Probably should have put a poll on this article. Which is worse:
1) That a rugby team manager should rely on Wikipedia to research a future employee, nearly costing the player his desired post?
2) That a BLP on a top flight rugby player spends about 50% of the article listing "controversies", nothing about him personally aside from that he was born, and a rag tag list of his playing appearances, but nothing that gives any sense of his skills or achievements?
3) That an editor, after reading this does nothing but add a note to the effect that he nearlylost his job due to Wikipedia?
Candidates should only write with one side of their persona at any one time.