league/uzivo-dinamo-pyunik-0-0.html to http://sport.dnevnik.hr/clanak/champions_league/uzivo-dinamo-pyunik-0-0.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to https://www.bsports.com/power50-list

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) 04:14, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

International career

I'm surprised that this has more lines than Lovren's entire month of football matches at the world: "During the tournament he sparked an incident after he celebrated Croatia's World Cup victory over Argentina by singing Marko Perković's "Bojna Cavoglave" in the locker room, a nationalist song adopted by far-right elements in modern Croatia. The song contains the phrase Za dom - spremni! (Ready for the homeland!), the slogan associated with the World War II-era Nazi-allied Ustashe, though these verses did not appear in the video."

I googled news stories on this and found very few articles on a so-called "incident". probably because there is none. It seems more like a personal need for someone to add rather than Wikipedia:Relevance, especially since subject only has 2 lines on the world cup itself.

--Vaguely violet (talk) 12:37, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Social views

Should the article include the section and if so what information?--Miki Filigranski (talk) 00:58, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

The section had several violations and issues while including defamatory, fallacy of association and controversial information on subject's social views (WP:BLPREMOVE, WP:LIBEL, WP:BLPGOSSIP). It was mainly based on anecdotal events or places without further context and wording for a proper social view, besides being irrelevant for the article of a sportsman. It was referenced by unreliable tabloid sources or very biased sources, taking things out of proportion, without other contrary sources, hence having lack of WP:NPOV as well. Miki Filigranski (talk) 19:29, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

@Pjesnik21: please don't make reverts, this kind of sections are not common for articles about people in sport, and "most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion and Wikipedia is not written in news style" (WP:NOTNEWS). Lovren is not a notable sports person like Novak Djokovic not even whose controversial viewpoints, besides on COVID, are not cited on Wikipedia. BLP policy is very serious and strict, and reportedly Lovren is taking legal action against various newspapers for defamation, possibly only then part of the section can be brought back if ever becomes relevant because it is nor relevant nor of interest for the readers, generally out of WP:SCOPE for the article, many people that have an article on Wikipedia have made to some strange or controversial claims, but it is not relevant for an encyclopedia (WP:NOTGOSSIP). This events are not notable nor persistent nor sourced by multiple diverse reliable sources WP:EVENT.

Most of the used sources are not reliable or were not found to have enough reliability and noteworthy for citation (like Maxportal etc.); most of the section is sourced by Index.hr which is a tabloid portal, but also Telegraf.rs and Kurir.rs are tabloids, per WP:BLPRS "contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be removed immediately and without discussion. This applies whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable and whether it is in a biography or in some other article. The material should not be added to an article when the only sources are tabloid journalism".

Association with the far-right is claimed by openly left-leaning and tabloid sources, not by Lovren himself. Bosnian reliable sources are making fraudelent claims as Thompson was not legally convicted for the allegedly "fascist" salute "Za dom spremni" in the song "Bojna Čavoglave" and others, "Lijepa li si" is not glorifying a Croat proto-state Herzeg-Bosnia as it is only an abbrevation for Herzegovina and Bosnia as one of the mentioned regions in the song where Croats live (Zagora, Slavonia, Herzegovina, Bosnia, Dalmatia, Lika, Istria, Zagorje), not to mention long information on ICTY with which both Thompson and Lovren have nothing to do. Index.hr in the initial news claimed that Lovren and Brozović during the party made fascist salutes to rebuke and apologize afterwards ("Pogrešnom procjenom napisali smo kako su Lovren i Brozović fašistički salutirali. Riječ je o nenamjernoj pogrešci koju smo odmah ispravili i ovim se putem ispričavamo."). This is not serious and professional journalism yet attention seeking yellow sensationalism for cheap public clicks and profit. Him being a guest to a journalist on a TV Zagreb show which is very popular and watched by many and mostly patriotic public (patriotic and conservative, not far-right), where answered on the accusations without making any controversial statement, is irrelevant for the article as well. Literally everything in the section is violating several instances of WP:NPOV.--Miki Filigranski (talk) 00:52, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@Joy: can you please revert the section until RfC finish?--Miki Filigranski (talk) 01:05, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Placed a NPOV template on the sub-section.--Miki Filigranski (talk) 02:10, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

MF, while it's clear WP:BLPGOSSIP is an issue here, this amount of wholesale removal is also suspect. After so many publicized incidents, some of Lovren's general notability is in fact related to his social views, and removing all of it is not appropriate either. The encyclopedia shouldn't dwell on a lot of drivel, but describing the reality of some of these things being controversial is appropriate. Let's start by removing the news-like coverage of every little detail, citing Twitter etc, and just cover the stuff from mainstream media where the topic is analyzed as opposed to covered (some of which is in fact in the wholesale removal diff). --Joy [shallot] (talk) 16:01, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Often this kind of articles are not watched and edited by many editors, wasn't by myself, and if am not mistaken the section was edited and expanded over the years by Pjesnik21. Most of the section was recently majorly expanded. First we need to discuss whether different information is appropriate and relevant for Wikipedia, then BLP article, then an article of a sportsman as well as readers, then as you said remove out of discussion inclusion of details and primary sources, avoiding tabloid journalism & sources and using those reliable mainstream media which analyzed as opposed to covered. How do we know Lovren's general notability is related to his alleged social views? He was already well known playing in the top football clubs and Croatian national team. Often sensationalist (WP:SENSATIONAL) tabloids are blowing up news (as Index.hr is the most popular news website in Croatia), other repeat & cover it because of popular tabloid coverage, somebody edit it citing both tabloid and reliable news sources on Wikipedia, other take it from there and worst case scenario is editors using those sources as confirmation for relevancy of information ("beware of circular reporting..."), while almost nothing would happen without the tabloids.--Miki Filigranski (talk) 01:01, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

• This RfC should probably be withdrawn since it's unclear what exactly to comment on regarding this section. It could be resubmitted after a discussion. As it stands right now, the answer is mixed. The section should be included if it's backed by reliable sources. Thanks! Nemov (talk) 14:15, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

  I read more upwards in this discussion that facts were not reported by reliable sources. Here under is the translation of an excerpt of an article from Mediapart, a rather respected information online newspaper in France

  https://www.mediapart.fr/journal/france/040123/chants-nazis-homophobie-la-nouvelle-recrue-de-l-ol-ne-choque-personne-et-surtout-pas-son-entraineur

  "On Monday, January 2, the club Olympique Lyonnais announced the recruitment of Croatian international Dejan Lovren, who was filmed a few days earlier making numerous references to neo-Nazism during the celebrations of his team's third place finish in the World Cup. With his thumb extended and his index and middle fingers pointed skyward as if mimicking a gun, he and his national team teammate Marcelo Brozovic sang "Za dom spremni" ("Ready for the homeland"), which is a Nazi song that was famously used by the Ustasha movement, a racist and nationalist group in Croatia during World War II that led to the extermination of hundreds of thousands of Roma, Jews, and Serbs. Far from regretting his actions, Lovren even doubled down on them on social media, stating that a "handful of miserable, jealous people" who "hate everything Croatian" and "actually hate themselves first" were disgusted when he sang in front of the whole of Croatia. Lovren has also been noted for his anti-LGBT views, calling for a boycott of Disney in April 2022 after the company publicly supported the rights of LGBT people in the wake of a controversy surrounding sex education in the United States."

  Reneza (talk) 16:07, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

@Reneza: This is a classic example how much foreign newspapers are spreading misinformation and wrong context, mostly because serious journalism has fallen to such a low level of quality that it is using tabloid reports as evidence hence we cannot anymore solely rely on source's genereal reliability. There's no Nazi song "Za dom spremni". It does not exist and they, including Lovren, did not sing it. It was a salute used during Ustaše's fascist Independent State of Croatia but also during the 90s Croatian War of Independence and Bosnian War, especially by Croatian Defence Forces, when Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina defended against Serbia. They were singing the song "Bojna Čavoglave" by Marko Perković performed by his band Thompson. That song was released in 1992 during the Croatian War of Independence in which Marko Perković also participated, and the song is about Perković's home village Čavoglave and village guys chanting that they are prepared to defend it from the Serbs (specifically Serbian Chetniks, who were ultranationalist enemies of Croatian Ustaše during WW II, while both of Yugoslav partisans, but Chetniks legacy had far stronger revival among Serbs than the Ustaše's was among Croats so to unfurl a counter-nationalist charge was used the "Za dom spremni" salute. It is mainly provocative terminology). The context and connection between salute's usage during 1930/40s and 1990s is still politically and legally debated, as latest, "in June 2020 High Misdemeanor Court's judiciary council decided on appeal that singer Marko Perković Thompson has not committed an offense against public order by using the salute in his song". Although different, but similar case is history and usage of salute Slava Ukraini.--Miki Filigranski (talk) 00:02, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

• I am surprised that materials quoted from L'Equipe were also deleted Reneza (talk) 16:42, 5 January 2023 (UTC)