![]() | 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. |
Does he satisfy the criteria at WP:NBOXING? Among other things he is a two-time Asian Games bronze medalist. Thanks! Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:18, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
CfD
Dropping this link here as I expect minimal participation as is with all boxing related deletion discussions. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 August 3#Category:International light-heavyweight boxing champions. – 2.O.Boxing 13:25, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
- I think it is a category that we should be keeping not deleting. --HuntGroup (talk) 16:55, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
WBC renamed minimumweight
WBC have renamed the division strawweight at their latest convention. Here's an article from World Boxing News detailing it. I've made the changes on the relevant WBC articles, just needs changing in the MOS. Also, are instances of past "WBC minimumweight champion" in individual articles to be kept as such or changed to strawweight? I'm ever so slightly leaning towards changing but not so sure. – 2.O.Boxing 15:29, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
- Changed at the MOS. Go ahead and change all instances retroactively wherever needed—it'll all point to the same article anyway. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 16:59, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
WBC female
Just a heads up. Despite this, I don't think we need to change any terminology.. unless they start putting men against women. Nor do we (hopefully) need to specify "WBC male". Mac Dreamstate (talk) 15:10, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- Agreed.--HuntGroup (talk) 16:11, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
Lack of coverage of early bareknuckle boxers
I've noticed Wikipedia doesn't have much on many of the important early English boxers, such as Jack Slack. I'm curious if there's much consideration of the reason for this. Is it a issue of lacking reliable sources or notability, or is it just that no one has made the articles? If the latter I'm happy to assist, though I'll probably need people to clean up my efforts. For what it's worth I submitted an article on William Stevens for review to test the waters on this, as I don't want to start on any others if it's clear none of them will be accepted, but any input would be greatly appeciatedd. Bitplayervesti (talk) 18:56, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
Notability of National titles
This issue has come up in a AFD discussion so I thought I would bring it here. I think Wikipedia:WikiProject Boxing/Title Assessment is quite limited and needs to be expanded, especially to including the national title for some of the major boxing nations as only the British and Irish national titles are included at the moment. I have an idea about what national titles should be included but I what I would like to hear from other editors is what national titles they think should be included?--HuntGroup (talk) 11:03, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
- I agree. For Europe, national titles from France, Germany, Italy, and Spain should be included, and probably many more. --Michig (talk) 11:58, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
- Other obvious ones that spring to mind outside Europe are, Mexico, Argentina and Japan. --HuntGroup (talk) 15:48, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
When I redrew the Notability Criteria for boxers back in 2016 this is something that I had suggested. The Notability Criteria for professional boxing is far more restrictive than any other genuinely global sport. --Donniediamond (talk) 12:03, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
- One issue I remember about this was the likelihood of notability for all 17 weight classes (or those contested). For example, in Japan, does the cruiserweight champion get as much coverage as the flyweight champion? Clearly the flyweight is notable, but there was doubt on the upper weights. That is why only British, Irish, and US (USBA) champions are included; because they are English language nations, so it was relatively easy to establish those as presumptively notable for all weights. I thought we tried adding Australia, but it was hard to establish for the lower weights despite being in English. Do enough editors speak German to establish the last 10 German flyweight champions were notable to overcome the deletion crew/those that require a Papal edict to make a change? I am all for expanding/adding national titles, but I worry it is an exercise in futility. RonSigPi (talk) 17:11, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
AfD
Are there any editors experienced with GNG willing to take a look at this afd? The article doesn't have a large number of lengthy references to examine so it wouldn't be very time consuming. – 2.O.Boxing 18:24, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Medal table
I think the medal table should be organised by the level/prestige of the tournament (regardless of medals won). For example, for English boxers (or Europeans):
Medal record | ||
---|---|---|
Men's amateur boxing | ||
Representing ![]() | ||
Olympic Games | ||
![]() |
2016 Rio | Heavyweight |
Representing ![]() | ||
World Championships | ||
![]() |
2019 Yekaterinburg | Heavyweight |
European Championships | ||
![]() |
2015 Samokov | Heavyweight |
EU Championships | ||
![]() |
2018 Valladolid | Heavyweight |
Strandzha Cup | ||
![]() |
2015 Sofia | Heavyweight |
ABA Championships | ||
![]() |
2012 London | Heavyweight |
The vast majority of medal tables I've seen are organised like this which made me think this was the standard, but the example in the MOS shows different. My main reasoning is, an Olympic bronze is considered a higher achievement than a World, European, or Strandzha Cup gold. Thoughts? – 2.O.Boxing 10:08, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
- Not a big MOS guy, but I do know that only major championships are should be listed. The Strandzha Cup and ABA Championships shouldn't be listed. Its only world level, major region, or other major games (e.g. Pan Arab Games). I know it doesn't answer your question, but thought it worth pointing out. RonSigPi (talk) 17:13, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
- Disregarding MOS:BOXING for a moment, I've never understood the rationale of "most prestigious first". If a boxer wins a bronze medal at some tournament in 2000, a silver at a different tournament in 2004, and Olympic gold in 2008, it doesn't make sense to me to list the 2008 one first just because of prestige. I think it should be chronological from top to bottom, like how we list boxing titles won (sanctioning body establishment order and/or weight class order) in the various sections.#
- However, I've yet to see a general MOS on the medals table—if there is one I'd been interested to see it, and possibly amend our MOS accordingly (if they prestige first, I won't object). Mac Dreamstate (talk) 19:32, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
- I understand it with the order of titles, as there isn't a hierarchy to them. But with the competitions there is, with the Olympics being the creme de la creme.– 2.O.Boxing 21:36, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
RfC about Sherdog.com at RSN
There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Responses (Sherdog.com) regarding the reliability of Sherdog.com which is going to affect considerable amount of boxing articles. I would like to hear your opinion on that. Thanks in advance. Best, Lordpermaximum (talk) 20:55, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
WBC Franchise
This will undoubtedly be a headache for us after the Lomachenko–Lopez fight. I refer to this discussion I started a year ago, which outlines—with sources aplenty—the lack of consensus on whether this non-transferable status should be considered a legit world title. Before the edit warring begins (I won't be around to clean up any mess until Sunday, so best of luck to all of you!), what I will say is this: until consensus is reached here first, you should revert any addition of WBC Franchise to either boxers' record tables on sight. Also keep a watch on the undisputed championship and related articles, as editors will no doubt try to add bogus claims. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:04, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
López and "undisputed"
As a boxing fan, I obviously don't regard López as undisputed. Whether Sulaimoney accepted the request to make the Franchise title transferable or not, it's still—per the WBC's initial statement—an honorary and non-transferable title. However, due to the WBC allowing the title to be on the line, all media sources are naming López as the undisputed champion (I could only find an article from BadLeftHook that shared my opinion). As I said, I don't agree with it and will laugh at the WBC Frencfries title til the day it's scrapped (wishful thinking), but my opinion is irrelevant and completely outgunned by the reliable sources. There hasn't been many additions of undisputed as of yet, but I'm fairly sure there will be some edit wars in the not too distant future. How will we handle this debacle? – 2.O.Boxing 11:17, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- It may well be that we end up capitulating to "reliable sources"—and I use that term mockingly, because any media outlet should lose all credibility for granting legitimacy to a literal made-up status. However, it's been less than a week. We should wait to see how mainstream boxing-focused media (and not just general news outlets) handles the situation, then collate a load of sources to be displayed here. We might even up with another Fury/lineal debacle, in which there is no consensus amongst them. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 18:44, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
Titles in boxing section
This has come up before (somewhere), albeit without any resolution, but I'm seeing these being bulk-added to a lot of articles now. I question whether this section is needed, because the titles succession boxes in External links handles this just the same, and in much better detail. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 18:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- I agree. There's no point if there's a succession box. – 2.O.Boxing 19:15, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- It's also never been part of the MOS—only the succession box. The article body and record table eat up a lot of scrolling as it is, so a section which merely abbreviates the succession box looks redundant to me.. unless such repetition is encouraged in sports articles? I'm seeing similar sections for Lewis Hamilton, Roger Federer, and Cristiano Ronaldo. It's not a huge deal, but I wanted to bring it up. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 19:24, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- It seems completely unnecessary in my opinion. I left a message on the user's talk page in case they weren't aware of the succession box (I suppose it is kind of hidden after all), pointing out that the section they're adding is kind of redundant. I've just looked and they removed the message with no reply, so they clearly disagree that it's pointless lol would it be worth replacing the content that's in the "Titles in boxing" section with the succession box? I personally never used to look in "External links" when I was a casual reader. I only found the (very handy and informative, might I add) succession box after I began editing and read the MOS. – 2.O.Boxing 00:46, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- It's also never been part of the MOS—only the succession box. The article body and record table eat up a lot of scrolling as it is, so a section which merely abbreviates the succession box looks redundant to me.. unless such repetition is encouraged in sports articles? I'm seeing similar sections for Lewis Hamilton, Roger Federer, and Cristiano Ronaldo. It's not a huge deal, but I wanted to bring it up. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 19:24, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
Nowrap
For the MOS, I'm considering adding a {{nowrap}} syntax to the Record, Date and Round, time columns to prevent the values from breaking off onto a new line, as they only are numerical. This appears to be acceptable per Help:Table#Nowrap and MOS:ACCESS (which doesn't mention it all), and would negate the use of
for all the spaces. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 18:47, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- I have no problem with that. I always edit on a mobile device so the record and round/times always break up for me. Looks a bit shabby at times. – 2.O.Boxing 00:49, 27 October 2020 (UTC)