BeanieFan11 (talk | contribs) →Mass draftification proposal on Olympians: new section Tag: New topic |
BeanieFan11 (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 152: | Line 152: | ||
== Mass draftification proposal on Olympians == |
== Mass draftification proposal on Olympians == |
||
You may be interested in [[Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#RfC on draftifying a subset of mass-created Olympian microstubs|this village pump discussion]] on draftifiying |
You may be interested in [[Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#RfC on draftifying a subset of mass-created Olympian microstubs|this village pump discussion]] on draftifiying nearly a thousand Olympians. [[User:BeanieFan11|BeanieFan11]] ([[User talk:BeanieFan11|talk]]) 14:35, 2 March 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:04, 2 March 2023
Boxing Project‑class | ||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
The article Omar Albanil has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Non notable boxer or businessman
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.
Thanks and God bless!
Antonio Locococoloco Martin (He he he he) 11:12, August 23, 2021 (UTC)
Lennox Lewis: British or English
Did Lewis identify as British or English, during his boxing career. If British? Why then is the "U.K." omitted from his boxing matches articles' infoboxes & his BLP's infobox, concerning his birthplace? GoodDay (talk) 16:34, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- People born in England are British. There's no need to include UK after England. – 2.O.Boxing 18:23, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- People born in Maryland are American. There's no need to include USA after Maryland. GoodDay (talk) 18:26, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- Maryland isn't a country. And we never use USA in locations. – 2.O.Boxing 18:40, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- England isn't a sovereign state, either. My concern is that the boxers' birthplace should match their personal preference. We don't add "UK" to Joe Calzaghe's BLP infobox, because he identified as Welsh. We should be adding "UK" to Lewis' BLP infobox, because he identified as British. GoodDay (talk) 19:25, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- Lewis' personal preference of British does match his place of birth. People born in England are British. Both Lewis and Calzaghe are British. England and Wales are in the UK. The reason UK is omitted has nothing to doing with a person identifying as English, Welsh, Scottish, Northern Irish or British; it's omitted because it's unnecessary. – 2.O.Boxing 20:18, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- It's omitted because over the years, enough editors pushed to have it omitted, which gives the UK special treatment. Anyways, we're just going in circles here. GoodDay (talk) 22:08, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- Your last sentence is one thing we can agree on. – 2.O.Boxing 22:31, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- And the only one we'll agree on, apparently. GoodDay (talk) 22:52, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- Your last sentence is one thing we can agree on. – 2.O.Boxing 22:31, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- It's omitted because over the years, enough editors pushed to have it omitted, which gives the UK special treatment. Anyways, we're just going in circles here. GoodDay (talk) 22:08, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- Lewis' personal preference of British does match his place of birth. People born in England are British. Both Lewis and Calzaghe are British. England and Wales are in the UK. The reason UK is omitted has nothing to doing with a person identifying as English, Welsh, Scottish, Northern Irish or British; it's omitted because it's unnecessary. – 2.O.Boxing 20:18, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- England isn't a sovereign state, either. My concern is that the boxers' birthplace should match their personal preference. We don't add "UK" to Joe Calzaghe's BLP infobox, because he identified as Welsh. We should be adding "UK" to Lewis' BLP infobox, because he identified as British. GoodDay (talk) 19:25, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- Maryland isn't a country. And we never use USA in locations. – 2.O.Boxing 18:40, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- People born in Maryland are American. There's no need to include USA after Maryland. GoodDay (talk) 18:26, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
Boxing fight article parameters
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. 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, 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! Antonio Beaten by a knockout Martin (loser talk) 14:46, July 25, 2022 (UTC)
Date of birth
Can we add a note in the infobox and lead sections with links to WP:DOB and WP:BLPPRIMARY. It'll give us a more professional look ;) – 2.O.Boxing 20:23, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
- Apologies for not spotting this. Do you mean one of those "See [policy]" hatnotes at the top of a section? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 15:30, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
Should this article exist?
Should Deirdre Nelson have an article as she did fight Mary Ann Almager for a boxing world title and she did take the Irish government to be the fight licenced female boxer. Irish boxing history-maker Deirdre Nelson challenged for a world title in Las Vegas in her first professional fight | The Irish Sun (thesun.ie) , Woman boxer wins legal fight – The Irish Times Dwanyewest (talk) 11:30, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
"African Boxing Confederation" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect African Boxing Confederation and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 19 § African Boxing Confederation until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:25, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
- And similarly American Boxing Confederation. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:28, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
ABC regional titles
I've been using these formats for as long as I can remember..
.. but a recent edit by User:Fep1970 made me realise they're not correct. Yes, they're affiliated with the main orgs, but not labelled as such. Some may remember I made a similar mistake with WBC International Silver. So, zap the prefixed main orgs wherever you see them and just leave the affiliated org. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 16:04, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
Indefinite articles in Notes
Apologies for spamming this here talk with yet more nitpicky shit, but there's something in Notes which has started to bug me—or rather, has me doubting myself with one of my old formats when the MOS got started.
For TD/NC/DQ explanations, we currently have these formats (indefinite articles underlined):
Split TD: Boxer cut from an accidental head clash
Originally a TKO win for Opponent, later ruled an NC after they failed a drug test
Originally a DQ win for Boxer, later ruled a KO win for Opponent after an incorrect referee call
Just a tiny bit clunky, but nothing outrageously brevity-killing. And should that be "an NC" or "a NC"? Anyway, if we drop the indefinite articles ("a", "an"):
Split TD: Boxer cut from accidental head clash
Originally TKO win for Opponent, later ruled NC after they failed drug test
Originally DQ win for Boxer, later ruled KO win for Opponent after incorrect referee call
Things start to look really clunky. Conversely, we never use definite articles ("the") for titles:
For WBC welterweight title
Add the definite article:
For the WBC welterweight title
Now that just looks flat-out weird. Any thoughts? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 19:47, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
RfC about replacing "vs." and "v" with "vs" in boxing match article titles
I'm opening a RfC about replacing "vs." and "v" with "vs" in boxing match article titles --Tbf69 15:59, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
- Comment: currently, MOS:MISCSHORT allows for all variations listed. I've never liked the dot in "vs.", but maybe it's strongly an American preference that cannot reasonably be expected to make way for "vs" for U.S.-based fights. I would absolutely loathe to see "v" used. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 18:52, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
- I'm hoping that there's going to be consensus on this issue that allows for an exception to MOS:MISCSHORT, for boxing match titles.
- --Tbf69 userpage • talkpage 19:18, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not sure we would be able to apply one or the other across all articles. As much as I love consistency, MOS:TIES should apply. Fights in the UK (and Europe?) should be without a fullstop and those in America (Canada too?) should be with. I'm not quite sure on "vs" vs "v" for British-English; I'd personally prefer "vs", but as Mac has pointed out, "v" seems to be common in English sports. However, looking at a bunch of official fight posters, I'm seeing both being used with no particular preference either way. So we may have an argument to go with "vs" over "v". – 2.O.Boxing 12:40, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- My argument against MOS:TIES is that many US based sources use "vs", hence it could become the new standard, if consensus is reached via this RfC. --- Tbf69 userpage • usertalk 12:56, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not sure we would be able to apply one or the other across all articles. As much as I love consistency, MOS:TIES should apply. Fights in the UK (and Europe?) should be without a fullstop and those in America (Canada too?) should be with. I'm not quite sure on "vs" vs "v" for British-English; I'd personally prefer "vs", but as Mac has pointed out, "v" seems to be common in English sports. However, looking at a bunch of official fight posters, I'm seeing both being used with no particular preference either way. So we may have an argument to go with "vs" over "v". – 2.O.Boxing 12:40, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- Just "v" is primarily a legal, not sporting, usage. "Vs." is usual in the US. Yes, some US sources use "vs", but they're just being lazy. "Vs" is more usual in Commonwealth English. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 13:46, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- I agree with "v" having mainly legal usage, but the aim is to standardize and create a consistency with specifically boxing match articles, as this is one area where there is major overlap and inconsistency between American, and British/Commonwealth English.
- Many boxing matches occur outside of these two regions, hence which version is to be used?
- For an example issue, many boxing matches such as Anthony Joshua vs. Andy Ruiz Jr. and Jake Paul vs Tommy Fury are being held in Saudi Arabia, so which version should we use.
- My proposition is using "vs" as an international standard, as it is widely used in US media (I don't believe that's due to "laziness"), and is the most common form of title in many places.
- Thanks, --- Tbf69 userpage • usertalk 14:08, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support. The period/full stop is superfluous. -The Gnome (talk) 18:57, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support/Prefer vs as standard. The Chicago Manual of Style actually prefers "vs." They don't even mention just "vs". However, Merriam-Webster, like WP:MOS, approves of all three. I agree with previous comments that "v." is largely legalistic, so that should simply be discarded as an option. My preference would be "vs" for the sake of practicality and simplicity; it also seems to be more universal than "vs." Scapulustakk 19:05, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- I agree, my main thought is that because "vs" is so standard outside of the USA, and within the USA all three are used, that "vs" should adopted as standard for all articles about boxing matches. --- Tbf69 userpage • usertalk 19:17, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- Merriam-Webster dictionary or manual of style?
- How is "vs" more practical?
- Why is it more universal than "vs."?-- Jahalive (talk) 21:00, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support using "vs" with no dot, across WP regardless of MOS:TIES. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 12:55, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
- Comment: disclosing that WP:ILIKEIT. No other reason. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:53, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose replacing "vs." per WP:TITLEVAR. Policy states,
If a topic has strong ties to a particular English-speaking nation, the title of its article should use that nation's variety of English
. American-English typically uses full stops for abbreviations while British-English doesn't. Ringtv[1] and ESPN[2] (both American) include the full stop. Support replacing any instances of "v" (I haven't seen any) with "vs". – 2.O.Boxing 13:20, 12 February 2023 (UTC)- Unclear what your postion is on fights outside of the US and UK, such as Jake Paul vs Tommy Fury.
- This proposal is about adopting "vs" as standard, as the use of "vs." and "vs" from US sources is mixed (for example: [3]). --- Tbf69 userpage • usertalk 09:56, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
- I'd argue Paul vs Fury should be American-English. Without Fury the event goes on with a different opponent; without Paul there is no event. That should be a strong enough tie.
- I don't see the inconsistent usage in some US sources as an issue. The Chicago Manual of Style and Associated Press Stylebook both say to use the period. – 2.O.Boxing 12:19, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
- Many others in this RfC see inconsistent usage of "vs" and "vs." in the US, but consistent usage of "vs" outside the US as a reason to standardize on "vs".
- Also, we cannot base the usage of "vs" or "vs." on every match outside the US on a wishy-washy metric of who's more important to the bout. --- Tbf69 userpage • usertalk 12:24, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
- Individual publications deciding to go against American-English conventions shouldn't be a reason for us to follow suit and ignore Wikipedia policy. I only see an argument to standardise one or the other for fights between non-English-speaking fighters located in non-English-speaking countries.
- And I don't see my suggestion as a "wishy-washy metric"; the A-side in a fight is the "more important" of the two in the overwhleming majority of cases. – 2.O.Boxing 13:36, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
- We can refer to WP:CONSISTENT however. Also, from an encyclopedic perspective (WP:ENC), we shouldn't be considering the "A-side" in articles. --- Tbf69 P • T 17:13, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- WP:CONSISTENT says,
There are two main areas, however, where Wikipedians have consistently shown that consistency does not control:
...Spelling that differs between different varieties of English
. TITLEVAR is unaffected. – 2.O.Boxing 19:40, 19 February 2023 (UTC)- TITLEVAR applies when Americans always spell color that way and those who don’t are seen as wrong (and vice versa for other countries). If people spell it differently by preference, and publications differ by style guide, then we don’t treat that as a national variety of English. For the same reason we are able to apply MOS:LOGICAL quotes to every article despite that style being more common in some countries than others. — HTGS (talk) 20:27, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- WP:CONSISTENT says,
- We can refer to WP:CONSISTENT however. Also, from an encyclopedic perspective (WP:ENC), we shouldn't be considering the "A-side" in articles. --- Tbf69 P • T 17:13, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- Question: What would be the benefit of changing all these article titles to a standard form of the abbreviation?--Jahalive (talk) 18:46, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
- Cleaner, makes making new match articles easier, makes linking easier. --- Tbf69 P • T 19:02, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
- What do you mean by cleaner?
- How would that make it easier to make an new article?
- Copying and pasting an article title into a link is pretty easy.--Jahalive (talk) 19:09, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
- It'll be cleaner because it will be shorter. And it will be simpler because the often confusing, full stop/period at the end of an abbreviated word would be eliminated. As to c&p, that's evidendly not always the case. -The Gnome (talk) 10:25, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- Oh yeah, cleaner, like taking out all those dirty, superfluous "u"s in words like colour and labour. Using "v" would be "cleanest"; it seems to be most popular in Australia, (ex. Australian National Boxing Federation - Upcoming Events, Kambosos v Haney LIVE updates & AS IT HAPPENED: 'Courageous' Kambosos responds to retirement rumours after rematch loss) but I'd like to hear from an Australian.
- It's hard to believe that anyone would be confused by seeing any of the four forms of the abbreviation in this context.
- I don't understand your point about copying and pasting.-- Jahalive (talk) 21:13, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- It'll be cleaner because it will be shorter. And it will be simpler because the often confusing, full stop/period at the end of an abbreviated word would be eliminated. As to c&p, that's evidendly not always the case. -The Gnome (talk) 10:25, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Jahalive see WP:CONSISTENT — HTGS (talk) 20:28, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- As 2.O.Boxing explained above, consistency does not overrule national varieties of English-- Jahalive (talk) 22:23, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- "Vs." is not an "American variety" however, hence does fall under WP:CONSISTENT --- Tbf69 P • T 22:34, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- By far, the most common usage in American English is "vs.", don't you agree?-- Jahalive (talk) 22:38, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- "Vs." is not an "American variety" however, hence does fall under WP:CONSISTENT --- Tbf69 P • T 22:34, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- As 2.O.Boxing explained above, consistency does not overrule national varieties of English-- Jahalive (talk) 22:23, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support vs as an ideal opportunity for WP:CONSISTENTcy. Whether there is a regional difference is not something I have ever noticed, but I hardly think many Americans will be offended at a missing period on MOS:ENGVAR grounds. In fact, given that you find both forms in many countries, you might say that Americans who use the period are just being extra.
As a secondary preference – in the case that votes win out to treat it as an ENGVAR case – we should at least be consistent with the two, and avoidv
. — HTGS (talk) 21:39, 18 February 2023 (UTC) - Oppose replacing "vs." The most common usage in American English is "vs." It is recommended by The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage, The Chicago Manual of Style and the AP Stylebook. The most common usage in British English is "vs" (with no full stop). The most common usage in Australia might be "v", but I was the only one to comment on that. MOS:ENGVAR and WP:TITLEVAR apply. There would be no significant benefit to ignoring these policies and replacing the American "vs." with "vs".--Jahalive (talk) 21:27, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Mass draftification proposal on Olympians
You may be interested in this village pump discussion on draftifiying nearly a thousand Olympians. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:35, 2 March 2023 (UTC)