Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
WhatamIdoing (talk | contribs) →Technical decision: Reply |
|||
| (34 intermediate revisions by 13 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Talk header}} |
{{Talk header}} |
||
{{WikiProject banner shell| |
|||
{{WikiProject Boxing}} |
{{WikiProject Boxing}} |
||
}} |
|||
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
||
|archiveheader = {{aan}} |
|archiveheader = {{aan}} |
||
| Line 11: | Line 13: | ||
{{Archives |bot=MiszaBot II |age=90 |search=yes }} |
{{Archives |bot=MiszaBot II |age=90 |search=yes }} |
||
== [[Draft:Daniel Hennessey (ring announcer)]] == |
|||
== [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|Proposed deletion]] of [[:Omar Albanil]] == |
|||
[[File:Ambox warning yellow.svg|left|link=|alt=Notice|48px|]] |
|||
The article [[:Omar Albanil]] has been [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed for deletion]] because of the following concern: |
|||
<blockquote>'''Non notable boxer or businessman'''</blockquote> |
|||
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be [[WP:DEL#REASON|deleted for any of several reasons]]. |
|||
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your [[Help:edit summary|edit summary]] or on [[Talk:Omar Albanil|the article's talk page]]. |
|||
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed deletion process]], but other [[Wikipedia:deletion process|deletion process]]es exist. In particular, the [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|speedy deletion]] process can result in deletion without discussion, and [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|articles for deletion]] allows discussion to reach [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> |
|||
Hey Can someone help me out please? I am not sure what to do next. I am pretty sure I am done. If i need to do more I can but I want to see if this is ready to be publish and how do i do that with this. for context here is this [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion#Daniel_Hennessey_(ring_announcer)] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Hennessey_(ring_announcer)]. [[User:Bennyaha|Bennyaha]] ([[User talk:Bennyaha|talk]]) 21:37, 19 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Thanks and God bless! |
|||
== Deletion of a group of articles == |
|||
'''[[User:AntonioMartin|Antonio Locococoloco Martin]]''' ([[User talk:AntonioMartin|He he he he]]) 11:12, August 23, 2021 (UTC) |
|||
I've recently stumbled across a group of British boxers who I don't think are notable enough for Wikipedia pages, including [[Louis Norman]], [[Thomas Essomba]], [[Joe Maphosa]], and a few other related fighters. Anyone have differing opinions on any of these fighters? I'd feel a bit bad going on deletion spree without some input. Most of these are out of date/don't follow the MOS so I'll try to update any we choose to keep around. [[User:ZenZekey|ZenZekey]] ([[User talk:ZenZekey|talk]]) 06:00, 1 July 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Boxing fight article parameters == |
|||
:<s>Norman (challenged for a British title) and Essomba (won a European title) would fulfil notability, but not Maphosa as he doesn't appear to have challenged for any titles.</s> Stratch that, I was going by an old edition of [[WP:NBOX]]. I would still say Essomba is worth keeping, because the European title is the highest regional achievement on the continent. [[User:Mac Dreamstate|Mac Dreamstate]] ([[User talk:Mac Dreamstate|talk]]) 18:56, 5 July 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Hi! I'd like to establish some parameters as far as notability for boxing fights. As there have been tens of thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of boxing fights, including world championship ones, parameters should be established as to which boxing fights should have an independent article apart from being mentioned in the respective boxers' articles and which should not. |
|||
::Appreciate the input! Essomba was the main one I was debating with myself. I'm traveling for the next couple days but when I'm back home I'll update his article and nominate the others for deletion. [[User:ZenZekey|ZenZekey]] ([[User talk:ZenZekey|talk]]) 17:05, 6 July 2024 (UTC) |
|||
The article criteria should be: |
|||
*Main or co-main events on Pay Per View |
|||
**HBO |
|||
**Showtime |
|||
**Or another country's equivalent to those American channels |
|||
*Fights with a proven historical context or impact (therefore [[Wilfredo Gomez versus Carlos Zarate]], [[Salvador Sanchez vs. Wilfredo Gomez|Gomez vs. Salvador Sanchez]], [[The no Mas Fight]] and [[Jack Dempsey vs. Georges Carpentier]], for example, would qualify) |
|||
*Fights where a country or a continent crowned its first world boxing champion |
|||
*Major organization's (IBF, WBA, WBC, WBO) unification bouts |
|||
*Ring Magazine fight of the year award winning fights |
|||
**Knockout of the year |
|||
**Upset of the year |
|||
**Fight of the decade |
|||
*Fights that led to major changes in boxing rules or where a major scandal took place |
|||
should qualify as notable enough or as notability establishing standards for boxing fights as events notable enough to have their articles on wikipedia. |
|||
What do you all think? |
|||
Thanks and God bless! [[User:AntonioMartin|Antonio Beaten by a knockout Martin]] ([[User talk:AntonioMartin|loser talk]]) 14:46, July 25, 2022 (UTC) |
|||
== |
== 2024 Olympics == |
||
For anyone in an article-creating mood, the [[2024 Summer Olympics]] starts in 10 days and there are a number qualified boxers still missing articles, many of whom are likely notable. See [[Boxing at the 2024 Summer Olympics – Qualification|here]]: 52 men's boxers and 39 women's boxers missing articles. [[User:BeanieFan11|BeanieFan11]] ([[User talk:BeanieFan11|talk]]) 18:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC) |
|||
It wasn't mentioned in the above RFC but I think it's safe to say the exclusion of upcoming fights extends to exhibition records, per the same rationale; they're not guaranteed to happen and the record table is a record of what has happened, not what might. Pinging {{Ping|GhaziTwaissi}} as we've had a revert or two on the matter. – [[User:Squared.Circle.Boxing|<span style="color: red">''<sup>2</sup>''</span>]].[[User:Squared.Circle.Boxing|<span style="color: blue">'''''O'''''</span>]].[[User talk:Squared.Circle.Boxing|<span style="color: red"><sup>''Boxing''</sup></span>]] 12:21, 31 July 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Revisiting rankings == |
|||
:Absolutely that should be the case. Lack of common sense if they think a different guideline applies. [[User:Mac Dreamstate|Mac Dreamstate]] ([[User talk:Mac Dreamstate|talk]]) 18:52, 1 August 2023 (UTC) |
|||
In multiple boxer articles across Wikipedia, I have noticed and removed[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Naoya_Inoue&diff=prev&oldid=1239547781][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Terence_Crawford&diff=prev&oldid=1238519448] the "dynamic" listings of rankings in the lead of their respective articles because a) they are often not regularly updated and more importantly (b) they are not cited to independent reliable sources outside of the ranking organisations themselves which causes [[WP:NOTCV]] and [[WP:UNDUE]] concerns. [[WP:LEAD]]s are supposed to be summaries about major parts of the article. There was a previous discussion at WP:BOXING about the rankings where there didn't seem to be consensus about their inclusion in the lead.[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Boxing/Archive_9#Rankings] I believe that if dynamic rankings are to be included anywhere, they should be in the infoboxes. Should there be a RfC about this to gain wider feedback outside the Wikiproject? [[User:Morbidthoughts|Morbidthoughts]] ([[User talk:Morbidthoughts|talk]]) 01:33, 11 August 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Unexplained abbreviation(s) == |
|||
:As far as divisional and all-time rankings go, I'd like to see the back of them. I particularly dislike BoxRec's "all-time greatest" dynamic rankings peppered everywhere. I've said it before that they're a chore to go around updating, and User:Morbidthoughts presents a good point with regards to [[WP:WEIGHT]]. Which are more credible—myriad outlets such as ''The Ring'', TBRB, BoxRec, or ESPN; or the sanctioning bodies themselves? I think neither, really. I also would not mind getting rid of pound for pound rankings, although ''The Ring''{{'}}s rankings tend to get significant coverage whenever there's a clear world's number one. However, when it comes to TBRB and all the others being shoehorned into lead sections—who cares? [[User:Mac Dreamstate|Mac Dreamstate]] ([[User talk:Mac Dreamstate|talk]]) 23:08, 13 August 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Not everyone who reads an article about a boxer knows all the abbreviations. For example, in the article on [[Dmitry Bivol]], there is a box column with his fights. A lot of them have "UD" in a column called "type"(a general word that is used with some sort of specific meaning). The article nowhere explains what "UD" means. It should be explained in some way, e.g., in a footnote or maybe a mouse-over. [[User:Kdammers|Kdammers]] ([[User talk:Kdammers|talk]]) 18:08, 14 August 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:[[MOS:ACRO1STUSE]] gives two options; link [[Unanimous decision|UD]] on the first occurrence in the record table or spell it out with the acronym in parenthesis in the prose. The latter is something I've done in a bunch of articles (see [[Jack Catterall]]), and I think fewer links is better when it comes to tables, so I prefer that option. – [[User:Squared.Circle.Boxing|<span style="color: red">''<sup>2</sup>''</span>]].[[User:Squared.Circle.Boxing|<span style="color: blue">'''''O'''''</span>]].[[User talk:Squared.Circle.Boxing|<span style="color: red"><sup>''Boxing''</sup></span>]] 01:54, 15 August 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Aren't the tooltips sufficient? They begin from the bottom of the table. [[User:Mac Dreamstate|Mac Dreamstate]] ([[User talk:Mac Dreamstate|talk]]) 10:19, 15 August 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::ACRO1STUSE seems to suggest no, {{tq|To save space in small spaces, acronyms do not need to be written out in full}}...{{tq|When not written out in full on the first use on a page, an acronym should be linked}}. For usage of the tooltip it says, {{tq|Upon later re-use in a long article, the template <nowiki>{{abbr}}</nowiki> can be used to provide a mouse-over tooltip}}. [[User:Squared.Circle.Boxing|<span style="color: red">''<sup>2</sup>''</span>]].[[User:Squared.Circle.Boxing|<span style="color: blue">'''''O'''''</span>]].[[User talk:Squared.Circle.Boxing|<span style="color: red"><sup>''Boxing''</sup></span>]] 20:44, 15 August 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::Then perhaps a key, like they do at [[Max Verstappen#Complete Formula One results|F1 articles]]. Long ago I had one in mind whilst compiling the MOS, but template:abbr was the quickest to implement at the time. ''Anything'' to avoid spelling out the result acronyms in the table—I've never liked the [[WP:MMABOX|MOS:MMA]] way of doing it. [[User:Mac Dreamstate|Mac Dreamstate]] ([[User talk:Mac Dreamstate|talk]]) 21:11, 15 August 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I must say, that's a pretty cool template. Not quite sure about using it for boxing though. I'd prefer to spell it out with the acronym in parenthesis on first use, then use acronyms throughout the article. We'd also keep the tooltips with that option, which I think are handy, even though they don't work on my mobile device. My least preferred option would be linking them in the table. And let's agree to just ignore how MMA do things lol (no offence, folks). – [[User:Squared.Circle.Boxing|<span style="color: red">''<sup>2</sup>''</span>]].[[User:Squared.Circle.Boxing|<span style="color: blue">'''''O'''''</span>]].[[User talk:Squared.Circle.Boxing|<span style="color: red"><sup>''Boxing''</sup></span>]] 11:07, 17 August 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Capital_letters#RfC_on_capitalization_after_a_colon_or_dash|Another RfC on capitalization]] of all our articles == |
|||
== [[Talk:Imane Khelif]] == |
|||
I thought this was a done deal back in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Article_titles/Archive_60#RFC_on_dash-separated_titles_for_sports_events this 2022 RFC] but obviously not. A handful of editors [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Capital_letters#RFC_on_capitalizing_after_dash_in_sports_article_names did another rfc with no sports projects] input at all. And it's being challenged because we just noticed it. This could affect almost every single tennis and Olympic article we have, and goodness know how many other sports. Some may have already been moved it you weren't watching the article. And not just the article titles will be affected but all the player bios that link to the articles. Sure the links would be piped to the right place if thousands of articles moved, but if the wording in a bio still said [[2023 Wimbledon Championships – Men's singles]] or [[Swimming at the 2020 Summer Olympics – Men's 200 metre backstroke]] that would likely need to be changed by hand. There is also talk of removing the ndash completely. |
|||
There are currently two RFCs at [[Talk:Imane Khelif]]. Interested editors are invited to participate at [[Talk:Imane Khelif#RfC lead]] and [[Talk:Imane Khelif#RfC on weight of "misinformation" in lead]]. ''[[User:TarnishedPath|<b style="color:#ff0000;">Tar</b><b style="color:#ff7070;">nis</b><b style="color:#ffa0a0;">hed</b><b style="color:#420000;">Path</b>]]''<sup>[[User talk:TarnishedPath|<b style="color:#bd4004;">talk</b>]]</sup> 10:50, 23 August 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Perhaps this is what sports projects want and perhaps not. Either way I certainly don't want projects ill-informed as the last RfC was handled. Express your thoughts at [[Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Capital_letters#RfC_on_capitalization_after_a_colon_or_dash| the following rfc]]. [[User:Fyunck(click)|Fyunck(click)]] ([[User talk:Fyunck(click)|talk]]) 20:48, 20 September 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Good article reassessment for [[Rocky Balboa (film)]] == |
|||
== RfC on readding upcoming fights in professional boxing record tables == |
|||
[[Rocky Balboa (film)]] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the [[Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Rocky Balboa (film)/1|reassessment page]]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. [[User:Z1720|Z1720]] ([[User talk:Z1720|talk]]) 20:57, 27 August 2024 (UTC) |
|||
==Top Billed or Champion First in articles== |
|||
<!-- [[User:DoNotArchiveUntil]] 17:01, 6 November 2023 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1699290081}} |
|||
As far as boxing match articles go, is it the champion that goes first or the top billed fighter that gets listed first. I generally listed the champion first in years past, but one such article I created, Terry Norris vs. Sugar Ray Leonard was moved to it's current title, [[Sugar Ray Leonard vs. Terry Norris]] as the poster for the fight billed Sugar Ray Leonard before the champion Terry Norris. Recently I just created [[Tavoris Cloud vs. Bernard Hopkins]] but with Hopkins first as he was billed before the champion Tavoris Cloud. Also, I see that Floyd Mayweather's fights (i.e. Victor Ortiz and Miguel Cotto) he is billed over the champions and that is reflected in the article. I'm fine with either way, just wanted to know the consensus for the titles.[[User:Beast from da East|Beast from da East]] ([[User talk:Beast from da East|talk]]) 04:05, 1 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
I understand this change was caused by the adding of fights with no official announcements, however it is misleading and has lead to actual fight articles being poor in quality. For example, Spence vs Crawford was one of the most anticipated fights of this generation and the quality of the article was appalling. In some instances, some important fight articles, like Fulton vs Inoue, haven’t been made due to fight articles typically being accessed and created through the record table. Moreso, it is misleading because it leads people reading Wikipedia to believe that said fighter has no upcoming fight. BoxRec displays this well and it is one of the main authorities of boxing record-keeping. Therefore, I request a discussion to add back upcoming fights to record tables. As per, choices are to '''Support''' or '''Oppose'''. Cheers. [[User:Faren29|Faren29]] ([[User talk:Faren29|talk]]) 16:10, 2 October 2023 (UTC) |
|||
: |
:It would be good to reach a consensus, as it's likely never been discussed. Articles being moved back and forth on a whim is not good practice. If we go by top billing on posters, we run into a problem if such posters cannot be found. The champion being listed first makes the most sense, although I have changed a few article titles in the past to reflect top billing over champion; Mayweather–Ortiz being one such example. [[User:Mac Dreamstate|Mac Dreamstate]] ([[User talk:Mac Dreamstate|talk]]) 12:55, 1 September 2024 (UTC) |
||
::It appears here on Wikipedia, it mostly skews towards top billed on the poster (Mayweather, Pacquiao, De La Hoya, Etc.) Boxrec though for example almost has the champion first in their articles, I'm fine with either way, just would like a consensus so everyone knows what is the correct way as I've seen pages moved both ways.[[User:Beast from da East|Beast from da East]] ([[User talk:Beast from da East|talk]]) 01:38, 2 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Spare the dramatics. Opening a new RfC shortly after the previous one has closed is only bad faith if it’s quite clearly just a desperate attempt to revert a change that one doesn’t like. This has caused a serious issue and needs to be rectified. My take in the original discussion would’ve had no bearing on the verdict because a consensus was already pretty clear. [[User:Faren29|Faren29]] ([[User talk:Faren29|talk]]) 18:18, 7 October 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::Well there's an admission of futility if anything. ''"Spare the dramatics"'' – [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3AWikiProject_Boxing&diff=1179073916&oldid=1178917162 way to deflect]. ''"quite clearly just a desperate attempt to revert a change that one doesn’t like"'' – which is what this is. ''"My take in the original discussion would’ve had no bearing on the verdict because a consensus was already pretty clear"'' – way to prove my point. [[User:Mac Dreamstate|Mac Dreamstate]] ([[User talk:Mac Dreamstate|talk]]) 22:31, 7 October 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:(Here from a notification at [[WP:NOT]]) Can I just say you question reads like the start of a discussion, rather than an RFC question. It's certainly not [[WP:RFCBRIEF]]. Maybe discussing this with other editors will come to a satisfactory compromise, rather than jumping to the RFC stage. -- LCU '''[[User:ActivelyDisinterested|ActivelyDisinterested]]''' <small>''∆[[User talk:ActivelyDisinterested|transmissions]]∆'' °[[Special:Contributions/ActivelyDisinterested|co-ords]]°</small> 21:04, 5 October 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*The clear answer is '''no''', per [[WP:NOT#CRYSTAL]] and [[WP:NOT#DATABASE]] and [[WP:NOT#SOCIAL]]. WP does not try to predict the future, and is not a ticket-sales or event-planning venue, nor a social-networking site for listing upcoming (you hope) events. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''']] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] 😼 </span> 21:15, 5 October 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Strong no''' per [[WP:CRYSTALBALL]], Wikipedia is not meant to predict events/outcomes that may or may not occur in the future. I disagree with the statement that "[w]hen Fury vs Usyk inevitably happens and the fight article is poor because the fight isn't displayed on the table, that's going to be a very poor look". There is nothing stopping an editor from adding it in after the event in question has taken place, once a [[WP:RELIABLE]] source provides coverage of it. It is arguably an even worse look for Wikipedia if the information is added to the article, and the event doesn't happen. <span style="background-color:black; color:white; padding: 1.5px;[[User:Grumpylawnchair">[[User:Grumpylawnchair|<span style="color:white">Grumpylawnchair</span>]] ([[User talk:Grumpylawnchair|<span style="color:white">'''talk'''</span>]])</span> 01:13, 6 October 2023 (UTC) |
|||
**'''Comment''' – ''"It is arguably an even worse look for Wikipedia if the information is added to the article, and the event doesn't happen"''; this was exactly the case prior to [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing/Archive 10#RfC on omitting upcoming fights in professional boxing record tables|the previous RfC]]. Fights were being added to record tables often with just a speculative month, or a "confirmed" date by all manner of interested parties (boxers themselves, promoters, TV networks, venue organisers, etc.), only to fall apart because of routine injuries or financial terms unable to be hashed out. |
|||
::A sporting ''record'', in the encyclopaedic sense, is a collection of information which has been verified to have taken place. I said it in the first RfC that it makes a mockery of WP, particularly the tenets [[WP:V]] and [[WP:CRYSTAL]], to include upcoming information on a record table pertaining to such a volatile and shambolic sport as professional boxing. It is a stark outlier to all other major sports where world-famous scheduled events rarely go awry. [[User:Mac Dreamstate|Mac Dreamstate]] ([[User talk:Mac Dreamstate|talk]]) 17:55, 6 October 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*Am I missing something, but wasn't this already addressed & decided here [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing/Archive 10#RfC on omitting upcoming fights in professional boxing record tables]]? [[User:RonSigPi|RonSigPi]] ([[User talk:RonSigPi|talk]]) 15:00, 6 October 2023 (UTC) |
|||
==[[Glossary of boxing terms]]== |
|||
:'''Comment''' – It appears your problem here is more to do with the quality of fight articles, rather than the actual topic at hand. An issue that needs to be resolved, yes, but starting an RfC to revert a valid change is not the way to go. There are other ways around the problem. [[User:Quettagon|Quettagon]] ([[User talk:Quettagon|talk]]) 20:50, 7 October 2023 (UTC) |
|||
I don't know enough to even start such an article; but it strikes me as a glaring hole in Wikipedia, which has such articles on several other games and sports (including, ptui!, [[Glossary of professional wrestling terms]]). There are the technical terms; and expressions which have entered everyday language include: toe the line (from bareknuckle days), saved by the bell, box into a corner, out for the count, and left/right hook in the military sense. Do any members of this WikiProject feel able to step up to the mark (another term from bareknuckle days)? [[User:Narky Blert|Narky Blert]] ([[User talk:Narky Blert|talk]]) 15:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::If the RfC starter is so concerned about the quality of boxing event articles, they seem to be forgetting or are unaware that they're welcome to start those articles themselves. I did just that with [[Carl Froch vs. George Groves|Froch–Groves]] and [[Carl Froch vs. George Groves II|Froch–Groves II]] after becoming a bit frustrated about the lack of coverage for those two events. And it had nothing to do with record tables. [[User:Mac Dreamstate|Mac Dreamstate]] ([[User talk:Mac Dreamstate|talk]]) 22:36, 7 October 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:Not to mention (duh) knockout and low blow. [[User:Narky Blert|Narky Blert]] ([[User talk:Narky Blert|talk]]) 16:35, 5 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Good article reassessment for [[Jermain Taylor]] == |
|||
== Technical decision == |
|||
[[Jermain Taylor]] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the [[Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Jermain Taylor/1|reassessment page]]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. [[User:Z1720|Z1720]] ([[User talk:Z1720|talk]]) 07:35, 9 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== New articles in need of clean-up == |
|||
[[Technical decision]], which is unsourced, came up as an example in a discussion at [[Wikipedia talk:Verifiability]]. I don't know anything about boxing, but if someone here knows where to find sources, I'm sure it would be appreciated. [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 18:59, 8 December 2023 (UTC) |
|||
All of [[User:Sam11333]]'s newly created articles need clean-up for capitalised weight classes, flagicons, and the inclusion of 'lineal' titles—it's all gotta go. Unfortunately he hasn't taken on board any of the style guide advice provided. [[User:Mac Dreamstate|Mac Dreamstate]] ([[User talk:Mac Dreamstate|talk]]) 18:52, 13 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Could you please add that information to the article? [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 20:22, 8 December 2023 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 19:45, 13 September 2024
| This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Boxing and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11Auto-archiving period: 90 days  |
 | This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Hey Can someone help me out please? I am not sure what to do next. I am pretty sure I am done. If i need to do more I can but I want to see if this is ready to be publish and how do i do that with this. for context here is this [1] [2]. Bennyaha (talk) 21:37, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Deletion of a group of articles
[edit]I've recently stumbled across a group of British boxers who I don't think are notable enough for Wikipedia pages, including Louis Norman, Thomas Essomba, Joe Maphosa, and a few other related fighters. Anyone have differing opinions on any of these fighters? I'd feel a bit bad going on deletion spree without some input. Most of these are out of date/don't follow the MOS so I'll try to update any we choose to keep around. ZenZekey (talk) 06:00, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Norman (challenged for a British title) and Essomba (won a European title) would fulfil notability, but not Maphosa as he doesn't appear to have challenged for any titles.Stratch that, I was going by an old edition of WP:NBOX. I would still say Essomba is worth keeping, because the European title is the highest regional achievement on the continent. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 18:56, 5 July 2024 (UTC)- Appreciate the input! Essomba was the main one I was debating with myself. I'm traveling for the next couple days but when I'm back home I'll update his article and nominate the others for deletion. ZenZekey (talk) 17:05, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
2024 Olympics
[edit]For anyone in an article-creating mood, the 2024 Summer Olympics starts in 10 days and there are a number qualified boxers still missing articles, many of whom are likely notable. See here: 52 men's boxers and 39 women's boxers missing articles. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Revisiting rankings
[edit]In multiple boxer articles across Wikipedia, I have noticed and removed[3][4] the "dynamic" listings of rankings in the lead of their respective articles because a) they are often not regularly updated and more importantly (b) they are not cited to independent reliable sources outside of the ranking organisations themselves which causes WP:NOTCV and WP:UNDUE concerns. WP:LEADs are supposed to be summaries about major parts of the article. There was a previous discussion at WP:BOXING about the rankings where there didn't seem to be consensus about their inclusion in the lead.[5] I believe that if dynamic rankings are to be included anywhere, they should be in the infoboxes. Should there be a RfC about this to gain wider feedback outside the Wikiproject? Morbidthoughts (talk) 01:33, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- As far as divisional and all-time rankings go, I'd like to see the back of them. I particularly dislike BoxRec's "all-time greatest" dynamic rankings peppered everywhere. I've said it before that they're a chore to go around updating, and User:Morbidthoughts presents a good point with regards to WP:WEIGHT. Which are more credible—myriad outlets such as The Ring, TBRB, BoxRec, or ESPN; or the sanctioning bodies themselves? I think neither, really. I also would not mind getting rid of pound for pound rankings, although The Ring's rankings tend to get significant coverage whenever there's a clear world's number one. However, when it comes to TBRB and all the others being shoehorned into lead sections—who cares? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 23:08, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
There are currently two RFCs at Talk:Imane Khelif. Interested editors are invited to participate at Talk:Imane Khelif#RfC lead and Talk:Imane Khelif#RfC on weight of "misinformation" in lead. TarnishedPathtalk 10:50, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Rocky Balboa (film)
[edit]Rocky Balboa (film) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 20:57, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
Top Billed or Champion First in articles
[edit]As far as boxing match articles go, is it the champion that goes first or the top billed fighter that gets listed first. I generally listed the champion first in years past, but one such article I created, Terry Norris vs. Sugar Ray Leonard was moved to it's current title, Sugar Ray Leonard vs. Terry Norris as the poster for the fight billed Sugar Ray Leonard before the champion Terry Norris. Recently I just created Tavoris Cloud vs. Bernard Hopkins but with Hopkins first as he was billed before the champion Tavoris Cloud. Also, I see that Floyd Mayweather's fights (i.e. Victor Ortiz and Miguel Cotto) he is billed over the champions and that is reflected in the article. I'm fine with either way, just wanted to know the consensus for the titles.Beast from da East (talk) 04:05, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- It would be good to reach a consensus, as it's likely never been discussed. Articles being moved back and forth on a whim is not good practice. If we go by top billing on posters, we run into a problem if such posters cannot be found. The champion being listed first makes the most sense, although I have changed a few article titles in the past to reflect top billing over champion; Mayweather–Ortiz being one such example. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 12:55, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- It appears here on Wikipedia, it mostly skews towards top billed on the poster (Mayweather, Pacquiao, De La Hoya, Etc.) Boxrec though for example almost has the champion first in their articles, I'm fine with either way, just would like a consensus so everyone knows what is the correct way as I've seen pages moved both ways.Beast from da East (talk) 01:38, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
I don't know enough to even start such an article; but it strikes me as a glaring hole in Wikipedia, which has such articles on several other games and sports (including, ptui!, Glossary of professional wrestling terms). There are the technical terms; and expressions which have entered everyday language include: toe the line (from bareknuckle days), saved by the bell, box into a corner, out for the count, and left/right hook in the military sense. Do any members of this WikiProject feel able to step up to the mark (another term from bareknuckle days)? Narky Blert (talk) 15:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Not to mention (duh) knockout and low blow. Narky Blert (talk) 16:35, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Jermain Taylor
[edit]Jermain Taylor has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 07:35, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
New articles in need of clean-up
[edit]All of User:Sam11333's newly created articles need clean-up for capitalised weight classes, flagicons, and the inclusion of 'lineal' titles—it's all gotta go. Unfortunately he hasn't taken on board any of the style guide advice provided. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 18:52, 13 September 2024 (UTC)