Talk:Michael Jordan/Archive 2

message: This is beyond rediculous, the greatest athlete of all time gets a wax photo for display? they're like what, 5 million pictures of this man lol. I've also notice that the more successful a black person is, the more wikipedia seems to go out of there way to find the lightest possible colored picture of them.I guess Michael Jordan was just too black to find a light picture of him so they use a wax photo (wth?) instead.
:Once again, This is not a race issue, but instead an issue pertaining to Copy Rights. Almost all of the images on the internet of MJ are owned by another company, Getty or the Associated Press, and protected under a strict copyright. If you feel that this is truly "rediculous", consider taking the time to write an email to Getty, AP, the NBA, or SI and request an image for Wikipedia. Sorry Mr. "Issac Newton", not all Wikipedia articles need photos to boost their quality standards; I'm also convinced most people who are able to find this page know how to use Google, or follow the links at the end of the page. Until then, the article's main concern should not be over a silly image but rather its overall content. --ShadowJester07 10:13, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you mostly ShadowJester, however to relegate the picture's importance is "rediculous". It needs relevant photos (and many other things),  to attain GA status, that's one of the criteria. Quadzilla99 22:22, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Good luck finding a better Fair-Use image. ;-) --ShadowJester07 22:41, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Seconded Zerak-Tul 00:05, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't understand what's so hard about typing "Michael Jordan" into Google and going to the image results.  I don't see any copyright info anywhere except for the pictures which are hosted by ESPN or similar sites. Jackpocalypse 17:52, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All images of NBA players are likely protected by some sort of copyright. If you want to use a picture from Google images, you have to get proper consent from it's actual publisher. Otherwise, you better call Corboy. --ShadowJester07 22:19, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

text: How about a screenshot from Space Jam? Uthanc 22:35, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Screenshots cannot be used as profile pics. However, you can add them to a part of the article which talks about MJ's involvement in the movie. --ShadowJester07 22:53, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Images

message: Who edits these articles? Seriously, these edits are getting entirely pointless. So, why the vandalism? What is it about the man that's so bad that you feel the need to demean his article?
Leopard Gecko 00:25, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism? What the hell ...

message: Although Jordan left college for the draft, he eventually returned and completed his undergraduate degree. I do not have a citation, but am certain that I recall a news story on his academic achievement. I believe that his reason for finishing the degree sounded something like "my mother wanted me to." --Ezratrumpet 05:46, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, he earned a degree in cultural geography in 1986.  (It's not necessarily the best source, but I'm sure this can be verified elsewhere if someone does a little searching.) Zagalejo 07:30, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done sourced with a reliable source. Quadzilla99 16:30, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: College completion

message: The Gambling Allegations absolutely belong in this article.  Let's review some facts:
*Yes, its true the conspiracy theory never was proven.  However, its also true that this was a widespread conspiracy theory - and it created a major buzz in the headlines. If you state the conspiracy theory as fact, then I agree it doesn't belong.  Keep in mind - nowhwere in the paragraph is this stated as fact.  A biography of Jordan would be remiss if this wasn't mentioned.
*There are legitimate references to this theory.   The Sporting News published an article on this. 
The precedent has already been set in wikipedia. One example is the "Paul is Dead" theory - referencing that Paul McCartney is dead. This was an unproven theory, yet it is still something that something that belongs as a part of McCartney's story. This is something that is in wikipedia.  Another similar example, "Elvis is Alive", etc.
Based on these precdents, Wikipedia has allowed this in the past and I feel it belongs back in there. I certainly welcome an appeal to the "powers to be" and would respect any decision that was made.    --Wac01
*I completely agree with you. I'm the writer of the previous gambling section (I was new on Wikipedia and didn't know how to sign yet). To me, the underlying fact is that there was wide speculation of extensive gambling and it was one of the theories about his retirement - just as much so as his father's death. But MJ himself nor anyone from his estate ever made mention of his dad's passing having anything to do with his retirement. So my question is, why is that kind of a statement allowed on Wikipedia if the gambling allegations aren't?  The kid who responded didn't even address that - he just said that it didn't belong on Wikipedia.  I think that, without making mention of gambling, this article is highly inaccurate and it paints an incorrect picture.BallingOutFull 05:17, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ridiculous, you two obviously aren't familiar with Wikipedia policy in the slightest. The theories are so minor and have absolutely no credible evidence to back them up. Please see Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons for more info on this. If this is your best chance of getting slander in there then you're outta luck.Quadzilla99 22:35, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Gambling Allegations

message: Hi. Is there any reason why you removed the Buckethead trivia on Jordan's page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Astral Connection (talk • contribs) -Moved from PRRfan's user page.
:Yes. It has nothing to do with Jordan; it belongs on the Buckethead article, if anywhere. BTW, these kinds of conversations are held on the article's talk page, or on a user's talk page, not the user's "own" page. PRRfan 13:46, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Buckethead song in Trivia

message: Why was Jordan's likeness excluded from many videogames during his playing career?
:If I remember correctly, it's because he never joined the players union. The game companies negotiated with the union for likeness rights, but felt that Jordan was asking too much for just 1 name. On that note, would his attempt to break the Union in the mid 90's be something worth putting in the Article? I'm going to see if I can find any reliable sources for it... --Onorem 10:11, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Videogames

message: I've started an approach that may apply to Wikipedia's Core Biography articles: creating a branching list page based on in popular culture information. I started that last year while I raised Joan of Arc to featured article when I created Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc, which has become a featured list. Recently I also created Cultural depictions of Alexander the Great out of material that had been deleted from the biography article. I'd like to suggest this as a model for the editors here as an alternative to the current trivia section.  Regards, Durova 14:59, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Cultural depictions of Michael Jordan]]

message: IMO, this section is unnecessary repetition - it is tacked on towards the end of the article and is simply yet more praise for Jordan. Any relevant info or statistics should be in the intro paragraph [if they are notable enough] or in the various paragraphs regarding his NBA career. Any thoughts? Hippo43 12:20, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Incorrect see FA's such as Wayne Gretzky (skills), Sandy Koufax (Mechanics), and Gilberto Silva (style of play) for featured articles with similar sections. Quadzilla99 00:54, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Basically it needs to be kept to specific descriptions of how he played. Statements like "he was the best ever according to so-and-so" are not needed. Just sourced examples of his skills. Quadzilla99 16:02, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Player Profile' section

message: MJ's role with the Bobcats is more dynamic than just being an owner. He is listed as "managing member of basketball operations". I suggest a reference be added to the first paragraph so it is clear he contributes more to the team than just the cash he used to buy a fraction of ownership. 
Off this topic, let me add that saying MJs retirement was caused by a gambling suspensions is just a mean rumor and as such should not be part of the biography unless it is very clearly stated that its a bunch of bs that no one has any proof of. Serious gambling implications in sports are a huge issue, enough to keep pete rose out of the hall of fame, and shouldnt just be thrown around. Mathacke 21:03, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Gambling allegations removed per Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Quadzilla99 22:37, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Role with the Bobcats

message: I not only see no significance to the sentence about Jordan attending the school, but I have found no proof on the internet to the fact that he DID in fact ever attend the school.  I suggest it is either cited or removed. -Unknown
:I agree. I removed the statement because as you said, A: I could find no source for the statement whatsoever, and B: it's probably non-notable anyway considering we need to keep everything marginal out of the article to keep it from being overlong. Quadzilla99 10:40, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Attending Bethesda-Chevy Chase High School

message: Ok I added a ton of citations per WP:Cite (finally, this article had pretty much none), found some bullet proof photos, and re-wrote large sections of the article. I plan on trying to help get this one to GA status  in the near future. It still needs copy-editing and more inline citations and help would be appreciated. Quadzilla99 10:11, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The flickr links on those photos both state "All rights reserved".  They were submitted as CC.  Sorry, but these images aren't allowed to be used on WP as they are copyright violations and I have removed them.  I'll nominate them for deletion tomorrow. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 11:41, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I got permission via messages from both users to use the photos. The lower image photographer sent me an email which I can forward. The upper image photographer sent me a flickr message, I've contacted him about sending me an email. Drop me a line about any relevant info needed. Quadzilla99 12:23, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Additions

message: And I mean everything per WP:Cite, before there was like 2 sources in the entire article. Surprisingly there was very little information which wasn't correct and able to be backed up with a reliable source. I also copy edited the entire article, made a section on his career before the championships, and removed a lot of unsourced or redundant stuff. Not bad for a day's work. Quadzilla99 15:19, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's some nice work there. Good work on the images too. I added some too --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk   21:06, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Every one of them is bullet proof except maybe the portrait one, the photographer hasn't emailed me back yet but I'm pretty sure he will. Quadzilla99 22:06, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Everything's Sourced

message: Thanks to benevolent photographer Joshua Massel we now have a photo for MJ if you would like to thank him, you can do so here , by sending him a flickr message. Quadzilla99 08:25, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Michael Jordan photo

message: Before the article is reviewed for GA status, make sure to add fair use rationales to all the fair use images.  There are currently two that don't have rationales for use on this article (:Image:JJam.JPG and :Image:Michael jordan utah jazz shot.jpg).  Also, this image was incorrectly tagged with  instead of , which is not acceptable for use on Wikipedia.  Unless the photographer can be persuaded to release it under either  or , the image can be speedily deleted.  ShadowHalo 17:33, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Jazz shot has a fair use rational and always has (check the history) it is the exact same fair use rational verbatim as the Wayne Gretzky Kings signing photo, and the movie screenshot is the same exact licensing as every single other movie screenshot used to illustrate a movie on Wikipedia. As for the plaque I'm sure the flickr user will change the licensing as he gave express notice on the image's source page allowing it to be used on Wikipedia. Quadzilla99 19:07, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay I emailed the user and he changed it. All of them should be fine. Quadzilla99 20:25, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The third image The first image has a fair use rationale for The Shot but not for Michael Jordan, though I'm assuming simply changing the title would work fine.  The movie screenshot will also still need a fair use rationale, though the majority of it can be copied and pasted from any other screenshot.  The third image looks good; I'm tagging it with  so that an admin can come verify its copyright status (it's custom for all Flickr images, so don't think there's something wrong with this one).  ShadowHalo 22:43, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I believe I have fixed the Space Jam Photo. The Image's Fair Use Rationale should be fine now. --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk   22:54, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Images

message: I guess the GA review passed - which is somewhat fishy, considering the article barley meets the Stability area, but meh. Good work everyone! --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk   22:59, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Stability only applies to edit wars not vandalism per WP:WIAGA. Quadzilla99 01:03, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Congratulations!  I'm really glad to see this important topic get the quality article it needs.  When I requested references be added, I didn't expect to see 67 refs in such a short time!  Thanks, Walkerma 05:19, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually they were all added in the past week thanks to Quadzilla99. Harvey100 09:08, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Quad worked harder than that, he added the refs in like 24 hours. :) --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk   16:22, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Passed?

message: The article makes it sound like Trask JHS & Laney HS are in Brooklyn but they are not. MJ`s family moved to Wilmington, North Carolina while he was young. NBA.com Bio —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 211.15.195.1 (talk) 00:21, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah I guess we missed that as we removed a sentence in the middle there for certain reasons recently, which made it clear he moved out of Brooklyn at a young age. Thanks. Quadzilla99 12:56, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Wilmington, North Carolina

message: I combined a couple of sections as I felt it was over-sectionalized and an editor made the same comments on the peer review. Feel free to comment. Quadzilla99 20:39, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sections

message: A few days ago I added information about a media hoax that attributed false quotes to Jordan. The hoax fooled some and was covered by multiple sources. Today I discovered that the reference to the hoax had been deleted but I couldn't tell who had deleted or why. If you're opposed to including this information, please tell me why. Jamiem 19:06, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, apparently Quadzilla99 deleted it because "we're trying to keep the size down." Whatever. Jamiem 23:25, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was a big news story that died down in a couple of days and is pretty much forgotten, just like the Lawrence Taylor-Michael Jordan gambling story and a huge amount of others. Really if we included every time this guy made the news the article would be huge, nothing personal. Incidentally to see the story about him and LT see here. Apparently they're still friends as they golfed together this year. Quadzilla99 01:50, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Hoax information?

message: Sort of a silly comment, but I noticed the article doesn't mention MJ's idiosyncratic tongue-wagging.  That was a major part of his image, at least early in his career.  Should we say something about it here? Zagalejo 05:53, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just searched, and it's mentioned, under First retirement.  Are you suggesting it should be noted in other areas? Zodiiak 01:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like that was recently added. OK, I'm satisfied! Zagalejo 01:47, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The tongue

message: fn 72 seems to be a broken link. Chensiyuan 04:27, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added a bunch of refs and changed some things since then. If it's still around, it's a different number now. I looked through real quick and didn't see any dead links. Quadzilla99 08:37, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah it's been a while since then if I find it again i'd let you know meantime I think it's safe to assume it's all good. Chensiyuan 08:56, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Footnotes

message: Here's a quote from MJ regarding his game-winning jumper at the 1982 NCAA Championship: "That started everything. The confidence, the knowledge, and everything I gained from that, is without question the beginning of Michael Jordan as a whole." qtd. in Lazenby, Roland. "Michelangelo: Portrait of a Champion." Michael Jordan: The Ultimate Career Tribute. Bannockburn, IL: H&S Media, 1999. p. 128.
Could this possibly be included in the Early years section of the article? I think it'd be nice to emphasize that Jordan viewed the game-winner as an important turning point in his career, but if others think it's inappropriate, let me know... Zagalejo 05:23, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I definitely think it's appropriate to include it, but I would say  "Jordan credits this shot with changing his game" "Jordan credits it as a turning point in his career" or something of the sort. It has to be carefully worded. I definitely wouldn't include that quote because a) he refers to himself in the third person, b) it goes into mystique analysis which I think should be avoided, and c) I'm pretty sure FAC reviewers in the future will read that and automatically think of the article as cruft right from the beginning. It puts Jordan in reverant tones, analyzes his mystique, and tries to figure out what makes him "Michael Jordan", which would probably cause some FAC reviewers to "shut off" mentally right at that point. Quadzilla99 05:46, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree it should be in there, Quad's idea sounds perfect. With the silliness on the FAC anything like that quote would cause people to start thinking they were reading a fanboy article. Aaron Bowen 15:43, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How's the present version? Zagalejo 19:45, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Great. Quadzilla99 04:10, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Does anyone think this is worth including?

message: I don't mean to mess around too much, but just a comment. The pic with him going in for a dunk with his tongue out -- that's probably the best pic we have right? i don't think there are hard and fast rules as to which pic should be featured in the box (i refer to the template on the right at the top of each NBA player page), but as a matter of first impression that pic is "box-worthy" and gives a good first impression. of course, there's going to be the question of where do you move the current box pic to etc... but like i said, just an observation. Chensiyuan 07:25, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is some debate on if we should even use this image and if we are legally able to get rid of the original watermarked copyright notice.  I would just leave the image where it is for now.  If it turns out that we can use the image, then we can decide where it should go later on. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 22:58, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's also fairly low resolution and doesn't show his face very well. Quadzilla99 23:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: okay both points by you guys are fair enough. Chensiyuan 01:55, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Pic

message: Because of the recent FAC discussion, we should probably double check some of the sources to seem if they are reliable enough. Here are really the only questionable ones.  They might be ok, but I think we can do better. :
*29 ^ Michael Jordan/Charles Barkley "Attitude vs. Altitude" - Nike Inc. 1993, sportsposterwarehouse.com, accessed January 15, 2007. (I don't really consider this the media, as it is just a poster)
:Removed that was the best source I could find for that and it was admittedly dubious. Quadzilla99 23:36, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, used Infoplease and the cnnsi.com as sources. Quadzilla99 23:49, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

text: That is the best source I could find, seems reliable. I remember Jordan saying that on Sportscentury, but I'll just remove the statement. To be clear that statement was in there I remembered it being true and tried to find a source for it. Quadzilla99 23:36, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Well they're obviously reliable sources. Quadzilla99 23:36, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Note 7 can be replaced with (Morris, Mike. "The Legend: A Highlight-Reel History of the NBA's Greatest Player." Michael Jordan: The Ultimate Career Tribute. Bannockburn, IL: H&S Media, 1999. p. 67.) I'm not sure why #88 is even necessary -- we have three citations to support something which should be considered common knowledge. Zagalejo 23:59, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Actually, #87 is the Encarta source now. Zagalejo 00:05, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay encyclopedia refs removed. Quadzilla99 00:13, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources

message: Should it have a title? Chensiyuan 11:35, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay I proceeded on the basis that there was something strange about it and decided to fix it. I hope I fixed it right. Chensiyuan 15:35, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Like anything else they should be wikified the first time they appear in the footnotes section if they have a Wikipedia article, I think they are. For instance The New York Times appears several times but should only be wikified the first time. sportsillustrated.cnn.com is actually part of what used to be CNN/SI.com, as it says on it's page "SI.com: a CNN website", so CNN is a contributor it's not actually just sportsillustrated.com. Also nba.com/history is actually a separate website from nba.com: devoted to just history, in any case there is no article on nba.com anyway it just redirects to the NBA article. They're all pretty much fine as far as I can see. Quadzilla99 19:30, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Footnotes

message: Michael Jordan is now a featured article. Booyah. Quadzilla99 23:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Great work Quadzilla99. Aaron Bowen 01:49, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Great Success!" Good work Quad, thanks for the contributions. --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk   01:58, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Congrats Quad.  I'd also like to thank all of the people who made suggestions for improvement and/or copy edited this article.  --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 08:45, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: MJ=FA

message: If MJ, from all the experts, is top 3 all time in sports athelets. What's with all of that crap? Tell me one respected sportswriter who doesn't think Jordan is the greatest NBA player of all time, and the most marketed of his generation? --Twlighter 00:41, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See Wikipedia:NPOV and Wikipedia:Featured article criteria, I'll leave it at that. --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk   01:17, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I still dont understand why we need "Widely considered" AND "one of the".  We dont run any risk of POV by dropping the latter.  "Widely" doesnt even imply "most", but "many", and it is trivially easy to prove that many people still consider him the best. Zagalejo 06:25, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been discussed over and over again.  However, I agree, it's redundant to state both Zodiiak 07:53, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just leave it the way it is. Let's not get into this over and over again. If you read through the article his place in basketball history becomes clear. The current form is the most neutral way of stating things. I'd oppose changing it. Aaron Bowen 08:27, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "One of the...