Talk:Fedor Emelianenko

wedding

Fedor got married. someone feel like editing? heres the source http://www.sherdog.com/news/blog/fedor-gets-hitched-20143 and someone please quit deleting notes about that stupid loss everyone wants a * by. if anything how about being helpful and changing it so it sounds a little better. no sense in removing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.188.201.146 (talk) 20:28, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

regarding the * for the loss

people just wont let this go. how about we leave the stupid star out and just write in the notes column. not only is that what the notes column is used for but a * is also used to indicate notes. so why have a * when it can just be put in the notes? someone should add it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.86.187.95 (talk) 06:48, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

btw someone vandalized the date column in the win/loss table —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.86.187.95 (talk) 06:50, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

1 NC?

(sorry I suck at editing wiki-pages so please have oversight :)) Anyways, isnt Fedor supposed to have 1 NC? If so why isnt it shown in his breakdown-table? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.182.22.134 (talk) 02:06, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

 Done - Some vandal removed it along with parts of the record table. --aktsu ^(t / c) 02:40, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

2008 worlds in st petersburgh

he came in second http://www.mmafighting.com/news/2008/11/16/fedor-emelianenko-loses-decision-semifinals —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.171.216.77 (talk) 04:45, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

The video on youtube of him against Ivanov shows that he won by a score of 5-1. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.35.84.36 (talk) 17:19, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

question

Why is there an asterisk on Fedor´s lost? --Vik.sanchez (talk) 14:57, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

People have been trying to turn that loss into an NC for some time. My guess someone went the subtle route and threw in the asterisk, and it's gone unnoticed. IMHO it should go.--Cube lurker (talk) 16:11, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

haha thanks --Vik.sanchez (talk) 13:20, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

its safe to say that fedor is virtually undefeated. he really didnt lose that fight but because of the tournament format, he technically lost. i agree that the asterisk should go. anyone who reads the article understands why its a loss.-ski

How on earth can you say "he technically lost." it's the exact opposite of that. Technically he didn't lose. How many times does it need to be laid out for people like you? It was an illegal elbow under the rules. So if it was an illegal elbow and not let's say a perfectly legal punch then yes he would have technically lost BUT that is not the case. The illegal elbow should be treated no different than let's say and illegal head butt. In Fedor's fight with Antonio it was ruled a no contest because of a cut caused by a head butt. How is that any different? I just don't get it. Someone tried to say that it wasn't an illegal elbow because it was an accident but hey I got news for you. The head butt that ended the Antonio fight was also an accident. So there you have it. The exact same set of circumstances yet two different outcomes. Makes absolutely no sense what so ever to me. You cannot win a fight VIA an illegal strike and you cannot lose a fight VIA an illegal strike. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.132.0.255 (talk) 04:55, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

It's a loss. Deal with it. If the tournament rules count it as a loss its a loss. The strike was caused by Fedor's actions so because he can't continue he loses. There is nothing in this entire article about how Fedor hasn't fought a number one contender in 10 years. Nothing whatsoever to suggest the fact that all the "former Champions" he fought were in fact many losses removed from their championships. This article is seriously one-sided and is not the prevlant feeling between all publications. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.103.75.30 (talk) 17:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Well IMHO the asterisk should be there. You said youself 'if you read the article.' According to the article it should not count as a loss, the only reason it's a loss in the first place is because it was a tournament and in a tournament there has to be a winner, hence the asterisk. How about you make the article say "tournament loss / no contest under MMA rules" or something like that. That way all the people who claim it is still technically loss are still technically right and all the people who know it is technically a No Contest won't have to be etarnally ostracized by a flagrantly illconcieved wikipedia entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.132.0.255 (talk) 22:13, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

i meant to take out technical before loss but oh well. the difference between the nog and kohsaka fight is the kohsaka fight was a tornament format so a winner was needed. yes it was an accidental and illegal elbow, and yes kohsaka won. so YES you can win a fight with an illegal strike.

You do realize that is an oxymoron. "here is you winner via illegal strike" yeah that makes allot of sense. That is a tournament win, there is a difference. Different rules.68.188.201.146 (talk) 20:25, 19 February 2009 (UTC)ski

I think that at the very least it should be included in the notes for the fight that under RINGS rules elbows without elbow pads are not allowed so if it weren't for the tournament format it would go down in the record books as either a no contest or a DQ.

Amateur record and Lazarev-fight

When I checked the reference for his amateur record (http://www.kickboxing.com/Media/Fedor-Emelianenko.html), it seemed very similar to the WP article around February 2006 (for example http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fedor_Emelianenko&oldid=41053638). Do we have any other source for his amateur fights? I removed mention of it for now. Also, Lordvader2009 removed the Lazarev fight from the fight record. I know the fight is on YouTube etc., but do we have a reliable source recognizing it as a professional fight? --aktsu ^(t / c) 19:43, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

NickName "The Baddest Man on the Planet"

"Fedor: The Baddest Man on the Planet" was a documentary on Fedor, and I do not believe it's a common nickname for him so I removed 2008Olympian addition of it. Any disagreements? --aktsu ^(t / c) 04:10, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

• Yeah, I disagree. You removed it once because there was no source, so I provided one. Now, although I have a reliable, verifiable source, you remove it based on your opinion that it is not a common nickname. Jay Glazer and Frank Trigg called him by this nickname on almost every PRIDE highlight show in addition to the show I cited.--2008Olympian^chitchat 05:43, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Saw no mention of it being a nickname of his on that source, only that it was part of the name of a documentary on him. They say "The Last Emperor" when announcing him, so I'd guess that's his "official" nickname notwithstanding what fans and Trigg/Glazer might sometimes refer to him by.--aktsu ^(t / c) 05:46, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

• • Just do a Google search for "Fedor baddest man on the planet nickname -documentary" to see how often it is used without mentioning the documentary, which was named such because it is his nickname: [1].--2008Olympian^chitchat 06:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Look, I've provided a reference for it from a reliable source. And look at Dan Henderson's article. He has more than one nickname listed. And I am now the second editor to have added that nickname, whereas you are the only one to have removed it, so it should stay until there is consensus to remove it.--2008Olympian^chitchat 06:19, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

• Uhm, so because some people think he's the baddest man on the planet (not that I don't agree, but hey) and find it funny to add it to his article - that makes it so? Should we list "The Running Joke" to nicknames of Kalib Starnes as well because that's what some "fans" call him? Didn't see much more than lots of talking about whether he's the baddest man on the planet or not with that search. Do you have a RS for it being one of the nicknames he goes by? No? OK, then shouldn't it be case closed unless something turns up? When it comes to Hendo, yeah he's got more than one nickname, and there's reliable sources for them being nicknames he goes by, so why would I have a problem with that? (Sidenote, someone apparently added "Decision" as in "Decision Dan" - not one of his adopted nicknames so I'll go ahead and remove that now). --aktsu ^(t / c) 06:41, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't get it. There is a reference cited in the article for an entire hour-long documentary that calls him that nickname. He was referred to by that nickname, and it was used in graphics for him, on the PRIDE highlight shows. If I could also get a source for those broadcasts, I would, but they don't play anymore. It was not just "some" fans, but the official media outlet for the PRIDE organization.--2008Olympian^chitchat 06:57, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Meh, you know, when I think about it; never mind me... It might as well stay. If I'm not mistaken, the documentary is "official" in that it's produced by M-1 Global (who's representing Fedor). I was probably just unnecessarily anal about it since I'm tired, but I've honestly never heard him referred to by that before the documentary. So; I agree, the fact that there's a documentary with that name should show it's a proper nickname used about him. --aktsu ^(t / c) 07:16, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

he has also been called the russian experiment and even cyborg(yes i know 2 other fighters also share the name cyborg). you can find it all over google and i've heard the announcer Mauro call him fedor 'the russian experiment' emelianenko on one of his early pride fights. i know these nicknames are rarely used anymore but does anyone think its worth noting? if you want sources and can dig them up sometime soon. 68.188.201.146 (talk) 20:57, 20 February 2009 (UTC)sk!

found a source on fedors myspace about the other nicknames. http://www.myspace.com/czarfedor "Fedor Emelianenko should need no introduction. He's the last emperor, the Russian experiment, the cyborg, and the baddest man on the planet." if anyone thinks its worth mentioning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.86.187.95 (talk) 06:41, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello guys. I never touched Fedor's page before but something in me just snapped. I'm sick of seeing stupid, cringe worthy nicknames being shoved up on people's wikis. I've argued about this for footballers (such as Andrei Arshavin), so I think I have a clear understanding. The Baddest Man on the Planet is NOT a NICKNAME. Do you understand English? It is the title for a 1-hour special filmed a week before the Arlovski fight. It is an abortion of a documentary. It was hashed together to attain two goals 1) Get views from the fight hype. 2) Make more hype to increase fight PPV sales

It's a marketing strategy. It is common in the industry. What isn't common is taking a stupidly titled creation and taking the things the narrator says word for word. What is Fedor's nickname? It was originally Mr Pride. That was his first Japanese nickname and definitely the most genuine. For some reason it didn't catch on elsewhere.. good luck finding a source on that one (you probably need to read Japanese). But guess what, Pride couldn't introduce nor discuss the fighter as "Mr. Pride" as it would convey EXTREME favoritism. It's like if we called Golf the Tiger Woods Championship. Not very sporting. That is why they created the generic "Last Emperor" alias for him. FINE. It's not the greatest, but he doesn't seem to care, it's not like nicknames are something you choose yourself. But, no one, absolutely NO ONE, not an announcer, not a commentator, not an editor (who knows SOMETHING about MMA), nor any of this friends or fellow fighters, would call him The Baddest Man on the Planet. It doesn't matter if he is or isn't, that simply is NOT a nickname. Look in the dictionary if you need help comprehending basic logic. It's fine to have the Fox Sports production mentioned in the text, but quite another to have it represent his identity. -Thanks for understanding, and sorry if I sound like a jerk. If you dis-agree please discuss.--Nothingnowhere (talk) 08:48, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely right, Baddest Man blblah has NEVER been his nickname. He was sometimes introduced as "The Russian Military Experiment" however, because he never shows feelings or so... The "baddest man"-BS ist just to promote him in the States, because for some reason they think ppl react on that. The "Mr. Pride" thing is also right, but I never saw it written in English btw, only in Japanese —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.82.71.144 (talk) 08:52, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

I aslo agree it not a nickname no matter how many reliable source you have of people using that name it not a a nickname. The Baddest Man is not something that is use to indentify him. A nickname is went you use a word or a series of word that will identify him. And altought it was used by somme commentator... it was not used inuff to be called a nickname.

Record is 30-1

Q: Fedor, some websites say that in 2001 you fought with Martin Lazarev in an MMA match at the RINGS Russia vs. Bulgaria II show. More established sited do not have that fight. Did it really happen?
A: I did "fight" with Martin Lazarev, but that was in 2000. I won via a choke.

I will change his record soon if nobody does it. Rings is not amateur.Randy Couture and Overeem and others fought in Rings.

http://www.411mania.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=5724255&Main=5724211

братух я сам с старого болею за тебя крепча —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.179.60.158 (talk) 01:34, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

 DoneI added the fight with Martin Lazarov Here is video of the fight - http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xhobr_rare-video-fedor-vs-martin-lazarov_extreme

Peer review results

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• This article may need to undergo summary style, where a series of appropriate subpages are used. For example, if the article is United States, then an appropriate subpage would be History of the United States, such that a summary of the subpage exists on the mother article, while the subpage goes into more detail.^[?]

 Done - Most of the length is caused by the MMA record box, I think.--2008Olympian^chitchat 08:28, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

• The script has spotted the following contractions: don't, didn't, wasn't, couldn't, wouldn't, don't, wasn't, wasn't, wasn't, won't, if these are outside of quotations, they should be expanded.

 Done They are only in quotes.--2008Olympian^chitchat 08:28, 18 February 2009 (UTC) You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, 2008Olympian^chitchat 08:28, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

locked again?

why is this page locked AGAIN? everything was fine then someone locked it. i complained and finally someone unlocked it, and now its locked again. wtf?68.188.201.146 (talk) 20:00, 19 February 2009 (UTC)ski

Because people kept vandalizing it. It'll be unlocked in two days, but I wouldn't count on it staying unprotected long. You're welcome to create and account so that you're not affected by the semi-protection. --aktsu ^(t / c) 20:24, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

--No kidding, how hard is it to create an account?--2008Olympian^chitchat 04:49, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

understandable, i guess since fedor is more known now in the states, vandalism will rise. thanks. 2008olympion, how hard is it to 'be polite, assume good faith, and be welcoming'? sure is easier than creating an account. 68.188.201.146 (talk) 20:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)sk!

How was I impolite? And I know that I didn't assume bad faith by anyone; we're not even talking about any edits. And every welcome template suggests to open an account. I simply fail to understand why anyone would express frustration with being blocked when to become unblocked all one has to do is open an account.--2008Olympian^chitchat 04:12, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Seriously. In the time spent coming up with rebuttals, he could have registered and account and be done with his issue.--Lvivske (talk) 04:22, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

because it did not seem polite or very welcoming to say 'no kidding how hard is it to create an account'. not only that but i thought your comment was unnecessary since the previous poster already stated to create an account. and (s)he stated it in a much more polite and welcoming way. also i already have had an account for some time now so their was not even an issue with that. i did not know that having an account would get around semi protection. thank you anyway though and i apologize if i seemed confrontational and for being inexperienced user in the wikipedia community. best wishes 68.188.201.146 (talk) 23:28, 23 February 2009 (UTC)ski

fujita fight still incorrect

the fujita fight is still incorrect. "Emelianenko was expected to make quick work of Fujita, but was caught by a wild right hook that stunned him—Emelianenko has claimed this is the only time he has ever been knocked down." i dont know if this was maybe a mistranslation or what but the punch did NOT knock fedor down, it only stunned him. AFTER the punch fujita was able to secure a takedown. wouldnt it be more proper to say that fedor was taken down? cause the punch didnt knock him down.68.188.201.146 (talk) 20:00, 19 February 2009 (UTC)ski

I just read the source for the claim (here), and the confusion seem to stem from the fact that Fedor refers to "almost being knocked out" as a knockdown in the interview. Something was probably lost in translation. I have in any case removed the claim as it's not actually clear he's talking about the Fujita-fight, only that it happened "once". --aktsu ^(t / c) 20:24, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Pictures/ Dead links

There were lots of deadlinks that had to be erased within the article, so i did it myself. The article could also use more pictures of some of fedor's fights. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.176.148.19 (talk) 23:16, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but I reverted :\ The dead links needs to be replaced not deleted and by removing them it's harder to know what's unsourced. Also, the videos of the fights on Youtube are violating Zuffa's copyright so we can't link to them (see WP:LINKVIO) and a mention of "notable wins" in the lead was decided against on WT:MMA.

Adding some pictures would be a good idea though, we can probably away with a few fair-use images of his fights. Any suggestions? --aktsu ^(t / c) 00:35, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

fedor never lost

the cut by which the fight was ended, was made due to an elbow, which was illegal in the competition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.212.98.190 (talk) 10:01, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

fedor is virtually undefeated but when they announce him before his fights they count it as a loss. we all know it isnt really fair for fedor and probably should have been ruled a no contest since it was accidental. but the media seems to just stand by rings ruling. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.86.187.95 (talk) 06:34, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Well it actually was fair Fedor had a huge gash on his forehead and more then likly shouldent of even been aloud to enter that fight but he did and he couldent continue and the japanese fighter involved didnt actually aim to do that (it was a missed punch which do happen in all forms of striking) and never recieved any previous warning for misconduct so what are you proposing giving fedor a win when the other person involved didnt actually do anything wrong either? Rings called it and recorded it and more intresting is that fedors fans he has aquired over the years are kicking up a stink about a long time after the fact when Fedor never even contested it when it was current.

Fedor lost and he took it like a man. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.223.197.111 (talk) 18:22, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry you don't have your facts straight. The stoppage was caused by an Illegal elbow strike early in the first round. Whether it was intentional or not does not matter as it was an Illegal strike. Under normal rules the fight would be ruled a NO Contest but because it was under tournament rules the person who threw the Illegal strike advanced because Fedor could not continue because of the injury he sustained from an Illegal strike. Did I mention that the strike was against the rules? Anyway, Fedor easily dispatched the no name opponent in a later fight. Please do some research before you start spouting off nonsense. Thanks. 173.73.6.197 (talk) 02:02, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

My facts actually are straight look at the fight (its on youtube) the swing was for a hook fedor bobbed and got hit by an elbow opening the existing injury. It actually does matter if the blow was unintentional you cannot DQ a person for one accidental blow that is even more unfair then you going up in arms about his loss.

It wouldent of been ruled as such even in a normal fight riding the tournament bandwagon is not going to help you as I already mentuioned in the same tournament fedor ALREADY had a gash above his fore head only the elbow opened it up & there is a really big chance it would of been opened by anything more then being breathed on. IN a normal fight he wouldent of been medically cleared to fight in the first place! This initial injury was caused in a fully legit fight too btw.

Ok research So my refering with ISKA & shooto as well as actually watcching the fight in queastion is not research enough? ok then how about my father being involved in rings australia (re working with Chris Hasman the man who established sanctioning under the rulebody that fight was conducted under?)

Might I add there was no complaint from either camp after the fight only complaints have been from people who usually act condescending (sound familar?) when soemone doesnt give the same answer they did......

Preahps you should follow your own advice before actually going off on a tangent? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.176.40.18 (talk) 16:05, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

i never proposed anything. i just think think rings should have ruled it a no contest. no one including me really cares though, any fedor fan knows the situation and that he is virtually undefeated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.86.187.95 (talk) 14:14, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

We don't want the result changed, we just want an Asterisks next to it to guide people towards a paragraph detailing the circumstances of the result. The Muss (talk) 14:49, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

^^^^^ could some body please do that. The asteriks should be there, It should be a link that takes you up to the paragraph in the article. It's not hard to do that. Oh, and it's not "handing fedor a win" it's just pointing out the circumstances of the situation more clearly. Illegal strikes are illegal weather they are done on purpose or not. Saying "he didn't try to do that" does not make it legal. It will still be listed as a loss. It won't be changed to a No Contest or a Win it will just have a link next to it so you can read why it says what it says. What on earth would be so horrible about that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.132.0.255 (talk) 10:28, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Change made. Apostrophe added. If unclear, change it so the whole word "Loss" is linked. 82.2.21.177 (talk) 09:40, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

An asterisk is, at best, innacurate and at worst revisionist. I reverted it and will continue to do so until I see some precedent for its use. The official result of the fight is "Loss" not "Loss*". The circumstances of the fight and its result are detailed in the article for anyone to read. Linking from or referencing to the result would probably be appropriate within the record table. BenTrotsky (talk) 06:24, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Question for Ben Trotsky or other moderators: OK so no * I get that. But what if you made the word "loss" link to the paragraph in the article. No * just make the word "loss" clickable. Would that be OK. Or would that be inappropriate as well? I'm just asking.

Huge thank you to who ever dug up that Kohsaka quote. We did it! .....who deleted the Kohsaka quote?

Hey WTF!! Who deleted the quote from Tsuyoshi Kohsaka? You jerk, put it back. WTF!!

Why on earth was the Tsuyoshi Kohsaka quote deleted from the page? Why hasn't it been put back? What's the story here? This is ridiculous.

Ok people whats the deal!? who's always returning it back to LOSS!?!?!? I mean we all concluded and even global MMA rules have proved that such match cannot be a loss and that it is proclaimed NO CONTEST, but someone is still returning it back to LOSS!? Is there really so much haters of Fedor here on wiki?! I mean seriously, please someone take care of this vandalism.--VEGETA_DTX (talk) 19:27, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

The bottom line is his official record includes 1 loss. This is verified by relaible sources. On his record he has to be shown with that official record. It's also true that the loss is very controversial. Therefore within the text of the article includes an explanation of what happened within that fight. Setting his record to the official number is not vandalism, but making sure the article meets policy.--Cube lurker (talk) 19:58, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Who took out the Tsuyoshi Kohsaka quote? How is that not vandalism.?

Can't we have a mention of legality of the elbow in the notes for the fight? If no then why the 'F' not? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.132.0.255 (talk) 17:45, 30 June 2009 (UTC) Who knows what's going on here. Obviously some one on here hates Fedor and they keep vandalizing this thing to make it look like his loss was legit when it was an illegal strike.

Man vs. Beast

That latest 'victory' where it has Fedor beating a brown bear into submission is highly questionable. I went looking all over the Internet trying to find evidence that this took place. I did not find it. Certainly it would be newsworthy. If it's valid, it needs a reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wordsworm (talk • contribs) 18:33, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

i'd just delete it next time if you havent already.

Are you dumb or wat it a joke it like saying that his that good but he would never be able to beat a brown bear, brown bear weight 3 times his weight and have hugh claws... —Preceding unsigned comment added by GSP-Rush (talk • contribs) 20:50, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

^ I wouldn't call anybody dumb if I were you... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.34.204.220 (talk) 00:33, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

"Russian heavyweight mixed martial arts fighter"

I was just wondering if the quoted sentence is the correct way to identify Emelianenko, as its a little ambiguous. Would "Russian heavyweight mixed martial arts fighter" mean that he is a heavyweight MMA fighter in a Russian division, or that he himself is a Russian MMA fighter (which would be incorrect considering him being born in the Ukraine)? Also later on there is another statement that should be made clearer; the article states that "Fedor had the honour of being one of 80 Russian sporting champions..." but it doesn't really make clear if it means him being an ethnically Russian sporting champion or someone who competes in Russian sporting events. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.236.233.126 (talk) 18:02, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

That would not be incorrect or ambiguous at all. "Russian heavyweight mixed martial arts fighter" would mean he is both in a Russian division (obviously) AND himself is a Russian MMA fighter. Consider the English word Russian. It's definition: a national of the country, anything pertaining to Russia, or an ethnic group. Fedor lives in Russia, hold's Russian citizenship, and eagerly represents Russia in sporting events, making him about as Russian as you can get. Regardless of what his ethnicity may or may not be, he considers himself Russian and that's what this biography correctly identifies him as. Ethnicity is never stressed on Wikipedia because it breeds exactly what I see here, nationalism. We don't emphasize Fedor's (or usually anyone's) ethnic background in biographies as per WP:BIO, and further, we'd have no way to cite it. For the record, my understanding is that he has a Ukrainian father and a Russian mother. --Eightofnine (talk) 17:57, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Mistype of the name Finkelstein

Name of Finkelstein is mistyped ones as Finklestein. Please correct.
Askender (talk) 09:23, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

 Done --aktsu ^(t / c) 15:54, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

fix the affliction section

^^^ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.222.91.253 (talk) 19:39, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

On it. --aktsu ^(t / c) 20:06, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Fedor signs with UFC

The LA Times is reporting that Fedor will sign with the UFC on Friday. Should we edit the article now, or wait for official confirmation? Icestryke (talk) 12:07, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Other outlets are reporting the signing is not finalized (see "M-1 disputes LA Times report", "Conflicting reports on UFC-Fedor negotiations" and "Will Fedor join the UFC? Who knows"), so we should definitely hold on until there's an official confirmation. --aktsu ^(t / c) 12:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi guys.

Fedor's management has specifically said they are not signing with the UFC. No announcement was ever made on Dana's twitter or anywhere. You guys have a factually incorrect article here. A quick Google search will do, seriously. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.199.148.204 (talk) 05:47, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

• Are there any sources for the information that is already posted regarding the Fedor-UFC deal?

This should probably be deleted. As of early August, Fedor has signed a 3 fight deal with Strikeforce (to be co-promoted with M-1 Global). He is fighting Brett Rogers this fall in his first fight for Strikeforce. the link to the article is listed below:

http://mmaweekly.com/absolutenm/templates/dailynews.asp?articleid=9277&zoneid=4

Fedor Refuses to Sign with UFC

According to the UFC and Yahoo! Sports, Fedor was offered: - $30 million for 6 fights - Immediate title shot - freedom to Sambo as often as he wants

The sticking point was that his management wants a 50-50 Pay-Per-View split and to be co-promoters. Neither party will budge on that point, so there's no deal. Links:

- http://sports.yahoo.com/mma/blog/cagewriter/post/UFC-presser-White-explodes-over-Fedor-negotiati?urn=mma,180154

- http://uk.ufc.com/index.cfm?fa=VideoPlayer.home&gid=21535 (Dana White press conference)

Someone should update the article explaining why he's not signed with UFC from a NPOV. Ikilled007 (talk) 17:17, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

• Bear in mind that M1 disputes the proposal: "It is M-1's preference not to negotiate in public and we are unsure why people claim that Fedor and M-1 turned down a six-fight, (US)$30-million contract to fight in the UFC when no such offer was ever made."--Львівське (talk) 18:17, 1 August 2009 (UTC)