Mac Dreamstate (talk | contribs) |
JMichael22 (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 297: | Line 297: | ||
:::::::::::@[[User:Fallengrademan]], that is utterly absurd. Are you seriously suggesting that there should be a Zimbabwean flag next to [[Dereck Chisora]], when he has UK citizenship and explicitly "represents" the UK? Or Arthur Abraham, who is a German citizen and has boxed almost his entire career in Germany, despite being born in Armenia? Or how about the current Haitian-born contingent, namely [[Adonis Stevenson]], [[Bermane Stiverne]] and [[Jean Pascal]], all of whom are Canadian citizens and are based in Montreal? Your reasoning makes no sense whatsoever. [[User:Mac Dreamstate|Mac Dreamstate]] ([[User talk:Mac Dreamstate|talk]]) 20:52, 8 December 2015 (UTC) |
:::::::::::@[[User:Fallengrademan]], that is utterly absurd. Are you seriously suggesting that there should be a Zimbabwean flag next to [[Dereck Chisora]], when he has UK citizenship and explicitly "represents" the UK? Or Arthur Abraham, who is a German citizen and has boxed almost his entire career in Germany, despite being born in Armenia? Or how about the current Haitian-born contingent, namely [[Adonis Stevenson]], [[Bermane Stiverne]] and [[Jean Pascal]], all of whom are Canadian citizens and are based in Montreal? Your reasoning makes no sense whatsoever. [[User:Mac Dreamstate|Mac Dreamstate]] ([[User talk:Mac Dreamstate|talk]]) 20:52, 8 December 2015 (UTC) |
||
'''Support''' inclution of flag icons in the professional boxing record tables. I see no problem in adding flag location to the professional boxing record tables. It's faster to identify the country.--[[User:Fallengrademan|Fallengrademan]] ([[User talk:Fallengrademan|talk]]) 18:51, 7 December 2015 (UTC) |
'''Support''' inclution of flag icons in the professional boxing record tables. I see no problem in adding flag location to the professional boxing record tables. It's faster to identify the country.--[[User:Fallengrademan|Fallengrademan]] ([[User talk:Fallengrademan|talk]]) 18:51, 7 December 2015 (UTC) |
||
::'''Support''' Using Flag Icons is helpful to show people where the fighter is from and where the fight took place they are helpful tools and should be used [[User:JMichael22|JMichael22]] ([[User talk:JMichael22|talk]]) 21:39, 8 December 2015 (UTC) |
|||
==MoS:Boxing Final call== |
==MoS:Boxing Final call== |
Revision as of 21:40, 8 December 2015
![]() | Boxing Project‑class | |||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Couple new ones
I just wanted to let other project members I finished a couple new boxer articles, maybe we can make them part of the project. Check them out: Andres Hernandez and Tami Mauriello. I am thinking of starting one of Bob Pastor. Thanks and God bless! Antonio el culoco Martin dime 04:04, March 2, 2014 (UTC)
Arlene Blencowe deserving?
Does Arlene Blencowe deserve a wikipedia article?
Weight class formatting and consistency
An IP with a rather hostile attitude (1, 2) recently went around edit-warring (and hurling insults aplenty) in the firm belief that weight classes are to be hyphenated. Examples of such edits can be seen at the articles for James DeGale, Zsolt Erdei, Julian Jackson, Gerald McClellan and Carl Froch. The sole source the IP claims as authoritative beyond any doubt is that of Boxing News, a British magazine for which the WP article currently lists no references besides itself. As we know, the UK forms an important part of boxing history, but the sport does not revolve around just one location. The notion that one magazine, however long it has been in publication, should be regarded as the definitive source for terminology which varies internationally smacks of WP:POV, and maybe even WP:COI and WP:PROMO.
However, said variation of terminology in the case of weight classes – particularly the inconsistencies – is a very valid point and needs to be addressed on WP. Right now it is all over the place. I present the formatting for three example weight classes as follows:
- IBF: "LT. HEAVYWEIGHT", "S. MIDDLEWEIGHT", "JR. MIDDLEWEIGHT".
- WBA: "LIGHT HEAVYWEIGHT", "SUPER MIDDLEWEIGHT", "SUPER WELTERWEIGHT".
- WBC: "Lt. Heavyweight", "Supermiddleweight", "Superwelterweight".
- WBO: "LT-HEAVYWEIGHT", "SUP-MIDDLEWEIGHT", "JR-MIDDLEWEIGHT".
- The Ring: "Light Heavyweight", "Super Middleweight", "Jr. Middleweight".
- TBRB: "LIGHT HEAVYWEIGHT", "SUPER MIDDLEWEIGHT", "JUNIOR MIDDLEWEIGHT".
- BoxRec: "light heavyweight", "super middleweight", "super welterweight".
- Wikipedia: light heavyweight, super middleweight, light middleweight.
As can be seen, the use of all-caps on many of those websites creates much ambiguity regarding case. Obviously on WP we cannot use all-caps, so that can be ruled out, but what about the WBC and The Ring using title case, e.g. "Lt. Heavyweight"? On the flip side, BoxRec uses all lower case, as does WP currently. And just to throw it out there, the UFC uses title case for its own weight classes, e.g. Light Heavyweight.
Now onto hyphens. From the above, only the WBO uses them, as do a multitude of UK publications. And of course, let us not forget the amazing/wonderful/brilliant/oldest-and-most-all-powerful magazine Boxing News, which must be respected because a certain ranting child will otherwise chuck their toys out of the pram if their way is not heeded. Make no doubt about it—we have been TOLD, so there! Either way, hyphenation looks to be more of a UK-centric format. Not common in the US, if at all.
Finally, the variety in the actual names of weight classes is also up in the air. As an example of the most inconsistent one, WP currently uses light middleweight whereas the four main sanctioning bodies (IBF, WBA, WBC and WBO) are split on "super welterweight" and "junior/jr. middleweight". TBRB and The Ring both use "junior/jr. middleweight", making it 4–2 for that name. All the while, BoxRec and Boxing News use "light middleweight", a name which I have an inkling might be outdated, but cannot be sure; in the US it seems to be rare, if not nonexistent.
With all that said, let's discuss—like adults, natch. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 21:05, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
- If we're referring to titles from particular sanctioning bodies then I would suggest we use the terminology that the sanctioning body uses. For general description of weight classes it would be better to standardize, but taking into account usage in the country that the boxer comes from. Re. the example above, light middleweight is the common usage in the UK I believe and is used by the BBBofC - it would look a bit odd for an article about a British light middleweight to describe them as a junior middleweight or super welterweight, despite what the (generally US-centric) 'world' sanctioning bodies and US publications/websites use. --Michig (talk) 22:01, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
- That's what I was thinking of too. Regional- and sanctioning body-specific terminology sounds like a good compromise, seeing as standardisation based on all the above variation/inconsistency looks a bit tricky to enforce on WP. In which case, "super-middleweight" (with the hyphen) could be acceptable practice if the titleholder – and therefore article subject – is British. It's a start, right? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:12, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
- However, what if a boxer holds "junior welterweight", "light welterweight" and/or "super lightweight" titles with different sanctioning bodies? Which one is to be used on WP? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:19, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
- If we are referring to a specific title I would say we should aim to use the exact wording used by the sanctioning body. --Michig (talk) 11:48, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
- What about consistency? Wikipedia has its own style guide and it should be followed wherever possible. It would be ridiculous to punctuate titles differently based on the sanctioning body if they all differed. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:45, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
- If we are referring to a specific title I would say we should aim to use the exact wording used by the sanctioning body. --Michig (talk) 11:48, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
- However, what if a boxer holds "junior welterweight", "light welterweight" and/or "super lightweight" titles with different sanctioning bodies? Which one is to be used on WP? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:19, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
Let us have a look at the naming minutiae for what WP currently has labelled as light welterweight:
- IBF – "JR. WELTERWEIGHT"
- WBA – "SUPER LIGHTWEIGHT"
- WBC – "Superlightweight"
- WBO – "JR-WELTERWEIGHT"
- The Ring – "Jr. Welterweight"
- TBRB – "JUNIOR WELTERWEIGHT"
All the above are 100% accurate with regard to case and punctuation. Of the six, "junior/jr/jr. welterweight" outnumbers "super lightweight/superlightweight" by 4–2. The use of "light-welterweight", with a hyphen, can be observed as being relegated solely to UK publications. As of 2015, "light welterweight" without the hyphen appears to be used on the WP title only. Even BoxRec recently switched to "super lightweight". Therefore I propose that any variation of "light welterweight" (particularly if touted by an aggressive IP) be dismissed as an outdated niche spelling only.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mac Dreamstate (talk • contribs)
- You seem to be looking at this from a very US-centric point of view. From the other side of the Atlantic, the BBBofC uses "Light Welterweight" ([1]), the two major British boxing magazines Boxing Monthly and Boxing News use "Light-Welterweight" ([2], [3]). The European Boxing Union uses "Super-Lightweight" ([4]). You can't dismiss anything outside America as "niche", and if we're describing specific titles we should use the actual name of the title, not an Americanization of that title. --Michig (talk) 22:07, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
- Granted, and rescinded on the niche aspect—that was unyielding of me. Not sure where I suggested Americanisation of titles, though? The ones at world championship level are right there, and none of them are labelled as "light(-)welterweight". It's just a case of how faithfully are we to reproduce their naming format. Say if someone held all titles at 140 lbs, would the lead section of their WP article have to state separately that they are the "WBC superlightweight champion", "WBO jr-welterweight champion", "The Ring jr. welterweight champion", etc.? I'm all for accuracy in general, but WP has its own guidelines for standardisation—and there's something in need of it. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:54, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
"dismissed as an outdated niche spelling only"...lol what a spastic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.4.234.117 (talk) 14:46, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
- Well hi there! Nice to see you again, too. Still not going to contribute anything to the topic except for insults? Doesn't seem like Wikipedia suits you. Try your local nursery instead. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 14:55, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for taking this on, Mac. It's not clear to me if the hyphens are the dominant usage in Britain. I think we should give more weight to the usage of reliable sources than the sanctioning bodies. When referring to a specific sanctioning body's title, I think we should use the name the sanctioning body uses regardless of the variety of English used in the article, but follow Wikipedia standards for caps and punctuation. When referring to the titles of multiple sanctioning bodies, I prefer to be concise and just use one name for the weight class.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 18:56, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
- From what I've seen, the UK media heavily favours hyphenation, as does the EBU. So, we might as well start inserting the hyphen for British and European boxers—I'm done scrapping with the above IP on that. However, for US- or anywhere else-based boxers, it ain't happening. They can stick the hyphen in as much as they want, and I'll just hit rollback every time. I'm not the one constantly getting blocked for WP:NPA and WP:NOTHERE. With that said, the WBO does use hyphens, but in the case of multiple titles being listed in a lead, it would look silly to have "[Boxer's name] is a former WBO junior-welterweight and WBA super lightweight champion". Instead of separately listing out both, with their inconsistencies, it's better to just default to WP's own light welterweight. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:30, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
Can this be included ASAP or needs to simmer for a few days so Floyd has a chance to address these pacquiao fight allegations?
Here is the link to what I'm talking about. 128.227.11.119 (talk) 05:40, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
Trainers, promoters and managers in the lead
Surely this counts somewhat as spam/advertising? Of what relevance is it, in a set of introductory paragraphs, as to who promotes or trains a fighter? If they're notable, mention them somewhere in the professional career section, but not off the bat. Can we get a guideline set on this? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 15:19, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
- I agree. I'm reluctant to set a hard and fast rule, but it is rarely important enough that the promoter or trainer should be mentioned in the lead.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 19:16, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
- At least if they're hugely notable like Angelo Dundee, Eddie Futch or Cus D'Amato, but even they are not mentioned in the leads of Ali, Frazier and Tyson. I recently cleaned up the lead for Chris Algieri, after someone tried adding John David Jackson and Joe DeGuardia's Star Boxing to the lead. Surely "no, just no" for that? Same goes for PBC as well—I'm seeing that quite a lot, which just smacks of advertising. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:07, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
Fight articles
A deletion discussion is going on at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wladimir Klitschko vs. Bryant Jennings. The reason I bring this up to the Project is the tone of that discussion seems to be going in a direction on what fights qualify as deserving an article. As it stands, many title fights have their own articles - not only in the heavyweight division, but other divisions (e.g., all Manny Pacquiao and Floyd Mayweather, Jr. fights for the past seven years). The outcome of this AfD seems likely to influence 100s of boxing fight articles. WP:SPORTSEVENT isn't really well suited for boxing fights, MMA cards, or other "event" type sports (e.g., the Kentucky Derby). Depending on how this AfD goes, it could have a strong influence on other boxing fight articles. Thought this was appropriate to bring to the attention of the Project. RonSigPi (talk) 21:25, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
- If it's an IBF/WBA/WBC/WBO/Ring title fight, and it's had a decent amount of coverage, then I see no reason not to have separate articles. Instead, what should be established is a definitive (and hopefully rigid) style guide for such articles. Why are people still formatting "lineal" as "Lineal"? It looks utterly absurd. Likewise the constant capitalisation of "Champion/Championship", or using "&" to separate titles. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:11, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
MoS:Boxing
I'll keep bringing this up. Unless there already is one and I can't find it, what we need is a manual of style for boxing. This would cover weight classes (correct case, hyphenation [or lack thereof] and sanctioning body differences), use of terminology ("title", "champion", "lineal", etc.), what to avoid ("&", etc.), a standardised lead, and other formatting ("WBA (Super)", "WBC Silver", etc.) Mac Dreamstate (talk) 01:32, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
RfC: format of boxing weight classes
How should weight classes be formatted on WP, and how should how professional fight record tables be presented? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 02:27, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- Following on from the above section, I propose that it is now absolutely necessary for a manual of style to be established for boxing articles, or at least BLPs. There has been much edit-warring going on, especially regarding whether or not weight classes should be hyphenated ("light welterweight" vs "light-welterweight"), capitalised ("super featherweight" vs "Super Featherweight"), presented in accordance with sanctioning body titles ("WBC super welterweight" vs "IBF junior middleweight" vs "light middleweight" if a boxer holds both), or simply follow BoxRec.
- Furthermore, the format for professional fight records should be set in stone. I'm seeing something like this a lot: "30 Wins (15 KOs), 2 Losses, 0 Draws"—the capitalisation baffles me. I have tried on a few articles to change it to something like: "32 fights, 30 wins (15 knockouts), 2 losses"—without the redundant "draws" field. All this and more awaits discussion for the RfC. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 02:33, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
While we are at it - and I agree the above should be standardised although I have no opinion which way - I don't think upcoming fights should be part of the record. No issue with those within a few weeks but there are some months ahead with no more information than a date. The MMA project has a MOS for records which we could take as a model and insert into this project.Peter Rehse (talk) 09:50, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- I agree we should standardize on hyphenation - we currently have weight class categories that don't match the titles of articles on those weight classes. I'm not really fussed whether we go for hyphenated or non-hyphenated. I think I covered the title naming above - if we are describing a specific title then we should go with the actual name of that title. I definitely wouldn't follow Boxrec too closely - it's riddled with errors for one thing. As for future fights, I agree they shouldn't appear on a boxer's record - even a confirmed fight can be called off at the last minute due to injury. Also no need to capitalize 'fights', 'wins', etc. as mentioned above. Some standard for presenting records would be useful as there's little consistency at present - maybe look at what formats are currently used in boxer articles and standardize on the best one. --Michig (talk) 10:24, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- I want to see how this conversation goes but we could copy the MMA records MOS into a subpage and start modifying it to this projects needs. I would like to suggest some cross-project consistancy where possible (I mean if there is no real difference between hyphen choice).Peter Rehse (talk) 10:47, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
I like the idea of adopting some of the MMA formatting for record tables. However, first and foremost I'd to get the weight classes standardised, as that doesn't require any copying and pasting—just a consensus. They are the subject of most of the edit warring I've seen recently: from this to this, we have one unresponsive editor insisting on capitalisation and no hyphens, whilst the other insists on lower case and hyphens. I'm in the middle, in that I prefer lower case with no hyphens. I highly disagree with capitalising them like proper names: unlike the UFC, boxing weight classes are not a "brand" like the UFC's "Welterweight" or "Light Heavyweight" divisions, etc.—the weight ranges themselves are completely different, as is the sport itself, and they only have a fraction of the weight classes that boxing has.
So I'll start: if we go by User:Michig's example of using exact sanctioning body formatting, then that hits several stumbling blocks in the way of standardisation. The sanctioning bodies all use different formats, and are case-ambiguous except for The Ring and BBBofC, which use proper names. That doesn't even take into account hyphens: the UK media favours them (but not the BBBofC), as does the EBU, but only the WBO uses them in the US. It's unfeasible already, and here's where it starts to get really messy: say a boxer has unified the WBO "JR-WELTERWEIGHT", WBC "SUPERLIGHTWEIGHT", IBF "JR. WELTERWEIGHT", WBA "SUPER LIGHTWEIGHT" and The Ring "Jr. Welterweight" titles. What is their infobox, lead and fight record meant to say? Listing all those separate titles with case all over the place looks ridiculous, when we could simply bypass all that soup and use what WP already has—light welterweight. What if a boxer has the WBA "SUPER LIGHTWEIGHT" and WBC "SUPERLIGHTWEIGHT" titles, or the IBF "JR. WELTERWEIGHT" and WBO "JR-WELTERWEIGHT" titles—which format do we use? I say screw all that and use light welterweight, as the WP article is already named. Or, a boxer wins the WBA "SUPER LIGHTWEIGHT" title, loses it, then later wins the IBF "JR. WELTERWEIGHT" title. Surely the infobox weight doesn't get changed just because of a sanctioning body? Again, screw both of them and stick with light welterweight. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 12:57, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- OK - then my preference is all lowercase no hyphens. That as mentioned has a certain consistancy with what WP already does. Your right - get this sorted first and then deal with the MOS on record tables.Peter Rehse (talk) 13:03, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- One more anomaly that would arise from using exact sanctioning body format: the WBO uses "JR-HEAVYWEIGHT" instead of cruiserweight, "LT-HEAVYWEIGHT" instead of light heavyweight, and "SUP-MIDDLEWEIGHT" instead of super middleweight. Articles would look mighty dumb if we were to recreate all that, letter for letter. Imagine a lead that says..
- "[Name] [(birthdate)] is a [nationality] professional boxer. He is the current WBO LT-HEAVYWEIGHT champion, having held the WBO SUP-MIDDLEWEIGHT and WBC SUPERMIDDLEWEIGHT titles."
- Seriously..? Imagine that then going on their infobox, prose, fight record, and achievements navbox. This what I'm getting at and I'll keep repeating it until I'm blue in the face—we need standardisation, because right now anyone (including me) who edit wars over these things cannot refer to an MoS like in other WP subjects. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 13:18, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- I don't think we should get too hung up on abbreviations and punctuation used on websites. I doubt the engraving on the belt itself says 'SUP-MIDDLEWEIGHT'. Everybody is going to understand 'SUP-MIDDLEWEIGHT', 'super-middleweight' and 'super middleweight' to mean the same thing, so there would never be any real need to go to that level of specific formatting - pick one of those. In the infobox we just put the weight class so if there's more than one name for the same weight class my preference would be to go with the name that makes most sense to the boxer's nationality, but I could live with one name for each class there. --Michig (talk) 14:25, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- So let's pick. And how do we define formats for nationality? Where do we set it in stone for other editors to check—maybe here? We've got the formats for the US and Europe somewhat laid out, but what about Canada, Africa, South America, Australia, East Asia, etc.? It's not as simple as basing a hyphen on nationality—there's way too many permutations, and who has the time to go around checking the format that every continent on the planet uses? Plus, we also still have the case to deal with ("super featherweight" vs "Super Featherweight"). As for "hung up", one only has to look at this IP (and their continuing history) to see what "hung up" really means. Without an MoS, it's hard to explain to RfPP or AIV what they're doing wrong besides being abusive; and they've been doing that crap monthly since June. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 15:03, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- Please, before you reach any conclusion this situation should also be explained to other Wikipedia editors and ask for their opinion, including the ones who have contributed to the Wikipedia articles of Miguel Cotto, Floyd Mayweather, Jr., Sugar Ray Robinson and Muhammad Ali between others. I'm obviously referring to those articles because the editors in charge still choose to use the capitalised letters when referring to weight classes and similar style of record tables. Let's just wait and reach an agreement with other contributors to boxing articles so we can all share our opinion. I've been reading this discussion and I think there are several points which I agree with but as this is a serious matter that will modify several articles, we should also wait for other users opinion.--Fallengrademan (talk) 17:49, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- So let's pick. And how do we define formats for nationality? Where do we set it in stone for other editors to check—maybe here? We've got the formats for the US and Europe somewhat laid out, but what about Canada, Africa, South America, Australia, East Asia, etc.? It's not as simple as basing a hyphen on nationality—there's way too many permutations, and who has the time to go around checking the format that every continent on the planet uses? Plus, we also still have the case to deal with ("super featherweight" vs "Super Featherweight"). As for "hung up", one only has to look at this IP (and their continuing history) to see what "hung up" really means. Without an MoS, it's hard to explain to RfPP or AIV what they're doing wrong besides being abusive; and they've been doing that crap monthly since June. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 15:03, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- I don't think we should get too hung up on abbreviations and punctuation used on websites. I doubt the engraving on the belt itself says 'SUP-MIDDLEWEIGHT'. Everybody is going to understand 'SUP-MIDDLEWEIGHT', 'super-middleweight' and 'super middleweight' to mean the same thing, so there would never be any real need to go to that level of specific formatting - pick one of those. In the infobox we just put the weight class so if there's more than one name for the same weight class my preference would be to go with the name that makes most sense to the boxer's nationality, but I could live with one name for each class there. --Michig (talk) 14:25, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- Seriously..? Imagine that then going on their infobox, prose, fight record, and achievements navbox. This what I'm getting at and I'll keep repeating it until I'm blue in the face—we need standardisation, because right now anyone (including me) who edit wars over these things cannot refer to an MoS like in other WP subjects. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 13:18, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
For any future editors joining in and having a look for sources other than that of sanctioning bodies, I've gathered up as much for English-speaking media as I can in a single sitting. So, in no particular order, whilst always trying to include a two-word weight class:
UK
- Boxing News: lower case, hyphenated ("super-middleweight")
- Daily Mail: lower case, mixed hyphenation ("super middleweight" and "super-middleweight")
- Daily Mirror: lower case, hyphenated ("light-welterweight")
- The Sun: lower case, hyphenated ("light-heavyweight")
- Sky Sports: lower case, hyphenated ("super-middleweight")
- BoxNation: title case, hyphenated ("Super-Middleweight")
- BBC: lower case, hyphenated ("super-middleweight")
- ITV: title case, no hyphens ("Light Welterweight")
Lower case vs title case: 6–2
Hyphenation: 7–1
US
- ESPN: lower case, no hyphens ("light heavyweight")
- The Ring articles: lower case, no hyphens ("junior middleweight")
- The Ring rankings: mixed title and lower case, no hyphens ("Light Heavyweight" and "light heavyweight")
- BoxingScene: lower case, no hyphens ("Super middle", "Light welter", etc.)
- Boxing News 24: title case, no hyphens ("Light Heavyweight", "Junior Middleweight", etc.)
- Fightnews: lower case, no hyphens ("super lightweight")
- Transnational Boxing Rankings Board: title case, no hyphens ("Light Heavyweight", "Junior Middleweight", etc.)
- BoxRec: lower case, no hyphens ("super flyweight", "light heavyweight", etc.)
Lower case vs title case: 6–3
Hyphenation: none
Australia
- The Sydney Morning Herald: lower case, hyphenated ("super-middleweight" and "light-heavyweight")
- The Daily Telegraph: lower case, no hyphens ("light middleweight")
- Fox Sports: lower case, hyphenated ("super-middleweight")
- The Advertiser: lower case, no hyphens ("light heavyweight")
Lower case: ubiquitous
Hyphenation: 2–2
Canada
- Canoe.ca: lower case, hyphenated ("super-middleweight" and "light-heavyweight")
- Winnipeg Free Press: lower case, hyphenated ("light-heavyweight")
- Montreal Gazette: lower case, hyphenated ("light-heavyweight")
- Toronto Sun: lower case, hyphenated ("super-middleweight" and "light-heavyweight")
Lower case: ubiquitous
Hyphenation: ubiquitous
South Africa
- Sport24: lower case, hyphenated ("super-middleweight" and "light-heavyweight")
- Times Live: lower case, hyphenated ("super-middleweight" and "light-heavyweight")
- IOL Sport: lower case, no hyphens ("super middleweight", "junior welterweight", etc.)
Lower case: ubiquitous
Hyphenation: 2–1
My observations:
- Title case just isn't a common format. Ditch it altogether and let's never hear of it again. Think of it like this: weight classes are categories—concepts, even—as are music genres. The latter are not considered proper names on WP, per MoS, so let's have the same rule for boxing weight classes. Otherwise we might as well start writing "Super Welterweight™ Championship© Title®" like WWE or something.
- It's clear the US does not favour hyphenation whilst the rest almost unanimously do. However, what to do in the case of non-US boxers who are based in the US, such as Sergey Kovalev? It would seem odd to hyphenate his weight class in accordance with European media, when most of his coverage (TV networks, etc.) is US-based.
- I'll ask again—if we end up going with sanctioning body format, surely it's best to default to "light[-]welterweight/middleweight" in the case of a boxer holding both a "super lightweight/welterweight" and junior welterweight/middleweight" title? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 01:32, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
Capitalization
The weight classes should use lower case. This is consistent with MOS:CAPS.
- Furthermore, the words "title", "champion" and "championship" should absolutely not be capitalised, like they are way too often right now. Again, they are not proper names even though a sanctioning body may prefer to stylise them in title case, e.g. "World Heavyweight Champion". That's something WWE can get away with, because it's their specially branded title, but boxing sanctioning bodies are not brands—they hand out belts for weight classes, which themselves are not branded (unlike UFC). Mainstream media also doesn't capitalise them, so neither should we. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 02:37, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
Hyphens
I'm not convinced that we need to standardize this rather than use the national variety of English used in the article. For Kovalev that is American English.
Title names
When referring to one specific sanctioning body's title, I think we should use the name the sanctioning body uses. When referring to the titles of multiple sanctioning bodies, I prefer to be concise and just use one name for the weight class (Ex.Floyd Mayweather held the lineal, WBA, WBC and The Ring light middleweight titles.)
Record totals
I don't have an opinion on this beyond saying it seems like a waste of space to write "0 draws" or "0 No contests" for the vast majority of fighters.
Record table format
I haven't noticed many problems or edit warring with these so I'd rather not spend our efforts on this. I do like to see upcoming fights in the tables.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 00:27, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
- Actually, this kind of edit warring—particularly the full stops at the end of sentence fragments—is exactly why I included record tables in the RfC. In fact, I finally found WP's own guideline which can finally put an end to such edits: "They should not have final punctuation unless they consist of complete sentences." That's helpfully set in stone for us already. Therefore, this is how the "Notes" column should read for, e.g., Andre Ward's fight against Rodriguez: "Retained WBA (Super), lineal and The Ring super middleweight titles". NO full stop at the end.
- I have no problem with adding upcoming fights if they have a date (not necessarily venue) confirmed by at least one realiable source. However, ambiguous date ranges like "2016" and nothing else should not be accepted. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 02:30, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
- That dispute on the Andre Ward article is typical. It's about capitalization and the format of record totals. If we can write a MOS for those and the other two issues above, that should solve about 99% of these silly disputes.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 07:18, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
- I do have an issue with up-coming fights especially those more than a month in advance. Its supposed to be a record and too much can go wrong. The MMA records do not allow them for the same reason. Much as we rely on Boxrec it should not be considered a reliable source for future events.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:45, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
- Ronda Rousey's MMA record has listed her upcoming fight with Holly Holm for a long time. If an event and opponent is confirmed by reliable sources (major media outlets, not BoxRec) for a boxer or MMAist, why not include it? It's like an everday calendar—things change, but things in writing are also assumed to go ahead unless otherwise stated. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 15:13, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
- According to the MMA MOS on records the Ronda Rousey's upcoming fight should not be listed (pretty much for the same reasons I listed). The place for up-coming fights is in the text along with a suitable reference.Peter Rehse (talk) 15:37, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
- Ronda Rousey's MMA record has listed her upcoming fight with Holly Holm for a long time. If an event and opponent is confirmed by reliable sources (major media outlets, not BoxRec) for a boxer or MMAist, why not include it? It's like an everday calendar—things change, but things in writing are also assumed to go ahead unless otherwise stated. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 15:13, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
Project page guideline/MoS
Five editors seems to be all we can dredge up so far—at least those who are willing to discuss and communicate. Any other editors appear to be limiting themselves solely to regular record table updates, or the ones listed as WikiProject members aren't all that interested. No problem. So, after we get some support/oppose answers to the basics (I'm cooling off on record tables for now; the edit warring isn't happening on those as much, so I'll revisit it later unless someone else wants to take it on in the meantime), I am willing to write up a similar style guide to that of WikiProject MMA, and put that on the WikiProject Boxing front page so that editors can finally have something to which to refer. Let's get to it. Support or oppose:
Weight class hyphenation
Fighters based in the U.S. (e.g. Sergey Kovalev/light heavyweight), no hyphens. Fighters based anywhere else (e.g. James DeGale/super-middleweight), use hyphens. To avoid edit warring of this kind.
- Support Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:50, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
- Support GoodDay (talk) 23:03, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
Weight class case
Lower case for all weight classes, including the words "champion[ship]", "title", and "lineal". To avoid edit warring of this kind.
- Support Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:50, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
- Support GoodDay (talk) 23:03, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
Weight class naming format (infobox)
Use WP's own neutral article name, e.g. "light[-]welterweight", "super[-]featherweight", etc. to avoid sanctioning body variation altogether.
- Support Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:50, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
- Support GoodDay (talk) 23:03, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
If a fighter has won titles by only one sanctioning body in a weight class, use a near-exact replication of their naming scheme ("WBA super[-]lightweight" or "WBO junior[-]heavyweight", etc.) If a fighter has won titles by multiple sanctioning bodies in the same weight class, default to WP's own neutral article name to avoid cruft and confusion ("WBC and IBF light[-]middleweight" instead of "WBC super[-]welterweight and IBF junior[-]middleweight"). To avoid edit warring of this kind.
- Support Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:51, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
- Support GoodDay (talk) 23:03, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
With five editors weighing in, hopefully we can avoid a stalemate and reach consensus. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:49, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
I have no issue with following your lead. Write up the MOS and post it.Peter Rehse (talk) 19:58, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- I've now got most of the infobox and lead section guidelines written up, but not much on prose or record tables—and those aren't my main concern right now. How would I go about making it visible to everyone else here to offer feedback? In a sandbox or something? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:58, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
- Where is it now? If it is not on wikipedia I would just put it here - Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing/MOSGuidelines. People will look at it and comment if they feel its necessary - or more to the point lack of comment means acceptance. I figure two weeks for comment should be enough.Peter Rehse (talk) 11:12, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
- A lot of this has been paraphrased and adapted from WikiProject MMA, but here's what I've cooked up so far:
- I moved the lot to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing/MOSGuidelines so it does not get confused with the regular talk discussions. It looks good.Peter Rehse (talk) 22:36, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
Record tables
In record tables (e.g., Manny Pacquiao's), the type column shows the type of result as KO, UD, MD, SD, RTD, or TKO. However, the values are wiki-linked to the page about the particular fight (if there is one), instead of an explanation of the meaning of the abbreviations. I believe the average non-boxing-fan, who might recognize KO, is unlikely to know what RTD means (I didn't). Also, it's not apparent which abbreviations are used for the various types of draw outcomes, "D" already being used for the "decision" values.
I suggest that the link to the fight should instead be from the date or the result (win/loss) column, and the type values should be linked to the explanatory page or section (e.g. UD). Alternatively, have a footnote with a table of the possible values with short descriptions linked to the explanatory pages. I'd suggest a template be used for the rows to ensure consistent formatting and make it easier to change things if needed (like add mouse-over alt-text with the descriptions). —[AlanM1(talk)]— 00:24, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
- I've long been in favour of using the fight date as the link to a main article. However, when I once tried using such a format, it was reverted by a user who hardly ever made any useful contributions to boxing articles. Thankfully he no longer edits, and he never based that assertion on any consensus, so screw him. Regarding the abbreviations, we could use the tooltip function on the first instance of a term, starting from the bottom of the table: {{Abbr|UD|Unanimous decision}} .. which results in: UD, SD, TKO, RTD, etc. Either that or provide a key above and below the table, like how it's done with motor racing drivers. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 01:24, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
- Having taken this suggestion on board, here is what it looks like in practice with Lennox Lewis' professional record. I think it looks much better, and less ambiguous than linking the articles via UD, TKO, etc. Let's get a consensus from everyone else on that as well.
Support or Oppose linking to individual fight articles via date instead of result type? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 00:33, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
Usage of flags in the articles of Professional boxers.
A discussion at Joe Calzaghe is taking place, concerning the usage of flags in the W/L/D boxes. Further input there, would be appreciated. GoodDay (talk) 16:32, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
RfC: Flag icons in professional boxing record tables
Should flag icons be included in professional boxing record tables?
- Support inclusion I prefer to have the icons because I want to see if a boxer has a home advantage without clicking on all their individual pages. 92.237.211.110 (talk) 05:08, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose, as flags should be only in boxing records for the Olympics, Commonwealth games or other such international sporting events. GoodDay (talk) 05:12, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
- Using flags will merely open up disputes over which flags to use. For example - IMHO, we should stick with only sovereign state flags. But not everyone agrees with this. GoodDay (talk) 17:32, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose, as professional boxers do not represent nationalities in the same way as amateurs. They flip-flop all the time, and it practically invites edit wars such as whether Danny García should have an American or Puerto Rican flag; Sakio Bika an Australian or Cameroonian flag; Omar Figueroa an American or Mexican flag; Arthur Abraham a German or Armenian flag; Nonito Donaire a Filipino or American flag; Joe Calzaghe a British or Welsh flag; etc. etc. etc. WikiProject MMA started the initiative of ditching flagicons many years ago, so WikiProject Boxing should absolutely follow suit. And I quote:
In the column Opponent, do not add flag icons before the name of the opponent. Per MOS:ICON, the consensus in Wikipedia is that flag icons should not be used to emphasize nationality without good reason. Flag icons for sportspeople should only be used in a sporting sense, that is, only when they are representing a national squad/team or for representative nationality in a competition, not legal nationality. There is no international sport governing body in MMA and MMA events are mainly handled by individual promotions. As such, MMA fighters do not represent their countries in a sporting sense, so flag icons do not serve an encyclopedic purpose. Flag icons should not be added only because they look good, because aesthetics are in the eye of the beholder: one reader's harmless decoration may be another reader's distraction ... In the column Location, do not add flag icons as they are redundant since the country must be mentioned in the text and their usage in such conditions is against Wikipedia:Manual of Style (icons), they increase server load and can be annoying for people with slow connections or text-based browsers.
And if anything, MOS:FLAG clearly does not support its use in this case:
If the use of flags in a list, table or infobox makes it unclear, ambiguous or controversial, it is better to remove the flags even if that makes the list, table or infobox inconsistent with others of the same type where no problems have arisen.
Mac Dreamstate (talk) 14:53, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
Comment The RfC was: Should flag icons be included in professional boxing record tables? The proposer's rationale relates to the fight location, not to the opponent, which appears to be how other editors have responded. In general, I find flag icons to have a useful role as an aid to visual navigation. However, with regard to the opponent, I am swayed by Mac Dreamstate's argument that many fighter's change their nationalities, and, therefore the MOS:FLAG quote is relevant here. Consequently, I oppose including flagicons in the opponent column. With regard to fight location. I agree with the proposer that flagicons allow us to see in which country the fight took place far quicker than by reading the location alone. For example: Of the two articles on boxers that are WP:FAs, only one includes a professional boxing record table: Susianna Kentikian. Here flag icons are used alongside locations. Within a couple seconds, by looking at the flag icons I was able to discover that all but one of her fights were in Germany. Without the flagicons it would have taken considerably longer, maybe 30 times longer, to discover the same information. That makes them useful, not merely decoration. Consequently, I support including flagicons in the location column. To summarise:
Oppose including flagicons in the opponent column
Support including flagicons in the location column Daicaregos (talk) 15:47, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
- The location in text should give the same information.Peter Rehse (talk) 16:14, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
- It does. But flagicons are far quicker to scan than text. Daicaregos (talk) 16:37, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
- And that leads us right back to the issue we had at Talk:Joe Calzaghe, as to whether national, sovereign, or state flags should be used for those locations, and how consistently that should be applied across WP. Yet, it could all be avoided with just a written location and an extra minute or so of reading—which really isn't much effort to expend, if one has actually decided to take the time in reading the table in detail. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 21:28, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
- @Daicaregos: Not what I meant. Made the question as neutral as possible and I would prefer to have flags for both location and opponent because I would still have to click on the fighter's page to see where they are from as they might be from the same city or country and it might be in a neutral location. 92.237.211.110 (talk) 02:05, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- So you prefer to have them, but look at what happens when there is disagreement on their consistent usage—all of which could be avoided without having them there in the first place. Also, MOS:FLAG is not in your favour here, as this is just the type of situation in which their contentious use is discouraged altogether:
- @Daicaregos: Not what I meant. Made the question as neutral as possible and I would prefer to have flags for both location and opponent because I would still have to click on the fighter's page to see where they are from as they might be from the same city or country and it might be in a neutral location. 92.237.211.110 (talk) 02:05, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- And that leads us right back to the issue we had at Talk:Joe Calzaghe, as to whether national, sovereign, or state flags should be used for those locations, and how consistently that should be applied across WP. Yet, it could all be avoided with just a written location and an extra minute or so of reading—which really isn't much effort to expend, if one has actually decided to take the time in reading the table in detail. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 21:28, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
- It does. But flagicons are far quicker to scan than text. Daicaregos (talk) 16:37, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
- The location in text should give the same information.Peter Rehse (talk) 16:14, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
Words as the primary means of communication should be given greater precedence over flags, and flags should not change the expected style or layout of infoboxes or lists to the detriment of words. ... If the use of flags in a list, table or infobox makes it unclear, ambiguous or controversial, it is better to remove the flags even if that makes the list, table or infobox inconsistent with others of the same type where no problems have arisen.
- Therefore, whenever there is a flag involving a fighter from the UK, there is a strong chance of someone going around and changing the flag to England/Scotland/Wales/NI or vice versa. Or if a fighter is American in birth and citizenship, but strongly identifies as Puerto Rican or Mexican, someone might be hellbent on their flag being either of the latter. I've seen both situations, repeatedly. Note that the most oft-used source for record tables, BoxRec, also does not display flags next to opponents. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 12:17, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- The idea of using flag icons is to determine a fighters' place of birth, whether that fighter strongly identifies himself/herself as Puerto Rican or Mexican because of his/hers descendence is irrelevant, thats a personal opinion, if we state in WikiProject Boxing that flag icons should only be used to determine a fighter's place of birth then that would end discussions. Oscar de la Hoya, for example, has Mexican descendence and though he might also speak spanish or wear a Mexican flag when he enters the ring he was born in the United States, it's his place of brith. We can't ask every fighter that has an artile in wikipedia whether they would like to be recognized for his/her descendence or place of birth. I repeat flag icons should only be used to determine the fighter's place of birth, not his/her descendence.--Fallengrademan (talk) 16:48, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Flags for place of birth still leaves an open window for users to edit war over trivialities like whether to use flags for UK/England/Scotland/Wales/NI, or US/TX, etc. Also, your flags-for-birthplace logic falls completely flat on these example scenarios: Sakio Bika, born in Cameroon, now citizen of Australia. Same for Vic Darchinyan, born in Armenia, Australian citizen. Roy Jones Jr., born in the US, now a Russian citizen. Paulie Malignaggi, born in Sicily, US citizen. Stop the madness! Mac Dreamstate (talk) 17:26, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- No, flags should only be used to determine a fighter's place of brith, if Darchinyan was born in Armenia then the Armenian flag should identify him, this same criteria should be applied to Sakio Bika, Malignaggi and Jones, Jr.--Fallengrademan (talk) 17:35, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Why can we not just follow WP:Manual of Style#Identity and use what they prefer like British or Welsh? Then use this as the basis for location like if they identify as British then use the British flag in location then a Welsh flag if they fight someone that identifies as Welsh and they fight in Wales. Not applicable for U.S. states as their Wikipedia articles don't say the Texan boxer. 92.237.211.110 (talk) 18:30, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- @User:Fallengrademan, that is utterly absurd. Are you seriously suggesting that there should be a Zimbabwean flag next to Dereck Chisora, when he has UK citizenship and explicitly "represents" the UK? Or Arthur Abraham, who is a German citizen and has boxed almost his entire career in Germany, despite being born in Armenia? Or how about the current Haitian-born contingent, namely Adonis Stevenson, Bermane Stiverne and Jean Pascal, all of whom are Canadian citizens and are based in Montreal? Your reasoning makes no sense whatsoever. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:52, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Why can we not just follow WP:Manual of Style#Identity and use what they prefer like British or Welsh? Then use this as the basis for location like if they identify as British then use the British flag in location then a Welsh flag if they fight someone that identifies as Welsh and they fight in Wales. Not applicable for U.S. states as their Wikipedia articles don't say the Texan boxer. 92.237.211.110 (talk) 18:30, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- No, flags should only be used to determine a fighter's place of brith, if Darchinyan was born in Armenia then the Armenian flag should identify him, this same criteria should be applied to Sakio Bika, Malignaggi and Jones, Jr.--Fallengrademan (talk) 17:35, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Flags for place of birth still leaves an open window for users to edit war over trivialities like whether to use flags for UK/England/Scotland/Wales/NI, or US/TX, etc. Also, your flags-for-birthplace logic falls completely flat on these example scenarios: Sakio Bika, born in Cameroon, now citizen of Australia. Same for Vic Darchinyan, born in Armenia, Australian citizen. Roy Jones Jr., born in the US, now a Russian citizen. Paulie Malignaggi, born in Sicily, US citizen. Stop the madness! Mac Dreamstate (talk) 17:26, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- The idea of using flag icons is to determine a fighters' place of birth, whether that fighter strongly identifies himself/herself as Puerto Rican or Mexican because of his/hers descendence is irrelevant, thats a personal opinion, if we state in WikiProject Boxing that flag icons should only be used to determine a fighter's place of birth then that would end discussions. Oscar de la Hoya, for example, has Mexican descendence and though he might also speak spanish or wear a Mexican flag when he enters the ring he was born in the United States, it's his place of brith. We can't ask every fighter that has an artile in wikipedia whether they would like to be recognized for his/her descendence or place of birth. I repeat flag icons should only be used to determine the fighter's place of birth, not his/her descendence.--Fallengrademan (talk) 16:48, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Therefore, whenever there is a flag involving a fighter from the UK, there is a strong chance of someone going around and changing the flag to England/Scotland/Wales/NI or vice versa. Or if a fighter is American in birth and citizenship, but strongly identifies as Puerto Rican or Mexican, someone might be hellbent on their flag being either of the latter. I've seen both situations, repeatedly. Note that the most oft-used source for record tables, BoxRec, also does not display flags next to opponents. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 12:17, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Support inclution of flag icons in the professional boxing record tables. I see no problem in adding flag location to the professional boxing record tables. It's faster to identify the country.--Fallengrademan (talk) 18:51, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Using Flag Icons is helpful to show people where the fighter is from and where the fight took place they are helpful tools and should be used JMichael22 (talk) 21:39, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
MoS:Boxing Final call
An MOS for the Boxing project can be found here and is, I think, ready to be put on the main Project page. It has been long overdue and follows the MOS for MMA as a guide. Final call for comments - I hope it can be put up in a weeks time.Peter Rehse (talk) 17:18, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- The write-up so far has been entirely the effort of Mac Dreamstate. I have no corrections or comments (besides thanks) to add.Peter Rehse (talk) 17:33, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- There's still not a resoluton, you have three users who have voiced their opinion and have supported the inclusion of flags. We need to reach an agreement to approve this. I please ask you and Mac Dreamstate to not take things for granted.--Fallengrademan (talk) 17:40, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- The whole point of the Rfc is to have comment - no one is taking anything for granted. The flag section is only a small part and can be excluded if necessary and added in later. Alternatively (my preference) is that it is left in as is since that reflects long standing WP:MOSMMA and WP:MOSICON and altered after the flags RFC is finished. I haven't given my view on Flags yes - that discussion is expected to continue in the above section.Peter Rehse (talk) 18:16, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- @User:Fallengrademan, who's taking things for granted? I've been practically pleading here for months trying to get an MOS written up, but hardly anybody was serious about it until I went the WP:BOLD route. Now that I've finally got one ready to go, having spent days writing it and almost the entire year warning this place that an MOS is coming, you're suggesting that *I* don't take things for granted, when you yourself have suggested nothing whatsoever in the past two months except for the inclusion of some cute, itty bitty flagicons? Get with the program. That's the whole point of a discussion—not to sit on the fence and wonder what happens next, then complain when things actually get rolling. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 21:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC)