Talk:Peyton Manning/Archive 1

message: Under the "Advertising" section, it says something like, "Ironically, Peyton was not used in the Disney World commercial but instead Tony Dungy and Dominique Rhodes."  This is not ironic, look it up in the dictionary.  It would have been ironic if the producers of the commercial had stated that they wanted to use Peyton in the commercial, but they had to use Dungy and Rhodes instead.  Why is this even notable?  They probably asked Rhodes because they thought he might be the MVP before it was officially announced.  But this should either be taken out because it's just irrelevant or at least change the use of "ironically" to "oddly enough" or something. go peyton i lv your game ben suckybuger will hopefully play u and lose then cry
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 131.93.24.11 (talk) 04:10, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Misuse of Irony

message: I think this page needs a picture of Manning. Tim 01:23, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll try to find the Sports Illustrated cover of Manning --J. Nguyen 01:26, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

text: It's been removed. There is no substantial discussion of the actual SI article in question; it is simply being used to depict Peyton Manning without critical review of the image or the article, so it isn't fair use. Even the caption suggested that what was being illustrated was 'Manning's trouble with Florida', and not any particulars of the image or article. (The other, infobox, image was removed because someone uploaded it with 'no rights reserved', and I see nothing on the website it came from that suggests that this is the case.) Skybunny 13:18, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Image

message: Not going to keep reverting obviously... but this is not a story being covered by the actual media, because it's not a story.  There's no reason to mention it in the article. --W.marsh 07:45, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Gay rumors

message: about how much of a crybaby Peyton Manning is? About how he constantly bashes teammates, blames losses on them, doesn't take the ride for his own mistakes or complete chokes? Yells at his players, coaches, etc... take the good with the bad. 
Personally, I'd like to see this page simple, like:
Peyton Manning:
a man created by a great offensive surrounding. The end.
It'll be humorous to see what this joke does next season without Reggie Wayne or Edge James (the main reason for mannings hype). 
THEY STILL HAVE REGGIE WAYNE. YOU OBVIOUSLY DONT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT
Chances are over for a superbowl...and the fall of a media figure is upon us. Poor poor peyton... spoiled all his life, but somethings cant be given to you... although refs tried their hardest.
:Without citations, all of that is original research and obvious POV. Anonymous detractors tend to come out of the woodwork after big losses, and it's fair to say Manning has a history of choking in big games (which has been duly noted), but no unbiased observer would claim that every bit of his career success is due solely to his coaches or teammates. Simishag 03:33, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Why is there no information...

message: Peyton wasn't 0-4 against Florida and 26-0 against everybody else in the SEC; his freshman year he didn't start the Florida game, so that loss is not "his." However he did start the Alabama game, which was also a loss. So he was 0-3 against Florida and 3-1 against Alabama for his 4 SEC losses in his career.
:fixed, thanks for the info. Simishag 21:06, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  College Record 

message: Is it appropriate to add a section to this article about the commercials Peyton has been in?  Or at least the companies he has endorsed?  I don't have enough information to do it myself, but it's something I would like to see and read.  --Crisu 21:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Marketing career?

message: I've placed a request for semi-protection to attempt to counter-act the consistent vandalism. Dlong 03:49, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur. I suggest a semi-protect until one week after the last week the Colts are alive in the playoffs, because that's most likely what's triggering all the attention by anonymous/new users to this page. (Most vandalism and negative POV focuses on Manning 'choking in the playoffs', so, we're going to get a lot of it right now.) Skybunny 19:34, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've made a request asking for exactly that. Dlong 20:22, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Semi-protection is really best for when there's 5-10 instances of vandalism a day, or beyond that... right now vandalism is very light except on game day. I'll consider semi-protecting next Sunday should it start to get vandalized a bit. --W.marsh 00:43, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Semi-protection

message: An anonymous user keeps editing this page to conform with ESPN's stats which seem to be regular season only, and refuses to address the issue. Because of this, I'm treating this as vandalism. I can't watch this page 24/7, though, so keep an eye out for this user Dlong 07:22, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Stats

message: I noticed you guys, especially Dlong, have stepped up to the plate to get this article to be well-sourced. I must say, very well done. We can always add more, but I think we can remove the citing sources template at the top of the page now. –King Bee (talk • contribs) 00:30, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: Is that too POV for Wikipedia to state the obvious that this guy is Overrated as a Quarterback. I mean to have your Kicker to pick up the slack for your choking in a divisional game. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.51.41.72 (talk) 02:22, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. Dlong 02:58, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In other news, American football fans are emotionally racist against kickers, thinking them not football players to begin with, but rather "foot-to-ball" players. --Chr.K. 06:08, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Overrated

message: Add anything that you think needs to be done to this article here. Hopefully we can get this article taken care of and make it at least a GA if not a FA. Things I'm (slowly) working on:
*Getting the "Citation needed" tags taken care of
*Add author and date to references
*Add information on NFL career prior to 2003
*Clean up criticism section
*Find information on Colts' records he holds (I can only find an outdated listing)
Dlong 20:24, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: To-do list

message: I am also not a registered user, but will somebody please remove the comment "Big Ben is way better than Manning" right after the 6th footnote.  Not only is it missing a period, or states a personal opinion, it is completely untrue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.40.205.14 (talk • contribs) 
:I removed that 5 hours ago? Dlong 20:49, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see anything like that now, or in the recent history. So I'm guessing it's been taken care of. Dlong 04:02, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: More Vandalism

message: I remember Peyton also being a spokesman and on the cover of NFL Fever, and starred in many commercials for them.  NFL Fever was a property of Microsoft for Xbox. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sharrock2003 (talk • contribs) 05:16, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a source for this? We should probably get sources for the other ads too, though pretty much everyone has seen them. Dlong 05:22, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Here's a link I found: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2002/jul02/07-25manningreturnspr.mspx
I also remember him doing commercials for it too. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sharrock2003 (talk • contribs) 11:57, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been added. Let me know what you think. Dlong 13:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advertising 

message: Why does this article skip from 2000 to 2003 in the Professional Career section? --pagemillroad 20:58, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't written those sections yet, because I haven't had time or energy to do so. If you want to write them, feel free. Dlong 22:34, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  2001-2002 season?? 

message: With his current win over the Bears in the Superbowl, Shouldn't that be added instead of the current: "he will face the bears..."
152.3.76.76 03:50, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This was taken care of almost immediately after the end of the game. Dlong 03:58, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Superbowl win? 

message: However, while Peyton Manning played well in the Superbowl, Domique Rhodes deserved the MVP award, as he single-handedly maintained the Colts lead against the Bears, especially in the 4th quarter, contributing to many incomplete passes by the Bears themselves.
single handidly...very very very biased
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.149.123.59 (talk • contribs) 
:Good thing it was removed 15 minutes ago. Dlong 04:28, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Without Rhodes, the offense might've survived on Addai alone. Without Manning, there is no Colts offense. MVP duly noted. --Chr.K. 00:40, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This isn't a forum.►Chris Nelson 00:46, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 2006-07 season 

message: Should we mention Peyton was the first Colt to win Super Bowl MVP and why? -- since its kind of an unusual trivia question?
Can we also mention the award that Peyton has, which is Most Consecutive Years of Being Owned By Tom Brady Award, which is still running, go pats.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.250.170.72 (talk • contribs) 
:Obviously this is POV. And irrelevant. The Colts are 3-0 the past 2 years against the Patriots. Dlong 04:55, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Colt MVP 

message: That Scott Wiese, a Chicago Bears fan, changed his name to Peyton Manning after the Colts won the Super Bowl.
http://www.nfl.com/teams/story/CHI/9981549 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.33.24.131 (talk) 08:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that the report is that he has petitioned the court to change his name to "Peyton Manning".  There has not been an official ruling.  In addition, the report said that this was based on losing his Super Bowl bet. Lmcelhiney 14:14, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  It think it would be worth mentioning... 

message: I have a quick question, under the infobox stats, it gives you options to add a link to Peyton's stats at espn, PFR, Database football, SI, CBS andnfl.com, but how can we add a link to Peyton's stats at yahoosports.com and foxsports.com, what's the code for those 2 sites, they belong in the infobox stats to, is it possible, just wondering if anyone knows, Thanks, Malibu55 20:35, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Links to 3 websites is enough. We don't need six in the infobox. Please do not disrupt Wikipedia just to make a point; I know you are adding these links here so that you can try to get them on the Brett Favre page, by citing the fact that "the Manning page has them too." –King Bee (T • C) 13:46, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Not really, I just don't see the need. If you dig on having 6 links there, that's fine. I just thought it looked a bit cluttered. –King Bee (T • C) 22:31, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Now that's what I'm talking about. Way to take initiative; I like the new format. –King Bee (T • C) 05:16, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox Stats 

message: I've reverted some changes by a sockpuppet account per WP:DENY.  This is in no way a judgement on my part on whether there should be 3 or 5 external stat links and if any established editor wishes to revert my change, by all means feel free to do so.--Isotope23 19:28, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Like I said before, if someone who isn't a disruptive sockpuppet wants to change this, they should feel free to do so.--Isotope23 19:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Stats

message: He played a certain way in the first two games, and then in a different fashion the latter two games, thus I clarified the situation. 
I think this is very relevant to the 2006 season.  It is a fact, and not opinion.  If mannings wikipedia site could only talk about the good that Manning does, we lose all neutrality. Then it would just become a peyton manning fan page.  
:Please sign your posts (with "~~~~").  Messages go to the bottom of the page (use the "+" at the top to start a post)  The removal of your statement was because it was dropped into the middle of someone's referenced text, not because of opinion.  Please provide a reference so that no one thinks that your text is just opinion. Thanks!  Lmcelhiney 20:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Check with WikiProject NFL on that. Also, even if that is allowed, we need a source that the seven interceptions is in fact a record. The citation given simply states that that's how many were thrown. I've left it for now, however Dlong 22:30, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

text: That's Lott's record for interceptions made, not thrown.  Ty Law may be getting close (thanks in part to the discussion we're having now), but, it's not the same thing. Neier 00:28, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Seven Interception post season record

message: This was added to the sentence: Ironically, Manning won his first championship during a year in which he was having arguably his worst statistical post-season throwing for 7 interceptions, and finding the end zone only 3 times:
"(though this is not a very accurate portrayal of his play in the latter two games)"
Is this really necessary.  The numbers were for his post-season as a whole.  I dont think we should get into each individual game. Also his numbers were still subdued even in those 2 games that are being refered to.  (2td, 2 int).  It just seems to be too much of a POV.  
Heh, I'm the one that did that, and maybe you're right. But at least let the 4 td thing stand. He did find the endzone "4" not three times. I also don't think his numbers were "subdued" in the last two games considering the defenses he was up against (as well as the rain and bone bruise on his throwing hand in the Superbowl). 596 yards, 3 td, and 2 int in the AFC Championship/Superbowl.
so instead of putting 4 td including a rushing td in parentheses lets just change the 3 to a 4 in the original entry.
"Manning won his first championship despite having arguably his worst statistical post-season; throwing for 7 interceptions and finding the end zone 4 times."
I'm removing this because statistically, this is untrue.  His QB rating for the 2006 postseason was 70.5, which was higher than his ratings in the 2001 postseason (31.2) and 1999 season (60.9).  It's not something that can be stated "arguably" if it can be proven or disproven through statistics.
Your right manning has had some of the worst postseasons imaginable..this one was close to them but no cigar. DChase1 22:19, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The adding on to the 7 int, 4 td post season 

message: "Just days before the Super Bowl, Manning's marketability as one of the NFL's most popular players took a step forward when he was signed to a lucrative and exclusive autograph contract[5]."   Does this really belong here?  Sounds a lot like marketing to me. 74.130.23.77 10:16, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch.  I deleted it.  --ElKevbo 23:10, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Autograph deal

message: manning is 31 years old. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.227.55.162 (talk • contribs) 
:No he's not. Do the math. He won't be 31 until the 24th. Dlong 01:17, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: that's not math, that's counting. (Mythos721 14:33, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Age

message: Article is getting better. I would say our goals are:
* Adding more comprehensive coverage of earlier NFL years. Granted Wikipedia wasn't around then, but they are still important years (albeit not as important as the later years, especially the last 3, which were massive years for both Manning and the Colts)
* Adding 1-2 more images, which would be appropriate for an article of this length. Not sure what we could add that wouldn't be fair use... but just throwing out there to see if anyone has ideas.
* Modify the layout for the quotes under "Advertising". Just kind of awkward... maybe integrate it into the prose, or at least put the quotation boxes down with the paragraphs. 
* Perhaps add a "personal" section, to bring in all the information about his family that is currently scattered across the article, and also mention his off-the-field reputation (squeaky clean, practically non-existent other than his advertising) and his charity activities. 
* Maybe trim "2005 season" slightly section and expand "2004 season". IMO 2004 was more important both because Manning set the most important single-season QB record that year, and because of the resulting MVP award. 2005 was mostly notable for the spectacular start and the notorious finish, the rest of the season really only needs light coverage, and that's how the section reads now. Nevertheless the section is quite long and perhaps still suffers from recentism.
* Trim "College records" a bit... do we have to list every single one? "Most offensive plays in a season", "Passing attempts in a Season", some of this just seems like trivia. Alternatively, a sleek, space-saving table might be a good idea here.
Just some thoughts... hopefully I will get around to addressing these myself. IMO once they're addressed this article will be to "good article" status for whatever that's worth. I'm hesitant to try to get an article on an athlete who's still playing to featured article status... since the subject will probably do quite a deal before their career ends, meaning the article will change a lot. --W.marsh 20:10, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Roadmap

message: Over on the cleft palate article, it lists Peyton Manning as a famous person who experienced this birth defect. I don't see any evidence that this is factual. Canuckle 07:46, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleft Palate