User talk:GOAT Bones231012

Hi GOAT Bones231012! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! - Dyork (talk) 02:37, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Greetings Bones. Keep up the additions, but be sure to take note of my recommendations regarding contractions for encyclopaedic tone ("he's", "they've", "wasn't", etc.) Otherwise you're good to go! Happy editing and welcome to Wikipedia. P.S., Crawford's the man. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 18:55, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Just saw this, noted and thanks. And yes, he is the man!! GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 19:13, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

		Research Participation Barnstar
		This is for your extensive research hunting down good "further reading" books for the Tom Brady article. Your efforts are appreciated. Left guide (talk) 07:07, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you sir! GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 07:11, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for helping shepherd the discussion at WT:NBA to focus on reliable sources. Your voice is one of very few to do that. Left guide (talk) 21:52, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Anytime boss, always happy to help. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 22:14, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

I think we should be very cautious about using TitleHistories.com. It looks like it is self-published by an anonymous author.-- Jahalive (talk) 17:48, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Totally agree, but there is a real lack of reliable sources for the NYSAC lineage online. From the reliable sources I could find, Benny Bass's victory against Red Chapman was only for the NBA title. See below links:

https://phillyjewishsports.org/2014/03/benny-bass/

https://www.nytimes.com/1927/09/13/archives/chapman-is-beaten-by-bass-for-title-bostonian-loses-verdict-in.html GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 18:02, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Those are good sources. I don't know what people have been using for a source for the NYSAC titles.-- Jahalive (talk) 18:31, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

They might actually be using titlehistories.com lol. I was scrolling through the list of undisputed world boxing champions (bantamweight), and right under Bushy Graham's reign, which is #8 on the list, it states "Graham's undisputed status ended when he vacated his NYSAC title in January of 1929." with the reference taking you to the titlehistories.com website. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 18:40, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Just a heads up that a while ago we stopped using "WBA–NABA", "WBC–NABF", "IBF–USBA", "WBO–NABO", etc. It was deemed unnecessary to prefix the regional outfit with the sanctioning body, nor does mainstream media format it that way. Granted, BoxRec does, which is probably where we got it from, but it's still clunky. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:30, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Noted, thanks. I’ll start removing where necessary when I can. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 20:55, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Completely revised ✅ GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 13:23, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

I have a couple concerns about what you're adding to Honorary titles sections.

• Jack Johnson's World Colored Heavyweight Championship was not honorary. He had to beat Ed Martin to win it. It was as real as his World Heavyweight Championship.
• I don't think undisputed should be called an honorary title. It's an achievement.
• Is it really worth listing silly made up belts that were only used for a single fight like the WBC Money championship?

-- Jahalive (talk) 19:24, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Some good points

1. I agree, Jack Johnson’s world colored heavyweight championship should be counted as a real title, I’ll move that now.
2. You’re right, I'll have to start renaming it under "Undisputed titles" where necessary.
3. I mean they made the belts for a reason, and are meant to signify the biggest of fights. I think it’s still worth mentioning under "honorary".

GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 00:24, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Complete✅ GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 02:41, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for your contribution to the RfC at WT:NBA. The thing is, I forgot to clarify in the proposal that it was supposed to be for the lead. If it isn't too much trouble, do you think you could go back to your comment and edit it to specify if you want it in the lead, or just in the legacy sections of the articles? Ladtrack (talk) 19:59, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes I assumed it was for the lead already but I’ll go back and edit. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 20:02, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. I meant it to be for the lead but apparently I barely mentioned it. I don't think it should be too much of a problem but I'm letting people know just in case. Ladtrack (talk) 20:39, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

GOAT, I don't really edit much anymore, but I'm touched you reached out to me. First, I think it was an accident, but you linked the Career Slugging BRef page when asking about single season: B-Ref DOES list Gibson's single-season record. I believe Gibson is not listed on the Career Slugging leaders pages (for BRef or Wiki) because of the minimum playing time requirement to make the list ("Minimum of 1000 IP, 3000 PA, 500 games (fielding, 500 IP for Ps), 200 stolen base attempts (catchers) or 80 stolen base attempts (baserunners only since 1951) or 100 decisions for career and active leaderboards for rate statistics", per B-Ref). The Wiki page doesn't say what the minimums are to make the list, but I believe it's just duplicating the B-Ref list. Gibson only has 2526 PA logged at this point, so I think he falls short of the 3k PA requirement for career ranking (the B-Ref pages all note that Negro League stat rankings may be incomplete, due to the incomplete data (and its ongoing collection). As for single-season (and Bonds' page), I think you're right, I'm going to correct that. Staxringold _talk^contribs 14:00, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Ah, and I see what you mean in the intro of the Slugging Leaders page, that needs an update. Staxringold _talk^contribs 14:04, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

@Staxringold appreciate the reply and you are correct, I linked the wrong page by mistake (had so many tabs open😅). Thanks for the explanation and help. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 14:44, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Hey there! Just wanted to give you a heads up. I've moved your stats table to the fork article List of career achievements by Babe Ruth because of size issues - there are a lot of spin-off articles for that particular fella. Also, do be careful about article size, particularly for featured articles.

Really appreciate your edits! :) Omnis Scientia (talk) 10:05, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Didn’t know it was bothering you that much. Obviously there’s nothing I can say or do, but I totally disagree. His career stats should be nowhere else but his main page. I guess Hank Aaron is the only one allowed to have his career stats on his main page. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 14:22, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

There are loads with career stats on their main page because they are stand alone articles, and they usually have more info on them. But Ruth's were forked off a while back because the article was quite big. Its nothing personal, I hope you understand. And Aaron's article isn't a featured article either. Still a work in progress. Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:44, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

There are loads with career stats on their main page because it’s vital info lol. But it’s all good we’ll just let the casual readers hopefully find their way to his secondary page to see it or be wise enough to click on his sports reference hyperlink on the main. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 14:55, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm just trying to be helpful here. I've gotten in trouble before for this as well. Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:56, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

If you do want to add it and think its important that it should be, then you can use the Stan Musial article as an example. Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:59, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and added it back in the same style as Stan Musial's article and added the secondary article for further information. Also cleaned them up to meet FA article standards. Omnis Scientia (talk) 15:07, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

I apologize, I get heated quickly and realize I sounded like a complete a**. I appreciate you adding it back, looks good. I like how each stat category is highlighted for the readers for the Babe and Stan. For Mickey and Bob, they’re not highlighted nor is there a key informing the readers of what each category is. I feel like that should be standard, no? GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 15:13, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

I personally think it should but I tried that once on Sandy Koufax's article but another veteran user said something along the lines of its too much like Baseball Reference. So a standard "career overall" table is the norm ATM. Omnis Scientia (talk) 15:17, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

And no worries! We all lose our temper from time to time. Lord knows I have! Omnis Scientia (talk) 15:18, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

BTW, if you want a blueprint of how to make baseball tables and sections, check out the one on Mickey Mantle's page for hitters and Bob Gibson's page for pitchers. That's the usual way to go about it. Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:56, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I saw your recent question about adding USA and NCAA nationals placings to infoboxes. I actually wrote a script to do this (well, for USAs and NCAAs but not conferences), here: User:Habst/getInfoboxNationals.js

It's a little technical and requires a WP:Tilastopaja account to use, but I've used it on most of my articles, see the "national finals" section of Angel Perkins for an example. If you want I can run the script for you, or you could find the results manually and just copy the same format.

By the way, I understand that there's a slow response time on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Athletics. We do have a Discord group that's becoming more active now for quicker responses if you use that platform. Feel free to ping me if you have any other questions. --Habst (talk) 17:57, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

@Habst Great script. I appreciate you still getting back to me. I’ve been working on improving Jesse Owens' page the past few days and just added this. Feel free to check it out and let me know what you think, thanks. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 19:10, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Looks good to me, thanks! --Habst (talk) 19:33, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

@GOAT Bones231012 I also read your question, just didn't have time to respond right away. I would typically not add national medals in the infobox, especially for smaller countries, but maybe for bigger countries there are cases where it makes sense to add them. I am not sure about NCAA as this seems to be a typically US American phenomenon. In any case, I would recommend that you use common sense and make sure the medal table as a whole is understandable for international readers. – Editør (talk) 20:14, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I moved your comment to the existing discussion at WP:ANI#User:Kelpongames continued disruptive editing. It's generally inappropriate to start a separate thread on the same page for the same issue, but I'll assume it was accidental oversight on your part. Regards, Left guide (talk) 19:25, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Hey @Left guide, yeah I didn’t realize till after as the separate thread was just titled by the month and year, but thanks for the help as always bro. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 20:59, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi GOAT Bones231012. I noticed that you used thefamouspeople.com as a reference for biographical information in Joey Chestnut. Please note that the general consensus as expressed at WP:RSN is that it does not meet the reliable sourcing criteria for the inclusion of personal information in such articles. I've gone ahead and removed it. If you disagree, let's discuss it. You may want to check WP:RSP and WP:RSN to help determine if a source is reliable. Thanks.--Hipal (talk) 20:07, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

@Hipal I don’t disagree, thank you for removing. Why all the tags tho if the rest of the article is properly cited? GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 20:46, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Many of the references are missing citation information, making review of them difficult, so {{ref expand}}. I skimmed through the first 25 refs, removing the more obvious poor sources. I expect there are more in the further hundreds, and there may be ones that I missed because they required a closer look, so {{blp sources}}.

I'm also concerned that the article is overly detailed. I realize that performance-related articles tend to have much more detail than other articles, but am not familiar enough with the general consensus on where the line is drawn. Asking for help at a relevant Wikipedia:WikiProject or at WP:BLPN should get a response from someone more familar with such articles. --Hipal (talk) 21:20, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and asked for help at BLPN. --Hipal (talk) 18:10, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi, according to the your latest revert on the article, you didn’t underhand what I wrote in my comment. But this is not my problem, and I won't spend my time to improve an article when other users don't want to. Enjoy your self.Γεώργιος Τερζής 1 (talk) 17:00, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Yes your comment made no sense. international business standard wasn’t cited nor is it a deprecated source. Maybe you meant international business times, but again, I didn’t revert that, I kept it out. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 21:19, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

I noticed that and it's OK. Obvsiously, my fault, it's International Business Time. But my first comment was about that TV panel. As I wrote wikipedia is not a newspaper. So what a panel "decides" is not a wikipedia "material". As I added earlier, Serena Williams is voted as the greatest female athlete by AIPS. Does she need a panel? The answer is no. She needs reliable sources.Γεώργιος Τερζής 1 (talk) 21:34, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

I don’t see your point to be honest. Associated Press awards are voted on by panelists all the time and those awards are always mentioned in article pages and are even considered prestigious. So not really sure there is an issue there. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 22:40, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Associated Press is a reliable source and the way its decisions are made is not mentioned in any article. That doesn't make all panels a wikipedia material.Γεώργιος Τερζής 1 (talk) 12:18, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Ok but there is no policy that bans panel-voted awards. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 13:40, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Of course you are right, that's why Associated Press awards are regulary mentioned for all athletes. But what awarded the mentioned panel? Γεώργιος Τερζής 1 (talk) 14:19, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Greatest female tennis player of the Open Era. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 14:30, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Yes, you are right.Γεώργιος Τερζής 1 (talk) 14:32, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

This was only a table (I've seen it even the first day of publication) and there is not any award. As a I wrote, Pele was voted and awarded for the 20th century Be so kind not to revert, in that case I'll follow.Γεώργιος Τερζής 1 (talk) 14:50, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

The sentence literally that "he was named" not that he was given a specific award. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 14:55, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

It's an opportunity to inform you some things:

1) The official authority of world football is FIFA. FIFA has named Pelé as the greatest in 2012 and 2024. Have you seen where is written?

It was mentioned in the intro of the article some three or four years ago (you can find it) and users decided to move it. So, this can be used in the intro for Messi. Be fair.

2) IFFHS has announced all time teams in 2021. You can find it in honours section for Messi, Ronaldo, Pelé etc. The same is for this list. It can be mentioned in honours section.Γεώργιος Τερζής 1 (talk) 15:08, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

No one is here to argue who the authority of world football is or what was or wasn’t written previously in other articles. You have been rewriting articles the way you think it should be written for some time and it’s been extremely disruptive. I’d suggest you stop. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 15:13, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Enjoy your self.Γεώργιος Τερζής 1 (talk) 15:16, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi. There’s too much vandalism by the user Γεώργιος Τερζής 1, and this can’t continue. He keeps deleting long standing passages and sourced content that clearly state Roandlinho is regarded as one of the greatest footballers of all time. These sources include The Telegraph and ESPN. This needs to stop. He also hasn’t reached any consensus and keeps reverting other users edits. Friskowwww (talk) 19:29, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

I hear you bro, these types of editors get me heated quick. They go around making a bunch of disruptive edits for no reason and everyone has to run around reverting all of them. I’m honestly surprised an admin hasn’t gone and banned him already. He already has multiple warnings on his page. The funny part is, I received a warning for edit warring with this guy so at this point I’m done with him. I don’t want to get blocked for trying to do the right thing. Guess we’ll just hope some admin realizes what he’s doing and can maybe undo his edits, but he’s already done a lot of damage so who knows… GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 19:43, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Ok bro. So is there any way we can report him to an admin? I’m pretty new on Wiki so I don’t know how to do it. He himself only has 400 edits. There’s no way he can get away with this. Friskowwww (talk) 20:49, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

You’d be surprised how slow everything is around here. This site really tests your patience, but maybe you can submit a complaint here at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 20:57, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Hey bro, looks like he ended up getting banned for good. I’ve gone ahead and reverted his edits at Ronaldinho for you. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 01:20, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Great news bro! And thank you! Friskowwww (talk) 03:08, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello I noticed you keep reverting my edits of Derrick Henry's height. Well currently we have 2 reliable sources, Pro Football Reference and Baltimoreravens.com which both list him currently at 6 ft 2 in. Considering it's 2 reliable sources that are generally accepted over NFL.com I believe it should be updated to 6 ft 2 in. There is a discussion on his talk page but no consensus was ever reached. Hopefully we can get some more editors to weigh in on the topic and come to a consensus. Hunterb212 (talk) 20:34, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, GOAT Bones231012. I wanted to inform you that any trouble that stemmed from the Ronaldinho article should now be resolved. A number of sockpuppets have been blocked, including at least two who interacted with you. If you encounter any more trouble that seems similar on football related articles, feel free to consider ANI, AIV, and SPI as appropriate. May you have a good weekend, Super Goku V (talk) 06:41, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

		The MMA Barnstar
		I, Cassiopeia, hereby award GOAT Bones231012 the The MMA Barnstar for their valued contributions to WikiProject MMA. Awarded MMA Barnstar

Cassiopeia talk 22:30, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Ayyyyy appreciate that!!! GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 23:41, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Why are you reverting all my edits? Thegardner123 (talk) 14:35, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

You’re kidding me, right? Calling Daniel Cormier a Bantamweight? Not to mention adding content without adding any sources and changing heights and nicknames when everything is per Sherdog. Please stop. Going through your history of edits, every single one of them have been reverted. Not a good sign. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 14:40, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Daniel Cormier’s frame is 5”9 and his reach is similar. If he wasn’t obese he would be fighting at around lightweight/welterweight. Bantamweight is a bit of a stretch- fair enough. It seems just because you are a Jon Jones fanboy, you cannot acknowledge DC not being a natural heavyweight. Many of my edits have sources already there that support what I am adding. For example, the GSP edit where I state he is widely regarded as the greatest welterweight of all time is already backed by all the sources. There was no need to revert that one, why did you? Thegardner123 (talk) 16:08, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Not relevant to Wikipedia editing but rather your character, strange how you idolise a man that beats up his wife, crashes into pregnant women and flees the scenes, multiple run-ins with the law and multiple failed PED tests. Just curious why that is? Thegardner123 (talk) 16:11, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

If you're going to revert the edits, you should say why? Terence Crawford: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia - my reasoning was, he's been in multiple weight classes. This way his profile matches the like of Canelo, Mayweather, Pacquiao. Mahussain06 (talk) 12:04, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Oleksandr Usyk and Sugar Ray Leonard competed in multiple weight classes and have sections titled "Undisputed cruiserweight champion" or "First world title". Crawford fought for a world title every time he moved up so it still mentions the new weight class every time. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 12:21, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Leonard's profile was done a long time ago, long retired. He has an old format. Usyk is only 2-weight classes and it was myself that helped build his page from when he was a cruiserweight. Anyone that has competed in more than 3 weight classes in the past 10 years, you'll notice the format. Mahussain06 (talk) 12:45, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

I’ll self revert, but keep the "Undisputed light welterweight champion" and "Undisputed welterweight champion" headers. Fair? GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 14:48, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

I've done that now, but it leaves only one fight under each of the headers, as he never defended the undisputed titles. Will leave it like that for now. ☺ Mahussain06 (talk) 07:21, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Why are removing them when its recognized as title fights by boxrec and major boxing publications like bwaa and Ring magazine. I get what your saying that they are secondary title belt but what your not understanding is that only reason they are recognized as title fight is because inoue fight took against reigning ibf and wbo champion and no 1 Ring ranked fighter McDonnell who only had wba regular with him. that's why all major boxing publications recognized it as a title fight. Songsten (talk) 16:35, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

@Songsten I’m not saying those two fights weren’t for titles, what I am saying is that he wasn't the primary WBA champion of that weight class at the time. It doesn’t matter that McDonnell was the #1 ranked fighter, he wasn’t the primary champion. Look at Inoue's BoxRec page for yourself, they exclude it.

https://boxrec.com/wiki/index.php/Naoya_Inoue#Professional_Record GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 17:29, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Yes because the belt was secondary but boxrec recognized the fight it self as title fight cause it was against real reigning champion and no 1 ranked fighter who only had wba regular with him. See it for yourself. https://x.com/song_jin36001/status/1919210510903357580 Songsten (talk) 17:35, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

@Songsten First off, I don’t know why you keep saying Ring rated #1 fighter. That has nothing to do with the conversation and isn’t relevant in terms of title status. Secondly, Ryan Burnett was the primary WBA bantamweight champion at the time, not McDonnell. I am not saying the fight between Inoue and McDonnell wasn’t for a title, I’m just saying it wasn’t for the true WBA bantamweight world title. There is a reason why the secondary lineage exists. There is a true champion that everyone is hunting for. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 17:53, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Your not understanding what I'm saying ryan burned was the wba super champion but was not rated highly. Boxing world saw McDonnell as the man at 118 as he was wbo and ibf champion pion but didn't have belt as ibf stripped him and wbo won't give him belt as he won't drop wba regular basically McDonnell was the real champion but only had wba regular and was rightly ranked no 1 ahead of super champion. And that's why Ring and boxrec recognized the fight it self as title fight cause inoue was fighting a real champion and no 1 fighter in the division. Thats why Songsten (talk) 18:01, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

You are not understanding that rating/ranking doesn’t matter and is irrelevant. It’s about what title he had at the time and it was the WBA "Regular" title. It’s not my fault he wasn’t considered the primary champion. And what the IBF or WBO did to McDonnell is none of my concern, it happened. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 18:04, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Again your not understanding it the title is recognized as secondary cause it was wba regular. But boxrec recognizes the fight itself not the title but the fight as title fight because it was against McDonnell was a real reigning champion. Which is also the reason Ring magazine and all other major publications recognizes it as title fight. I couldn't have made it more clearer than this. That'd why said once they stop recognizing it we can change it here no Wikipedia. https://x.com/BoxrecGrey/status/1918773938709987402 Songsten (talk) 18:12, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Ryan Burnett was the primary reigning champion. McDonnell held the WBA "regular" title. Both statements are true. Again, I am not saying it wasn’t a title fight, like I’ve been saying, McDonnell held the WBA "Regular" title, but he wasn’t the "real reigning champion" (to quote you) of the division. Yes, of course boxing publications are going to mention the belt in the title fight, but it was the secondary championship at the end of the day. We are not going to let’s say for example start counting an Interim world title or say the IBO world title in such a streak now, would we? This opens up a can of worms. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 18:20, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

The fight was recognized as title fight not cause of wba regular but that McDonnell was the no 1 fighter of division and a real champion. Thats why boxrec amd Ring magazine bwaa espn all recognizes it as title fight cause inoue was fighting a real champion.and Wikipedia is supposed to reflect the real world by representing significant published viewpoints on topics, not personal opinions, and it aims to be neutral and verifiable through reliable sources. thats why i said once major publications stop recognizing it we can can remove if from Wikipedia. Songsten (talk) 18:29, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

You keep saying it’s my personal opinion, meanwhile ESPN called it McDonnell a "secondary bantamweight titlist" while BoxingScene even stated "While some credited Inoue for winning a title in his third weight class, it’s important to note he really didn’t. The WBA belt he won is their sub-title. Ryan Burnett is the higher WBA champion at 118 and will be a part of the WBSS." See below links:

https://www.espn.com/boxing/story/_/id/23602405/naoya-inoue-posts-first-round-ko-victory-jamie-mcdonnell-tokyo

https://www.boxingscene.com/articles/naoya-inoue-jamie-mcdonnell-afterthoughts GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 18:36, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

That's why I said the title is not recognized as championship belt because it was wba regular. Do you have problem reading or what. I said it's the fight that's recognized as title fight because it was against McDonnell. Had the wba regular fight was against someone else than the fight it self wouldn't be recognized as title fight. Songsten (talk) 18:40, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Ok now you are just not making sense and if "the title is not recognized as championship belt" (your words) then you’ve proved what you’ve edited on his page is false. In any event, either continue the discussion here or on Naoya Inoue's talk page, but not both. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 18:43, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

dude are you having problem or what. It's the fight that's recognized as title fight because it was against McDonnell. Here you can hear it from the man himself Jimmy Lennon Jr. https://x.com/trboxing/status/1967185112409284762

https://espnpressroom.com/us/press-releases/2025/04/top-rank-presents-undisputed-world-championship-naoya-inoue-vs-ramon-cardenas/https://www.espn.com/boxing/story/_/id/38046833/naoya-monster-inoue-biography-record-fights-morehttps://x.com/BoxrecGrey/status/1918773938709987402 Songsten (talk) 18:47, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

X is not a suitable source or reference and the other link is taking me to an error page so… GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 18:57, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

But it has nothing to dp with X. It's boxrec graph posted on x by boxrec's gery. And it's Jimmy Lennon Jr intro about Inoue's title fight. You can listen to it yourself. https://x.com/trboxing/status/1967185112409284762. And the other seems it be broken and you see it's recognized as title fight as its listed in hus record. So does Ring magazine https://ringmagazine.com/en/news/naoya-inoue-declares-murodjon-akhmadaliev-his-career-best-challenge-september-14-fight-date-and-location-announced https://www.espn.com/boxing/story/_/id/38046833/naoya-monster-inoue-biography-record-fights-more Songsten (talk) 19:01, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

I don't have X and it’s not letting me listen with sound and again it isn’t a suitable source no matter where it originally came from. Secondly, the post says Alhmadaliev which was his most recent fight. Not sure how that applies here. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 19:07, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Here then on instagram. And How is Jimmy Lennon Jr not suitable source when he gets his information from boxrec and is the man who introduces fighter at BWAA and IBHOF. https://www.instagram.com/toprank/reel/DOlK9YQCHzp/?hl=en Songsten (talk) 19:14, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Have you actually even listened to it yourself? Because I just did and I am completely lost on why you’ve even sent it now. It proved absolutely nothing. Please explain to me why you’ve cited it. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 19:18, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Jimmy Lennon literally says inoue is making his 26th consecutive world title appearances. Sp how did it not prove anything when Jimmy Lennon Jr is one if the most credible source in boxing. Songsten (talk) 19:22, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Question for you. Is an interim world title fight, a world title fight? Is an IBO world title fight a world title fight? I mean yes, you can announce it out loud as a world title fight if you’d like, but in reality when keeping records, no one is counting minor, interim, silver, or regular (when there is a primary champion) title fight in a streak like Joe Louis's. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 19:26, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

except you are not understanding that inoue fight is recognized as title fight cause of it being against McDonnell. It has nothing to with interim or ibo. And when you have ever seen Jimmy Lennon Jr announceing interim or ibo as world title or title fight, he literally announces as interim title fight or ibo title fight. And what's the point of removing it from here when both Ring espn and boxrec recognizes it and Jimmy Lennon does so and introduces as such. You removing it from Wikipedia is not going to make Jimmy Lennon Jr go inoue has 24 not 26 title fights. Wikipedia is supposed to reflect real world. Songsten (talk) 19:33, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

You keep saying ESPN and BoxRec when I’m the one that provided links from those site either proving the secondary championship is excluded or calling McDonnell a secondary bantamweight titlist. You keep going on with nonsense. That title fight isn’t the same as if Ryan Burnett had a title fight with someone else at the same time and you know it. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 19:38, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

I literally linked espn records of Inoue's title fight and boxrec graphic but you said u don't have X. And what does Ryan Burnett have to with this, only reason it's recognized as title fight is because the fight was against McDonnell.

https://www.espn.com/boxing/story/_/id/38046833/naoya-monster-inoue-biography-record-fights-more https://x.com/BoxrecGrey/status/1918773938709987402 Songsten (talk) 19:42, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

In that case, ESPN contradicts themselves with the article I’ve linked. And it doesn’t change the fact that the organization themselves (WBA) recognized him as a secondary titleholder, not the primary. On top of it, there are plenty of sources discussing the fact that it was a secondary title fight. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 19:54, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Espn don't contradict thenself, what espn is saying is that title was regular. But the fight itself is recognized as title fight since opponent was McDonnell. Here as fight happened espn bbc boxingscene all say it was title fight. And that is what I'm saying it's recognized as title fight cause they opponent was McDonnell not the belt. And like I said you can removed it from Wikipedia but it won't reflect the real world.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/boxing/44224379 https://www.espn.com/extra/boxing/story?id=23604911&src=desktop https://www.boxingscene.com/articles/inoue-blows-out-mcdonnell-1st-round-win-bantamweight-title Songsten (talk) 20:03, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

McDonnell was a secondary champion and the fight was for the secondary title. Plain and simple. The fact that you admit it was for the "Regular" title proves that you know Ryan Burnett was the primary champion at the time. You can’t argue this. There is a clear title history of primary champions and McDonnell wasn’t on it. I know you understand what I’m saying, I just don’t get how you don’t see that it is not the same thing as Joe Louis, who was the "real"/primary/undisputed throughout his whole reign. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 20:27, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

you are the one is not getting it. I told you only reason it's recognized as title fight is because the opponent was McDonnell who was recognized as a real reigning champion and was the no 1 ranked fighter.Songsten (talk) 20:40, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Yes, McDonnell was recognized as "Regular" champion while Burnett was the actual WBA bantamweight champion. And stop bringing up rankings, that means absolutely nothing. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 20:44, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

it's recognized as title fight is by boxing publications because the opponent was McDonnell who was recognized as a real reigning champion. Ryan Burnett has nothing to do with it who was recognized as paper champion. Songsten (talk) 20:46, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

So it clearly sounds like you are trying to discredit Burnett's title now. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 20:50, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

You are not getting it. I'm talking about recognition. Burnett had super title but was recognized by boxing world as paper champion. While McDonnell was reigning wbo and ibf champion but only had wba regular that's why McDonnell was recognized as real reigning champion. And that's why inoue fight was recognized as title fight since it was against McDonnell. Songsten (talk) 21:10, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

See that’s where the disconnect is. It doesn’t work like that. You’re basically saying "Burnett wasn’t the real champion, McDonnell was". Utterly ridiculous. Burnett was THE champion. I am now done talking to you here. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 21:23, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Wow you're still not getting it. I'm saying because the opponent was McDonnell that is reason why the fight was recognized as title fight by boxing publications. Ryan Burnett has nothing to do with this. And no matter what your opinion is it won't reflect the real world, Jimmy Lennon will always announce inoue with 26 title fight and 27 for his upcoming fight so will ring magazine, so will espn, so will BWAA, so will all the other outlet like tnt, dazn, bbc, CBS. Songsten (talk) 21:39, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Burnett has everything to do with it. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 22:04, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

No he doesn't cause the fight itself was recognized as title fight. And like i said inoue will be always be announced as guy with 26 title fight and 27 for his upcoming fight. At this point Wikipedia no longer reflects the real world. Songsten (talk) 22:20, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, how are you? I've noticed for a while that you became a new editor of mma articles with less than a year of experience. I've been around for over a decade making updates here, so I think I can add relevant context to the discussion. My point here is that if a relevant record is tied, it should be mentioned in the fighter's mma record section. Sterling broke the record in the past and he shares it with Merab now. If the latter breaks the record in his next fight, then we'll remove the "tied the record" message in order to add one for the fight in which he broke the record. If he loses his belt, it should be noted there that he also became the BW champ with more title defenses in the promotion history.

All the examples you mentioned on the edit summary are not relatable due to being different situations than this one. Also: when a record holder extends their record, we add the lastes extension. It's rare for title holders, but more recently we had both Derrick Lewis and Charles Oliveira extending their KO, submission and finish records respectively. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 19:36, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

There are no relatable examples simply because there are no other examples I could find of a tied record being mentioned in "Notes" for any other MMA fighter. I could be wrong tho. Just to be clear, what are you saying would happen if Merab happens to lose his next fight. You mean to remove it or keep it? GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 19:57, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

There are none, because we can simply keep the current record holder with that note. If there are multiple fighters, we have the one that broke the record and then the ones that tied it. If someone new breaks the record, then we just keep that one moving forward. Obviously that goes to multiple fighters. For example: if Merab breaks it, Sterling's page will remain the same because he was the one who broke it before and so goes one.

If Merab loses, we just keep it until someone breaks it again. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 22:01, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm a total newcomer to the UFC (my first event was UFC 317 lol), but I find myself rather disappointed in the quality of most UFC pages. Besides the GAs UFC 94 and UFC 148, it seems like the overwhelming majority of UFC event articles are simply descriptions of their backgrounds, and their fight cards, both of which can easily be found on Tapology and other sites.

I see that you edit MMA articles a lot and you're clearly a fan (I'm not sure if your username refers to Jon Jones, do tell). Would you be interested in a collaborative project to try and make UFC pages have descriptions of each fight? I would love to work on a few starting articles with you and adding detailed fight descriptions to recent events like the Pereira vs. Ankalaev blowout. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 03:33, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Hey @HadesTTW, lol yeah my username does refer to Jon. I totally agree, there are plenty of boxing events with fight details so I don’t see why it shouldn’t potentially be done for MMA events. Problem is, there aren’t a ton of active WikiProject participants, and the ones that are, are preoccupied with updating roster, rankings, records, and patrolling pages for vandalism (which is mostly what I do). I would be open to helping out, but just want to let you know that I will be traveling all week next week so I’m not gonna really be active much. I’ve also been busy recently adding about 800 references to List of sports figures considered the greatest over the last month, which is now the 12th most referenced article on English Wikipedia 😂. If you want to get it started for now, I can check out the specific events you’ve edited when I get back and follow your lead. Just let me know which ones (assuming UFC 320 first?) GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 05:02, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi Goat Bones231012,

I noticed that that you keep replacing my Magnus Carlsen picture with the one before it.

Have a look at this Wikipedia article which uses my image instead:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_Chess_Championship

I'm not having inconsistent images throughout Wikipedia articles.

Your regards,

BrandenburgGateGermany BrandenburgGateGermany (talk) 04:33, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Your image changes are highly questionable. Not sure why you’d change a perfectly fine image with one that is good, but not as good. Makes no sense to me, and you did the same thing at Hikaru Nakamura. Just because the image is already in another article, doesn’t mean it has to be the infobox image for Magnus Carlsen so I’m not sure what you mean. Also, another user has already reverted your edits again with explanations. Maybe just take it slow. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 05:04, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi GOAT Bones231012,

Thanks for your message. I understand your concern, but my goal wasn’t to replace for the sake of it — it’s to maintain consistency and encyclopedic quality across related pages. The photo I used is:

• Higher-resolution and shows Carlsen more clearly (neutral expression, professional lighting).

• Already in use on the Speed Chess Championship article, where it represents him in the context of the event.

Having the same image across key pages about the same subject helps readers recognize him easily and aligns with WP:CONSISTENCY and WP:IMAGEUSE. There’s no rule that forbids re-use of a high-quality image; in fact, WP:COMMONNAME and WP:IMAGES encourage using the most representative and freely licensed version available.

If you feel another image better fits this article’s context, could we discuss it on the article’s talk page and maybe get a third opinion? I’m happy to collaborate to settle on whichever image is most encyclopedic overall.

— BrandenburgGateGermany (talk) 10:xx, 4 November 2025 (UTC) BrandenburgGateGermany (talk) 05:45, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

BrandenburgGateGermany, please stop using LLMs to generate your talk page posts. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:29, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

I misread the edit history and undid your edit by mistake. It was an appropriate removal, though it should have had an edit summary. TornadoLGS (talk) 19:31, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

No worries, you’re good. I should’ve at least wrote a small edit summary. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 19:34, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi there. You probably weren't aware, but there was consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football/Archive 28 § New College Statistics table format against the table having a colorized banner and team name removed from the individual rows. I partially reverted your edits at Philip Rivers. Regards. —Bagumba (talk) 14:51, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

Hey @Bagumba, sorry about that I really had no idea. Thanks for letting me know tho, won’t happen again. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 15:51, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

No need to apologize. You know when you know. Thanks for understanding. —Bagumba (talk) 15:57, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it. To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:41, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2026!

Hello GOAT Bones231012, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2026. Happy editing, Red Director (talk) 00:34, 26 December 2025 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Red Director (talk) 00:34, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

@Red Director, thank you so much! Happy holidays to you too! GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 00:59, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello, just a Wiki beginner not sure hoe to ask in the right place but wondering why you deleted Sabalenka's transgender comment addition? It's definitely newsworthy especially talking about nattle of the sexes, Martina says it, it's sports headlines. Deleted on Nick Krigos page too. Editorcgvv (talk) 05:35, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

You’re supposed to add a new topic below instead of commenting here, but anyways, Wikipedia articles, especially biographies, should reflect what is most significant and enduring about the subject. A single off court comment even on a controversial topic does not carry comparable long-term encyclopedic weight and is not central to her notability. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 06:15, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Got it thanks. So future comments could warrant it possibly. Her coach wearing that anti transgender hat wouldn't count either. Editorcgvv (talk) 12:47, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

BoxingScene’s 2025 Fight of the Year - article: https://www.boxingscene.com/articles/boxingscenes-2025-fight-of-the-year Mahussain06 (talk) 11:30, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

GOAT Bones231012,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Volten001 ^☎ 06:39, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Volten001 ^☎ 06:39, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

@Volten001, Wow cool template! Thanks and Happy New Year to you as well! GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 08:05, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes indeed... You're most welcome and nice time! Volten001 ^☎ 12:11, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Are you black? If not then ignore it.~2026-67156-9 (talk) 02:26, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Seriously? Why does that matter? Just say what you want to say. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 03:39, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

it me again MMaNapoleon450 (talk) 04:39, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

@MMaNapoleon450, lmaooo I guess I did join your fan club after all.😂 It’s still confusing that all of the major sources still list her as 1989 though. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 04:42, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

Im pretty sure it a common mistake for translation age from china to English if my memory is correct MMaNapoleon450 (talk) 04:44, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

@MMaNapoleon450, I hear you, it definitely makes sense given the interview she had so I will just leave it as 1990. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 04:46, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

I have to take on some issues with you regarding NFL awards. Firstly, why would you remove the Salute to Service award and NFL Moment of the Year award from their infoboxs? I saw you commented that their is no consensus and I find that blatantly false. They are recognized at NFL Honors. I can understand not including Fedex Air and Ground Player of the year but the Salute to Service award and NFL Moment of the Year award needs to be included, so please allow me to do that. Secondly, in regards to rookie of the year and offensive player of the year, since they won the AP version, it is only right to link it to the correct wikipedia page being AP NFL Offensive Player of the Year and AP NFL Offensive and Defensive Rookie of the Year. AloofStorm5476 (talk) 14:32, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

@AloofStorm5476, if you find that "blatantly false", then point me towards a past discussion where a consensus was reached to add those awards. Or even show me where they are listed anywhere in the Wikiproject. As for Offensive or Defensive Player of the Year, it doesn’t make sense to only highlight AP if they have also been honored by other outlets. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 15:30, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm fairly new to editing on wikipedia so I'm not sure if there are any past discussions or a wikiproject for NFL awards. AloofStorm5476 (talk) 15:38, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

@AloofStorm5476, you can start a new discussion regarding they’re inclusion in infoboxes at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Football League if you’d like. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 15:52, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

I ended up doing that after looking it up! AloofStorm5476 (talk) 16:08, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:NFLINFOBOXINCLUDE does say to include "Other NFL recognized awards and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Assadzadeh says this about this problem, "You bring up a good point. WP:NFLINFOBOXINCLUDE states that "Major league-wide awards" should be included, in addition to "Other NFL recognized awards", which is confusing. Why not just state that all NFL recognized awards should be included? I think we need to clearly define what awards should be included, regardless of whether they are considered "major" (by whom) or "other". So I think including the Salute to Service award and NFL Moment of the Year award would fall under the include category. I need to just get approval then I can let you know so that you don't remove them! AloofStorm5476 (talk) 18:25, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

@AloofStorm5476, if the consensus is to add them, then there will be no problem. If consensus is not to add them or if there is no consensus, then they will not be added. If that is the case, a lot of players have an "Awards and honors" sub section which you can just include it in. And if they don’t have that, I guess you can just mention it in their "Professional career" at the end of the season in which it was awarded. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 19:13, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Ur a kill joy my boy ~2026-99144-4 (talk) 05:03, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed that you've worked on MikeTyson’s article, as well as several football-related pages. Would you mind adding Peter Arnell's creation of a Super Bowl LX commercial, featuring Tyson, to Arnell's page? Here is a direct link to the request: Talk:Peter_Arnell#Super_Bowl_LX_commercial.Thanks, Joanne PA (talk) 18:22, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

@Joanne PA,  Done. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 19:40, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello! I hope your day is going well. I just wanted to send you a gentle reminder to please leave edit summaries when you revert edits, such as this one. As far as I can tell, the other editor was acting in good faith, and they provided a high-quality source to back up their edit. I agree with you that the content they added doesn't belong where they put it, but you did not explain that to them. Please always leave edit summaries, even brief ones, when reverting edits like this. Thanks! OrdinaryOtter (talk) 20:50, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Hey @OrdinaryOtter, will do. Hope all's going well for you today as well. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 20:57, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Greetings. I was just wondering if you can clarify your revert to the article of Cus D'Amato. Do you have a specific reason as to why you would do such a thing? Beast from da East (talk) 13:19, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

His name has an apostrophe, so I guess I was just confused why it was removed. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 19:04, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Hope you're doing well. Regards. Bringingthewood (talk) 21:01, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Like Bringingthewood, I had thought about you and noticed you haven't been around for a little while. I think some of our star athlete infoboxes miss you for working tirelessly to cull bloat. Hoping everything is good in life. Left guide (talk) 07:29, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

Hey guys, I know it’s been some time and I appreciate the well wishes from both of you! All is good here, I had started a new job and couldn’t really find the time to continue editing especially at the pace I was (I think I needed the break too). I’ll try and still make edits here and there now. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 19:08, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Great hearing from you, GB. Just do what you do and try not to burn yourself out, which is sometimes easier said than done, lol. Good luck with your job. Bringingthewood (talk) 00:29, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

where did the 13 year being the longest unbeaten streak in boxing come from? many boxer including Terrence Crawford, Floyd Mayweather, Ricardo Lopez, Joe Calzaghe have gone on longer. Do those boxers not actually exist? Fruitloop11 (talk) 23:50, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Sorry I haven’t responded sooner, I’ve been away for a while. I have no idea wtf I was smoking when I added that info especially since I’m the one that has edited most of Terence Crawford’s wiki page. Thanks for pointing out the mistake. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 19:37, 31 August 2026 (UTC)