Talk:Béla Károlyi

message: The article says: "He established a boarding school in Onesti..." Well, anybody who lived in those days in Romania can tell you that no individual established anything in Communist Romania in those days. (Maybe it is difficult for Westerners to believe it, but think of North Korea today. How many individuals can establish anything therenow ? It was the same in those days in Romania). The training center was established by the Romanian Gymnastics Federation, and he was hired as one of the coaches there. Eventually he became head coach. He didn't establish the center.Mycomp 02:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Boarding school

message: I am concerned about Karolyi's "Later career" section as it is an incomplete portrayal.  
Here is a yahoo sports article by AP sports writer Barry Wilner at
http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/beijing/gymnastics/news?slug=ap-gym-karolyi-ages&prov=ap&type=lgns
The article describes what has already been put into the wikipedia article, but then continues with what Bela thinks the solution should be:
"The solution, he said, is to not have any age limit. He believes if a gymnast is good enough to earn a spot at the Olympics or world championships, that athlete deserves to go. He said some juniors today are just as proficient as the age-eligble competitors. Nastia Liukin, for example, would certainly have made the squad for the Athens Games four years ago had she not been 14."
So, Bela strongly believes the Chinese are using younger girls than they say they are, but he also believes the age requirement should be abolished, as long as their gymnastics are at a proven level.
Can someone modify the article to improve this aspect?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.235.251.198 (talk) 11:01, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Later Career Section Doesn't Present Full Story

message: what was the justifications for taking out the controversy section(along with some of the criticism) and the semilock?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.104.246.170 (talk) 02:20, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The controversy section shouldn't have been deleted; I'll restore it now. The semilock, from what I can see, was the result of a huge level of IP vandalism and nonconstructive editing right after the team finals. That last seems justified. DanielEng (talk) 02:35, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, controversies/criticisms sections are discouraged per WP:CRITICISM and WP:NPOV. I attemped to solve that problem by integrating the controversies/criticisms into the body article while strictly adhering to WP:WEIGHT in determining how much content is relevant to back up an issue (i.e. gymnasts working too hard). A large paragraph, in fact the bulk of a section, criticizing Karolyi and his methods of training does not adhere to WP:WEIGHT, but criticisms of his training methods certainly do and I attempted to display that in the article. Happyme22 (talk) 03:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, from what I saw it just looked as though the section had been deleted outright without any explanation--I assumed it was a drive-by IP deletion or something of that nature. However, after looking at it again, in respect to WP:UNDUE, in this case, I do think a fuller discussion of Karolyi's training methods is necessary than what was in the article before the restoration--the man has been the subject of entire books which are critical of his methods and he's been accused of major abuse. It's not a fringe theory but one that has been espoused by several of his high-profile former students, so it should come up. Perhaps there's some way to find a happy medium. DanielEng (talk) 03:24, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course, no problem at all. As you will see, the content that I merged into the different sections is still there, so with the criticism section in place much of that content is being repeated at this moment. I merged the content into the "1970s" section, but the marjoity was marged into the "1999-2000" section, which covers the criticism regarding the methods of training, as well as different responses by different gymnasts. I would recommend reading over that paragraph, which contains much of the original material from the original criticism section. So by merging the content that was in the criticism section, nothing was randomly deleted. If all parties can agree that that paragraph is a good "happy medium", then I see no further violation of WP:WEIGHT or WP:NPOV, and the only thing that would need to be done is remove the criticism section as it is duplicate material. Best, Happyme22 (talk) 03:41, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

text: No worries at all. :) I am in the process right now of moving some of the material around in the 1999-2000 section and the "Six Pack" section, because the abuse allegations and some of the gymnasts who spoke out--notably Stokes and Phillips, as mentioned--were not from the 2000 era. When I'm finished (I'm editing by section) I'll indicate in the edit summary--please have a look at it, make changes as you see fit, and let me know if we're good. Best DanielEng (talk) 04:13, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it appears to look fine! I don't have much time to thoroughly look it over now, but I will tomorrow and I'm sure I won't have any major problems with it. Very nice working with you! Best, Happyme22 (talk) 06:43, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

text: i agree with daniel i think there should be a section for karolyi's teaching methods and more information on the allegations made by former athletes ie who and what.
also i am not sure the tone of the later careers section accurately reflects karolyi views. they tend to be selected from his less contraversial statments and are not directly quoted statments and may have been just added in the news report to make him seem more moderate
but over all i think the article is a lot better since the edits you guys made. much thanks  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.104.246.170 (talk) 03:37, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Major rewrite and semi lock protection

message: I am an American Hungarian and proud of it.    My Question how do you say your name.  I have family with the name of Bela.  It is pronounced Béla (bay la) with the "e" sounding like "a" not Bella.  This is why there is an accent over the e.   No disrespect Béla but when we hear it pronounced wrong we politely correct them. I have heard Béla Logosi was upset that people said it wrong.  Now is your chance to tell America how to say your name correctly.  We are corrected when we say José or Jésus wrong. 
Sallymae1  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sallymae1 (talk • contribs) 06:47, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: How do you pronounce your name Bela?

message: There have been several edits back and forth claiming Károlyi's birth nation to be either in Hungary or in Romania.  At the time of Károlyi's birth, Cluj-Napoca was a part of Hungary.  The city, along with northern Transylvania, had been ceded by Romania to Hungary in 1940, under the Second Vienna Award.  See the map of the Kingdom of Hungary between 1941 and 1944 on this page, which shows Cluj-Napoca (Kokozsvár) within its borders.  Romania regained control of the territory with Allied assistance in 1944, and the original borders established by the 1920 Treaty of Trianon were reaffirmed by the Treaty of Paris (1947). Király-Seth (talk) 06:55, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I think the intent of the originating editor was that it was regained by Romania after WWII. I think it's well-stated now. --- Wikiklrsc (talk) 04:42, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

text: Thank you for your position on this matter. I had an administrator look at it and the administrator thought it was okay as it stands, mentioned that Bela Karolyi was born in Hungary although it was before and after Kluj, Romania. A previous editor (see above) has taken a position on this matter, saying that it was akin to Simon Wiesenthal's place of birth. This all will have to be researched further in the long run. Best. --- Wikiklrsc (talk) 04:42, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

text: The "He was born in what was then X, now Y" form sounds a littbe bit weird, since it could be easily be as it is in most of the articles according to the convention: "He was born in X (present-day Y). I am sorry to see so many attempts to corrupt the birthplace with false and mistaken allegations. Territorial changes has no connection to the countries designation - however that time Italy was classic fascist - moreover Germany re-annexed many Polish territories that was never ever a Polish territory before but the same time as well an old German territory with majority German population. The anonymus contributor (99.226.188.218) who claims the recognition of two different international legal treaties forget to mention that time the first treaty before was not anymore valid, the second was signed many years later. Stating the Second Vienna Arbitrage as "illegal" is as well false, since Kingdom of Romania signed and recognized the new borders between the two countries, thus any contemporary "international recognition" has no effect in this case, since almost always every belligerent countries on different sides usually does not recognize any kind of territorial gain. In this particular case, in 1942 Hungary and Romania were allies fighting on the same side thus 99.226.188.218's claims are comic. As a wikipedia convention, always the contemporary status quo is valid. (KIENGIR (talk) 14:18, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Country of birth

message: The article should mention that he graduated form the Romanian Physical Education Institute.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.226.188.218 (talk) 02:47, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Do we have a formal backing citation for that? And which university is it? Is it the Romanian INEF -- National Institute for Physical Education? Or National Academy of Physical Education and Sport in Bucharest? Thanks. --- Wikiklrsc (talk) 05:01, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Studies 

message: After watching the documentary Athlete A, and conducting further research on the Károlyis; I am shocked to see the ledes in both this article and Márta's to be so one-sided to the point of absolute innocence and glorification without any sense of the trauma these two persons have inflicted on innocent youths. Factual representation needs to be included in both this article's lede and Márta's to better represent a NPOV. They are not angels. Maineartists (talk) 01:21, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Athlete A]]