Talk:Bruce Lee

Ancestry and Origin will be removed from the infobox

Please read:Bobby Jindal: Ethinicity and Infobox Question plus please let us know if he also he remained or even was a Hongkonger citizen so we can add his nationality to the first line.(Only American or Hongkonger American?) -- And Rew 05:32, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

This topic was discussed here before, and sadly has been removed for no reason. Once again, Bruce Lee did actually returned to Hong Kong for good in 1971. Undefeatedcooler (talk) 14:39, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Categories

Ok, so what is the consensus on the Chinese-related categories ("Chinese philosophers" etc.) and the infobox? We keep the infobox on the grounds that most of his films were originally in Chinese (were they?), but remove the categories for lack of evidence of his Chinese citizenship? To me this sounds ok. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 01:10, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

"Categories" are not just about citizenship (anything that related to Lee), and he was at least dual citizens, understand? Undefeatedcooler (talk) 10:58, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but his citizenship is directly related to his citizenship. You can't claim he is a dual citizen unless you can prove he was, and citizenship is a legal issue. So barring the revelation of two concurrently active passports there is little in the way of proving what his citizenship was. Normally this would not need to be proven but then, nobody is contesting Chuck Norris' citizenship. Since there is a contention there needs to be citations. That being said there should be little question of Lee's lineage. To call him a US Actor is blatantly false. He was a decidedly Chinese actor and rather proud of that fact. To dispute his citizenship is different than disputing his lineage. Any cultural reference to him should respect his Chinese lineage. Padillah (talk) 13:04, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

We don't know whether he felt more like a US American and Chinese actor, and it is irrelevant anyway. The only evidence we have so far clearly points at him being a US citizen (the testimony of his wife in her biography), hence he was a US actor. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 13:07, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

He was not only a US citizen and US actor, he was a HK citizen and HK actor before and after. Undefeatedcooler (talk) 19:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

While he was definitely a US Citizen, I favor using the Hong Kong Actor category. He started in HK cinema and the majority of his most notable filmwork was in HK Cinema. Let's discuss this here and hammer out consensus. UDC, for the love of God, please indent your posts and follow along with the rest of us.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 00:09, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Edit Warring

Folks, the editwarring is getting old. I'd like to think we could hash this stuff out like adults here rather than act like children. I hate having to go to ANI for these things, if this battleground mentality keeps up the next step will be RFC. Let's not go there. Let's go to talk and act like adults rather than people with a hidden agenda. Thanks--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 14:04, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Mike, I agreed with you, but it was Gun Powder Ma (talk) who always started the edit warring, and I thought the "Lead sentence" was settled by you and Tbrittreid ? Undefeatedcooler (talk) 14:14, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

The constant warring has to stop, regardless of who started it! We will get nowhere at this pace. Please read the rules on wikipedia regarding edit warring. This takes up valuable time that could be spent improving the article.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 14:22, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Regrettably I had to request the page to be fully protected, which now has been for two weeks. --Frank Fontaine (talk) 20:24, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

So the edit warring by the one problematic editor can resume in two weeks? I've never understood the logic behind that type of kindergarten mentality.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 20:50, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, well, if they do, their going to be reported. So don't worry. --Frank Fontaine (talk) 22:25, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm not worried, but they were reported this morning, before the 2-week lock on the article. So they edit-war again in 2 weeks and they will be reported and the article will be locked again, conveniently with the disputed version intact. I wouldn't mind, but the editor reverted 4 other editors six times in a row, including 2 admins. I fail to see how this helps anything.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 00:24, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Don't shoot the messenger. --Frank Fontaine (talk) 00:33, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm not! We're cool!--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 00:38, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

I am going to file an official complaint soon, if the admins do not reconsider their action. This was a crystal clear violation of the 3RR rule and I don't see any mitigating circumstances for that single-purpose account. I'd rather be willing to spend two weeks discussing with some admin than restarting the same childish game here in fourteen days. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 00:41, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

An official complaint to where? WikiMedia? You highly overestimate the "officialness" of anything here, and everything I did was within policy - just because someone violates 3RR doesn't preclude the page from being protected. I suppose you could have requested it at WP:RFUP, which wasn't mentioned above; instead, Gun Powder Ma chose to come be sarcastically bitchy on my talk page. Awesome; sorry I wasn't working for you as hard as I should. My salary here is a little low. At any rate, I agree with the gist of the above, and I am going to unprotect the article. If the obvious SPI starts again - which is fairly certain - notify me or the edit war noticeboard. And try not to be a bitch. Tan | 39 21:49, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

What a poor reaction. I am certain now you have convinced everyone of your competence... Gun Powder Ma (talk) 22:09, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

The "Ma" part of your name is apropos. Thanks for the scolding; I'm very, very chagrined and will never, ever disappoint you again. Tan | 39 22:11, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Seriously, I am appalled that the "Fight History of Bruce Lee" exists here on an encyclopedia that makes every attempt to be as accurate as possible. All of these so called "fights" are completely and utterly non-factual and are based solely on hearsay. There are absolutely no records of Bruce Lee actually fighting. Go ahead and look up this "Gary Elms" character. He doesn't exist. I have no idea why this section is locked, that note at the top doesn't make an argument for why it can't be deleted. Please do the right thing and erase that garbage. 76.213.246.134 (talk) 03:04, 23 May 2010 (UTC)C

Archive?

Well, this talk page is well over 200 kilobytes long, and i can see that some discussions were restored, some of which have not been edited in months. is there anyway we can archive something as it is extreamly hard to navigate through all of this and it is recommended to archive when it exceeds 50 KB, or has more than 10 main topics here Peppermint Chills 02:28, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

There, I added Mizabot so the page should auto-archive every 7days. We can change that after the bulk of the current page gets archived. Padillah (talk) 12:40, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Cause of Death

Lee used polyphasic sleep for most of his life, this could have caused unforeseen complications or chemical imbalances in serotonin, which could cause a hypersensitivity to drugs found in Equagesic. This is OR though, try to find some sources suggesting it. 99.236.221.124 (talk) 04:19, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I found something, doesn't suggest what you said. I'll wait until you have a source for me to conclude.Iamthemanofthehouse (talk) 19:41, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I asked Gun Powder Ma To stop being a Dick so you guys can finally get something done. Someone here makes you guys look like children arguing here.Mikimouseshoes (talk) 03:02, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Where are all these red-links suddenly coming from? Are you from the communist front? Gun Powder Ma (talk) 10:46, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Iamthemanofthehouse and Mikimouseshoes are sockpuppets and I did not find any reliable sources (but some sources) of Bruce Lee with Polyphasic sleep.Imperial Monarch (D•R) 07:13, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Please remove ad at the end of the article

Please remove the ad to the Light A Pixel memorial website Memorial website, pfffffffffft.... what a joke —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.101.96.48 (talk) 18:45, 28 May 2010 (UTC)