Talk:Frank Dux

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

Contents 1 Fraud? 2 what is there to add... 3 Balance this article 4 Overstatement 5 Famous 6 Dux has nothing to do with the film KUMITE 7 Innocent until proven Guilty with FACTS or SOURCES 8 Citations

[edit] Fraud?

Some anon added the following comment into an earlier version of this article [1]: Frank Dux is a fraud as conclusively proven in the book, Stolen Valor by B. G. Burkett, pages 411-417. Anyone care enough to verify? jni 18:04, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I don't have that book, but there's a pretty wide consensus that he is a fraud, in that he makes many unsubstantiated claims and that many of his claims have been conclusively refuted. Zuiram 22:30, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] what is there to add...

We all love a good story, I just don't think I would trust Ms. Rollins to teach me magic, even though I love Harry Potter.

I really cannot take this article seriously as to questioning the veracity of Frank Dux as I have read several articles written by Mr. Busman which are humorous due to his un abashedly untrue slander.

I could give several examples of his perpetual disinformation if you would like. < Your title is ????? read my edit directly below

Frank is not a fraud, not even by a fraction of a percent. I KnowKisida 16:51, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Unless you can provide sources to Wikipedia standards, your statement is a non-event. 68.249.1.210 14:13, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Balance this article

Dux is no doubt controversial, but regardless, this article is so one-sided it defies logic.

[edit] Overstatement

"There are many critics of Dux however, that claim that virtually all of his exploits are fraudulent, that he never competed in any underground no-holds-barred tournament, and ***that he is no martial arts master.*** In a November 1998 article titled "Stolen Valor: Profiles of a Phony-Hunter." Soldier of Fortune Magazine accused him of falsifying his military record. Many people in the martial arts community accuse Dux of fabricating his past, ***and that he is no martial arts expert.***"

There is redundancy in this paragraph stating that many claim he is not a martial arts master/expert. The redundant sentences are highlighted above between the asterisks.

And as for the balance, I agree that it is one-sided. There is a place for critics denouncing him as a fraud, but this is over the top.

I agree that it is over the top. We should have more biography-material etcetera, and better sources.

However, neither is it surprising. The man is generally only notable for his claims, and those claims are usually not borne out by the evidence. Zuiram 22:33, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Famous

Imagine being famous, famous too who’s eyes, Famous to those who dwell for your kind words, Famous for those who beg for forgiving-ness, Famous for those who envy, Famous for those who crowd every occasion, Famous for those who contest every master of every kind, Famous to those in distress who cannot find kindness a virtue, Famous who find words a weapon to cause despair, Famous a word that entitles elusion (A Paper Tiger),in who's eyes, My WordsKisida 07:03, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't see what this poem has to do with improving the article? Zuiram 22:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dux has nothing to do with the film KUMITE

According to reliable sources, Frank Dux has nothing to do with the movie Kumite (to be released in 2007) and all writing credits are of Jean-Claude Van Damme.

Kumite is no longer on imdb... i guess they aren't making it anymore.--71.194.28.102 01:50, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Innocent until proven Guilty with FACTS or SOURCES

There is no evidence or verifiable sources to disprove Dux's claims or life, therefore I tagged this article as NPOV due to its bias, the controversial claims against Dux should be placed in a sub-heading "controversy" surrounding his life. Piecraft 22:57, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, a there have been several detailed research articles that have examined his life and found the evidence to be wanting. The LA Times article and the Black Belt article (both of which are in the sources section) come to mind. On the contrary, it has been Dux who has been unable to supply any supporting evidence to his claims, other than personal assertion. The sources generally cited to support his claims were all interviews (personal assertion) or autobiography (again, personal assertion.) His critics have cited verifable sources such as military records, passport information, and available sensais where he claimed to have trained.

The burden of proof within a peer-reviwed article lies with the claim, in this case Frank Dux. If no supporting evidence can be provided on his achievements, and if there *is* supporting evidence to the contrary, it does not classify as NPOV. I agree, however, that they should be under a controversy section.

24.147.64.218 03:05, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Citations

I added many cite tags to the controversy section. I am sure some of the periodicals listed below contain the info but which to what? shouldn't we link the statments to the right articles. This is why I added the tags. Don't know which source to what statement it goes. So whomever put those could they link them to each statement tagged and any others so people know where the info came from. Thanks. --Xiahou 00:39, 10 March 2007 (UTC)