Talk:Roy Jones Jr.: Difference between revisions
Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
The article references a controversy without mentioning it previously. What controversy??? |
The article references a controversy without mentioning it previously. What controversy??? |
||
[[User:KristoferM|KristoferM]] 02:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC) |
[[User:KristoferM|KristoferM]] 02:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC) |
||
The article needs to be more fair minded. Jones had the potential to be one of the great fighters in boxing history but spent so much time choosing bad opponets and dodgeing quality opponents that his last years make a mockery of the first part of his career. I was glad to see how easily Tarver kocked him out because it procved what I jad been saying fore years, jones was over-rated and not worth watching on free t.v. much less on PPV. Good riddance Jones, boxing has had enough of your lame show.... |
|||
I have to agree. He dodged Collins. [[User:Palx|<font color="#002266">'''Pal'''</font><font color="#FF8800">'''''X'''''</font>]] 01:33, 9 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Music career == |
== Music career == |
Revision as of 00:22, 22 March 2009
Biography Unassessed | |||||||
|
This article from a Korean online newspaper contains an interesting quote:
"...it took more than 10 years for American boxer Roy Jones Jr. to get the gold medal back from South Korean Park Shi-heon after a judging controversy at the 1988 Seoul Olympics."
This makes it sound as if Roy Jones Jr. got the gold retroactively, yet there seems to be no evidence of this anywhere else. What's the real story?
http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/sports/200409/kt2004092216573211620.htm
- He didn't get the gold, but he was awarded a gold olympic order, a special reward by the IOC. Jeronimo 08:41, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
This article has taken on an immensely POV side, just like I used to write articles three years ago as a rookie Antonio The Winner by Split decisioon!!! Martin 12:18, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)
Specify pov please - in what way, where? He's arguably one of the best boxers ever, I would think its hard to not sound pro-Roy when writing about him. Is that what you meant?KillerChihuahua 10:30, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
- Look, anything you use an exclamation point on looks POV. Encyclopedias should not use exclamation points
Ridiculous use of POV in the article. He is largely unheard of outside the USA. Nobody knows him. What is a 'pound for pound' boxer ? Why did he never fight Collins ? None of these things are explored in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.166.15.246 (talk) 14:59, August 28, 2007 (UTC)
It's REALLY hard to sound anti-jones, since he REALLY is one of the greatest boxers! Definately one of the best.
Well I'm anti Jones since he failed a drug test for steriods and paid the fine. No denial he just paid the fine. Thats why boxing so needs a national boxing commission. He was caught and fined, in a big boxing state he would have been banned. If there was any justice Jones would have been banned.
This article doesn't mention things like Mike McCallums age or Pazienza being way out of his division and past his best. Roy Jones was an awesome fighter but there was a long stretch in his career that was just padding.
Playing basketball and boxing on the same day...
The article says that he played for the Jacksonville Barracudas and defended his lightheavyweight title on the same day... in fact it was his IBF supermiddleweight title (against Eric Lucas)... so I'm just making that minor alteration, mmkay?FlyBang 22:56, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
What controversy??
The article references a controversy without mentioning it previously. What controversy??? KristoferM 02:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Music career
Anyone remember he started the Body Head Bangerz, and had a few big hits with that? Zchris87v 18:48, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Dogfighting Controversy
jmfangio keeps removing convtroversial statements made by him in reference to michael vick. nobody posted any opinion or biased statements but he keeps initiating revert wars and deleting factual statements. They were in the news a lot and are highly relevent to his bio. Just like we put up controversial statements by politicians and other celebrities. See Keith Hernanez's bio - we have put up his controversial comments about women and baseball. The bottom line is these statements are not at all biased and belong on his page. Please stop violating wikipedia policy by revert deleting them. Feel free to change how they are presented but they belong on the page. See Wiki policy:
"Be respectful to others and their points of view. This means primarily: Do not simply revert changes in a dispute. When someone makes an edit you consider biased or inaccurate, improve the edit, rather than reverting it. Provide a good edit summary when making significant changes that other users might object to. The revision you would prefer will not be established by reverting, and repeated reverting is forbidden; discuss disputed changes on the talk page. If you encounter rude or inappropriate behavior, resist the temptation to respond unkindly, and do not make personal attacks."
I emphasize the policy on refraining from reversions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gtown05 (talk • contribs) 04:55, August 29, 2007 (UTC)
Possibly Best Pound for Pound All Time?
I don't know of a single boxing expert that picks Jones Jr. as best of all time. Most would not even pick him as best in his own weight division. He could possibly be the best accordion player of all time also. This statement is useless and misleading.12.105.154.103 22:16, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
When I search Roy Jones it takes me to one page, but then if I click on discussion and then back to the article, the introduction is considerably different. I'm a wiki newb but what is up with this? I agree with the intro that cites Robinson as the concensus p4p, its much more accurate, if not as well written.12.105.154.103 03:04, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
As far as I know, pound for pound is nothing more than a concocted term by some magazine. One cannot say that pound for pound is factual because it isn't. A made up expression with no relevance or intrinsic value is all. As Jones did not fight Collins, shouldn't this get mentioned in the article. Most people outside USA who actually know a bit about boxing reckon he was simply wasn't good enough and dare one say it afraid to do so. There's enough substance in this instance to merit inclusion given the plethora of insubstantial rhetoric in this article. Wikipedia makes him sound invincible and is not accurate as an encyclopaedic article in doing so. Jones is a good boxer but nowhere near the legendary status one would take from reading about him on Wiki. Rewrite sensibly please and properly. PalX 01:28, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
picture seems odd
For a boxer, best known for being a very successful fighter, doesn't a photo of him holding two machine guns as his primary photo seem a little out of place? Just my two cents. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edcoxflorida (talk • contribs) 08:18, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
- I concur. Seems to violate WP:BLP oknazevad (talk) 15:54, 25 February 2009 (UTC)