Talk:Conor McGregor

John Conor McGregor

Is there any sources for this being his birth name? Murry1975 (talk) 18:19, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Keep up Luckylunyo (talk) 12:13, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

"Keep up"...? Pointless response! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.144.68.71 (talk) 00:41, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Belt

How can one have a BJJ black belt and then be mentioned later having a brown belt only... so which is it? 108.168.108.221 (talk) 03:49, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

British?

According to the BBC McGregor is British, from the "United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland" (http://media.balls.ie/uploads/2015/07/12200708/bbc1a.jpg). Will we change it now that we have a "reliable source"? We can change it back to Irish when he loses a fight as I'm sure the BBC will give us a reference for that then. 188.141.10.11 (talk) 18:35, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

• I don't think we should post it. BBC's report has not been received positively. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 18:55, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

I see a bunch of bemused/amused tweets responding to an obvious error. [3] - they have not repeated it! --86.135.159.252 (talk) 11:33, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 July 2015

Change McGregor not a professional boxer (http://www.express.co.uk/sport/boxing/845838/McGregor-Mayweather-joke-boxing-Las-Vegas-50 ).

Change McGregor rank from #3 to #1 (updated on UFC ranking). Mtran76914 (talk) 21:13, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Done by Eoinmurray91. Stickee (talk) 00:56, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

_________________

This article should include a segment on McGregor's critics regarding two points of contention:

1. Critics contend that Conor McGregor is/was protected from facing higher caliber fighters in the run up to the title fight with Aldo. This criticism was amplified after McGregor was booked to face Dennis Siver, but it has been somewhat tempered by his match with Chad Mendes, who was the most recent title contender, and has a reputation as a fighter of respectable skill.

2. Critics, most notably Wanderlei Silva, contend that Conor McGregor's fights show evidence of match fixing. Critics point to his opponents' seemingly inexplicable errors and lapses in judgment, coupled with quick referee stoppages and circumstantial evidence of the UFC's financial interest in the outcomes of McGregor's fights. Critics point to three of McGregor's fights in particular: Brandao, Poirier, and Mendes.

Replays of the Brandao fight show Brandao abruptly refusing to engage offensively, back fuck off ing up with his hands down, then falling down in a prone position. In the finishing sequence, Brandao can be seen blocking nearly all of McGregor's punches with his exposed palms, but not attempting to stand or otherwise defend himself.

Replays of the Poirier fight show Poirier falling to his knees after McGregor missed with a punch. As in the Brandao fight, Poirier seemed to abruptly cease meaningful offense and defense. After Poirier fell to his knees, all but two of McGregor's follow up punches can be seen to clearly miss the face of Poirier.

In his fight with Chad Mendes, a clearly slower McGregor was on the receiving end of striking exchanges for a majority of the fight, and was taken down on multiple occasions. In several instances, Mendes appeared to have a fight-ending position (e.g. McGregor's arms pinned and face exposed), only to relinquish the positions voluntarily. Despite not having cardiovascular issues in previous fights, Mendes appeared to feign exhaustion after the first round. In the final sequence, Mendes relinquished a guillotine submission attempt and let McGregor stand up, and thereafter stood with his hands down until McGregor landed a combination of punches. referee Herb Dean, who has also faced criticism for his officiating of the fight, stopped the fight almost immediately.

The UFC has not addressed these critics specifically, but has previously denied all allegations of match fixing.

Guest User 01 (talk) 02:08, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

References

If you're serious (and you typed enough to make me think you are), most of that is unusable synthesis. You'd need reputable critics to analyze these fights and come to the same conclusions, not just point to fight coverage and then to a bunch of nuts on Twitter. Even if they aren't as nutty as the Bleacher Report article makes them out to be, they're still just riff-raff. Everyone has opinions.

In my opinion, what happened to those poor boys was what happens to many fighters who realize they're outmatched while also getting hit very hard and mocked: they crumble. Break. Give up. Whatever you want to call it. McGregor just says that's what'll happen, loudly, before he does it, so it gets more attention than when the polite, quiet sort do it. You ever really look at a Demian Maia opponent's eyes after 12 minutes of helplessness? Same deal, just slower.

Wanderlei's complaint might be notable, though. He's something of an expert. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:11, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

I dont think Wand is what Wikipedia would consider a reliable source :D There would be POV issues due to his ban by Nevada Comission and his legal action against them and the UFC Dimspace (talk) 21:57, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

I find it hard to believe you are serious. Unfortunately wikipedia is not a source for Reddit-esq debate, it is for encyclopedic, factual information, not gossip. Also, you reference all of your outlandish claims, but not a single source has even an iota of reference to what you are talking about.

LeinsterLad (talk) 21:45, 05 December 2015 (UTC)

The fact of the matter is McGregor has crumbled the uncrumblable and Demian Maia's opponent's eyes showed emotion for the first time. It sure wasn't joy. And it sure wasn't predetermined. By bookers, anyway. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:37, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Style shouldn't include BJJ

Per the norm with MMA fighters, style should indicate his general preference, not just disciplines he has learned. Otherwise, Royce Gracie should have Muay Thai listed as well, for example. --140.32.16.52 (talk) 04:44, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Someone screwed up this mma records page, please fix

This article made the Top 25 Report

This article was the fourth most popular on Wikipedia according to the Top 25 Report with 1,139,804 views for the week December 13 to 19, 2015. McGregor became the became the UFC featherweight champion December 12. Congratulations to the editors of this article for the exposure of their work.  SchreiberBike | ⌨  18:02, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

That week, this also became the first MMA article featured "In The News" on Wikipedia's main page. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:10, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Aldo Fight KO

The McGregor Aldo fight at UFC 196 was called via knockout not TKO. It's listed as a KO (Punch) at sherdog.com and Bruce Buffer called it as being a knockout on the night. It should be changed. Marz8ar (talk) 16:23, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

As source was added at the bottom of the table, two actually, one for Aldo and Mendes. Aldos from the "STATE OF NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY ATHLETIC COMMISSION" as is on the pdf, by TKO. There is a difference in the sources, I would personally call it a KO, the State Commission call it a TKO, I dont know why. Murry1975 (talk) 16:51, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

The source given, claiming that it was a TKO, also erroneously lists Anderson vs Weidman 1 as a TKO, to give one example. http://boxing.nv.gov/uploadedFiles/boxingnvgov/content/results/MMA/2013/07-06-13MMA.pdf Whoever is changing the result to TKO, please stop removing factual content. Let's not be emotional about this. NerdNinja9 (talk) 00:56, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Cites moved inline. , "erroneously"? It is the actual fight regulator. Murry1975 (talk) 16:36, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

But it's not infallible, and not an independent, secondary source. That's what Wikipedia prefers. And of course, the video is quite clear. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:08, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

They are the sanctioning committee. What they declare is the official record. Any disputes with the record need to be taken to the athletic commission. Anybody else's opinion is ultimately irrelevant. It's akin to changing a fighters record because you don't like a judges decision. The sanctioning commission is the only relevant record. Frankie edgar 32 (talk) 21:54, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

They're a sanctioning committee, responsible for fighters and promoters in Nevada. Wikipedia is a global encyclopedia, with its own rules and regulations. In our world, they're just a primary source making an exceptional claim, contrary to global mainstream sources and all of our own eyes. So we either find exceptional sources for the claim, or we disregard it. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:34, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 6 March 2016

Conor McGregor's win against Jose Aldo was a KO, not a TKO, as visible on Sherdog.com

99.229.246.18 (talk) 01:36, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

See the section above which discusses this issue EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 04:22, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

The NSAC (the athletic commission that sanction the fight) recorded the win as a TKO. This is the official record. Sherdog is mistaken. Frankie edgar 32 (talk) 22:56, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Nate Diaz fight

"he was taken down several times"? Diaz never took him down and never attempted to. McGregor tried to take himm down after getting rocked,but Diaz sprawled and went on top. Please correct that.--93.57.255.136 (talk) 20:17, 6 March 2016 (UTC) 7

It says that McGregor was a -300 underdog. The source clearly says he was a -400 favourite. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.207.218.180 (talk) 16:06, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Retirement rumours

A single tweet that its fairly vague is not a verifiable source as far as "McGregor has retired" goes. If something official comes from the camp or the UFC then yes, but random tweets are not wikipedia sources. If we use that logic, CM Punk, Nate Diaz, and various others have also confirmed their retirements on twitter today Dimspace (talk) 20:46, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

"I have decided to retire young", is not "I have retired", agree until something concert comes out we should be, well, encyclopedic. Just sayin'.... Murry1975 (talk) 20:57, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Agree. I have added a line saying that he sparked rumours of retirement but nothing confirmed. Hopefully seeing that will dissuade people from repeated editing Dimspace (talk) 21:02, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

• Looks like there is confirmation that his next fight has been cancelled, only his own word that he's retired now though. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:18, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

This is definitely still too much up in the air. We're in no hurry as we are not a news source. We can wait for something definitive from him or as the stories begin piling up on the news sites and there still isn't official word from him then I guess we can mention it. But for now it feels too much like original research to assume anything from that text. SQGibbon (talk) 00:24, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

I think the way we have it at the moment is fine, at the very least we want to be careful not to convey inaccurate information by stating that he's going fight Diaz in July. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:41, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

We mentioned that the fight has been cancelled as that announcement was an official. The retirement one still feels way too much like speculation and giving too much credence to a vague tweet. It doesn't feel encylcopedic to even mention it at this stage. But I'm not going to press the point. The whole thing will probably be clarified in a day or two. SQGibbon (talk) 00:51, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

As it stands is perfect. States the fight with Diaz is off, which has been officially announced, but anything beyond that is speculative. Looks good as it is until something actually happens officially Dimspace (talk) 16:53, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Well since there has been many speculation about this I've decided to share what I've gathered

Conor McGregor refused to promote UFC 200 this weekend in Las Vegas, according to Dana White, which caused Dana to cancel the McGregor/Diaz fight at 200. I'm assuming that's what triggered McGregor's retirement. Seems to be him being frustrated at the UFC and Dana White, especially, and decided to retire because he knows what a big blow that'd be. -Zach(MMA Fighter) Jose13Noh (talk) 23:08, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Conor announced on facebook just this morning that he is not retiring yet, and very heavily implied it was nothing but a publicity stunt. A metal shard (talk) 16:14, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Aye, multiple sources are on it, Wikipedia is not. Seems he did break the Internet, because I can't add them. BBC has him in their football section. Just thought I'd point that out. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:42, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a news outlet. The article can only be edited by admins until tomorrow, due to page protection caused by the heavy editing on his "retirement". Murry1975 (talk) 18:31, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 April 2016

Conor McGregor announced his retirement on April 19, 2016 in a twitter post.

204.186.238.206 (talk) 20:48, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Not done for now: It's being discussed above. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:18, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

References

The truth about why wasn't Conor facing the UFC 200?

A supporters opinion. http://ufc.create.it/entry/zuffa-llc-fight-pass-fanatic-promotion-roy-dg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joej161 (talk • contribs) 07:10, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 July 2016

Reubenhealy96 (talk) 03:20, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Not done: Misplaced request. Wikipedia:Requested articles is the appropriate venue to request an article. — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:10, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 August 2016

212.235.180.90 (talk) 16:58, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Please, correct the article, mr. Conor McGregor has fight today and the fight isn't shown as future fight with Nate Diaz. plzTHANKu

Not done: as you have not requested a specific change in the form "Please replace XX with YY" or "Please add ZZ between PP and QQ".
You must also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 17:47, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Submission grappling record

Mcgregor fought on the 2012 IBJJF European Open No Gi Championship, Middleweight (—82.8kg/181lbs) purple division. He lost by points 2-0, in the openning round againt Kywan Gracie Behring.

If someone can add this, the video is on youtube, I noticed other fighters have these records so why not Conor? Cheers Sasukept (talk) 18:17, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 August 2016

Conor McGregor -- should be Connor McGregor 2602:306:8343:E980:3C12:9468:9110:73E3 (talk) 23:07, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Consider a requested move if there's consensus. i.e. {{subst:Requested move}} — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 23:39, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 August 2016

89.101.250.169 (talk) 09:55, 24 August 2016 (UTC) Last official weight is 168 not 170.

Not done: as you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 10:38, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 August 2016

Please change birthplace. He was not born and is not from UK. 83.110.98.141 (talk) 18:52, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. KGirlTrucker81 ^{talk what I'm been doing} 19:28, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Done. KGirlTrucker81. Sorry to disagree but I don't think a source is required to state that Dublin, the capital of the Republic of Ireland, is not in the United Kingdom. It was added earlier today. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 20:08, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

@CambridgeBayWeather: Oh, I thought was a source required to do it. :/ KGirlTrucker81 ^{talk what I'm been doing} 20:24, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Normally yes but this had several problems. It was added about an hour ago and was unsourced. A source would be required to prove a negative and it is the "water is wet" sort of statement. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 20:36, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 August 2016

Conor was actually born on the 12th of July

Source - Play at 2:49 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRYGi0ucorg

203.173.137.212 (talk) 20:31, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. KGirlTrucker81 ^{talk what I'm been doing} 20:37, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 October 2016

Why does his weight say 170lb? It says Weight not Weight class. His last weigh in was 168lb. On fight night, they announce his height as 5'9 and weight 168lb.

89.101.250.169 (talk) 18:50, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Topher385 (talk) 01:07, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 November 2016

According to his ufc.com fighter profile, his current weight is 145lb. Please change his weight from 170lb to 145lb. 141.170.25.116 (talk) 13:20, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Done. His weight has been updated within the article per the existing reference. Thank you for your request. — ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 15:07, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

ITN Potential?

Hello guys. What do you guys think of nominating McGregor's recent victory to ITN? He made history tonight. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 06:40, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Definitely. His victory at UFC 194 was featured in that section. This was a greater win, and it occurred in the main event of the biggest MMA event in history. LlamaAl (talk) 08:10, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Nominated. LlamaAl (talk) 08:18, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

InedibleHulk, you have experience in this, maybe you could help by editing the blurb (English is not my mother tongue). LlamaAl (talk) 20:27, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Personal Life

He has two sisters, Erin and Aoife .Niamh. (talk) 18:35, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Done I treated your comment as an edit request & corrected the information in the personal life section regarding his siblings. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 23:57, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Conor McGregor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140129015243/http://mmainsider.net/13967/mmainsiders-2013-annual-awards-the-results to http://mmainsider.net/13967/mmainsiders-2013-annual-awards-the-results

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:22, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 December 2016

Personal life: Conor and his girlfriend Dee Devlin are now expecting their first baby in May 2017. It is expected that Conor will take an extended leave from MMA because of the pregnancy. Robkeane89 (talk) 16:23, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

 Not done Can you please provide a reliable source to support your claim? regards, DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 16:33, 10 December 2016 (UTC).

Connor McGregor's Opinions on Free Trade, Global Warming, Gay Marriage and Deficit Spending

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Bottom line, the inclusion of McGregor's opinions on gay marriage are irrelevant. Whether or not it has a credible source doesn't change the fact that it utterly fails to live up to the guidelines set out on wp:trivia. If McGregor was a longstanding and proactive LGBT advocate and it was actually a relevant component to his life, then maybe it might be a worthwhile addition but making a passing comment on a social issue is absolutely not worthy of inclusion. The problem with allowing this sort of thing to persist (and has been argued in detail on other articles) is that biographies of living persons then devolve into issue-signaling devices, where ideologues who fall on either side of some social or political issue are quick to enrich articles with agenda driven 'content' that is otherwise irrelevant to the individual in question but serves to further their desire to prove that someone famous agrees with them. This doesn't even begin to withstand wp:trivia, it has been reverted and I'd encourage mediation. If the standard is that this sort of thing *IS* acceptable, then beware; you're opening a huge can of worms. FactsAndHonesty (talk) 17:46, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

It seems to be reliably sourced and it has been in the article for many months. There is no question of a BLP issue with the content, so repeatedly removing this without consensus on the talk page to do so is edit warring. Per WP:BRD this should have been discussed on the talk page before removing it the second time. let alone the third time, and the content should remain n the article while consensus is being reached. I will restore it pending the outcome of this discussion.

The edit summary with FactsAndHonesty's initial removal [4] mentioned WP:NOTABILITY and minor trivia as reasons for deleting it. WP:NOTABILITY only deals with whether topics are notable enough to warrant an article, and explicitly states that it does not apply to article content. See WP:NOTEWORTHY.

As for the suggestion that WP:TRIVIA requires that this material be removed, the guideline deals with lists of miscellaneous trivia, which is not what we are dealing with. It is a public statement by a notable person on a contentious issue. I don't believe the information is trivia at all, but it certainly is not the "list of miscellaneous information" that the guideline applies to. As with WP:NOTABILITY, this guideline seems to have been misunderstood. It explicitly states that it does not apply to article content: This guideline does not suggest the inclusion or exclusion of any information; it only gives style recommendations. Issues of inclusion are addressed by content policies.

The suggestion that Mediation be used to resolve this is extremely premature. There has been no talk page discussion (let alone the "extensive talk page discussion" required before any formal dispute resolution. Meters (talk) 21:53, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

My initially citing WP:Notability was in error- I was thinking WP:Undue- but lets not go down the turgid road of arguing semantics and punctuation over actual substance. The brave, new standard you're proposing we accept for this article is not realistic, lest any comment anyone ever makes via any reliable source be considered magically worthy of inclusion into their article. So pick WP:Undue or WP:Trivia, plain reading of their intent, a passing comment Connor McGregor made on gay marriage is absolutely not noteworthy enough for inclusion. You can make whatever tortured interpretations and narratives you wish but I rest my case on the blindingly obvious, plain reading of WP:Trivia and WP:Undue, which speak directly to adding things like passing quotes on social issues for which the party in question is otherwise not a relevant player. I really don't see how we escape mediation on this, as there is no 'middle ground' on the inclusion of trivia or giving undue weight to a passing quote OTHER than to delete it, which is what you're trying to rationalize against doing. FactsAndHonesty (talk) 02:49, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

@FactsAndHonesty: it seems you have misinterpreted BRD. You were bold in removing the content, and yes bold includes removal of content not just additions or alterations (see how to proceed), then @AffeL: reverted. You correctly started this discussion, but only after you removed the content again & then a third time incorrectly accusing @Meters: of violating policy when it was in fact you who violated policy. Therefore the content should remain until a consensus is reached. As for the permanent inclusion of the content, I'm unfortunately somewhat on the fence. However, I've notified the relevant WikiProjects so hopefully there will be a little more input & a clear consensus can be reached. If edit warring persists, I will request full page protection, then warn & ultimately report flouting users. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 00:11, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

It's WP:UNDUE, whether it's sourced or not. As you say, if he were really known for being an activist for an issue the way Ronda is known for body image stuff I might think there's reason for inclusion. That's not the case, so it doesn't belong. Chris Troutman (talk) 00:17, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

I personally don't care whether this is in the article or not, but I still have not seen a valid justification for removing it. WP:Notability and WP:Trivia explicitly state that they do not apply to article content. User:FactsAndHonesty can insist all he or she likes that wp:trivia applies, but as the quote above shows, it clearly does not. It is simply not a content policy.

I'm not convinced that WP:UNDUE rules out the inclusion of this information either. How does it apply? Most of wp:undue is concerned with not giving undue weight to minority views in articles, but that is not what we are considering here. We are simply reporting a sourced, public statement made by a notable person. It's not an extraordinary claim or a minority view. It does not "give undue weight to the view of a significant minority, or [to] include that of a tiny minority".it's simply what an article's subject said about a particular topic. We could consider the WP:PROPORTION portion of Undue, but I don't see it as a problem. His country had a referendum on a controversial subject. He made a statement on the subject, and we simply mention what he said. It would be difficult to report this with any less detail or weight than we have done. Is the argument that it should not be included at all because he is a fighter and we should not mention his public opinion about anything that is not fighting related? That line of reasoning would rule out an extraordinary amount of material in other articles about notable people... political affiliations of non-politicians and statements about humanitarian issues by actors, for example. Meters (talk) 03:50, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

The operative point is that it doesn't warrant inclusion at all because it violates WP:Trivia and WP:Undue on its face (irrespective of whatever tortured narratives you wish to create about how otherwise plain policies somehow don't apply in this case). The fact that it is appropriately sourced is not in dispute, you keep reflexively citing that as though it's somehow relevant. It is not. It is indeed credibly sourced but it is trivia at best and absolutely wp:undue by any rational measure. Ultimately, though, since you personally don't care whether it's left in or not, that makes you one neutral vote, one other neutral vote and two against, so far. Lets stay focused on the facts FactsAndHonesty (talk) 03:59, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm not a neutral vote (I have no personal stake in whether it is in the article, but I think it should remain), and this is not a vote in any case. This is a discussion of whether Wikipedia policies and guidelines justify the removal of the material. Refusing to accept that wp:trivia does not apply does help your position. Please provide reasons supported by policy and guidelines why this material should be removed. This is looking like a case of I WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Meters (talk) 04:08, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

I've struck the mention of Free Trade, Global Warming, and Deficit Spending from this thread's header. There is no mention of these topics in the material being discussed. Meters (talk) 05:18, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

• Remove, per WP:UNDUE. The statement is not a significant part of McGregor's personal life. FactsAndHonesty's original post sums up the situation perfectly, and dismissing the argument as IDONTLIKEIT because he fails to cite chapter and verse on policy is tendentious. Scolaire (talk) 12:30, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

• Remove as per WP:UNDUE. This was one comment. We do not include every single thing we can possibly include in articles just because there's a reliable source backing them up. If he were notable as an LGBTQ activist or if his comments created some kind of media stir that itself became notable then inclusion would make sense. But as of now it was a statement that doesn't seem to have any real significance toward an encyclopedic understanding of the subject. We are not Wikia where we want every single little possible nugget of information included on a subject. We want our readers to get a general understanding of the subject. Had he received death threats or major newspaper wrote op-eds about him because of this then that might be different. As it stands it does not warrant inclusion as argued convincingly above. SQGibbon (talk) 14:57, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

• Remove Random quote not worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. Also, his wearing of a poppy garnered more attention than this glib remark, and led to him stating "Fuck politics and fuck religion. I just want to swing a few lefts and a few rights for a couple of hundred mill in peace." Igor Bišćan (talk) 18:50, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

• Remove I think the strongest point is what SQGibbon pointed out, that this was just a one-off comment. My thoughts were the same: if the comment were relevant to something that is a large part of his life, and therefore served as some kind of summation or reasoning for a component of the subject's life that was worthy of its own section in the article—that would be one thing. Or if the statement ended up becoming notable itself for some reason (e.g. he received professional reprimand, or someone filed a lawsuit against him, and he ended up making a public statement, etc.)...that would be another reason such a thing might be included. But at this point, Conor McGregor's views on gay marriage are no more relevant to a biographical encyclopedia article on him than are his opinions on a particular sports team. He could have easily been quoted in Time Magazine as saying he was a huge Boston Red Sox fan. If that doesn't qualify as unencyclopedic trivia, I don't know what does. The fact that such a comment is printed in a major publication is not a reason it should be included in Wikipedia. --Wikisian (talk) 23:55, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

I've removed it again. Thanks for the discussion. Meters (talk) 00:11, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 16 February 2017

Add 'return to lightweight' on the notes of the UFC 205 fight against Eddie Alvarez. 24.143.60.105 (talk) 03:25, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Not done for now: The notes already say "Won the UFC Lightweight Championship." Wouldn't this be unnecessary?  ^B E _C K ^Y _S A ^{Y L} E _S  04:44, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Conor Mcgregor was not youth Amature boxing champion in Ireland

Take look this link. this record appears the Amature boxing record in Ireland but obviosly there is no Conor's name

http://amateur-boxing.strefa.pl/Nationalchamps/Ireland.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeasantProprietor (talk • contribs) 13:44, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Conor McGregor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130409065139/http://www.mmajunkie.com/news/2013/04/ufc-on-fuel-tv-9-bonuses-mcgregor-madadi-pickett-easton-win-60000 to http://www.mmajunkie.com/news/2013/04/ufc-on-fuel-tv-9-bonuses-mcgregor-madadi-pickett-easton-win-60000

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:31, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Fluent in Irish

He was taught it at school, like many schoolchildren are taught French. But he struggled with it in interviews. It seems as if he has a working understanding of Irish, plus the claim he speaks Irish fluently is unreferenced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:7A12:9D00:35A9:4692:3B90:2E18 (talk) 13:39, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Connor McGregor VS. Floyd Mayweather....

Will Mayweather's career be hurt by this fight? If he wins he will hit his 50-0 on a MMA fighter, but if he looses than he lost to someone who only used ½ of there fighting style. Geraldgossett (talk) 16:55, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

The second paragraph of the Mayweather fight needs to be edited. "7 March 2016" should really be "7 March 2017". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:602:9501:2F2B:4589:756A:C35A:525D (talk) 18:24, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 July 2017

124.29.207.238 (talk) 10:45, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

 Not done - you have made no specific request, but appear to be trying to add a spam link - Arjayay (talk) 11:47, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 26 August 2017

Can I please write his relationship partner and his child Miss.trish099 (talk) 07:19, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. — nihlus kryik  (talk) 07:40, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 August 2017

Please delete xProfessional Boxer one fight does not make him a pro boxer he has only ever had 1 fight as a pro boxer debut fight says right in the articale Xigeneral (talk) 11:50, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. SparklingPessimist ^{Scream at me!} 13:25, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 August 2017

Aaaaa2300 (talk) 06:35, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 06:49, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 November 2017

MMA hiatus and boxing endeavours After winning the lightweight championship at UFC 205, McGregor announced he would take time off from the UFC to wait for the birth of his first child due in 2017.[148] McGregor would spend the majority of his public appearances in early-2017 campaigning for a boxing match with Floyd Mayweather.[149] After months of negotiations, the two finally came to terms on 14 June 2017 and announced the match to take place on 26 August.[150] The match ultimately ended in the 10th round with a victory by TKO for Mayweather.[16] On 10 November, McGregor appeared at Bellator 187, where he congratulated victorious SBG Ireland teammate Charlie Ward and confronted referee Marc Goddard.[151] McGregor's next scheduled fight against Tony Ferguson at Bellator 219 was reportedly pulled due to McGregor's unacceptable behaviour at Bellator 187.[152]

Conor's fight was pulled from UFC 219 not Bellator 219. Conor is signed to the UFC, so cannot fight for Bellator. Also, it was not certain that he was on this card, so it is best to say 'allegedly' he was set to fight. 81.104.73.140 (talk) 20:25, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Done I corrected Bellator 219 → UFC 219 and tried to reword the statement about the rumored Ferguson fight in line with the source already provided. Thanks, —KuyaBriBri^Talk 21:07, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

McGregor racially-charged remarks

Edit: these changes have been approved.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Conor_McGregor&oldid=815141409#Controversies

I made some additions to the "Controversies" section that were removed for not being constructive. However, McGregor's racially-charged remarks are discussed widely among fans, media, and MMA community at large. They are more widely known and probably more controversial than his incident at Bellator 187, but that remains on the page. These remarks are a large part of his story and his trash-talking persona. They are a huge factor in why he is so polarizing among MMA die-hards and casual fans. I have followed MMA and McGregor for many years so I have context to these remarks, and my edits were neutral and relevant. I'd like to discuss why they should be included on his page- thanks.

Here are the full changes- the above link doesn't capture everything, as it was reverted before I was finished. — Preceding unsigned comment added by X2o (talk • contribs) 03:28, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes, should allegations of racist be added to the article? See here. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 04:51, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

• I have added it myself. I find it shocking that since the editor raised the concern last year - 2018, their edits were removed in an attempt to keep it off the page. Terrible! I've added a section for his racial antics over the years. That section can be expanded as per our policies..Tamsier (talk) 03:57, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Further Controversies

McGregor has being involved in several controversies since returning to Ireland,here are a couple that seem to have not gotten much international media attention.

Alleged fight with a man associated with the Kinahan cartel. Speeding charge.

There have been other instances involving cheating on his wife but they seem a lot less credible. I feel the wiki page does not reflect his current character very well.

Cj493 (talk) 12:57, 28 December 2017 (UTC)Cj493

References

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Conor McGregor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161130185327/http://entimports.com/2016/11/coach-kavanagh-gives-in-depth-response-to-ufc-stripping-conor-of-his-belt/ to http://entimports.com/2016/11/coach-kavanagh-gives-in-depth-response-to-ufc-stripping-conor-of-his-belt

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:38, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

jfkhfkhjkfjhkhj — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.34.104.34 (talk) 14:07, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Infobox person

Why can't McGregor have a person infobox to include his girlfriend and child? RKJ 5 (talk) 19:08, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Silence about Scottish heritage?

Shouldn't this article have some mention of Conor's Scottish heritage? The article has very little about his background and, after all, people will surely wonder why he has a Scottish name. He has in the past expressed his personal pride about his Scottish and Clan MacGregor ancestry.[5] [6] Also, surely the [[Category:Irish people of Scottish descent]] should be added to the bottom of the article, as in analogous articles? 89.241.187.26 (talk) 11:58, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Nickname

There is a semi-official/unofficial nickname of Conor McGregor circulating on YouTube, spoken by a few MMA fighters, calling him "Mr. Confidence." Can you add it? I think Colby Covington said it.

 Not done: I don't think it is relevant enough to be added to the article. L293D (☎ • ✎) 20:07, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 September 2018

He practices Karate, boxing is useless in street fights 151.30.46.202 (talk) 07:11, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Kpgjhpjm 12:04, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 October 2018

Karate, please 188.219.235.42 (talk) 15:45, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 18:13, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

He also trains in Karate

He trained and trains in Karate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.219.235.42 (talk) 15:46, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

McGregor TUF stint inaccuracy

McGregor then took part in UFC's reality television series The Ultimate Fighter where he would coach against Urijah Faber. This "U.S. vs. Europe" installment of the show was the first time that the coaches would not fight against each other at the show's conclusion.[88] Faber's team member Ryan Hall ended up winning the competition.

The text in bold is incorrect. The Ultimate Fighter season 2 had two coaches (Matt Hughes and Rich Franklin) that were not expected to fight each other at the season's conclusion, as both coaches competed in different weight classes. I know it isn't a huge deal, but it should be corrected in order to be accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Woodsgrady (talk • contribs) 06:29, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

 Done Enigma^msg 15:50, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Neck crank vs. Rear naked choke

Discuss here. It certainly appeared to be a neck crank. Enigma^msg 22:14, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

UFC 229 Controversies

It should be *Dillon Danis not Dannis Dillon Blakeminnix (talk) 17:34, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

You're right. I didn't write that but the person who did was confused. Done. Enigma^msg 17:42, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 October 2018

103.119.51.12 (talk) 14:03, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 14:13, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 October 2018

107.135.209.196 (talk) 21:56, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Face crank instead of neck crank for Khabib fight.

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. --DannyS712 (talk) 23:50, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Conor McGregor Net worth

Conor McGregor is reported to have the net worth of $137 million in 2018. He is the highest paid MMA fighter at current and has made about $12,072,000. He reportedly made over $100 million from his mega-fight against Mayweather. The Notorious earned around $50 million including $3 million fight paycheck when he fought Khabib at UFC 229. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajesh2132 (talk • contribs) 11:27, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 4 January 2019

"in December, [year]" = "in December [year]" 2605:E000:9149:8300:AD96:7ABA:7CA2:5D81 (talk) 10:38, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

 Done DannyS712 (talk) 11:03, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 January 2019

hisotry => history Libby Kane (talk) 16:13, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

 Done, thanks! ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 16:17, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 March 2019

|4,600,000

the article clearly states that it's 4.3m not 4.6m please change it

References

Islamophobic anti Burka

Islamophobic anti Burka and Race row April 2019 Calling Khabib’s Wife A Towel and Goat https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/sport/2019/04/uneducated-racist-mutt-conor-mcgregor-s-anti-muslim-tweet-at-rival-slammed.html

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/8778792/conor-mcgregor-racist-khabib-wife-towel-traditional-wedding-dress/

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/769872/conor-mcgregor-twitter-khabib-nurmagomedov-racism-row-ufc-rematch-mma

https://www.mmamania.com/2019/4/3/18294277/dana-white-statement-unacceptable-conor-mcgregor-khabib-twitter-beef-towel-rape-ufc-mma

https://www.bloodyelbow.com/2019/4/4/18295311/islamophobia-ufc-conor-mcgregor-ethnic-religious-tension-fight-promotion-khabib-crime-mma

https://talksport.com/sport/mma/521814/conor-mcgregor-racist-deleted-tweet-khabib-nurmagomedov-wife/

More Racism https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/conor-mcgregor-s-racism-and-bigotry-need-to-be-called-out-1.3155257 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greenvoter (talk • contribs) 00:32, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Islam isn’t a race and therefore “islamophobic” comments are not racist. Isuausuhzhs (talk) 05:58, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Neck Crank for Khabib fight not right.

It would be more specific if it was listed as a fulcrum choke, https://www.scrapdigest.com/khabib-explains-why-conor-mcgregor-had-to-tap-out-early/42774/. Not a big deal but thought it should be listed correctly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yominick (talk • contribs) 18:31, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Paulie Malignaggi

Conor has pretty much engulfed Paulie Malignaggi, I have not seen and interview with Paulie where he doesn't refer to Conor and how bitter he is about the sparring session that took place for the Mayweather fight - I feel this should be referred to in the main article.

The upcoming Lobov vs Malignaggi has basically come to fruition on the back of the ill-feeling from the Mayweather sparring session.

Semi-protected edit request on 23 June 2019

82.43.69.195 (talk) 13:48, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Net Worth - $145 Million / USD

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. NiciVampireHeart 15:27, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

mr. mcgregor

My opinion of this red o brians type person is more like a westside hollywood clown nothing but a irish little boy in show that probably parents are paying i would like for sure have a show with this fun looking person with so many stories written by other maybe a hard gang members who have nothing else to do than draw cartoons in crash test dummie from ireland for me as a mma fan and ex pro who never got fights ,>maybe too brutal in the cage<. would be happy to put this fag in a grave yard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.146.86.2 (talk) 12:44, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Alleged sexual assualt

Go ahead and delete and hide his sexual assault allegations fanboys. It is a form of historical negationism and this page is now suspect. There are four unamed sources that point the finger at mcgregor, police report say video of his room was taken at the time, and hotel records say he was there. All that wasn't reported by now is him actually being literally and directly named by the irish LE. https://www.forbes.com/sites/trentreinsmith/2019/08/28/dana-white-gives-confusing-answer-regarding-conor-mcgregors-alleged-sexual-assault/#3e5f99171111 Ap4lmtree2 (talk) 06:58, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

You missed a comma in the first sentence. Put a comma before “fanboys”. Please use proper grammar so you can be better understood. 👍🏻 Isuausuhzhs (talk) 05:56, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Style should include kickboxing, because he loves kicking

He does a lot of kicking techniques in his fights, like high kicks, low kicks, spinning kicks and others, boxing doesn't do him justice Saul Oliveira (talk) 15:46, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Please read wikiproject mma. Until you have done so I would ask that you make no more style edits.NEDOCHAN (talk) 20:52, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Sexual Assault Investigations

Numerous news outlets are reporting that Conor is under investigation for sexual assault including the NY Times, NY Post and CBS Sports can someone add this information to the article ? Souces. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/19/sports/conor-mcgregor-sexual-assault-accusation.html https://www.cbssports.com/mma/news/conor-mcgregor-under-investigation-for-second-sexual-assault-accusation-per-report/ https://nypost.com/2019/10/19/conor-mcgregor-reportedly-being-investigated-for-second-sexual-assault-this-year/. 46.45.138.100 (talk) 00:00, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: for allegations such as these, we need the strongest possible sourcing (see WP:BLP). The NYPost article says "reportedly being investigated" and CBSSports says "per report" – which it later identifies as from the NYTimes. The NYTimes mentions "allegations" "according to people familiar with the matter" and that the "Garda[i] declined to comment on the profession of the person accused". Based on this, I am not happy to add this to the article. NiciVampireHeart 18:56, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Dana White and his UFC cronies are paying good money to cover the whole thing up. 172.58.227.13 (talk) 12:40, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

They probably paid off some Wikipedians to including NiciVampireHeart. 172.58.227.13 (talk) 14:20, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Next fight

Ufc president Dana White is thinking about Connor McGregor next Dana White suggest Donald Cerrone and The highlight Justin McGregor is returning next year 2020 TIRELO CHARLIMANS (talk) 15:30, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Someone needs to add it to the MMA record chart — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:4B:301:2670:2487:4725:30CD:EF48 (talk) 16:17, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Mixed martial arts record - TKO win agains Donald Cerrone

McGregor finished Cowboy by TKO due to a head kick followed by punches. Considering this, it's description should include "TKO (head kick and punches)" at the "Method" section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caioggarcia (talk • contribs) 15:10, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Robbery arrest

The text that originally discussed the robbery omitted important information and misrepresented the result of the affair. It said nothing about a settlement that is mentioned in various sources and represents the fan in a negative light that is not found in the source so as this concerns a legal case we have to tread very carefully. I added the missing information from the sources and was reverted, I have restored my original text that is in concordance with guidelines. Please de not remove without discussing first to form consensus. --Dom from Paris (talk) 13:46, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

For a case in which charges were dropped I think there is too much detail. This edit makes the point but we don't need chapter and verse. If there is consensus that's fine but my view is that this https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Conor_McGregor&diff=936872869&oldid=936863619 improves readability. I should add that consensus should be sought for inclusion not vice versa. As you know.NEDOCHAN (talk) 14:57, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

And it's not a legal case. Which is why the detail is unnecessary. Charges were dropped. NEDOCHAN (talk) 15:51, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

I have removed the line about inconsistencies as that could be misconstrued. Simply stating the facts briefly seems best unless consensus for inclusion is reached.NEDOCHAN (talk) 15:56, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

:::As for the negative not being in the source:

"Based on the witness's credibility issues, his unwillingness to respond to a subpoena and the inability of the witnesses to testify as to his subjective mindset, the State of Florida cannot prove the charges against Mr. McGregor beyond a reasonable doubt," Madani wrote."'

Easier just to leave it out.NEDOCHAN (talk) 16:10, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry but consensus has not been found. By repeatedly removing content backed up by sources added by another editor you are coming close to entering an editing war. In the new version there is nothing about the fact that the fan dropped the charges not that there was a settlement. This is cherry picking to give the impression that the accusations were false. I shall reinstate the information as is backed up by the sources. --Dom from Paris (talk) 12:12, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Hang on - where is your consensus? You are adding your edit. WP:STATUSQUO.NEDOCHAN (talk) 14:08, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

What are you up to? Why do I need consensus to keep the stable version? Why I am warring when I have actually addressed the issue?NEDOCHAN (talk) 14:11, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

In all seriousness, you are adding information that is not in the sources. You said ' after the fan dropped his charges following a settlement.'. The source does NOT say that. The source quotes the accuser's lawyer as saying that his client "has been made whole".NEDOCHAN (talk) 14:24, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

I have sought a compromise that is concise. It's still unnecessary, I think, but it addresses our concerns (yours for balance and mine for brevity). You have handled this quite poorly, if I may say so. Tagging the article as being paid for was very petulant and totally uncalled for.NEDOCHAN (talk) 14:36, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

that is better and is what you should have done rather than carrying out multiple reverts without discussing. But I wish for it to be stated that the fan dropped the charges following a settlement as per this source [7] that says "The man who sued Conor McGregor for allegedly smashing his cellphone on March 11 in Miami has dropped a civil lawsuit against the UFC star, according to online records." As per this source [8] that states "Abdirzak, a resident of England, later dropped his lawsuit after reaching an out-of-court settlement with McGregor." as per these multiple sources that all say the same thing [9] [10]. In the future please discuss rather than repeatedly reverting and quoting status quo as a stonewalling tactic as per Wikipedia:Status quo stonewalling. I shall let you make the necessary edit to reflect the sources. --Dom from Paris (talk) 14:54, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Nice source selection. The bit you left out was the sourced, DIRECT QUOTE FROM THE FLORIDA DISTRICT ATTORNEY. Who I would have thought is fairly relevant. Anyway, I trust now you have had your fun. You have succeeded in making the article longer in order to detail a dropped civil case and a dismissed legal one. Thanks.NEDOCHAN (talk) 16:47, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Dom from Paris (talk) 17:21, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Nicknames styles and page protection

Hi. Please can we protect the page? A sock is perpetually changing the article. To be clear, it has long been agreed that the nickname comes from Sherdog. As for style:

Do not use the style parameter from the

Conor McGregor

in MMA biographical articles. Modern MMA requires training several fighting styles, which means that no mixed martial artist uses a single style when fighting. References that describe martial arts ranks (i.e. black belt in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu) and/or martial arts training (i.e. training boxing) are not evidence of fighting style and are not valid to justify a fighting style in an infobox. Do not add your own interpretation of a fighting style. The style parameter should only be used in MMA fighters that have participated professionally or in international competitions in other combat sports (i.e. boxing or kickboxing) and who are notable in said sports and deserve an article for their merits in these other sports (i.e. Antônio Rogério Nogueira, Alistair Overeem). It is suggested to MMA editors that they actively remove the style parameter in infoboxes of MMA fighters that do not meet these criteria.

Please can we sort this out.NEDOCHAN (talk) 22:12, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

No problem with page protection.

As for the nickname issue, no, absolutely not. A (dreadful!) guideline on a wikiproject does not override WP:RS. One particular website being regarded as the bible for a whole topic? I think that's unprecedented, and goes against several main WP policies, including WP:V and WP:RS. No disrespect to your wikiproject, but no, we'll go by what the reliable sources say, the majority of whom list McGregor's nickname as "The Notorious", definite article included. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 09:46, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. The issue with the nicknames section is that there are multiple RS for a myriad of nicknames for fighters. It's a very specific problem. If we are to prevent there being half a dozen nicknames and sources for every infobox (which would be a mess) then we need an agreement. Which, through consensus, we have reached. Editors have agreed that we go by Sherdog and that consensus has been reached over many discussions. And, other than this instance, in which malicious editors have reverted the status quo, it works. Do you have a better solution and, if so, shall we restart the whole process? Consensus is key and we have reached it (we being the contributors to WP: MMA.

As consensus has not been reached to go against that which has been established, we should continue until an alternative has been reached.NEDOCHAN (talk) 10:40, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

You've pointed to a project, but not to any specific discussion or consensus. Could you link to one of these discussions, please? But again, I'm not seeing how the guidelines of a wikiproject can override established WP-wide policy. We're not even arguing over different nicknames, here - it's the inclusion of the definite article. (Btw, I've requested temporary page protection). Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:48, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Again, thank you. I recently posted on the Wikiproject MMA talk page to renew the discussion. As per WP:CONSENSUS, the discussions have taken place on numerous talk pages over a few years. I understand that in this instance it is unusual that it's just the definite article but in many others (Henry Cejudo, Robert Whittaker, Michael Bisping) nicknames have been added as they've been announced (often in jest) and it's turned into a puerile game - look how many times 'Lefthook Larry' has been added to Bisping, 'Triple C / King of Cringe) to Cejudo. @Cassiopeia: might be able to help. Sherdog does seem effective for method of finish and other names. In this instance, it's imperfect (in my opinion The Notorious is better) but as a principle it does seem to work in >99% of cases. Do please bear in mind that the editor who has been adding it has also added other things, such as 'style' that are clearly agreed as wrong.NEDOCHAN (talk) 12:00, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Even a stopped clock can be right twice a day... ;-) Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 22:48, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Withnail would be a better editor.😀NEDOCHAN (talk) 00:01, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Bastun Good day. I am asked to request for comment regarding the nickname as I am one of the regular MMA editors. I am with NEDOCHAN here, he has explained and gave his views which are same as mine and in addition, there are RS out there states just nickname without the definite articles. Thank you. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:23, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

And my response is the same: it is not up to a group of editors to decide that one particular source (minor, in the greater scheme of things) can trump Wikipedia policies such as WP:V and WP:RS. Link to where was this discussion took place, please. Clearly, McGregor himself uses "The Notorious", as do plenty of other sites. Clearly a Google search comparison won't work as any search for "The Notorious" will also return just "Notorious", so I don't know what the solution is. I do know it isn't "Some of us over here decided we'd only accept this one source." Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 13:07, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

The process you describe is WP:CONSENSUS, very clearly. Specifically, CONACHIEVE. I have already drawn your attention to examples, such as Cejudo's edit history. Again, I have already stated that these conversations have been taking place for a long time on many talk pages and, as per WP:CONACHIEVE, we have arrived at a solution for which we have WP:CONSENSUS. I invite you to propose a better solution to this specific issue (other names in MMA fighter articles) if you really feel it necessary, yet it seems a bit unnecessary, as other than notoriously unhelpful IPs and vandals, we don't appear to have a problem.NEDOCHAN (talk) 14:17, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Bastun You will find the discussions here. Please understand that I don't feel the need to trawl through discussions I have been a part of but should you wish, here's the discussion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mixed_martial_artsNEDOCHAN (talk) 14:27, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Seriously? So you're just asserting "This is the way things are!", then? There's nothing about nicknames on that page. There's nothing about nicknames on the archive of that page, either, and the only result for "notorious" is in relation to another individual entirely. Sorry, that most certainly doesn't trump WP:RS. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 22:33, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry mate I have pointed you in the direction required and have demonstrated consensus through talk pages and through pinging another editor who's involved.. If you feel as if it's worthwhile, please seek consensus, particularly if you feel there's a better solution. I would be happy to discuss an alternative if you'd like to suggest one. NEDOCHAN (talk) 22:41, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

No, you have pointed at a wikiproject than does not contain what you claim it contains, and you canvassed someone... That's not demonstrating consensus - far from it! Anyway, I'm not going to argue for inclusion of The Notorious's definite article or edit war on it, as sources support both, but likewise, I'm not agreeing to the inclusion of the hidden "Do not change this" warning. WP:V. WP:RS. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 08:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Fine.NEDOCHAN (talk) 12:34, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

It's not a coincidence that thanks to stones being thrown and no solution offered the very day protection is removed, here is the next edit, right where the instruction was. Bastun https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Conor_McGregor&diff=948718198&oldid=948697144NEDOCHAN (talk) 09:14, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Feel free to request longer protection. I really don't think a hidden admonition to not change the nickname is going to stop an IP vandal, though. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:18, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Style

Re McGregor's style, can all of you - Domdeparis, AmThBeautifulScotThBrave, NEDOCHAN, PabloLikesToWrestle stop edit warring. Wikipedia policies apply, and only those - the most relevant being WP:V and WP:RS. If a reliable MMA source describes his style, it can be included, with the appropriate citation. Avoid original research, "ownership", and edit warring, which will get you blocked. Regards, Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 09:41, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Bastun. In this instance it's abundantly clear. There is one editor who's changing a long-established edit that is unambiguously laid out above. To any other editor reading this, you may of course add sourced info to the article. Just not in the info box. NEDOCHAN (talk) 09:46, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

The following is the agreed status quo for the style parameter.

Do not use the style parameter from the infobox in MMA biographical articles. Modern MMA requires training several fighting styles, which means that no mixed martial artist uses a single style when fighting. References that describe martial arts ranks (i.e. black belt in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu) and/or martial arts training (i.e. training boxing) are not evidence of fighting style and are not valid to justify a fighting style in an infobox. Do not add your own interpretation of a fighting style. The style parameter should only be used in MMA fighters that have participated professionally or in international competitions in other combat sports (i.e. boxing or kickboxing) and who are notable in said sports and deserve an article for their merits in these other sports (i.e. Antônio Rogério Nogueira, Alistair Overeem). It is suggested to MMA editors that they actively remove the style parameter in infoboxes of MMA fighters that do not meet these criteria. NEDOCHAN (talk) 10:18, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Bastun, you are mistaken, I have not been edit warring at all I simply reverted to a version that is in accordance with the project guidelines and asked the person who has been edit warring to take it to a talk page to avoid any further edit warring. Even though the project style recommandations are not policy they are very clear and there is little need to discuss them or look for sources that would clearly support going against them. The project guidelines say that a style should not be noted unless the person has participated in professional matches of any particular style and would have merited a page on this basis. AmThBeautifulScotThBrave seems not to understand this hence my message on their page to reinforce that of NEDOCHAN. WP:OR and WP:OWN clearly do not apply to mine and NEDOCHAN's actions. Hope this clears it up for you. Dom from Paris (talk) 11:23, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Reverting without discussion is edit warring. As per previous talk page sections, project guidelines do not and cannot override Wikipedia policy. If you are a mixed martial artist, you will, by definition, be using mixed fighting styles - you cannot win an MMA match using a single style. This is even stated in the project's style guide, quoted above! However, the stated guideline "The style parameter should only be used in MMA fighters that have participated professionally or in international competitions in other combat sports..." is particularly arbitrary and perverse. Just because someone previously fought in some other martial art, it simply does not follow that that is the style they use in MMA. Insisting this is the case - "A implies B" - is a classic example of synthesis, a type of WP:OR. Insisting on maintaining this - "this is not up for debate" - is WP:OWN. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:21, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

It was discussed. On the editor's talk page and on this one. So it's not edit warring. It's restoring a consensus version following its having been altered by an editor whose edit history shows a keenness to impose their opinion (including vandalising a trans woman's page to refer to her as a man). Your other points you are free to take up on the talk page to the project. Again, you have not offered any alternative, or volunteered to help in any way. You have argued against an instruction to avoid this problem (which is no longer there and, lo and behold, here we are), you have also argued against consensus on several occasions, including admonishing three established editors for reverting one with a short and clear history of vandalism. You did this as well previously, and the editor who you were defending was banned. We are talking about the style paramater in MMA fighters' infoboxes. It is a specific issue.

I hate to repeat myself but is it fine to change the genre of films if an RS disagrees? The answer is no. It's the same here. WP:CONSENSUS is clear. Please could you either address the specific issue on the talk page to the project, or, perhaps, could you leave it? I note that you haven't edited many MMA pages, so I would ask you to consider whether your actions are improving wikipedia. Please, I am asking you nicely to drop this ball.NEDOCHAN (talk) 12:47, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

By the way, this is the explanation of the editor whose edit you're defending.

'So that means he's not a kickboxer just because he hasn't done a kickboxing match? You've never even done martial arts in your life. I am a martial artist and he is a kickboxer'

So if you go by RS, it's wrong, and if you go by the guidelines, it's wrong. So the edit is bad and has been reverted. Enough.NEDOCHAN (talk) 12:56, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Can you please indent consistently? I'm not getting into an argument with you. I don't stalk editors to find out what they do and don't do. Edits on articles do not get consensus from discussions on editors' talk pages. That's what article talk pages are for. Once again, wikiprojects do not get to override Wikipedia policies, such as WP:V and WP:RS. Especially a wikiproject that seems to have attracted only 10 contributors to its talk page this year, and has had only 5 edits to its main page since July 2018. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 13:40, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Per WP:V and WP:RS, the edit that was reverted by separate editors is wrong. I still think you haven't grasped WP:CONSENSUS and the role it plays in wikiprojects. As you haven't addressed a single one of my points or made a single helpful comment or suggestion as to what you, a single editor, would prefer, I suggest we leave it. Perhaps edit a dozen film articles and change their genres (with RS refs). I think that will demonstrate the principle of WP:CONSENSUS.NEDOCHAN (talk) 13:49, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Idk if the conversation is over but that's what it looks like, I made a mistake and they fixed it, NEDOCHAN had already told me not to and I did it a second time and he told me not to and reverted it again. I don't really get the usage of the term "edit warring" right here bc it's stated in one of the articles above, if by your perspective a fighter uses one style in which he competed previously or not, it doesn't really matter as it's already stated and discussed that fighters with a notable background in another martial art/combat sport could have a section of "style" and put it there, so there's no "discussion" anymore. Again, I'm a "new" editor trying to do his best and having fun, I'm learning. I haven't even committed one act of vandalism so warning me about me getting banned just doesn't make sense. By the way, if you're laughing at a wikiproject because of the amount of members it has then I don't your 15 years of experience are really showing up in this conversation :). Best.PabloLikesToWrestle (talk) 13:45, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Nah. I understand WP:CON perfectly well, thanks. You did not revert anything because of WP:V and WP:RS, that's an entirely new claim, absent from your edit summaries. Asserting something does not make it so. What I would prefer is adherence to WP's policies, particularly WP:V and WP:RS, rather than you saying "some of us on this wikiproject decided this one time that an article subject's nickname will be decided only by what's listed in this one external site, and a fighter's style will be dictated by them competing at some point in some other sport, SO MOTE IT BE!" and edit warring with people who follow actual WP policies. I'll edit where I want, if it's all the same to you, in accordance with those policies. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:32, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

So, should we have unlimited styles listed in the infobox, provided they're supported by RS? Here's a reputable source: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/boxing/2017/08/18/conor-mcgregors-martial-art/. So we have boxing, kickboxing, Tae kwon do, Copoeira, karate and Brazilian jiu-jitsu for starters. Blimey...shall we set a limit of, say, 20? Otheriwse the infobox will look a right mess. But then what gets priority? Shall we create a priority list of sources, or articles within sources? Shall we go through every fighter article and name every one of the styles that a source says they use? Or shall we just stick to a system that works, is concise and has been agreed by CONSENSUS. It also works; except for a few known vandals and you there's never a problem. If you have such an issue, join the blasted project and moan on there.

Do you have a SINGLE SUGGESTION for what you're moaning about, or are you just being intentionally disruptive? If it's the latter, please let me know and stop wasting our time.NEDOCHAN (talk) 15:48, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes. I do have a single suggestion. I've stated it a couple of times now. Once again: Follow WP policies (which - again! - overrule wikiproject guidelines). WP:V. WP:RS. WP:NOR. They'll do, for a start. Stop being so aggressive and defensive, stop your ownership attempts, and stop putting words in my mouth. Ok? As for "consensus" on the moribund wikiproject - which one? This one or this other one which is inconclusive (and discusses people leaving the project), or this other one, featuring only 3 editors? As to your "should we have unlimited styles listed", nobody is proposing that. If they were, I'd say once there's verifiable reliable sourcing, there is absolutely no problem listing several, as happens with, say, political party ideologies right now without the sky falling in. Wikipedia is not paper. We have the room. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 18:06, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

And given the welcome given to potential new members of the Wikiproject, it's no surprise it's completely moribund. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 18:15, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

How many styles would you suggest as a maximum? Unlimited? 10? How long do you think that would take to move towards uniformity? McGregor could be argued to have 11, some fighters many more. Indeed, the vast majority of modern fighters have trained exclusively in MMA, which is by definition a mix of styles. In a very few cases they're notable in another combat sport and have real achievements; some even have record PPV numbers in, say, boxing, so we should....

Do you have any support in this discussion? As for your question about the project, I am referring to this Anyway I shouldn't answer questions as you won't answer them and this process is fruitless as in this discussion alone consensus seems clear. I understand your allegations of the poetic 'aggressive and defensive' and shall respond by not responding. That is of course unless there is consensus to make the edits from other editors to counter the arguments of the two other editors to have commented so far. I have said my piece. Perhaps we both have.

Thanks for not making the edits by the way; you have remained classy.NEDOCHAN (talk) 18:22, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Batsun I would suggest you go and ask for some advice at the project page if you disagree with the infobox MOS. You're showing some battleground behaviour and bludgeoning your point which is not such a good way of proceeding. Infoboxes are not mandatory and most of what goes in there is just supposed to reflect the main article. There was a stable version that was in accordance with the project MOS and was not against policy. This was edited by a editor who has already been warned several times about his behaviour. His edit was reverted and a discussion was opened but the editor continued to ignore the reasoned arguments. You are just pouring oil onto the flames. There is reasoned consensus to keep the edit as it is. Please go and ask for other opinions if you do not agree. Dom from Paris (talk) 23:20, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Bastun, not Batsun. Several points: 1) It was actually me who opened the discussion here. 2) I have not edited the style parameter. so there is zero battleground behaviour on my part. 3) "Infoboxes are not mandatory" - correct. 4) "most of what goes in there is just supposed to reflect the main article" - also correct. The article has five sentences on McGregor's MMA fighting style. One of those mentions boxing. 5) The vast majority of the article discusses McGregor's MMA career. McGregor has also been a professional boxer. 6) Project style guidelines do not overrule Wikipedia policies. As the discussion has now re-opened, I'll repeat, if reliable, verifiable sources indicate a fighter's styles are X, Y, and Z, then we can list those styles. We have the space to include main styles and this principle works absolutely fine for other topics including bands and films (genre), political parties (ideologies), settlements (electoral areas), etc. Cheers, Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:22, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

I would suggest you go and ask for some advice at the project page if you disagree with the infobox MOS. NEDOCHAN (talk) 15:26, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Bastun if you had checked the now-blocked editor's page you would have seen that the discussion had already been started over there which is where you should have carried it on because we don't normally threaten other editors with sanctions on article talk pages. You can repeat as much as you like your opinion but so long as there is consensus that is in accordance with policy, guidelines, MOS etc it doesn't really matter. As NEDOCHAN and I have both suggested have a look at the project page and ask for some advice there rather than simply repeating yourself. If you think you can convince them to change the MOS on infoboxes fill your boots but I won't hold my breath waiting. Cheers and happy editing. Dom from Paris (talk) 11:41, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, but no. You discuss articles on article talk pages, precisely so discussion is centralised and you don't have to stalk multiple editors' talk pages. That's what they're for. I have never argued anything other than policy > guidelines/local agreements. IIRC, nobody has even managed yet to point out where this "consensus" is listed, or agreed, on the moribund MMA wikiproject. I'll stick to policy, thanks all the same. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:26, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I presume you haven't bothered trying to open a discussion at the project page. For the moment a part from a blocked editor the only person arguing this is you so there is consensus both here and from the project's infobox. If you don't want to open the discussion over there and it's really a problem for you then remove the style as per the guide for the infobox otherwise it might be better to drop the bludgeon or wait until someone else supports your POV here. Happy editing. Dom from Paris (talk) 02:23, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

FWIW I think no style would be better than boxing here because he only had 1 professional fight because of his position in MMA. MMA fighters use so many techniques that it is impossible to say they have 1 particular style so I would support you removing it but definitely not adding more styles as per consensus here. Dom from Paris (talk) 02:37, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

It's an info box. The contents are laid out by the project that designed the info box. The style parameter suggestions are fine. There are equivalent infoboxes whose parameters are also laid out by the parent project across Wikipedia. Anyone who edits MMA pages regularly understands the point made. In early MMA days it was style v style, hence the parameter. Normally we leave it empty for modern fighters, unless they have notable achievements or professional competition in another sport.

This is an immensely dull discussion and we're wasting time on vandals and pendants. We're picking peanuts out of poo. Let's leave it and move on.

The style parameter should only be used in MMA fighters that have participated professionally or in international competitions in other combat sports (i.e. boxing or kickboxing) and who are notable in said sports and deserve an article for their merits in these other sports (i.e. Antônio Rogério Nogueira, Alistair Overeem).

McGregor would have an article about his boxing as the second-biggest PPV fight of all time had him in it. NEDOCHAN (talk) 13:12, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Reply to Domdeparis: Why would I open a discussion at the project page? It's moribund, practically dead. All I'm "arguing" is that wikipedia policy trumps idiotic decisions arrived at by a couple of people on a wikiproject, who can't even point to where consensus was reached. But apparently project guidelines will be known automagically by our readers, who will obviously know that a style in an MMA fighter's infobox refers to their nonMMA fights! I mean, that's only logical, right? /insert eyeroll gif here. I've removed the parameter. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 19:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

That is not consensus. Restored until you have it. NEDOCHAN (talk) 02:42, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

That said, and please read and respect this, I am going to start a discussion on WP:MMA about the points Bastun has raised. I happen to agree with the parameters laid out and, broadly, the guidelines, but I do realise that if WP:MMA is to continue to be respected it DOES require more discussion and participation. The McGregor page should not still be C Class, it's better than that.

I will of course ping you all and we can chat it through. I have the time so will now endeavour to reinvigorate the project. I ask for some time to do this. Can we agree to, say, a month, to see whether there is still an appetite to continue with a revamped project? At the moment it seems like it's just a few of us. NEDOCHAN (talk) 09:20, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

"That is not consensus. Restored until you have it." So there's one user adding kickboxing, without citation; one adding boxing, without citation, but that's ok because everybody knows the MMA infobox style parameter is about non-MMA fights and this is obvious to everyone, daw; and two users saying no parameter makes more sense (or at least only use cited ones). But you have consensus? lol! Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 10:25, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Personal life

He is the most followed irish celebrity with over 36.3 million followers. Post it. Eze jeffrey (talk) 07:00, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Yep. Sounds like that should be there.NEDOCHAN (talk) 08:37, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Be bold. Once you have a citation, feel free to add. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 10:27, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Attempted Sexual Assault?

It wasn’t attempted sexual assault of the lady in the bar not was it said to be that by her. She claims he exposed his genitals. A news article labeled it attempted sexual assault. Neither the alleged victim nor the police did. The news article’s tittle was changed as well. Isuausuhzhs (talk) 05:54, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Please feel free to amend, with citations, obviously. It does like the alleged sexual assaults committed in Ireland have been omitted, though. I'll try to add something later. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:03, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

I've added a source in French where it says that he was accused of « tentative d'agression sexuelle et d'exhibition sexuelle » which means attempted sexual assault and indecent exposure. I've updated the text and modified the title. Dom from Paris (talk) 18:21, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Dom. A foreign language source is hard to verify. I think the question should be whether the incident is noteworthy enough for inclusion, not nitpicking over the description. It was fine and sourced before. Sources in foreign languages aren't the way to go.NEDOCHAN (talk) 10:11, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Foreign language sources are absolutely permitted, per WP:V. No reason to remove reported facts such as dates. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 18:21, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

McGregor (former)

McGregor is no longer retired. Today he accepted a UFC fight with Dustin Porier. Therefore, he should no longer be considered a 'former' MMA fighter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomas156cote (talk • contribs) 20:27, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Thomas156cote Bout (as of this message) has yet to be official. So pls wait until both parties singed the contract and it is reported by the media. Thank you. Cassiopeia^(talk) 21:31, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Conor McGregor's Height Should be 5'11" and Certainly Not 5'8"

There's a recorded footage of Conor McGregor, where he was measured by a UFC official and his barefoot height was found as 5 ft 11 in. This is a 1st degree proof and it's very rare to have such a strong evidence for an individual height. It overrules any claims made by anyone including Conor McGregor himself.

A few user accounts which were probably made by the same people who constantly edit the article and Conor McGregor's on-page listed height to 5 ft 8 in and gives an irrelevant website called sherdog.com as the source. In truth there are 5 reputable sources in the order of strength of evidence:

• 1. There's a recorded footage of his height getting measured by a UFC official as 5'11".
• 2. UFC listed his height as 5'11" in the first few fights of his UFC career.(Link to copyvio removed. GirthSummit _(blether) 14:37, 10 October 2020 (UTC) )
• 3. His coach John Kavanagh claimed McGregor's height was 5'10" in 2016.
• 4. McGregor himself claimed he was 5'9" in 2014.
• 5. Currently, the UFC and the official UFC website - ufc.com - list his height as 5 ft 9 in.

Conor McGregor is a celebrity and a polarizing figure. These kind of individuals who are constantly on the media evoke personal feelings toward them and there's a significant chance that these editors (Cassiopeia, NEDOCHAN, Squared.Circle.Boxing) who try to downgrade his height has potential dislike towards him and that's why they use some obscure 3rd party site as the source for his height instead of using an actual recorded footage or UFC listing as the source. They reverted my edits constantly by giving that site as the source and Squared.Circle.Boxing reverted my last edit because of some potential copyright violation although it's pretty obvious TheMacLife who is the publisher of the linked video is a licensed media member of the UFC material. Cassiopeia refers to Wikipedia:MMA guideline but that project guideline does not force users to use sherdog.com as the source for fighter heights or profiles and that guideline cannot conflict with Wikipedia's main principles of verifiability, reliability and editors' moderation rights.

I suspect there's a potential organized sneaky vandalism going on here. Lordpermaximum (talk) 19:36, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

WP:ASPERSIONS. That will be the extent of my input. Toodlepip. – ².O.^Boxing 19:32, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

WP:ASPERSIONS has nothing to do with the subject and I only shared my suspicion for your hard to explain actions. I did not make any claims. If you have anything to offer about the subject, please feel free to contribute. Lordpermaximum (talk) 19:40, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't know whether McGregor is 5'8, 5'9, 5'10, or 5'11, but we go by what the sources say. When there are six different citations available listing four different heights, then I'm not sure what the answer is. You are correct that no one site has more weight than another site just because a dead wikiproject makes such an assertion; and there is absolutely no basis for claiming "Potential copyright violation", because it's YouTube. One thing, though - don't edit war on the article page over it, discuss it here instead. If you edit war, you'll just end up blocked for breaching the 3RR rule. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 19:47, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Like I pointed out before, a recorded footage of someone getting measured by an official is the strongest evidence anyone can have for such a thing. It should have the highest weight. Then comes the UFC - which is a sports organization and known for measuring and comparing athlete attributes before competitions and also the organization where Conor McGregor participates and earn a living - and its official listings. Then comes individual (the fighter and the coach) claims. A 3rd party site that has nothing to do with the person in question should not have any weight at all. Lordpermaximum (talk) 19:59, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

I would agree with your assessment. Let's see what the other editors say, too, though. If they don't respond, I'm happy to reinstate your edit. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 22:37, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

YouTube is not a reliable source. Sherdog is and it has information on all notable fighters regardless of their promotion or whether they're active. Please see Dan Henderson for an example. There is not a single reliable source that lists him at 511. NEDOCHAN (talk) 08:41, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

• 1. The actual recorded footage of him getting measured by an UFC official is the most reliable source there is. You can't have any better supporting evidence. Content publisher YouTube has nothing to do with it.
• 2. No, sherdog is not a reliable source. It's not even a weak source. Check Proof by assertion for what you're doing. Who stops me from creating a website to list people's heights according to my wishes and make a couple of my friends agree with me to use it as a source for all MMA related content from now on in a wikiproject? I have nothing to do with those people and sherdog has nothing to do with MMA fighters.
• 3. I can understand not being able to find a height measurement footage like that before but not using the actual UFC site as the source for fighters that compete in its competitions in the first place is very suspicious.
• 4. What you're doing is against the core ideology of Wikipedia and WP:V along with WP:RS. Lordpermaximum (talk) 13:06, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello,

1. For all MMA pages in Wikipedia, we use Sherdog.com as the source in the fighter fight table and the infobox unless those parameters are not found on Sherdog MMA fighter profile pages or new content such as "fighting out of" / "Team" as the fighter move to another city or fight team. For such cases, we will add the content and support them with source.

1. Sherdog.com is the largest and most comprehensive MMA fighter database in the world follow by Tapology then Fight Matrix. We use Sherdog as for the reason just stated. Most sport fans would not heard about any Sherdog and few casual fans might know it as well. Sherdog is extremely well-known by all MMA fans who follows MMA for years/closely just as most people have not heard about Boxrec (Boxer database) if they only watch a few heavyweight title bouts a year or know about Rugby League Project if they are not a hard core fan of Rugby League. Pls see/check List of current UFC fighters for all 610 +/- fighter pages for verification. For McGregor - here, his height is 5'8".
2. Since 2007, Sherdog partnered with ESPN, providing extensive MMA content and fighter database to ESPN - see here - 1. There is also discussion on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard regarding Sherdog as a reliable source - see here - 2. Since Sherdog partnered with ESPN and ESPN is considered reliable then Sherdog info should be considered reliable as well which meetsWP:PROVEIT guidelines. Stay safe and thank you. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:08, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

• 1. As I said before, sherdog or any other 3rd party site that has nothing to do with the people in question is not a reliable source. It's not even a weak source. Check Proof by assertion for what you're doing. Who stops me from creating a website to list people's heights according to my wishes and make a couple of my friends agree with me to use it as a source for all MMA related content from now on in a wikiproject? I have nothing to do with those people and sherdog has nothing to do with MMA fighters.

Besides, that site has Eddie Alvarez at 5'10" and McGregor at 5'8". In reality, McGregor was clearly and significantly the taller man in their staredowns and fight. Here's an example and the UFC published video where it's taken from. That means that site called sherdog had made 4 or 5 inches of error which makes it competely unreliable anyways. Funnily enough, Wikipedia lists Eddie Alvarez at 5'8" instead of 5'10" which is sherdog's claim. When I consider all of this, your defense of using that 3rd party fan site or whatever it is as the sole source of mixed martial artist profiles is getting beyond absurd and I feel bad commenting on such a silly matter.

• 2. You can't overrule WP:V and WP:RS with any wikiproject or getting one or two users kinda agree with you in a noticeboard nearly a decade ago. That wasn't a consensus back then and it's certainly not now. Lordpermaximum (talk) 13:06, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

1. YouTube in and of itself is not prohibited as a RS. Proof by assertion ("Sherdog is a reliable source") is a logical fallacy. 2. "For all MMA pages in Wikipedia, we use Sherdog.com" - no, "we" don't. Some authors might, and that's fair enough. A wikiproject may well have decided to use it, some years ago, but that wikiproject is dead and other sources of at least the same standing - such as ufc.com - have been presented and a wikiproject does not overrule wikipedia policies such as [[WP:V}}, WP:RS and WP:CON. 3. One person posting a query and three people answering on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard, nine years ago, where they mostly go "Yeah, it looks ok", does not mean it is forever set in stone and other sources can't also be used. 4. Therefore, as a compromise, I propose changing the entry to read "5ft 8in,<sherdog reference> or 5ft 9in<ufc reference>". Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 09:58, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

I thought you agreed with the 'assessment' that he's 511 because of a 14 minute YouTube video? Make your mind up for this wind up.NEDOCHAN (talk) 11:16, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Bastun, I agree with everything you said except the last part. I won't compromise on such an obvious thing. What they're trying to take as a source and disregard the actual evidence is against any principal and ideology of Wikipedia. It's against WP:V and WP:RS but that's only a minor thing compared to how it destroys any common sense and reliability of Wikipedia. If we let this go now, it would only lead to degradation of the quality of content and make way to unreliable sources in thousands of biographies of living persons in one swift stroke.

Besides, are we going to include every 3rd party site as a reference for people's heights from now on only to have 5, 6 or even more listings in the infobox for each one of them? I think even discussing such a clear-cut matter in length gives credit to what these few users try to accomplish by exerting their control on thousands of pages by a couple of them getting together and accepting some irrelevant 3rd party site as the only source for anything MMA related. I'm going to use every tool available to stop them from damaging the remaining reliability and credibility of Wikipedia any further.

I would like to have an administrator perspective on this before going on with other tools available for the quick resolution of this dispute instead of dragging it any further. Especially considering the resolution of this dispute affects thousands of pages. It looks Deepfriedokra, Airplaneman and Goodnightmush were the last administrators to had involvement with this page. I would like to hear their opinions.Lordpermaximum (talk) 13:06, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Lordpermaximum - I'm an administrator, and I'm uninvolved - I think this article is only on my watchlist because I've reverted vandalism here in the past, I know nothing about the subject and have no opinion on him (if I'm honest, I don't really know what MMA is). Some things to get out of the way first of all:

• First, this talk page is categorically not the place for you to suggest that there is some kind of off-wiki collusion or bad faith editing going on amongst named individuals. On article talk pages, you should stick to discussing article content; if you want to make accusations of improper conduct, you need to take them to the appropriate forum, which for accusations like that would be WP:ANI, or (if it involves off-wiki evidence) you should ask an administrator whether you can e-mail them details. You should also read WP:ASPERSIONS. I'm going to ask that you either withdraw those accusations, or present your evidence in the proper manner.
• Strictly speaking, YouTube is a medium rather than a source. So, if there was something reported by the BBC, CNN or whatever, which appeared on their own accredited YouTube channel, that would be fine to use as a source. Random YouTube channels, however, are just that - random YouTube channels, and they often do publish footage that violates copyright. I very much doubt that 'Best of UFC', a channel with 77 subscribers and no information on their 'About' page, actually owns the rights to the footage they upload to YouTube. Posting links to videos like that anywhere on Wikipedia is not allowed (see WP:YOUTUBE for more on this), because our copyright policy prohibits not just the posting of copyright violations, but also the posting of links to copyright violations. Note that the copyright policy applies to talk pages just as much as it does to articles themselves, so once I've finished posting this message I'm going to remove some of the links you posted above. Please do not reinstate them, or post links to YouTube channels of that sort again.
• I'm not sure what I'm meant to be looking for in the 'behind the scenes' footage video - does it make an assertion, or is the reader expected to listen out for something a doctor says in order to verify the claim? What is 'The Mac Life', and does it have the kind of reputation for fact checking that we expect from WP:RS? I will say that if he's 5'11", then the other people in the video seem to be unusually tall, but that obviously might genuinely be the case.

I haven't reviewed all of the sources fully - I'd suggest going with whichever seems best bearing in mind the guidance at RS, WP:INDEPENDENT and WP:SECONDARY. The UFC site is promotional, and wouldn't generally be my first go-to place for reliable information; that said, if you doubt the veracity of Sherdog, you could start a conversation at WP:RSN. GirthSummit _(blether) 14:35, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

I've had a look at the sources in a bit more detail now. I removed a link to one YouTube video which I believe was a copyright infringement; the others seem OK. I don't have any knowledge of Sherdog whatsoever, but I must admit it's not screaming RS at me - I can't find an 'about' page where they publish how they get their information, for example. BoxRec seems slightly better, in that they have an easily accessible 'About us' page where they list their editors, but I don't know much about their reputation for accuracy and they have some nice disclaimers about how any information on the site may be incomplete/inaccurate. Given that both RoxRec and UFC seem to agree on 5'9", and Sherdog seems to be the outlier at 5'8", editors involved in this discussion may wish to consider going with that. Best GirthSummit _(blether) 14:59, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Girth Summit, thanks for spending your time to review this dispute.

• First of all,I haven't made any accusations. Those were only suspicions. If anyone thinks otherwise, I say "I withdrew them" for the sake of the actual discussion.
• Youtube was not the source. The actual recorded video is the source. You can access the same video by going to The Mac Life's own site. The Mac Life is a media platform which is officially accredited by the UFC. Here, the UFC's official page hosts one of The Mac Life's videos. I can include TheMacLife links instead of YouTube ones if it's a problem. However I agree that the one link you removed had potential copyright violation. I'm sorry I missed it but I provided 6 or 7 sources so, it's not that bad. I'll try to find another source that doesn't have any doubt about copyright violation for that one.
• As far as the recorded video of Conor McGregor getting his barefoot height measured by an UFC official/staff goes, you pretty much focused on procedures instead of basis and merits. Wikipedia's main purpose is to provide accurate and quality content and that prevails everything else, including minor procuderus of its own. That video is still the most reliable source, especially considering you validated it such that it did not violate any copyright.
• Still, although I stand by my claim that the recorded video of someone getting measured by an UFC official is the best source you can have for a thing like height and for that reason Conor McGregor's listed on-page height should be 5'11", I can live with your suggestion to take UFC and BoxRec listings instead of sherdog and make it 5'9". This is going to have an effect on all MMA-related content.Lordpermaximum (talk) 15:32, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Lordpermaximum, thanks for explicitly withdrawing that. To be clear though, since I recognise that you're new - it doesn't matter whether it's an accusation, or just voicing a suspicion - it's not permitted on article talk pages. WP:NPA is quite clear - you should focus on content, not contributors or their motivations.

With regard to the source, I'm afraid that's not how we work. That video might be an interesting source for a journalist writing an piece about McGregor, but as an encyclopaedia our mission is to summarise reliable, published sources. We use sources that make assertions of fact in the authorial voice; that video makes no assertions of fact of any kind, it's just a fly on the wall view of what happened behind the scenes that day, and overhearing someone saying "71" while holding a tape measure is very different from having a representative of the UFC say to the camera "McGregor is 71" tall". For us to draw any conclusions of any kind from it is WP:OR, which is not permitted. Who knows why that video doesn't match up with the published sources - maybe the bloke with the tape measure made a mistake, and went back and remeasured him later? Maybe he said 71 and then wrote down 69"? We can't know - and we aren't permitted to guess. I'm afraid that video is of no use for our purposes.

Let's wait and see whether the other editors agree with using 5'9" and those sources - I have no special authority here with regard to editorial decisions, we'll need to see whether a consensus along those lines emerges. To be clear though, a consensus established here amongst a few editors will not have any kind of binding effect on other pages - that would require wider discussion, either on the relevant a Wikiproject page, or (more probably) via a more centralised discussion somewhere like WP:RSN. Best GirthSummit _(blether) 15:46, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Well, although I haven't really contributed until late, this is a 4-year old account and I contributed a lot to Wikipedia in the beginning of it as an IP user since I've been a webmaster for 16 years. But I'm glad you're providing guidence on this because as you said I'm not really experienced on disputes or their resolution.

Still I feel, people shouldn't have to prove water is wet let alone fail at it because of some Wikipedia procedures. The benefits of actual evidence and reality far outweighs a couple procedures of Wikipedia in a matter that's crucial to Wikipedia's existence in the first place. If we have to prove what the UFC official meant in that video by saying "71 inches" (or wondering about if he made a mistake or not), we're opening a can of worms and it would send shockwaves through out the whole Wikipedia. As you could see in the removed link which I'm going to replace with a unquestionable source pretty soon, UFC listed McGregor 5'11" too before his fights in the begining of his UFC career. So that means the UFC took its official's measurement of Conor McGregor as correct.