Talk:Wayne Rooney/Archive 1

message: Wayne's favourite is Diddy, not Eminem and 50 Cent.
No its not, it is tupac
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.3.20.234 (talk) 22:46, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Favourite Rapper 

message: What a complete joke. Rooney is a footballer so this article should stick to football. Sure include facts about his personal life like born ....  Married .... but why focus on the negative? I'm sure Wayne gives a shed-load of his time and money to charity but that wouldn't interest most of the types currently editing this page. A pity.
:I find some of the content of this article distasteful, but nevertheless they are facts relevant to Wayne Rooney. If you know stuff about any charity work he has undertaken, by all means include it, it would be nice to see. In the meantime, I've removed the prositutes section because most of it wasn't relevant to Rooney at all, but some other person's defamation case. The remainder went in "personal life" 125.239.244.181 00:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Further to this, I would like to remove the majority of the section, leaving the following: 
Rooney's personal life has also often been marred by accusations from the press surrounding his visits to prostitutes, which he later confirmed to be true. Rooney has spoken of his deep regret at the incident.[26]
I suggest that it all that is required. The Angel of Islington 07:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Visits to prostitutes 

message: I have removed the tag because no specific reasons have been given for the article (or sections thereof) containing POV. It is not clear what "at best questionable" (see below) means, and it is not clear what part of the article is being referred to. The other POV criticisms seem to be out of date. If anyone disagrees with what I have done, please say so. The Angel of Islington 22:27, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of NPOV tag

message: I added a POV neutrality symbol because the last part of this article is at best, questionable.82.42.151.164 15:34, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: As no reasons have been given for the alleged POV and if the tag dates from 17 Aug 05, is it not time to remove it perhaps? The Angel of Islington 07:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality

message: The previous picture had a "no source, will be deleted" notice on it, so I've replaced it, Just In Case. --fuddlemark 09:21, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: Huh? how does London redirect to this? Surly the city of London is more important that some football player?
*It was vandalism that was fixed. -- Reinyday, 19:16, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect 

message: I added the  onto this page because stuff like, in the opening paragraph, states "he is a talented young player" etc. Serious work must be committed to this article for it even to be regarded as NPOV. --Kilo-Lima 15:20, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV check 

message: I see an anon has put Wayne in Category:Roman Catholics. Given his name, I wouldn't be surprised, but is there any clear evidence for it? And even if there is, is it a relevant fact to record? -- Arwel (talk) 02:49, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: How do you know? Plenty of people attend faith schools for different reasons, be it academic, convenience or whatever.  I know many Anglican, other christian denomination, and non religious people who have sent their kids to an RC school.  Dainamo 10:30, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cite wanted 

message: The initial fee of £22m is paid directly to Everton Football Club.
I think this is wrong. United initially paid Everton £10m. While another £10m was paid a year later on 1 August 2005. Plus a Payment of £3m if Rooney is still a United Player on 30 June 2007. I'll leave it for now to see if anyone disagrees. --Redmachine432 06:02, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transfer fee 

message: Though there are a few mistakes here or there, the article on the whole does not appear to me to be biased. Calling a talented player a talented player cannot be deemed to be inappropriate, and Rooney definitely qualifies as a talented player and also as one of the most promising young players of our time, as can be testified to by anyone who as seen him play.
59.93.245.124 17:57, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not Biased 

message: I would suggest that describing him as a talented young player is not POV, as I'm pretty sure he's won a few young player of the year awards, which would be a definite source for the comment. The whole `temper` section needs renaming to `disciplinary issues` and its loaded terms removed (`tantrum`?), and there's nothing on the brothel thing in Personal life - BBCi can be referenced for that. Proto t c 09:28, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: Thanks to the incessant vandalism of this article, I have semi-protected it which should at least keep some of the kiddies away. -- Arwel (talk) 17:44, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Semi-protected

message: I propose deleting the "Trivia" section as it appears to be becoming a magnet for for any rubbish people want to insert. As it stands, it's supposed to be reporting what was said about Rooney in the German magazine, "Kicker", but recently it's had "Footballers' Wives character Callum Watson is based directly on Wayne Rooney. Elements of Rooney can also be found in characters Darius Fry and Harley Lawson" added - can anyone prove this? (WP:V). The value of the advance of his book deal was given in Sterling in the immediately preceding paragraph (7.5 million euro = $5 million), and who the hell cares what his favourite breakfast cereal or rapper is? This is supposed to be an encyclopaedia, not a drooling fansite! -- Arwel (talk) 11:57, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia section

message: Why exactly did him being compared to Pele lead to him being nicknamed Shrek. Surely, this nickname is more to do with the fact that he actually looks like Shrek. I can't think of any possible connection between Pele and Shrek. Timb0h 09:53, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pele / Shrek? 

message: Is he actually nickamed Shrek, or is this the vandals?--M Johnson (talk • contribs) 09:20, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not even sure he's officially nicknamed anything.  The "White Pele", I've only ever seen on Wikipedia.  He does look a bit like Shrek, and the vandals like to try and get this in.  The tabloid newspapers occasionally comment on it (like they compare Ruud van Nistelrooy to a horse). Proto||type 09:57, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

text: You see it a lot on the web, can't say for sure if this is something the rival fans throw at him. Someone also went to the trouble of doing a piccy too - Shrek/Rooney--Andymarczak 10:00, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've actually just hidden all the nicknames from the article, and they should stay hidden until decent references can be provided. Proto||type 10:03, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Everyone knows he's called Shrek. Skinnyweed 16:38, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have provided references to all of his nicknames.  They are actually quite easy to find.  --theorb 05:18, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm still dubious over the El Pele Blanco thing. I've heard the tabloids call him the other things multiple times, but the El Pele Blanco thing I've only heard on here. It seems to have come from one interview, which has been added into a fair number of generic information pages (like the source for it). Not only that, but El Pele Blanco is such a moutful, it doesn't lend itself to being a nickname and that's why I don't it really is one. HornetMike 11:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't searching for additional sources for the El Pele Blanco nickname.  I wouldn't be surprised if it came from one interview, and may be popularized by that interview (since I did see links to forums for El Pele Blanco when I did a search on the nickname).  A lot of nicknames are derived from the media.  I don't believe that just because it is a mouthful would necessarily mean that this is not a legit nickname.  Is "The Round Mound of Rebound", or "The Hick from French Lick" a mouthful?  Those are real nicknames, albeit nicknames of basketball players.  Just a few thoughts.  --theorb 13:39, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I see Shrek is back in, but where did Smeagol come from?  I've never seen or heard this one? Darkson - BANG! 22:30, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shrek 

message: I am curious as to why links to sites relating to Rooney's injury have been removed. Do they not give an indication of the cultural impact of Rooney upon the Enlgish physche? I have restored them for the time being, but if they are subsequently removed, could the editor please bring the debate to here and justify it? Thank you. McGonicle 14:14, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links 

message: Add more references and help inline cite them. Skinnyweed 00:14, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: Source: BBC
This is so that Rooney does not have to fly back from Germany and a replacement can be drafted in - see article. TheTallOne 22:13, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That "World Cup doubts" section is recentism. There's more on this than his Euro 2004 performance. Skinnyweed 16:41, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a good reason to add more on Euro2004, rather than take away from WC2006. In time, the injury section may be reduced accordingly to its long-term context. SLUMGUM  yap  stalk  23:17, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Foot scan brought forward 

message: I've removed the heading as the allegations were denied, and thus I don't consider it important enough to be a topic on this page when it hasn't been substantiated. The content itself is still under the "personal life" heading. If anybody objects to this change please state why here before reverting it. 82.17.202.62 14:32, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gambling 

message: Apparently, the PC Brigade is out waving their bullshit again.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=391684&in_page_id=1770
I guess the English flag ought to be banned too since it reminds the Muslims of the Crusades. Anyways, is this notable enough for a mention in the article or does it need to spin further out of control to be called a 'controversy'? Joffeloff 20:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Rise above it, my friend, rise and float like a cloud above the whole PC malarky.  Budgiekiller 20:52, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's political correctness gone maaaaaaaaaad! The Daily Mail - honestly. HornetMike 22:51, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's grotesque.  And putting red and white paint on it doesn't improve it much either.  SLUMGUM  yap  stalk  05:28, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anyone catch this? 

message: The precise reason for the sending off has not been made public yet. See  - so this article should not speculate. Jooler 08:41, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/world_cup_2006/teams/england/5138240.stm says that the reason for the red card was the stamp, not the push. Baiter 15:08, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I find it quite odd that people think the groin-step was deliberate, why would he do that? he was trying to get the ball and stay on his feet. The addition of "perhaps intentionally" could be followed with "perhaps not". So I have removed it. Report the facts and leave the interpretation to the reader. Jooler 20:53, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why would he do that? Why wouldn't he? Why did he push C. Ronaldo? Why does he curse at officials during matches? Why does he often pick up yellow cards? Peoplesunionpro 04:10, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

text: You're right, my addition was POV.  I still feel this paragraph reads like it was likely an accident, which I also find POV, so I am going to change it from 'he appeared to step on' to 'he appeared to stamp on on.'  Whether it was stamping or alleged stamping is up for debate, but he certainly stepped on the fellow.  Baiter 03:14, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I have replayed the incident many times now. It is important to look at the incident in real-time and not just slow-motion. Slow motion always gives the impression of more deliberate movement. I am pretty sure now that the act was not deliberate. Theere was no "gaze downward at Carvalho's groin", you can't follow the eyeline with only a two-dimentional represwtation, without seeing it from ore than one angle. What is certain is that he was battling for the ball, and he was unbalanced. He was crouched over with his head almost level with his hips. If nothing else I think you have to give Rooney the benefit of the doubt. Jooler 09:06, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Noted. Agreed article modified. Jooler 10:47, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

text: It's through discussion that wikipedia articles are improved.  I don't think the current version is perfect, and I'm sure someone will always have disagreements with what's written, but the article certainly has been improved by the discussion on this talk page, and I'm sure through further debate we'll have an even better article.  And a more NPOV article as well.  Your anonymous criticism of our discussion is unwarranted.  Baiter 02:07, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

text: From viewing the video numerous times "... I am pretty sure now that the act was not deliberate" - I am clearly stating that and I think that stating that is quite honest of me. Naivety doesn't come into it. Rooney has stated quite clearly that it was unintentional and I think you have to give him the benefit of the doubt. Jooler 06:51, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sending off

message: "Before the match Rooney's Manchester United team-mate Cristiano Ronaldo approached him from behind and aggressively placed his head close to Rooney before speaking directly into his ear [6 http://worldcup.reuters.co.uk/portugal/news/usnL01398402.html]."
This news article says nothing about this incident, is there another source? --Phelan 06:03, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is mentioned, although briefly towards the end of that source. There's a video of it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqC3NE7TYVE&search=rooney%20ronaldo where you can clearly see that happen. I'm sure they'll be clearer sources though. Englishrose 22:07, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  You're right, I'm sorry. I missed this part:"Ronaldo had also feigned a head-butt towards Rooney seconds before the match kicked off as he was walking past his club mate to take up his position on the left-wing." And thanks for the video, though from what I see there, it doesn't seem agressive, it seems playful...But since I could probably be biased, I'll wait for someone else to review it. --Phelan 02:51, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ronaldo speaking to Rooney's ear 

message: Since FIFA have maintained the disciplinary action against Rooney, and further punished him with a monetary fee and a 2 match-suspension (as per Wikipedia's World Cup 2006 - Disciplinary Action page), it's time to remove the sneaky words contaminating the impartiality of this article.
Rooney, being 'convincted', no longer "allegedly" stomped on Carvalho's groin. He stomped. (Legal analogy: you're only an 'alleged robber' until convincted in court. Henceforth, you're a robber.)
This is a Reverse-Weasel Word.
Also, after the referee declared unequivocally that he awarded the red card for the stomp, is there a reason to include whatever Ronaldo said or didn't say, or did or didn't do? 
The admission that the sending-off was exclusively related to the offense against Carvalho makes this speculation perfectly irrelevant and, instead, gives the impression that the Encyclopedia (through us) is trying to find excuses for a red card which - per FIFA (see above) - was not only merited, but actually insufficient punishment for the deed done. 
This is analogous to using weasel words. We could say it's a Weasel Fact.83.132.98.175 13:42, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The article ATM describes the facts of the incident itself rather than that of a referee who had to justify his decicions to FIFA ,or FIFA who jave to back-up the decisions of the appointed referees. You can verify them for yourself by looking at this. Jooler 14:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with Jooler. As a footballer myself who never quite made it but managed to play alongside some players that are now in the Premiership, it is a bit hard to say it's an intentional stamp as Rooney makes no eye contact with the player he puts his foot on. Couple that with the fact that the player is tangling with him from behind, I can see how Rooney could have quite easily accidently stepped on him. From my experiences, that kind of stuff happens all the time in those situations. It is just unfortunate that Rooney stepped on his groin, if it had have been on his leg it would have been a nothing incident and seen as accidental. However, that's just my opinion. Nevertheless, I'm sure it's the opinion of countless others. Rooney says he accidently did it, so we have to give him the benefit of the doubt. I don't really see how you can compare it to a conviction at a court case because if it was decided in court there would have been statements from independent experts and behaviour analysts/body language experts. Englishrose 15:22, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed the word 'accidental' again when describing the step.  Rooney says it was accidental; the ref says it was on purpose.  We can't be certain one way or the other, and all we can report on is the facts.  Rooney DID step on Carvalho.  Rooney DID claim it was an accident.  The ref DID claim it was a stomp.  Not being a court case, we don't give the benefit of the doubt to Rooney.  We simply report what happened, and the various opinions, as opinions, about the play.  Baiter 01:31, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I should point out that the word "accidentally" - was added by an anon IP user and was not part of the text that I was referring to earlier. Jooler 09:36, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Alleged" Stomp 

message: the comment about manchester united's wealth is definately not encyclopedic, nevermind biased. I'll do what I can to get rid of the POVs.82.42.176.67 22:00, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Obscene POV

message: I've just removed what I'd consider opinion from a recent edit of this article. Please contact me on my talk page if you dispute this. Pursey 10:09, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed Opinion 

message: "Rooney is also on the cover of FIFA 07 in the United Kingdom."
I think that this should be at the bottom of article
 and not in the summary.
    I agree. As well as the fact that he is on many other game covers, 
not just FIFA 07. skaterdude182 16:09, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  FIFA 07 cover importance 

message: someone needs to edit that box, and also create one in Messi's article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GranadaV (talk • contribs) 23:06, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Messi is the new FiFPro young player of the year