Talk:Ray Lewis (American football)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Archives
1



Archives
1


Contents

[edit] Deletion of the Year by Year

Why was that deleted? I added over a thousand words to the Ray Lewis page when it was a stub and I was wondering why on earth added information was deleted from Wikipedia. Remember the beliefs of wikipedia, guys. It does not have a limit. It's supposed to be all inclusive. I am working on returning it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.126.46.148 (talk) 11:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Pro Bowls?

Lewis has been named to 9 pro bowls not 8. His 8th would have been after the 2006 season. He replaced an inujured Al Wilson but then withdrew and then his teammate Bart Scott replaced Lewis. Here is the link.


http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2748577

That would mean that his 9th pro bowl was after the 2007 season to which Lewis was just selected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.61.31.216 (talk) 06:43, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 20/20 Club in infobox

I am concerned about this being in the infobox and my concerns extend to a general problem with the way "achievement clubs" are portrayed on here. Much like the 40/40 club in baseball and such - this "club" doesn't really exist. There is no award or organization that sanctions it and it is more just a way of identifying certain achievements by a player. Fans are more intent on this than anything else. I think it is certainly worth inclusion here and in wiki in general, but as it is currently misrepresented - i think we should kill it from the box. Any objections? Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  05:01, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you. I would not really mind removing it, but couldn't it be mentioned in a "See Also" section? Maybe it would be better as a category. --ShadowJester07 ► Talk 12:03, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
No. I disagree. It is an achievement. It isn't awarded, but it's certainly a goal. Don't forget that the person who proposed this was a sock puppet that got blocked and deleted from Wikipedia entirely. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.126.46.148 (talk) 11:54, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Page location

Please discuss this before simply moving, it's obviously a controversial move (since it's been done before). Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  04:37, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I just thought that it was dumb for Ray Lewis to be re-directed to Ray Lewis (American football), I was thinking about when you type in Kenny Rogers it doesnt say Kenny Rogers (singer), I am sorry if this is hard to understand, but it is hard to write out what I am trying to say--Yankees10 04:48, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

It's not hard to understand at all. Per WP:D, i'm actually inclined to agree with you - it's just that there is obviously some desire to have the page here. It's funny that you mention Kenny Rogers because that is probably the best example of when to actually have both people disambiguated. I would recommend that we use Ray Lewis for this article and, like the Michael Jordan article - have a disambig link at the top. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  05:02, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah the Michael Jordan Location is a great example of how this one should be with the disambig link at top--Yankees10 05:37, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

That's exactly how it should be and exactly what I did. If someone types George Washington, they likely mean the U.S. president, not the instant coffee inventor. When someone types Michael Jordan, they're typically looking for the basketball player, not the chesterfield goalkeeper. Same logic applies here. We can discuss but I don't see why "Ray Lewis" should immediately redirect to the disambiguation page. The other people named "Ray Lewis" are hardly as notable. --mc machete 07:08, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure I'd agree that Ray Lewis and Michael Jordan should be considered in the same light. That aside - I'm personally sure that I think of the football player and not the track and field runner - but the later was clearly notable and fairly famous. I did some cursory checks of canadian search engines - I found far more results for the track and field Ray Lewis than for the American football player. I live in the states and whole heartedly agree that Ray Lewis is more notable here - and perhaps because of the fact that he is still living - more likely to come up in popular news stories - but i think moving this article without giving someone the opportunity to chime in with an alternative is a bit shortsighted. I'm in agreement with the move but perhaps you should bring this up with people who are familiar with the "other" ray lewis. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  07:57, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
You can see my point. The semantics of my specific examples are meaningless; the level of notability between Michael Jordan and Ray Lewis is irrelevant. The Kenny Rogers example is a good one. Certainly the pitcher is very notable but the fact remains that the singer is moreso. I don't know how you are performing your search but results for Ray Lewis the football player far outweigh those for the track and field runner (approx. 357k vs. 91k - almost 4x the results). Here are the links to the searches (you will see that I attempted to create as complete search strings as possible):
I will leave a note on the other Ray Lewis' talk page but this further convinces me that the change should be made. --mc machete 16:41, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I will try and simplify what i'm saying here: I personally agree with the Ray Lewis page housing the Ray Lewis (American football) content and then using a "for others" template. However, I don't know that either of us is in a position to make a claim about the notability of the runner when he is not from the states (i'm assuming here that you are from the us). We need to get input from people with interest before making that move. In regards to the Kenny Rogers article, I think that's a prime example where the main page should be the disambig page. I'm not disagreeing with you on Lewis, I'm just saying neither of us is in a position to affirm how people in other countries are likely to think of "Ray Lewis". If you don't want to raise this issue with someone like that, i'll be glad to go find some people (or at least try). If they don't want to participate, that's another thing. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  17:05, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I understand what you're saying. I don't disagree, but Google search results are global (though perhaps not the end-all answer we need?). Also, wouldn't Canadians have the same perspective "problems" we do, but in reverse? I'm happy to receive input from the other side, but I think we both know how this should be structured. --mc machete 18:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Actually search results are far from universal on google. There are times when you do a search that you may get different results from your nextdoor neighbor. These are not "likely", i'm just trying to relay how the system works. When a user who lives in toronto goes to google - they end up at google.ca not google.com. The point is that if there is a significant move from the other side - then the current setup will need to remain in place. Again, I'm with you on this - but that doesn't mean that others won't disagree. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  18:50, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
I think this hoop-jumping you've got me doing is a bit much, but I've humored you anyway by posting on the other talk pages. The other two pages are stubs, and the football player is clearly more notable. And though Google does geotarget search results as you suggested, results for Google.ca yield the same results as noted earlier despite the runner being Canadian. This tool lets you view google searches through different international datacenters. I find Ray Lewis the football player leads around the world. --mc machete 12:06, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mod Help

So I'm trying to do what was discussed in the previous section. What User:Jmfangio (who has subsequently been banned) undid is making it extremely difficult to execute without mod assistance. Essentialy, what I'm trying to do:

Because a page currently exists at Ray Lewis (disambiguation), I can't move Ray Lewis there. I tried to change its name hoping it would vacate the spot, but that didn't work. Using Redirects to accomplish this would be sloppy. Any help will be appreciated. Thanks. --mc machete 01:36, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

definitely needs to be done once someone figures out how to do it. 149.79.35.227 17:02, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ray Lewis' mother

Ray Lewis' mother is named Sunseria Keith. Her given name is Sunseria, "Buffy" is her nickname. I made the change to reflect that and was reverted twice, the second time also being accused of "sock puppetry" for no apparent reason. I certainly don't appreciate that at all, and I also do not comprehend the reasoning behind the name reversion. I will wait to hear an explanation but I'm at a loss in trying to understand that accusation. Ronnymexico 21:14, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Provide a source that meets WP:SOURCE, and then the information can stay. Until then, it needs to be left out. You have edit warred with several users over this, please consider alternative methods of discussion. JmFangio| ►Chat  21:22, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Looks like it is Buffy Jenkins to me, see http://www.espn.go.com/classic/biography/s/Lewis_Ray.html. JmFangio| ►Chat  21:27, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Leaving aside that it appears the entire Wiki paragraph has been lifted from the ESPN article and copied over with the exact same wording (verifiable, I suppose, but not exactly proper convention), the ESPN story simply confirms that his mother sometimes goes by the name "Buffy." As one might expect, Buffy is actually a nickname and her given name is Sunseria:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/29/AR2005082901837_pf.html http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0002/14/bp.00.html http://www.miraclecorners.org/pr_gala.htm http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/news/2000/02/06/lewis_killings_ap/ http://www.eduplace.com/tacklereading/stories/nfl_grads.html http://www.turn2channel.com/Channel_Magazine_Issue3_web.pdf


Let's not go overboard accusing me of "edit warring with several users," it's only been one along with yourself. I'm still waiting for you to explain why you immediately accused me of "sock puppetry" too, as you did not address that in your prior comments. Ronnymexico 21:38, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Your username, agressive and confrontational editing style, and in ability to get alone with other users is very similar to the behavior of another editor who has been involved with this article. Unfortunately, you are right about the lifting of the information, I'm going to review the paragraph to make sure nothing violates WP:COPY but i'll leave in the sourced information. Please consider using sources more often, they will help prevent these types of disputes. JmFangio| ►Chat  21:49, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
I resent the additional accusations in your message. While I can't do anything about the user with a similar name and have no knowledge of such, I categorically deny the second and third claims in your opening sentence. My "editing style" is no more aggressive or confrontational than your own. Common sense should've told you that I was not interested in vandalizing this page, it's not like I was repeatedly erasing legitimate material and posting "Ray kills tigers with his bare hands" or something of that nature. In any case, I have trouble seeing how my edits were more confrontational or aggressive than your immediate "sock puppetry" accusation.
Moreover, I've contributed to numerous Wikipedia articles and have not had any trouble getting along with other users, it's exceedingly arrogant, and once again unfounded, to insinuate otherwise simply because I have not gotten along with one specific user, particularly when you are that user.
I admit my mistake in not immediately sourcing the edit. I assumed it wouldn't be a big deal because my edit was in the midst of what appeared to be an unsourced, common knowledge paragraph. I didn't realize that the source at the end of the paragraph was meant to cover the entire plagiarized paragraph, but that doesn't change the fact that I should have sourced that material anyway and I was wrong not to.
Please consider assuming good faith (a fundamental Wikipedia principle) rather than making unfounded accusations against other editors. It would've been very easy to look at my user contributions and conclude that I am most likely not a likely sock puppet. Failing that, please consider apologizing when you're wrong rather than refusing to back down and making even more unfounded accusations. A simple "I'm sorry, I mistook you for another user" would have sufficed, along with a request that I either source my edit or refrain from future reverts. Ronnymexico 00:56, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry you resent things - you asked my why i made the note and i told you. Your continued desire to explore this in a confrontational manner is not helping. If you would like to discuss certain pieces of content, let me know. Stick to cited edits when someone reverts you and you won't have any problems. Had I not assumed good faith, this would be in front of the sock board. Don't edit war with people in the future and you will not have this problem. Be well. JmFangio| ►Chat  00:59, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
As I said before, I've been no more confrontational than you have. I have not engaged in personal insults or used abusive language, I simply criticized your "sock puppetry" accusation and baseless claims regarding my Wikipedia participation (aggressive editing, inability to get along with other users) that my user history can easily contradict. I admitted my mistake regarding the sourcing issue, I find it telling that you're unwilling to do the same. Assuming you're familiar with the criteria, I'm sure you're aware that "strong evidence" is expected when bringing a claim before the sock board. As such, the assumption of good faith wasn't what kept you from bringing this before them. Don't immediately assume bad faith with editors in the future and you will not have this problem. Ronnymexico 01:31, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
As a courtesy, I want to inform you that I will not be responding to this portion of the discussion any further. Be well. JmFangio| ►Chat  01:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jew?

Who on earth said Ray Lewis was Jewish? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.2.209.248 (talk) 02:20, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gay Jokes

I deleted all the gay-jokes/references on the page. Someone had added multiple "Gayest Player" and "Butt Pirate" sort of reference, I just cleaned them up. 155.68.69.217 (talk) 19:46, 20 February 2008 (UTC)