Talk:Phil Mickelson

message: i removed the photograph of the  of mickelson's 'book'; it lends some credence to my thoughts that this article was originally a PR ploy...
:That's total nonsense and the article is fine. I've put it back. This pointless deletion is the sum total of this user's contributions to wikipedia. ReeseM 00:21, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Perhaps someone should add a section on controversy, since Phil does have his detractors. The rumors of gambling debts and accusations of falsity by other professionals might be worthy of mention.
Okay, what's with the thing about the rehab and the pot? I've been following Phil for years and have never heard of that. Where's the link otherwise it should be deleted. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 204.52.215.101 (talk) 09:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversy section

message: I don't know maybe a little to descriptive but I think that his breakdown at WInged Foot was one of golf's greatest meltdown performances of all time. If he didnt blow his lead in such dramatic fashion then I would whole heartedly agree with you to just include a regular summary instead of explaining in full detail. I think Phil's meltdown will def. go down in history as one of the biggest fuck ups in major championship history.Badnewzkennels 11:32, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is clearly pov. If you want to cite a source or two that call it the greatest meltdown of all time, please do. But until then it has no place in a wiki article. Focomoso (talk) 00:12, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: 06 US Open

message: I know the collapse was big and all, but do we need a play by play? A short summary is more appropriate for this forum, I think.
I agree.  It's weird to have a paragraph/heading devoted to Winged Foot, while his three major victories are lumped into an analagous paragraph.  And do the other players who lost Winged Foot on the last hole (there were a few others) also have paragraphs about it on their pages?  I don't think so. -- AlmostAGhost Sept. 5 2007
The whole Winged Foot section is ridiculous, and a sop to Lefty detractors. As mentioned, the mere fact it gets more "airtime" than his major wins combined says all anyone needs to know. Frankly it should be a footnote in another section.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.58.114.7 (talk) 23:29, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it was kind of ridiculous. I just shortened the section somewhat. - PM800 (talk) 23:39, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too much talk about 06 US open? 

message: Some people write right-handed and swing a golf club or throw a baseball left-handed. They are called ambidextrous. I just took out a line in the article that said Phil swings left handed because he was standing in front of his father (a right-hander) and wanted to mirror his swing. That is one of the most idiotic things I think I've ever read in this encyclopedia. Some Australian schoolboy put that in the article of the number 1 golfer in the world on April 10, and no one questioned it until now. Thousands of people have probably read that crap. He swings a golf club left handed and writes right because he is ambidextrous. That simple. --Hokeman 05:16, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've actually heard that story myself, I don't know where from though. It does seem a tad unbelievable, but you never know these things.Grover 10:46, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, i've found some proof on his official website here. I will try to incorporate this into the article. Grover 10:52, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Phil is ambidextrous

message: as someone added to the tables at the bottom phils win today of the 2010 masters
... should someone add to the remarks ab play , his bursts in this masters of brilliant outstanding
play ... which also had mixed in,  his return of winged foot split personality bursts of bizarre
blasts into the woods ... as at winged foot w/o those bizarre sideways blasts he would have won
easily and today at masters without his sideways blasts, he would have won with larger score ...
... lil schiz sr 69.121.221.97 (talk) 00:34, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Phil played great today, and your writing is atrocious. Do better next time, OK? Thanks. PM800 (talk) 00:53, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: 2010 masters

message: I find this article on Mickelson lacks balance, especially considering the Phil does not get a lot respect from his peers on the PGA Tour.  The fact that he is known as Figjam, pretty much says it all.
I would like to add reference the following webpage, but I can't figure out where to put it.  Any suggestions?
http://www.worldgolf.com/blogs/alan.katz/2006/02/06/why_players_on_the_pga_tour_call_phil_mi
I restored the article, the information was blanked earlier in the day by an IP contributor. BoojiBoy 23:49, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm an impartial observor here (see my edit history I have no special interest in golf) but blogs in general do not rise to WP:RS and that one in particular is especially caustic and mean spirited. Quadzilla99 07:54, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the statement to the talk page: "Colleagues on the Tour refer to Mickelson as "FIGJAM", which stands for "Fuck I'm Good--Just Ask Me"." No reliable sources for it on the web that I can see: Just blogs and forums, most of which probably got the info here. Quadzilla99 12:36, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is neither a blog nor a forum:  24.91.178.94 (talk) 22:24, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Figjam 

message: This article reads like it was written by a Sports Illustrated intern.
"Sweet short game", "daring" shots, etc. The section awfully and dramatically titled "Disaster at Winged Foot" is the worst. I guess this is up for debate, but I feel strongly that sports jargon is unnecessary in an article of this type. *Technical* terminology is ok, because you can define the terms themselves, but in general I think it's best to avoid things like "plugged", "unable to get up and down" etc. for clarity's sake.
I'd rewrite this myself but I'd just hack it to bits, someone who knows and cares about golf would do a much better job.Matttoothman (talk) 13:17, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-encyclopedic style 

message: Phil was not raised in Arizona. He attended Arizona State University. 
He lived in Scottsdale, Arizona after graduation and for his first few years on the PGA tour. 
Was born & raised in San Diego, California. Has resided in Rancho Santa Fe in San Diego County, California for several years now. 
4rqueen (talk) 00:01, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you provide a reliable source to verify?  fetchcomms☛ 00:30, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from 4rqueen, 11 April 2010 

message: This does not belong in the Majors section: "Just prior to the 2004 Ryder Cup, Mickelson was dropped from his long-standing contract with Titleist/Acushnet Golf, when he took heat for a voicemail message he left for a Callaway Golf executive. In it, he praised their driver and golf ball and thanked them for their help in getting some equipment for his brother. This memo was played to all of their salesmen, and eventually found its way back to Titleist. He was then let out of his multi-year deal with Titleist 16 months early, and signed on with Callaway Golf, his current equipment sponsor. He endured a great deal of ridicule and scrutiny from the press and fellow Ryder Cup members for his equipment change so close to the crucial Ryder Cup matches. He faltered horribly at the 2004 Ryder Cup, going 1-3-0, but refused to blame the sudden change in equipment or his practice methods for his performance.[5]"  I'm not sure it belongs at all.  What do others think?  Josh a brewer (talk) 15:43, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: "Four majors" is the actual title of the section.  Sorry. Josh a brewer (talk) 15:46, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Majors 

message: Okay, some moron put the above quote in the intro paragraph to the article. I deleted it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkentrandall (talk • contribs) 17:53, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "is every bit good [sic] as tiger" 

message: If anyone here can help expand the paragraph I wrote about when Phil won the 2008 Crowne Plaza Invitational, please help. I could find articles with scoreboards; however, could not find any with in-depth writing of each round. I added the paragraph because, I did not see anything about him winning the tournament in the 2006-08 section.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.125.113.116 (talk) 04:05, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Done - don't know if we need anymore about this tournament. Tewapack (talk) 15:56, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please Expand 

message: Should there be one about wife and kids and favorite type of pizza, ect? --Malerooster (talk) 16:01, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal Life section 

message: to edit the no of majors won from four to five as he has won the open championship 2013.
Gokul93 (talk) 16:57, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It should also be mentioned that Phil Mickelson is the first person in history to win the Scottish Open and The Open Championship in the same year. Indeed it is a standing comment in British golfing circles (including BBC commentary down the years) that winning the Scottish Open will invariably mean that you will NOT win The Open Championship in the same year. So Phil Mickelson's achievement is doubly noteworthy for this reason, and a comment to this effect should be added to the article.Ds1994 (talk) 17:37, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not done: This page is no longer protected. Subject to consensus, you should be able to edit it yourself. -- TOW  talk   08:49, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

text: Thank you. Subject to consensus I have added a brief sentence mentioning Phil's historic first of winning both the Scottish Open (which is held invariably a week before The Open) and The Open Championship in the same year.Ds1994 (talk) 09:51, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 21 July 2013 

message: This should be fixed, for a player of his stature and his number of victories.  We talked about this years ago after the 2006 US Open (scroll up).  There is a GIGANTIC section about his 2006 US Open loss, which apparently is just as relevant as his first three major victories combined.  And then now, in 2013... he's got a giant sole section for his runner up at the US Open (not any different from any of his runner ups there really).  And for winning the British Open, there is one sentence tagged on to the 2013 summary.  I realize today's win just happened, but still. Other players don't get focused on losses on wikipedia like this. Lots of golfers lose (or even collapse); Phil's not unique about this.  If he had no major wins, I'd understand.  But he has five now.  This whole page should be cleaned up.  Rant over :) Almostaghost (talk) 19:09, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  major losses get WAY more space than his victories 

message: I would add it but I want to make sure. By my count, Mickelson is one of only 7 players to win at least 1 Masters, 1 Open Championship, and 1 PGA Championship in their careers. The others by my count are Jack Nicklaus, Tiger Woods, Gary Player, Gene Sarazen, Ben Hogan, and Sam Snead. Any others? I don't think Byron Nelson, Tom Watson, or Arnold Palmer did it.John ISEM (talk) 00:15, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Masters, Open Championship and PGA Championship: How many others? 

message: Come off it, there's absolutely no way this guy is only 200lbs! I've been watching the golf and he's both muscular and fat and he's tall as well. I'd be very surprised if he was under 225.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:32, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Per PGA Tour profile, unless you have a reliable source that states otherwise. Tewapack (talk) 17:43, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weight 

message: I will be editing this in the coming days/weeks, but this wiki entry is downright terrible. For example, under the heading, 2004–06: first three professional major wins, a HUGE chunk is spent talking about all the other left-handed winners of majors. I'm sorry, but they have their own wiki entries for that. This page is about Phil Mickelson. That's just one of many sloppy stylistic points. Speaking of stylistic, there is no flow whatsoever to speak of, which makes the overall readability of the article a joke. On the whole, then, it's about time this puppy gets an update. I've done a few things here and there, but it's getting late where I'm at. I know that's awfully general, but this entry should flow well, focus on the subject, and be tight and relevant. I'll be back with updates. Love and cheers to all my fellow Wikipedians. We keep this site going, after all, so love to us all! Percinr1819 (talk) 09:49, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phil's Wiki is Awful & Needs a Comprehensive Update/Revamp 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Phil Mickelson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071106032959/http://www.thegolfchannel.com:80/core.aspx?page=15110&dv=6616763&select=14242 to http://www.thegolfchannel.com/core.aspx?page=15110&dv=6616763&select=14242
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.majorschampionships.com/masters/2010/news/mcallister041110.cfm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:18, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It says one of Phil's nicknames is "Phildo" in the quick info/stats thing under his picture. I have never heard this and can't find anything about it online. Is this perhaps just a corny joke (phildo/dildo) that should be removed? Wanted to ask rather than remove myself as I am uncertain.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.194.152 (talk) 15:49, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nicknames 

message: Why is Phil Mickelson's results time line split into three parts?  I think two parts would be sufficient and would be cleaner and easier to follow, and would conform to other golf and tennis athletes, for whom this format is used.  If others agree, I would recommend making that change.
:Many timelines which cover 20+ years are split into decades. eg Arnold Palmer and Ben Hogan as random examples, although many have variations on this. As to whether it looks better, that depends on which device you're using and how big the screen is, the character size, etc. etc. Maybe best to wait until he retires to sort it out. Nigej (talk) 16:27, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Results timeline

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Phil Mickelson. 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/20130620124552/http://www1.skysports.com/golf/us-open/story/14640/8779755 to http://www1.skysports.com/golf/us-open/story/14640/8779755
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:02, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In the article, it states that Phil Mickelson is one of sixteen players to win at least three of the four majors, but the link given to support this information is from over three years ago. It was from before Jordan Spieth joined that list last year. Therefore, it would be appreciated if this information could be updated and a more recent link could be posted supporting the new information.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jay72091(2) (talk • contribs) 00:18, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of players to win three of the four majors link