i would like to discuss re-adding information that @Nswix: previously removed. ive read the guidelines for criticism and believe this information is relevant and verifiable, and has coverage. the ocomment was covered by reliable sources, including usa today and bloody elbow, demonstrating it received some media attention.
can we re-add the info under a new section, titled "public image" instead? ~2026-52457-0 (talk) 08:15, 25 January 2026 (UTC)
- Hey, go ahead and add it. Just know essentiallysports is considered a content aggregator, not a reliable source, the section can't be called 'Controversy' and the only reason I reverted it was because it went up so fast, I figured it was just a troll account adding reactionary stuff, which happens about a million times a day. Nswix (talk) 07:04, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
- hey thanks for the reply! and yes, ill add it in a new section, not called "criticism", and not dedicated to controversial remarks, just "public image". thanks for letting me know. ~2026-52457-0 (talk) 20:52, 8 February 2026 (UTC)
