Jump to content

Talk:Bob Arum

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

POV

[edit]

There seems to be way too much editorializing in the article - it needs a fresh pair of eyes for improvement. B.Wind (talk) 01:15, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't agree. Give me an example. The controversy section is a fair representation of his public persona.Mwinog2777 (talk) 06:41, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shoah Business?

[edit]

Guys, do you even read your own sources?

http://www.doghouseboxing.com/Benz/J_Benz040409.htm in this article it pretty much says that dana white speaks badly about homosexuals, not bob arum. There's also no sign whatsoever of bob arum ever calling the holocaust a business and an inside joke, or that he feels "innately inclined to benefit as much as possible in terms of monetary value off his fighters".

You people need to delete the last paragraph entirely, its libel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.201.129.254 (talk) 18:03, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mayweather Saga? - NOPV???

[edit]

Wow, seriously. This is the most absurd section I've ever read on Wikipedia. And why in God's name is the article locked??

I was going to select quotes, but the whole things is so absurd I will repaste it verbatim:

"He has come up with a plethora of excuses in recent years to prevent Floyd Mayweather from fighting Pacquiao. Despite public demand for a Mayweather-Pacquiao bout, Arum continues to match Pacquiao with washed up opponents coming off of loses and mediocre performances. Pacquiao, who appears to fear Mayweather, does whatever Arum tells him to do and gladly ducks a Mayweather fight even though he could make upwards of $50 million. Instead, Arum matches his cash cow with the likes of Josh Clottey and a mummified Shane Mosley.

The saga continues." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.223.176.156 (talk) 02:04, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Bob Arum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:11, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bob Arum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:06, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Controversies: he said/he said

[edit]

Plenty of negative reports on Arum to be had, but this inclusion reads like mere back and forth between the parties, far from encyclopedic in style. Any objection to deletion?

"In 2007, UFC president Dana White accused him of "sucking the life out of the sport (boxing) and not putting anything back in." Amongst White's criticisms were that Arum had created a weak undercard for the De La Hoya-Mayweather fight in 2007 saying Arum did not promote the show correctly. "He promoted that show completely the wrong way, because he worried about the money as opposed to trying to secure the future", White said. "He should have stacked that card. He should have had Shane Mosley and Bernard Hopkins and (Marco Antonio) Barrera and Winky Wright on there and used it to show that boxing is back". Arum responded by saying that MMA fighters need to examine the revenues being generated and ask why the UFC wasn't paying them more."[9][10] Lindenfall (talk) 21:52, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Trying to take the tabloid quality down. Hit Mayweather, and that still reads like a he said/he said. Maybe another editor could rephrase the substance of the controversy.Lindenfall (talk) 02:28, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 30 deletions

[edit]

Deleting unsourced back-up singer part which I had cn tagged a while back, finding no proof of it myself, but the rest I researched, and so restore — he was widely and famously quoted. Maybe someone could constructively (cooperatively?)weigh in on my old note above, rather than merely backing up the subjective and over-reaching deletion of a one-time editor with a handy delete button?Lindenfall (talk) 20:57, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because Talk is the correct forum for disagreement, as I understand it, and because this note sits under an aging note ^^ which remains so much more worthy of your attention (yet remains ignored). Why delete a legitimate, sourced fact, however trivial, unlike the unnoticed, yet seemingly ridiculous "back-up singer" claim, rather than make a considered contribution to the page's content? Checking those bits was how I had encountered his cannabis advocacy, in fact. Twitter is not a source I've considered a source, either, yet the comment was written by a senior writer fromSports illustrated," so I checked and kept. I don't personally care if the small, but noteworthy, fact is kept, or not.Lindenfall (talk) 01:28, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bob_Arum&oldid=1256885452"