Jump to content

Talk:Kenny Omega

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleKenny Omega has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 15, 2019Good article nomineeNot listed
October 1, 2019Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article

Citizenship

[edit]

"Canadian-born Japanese" - How is he Japanese? Isn't he Canadian? THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 21:49, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

He stated during a press conference that he is a Canadian-born Japanese citizen. KyleJoan (talk) 14:18, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@KyleJoan: where is the source? THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 16:44, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Here is the article in question, which is cited under the personal life section. He also states it here. KyleJoan (talk) 17:03, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@KyleJoan: Ok. But before you go for another review, please replace all the unreliable sources according to WP:PW/MOS. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 17:26, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@KyleJoan: FYI it's WP:PW/RS, not WP:PW/MOS. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 22:30, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Already did that. All of the unproven sources are cited with discretion. If you would like to take a crack at it, feel free to do so. KyleJoan (talk) 03:29, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@KyleJoan
In that interview he says "I am playing a Canadian-born Japanese citizen" describing his role representing NJPW in North America. He clearly does not literally mean that he has Japanese citizenship. 173.45.209.196 (talk) 00:27, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that he states it doesn't necessarily mean it's true. he may consider himself one just because he's been acclimated into the culture and became a fluent Japanese speaker. The fact that he's being routinely stopped at the border and that there is documentation indicated that NJPW has been trying to ban him from entering Japan, seems to indicate that he's not a Japanese citizen. A Japanese citizen would have automatic rights to enter the country and can never be banned from the country. In addition, Omega never provided any proof, such as a citizenship certificate, natrualization record, passport, etc. He's also never indicated any details about the supposed naturalization, such as the date of it or location. Lastly, Japanese Nationality Law requires foreigners to officially renounce citizenship. Japanese law does not allow dual citizenship. It doesn't look like Omega has gone to the Canadian government to renounce his citizenship, which would be highly unlikely. Therefore, I don't think there is sufficient evidence to indicate that he is a Japanese citizen. Here is an article that seems to increase the doubt that he has naturalized. https://www.ringsidenews.com/2019/11/07/attempts-made-to-ban-kenny-omega-from-entry-into-japan/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.12.174 (talk) 16:09, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that he states it doesn't necessarily mean it's true. Unless another source states otherwise, this is the info we have. The fact that he's being routinely stopped at the border and that there is documentation indicated that NJPW has been trying to ban him from entering Japan, seems to indicate that he's not a Japanese citizen. "Seems to indicate" is WP:SPECULATION. In addition, Omega never provided any proof, such as a citizenship certificate, natrualization record, passport, etc. We don't have documentation of his supposed Canadian citizenship either. It doesn't look like Omega has gone to the Canadian government to renounce his citizenship, which would be highly unlikely. WP:SPECULATION. Finally, per WP:PW/RS, Ringside News is unreliable. KyleJoantalk 16:38, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Pretty much all of the above. Speculation, and non RS. There should be a paper trail somewhere to know what is actually true, but none of the evidence above can really change what we already have. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:48, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
He is not listed in the official gazette. All naturalizations are listed there - 官報 240D:1A:3B6:9600:EF86:35A2:9123:128F (talk) 13:10, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
PASSED GA
Still some cleanup (copy-edit) related things, but I think it clearly meets the criteria. Closing.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Kenny Omega/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 07:42, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I will use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs)

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Immediate Failures

[edit]
  • It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria -
  • It contains copyright infringements -
  • It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include{{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags. (See also {{QF-tags}}). -
  • It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. -
[edit]

Prose

[edit]

Lede

[edit]
AEW has four EVPS: Cody, the Jacksons, and Omega. I rephrased it but can understand if it still sounds jarring. Let me know what you think! KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • one-time IWGP Heavyweight Champion, one-time and inaugural IWGP United States Champion, and one-time IWGP Intercontinental Champion among other championships. (one-time is a bit pointless, can we just say "Omega has held the IWGP Heavyweight, United States... etc). Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:22, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Done KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I added a link to what defines a stable. If this is improper, I'll change the word "stable" to "group". KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Done KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Done KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Done KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Done KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I moved all but one of the citations to the body. The only I'm having an issue with is the ring name Scott Carpenter because he's only been documented to have used it once, so there's no paragraph dedicated to the portion of his career under the ring name. I'd love suggestions on how to sort this. KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Body

[edit]
 Done KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Done KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I consolidated all of the information in multiple sources to a single sentence in the early life section regarding his debut. KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I revised all sentences that use the term "drop", but is it really considered jargon? Per Thesaurus.com, "drop" is a common synoym for lose. KyleJoantalk 23:31, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Done KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Done KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is. It seems to be a recurring event for the promotion, held sporadically over the years. KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
My knowledge isn't great on this, but should these be in italics, per MOS:ITALICTITLE? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:36, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the reason for the italicization of this one event is because it is also broadcast on television. KyleJoantalk 08:48, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This section's paragraph break was put in a weird place. I fixed that, and when he received his tryout, it was already WWE. KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • After returning from a hiatus on November 15, 2014, JAPW stripped Omega of the Light Heavyweight Championship - Why? 19:31, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
I revised the sentence entirely because the title was vacated, therefore, Omega was only stripped in the process rather than due to a specific reason. KyleJoantalk 23:31, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Done I also removed a picture that shows him with a different promotion than the section in which it was placed. KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • there is a piece here - Regarding his life outside of wrestling, Smith said that he had no time to think about relationships because he was completely focused on his wrestling goals. - however, I know that shortly after this he began dating Hikaru Shida... I would recommend dating this statement. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 07:49, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Done KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Done KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Done KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I rephrased the sentence and moved the gamer link to the personal life section. KyleJoantalk 08:48, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notes & References

[edit]
 Done KyleJoantalk 08:17, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

General issues

[edit]
Other than the one citation to support the ring name, they all have been moved to the body. KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Done KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Done KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Done KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Done KyleJoantalk 07:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Comments

[edit]
  • Automated note - If you fancy returning the favour, I have outstanding GA nominations that require reviewing at WP:GAN. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these, however it's definately not manditory. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs)
Thank you for your willingness to write another GA review! I see that your GA nominations are currently under review, so I'll be sure to leave additional comments regarding those articles in the coming days. I do have a question, though. I'm not really clear on when the review a specific section is finished, so would it be more appropriate to address your concerns and update the content in accordance to your recommendations once the entire article has been reviewed? KyleJoantalk 08:52, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, yeah, I usually do this in stages, but I only had five minutes, so I just chucked a few comments here. I'll be adding additional nominations in the coming days, if you fancy doing a review (I'm currently 11 GA passed articles for this month, so my whole backlog has been worked through! Unheard of!), additionally, I do have an FA open at 2019 World Snooker Championship, if you would like to add some comments to that instead if you were interested. I'll try and get this one fully reviewed in the next two days or so. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:32, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's awesome! Shows how fascinating and notable your nominations are. I left some comments on your FA nomination. I hope they help it achieve FA. Wonderful work all around! And thank you! KyleJoantalk 01:47, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for doing that! Looks pretty good now, I'll do the review now (or some of it, it's a long article) Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:13, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
right, on hold. There's only a few things here. It's the general issues that need addressing mostly. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:37, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm ok with this - as is. There's always extra information, and extra cleanup, and a lot of work would need to be in place if you were to nominate for FAC, but as of today, this meets the GA criteria, so I'll promote. Congrats. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 07:14, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 13 November 2022

[edit]

In the section ‘[Bullet Club and various championship reigns]’, the last paragraph states that Omega’s 2017 Wrestle Kingdom 11 match against Kazuchika Okada was the longest main event in Tokyo Dome history. This was true at the time, but the record was broken in 2021 by Kota Ibushi and Jay White at Wrestle Kingdom 15. The 48:05 match time is listed on [the Wikipedia page for Wrestle Kingdom 15]. Suggest either deleting the reference to the longest match, or updating to say that the record has since been broken. 97.120.218.215 (talk) 01:35, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done The paragraph has been updated accordingly, thank you for your attention to detail. When making claims that require sources, please ensure that you refer directly to (external) reliable sources, not other Wikipedia articles. This makes the reviewer's job a lot easier :) Actualcpscm (talk) 10:48, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 4 December 2022

[edit]

In the beginning paragraph. After you list Omega is the inaugural trio champions you should add "Omega is widely considered one of the greatest wrestlers of all time." As this line adds to how great Omega is and how many wrestling critics view him. 2601:19B:A00:CEC0:4196:5A06:BB88:EBB1 (talk) 08:30, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: This is already mentioned in the final paragraph of the lead: "Hailed as one of the best professional wrestlers in the world, Omega was named Sports Illustrated's Wrestler of the Year in 2017, and topped Pro Wrestling Illustrated's list of top 500 male wrestlers the following year and in 2021." ARandomName123 (talk) 19:17, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 5 March 2023

[edit]

It is impossible to havd dual citizenship in Japan. Either he is a Japanses citizen or Canadian not both. 2600:6C46:6C00:5BD:5134:EB2:BF53:63B (talk) 04:14, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: His dual citizenship is sourced. M.Bitton (talk) 14:01, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Somebody claiming something which is not possible does not a good source make, especially in the world of wrestling when so much of what talents say is meant to mislead the audience. 173.45.209.196 (talk) 23:32, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT paragraph in Omega's personal life section

[edit]

@KyleJoan: You began a conversation on my user talk page, but let's have it here on the article's talk page. For anyone else reading this, we are discussing the bottom paragraph of the personal life section in this version of the article, which has been reverted.

First all, the paragraph is primarily sourced by Yahoo News and WON/WOR. When I said "Primarily", I did not mean 6 divided by 3; "Primarily" means the information itself is mainly drawn WON/WOR and Yahoo News but augmented by addition of Outsports who confirm what's already stated by WON/WOR and Yahoo News. I can and will take out the Outsports sources if you'd like me to, but I feel that everything I've written will still stand on the Yahoo News and WON/WOR sources I've included alone. Also, WOR and WON are the same entity (in a near-literal sense, both being Journalist Dave Meltzer), in the same manner a video from CNN and a written article from CNN are both CNN, or a video with Journalist A and an article by Journalist A are both sourced from Journalist A.

Secondly, you suggested the paragraph breaks WP:BLP, but reading Dojo Cat#Personal life, Lil Nas X#Coming Out, and Miley Cyrus#Sexuality and gender, I don't see how my paragraph differs in any way. You cited WP:NOTGOSSIP, but again, my paragraph doesn't differ from the likes of Miley Cyrus#Sexuality and gender, which is also a GA rated article.

Finally, you object to the sourcing of the opening sentence, but I can provide an additional reliable source from CBC.ca which supports it. [1].

I am happy to remove Outsports and add CBC.ca if these would address your concerns; would this suffice?

And if not, could you please offer suggestions to how your concerns could be reasonably met.

Regards, CeltBrowne (talk) 10:44, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Meltzer might be a journalist, but the WOR clip is an analysis of the documentary on Omega and not factual reporting, therefore, it does not help any reference to Omega's sexual orientation become due. The comparison you've drawn to CNN is incomplete. Dave Meltzer is Don Lemon. While CNN is reliable, we wouldn't cite Don Lemon's analyses on his former program and automatically deem them reliable or due.
The WP:OSE examples are not valid here. The prominence of the material about those subjects' sexualities is determined by the prominence of the coverage–Miley Cyrus, the GA-level article of the three, includes more than several exceptional claims that are supported by exceptional sources. The only exceptional source here, Yahoo!, only verifies quotes and not any of the general claims. One additional source is also not sufficient to justify the proposed length, which brings me to...
The CBC says Omega is involved in "LGBT-friendly storylines". There's nothing in that source that outlines any speculation or his sexuality itself.
I'm concerned that you believe everything [you've] written will still stand on [Yahoo! and 'WON'] alone, but given our past interactions, I'm not optimistic that anything I say could change that belief, so feel free to open a discussion on Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. KyleJoantalk 11:25, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In the meantime since my last reply, I've been doing more examining of Wikipedia guidelines. One thing I wish I could have covered in my first reply relates to your concern that Outsports should not be used because it is "biased", however WP:BIASED states that a source should not be discounted on bias alone, rather than the bias of that source should be accounted for when considering them. In the same manner that Miley Cyrus#Sexuality and gender used the phrasing Time magazine reported", the phrasing Outsports reported that or Outsports suggested that could be used if necessary, which is the kind of language suggested in WP:BIASED. Outsports is a wing of Vox, which is considered a reliable source WP:RSPVOX. It's unfortunate that I didn't see that before the first reply.
The CBC says Omega is involved in "LGBT-friendly storylines". There's nothing in that source that outlines any speculation or his sexuality itself.
The CBC source can be used to support the opening sentence of the paragraph, which you have objected to. The Golden Lovers story is the LGBT storyline which CBC is referring to. I can alter the phrasing of the sentence if necessary, but source supporting the underlying assertion that Omega and Ibushi have suggested through the medium of wrestling that they are/were in a romantic relationship.
but the WOR clip is an analysis of the documentary on Omega and not factual reporting
A reliable source is stating what the content of a documentary is. Journalist Dave Meltzer stating that a component of the documentary is the implied romantic relationship between Omega/Ibushi is no different to Journalist A stating a component of the Jurassic Park series is the relationship between Humans and Dinosaurs. That's not analysis of something complex such as the themes of the film, It is a factual statement about the content of the film.
If I amended the phrasing of the paragraph and used additional sources, would this address your concerns? CeltBrowne (talk) 12:15, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Neither OutSports article even verifies that first sentence, so it's almost irrelevant whether its use is appropriate.
The CBC can only be used to support Omega and Ibushi being in a LGBT storyline but not about either subject's sexuality, the former of which has nothing to do with Omega's personal life regardless of how much synthesizing you're attempting.
Meltzer's description isn't fact. That clip is full of Meltzer referencing himself (e.g., "I think..."). The Jurassic Park comparison is absurd because you could find hundreds of sources–print and online–to support a claim about its exploration of human and dinosaur relationship dynamics. The same can't be said about an implied romantic relationship between Omega/Ibushi.
This discussion is becoming futile, so rather than engage in hypotheticals, please present this new phrasing and sources on Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. I maintain that this paragraph is a WP:BLP violation. Good luck. KyleJoantalk 13:21, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I was bold, you reverted, and now we are both discussing. I am willing to make compromises and amendments, and have already offered to do so. If we're going by what's suggested in Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle (which I acknowledge is optional, but is considered good etiquette) is seems like I should make the new phrasing as a new bold edit, and you can edit or revert that new edit if you believe it is still not addressing your concerns. I'd much prefer if you would edit your specific issues with the paragraph instead of bloc reverting the entire thing.
One of us can notify Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard of this discussion, but I would imagine anyone without knowledge of the genre of professional wrestling is going to struggle to follow this conversation.
The Jurassic Park comparison is absurd because you could find hundreds of sources–print and online–to support a claim about its exploration of human and dinosaur relationship dynamics. The same can't be said about an implied romantic relationship between Omega/Ibushi.
That's a measure of popularity, not truth. If only 3 written sources in the entire world noted that Jurassic Park is about dinosaurs, it'd still be true to say Jurassic Park is about dinosaurs. The reason there are 100s of sources about Jurassic Park is because it was an blockbuster Hollywood film(s) seen by a mainstream audience of millions and millions in dozens of languages. Omega/Ibushi occurred in Japan before a predominately Japanese speaking wrestling audience. In all probably, there are probably more sources in Japanese about this dynamic, but as someone who doesn't understand Japanese, that would be difficult for me to source them. If the Omega/Ibushi angle had been seen by as many people internationally as Jurassic Park, sourcing would not be anywhere near as difficult.

One thing I would like to try and clear up is that I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding of what the paragraph is trying to state (and perhaps this part of the root of disagreement here). On Wikipedia, and in writing in general, there is a essential difference between writing John Smith is the most fiscally conservative President in history and John Smith has claimed to be the most fiscally conservative President in history.
My impression right now is that you think I'm trying to state
Tyson Smith is a gay/bisexual man
whereas what I'm trying to communicate with this paragraph is
Kenny Omega, both in and out of the ring, has suggested he is a gay or bisexual man
It may be a contentious thing to state "John Smith is the most fiscally conservative President in history" as a fact because it is possibly incorrect or heavily contested. However, it should not, ever, be a contentious thing to note that John Smith has claimed to be the most fiscally conservative President in history, and to use that as signifier of what he stands for. This difference is presenting information is outlined in WP:WIKIVOICE.
Using the Wikivoice to state Omega/Smith is gay/bisexual at this moment in time would probably be a BLP violation...but that's not what I'm trying to do. I'm noting the claims/language/insinuations.
Do you see what I'm trying to say here? I hope that helps clarify the purpose of the paragraph. CeltBrowne (talk) 15:35, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We only include material that we could source sufficiently and appropriately. "I know this material is appropriate even though I can't fully respond to the policy concerns" does not cut it. Your clarification confirms that even the intent behind the paragraph is a violation because none of these sources supports claims/language/insinuations about Omega's sexual orientation. Our specialized wrestling knowledge cannot and should not determine what we include. Sources do. As fans, yes, we may have picked up hints from consuming the products that Omega's in-universe character has exuded LGBT undertones, but to note how that relates to his actual sexual orientation without sufficient sourcing is just unacceptable. This article does not get to circumvent the BLP policy just because it's a pro wrestling article. You can't convince me otherwise. KyleJoantalk 16:28, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I was 80% into writing this reply when I saw you post on my talk page stating you don't want to keep discussing this. I am still posting the following for the benefit of any other editors joining the discussion, as clarifies the use of some sources, and also introduces some new ones.
I've never, at any point, suggested the article can violate BLP policy on the basis of it being a pro wrestling article. Previously, I simply said members of the BLP noticeboard may struggle to follow this specific conversation.[a] Those are entirely two separate sentiments. I was and have always been open to other editors being involved in this discussion; in fact in the very first post of this thread I gave a clarification in the opening to help any editors navigate the discussion. For what it's worth, I've left a message on the BLP noticeboard directing them to this discussion.
You are correct that "Our specialized wrestling knowledge cannot and should not determine what we include. Sources do.", which is why I made a good-faith effort to improve the sourcing of the first sentence with several additional sources, something I'd like to segway into now.
In your edit summary, one of the reasons you gave for removing them was the author of the 'Mel' magazine says Omega is openly bisexual; that disqualifies these articles right away. However, I have three sources here where all three authors state that Omega is "openly bisexual":
1. Main-eventer and executive vice president Kenny Omega (real name Tyson Smith) is openly bisexual.[1]
2. Omega also brings something unique to wrestling as far as representation goes. He’s openly bisexual and willing to discuss being so in interviews.[2][b]
3. This bizarre dynamic plays into the controversy surrounding The Golden Lovers: Kenny Omega has come out as bisexual, and while Kota Ibushi has not discussed his IRL sexuality in public,fans continue to debate his proclivities.[3]
So it seems like rather than being an outright error, there is a minority view amongst some authors that Kenny Omega the person is "openly bisexual". I don't think the sources should be disqualified for expressing a minority view; we can use them and account for the fact that their view on that specific aspect may be a minority one. We're not citing them to suggest Omega the person is bisexual, we're citing the part where they discuss the on-screen romantic relationship between Omega the character and Ibushi the character.
Another part of your edit summary stated
"major component" is according to Dave Meltzer only, so questionable whether due
Since last night I have come across this source. It is a press release from Bell, who funded and help broadcast the documentary. The press release explicitly states that the documentary is covering the implied "romantic relationship" between Omega and Ibushi. I would like to now add this source to the article, and return to the "major component" phrasing as the source explicitly supports that. However, because the preceding sentences were removed, I would have to write something like "A major component of the 2019 documentary Omega Man: A Wrestling Love Story was the implied romantic relationship between Omega and Kota Ibushi".
Now that I have a source explicitly stating a major component of the 2019 documentary was the implied romantic relationship between Omega and Kota Ibushi, can someone suggest how I can add this information to the article without it being objecting to?
Finally, to reiterate once again: I am not stating that Tyson Smith the person is definitely bisexual. I am stating that on-screen Kenny Omega the character and Kota Ibushi have had an implied romantic relationship that was a "storyline" in both DDT and NJPW, and subsequently Tyson Smith the person has been ambiguous about Tyson Smith's sexuality. If you want to cut off the Tyson Smith part, that's whatever. At this point I am simply trying to incorporate the information that Kenny Omega the character has been, on screen, implied to be in a romantic relationship with Kota Ibushi, in a way that is not objected to.
===Footnotes===
  1. ^ At the time I should have stated that I meant that I thought other editors not familiar with wrestling may find elements/terminology such as "Kenny Omega the character" vs "Kenny Omega the person" confusing
  2. ^ ProWrestling.Net is considered a reliable source per Wikipedia:PW/RS
===References===
  1. ^ Bixenspan, David (2020). "The New Brand Battle in Pro Wrestling Isn't Just About Entertainment — It's About Inclusion". Retrieved 11 June 2023.
  2. ^ Pruett, Will (3 August 2017). "Will's New Thing – Falling in Love with Kenny Omega, far too many must-watch matches, and two Shane McMahon gifs!". ProWrestling.net. Retrieved 11 June 2023.
  3. ^ Shorey, Eric (27 May 2018). "The Golden Lovers Explained: The Complexities Of Pro-Wrestling's Gayest Tag Team". INTO magazine. Retrieved 11 June 2023.

CeltBrowne (talk) 12:36, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speculation about Omega's sexuality in his personal life section is WP:BLPGOSSIP. If this ambiguity is presented in wrestling storylines or as part of his wrestling persona, then it should be mentioned there. Morbidthoughts (talk) 23:33, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If this ambiguity is presented in wrestling storylines or as part of his wrestling persona, then it should be mentioned there
In my most recent edit to the article, I did place discussion of Omega and Ibushi's implied romantic relationship while in DDT and NJPW (two Japanese wrestling promotions) in the persona section. The sentence that contained the discussion of the implied romantic relationship was removed, with KyleJoan citing that they were unhappy with the sourcing of that sentence. As discussed in my previous reply here, I've since come across an additional source (kind of two actually, but I'll focus on just one for the moment) that I feel support the claim that Omega and Ibushi were presented on-screen as having a romantic relationship, but I was trepidatious about (re)adding the phrasing "implied romantic relationship" because of the pushback. CeltBrowne (talk) 00:13, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That press release does not explicitly say what you're describing. Your proposed claim is your interpretation of the release, which can't be used for an exceptional claim. If we get to cherry-pick any part of that release and write what we believe it implies, I have several items to insert, one of them being "One-Winged Angel and the high risk and pain it involves are major components of the documentary", but it wouldn't be due, and this claim doesn't even contain information about living persons.
What disqualifies that MEL article is it doesn't even mention the Ibushi partnership. Neither does Prowrestling.net. INTO attributes that contentious claim to Reddit, so its content's partial compatibility with the other sources' does not matter. The New York Times and New York Post publishing a similar claim does not make the latter reliable for other claims. You're going to keep running into the same policy issues without proper high-quality, reliable sources that actually support the removed claims. Right now, it seems like you're throwing in any source you could find, hoping it's usable. Rather than not mind my level of scrutiny, please scrutinize sources yourself. KyleJoantalk 11:11, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To save everyone's time, here's a review of the two sources that aren't outright unreliable or low-quality:
That apparently important first claim remains without support from multiple high-quality sources. KyleJoantalk 07:01, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't notice at first that the CBC source has a transcript feature of the long format interview they conducted:
JAYME POISSON: Yeah. And maybe I wonder if one example of what you're talking about here is a story that unfolded over a decade, right, about you and your tag team partner, Kota Ibushi. Yeah. And you called yourselves The Golden Lovers, and you were two men who said you loved each other and you. You embraced and you kissed. And I'll note, I don't think you're ever explicit about your sexuality, but, you know, talk to me a little bit more about how you've tried to deal with these topics better than wrestling has in the past
KENNY OMEGA: ...I wanted to tell a different kind of story, and I wanted to investigate something that was was very personal to a lot of people, personal to me, even though I was really opening myself to the world. I felt that if I had done it in that fashion, that I could be true to myself and tell something that was very respectful rather than something that would be laughed at. I wanted to tell a story that whether you you're straight, whether you're gay, whether you were X, Y, or Z didn't matter. You could look at this story and you could appreciate the love between two individuals, the hardships of of being in a competitive business, struggling together, struggling apart. The power that they have when they're are then focused together as a team, how much more you can accomplish. There's so many messages within. And I say again, yes, at its core you could look at it as as a gay wrestling story, which which would be kind of was.[a] But I like to look at it more as as a love story. And I don't want it to be defined necessarily by the fact that it was, you know, two male leads that could have been two females, it could have been a male and a female, it could have been anything. I I'm I'm a I'm an animal lover. I feel like I would love to tell this story, you know, with that as a central focus as well. Yeah, I love that that a person has for his pet or another another animal like these, these things you don't really see in wrestling and you think like, okay, how would that work? Well, at one time, people in wrestling or fans of wrestling would be like, okay, well, how would a gay wrestling storyline work at all? It wouldn't. But there was a time when you would say that you'd be crazy to try it.
I believe this is the creator and (one of the) performer(s) of the storyline stating that yes, the intention of the storyline between Omega and Ibushi was for it to be received as a romance/love storyline. I feel this is a pretty, pretty, pretty solid source.
Just in case there's any wobbling later; I interpret the final point he makes in the paragraph as "Years ago, wrestling fans would have said you're crazy to try and do a gay wrestling storyline, but we did just that and demonstrated it could work, and I feel that other concepts can work in wrestling as well".
I'm regretful I did not see the transcript feature earlier because I feel like this kind of source is really demonstrating what I was trying to get at previously.
This second Source from Fightful.com, which is considered a reliable source by Wikipedia:PW/RS, states:
The Ibushi and Omega characters, while not explicitly mentioning their sexuality, have implied a relationship throughout their run.
This third source from Pro Wrestling Torch, which is considered a reliable source by Wikipedia:PW/RS, in the form of reporting what occurred on-screen in the television build up to the Supercard of Honor XII PPV, states:
The Golden☆Lovers are believed by many to be in a romantic relationship with each other. While this has never explicitly been confirmed, Omega is openly queer. Many people will point to myriad [on-screen] indications that Omega and Ibushi are in love with each other, even if they’ve yet to openly address this in public. Playing into these rumors, [on-screen] Cody and his wife Brandi attempted to play mind games with Omega and Ibushi. First Cody would kiss Ibushi during a match in Japan. Then Brandi would force herself on Omega during ROH’s 16th Anniversary show. Cody claims that any talk of an Omega-Ibushi relationship is just a publicity stunt. Omega claims that 16th Anniversary wasn’t the first time he and Brandi kissed and probably wouldn’t be the last. This accusation left Cody seething.
This fourth source from CBS Sports, which is considered a reliable source by Wikipedia:PW/RS, states:
Talk about a potentially huge swerve. While it's not fully clear this is the direction things are headed (although the ambiguous tease certainly seemed on purpose), WWE could be on its way to presenting its first same-sex relationship angle [storyline] with a tasteful undertone. Considering the successful precedent recently set in New Japan Pro-Wrestling with the Golden Lovers (Kenny Omega and Kota Ibushi), it's about time, if so.
I would like to use these sources to support the sentence, in the persona (fictional) section,
Over the course of his professional wrestling career, It has often been intimated on-screen that Omega and his "Golden Lovers" tag team partner Kota Ibushi have or have had a romantic relationship, particularly during their time together in DDT and NJPW.
or a sentence of similar construction but alternatively phrased such as
Over the course of their professional wrestling careers, Omega and his "Golden Lovers" tag team partner Kota Ibushi have been portrayed as having or having had a romantic relationship, particularly during their time together in DDT and NJPW.
Just to be clear; this is supposed to be the equivalent of writing in a Wikipedia article
In the fantasy book series A Song of Ice & Fire, the character Daenerys Targaryen is a princess with the ability to control Dragons.
NOT
Emilia Clarke has the ability to control Dragons.
===Footnote===
  1. ^ When I listen to the audio version of this sentence, I hear Omega ending on the wording "which it, which it kind of was". The soundbyte occurs at 19:45.

CeltBrowne (talk) 22:27, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All four sources are great. The nature of the claim is no longer a BLP violation. I do suggest we tweak the phrasing to make it even more sensible and succinct. Wherever we place this claim, it's crucial that it doesn't contain suggestions involving the living people's real lives or a specific timeline. Writing "have or have had" suggests they're currently in an implied relationship or no longer in an implied relationship when sources only say the romantic undertones exist. Also worth considering is the removal of the unnecessary promotion mentions. Maybe something like...
KyleJoantalk 01:45, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That phrasing works for me also CeltBrowne (talk) 02:12, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kenny_Omega&oldid=1209514345"