Talk:Apolo Anton Ohno

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Apolo Anton Ohno article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Sports and games work group.
Apolo Anton Ohno is within the scope of WikiProject Olympics. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Olympics Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
Olympics To-do:
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Asian Americans, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Asian Americans on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

Contents

[edit] Picture?

This article ought to include a picture, in case anyone has one. I took the liberty of putting a notice on the article page saying so. Creationlaw 00:20, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Koreans

Koreans don't really hate him because he is of Japanese descent. They are mad at him for his "hollywood action," pretending to be pushed. Jamesdakrn 07:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Funny, considering Koreans are INFAMOUS within Asia for being cheats. :-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.251.17.183 (talk) 11:55, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

shouldn't there be mention that part of the Korean's hatred for him is attributable not only to their anti-American viewpoints, but to their racist attitudes against the Japanese and mixed-raced individuals of Asian decent?

First, the Japanese and Koreans are genetically close races. This is an issue of seemingly poor sportsmanship on Ohno's part as well as his Japanese heritage, which is quite obvious given the tv time of his father. Korea's view of mixed-raced individuals is the same throughout the world, i.e. it is looked down upon by some and accepted by others. However, as stated, this mixed-race issue is easily trumped by the greater issues of sportsmanship and the Japanese occupation. All the other competitors believed that he did a pure acting job but I guess this first matter is too subjective. The Japanese occupation is a bit more factual. The elders of Korea still remember the Japanese occupation and all of it's human rights abuses of rape, torture, and murder (see Comfort Women). Obviously, Ohno did not participate in any of those violations, but to acuse the Koreans of being "racist", i.e. ignorantly discriminating against a people, is walking a fine line. Yes, Koreans should not hold Ohno accountable to the actions of his ancestors. But the Koreans are justified in maintaining malcontent for the years of unthinkable torture which they endured not so long ago. It's not like the anti-French sentiment in the U.S., where the French never came close to the human rights violations of the Japanese.

Only a Korean would say "the Japanese and Koreans are genetically close races." Most Japanese deny this. In fact it is more common to hear Japanese academics say the Japanese came from the Asian mainland through China. --75.34.10.8 19:10, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Could you please not talk if you don't know what you're talking about? If you had paid any attention, you would see Koreans denying any relations with the Japanese and identifying them closer to monkeys than they are to humans. So suck on it! monkey! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.102.67.28 (talk) 20:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
I call you on your statement that "All the other competitors believed that he did a pure acting job." If I remember right, at least one competitor stated that the South Korean skater had been cross-tracking throughout the entire competition and he was glad that the South Korean skater was finally called on it. If that's true, then who's the truly poor sportsman in the incident in question? Nevertheless, this debate isn't appropriate for this article. It should be in a separate article titled something like, "2002 1500 meter speedskating controversy" or something like that. Cla68 13:45, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
I do not believe that I was the one who wrote that statement. Someone else must have edited that in. If I did write that, then I must have been not clearly focused at the time, because I definitely do not remember hearing or reading that specific occurence. As for adding an entire new article, it would not be inappropriate assuming that the new article was linked from this one. --Bakphp 00:58, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Keep it neutral

This is not a place to discuss any (percieved) anti-Japanese sentiment in Korea. It is an article about a sportsman from the USA.

There have been several anonymous edits (myself included), so I think it's better if anyone who wants to contribute gets an account.

I will revert the page back to my last edit, basically talking only about the races, and I think if people want to discuss the percieved Japanese treatment of Koreans during WWII they should do it on the appropriate pages. If anyone disagrees they should discuss here first.

I didn't think the entry was very neutral, so I've changed it to be more neutral. Any discussion as to historical tensions between South Korea and the US and Japan should only be briefly mentioned here, and then more fully explained in the different, appropriate entry. 28 Mar 06, ca

[edit] Maximizing Accuracy along with Neutrality

I agree with many of your edits (especially with word choice), however it is fact that 1)The Japanese did mistreat the Koreans during the occupation (pre-WWII and during WWII) 2)The expected anti-Japanese sentiment due to the occupation is still very much alive, especially amongst the older generations who remember the mistreatments. 3)Many, but not all, Koreans will openly admit their dislike of Japanese decendents and claim that any innately negative impressions upon such people are justified.

Thus, in mentioning the negative response by the Korean fans, a maximal explanation of the motives behind this negative response seems very pertinent, especially given the unusual degree of the response. Such an extreme response (i.e., e-mails flooding and crashing the Olympic Committee's account server, formal complaints continuing during the 2004 Summer Olympics, etc.) by the Korean fans deserves an explanation beyond what happened in the race itself.

I hope you can understand why it is very relevant and neutral to mention the full motivations of the Korean response.

It'd be better to have a separate article on Korean anti-Japanese sentiment, rather than trying to explain it in an article on Ohno. Andjam 00:31, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you. This article is not the place to explain such an issue. So it shall be noted but not explained.--Bakphp 01:29, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Seems we're coming to a concensus here.The anti-Japanese mention would be relevant if it was occuring in all Japanese-Korean sports encounters, but it isn't. This kind of thing doesn't seem to happen when Japan and Korea play in soccer or baseball. Also, Ohno is not Japanese, he is a citizen of the USA. There are of course other articles where it should be mentioned, but I still think it's irrelevant to this article.--Dnheff 02:47, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
Actually, the anti-Japanese sentiment does clearly occur in other sports. For example, in the 2002 World Cup which was held in Korea and Japan, the two teams were placed in separate groups and both managed to qualify for the single-elimination rounds. Immediately, a huge debate ensued in regards to which team had the more difficult schedule to get to that point. The coach of Korea at the time (Dutchman Gus Hiddink) was surprised to have to answer to so many questions juxtaposing the two sides. And, yes, Ohno is a U.S. citizen, but as mentioned, the anti-Japanese sentiment applies for all those of Japanese decent. I agree that this issue should not be elaborated upon, but the mentioning of its existence and relevance is an integral part of the explanation to perhaps the most controversial event in Ohno's career.--Bakphp 20:11, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Again, not relevant. South Korea and Japan didn't play each other in the 2002 World Cup. This was just both teams trying to talk themselves up. It certainly didn't result in any major riots as far as I'm aware, and I don't think they have hundreds of riot police standing guard when the Japanese soccer team travels to South Korea.--Dnheff 02:47, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
As an avid soccer fan, the fact that they didn't play eachother but still had a heated debate is quite amazing and shows the significance of their rivalry. And the lack of rioting over sporting events is not part of their culture. The infamous soccer riots are localized to Europe and South America. Back to the issue, anti-Japanese sentiment is prevelant across the board, even beyond sports. If you look up disputes in regards to Dokdo Island and the hundred appologies that Japan has made in regards to the Japanese Occupation and all of them being rejected by Korea, then this issue should seem a bit more clear. I found a nice article [1] that ties together the ongoing disputes between Japan and the Koreas in relation with a soccer match. --Bakphp 21:35, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Debates betweeen nations over sports isn't unusual. The Japanese Korean sporting relationship is not significantly different from that between USA and Canada in Ice Hockey, or between England and Argentina in soccer, or between USA and Australia in swimming. KiwiDave 08:38, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
USA and Australia or USA and Canada do not have a clear history of occupation and human rights violations.

I am Korean American and live in Seoul, Korea. So, let me offer my perspective on how I see things. From what I understand, the dislike of Ohno is not based so much on anti-Japanese sentiment as it is on the fact that Koreans think Ohno is a whiner and a cheater. LOL. And I think they see Ohno as more of American than Japanese. A lot of Koreans think Americans tend to get an unfair advantage at the Olympics due to the commercial power of the USA for the games. Thus, mentioning anti-Japanese sentiment isn't really relevant here, in my opinion.--Mapo 05:04, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I too am Korean American and my parents and extended family in Korea always fill me in on these popular issues. For them, Ohno is seen as both of Japanese decent and as a U.S. citizen. Somebody already talked about the anti-japanese sentiment, and the anti-Americanism is related to the ongoing presence of U.S. troops in Korea which has resulted in an accidental death of a little girl as well as several crimes on the part of the U.S. troops. So, I think both the anti-Japanese and anti-American sentiments are both relevant. After all, the reaction by Korea was quite amazing.

[edit] Anti-Ohno Section?

Maybe we should make a small seperate section about the anti-ohno attitude in Korea. So it would seperate the controverseries and his achievement, which would help the reader to understand the about Ohno little bit better. --Stevefis 08:19, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I still don't really think it's releveant, but this idea is definitely better than merging them together like they are. At least it will cool the arguments for a while.--Dnheff 02:47, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] We are here to write an encyclopedia,

not to spread rumors. I've applied the (not verified) tag to the material that seems to cause the most dispute; if it cannot be cited to a reliable source then it must be removed. The lack of references is already a problem on any article of this size; let's not make it worse by broadening the scope of the article to include baseless speculation on what "many Koreans" think. Melchoir 08:46, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

I added the sources as requested. Please feel free to remove the 'not verified' tag. I'll leave it up for someone else to verify my work. Kimathi 23:17, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, Kimathi! I see you've also helped out at a couple of politician's pages; perhaps we need more political veterans to take a look at popular-interest disputes such as this one!
As for removing the tag, I'm not sure the work is done. The current reference on Ohno's absence in 2003 speaks only of "cyber terrorism", and the next reference explains anti-Ohno sentiment at the time as due only to his 2002 performance. None of the references mention death threats, and more importantly, none of them actually link general anti-American or anti-Japanese sentiment to Ohno. So while the current revision of the article is reasonable speculation, and infinitely better than before, it still makes a few too many guesses. Melchoir 00:22, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
As a Korean-American, I guess I wrote this info thinking it was all common knowledge. My mistake...I'm sure most people don't have Korean newspapers and family members discussing the latest ongoings in the Korean general public. I hope these citations clarify things. Thanks. --Hodori11 03:21, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks Hodori11 for adding more sources. If another is needed, this link seems to give an outline of both anti-american sentiment and its impact on Ohno[2]. I don't want to add more links to the article because it may become overwhelming. Feel free to add it though. As an important part of Ohno's career, I think this section of the article has been greatly improved. Kimathi 03:28, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Actually, I think Hodori's TIMEasia story says it all. Great work! Melchoir 04:51, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Three things. Firstly, thanks to Melchoir for the help here. Much needed and I appreciate the effort. Second - sorry too for being a pain here and not throwing in the towel - but I'm still not satisfied. I'm not convinced that the Time article is a reliable source. The article says "had Ohno been, say, Italian, his disputed victory might have made him a target of mere outrage ..." implying that the anger was more than "mere outrage" because Ohno is a US citizen and of Japanese descent. This is still only opinion (albeit external opinion). Where does the Time author get this info from? The burden of proof in this case lies with the people making these claims. If you think Ohno's citizenship and ethnicity were responsible for exacerbating the reaction against him, over and above what would have been expected from causing the disqualification of a SK athlete, then proove it. Thirdly, I've been editing without logging in. Edits for KiwiDave and Dnheff are all mine. Sorry for the confusion.KiwiDave 14:31, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

You make good points. I'll try to edit the section to conform to WP:NPOV. What would be really useful here is even more sources discussing reasons for the anger towards Ohno. Perhaps one of them could offer evidence either for or against an ethnicity explanation. Melchoir 21:16, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Essentially, KiwiDave is asking that the motives behind the Korean people's reactions be proven to involve anti-American and anti-Japanese sentiment. I could ask a thousand Koreans that protested, why they were upset and took action. If they all said it's because Ohno is of Japanese decent and American, then would that 'prove' the link to be true? I guess that's the only way to prove the claim if a TIME article does not suffice, but who knows, those Koreans may be lying or exagerating for whatever reason. Even the 3rd external link of this article includes a clear,strong indication that the upset Koreans did indeed act out of anti-American sentiment. But again, we could say that this is not a reliable source. If the 'motivation of action' is going to be questioned to such a degree, then the only way to sufficiently prove the 'why' of peoples actions would be to have lie detector tests for at least a thousand korean protesters. Obviously, that would be ridiculous. If the problem is that a Korean voice needs to be cited, then one could just blog search anti-ohno sites and you'll get plenty of angry Koreans ripping on Ohno's Japanese or American background. But then again, it's just a blog...a very informal source. My point is that we have to go with the citations when it comes to proving something as abstract as one's thoughts and motivations for action. --Bakphp 06:25, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Well, the TIME article might have been enough, but it uses really weak language: "might have made him", "was hardly ameliorated by". The article references a survey elsewhere, but it doesn't seem to have any survey data for this point. If they'd taken a more authoritative tone, or offered some evidence, I might feel comfortable taking their point at face value. That doesn't mean it's not possible to find a better source. In fact, any source independently using the ethnic explanation would help; two are better than one. As for Korean voices on blogs, it is sometimes acceptable to use a blog as a source, but only to verify what the writer of the blog thinks; see WP:RS. So if you know of a demonstratably influential blogger, it might be appropriate to quote one. Melchoir 07:00, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. If you do a survey of "a thousand Koreans that protested" and half of them said that
1) nationality and ethnicity were major factors, and
2) if an American athlete not of Japanese ancestry had play acted a miss and gotten a South Koren athlete disqualified then they wouldn't care,
then I would be satisfied. Alternatively if the TIMEAsia article was a bit more authoritive and had the results of their survey then that would be fine too. I just want something solid - anything solid - as evidence. Without it this is still just opinion along the lines of "someone I spoke to thinks it might have been a factor." KiwiDave 06:15, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Oh My gosh! What is with this?

Is this section about Apolo Anton Ohno or is it about Koreans hating Japanese and their decendant to this day in age. Ohno is an American. Koreans should stop with this childish attitude. If Korean want to talk about Japanese/Korean issue, they should go to a talk site. Not here.


Sheeyea, Study your social science whoever you are. We don't hate Ohno because he's half Japanese. It really doesn't matter. Do you see bunch of anti-Japanese contents in articles about Japanese victory against Korean soccer team? No. There isn't any complaint when they won fair and square. However, Most Koreans don't think Ohno won fair. If you had little bit of awareness and watched the video you wouldn't be saying that kind of ignorant things

[edit] Stop adding anti-Ohno diatribe to the article!

Everytime I visit this article someone has added anti-Ohno, biased opinion verbiage to it. I edit the stuff out, but it reappears again. If it contiues, I'm going to ask that the page be frozen and the IP addresses of the offenders blocked. I'm serious, stop being so childish whoever you are. It reflects poorly on whatever agenda you have. Cla68 12:40, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea who has been causing the reappearance of the material you editted out in the past, but I am reinserting the edit this time around (I have openly been responsible for a good portion of this paragraph). This controversy was closely followed and is well documented and is the event for which people around the world know him best. The reactions after the race were extreme and unique with clear motivations that many journalists have exposed. Thus, the paragraph is very relevant. I wouldn't categorize any of this as "anti-ohno" propaganda, as it is all well cited thanks to the criticisms and contributions of other users. If you see any info as not factual, please share. --Bakphp 00:34, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't think there's any overt anti-Ohno verbiage in the article, currently (there definitely was before). However, I don't agree with you that the paragraph detailing some South Korean's reactions to the the race belongs in this article. I think it should be discussed in a separate article called "2002 Olympic 1500 meter short-track controversy" or something like that. But, I won't edit that paragraph out of the Ohno article anymore. Cla68 20:01, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Why don't you search some "serious" information on "2002 Olympic 1500 meter short-track controversy" on Internet or in others wiki's pages (not american, of course)?. Why many people insert some "anti-Ohno, biased opinion verbiage"? Because this article is, in fact, "pro-Ohno". "during a turn around the final corner, fellow skater Ahn Hyun Soo triggered a massive wipe out, taking himself, Ohno, Mathieu Turcotte and Li Jiajun into the barriers"??? I think you should see these information as false and "pro-Ohno". I'm Italian, not Korean, or Japanese, or other. I had simply watched the game. I don't see in anywhere the information that, in another country (read, without a whole nation, USA, that wanted to see Ohno win) he would have been disqualified. Corwin86 18 December 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.103.90.59 (talk) 12:13, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
I was surprised to find that there was no link to a source quoting Italy's Fabio Carta saying that the disqualification of Kim Dong Sung was "absurd": http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/winter02/speed/news?id=1337596. I think the third party point of view of a skater who was right behind Kim Dong Sung and Ohno when the incident happened is very important in discussing the controversy. Also I completely agree with the above person about the phrase "fellow skater Ahn Hyun Soo triggered a massive wipe out" - to me it sounds too much "anti-korean-skaters", which in turn makes Kim Dong Sung's disqualification seem justified. Wookie919 (talk) 23:56, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Did some more googling and found the entire quote of Fabio Carta. I also think that this article has much more in-depth discussion about the controversy: http://www.sptimes.com/2002/02/21/Olympics/Ohno_finishes_second_.shtml. Wookie919 (talk) 00:20, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Well, no one responded so I have made the changes to the article myself. I replaced the phrase "triggered a massive wipe out" with a simple "fell and slid across the ice". Also I included the quote from the Italy skater. Wookie919 (talk) 22:09, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
You make it seem like adding a quote from a third party is really that helpful. Carta is a biased competitor of Ohno's (hardly a third party with an independent view), so why should what he says really be highlighted? Adding Carta's comment adds an unbalanced weight towards the Koreans' case when this is an issue between the result and South Koreans' reactions; not moreso of what a biased Italian skater makes of the reaction. I'm going to remove the quote by Carta. oncamera(t) 18:24, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for responding to the discussion. May I ask why you believe that this is an issue between the result and the South Koreans' reactions? Shouldn't that be in a completely separate article? This is an article about Anton Ohno and the controversy section should detail how Ohno was involved in the controversy, not how Koreans reacted AFTER the controversy. Why do you think the Italian skater would be biased against Ohno more than the Korean? Surely Koreans and Americans are much more biased in this matter than an Italian? The reason the view of the Italian skater is so important in discussing this controversy is that he was right in the heat of the race when the "raising of the hand" by Ohno occurred AND he provides a third party point of view where he has no reason to be biased towards the Korean or the American. You make it seem like adding a quote from a third party is not helpful. Surely, adding a quote from a third party is as helpful as it can get in sheding some light into this controversy? Finally, you did not make any comments on the changes I made to the "triggered a massive wipe out" phrase. Does this mean you agree with the change? Wookie919 (talk) 10:14, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Look, I am sorry for double posting again but really I fail to see how this is an issue between the result and Koreans' reactions. It is quite simply "ubsurd" to think so. In fact there is more in the section about the negative reactions from the Koreans than the controversy itself, which makes this article anti-Korean. Maybe you have reacted this way because the one quote I did pick from the article was very anti-Ohno. Well, there are two other quotes in the article: "Whether Dong-Sung moved across enough to be called for cross-tracking, I don't know," said 1,000 gold medal winner Steven Bradbury of Australia. "He obviously moved across a bit. It's the judge's interpretation. A lot of people will say it was right and a lot of people will say it's wrong. "I've seen moves like that before that were not called. But I've seen them called too." Ohno was not the only one to benefit from the call. China's Jiajun Li moved from bronze to silver and Canada's Marc Gagnon was awarded bronze. "I respect the decision of the referee," Li said. "I'm not going to say any more." It was my mistake for adding only the one quote from the Italian in attempt to neutralize what I believed was quite a pro-Ohno article. I believe all three quotes are very relevant and should be added to the section. Also there should be much less emphasis on how Koreans reacted after the controversy. Wookie919 (talk) 10:31, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Changing of the "triggered a massive wipe out" was more neutral and I did agree with it. I didn't think I had to make a point of that. And the quote you did pick was very non-neutral (I mean, come on, shooting him with a rifle? ). Making more of the issue is misleading as per undue weight applies to more than just viewpoints. Just as giving undue weight to a viewpoint is not neutral, so is giving undue weight to other verifiable and sourced statements. An article should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject, but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject. Note that undue weight can be given in several ways, including, but not limited to, depth of detail, quantity of text, prominence of placement, and juxtaposition of statements. That is why I rather keep it short and sweet sticking to the "facts" which pertain to Ohno and this article—— the disqualification and the reaction by the Koreans to their countryman's DQ—— and avoid what the fellow skaters felt and said (by that, I mean, restrict the use of their quotes because they are biased, they are/were Ohno's competitors and have their own personal feelings towards him, etc.) If you have statements by the ISU and/or International Olympic Committee, that's much more reliable detail than what skaters speculate or say. And about your statement, Also there should be much less emphasis on how Koreans reacted after the controversy. as it is, there isn't even much of an emphasis on their reaction other than the referenced reactions and without these details, it would difficult to understand further in this article about Ohno's fears of negative reactions during future speed-skating events held in South Korea.

If you continue to feel this section needs to be written in greater detail, why not follow Cla68's suggestion and creating a separate article that deals with it indepth, because this article is about Ohno and going off on tangents about other skaters should be dealt with by creating new articles about those issues. oncamera(t) 19:54, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

The controversy is that the judges disqualified Kim when many believed otherwise, hence questioning whether the judges were pro-Ohno or not. THAT is the controversy. In discussing this, whose point of view, do you think, would be the most neutral in the matter? You again pointed out that the fellow skaters would be biased against Ohno, but I can see your bias in you doing so, because why would the fellow skaters be any more biased against Ohno than Kim, who was just as strong as Ohno at the time? Because the controversy is with the judges, I completely disagree with your argument that the statements issued by the ISU and/or the International Olympic Committee would be more reliable. The fellow skaters are the only ones who did NOT have to speculate about what went on on the ice because they were right beside it when it happened and they are the ones who would be the least biased against any of this. Focusing on how Koreans reacted and therefore explaining Ohno's fears in the Korean skating events without explaining in detail WHY the Koreans reacted the way they did is very anti-Korean and pro-Ohno. "Ohno raced in the most hostile environment imaginable but still came out on top, thereby winning the hearts of many Koreans who hated him prior to the events?" (Er, Rocky V anyone?) THAT is exactly the message that is portrayed by this article currently which is very heaviliy biased. Wookie919 (talk) 21:11, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
There isn't even a scandal if you look at the big picture. In every sport, throughout the history of sports, people have disagreed with an official/referee/umpire's decision. That's natural. Disagreements with judgments shouldn't get out of hand unless there's a reason for it. In this case, there was no scandal--no one was proven a cheater, no miscalulations occured, the ISU/IOC saw no reason to overturn the official's call, etc etc. The reaction(s) by the Koreans was for what reasons exactly? How can you explain why Koreans were upset without some speculation? It's obvious they were upset because their countryman was disqualified and here's some speculation, Koreans must have thought, "because Ohno was on home tuft, they (the USA) had to have cheated. They stole the gold medal from us. We should continue to hate Ohno forever and ever until short-track ceases to exist." :P
Anyway, no-nonsense now: how would using quotes from the other skaters explain why the Koreans were upset? Ohno has explained why he thought the Koreans were so upset; let me quote, "I was really bothered by it. I grew up around many Asian cultures, Korean one of them. A lot of my best friends were Korean growing up. I just didn't understand. Later on I realized that was built up by certain people and that was directed at me, negative energy from other things, not even resulting around the sport, but around politics, using me to stand on the pedestal as the anti-American sentiment." oncamera(t) 00:26, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
That Ohno quote is a good one and probably should be included in the article. Cla68 (talk) 01:40, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
I thought so too, and added the quote, although I don't mind if someone else wants to edit the placement or structure of it. oncamera(t) 00:56, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
"Disagreements with judgements shouldn't get out of hand unless there's a reason for it" - Correct, the reason is that Koreans strongly disagreed. "How can you explain why Koreans were upset wihtout some speculation?" - The Koreans were upset because they disagreed with the decision. Why speculate? Wikipedia should be based on facts, as you have said before. "How would using quotes from other skaters explain why the Koreans were upset?" Because if other skaters thought the decision by the judges were unfair also, this backs up the fact that Koreans strongly disagreed with the decision. "Ohno has explained why... That Ohno quote is a good one..." COULD YOU GUYS BE ANY MORE BIASED? quotes from other skaters should not be used but quotes from Ohno himself is used because it is good? Wow, please do not lecture me about NPOV after that paragraph. Koreans believed Ohno did hollywood action when he lifted up his arm. Koreans believe judge was pro-Ohno. Therefore any quotes from a Korean or Ohno or the Judges should NOT be used in discussing this matter from a neutral point of view. No? Fine. If Ohno's quote is good, then should I put Kim Dong Sung's quote here which should be regarded with equal weight? Wookie919 (talk) 00:11, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
I got a bit excited with my last post. I apologize. I have modified the section to include a) more details about the race itself and b) the views of the fellow skaters, showing both neutral and non-neutral POV about the whole issue. I really cannot see how you guys would disagree with the additions I have made to the article when all I did was added some facts with proper references. Also I honestly cannot see how the changes I have made could be considered anti-Ohno. Please consider the discussions we had here before reverting my changes, if you feel so inclined. Cheers. Wookie919 (talk) 23:17, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
They seem ok to me. Cla68 (talk) 23:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, the edits look good. Resolved? :) oncamera(t) 00:27, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
There were some discussions around whether the hostile crowd (booing at Kim) had any effects on the judge's decisions, which is the reason why I included that sentence in there. I am not sure why it was deleted, but I am not prepared debate about that sentence at this point in time. Anyway, I am now happier that the article contains more information about what actually happened at the 1500m final race. Wookie919 (talk) 02:31, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Oh, if the source states that some think that the booing influenced the judges decision, then I don't have any problem with including that sentence in the article if the sentence specifies why the booing is relevant. Cla68 (talk) 04:05, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
In one of the two references I gave (both news articles) there is a section where Ohno was asked whether he thought the crowd booing had anything to do with the decision. Ohno replied "I don't think so." As for the relevance of the booing, I thought that would just be far too obvious to be explained in a news article? I mean... when the crowd is hostile, judges get scared and tend to take the crowd's side - this is just human nature. Wookie919 (talk) 21:35, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Semi-protect

Can someone semi-protect this article? 70.55.20.170 04:19, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] confusing

The article says that he declined to participate in the world cup of that season, but defended his title. That needs clarification.--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 13:04, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

At the world cup, there are more than one competition that they compete in and accumulate points, which determines the overall champion at the end. It's like a Grand Prix or something, so he didn't skate at the event in Korea, but did well enough in the other events to win the overall World Cup title, I suppose. oncamera(t) 20:07, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dating Hough

Someone(s), sometimes using different IPs, keeps saying that Apolo hasn't confirmed or denied if he is dating Julianne, which is flat out wrong, and their a citations in the article from this week where he says that they are not dating. Continuing to revert this is a violation of WP:BLP, and the offender will soon be facing being blocked--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 18:16, 31 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Madagascar vs. Reel 2 Real?

I'm now not sure whether the song Ohno danced to, "I Like to Move It", is by a band called Madagascar or the band mentioned, Reel 2 Real. I just finished a stub for that, too. Dang, I may have to backtrack... Galactiger 08:00, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure Reel 2 Real did a cover of the song for a DDR-genre game, but as for the one featured in Dancing... I'm not sure. Galactiger 08:09, 22 June 2007 (UTC)