Talk:Michael Bisping

article - "Bisping's Cage Rage title would eventually be vacated when in 2005 he signed to fight in England's Cage Warriors Fighting Championship promotion"

That's not quite correct as Bisping had already fought three times in Cagewarriors , whilst also being Cage Rage champion, some months before this eventual stripping. Bisping is associated with Wolfslair Gym as stated elsewhere in the article, which is connected with Cagewarriors. I've sorted the date order of this stuff as there is overlap and also put references from the two fight promotions. --Revolt 13:22, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Anyone know what music he came out to at UFC 70? It sounded like a different song then usual. -- ErikG803

Will delete "Damn Cecil Peoples" in Biography and "Hammer Time" from the records section. Also changing the loss to a win as he won the fight. These are the personal opinions of an unknown user and will be deleted. Y2p731 03:33, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:M bisping.jpg

Image:M bisping.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:34, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Official Website link

[1] - Official Website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spooksie (talk • contribs) 11:31, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Michael Bisping vs Matt Hamill

Maybe it should be mentioned that Michael Bisping is planning on dropping a weight class to avoid a rematch? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flapdoodle111 (talk • contribs) 07:52, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

“ I have contacted the UFC and stated I would like to rematch Hammill at everyones earliest convenience as Im sure most of you know, no fighter wants a win when the decision is debateable. I am happy for the fight to take place where ever, and look forward to settling the score once and for all. I personally feel we put on a great fight for the fans and perhaps people should focus on this more. [2] ”

?  east.718 at 08:42, September 12, 2007 

he didnt drop a weight class to avoid hamill. he wanted to fight hamill but hamill got injured. he then decided to drop down to middlweight after his loss to evans. At this point hamill was still injured making a rematch impossible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.29.53.115 (talk) 13:52, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

It says in the article that two of the judges were American and one was British. It says that the one British judge sided Hamill won and that the two American judges sided with Bisping. It says that fans felt that the judging must have been bias but it claims that because the two judges who sided with Bisping were American that it couldn't have been. I think the fact that the two American judges sided Bisping only goes to reinforce the fact that something was fishy with the judging. The two american judges would have been murdered by the British fans. It would have been a riot. They sided with Bisping out of fear for their safety. If the crowd had heard that the two Americans sided with Hamill there would have been a riot and they would have been attacked physically. They were just trying to keep the drunken brits from rioting. They didn't decide based on the fight. They decided based on their fear of being attacked. The article seems to claim that because the American judges sided with Bisping that it was a legit decision. EVERYONE who saw that fight KNOWS Hamill won that fight. Bisping didn't do a god damn thing to win that fight. You can say he won round 3 but that's it. Hamill won the first two rounds and had a million take downs. EVERYONE KNOWS that was straight up BS. Even Bisping fans after the event went up to Hamill to congratulate him on winning the fight. That is a fact, you can look it up yourself. Hamill said it himself. He said, "Even fans of Bisping came up to me, congratulated me on the win, and admitted the decision was BS." I didn't make this up, he did say that the day after in an interview. Why isn't this pertinent information like that presented in the article? I think it would be kind of important to mention don't you? Something is horribly wrong here.

His brother

The article that mentions his girlfriend and children also mention his older brother Konrad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.130.182.70 (talk) 14:01, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Hometown

Article's locked now but once it gets unlocked, there's a mistake at the bottom of his bio. UFC 75 took place in London, England, but that is not his hometown. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.117.178.23 (talk) 15:47, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Y Done  east.718 at 21:48, September 12, 2007 

Article says born in Cyprus, profile says born in Liverpool

One has to be wrong —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.86.143.91 (talk) 10:13, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

it says fighting out of liverpool not born in liverpool