Talk:Frank Dux

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Sports and games work group.
Photo request It is requested that a picture or pictures of this person be included in this article to improve its quality.

Note: Wikipedia's non-free content use policy almost never permits the use of non-free images (such as promotional photos, press photos, screenshots, book covers and similar) to merely show what a living person looks like. Efforts should be made to take a free licensed photo during a public appearance, or obtaining a free content release of an existing photo instead.

Contents

[edit] Complete and utter fraud please someone re-write this

Frank Dux was a complete and utter fraud. Here is a link to an article that provides many sources and evidence that he was making everything up. http://www.bullshido.com/articles/frankdux.html

there are sources like Johnson, John. "Ninja: Hero or Master Fake: Others Kick holes in Fabled Past of Woodland Hills Martial Arts Teacher" in Los Angeles Times Valley Edition, May 1, 1988, Metro, Part 2, Page 4.

Bailey, Larry. "Stolen Valor: Profiles of a Phony Hunter" in Soldier of Fortune, November 1998: 58-61, 73.

Burkett, B.G. (1998). Stolen Valor. Verity Press: Dallas, TX.

all stating he made everything up. For the love of god someone that has the time please re-write this article. What is up now is ridiculous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tapout181 (talk • contribs) 16:37, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[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)

I propose that his claims are not unverified, but unverifiable. Maybe that's on purpose, whatever; but there's nothing in the article that refutes anything--it just pretends to have smoking gun evidence which ends up just reinforcing the unverifiable nature of the claims. I mean, I won the kumite too, and I was in the CIA, and my spirit was kidnapped by Elvis' but my body was run by remote control elves while I was gone. Can you prove or disprove any of that? It's easy to say the burden of proof is in his court, but that's just the point. There is no burden of proof for him because he's not the one writing this article, especially since he already excused such by calling the events classified. The burden of proof is always on the perpetrator of the current verb--in this case, the haters. I mean, it's not Bush's job to prove to me he's President. I haven't seen documentation; it probably would be hard to find any; but if I'm going to call him a fraud I'm the one who's gonna' have to stand on the streetcorner with a sandwich board. Could you imagine watching National Treasure if Nicholas Cage said, "Okay, Masons, prove to me where the gold is!"--Mrcolj 13:44, 9 August 2007 (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 know I am nitpicking but it's Rowling. Rotten Venetic 18:27, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


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)

Okay, since no one's stepped up to the plate, and there have been warnings on this page for over a year now saying to cite some accusations (or affirmations) or they'd be deleted; I'm gonna start hacking away at this article. I'll start by removing the unprovables, the hyperbolic adjectives, and the exclamation points... :) Anyone who has an opinion otherwise, please mention it with links to legitimate sources (not paid articles we can't see or links to bullshido or any of those kinds of sites. If you believe those sites, you don't know the rabid nature of capitalism in the martial arts.) Wikipedia just deleted the United Studios of Self Defense article, which was way more active than this article, for similar reasons--too many vandals and antis, making all kinds of conspiracy edits. --Mrcolj 12:43, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
There! I didn't completely fix it, but I did spend 45 minutes on it. I tried to soften the claims, showing them not as unverified but as unverifiable; because that truly is the issue. It's impossible to say you verified or didn't verify whether he was approached to be in the CIA. They don't confirm or deny that stuff--they may not even have record of it. Ditto with the Kumite. To say that "no martial arts master has ever heard of it" is fundamentally ridiculous, because it's a secret event. I mean, no President "has ever heard of" the Skull & Bones society either.  :) And, second point, this is an encyclopedia article--it should not be designed to give people enough information to decide for themselves, but to introduce a general biography, perhaps with links to additional info for those who are interested. Anyway, keep hacking people, because this should be a legit article that isn't offensive to either Frank Dux or his detractors. And don't let the "citation needed" amateurs and nazis get you down... --Mrcolj 13:37, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

yes presidents have heard of skull & bones and have admitted it. Frank dux is a joke and according to things he has said there had do be hundreds of people involved in these tournaments and not one has come forward... additionally the league he says that hosts the kumite does not exist. If this article stays up I am making an article about myself that states I have fought in the kumite and broke dux's record... and not just that, i fought handcuffed and blindfolded. Prove otherwise. Stupid isn't it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tapout181 (talk • contribs) 16:45, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Biased re-write

4.246.212.157 has just re-written the article and, without so much as a single cite, populated it at length with all manner of claims and exceptional insights to Frank Dux's life. All at the cost of removing what few cites the article previously had. I'm not going to revert it just yet, but would urge 4.246.212.157 to come up with cites to support what they added, or I will. And please keep in mind that Wikipedia requires that biographies are neutral, accurate and well cited from reputable sources. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 19:54, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

If he reverts to it one more time someone should request semi-protection for the article

[edit] Typo / Corrections

"Dux' style is" should be an apostrophe s (Dux's). --Dramikar (talk) 18:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

"playwright and fight choreographer" Does wikipedia use serial commas? If so, should be playwright, and. --Dramikar (talk) 18:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

"$50,000[1]" should be a space after the dollar amount. --Dramikar (talk) 18:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

"The Kumite," as profiled in the movie "Bloodsport,". That line should end with "Bloodsport." (remove the comma and place the period inside the quotes), no? --Dramikar (talk) 06:38, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The real (?) Frank Dux responds to allegations he is a fraud

I've added a few bits and pieces to the external links section of this page. A couple of months ago I wrote a mostly tongue-in-cheek article about Frank Dux, his life and the allegations that he is a fraud. Well, somebody claiming to be the real Mr Dux took the time to respond to my post - in some real detail - yesterday (June 4, 2008).

The poster provided two new links for me to verify his identity - the official Frank Dux website and his MySpace page. I've included both of these in the 'external links'.

There's a chance that this person may not be Mr Dux at all, and may be just a huge fan or friend. However, prior to his comment photos of Mr Dux on the Internet were hard to find. On his site, there are dozens of quite personal images that only Mr Dux himself or someone who knows him very well could have obtained.

Hence, at this stage I am taking the poster at face value and assuming it is Mr Dux himself.

It certainly makes for interesting reading, although I'm not really sure it's furthered his cause too much, as the problem of a lack of hard and fast evidence - from all sides - remains the same. However, one should afford Mr Dux the opportunity to respond to criticisms and I have done that, and hope Wikipedia will too, to provide some much-needed balance. - Sheamus (talk) 10:28, 5 June 2008 (UTC)