Talk:Terrell Owens/Archive 1

message: The "profootballreference" and "databasefootball" links should be removed because they are not official and this is not appropriate advertising for those sites, the only other official site for terrell owens statistics besides ESPN.com is here http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1290 71.87.7.14 06:22, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: WP allows Pages to use those links because they are non-commercial. --ShadowJester07 12:09, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Stats

message: as of now, in the timeline, there is a mention of the training camp prior to the season, and his being cut from the Philadelphia Eagles, but no mention of the 2005 season, his being deactivated, or what led up to that. maybe someone can fix this? If this problem is not fixed, his reputation will continue heading in the wrong direction.
Also, there should be a mention of his newly published book that was probably ghostwritten...
:Someone deleted a lot of text about it without reason. I restored it.ErikNY 17:16, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: what happened to the 2005-06 season?

message: What happened to all the images? Don't tell me it's that ludicrous policy of "if the copyright owner doesen't contact us and verify that he/they does/do in fact own it, than it's illegal to use!" bullshit. 71.10.17.198 10:33, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Images

message: "The day before the Eagles lost to the Dallas Cowboys at Home; 21-20 on October 14, 2005, Terrell Owens did not appologize to Ashton Kutcher after Kutcher read a apology letter written by T.O. on MTV's Punk'd. " This is missing information, I don't know what exactly is trying to be said here or what exactly it may be missing. Could the person who wrote it please clarify this? 
* What was Ashton Kutcher's controversy with T.O. and was it relevant enough to be in this article?
* What would he be apologizing for? I.E. what happened.
If this was just some practical joke on that particular TV show then I don't see its relevancy to this article. Mithotyn 00:46, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Confusion

message: While I don't feel strongly enough about this to add it back, I don't see how saying Owens was "controversially" deactivated makes it POV; that's not implying that the decision was right or wrong, it's just saying it was controversial, which it no doubt was. Maybe I'm missing something, but I didn't see the point in editing that. BMetts 20:53, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't especially care either way either, but who was it controversial to? Owens, his agent, and his union? The rest of the world kind of just reported on the fiasco, and no one with the exception of Michael Irvin tried to defend him. I don't think it was so much controversial as it was just on ESPN all day every day. But as I said, I don't especially care either way.Tommstein 01:37, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: "Controversially" deactivated

message: First off, I added a  next to the recently added 40-yard dash record claim. If someone can verify this, it will stay.
Secondly, is there really a point in having a 'Quotes' section? There's really no way to verify them, and somebody could easily make one up at will. BMetts 02:41, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotes 

message: That picture of Terrell Owens stamping on the star that was edited to show T.O. wearing a cowboys uniform was deleted.  That picture isn't real, so shouldn't be there anyways, plus is actually offensive to Cowboys fans, even with the new colors.  The star is a symbol to represent many and not one.
* Do you mean that that particular image of the event wasn't real, or that the event did not happen?  I have seen footage on ESPN of Owens running onto the star and striking a messiah-like pose. shoez 00:37, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dumb Picture 

message: There appears to be a severe lack of references in this article.  Per WP:LIVING, anything not referenced should be deleted.  I don't think it would contribute to collegial relations with other Wikipedia editors if I (or anyone else) started removing huge swaths of text from this article but I'm afraid unless some serious work is done that may become necessary.  Much of the information does appear to be legitimate and it would be a shame to remove it because someone didn't take the time to properly source it.  --ElKevbo 17:12, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: It appears that a lot has been removed to favor TO. He has been causing trouble in Dallas already by faking a hamstring injury and Parcells is ready to blow up, yet this was taken out, in addition to him not showing up for the daycamp he was running, and also the incident where he wore the opposing teams jersey to the mavericks championship game.
:See WP:LIVING --ShadowJester07 01:09, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pro TO Vandalism

message: Dude, why are you deleting the More Controversey section.  This is an encyclopedia...right?  So why are you deleting what happened.  The POV is fair.  If you think it is not change the parts that are not.  But don't delete the entire section.  That is an integral part of this persons life.  IT HAS TO BE THERE.  Its like a biography of Lincoln w/o the civil war.
:Eh, POV may be proper, but are there proper sources sources? :p Please take time to read WP:LIVING. :) If you can find sources, feel free to add it in. Usually, Radio Blurbs do not count. --ShadowJester07 03:14, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: SHAWDOWJESTER

message: I propose removing the info about Owens' being deactivated from the intro.  This is a (somewhat) current event, and is important to the article, but seems out of place here.  The intro should give a brief overview of this person's life, similar to other biographical entries.  Owens' is more widely known for his controversial actions than for any one specific episode.  We should rework the paragraph to reflect that and save the specific incidents for later in the article.  I'll wait for additional input before changing.  CPitt76 01:54, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: sounds good, holmes.  do it. 81.197.12.246 18:06, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Intro Section

message: This section is riddled with unsourced statements and blatantly non-NPOV statements, such as claiming the Cowboys are the "most despised team" in Philidelphia.  Can someone with better knowledge than I possess do something about this? Diagonalfish 17:20, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hence why there is a clean-up tag on the article. ;) --ShadowJester07 00:09, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality in 'More 2005 Controversy'

message: The article claims that TO died today (9-27-2006). I just saw Terrell Owens on a live press conference an hour ago, and he seemed quite alive to me.
:TO is alive. Someone was probably trying to be facetious. --ShadowJester07 00:09, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  TO dead? 

message: His college was listed as University of Texas at El Paso.  But I changed it to University of Tennessee at Chattanooga since I'm pretty sure that's where he went.
29 September 2006
College: Chattanooga according to NFL.com, good catch. JBKramer 20:35, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong College? 

message: I think we should add some more pictures to this article.  Also I was wondering if maybe we should put a section on Owens' two books.  The first is mentioned in the article, but his second one is only briefly referred to.  
Thoughts??
:It's somewhat difficult to find fair use photos of Terrel Owens, since most of his action shots are under a strict NFL copy right. --ShadowJester07 21:03, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures and Book Section 

message: How come when you click on the controversy links in the Dallas Cowboys section, it goes to the top of page and not to the controversy links.
:I probably forgot to update the Link's path once we changed the name of the overdose section, Sorry. --ShadowJester07 23:38, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Problems

message: Dude, it is relevant and it doesn't come out of nowhere.  You know his history with his quaterbacks and his insulting remarks about them.  It fits in wit the article.  he said it right after the eagles boys game.  Stop deleting dude.  And also, STOP SAYING UR GAY AND PUTTING HEADLINE TEXTS.  Damn ShadowJester, congratulations for being gay, now stop writing it on this article.  And this is a NPOV article.  The intepretation is from the reader.  The structure is good and is the quote is relevant.  Stop deleting and follow WP guidelines for PETE's SAKE
:== Adding Random Quotes ==
Would like to explain why Owens' remarks to Beldsoe posses enough significance to make a cameo in this article? Before venturing any further, have you even read WP:BLP or WP:MOS? Honestly, adding the comment would be the equivalent to adding Owens' remarks about religion in the "leaving Philly Section". Furthermore, the quote comes out of nowhere, you cant just add quotes out of the blue; this is not a grade school paper. And on top of that, was there proper interpretation of the quote? I guess this goes to show someone botched the American Education System, thanks for proving my Psychology Thesis --ShadowJester07 01:01, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What I'm saying is that if your going to make a claim like that, you have to mention TO's QB History. WP demands Articles be written for a general audience, as opposed to just NFL fans. --ShadowJester07 01:15, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I updated it, it would make more sense if you claim how the indecent remark relates to his past. --ShadowJester07 01:24, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Hmmm, Perhaps this relates to my idea of interpreting the true meaning of the quote 
However, there's no reason to be so "coarse" about it ;) --ShadowJester07 22:25, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Quote 

message: Please stop removing the abbreviation "UTC" from the final sentence of the first paragraph of the "Early life" section.  The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga is abbreviated UTC.  The institution's Wikipedia article says so.  As a UT alumnus, I say so. And I'm positive that even the briefest search would turn up more than enough additional evidence to support this contention.  It's not even contentious!  Further, the abbreviation is used in the very next sentence'.  Before you use an abbreviation, you must define it.
So please stop removing this and labeling it vandalism.  It's not funny and it's not helpful.  --(a frustrated) ElKevbo 19:42, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not their fault - it looks kinda like vandalism to automated tools and they're just not checking hard enough. Don't get frusterated. JBKramer 19:45, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: UTC