Talk:Marvin Harrison

Nv8200p

You shouldn't remove images because they contain no source, its the responsibility of the owner to protect his work, if nobody is complaining then the image should be fine. Also, very rare to see a image that contains source information... why don't you just delete all of them? which would be roughly 75% of all images uploaded to wikipedia. Mithotyn 09:02, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

How times have changed. -Ashley Pomeroy 19:34, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion

If anybody wants to fix the year by year section you might consider using the code/style me and Gherald came up with on the Terrell Owens page ([1]). It's not super easy because it would require a tear down and redo, If I find time I might do it and call it a christmas present ( :- \ ). As you can see by comparison the style makes it much easier to maintain and is still tweakable. Mithotyn 23:36, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Regarding the college section, 2718 is not and never was a national record, this should be changed to school. It was locked at the time of this post. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.191.170.167 (talk) 20:41, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Image Removal

If you're going to be this way (both of you) why didn't you remove the last one? it has no source information either, very few images on any article on wikipedia do. This article has gone from being decent to being sub-par to now being completely uninteresting and worthless.... thanks! (note, I didn't upload them, but laugh at wikipedia's policy on images, wikipedia cant get in trouble for hosting these pictures unless they refuse to remove them at the owners request! ,,.. thats the law, at least.)

Because of this and other problems i've had on football articles you're all on your own. Mithotyn 06:36, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks you guys

I did the tables, pictures, the stats, and now your completely ruining everything. Just please leave this article the hell alone, no in fact leave the sports articles to competent fans. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by IndyFanSinceMarshallFaulk (talk • contribs) 10:00, 10 December 2005.

All I did was redo the code from your stats table from that god awful mid 90's era HTML code that made it almost impossible to update/maintain to well, the much more improved thing that it is. Welcome to Wikipedia. Mithotyn 06:17, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Major revision

Please compare http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Marvin_Harrison&oldid=95299723 to the version to which the article was reverted. Though the revision is shorter, the previous version is full of hype and grammatical errors, and basically looks like a report by a seventh-grader. I started to make the revisions individually with separate justifications, but there are so many errors in the unrevised version that I simply don't have the time. 68.122.68.5 13:39, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I completed another major revision of the article here. It's much better than doing a mass revert IMHO. :-) Grandmasterka 00:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Championship win

The article originally said that Marvin Harrison has never won a championship. I have updated the article. If you find any details or find a better way to word it, then feel free. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chungster (talk • contribs) 07:52, 23 January 2007 (UTC).

Not even sure why it's valid to say "He never won a championship until 2006." Peyton Manning was criticized in the past for not winning a championship, but I've never heard Harrison criticized.--Tjcthree 21:34, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Not sure just made a minor change because it originally said "Harrison has not yet won a championship. However, he."Chungster 03:50, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

POV, weasel words, cleanup

"Harrison has placed among the top wide receivers statistically since entering the league."

How is this possible? And how is it relevant to his personal details, such as name; and date of birth?

Ahhh I finally read the whole thing and I conclude that this article is chock full of POV and weasel words I.E. "Harrison is most recognized for" and requires a major cleanup.

I'm not going to go through it piece by piece, otherwise i'd fix it myself (this article is absolutely horrific, it reads like it was written by a 8 year old colts fan) but again, how is this possible? Am I reading it right? -

"Marvin Harrison tied with Carolina's Steve Smith for the most receiving touchdowns in 2005, with 12, marking the first time he has ever led the league in receiving touchdowns in his career."

How did he lead the league in receiving touchdowns if he was tied with Steve Smith? 71.87.7.14 11:59, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Who wrote this garbage?

"Harrison, together with his longtime Colts teammate Peyton Manning are the best Passing Combination in NFL history" That's just an opinion, I don't care if NFL Network were the ones who ranked them the best, it's still just someone's opinion and the article should at least mention that this was only how NFL Network ranked them.

Why?

is the article fully protected? there hasn't been that much vandalism, i don't think it needs full protection, maybe a semi-protection.. but why full? RF23 (talk) 20:52, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

It was a mistake. It was intended to be semi. Should be fixed shortly. Enigma^msg 21:19, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Tampa Bay Buccaneers?

There's no source supporting the claim that he signed a 2-year deal with the Buccaneers, nor can I find any evidence verifying it on any sports website. Seems like someone has some wishful thinking... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.73.195.113 (talk) 05:02, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Error - Please Correct

Tampa Bay Buccaneers

On May 11th, 2009, Harrison signed a 2-year deal with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.

This is not true and should be deleted.

Vandalism. reverted. RF23 (talk) 20:39, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Dead Link

Reference 4 is now a dead link and needs replacing. Koumz (talk) 23:25, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Edit request

{{editsemiprotected}}

The line "Both trials are expected to come to trial in mid-2010" needs to be removed since it's outdated. As far as I can tell both trials are either delayed or not gonna happen, there haven't been any media updates on them since mid-2010 as far as I can find. Saying nothing is better than saying something inaccurate, in this case. --74.138.214.5 (talk) 13:29, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Done -Atmoz (talk) 16:27, 5 November 2010 (UTC)