Talk:Audley Harrison

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Biography / Sports and Games (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the sports and games work group.
 

This article has comments here.

WikiProject London (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Boxing (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Boxing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Boxing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Olympics (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon Audley Harrison is within the scope of WikiProject Olympics. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

This article has comments here.

WikiProject England (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject United Kingdom (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Television / Reality (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of television on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Reality television task force.
 

This article has comments here.

This article has an assessment summary page.

Untitled[edit]

So ... posting "unsourced or poorly sourced negative material" is OK for dead people? Ben-w 19:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

  • they can't sue for libel so yes. --Wikipediatastic 10:40, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Is that reach accurate?[edit]

86" arm span seems a bit extreme for a guy 6"4. His arms would have to be hanging well past his knees. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.45.16.24 (talk) 02:54, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

External links[edit]

Can somebody please turn the external links within the "Professional career" section to inline references Kingjamie 19:52, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Done - Foxhill 04:52, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

The Sun[edit]

"Also in September 2000 he told The Sun newspaper that he was a bully whilst at school and university, a claim which The Sun retracted after having seen him fight in the ring."

This makes no sense at all so i'm taking it out. 62.25.109.195 14:59, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

This is the best comment ever FACT! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.84.1.3 (talk) 11:57, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Frank Bruno[edit]

Please correct or otherwise provide a reference for '41 year old sex-World champion Frank Bruno'. (I like that one Harry).

Sortable table issues[edit]

There were several problems with this sortable table - see HELP:SORTING for information on how they work; the big problems are that the sorting process is pretty "dumb", it will sort dates entered as "17 July, 2009" etc by the "17" before the "2009", and names like "Brian Nix" by "Brian" not "Nix". The trick is to use Template:Sort for the names/surnames issue and Template:Dts for dates. To see the difference, compare the two revisions once the sorting was fixed and with the problems before. TheGrappler (talk) 23:03, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Neutrality[edit]

I am some what of a supporter of Audley but this article is written like a press release from his management team.--Vintagekits (talk) 08:45, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

What parts do you think are unbalanced and need attention? --Jimbo[online] 14:04, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I've fixed most of it but the "UK and America" and "Comeback" sections are still written in an extremely flattering tone.--Vintagekits (talk) 09:47, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Edit sparring[edit]

Just a note: I plan (in future) to request 'page protection', if edit sparring re-occurs. That way, nobody will get blocked. GoodDay (talk) 19:49, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Nickname[edit]

Ok, Nobody calls him A-force except Audley, Everyone else calls him Fraudley, even the news papers and Barry McGuigan! Just because he might not like it doesn't mean its not a factual nickname.

I dont think he comes from Bangledesh either. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.214.161.193 (talkcontribs) 00:36, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, yeah, and that's why my change comment was
(but I can't find a 'good' place to revert back to - it's a mess))
Shenme 01:12, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Calm down Shenme, If you don't know whats good and whats not then find out and then edit! Don't just delete other peoples legit comments. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.34.177.217 (talk) 17:28, 24 February 2007 (UTC).
Would anyone removing the nickname have any objections if it was added back with cited from the Daily Telegraph and Frank Warren himself? One Night In Hackney303 17:26, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Let not forget "Audrey".--Vintagekits 17:31, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
I've previously removed "fraudley" when it wasn't cited. With the cites as they stand I wouldn't remove it but an admin thats a specialist in living persons bios should probably still double check. As for Audrey its just the same, I have heard it said by Herbie Hide but havn't seen it in print from a reputable source. --LiamE 22:30, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
There is no way these derogatory nicknames should be stuffed in the infobox, they are not widely known or widely reported. This is being discussed on the BLP noticeboard, please come there to make your case for insertion. Off2riorob (talk) 13:04, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Off2riorob you are talking rubbish. If people call him that on an ongoing basis then those are his nick names. Even Frank Bruno accidently called him Ordinary Harrison live on sky sports. We all know him by these so they should stand as nick names. Just beacuse you don't know that much about it doesn't give you the right to change what is fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.45.116.247 (talk) 20:20, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Bring the fighting here guys. I see no problem with the nicknames in the Infobox. GoodDay (talk) 23:03, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

The guy thinks he has even a modicum of knowledge with respect to the pugilistic artist and he knows zip! I said all I have to say on the topic above. P.S. AForceOne is a SPA and is Fraudley brother and manager!--Vintagekits (talk) 23:19, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Okie Dokie. PS: Harrison sure resembles David Haye. -- GoodDay (talk) 23:33, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Only in a parallel universe.--Vintagekits (talk) 23:42, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Yeah. GoodDay (talk) 23:45, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Quite a few of those listed above are dead links or not RS (as they're posted) in the comments section by users. Audrey, Fraudley, Ordinary and A-Force seem to be the only referenced nicknames. --Jimbo[online] 08:43, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm concerned that COI may have been violated. One of the editors seems to be a brother/manager of Harrison. What's going on? GoodDay (talk) 12:42, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
I would be happy to ensure that only those with cast iron sources are added.--Vintagekits (talk) 14:28, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Compromise[edit]

Assuredly, we're allowed 'atleast' 2 nicknames in the Infobox. Howabout a 'positive' & a 'negative' nickname? GoodDay (talk) 13:03, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Please see the message regarding the nicknames and in the previous nickname section on this page and the [link to the discussion on the BLP noticeboard. Off2riorob (talk) 13:07, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

I know about 'em. But, let's find middle-ground for this article (and other Boxing articles). A positive & a negative nickname, thus NPOV. GoodDay (talk) 13:11, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
No..no.. you misunderstand NPOV, it's not a balancing act of "say one good thing, say one bad thing". We write about subjects in a conservative manner, adding in derogatory nicknames is not a sign of conservative writing. --Cameron Scott (talk) 13:17, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
I've only suggested 'one' derogatory name. GoodDay (talk) 13:24, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
So if someone gets in trouble with the law we dont mention it because its "derogatory"? Or we dont mention Al Capones nickname - because he considered it "derogatory"?--Vintagekits (talk) 13:29, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

I recommend that we leave the Infobox's 'nicknames' section empty, until we can sort things out. Edit sparring isn't gonna get us anywheres. GoodDay (talk) 13:52, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. That way any nicknames that are widely used and widely known and sourced to a couple of quatity sources can be added to the body of the article where they can be explained and rebutted as required. Off2riorob (talk) 14:02, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

As "A-force" and "Fraudley" are by far the most common nicknames then I am going to add these to the article one I find multiple cast iron sources for each. Agreed?--Vintagekits (talk) 14:27, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Either 2-names or no-names. GoodDay (talk) 14:31, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Derogatory nicknames have no place in the infobox. There is already a section especially called nicknames with 4 nicknames in it all cited, one is positive and 3 are negative, what is the problem. Off2riorob (talk) 14:46, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
A. Why have what you call "derogatory nicknames" no place if they are well sourced? Have you read Wikipedia:CENSOR#Wikipedia_is_not_censored? There is no policy based reason to not have them. There are multiple examples across wikipedia where less than flattering terms are used.
B. They are explained in the article and well sources for passes WP:BLP, WP:V and WP:NPOV.--Vintagekits (talk) 14:52, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
yAWN, they are in the article and explained, take fraudly for example it is designed to demean him isn't it? Yes, I fail to see what you are doing here, get over it comes to mind. Off2riorob (talk) 14:58, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
I am simply looking to reflect real life - and the sources. Again you still havent come up with any policy based reason not to have it in the article.--Vintagekits (talk) 15:01, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
I don't think the sources for "Audrey" and "A-Farce" are strong enough to include them in the infobox.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 21:23, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
You are probably right SS. I would hold off on inserting those until stronger sources come along. The ones I am proposing inserting at the moment is "A-Force" and "Fraudley". Both are commonly and widely used with strong sources.--Vintagekits (talk) 09:34, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

We don't seem to be making any headway folks. Recommend 'deleting' nicknames from the Infoboxes of 'all' Boxer bios. GoodDay (talk) 15:04, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

For the life of me I cant figure out that logic behind that move - I am arguing from a policy point of view and providing sources and in return all I am getting is personal opinion and POV. In any event the Boxing Project would never accept it.--Vintagekits (talk) 15:06, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
I'll recommend it there. It wouldn't be the first time a WikiProject gave me the thumbs down. GoodDay (talk) 15:12, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

The nickname in the infobox should be for the 'official' nickname by which the boxer is known in the ring, e.g. 'Marvellous', 'The Clones Cyclone', 'Hit Man'. It isn't there for any insults that can be sourced. If a boxer is known by more than one of these 'official' nicknames during their career then these should all be in the infobox. Derogatory terms and insults should not be in the infobox and should only be included in the body of the article if they can be sourced from multiple reliable sources that demonstrate that they are/have been in common usage.--Michig (talk) 10:19, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

I expected little else from you but hey! Anyway, when does an "insult" become a genuine alternative nickname? or do we simply censor wikipedia to appease British sensibilities?--Vintagekits (talk) 10:28, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
I totally support Michigs comments. Off2riorob (talk) 10:34, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll throw my 2 penneth in. A-Force is the "official" nick name but there are certainly others in common usage such as A-Farce, Audrey and Fraudley. I dont see a problem putting any or all 4 of those in the info box or simply putting see nick name section in the discussion box and going into detail there. As a guideline the Ali article infobox includes both the official "The Greatest" and the slightly derogatory "Louisville Lip" as he was indeed widely known in his early career. --LiamE (talk) 02:45, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

The consensus here was for nicknames with multiple reliable sources to be included in the infobox. I see two sources for A-Farce, one of them reliable, the other maybe, but where are the multiple reliable sources for the others? Can you cite them (ideally in the 'Nickname' section rather than the infobox - if they're cited there they aren't needed in the infobox).--Michig (talk) 19:55, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

This , what is basically forum shopping by Vintagekits until he thinks he gets the answer he wants should not be considered a consensus for what got him a block last time he repeated tried to add these excessive nicknames to the infobox. Off2riorob (talk) 20:11, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Forum shopping my arse! Weeks of discussion and building concensus. Multiple suggestions put forward and a concensus was finally found.--Vintagekits (talk) 20:38, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Michig, which ones are you unsure of? regards--Vintagekits (talk) 20:39, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
A-Farce, Ordinary and Audrey.--Michig (talk) 20:47, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

A-Farce.

Ordinary.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Vintagekits (talkcontribs)

Thanks for finding sources. I have no objection to these nicknames if properly sourced being mentioned in the 'Nickname' section of the article, but they don't belong in the infobox. The infobox is there to give a quick summary of the article, and these lesser-used nicknames are not important enough to be included there.--Michig (talk) 07:21, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
What was the point in you asking me to find the sources if you already had your mind made up that you didnt think they should go in the infobox - why waste my time?
Give me a policy based reason my these nicknames shouldnt go in the infobox.--Vintagekits (talk) 09:21, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
They need to be properly sourced wherever they are in the article, so it's hardly a waste of time. The infobox should summarize the most important parts of an article for quick reference. A few insults from John Inverdale, etc. don't fall into this category. A nickname that a boxer is most commonly known by does. Why do you think these need to be in the infobox rather than just mentioned in the appropriate place in the article? --Michig (talk) 12:25, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
A boxers infobox should show his/her most common nicknames - we should not pick and choose which ones we like - we reflect the sources and state the commonly used ones. There is a clear concensus at the Boxing Project to do this.--Vintagekits (talk) 16:13, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Yes, the most common nickname or more if they have more than one that has been most common at different times - not every one that can be sourced.--Michig (talk) 18:46, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

We've an understanding, reached at my talkpage. Take a peek, as this will be how it's done per each Boxer bio article. GoodDay (talk) 17:46, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Can you provide a link to the agreement? I see a discussion, but not an agreement.--Michig (talk) 18:46, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
See my 'talkpage', as it's just a 2-editor agreement. You can make a copy of it here, if ya like. GoodDay (talk) 18:58, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Please don't restore the nickname section; it has generated legal complaints to OTRS. Stifle (talk) 10:20, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Protection request[edit]

I don't want to see 'anybody' getting blocked. Therefore, I've put in a request for Full Protection. GoodDay (talk) 21:26, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

OK, there's 3 days to get a consensus at BLP for inclusion. From the way I see it, BLP is the only place that seems to have the authority. GoodDay (talk) 21:48, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Where are you getting this information that we need a concensus at BLP? There is concensus at the Boxing Project! There is no BLP issue - ALL nicknames are sources per WP:RS so that is a red herring.--Vintagekits (talk) 21:55, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
I remember 'somewhere' on the BLP, that it frowns on 'critisim' being added to 'living people articles'. GoodDay (talk) 22:05, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Not when someone has been extensively criticised for their career, it would be a major breach of NPOV to leave it out. 2 lines of K303 12:17, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
All the negative nicknames are in the body of the article, if he is so useless then those details can also be cited and added to the body of the article. Off2riorob (talk) 12:22, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Its not more or less useless than any other nickname - nicknames are central piece of information with respect to boxers and should be included in the infobox - concensus on the Boxing Project backs this up - why are you editing against concensus?--Vintagekits (talk) 16:04, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

It's frustrating (these situations) to be sure. I've run into simliar situations at WP:HOCKEY (concerning diacritics), I don't agree with the usage of dios, but there's not much I can do about it. GoodDay (talk) 15:22, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Protected[edit]

As the nicknames section of the article has generated a complaint to OTRS, this article is protected pending review. Please calm down, and discuss the matter here (without repeating the disputed nicknames). Stifle (talk) 09:51, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Ringside[edit]

In an interview on a British television programme called "Ringside" after the David Haye fight Harrison expressed his intention to continue his career and give it one last shot. He went on and said, "The dirth at the top level at the moment is so bad and the Klitschko's are so desperately looking for challengers... For example, If I fought Tyson Fury for the British Commonwealth that one victory could potentially get me back a world title shot." The claim was laughed upon by people that interviewed him.

Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJPWfiHVGxI Humphrey54321 (talk) 19:19, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit request[edit]

Just a small thing, but don't have an account to change it - There is a typo on "David Price"'s name in the Professional Boxing Record section. Could someone fix it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.16.153.238 (talk) 12:10, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 13 October 2012[edit]

Under heading 'Professional boxing record', the following line of code has a mispelling:

| align=left|England David Prince

The link is correct, the boxer's name is incorrect (Price, not Prince)

| align=left|England David Price

2.29.73.178 (talk) 17:44, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Fixed Thanks. Dru of Id (talk) 18:54, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 April 2014[edit]

I want to add some information that has been left out when talking about his achievements and victories. My addition will improve the article.

78.100.227.130 (talk) 01:47, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 02:38, 25 April 2014 (UTC)