Talk:Florence Griffith Joyner

message: I fixed a bit of grammer here and there so that sentences were readable. Also removed a reference to Ben Johnson which was simply too general to be relevant, and removed a statement about the longevity of a record (due to improved current athletics) implies the drug use of the athlete holding of the old record, which is not logical. There are clearly examples of old records, especially in women's sports, seemingly being out of reach by the current stable of relatively 'clean' athletes. But there are also old records on the books held by widely-believed-to-be-clean athletes. Such a deduction can't be made at this time. --Daydreamer302000 14:06, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also there is quite good reason to believe it was significantly wind aided despite the 0.00 wind gauge reading at the time. David D. (Talk) 20:05, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor Edits 

message: I've removed the {NPOV} tag as the article seems OK to me.  If you feel that it should be back, please state the specifics of what concerns you. -- I@n ≡ talk 04:41, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: "Many have jokingly claimed that if she could just jog 100m her appearance fees and endorsement contract would be worth multiple millions during 1989. " —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk • contribs) 04:27, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed

message: Duh, could the truth have anything to do with it?  Nah, this is Wikipedia, you're right. --66.229.61.232, 16:32, 6 October 2007
I think that she was a druggie cheat and that the times she ran are testament to this. However there isn't any proof of this apart from her times and if Wikipedia is going to be accurate it needs to report facts. Basically we know she's guilty but we can't proove it so we shouldn't write about it. Cls14 (talk) 22:41, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duh, could the truth have anything to do with it? 

message: "She stunned the world when — known as a 200m runner — she ran a new 100m World Record of 10.49 in the quarter-finals of the US Olympic Trials."
The link below to the ABC video of her performance mentions the semi-finals as the occasion of the record. Is that correct? Could someone more athletologically apt than me check it and correct it in the entry, if necessary? Thanks a lot!
--82.207.232.154 (talk) 23:44, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The youtube video clearly calls it the "second round". Later in that video the interviewer calls it a semi-final, but Flo-Jo says her plan now is "go to the semis, make it to the final, take the final" (or something like that). Going both by the fact it was the second round, and Flo-Jo's answer, I think it was quarter final. p.s. that video also has some discussion about the wind. Peter Ballard (talk) 12:43, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: And here is an official IAAF list, which settles it conclusively, because her final, semi-final and quarter-final runs are all on the list. The WR was in the quarter-final. Peter Ballard (talk) 01:25, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quarter-finals or semi-finals? 

message: Sometimes this is due to sustance abuse.  For example abuse of EPO results in so many red blood cells in the blood that the blood is dangerously viscous.  Even a strong heart is heavily taxed and heart problems may result, especially when the athlete is asleep, as the heart rate slows and weakens.  This was speculated to have happened to FloJo.  All the athlete has to do is stop the EPO usage long enough before the testing so that they still have excess Red blood cells, but EPO abuse will not be detected.  By the way EPO is NOT an anabolic steroid, so tests for steroid use will not detect it. 09:26, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Joyner suffocated during a severe epileptic seizure. Those who speculated that somehow EPO caused heart problems that resulted in her death are misinformed. Also in 1988 EPO use amongst sprinters was probably non-existent, and Epogen did not come out until 1989. Charlie Francis also claimed in 2006 that sprinters in the United States were using it as far back as 2000. Doubt that Francis would be so in the dark as to not know that sprinters were using it before 2000... Just some thoughts- I think EPO use in sprinting is relatively new (15 years tops). --Yankees76 Talk 23:49, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

text: I don't think removing the entire controversy section was justifiable. It is a fact that Flo Jo was a controversial athlete and this should be acknowledged; if not in a separate section then worked into other parts of the article. There are no BLP issues, and to remove all mention of the suspicion that dogged her for much of her life is just a whitewash. Of course unsourced speculation is inappropriate, but here is nothing wrong with reporting what reliable sources have said about her. We don't have to prove she took drugs to do this. To adhere to WP:NPOV, we cannot simply pretend that there was no controversy. Pawnkingthree (talk) 09:28, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem with your reasoning is the 'reliable sources'. If someone of enough notable stature, notable enough to be mentioned on wikipedia, states publicly "Hey, I think she took drugs", does that mean that we should mention it here in wikipedia? The answer to that question alone is itself debatable. However, a strong point against mentioning such things in that debate would be the fact that no matter who your 'reliable source' is, and how many sources you might think you have, no one, not you, not I, not any agency, not any of those 'reliable sources' has any evidence to back up their statements to the positive. Not even closely associated heresay (friends or ex-coaches who might have witnessed a purchase, or overheard an implicating conversation,... anything). Just speculation, based on other 'reliable source' speculation. Do you really believes this qualifies for inclusion into this article? If yes, fine. But look at the article. It certainly has a nicer flow, is clearly factual, and invites no bias in any manner as it stands now. Unless there is something more than reliable sources with only their opinions, I believe the article should stay that way. Perhaps a separate article on the subject would be more appropriate? I agree with you that it was a notable topic of some discussion on its own, just not worthy or appropriate of mention in this article.  --Daydreamer302000 (talk) 11:35, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with Pawnkingthree; there has been so much controversy about this particular athlete that I believe it should at least be mentioned. Here in Belgium for one, the consensus in the media when talking about Florence Griffith-Joyner's world record is one of high doubt. I am no expert on the matter, so I can't tell if she indeed took performance enhancing drugs, but the controversy should at least be mentioned. Jellevc (talk) 09:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have just checked Flo-Jo's Dutch, French and German Wikipedia entries and all three of them note the doping controversy. Another reason for it to be added to this article, if you ask me. Jellevc (talk) 09:15, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, whether or not she actually took drugs (and there is no definitive proof that she did), there is ongoing controversy about the issue covered in multiple reliable sources and there is no excuse for not including this controversy in the article providing it is properly sourced.--Jackyd101 (talk) 18:11, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

text: I agree with Jackyd101 and Jellevc etc about mentioning the doping controversy. It should be mentioned with properly sourced. I've also checked the Chinese entry and it is mentioned there too. 75.83.60.2 (talk) 18:17, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Although there has been persistent talk of possible doping to explain Griffith-Joyner's exceptional times {give refs to articles}, no evidence has ever been produced.
Fig (talk) 21:58, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps related here, the article currently reads "Track athletes commonly retired in their late 20s, . . . " and continues into her husband's justification for her retirement.  I think that unattributed statement is stretching beyond NPOV.  It is almost unprecedented in the modern era, since the advent of professionalism which happened around the beginning of her career, for an athlete to retire at the peak of their success.  Most will continue to run for appearance fees as long as their name recognition gets them paid.  Her name recognition at the time was perhaps the greatest ever.  She could have made good money for four years or more without making the effort to train.  Anybody around the sport would know that too.  The point being, her retirement was early.  For us to give the excuses she used as factual and to suggest it was common is improper.  So I'm removing that line.  Feel free to discuss why you think it should be replaced. Trackinfo (talk) 06:16, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Drug Use

message: No remark on her one legged running outfits? Like when/why she started that maybe?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.94.31.68 (talk) 18:53, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: yeah, i'd never heard about any "fingernails" and i didn't even know she'd died, but she was world-famous for those one-legged suits! 173.9.95.217 (talk) 18:19, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fashion 

message: In the Sir Mix-a-lot song "Baby Got Back," he says, "You can have them bimbos /
I'll keep my women like Flo Jo." There should be a "cultural references" section.
Doubledragons (talk) 13:09, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Sir Mix-a-lot Song

message: In regards to the comments made by Whoopi Goldberg for Hollywood Squares...was that necessary?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.43.96.3 (talk) 20:02, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: "As opposed to after her death..."

message: She eventually married Al Joyner and had a child with him - where is that in the article? A complete article should include information about her personal life as well. 68.20.35.90 (talk) 01:33, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal life 

message: Then Griffith-Joyner or Griffith Joyner? --84.245.229.37 (talk) 14:34, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Judging from the Library of Congress and her official website, the non-hyphenated version was her official name. I have requested that the page be moved. SFB 18:34, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Surname 

message: She was tested all the time and never once had a positive drug test. She has been gone now 15 years let her RIP.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.253.155.86 (talk) 06:25, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Lance Armstrong never tested positive either. As much as I'd want her to have been clean, the general consensus is she was on something. I recall the reaction to her wins, and none of it was positive. The thing that stands out most in my memory is a split screen was done of Flo Jo which showed the change in her physique from 1987 to 1988: she was a different person, as were her times. This dramatic improvement was put down to a change in training regimen; if you believe that I've got a bridge to sell you. Her times still stand (to date) and nobody has even come close to breaking them. Her wins will always have an asterisk beside them.  Carlos Rojas77 (Talk) 22:17, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Lance Armstrong has tested positive repeatedly. The absence of fact does not give reason to make fact up.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:1319:402C:D88E:577F:988:9648 (talk) 04:51, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean 

message: It seems to me I recall contemporary coverage of her being an asthmatic, and I have a questionable memory of her in an asthma medication advertisement.
A history of respiratory issues would go a long way to contributing to her death from an epileptic seizure (it's very, very, rare for them to be fatal). So perhaps it's worthy of mention.
wiki-ny-2007 (talk) 00:32, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm late to this, but in case anyone sees it, I think this editor might have been thinking of Jackie Joyner-Kersee. EricEnfermero (Talk) 02:36, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of her asthma? 

message: I just saw her daughter on America's Got Talent. Her husband is famous too, no? I think there should be mention of them and the rest of her children, if she has any. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrRQCCGAHeg
Benvhoff (talk) 02:45, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Florence's family (especially daughter) 

message: This Time article from 1988 looks promising but requires a subscription. If anyone has access, it might be a great source for the article. Knope7 (talk) 03:19, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  1988 Time article 

message: As you may know, the Florence Griffith Joyner article has been named as one of the Hot 100 articles for Women in Green. This is part of an effort to improve important articles about women so that more Good Articles are about women. To that end, there is a lot of work that needs to be done on this article. First I am trying to find a source to support every non-obvious fact in the article. As I am doing that, I am also using those reliable sources to add relevant details. Several sections of this article, in particular anything about her experiences at the Olympics and her other professional endeavors, need expansion. I would encourage anyone who is interested to join in (or continue) to improve the article anyway you can. Please keep in mind that sources must be reliable and any controversial information needs to comply with Wikipedia guidelines. Knope7 (talk) 23:36, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Women in Green 

message: I think a few more photos would improve this aticle. I do not see any other photos available in commons. Would anyone be able to find more photos with an appropriate license to add? In particular, a photo of her on a track and/or wearing one of her famous one leg running uniforms would be great. Knope7 (talk) 01:27, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding images 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Florence Griffith Joyner. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110822140629/http://www.sports-reference.com/olympics/athletes/gr/florence-griffith-joyner-1.html to http://www.sports-reference.com/olympics/athletes/gr/florence-griffith-joyner-1.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:03, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Some sections refer to her as Flo-Jo.  This is really unprofessional.  She should be consistently referred to as Griffith Joyner.  Also sometimes Griffith Joyner is hyphenated, sometimes it isn't.  Sometimes she is just Griffith (although probably referring to a period before marriage.)   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.199.114 (talk) 08:01, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flo-Jo 

message: The article does not currently mention that two of her world record still stand. I tried to repair this yesterday by writing
As of 2021, her 200 m world and Olympic record (21.34) as well as her 100 m world record (10.49) still stand. Her 100 m Olympic record (10.62) was improved in 2021 at the 2020 Summer Olympics in Tokyo by Elaine Thompson Herah (10.61).
but was reverted by Wtqf, a user wioth 20 edits, with the comment implying I do not know what I am talking about. I left a message at their paqe3 but they did not respond. Unless there are justified objections, I am going to reinstate the text in the articke, in the Statistics section.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:46, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It does mention that her 100m and 200m records still stand, very prominently in the lead section. I undid edits by people claiming that the world record had been broken. Did you claim that the world record had been broken? You did not. So how, when I referred to people "grossly misunderstanding the olympic results", could I have implied anything about you? Wtqf (talk) 10:05, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  You have undone my edit though.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:11, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

text:  The user has been blocked as long-term abuse. Thus, I am going to introduce my suggestion to the article, as it has not been opposed by any user in good standing.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:38, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Records