Talk:Quinten Hann

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Resignation

Quinten Hann (born June 4, 1977) was an Australian professional snooker player.

He is no longer a snooker player so shouldn't appear on the list of snooker players. Skinnyweed 22:22, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Why not? The list features several non-active and deceased snooker players. --80.202.107.156 18:47, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. We do not remove people from categories based on "former", or all historical characters would have no categories! — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 06:02, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

the whole page is full of innacurate crap wikipedia is a joke if they use stories from cheap tabloid papers you dont even get half a story more like 5% and that 4% of that is crap —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.2.149.117 (talk) 01:49, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Copyediting needed

This whole article is terribly biased and poorly written. 69.109.185.89 20:52, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

It isn't very well-written, but it's all true, as anyone who follows snooker knows. All this stuff can be found on the BBC snooker site or www.worldsnooker.com. Here's a page with the Hann articles: http://newssearch.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/search/results.pl?q=quinten+hann&scope=sportifs&tab=sport&edition=i&go.x=0&go.y=0&go=go .

--anon

Sorry--see this also: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/snooker/2973407.stm

--anon

Pool

Quinten Hann plays now at the 2006 IPT North American Open 8-Ball Championship, someone should mention it in this article. Nobbes 22:41, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Unreferenced tag

Most of it's true, I'll find the remaining sources. Skinnyweed 21:01, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Done. Skinnyweed 21:47, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

well i just assumed people that edit here for free wont listen or believe anything that they have not read from some journalist hack. I major lie is the fight Quinten broke johny magee nose in ireland just like he did to mark king one irish journalist printed a lie and now it has been referenced here. the fight is on utube he did not have one mark on him.

he does not play anymore full stop. He did play 2 tournaments in America nearly 3 years ago but now has retired he reached 8 quarters and a semi in snooker he also won the world under 21 snooker title in 1994. his highest break was 145. he won a world title on a video game in 1999 his biggest accomplishment he has stated in interviews.

i just thought that the article here is so biased against him i wanted to make it more balanced as i know him quite well. and after years of bad tabloid stories and harrasment from them, this is the no 1 google selection yet it still referenced things said in court which were proven lies. and the reasons why he was found not guilty were never reported because the sun and those papers only want to print the stuff that sells papers.

and probably the most telling thruth is both girls did kiss and tell sex stories on 2 other footballers within 3 months of the trial ending with the same tabloid paper. Is it just me or does it seem like he has been railroaded by the press and wikipedia is just doing the same now Davidmorris666

First of all, you can add anything you want to the article as long as you add a reference for it. If it conflicts with something else in the article that is also cited then both pieces of information should be included. It is unacceptable to remove referenced information without the consensus of other editors, as you did with the "whole departure from snooker" section. It's biased against him because he was found guilty of match fixing. The rape trials are included because it's a major part of his life. But ot be fair the section makes it clear that the girls lied under oath and that he was exonerated of all three attacks, and that Quinten quite clearly is on record as saying that his mother taught him not to be violent towards women. If you want to make the article more balanced then I suggest you add more 'positive' referenced facts rather than deleting massive chunks of the article. I agree that the article doesn't put Quinten in a good light and could do with balancing out, but the reality is that the bad stuff about him is sourced. Regardless of what the tabloids reported, he was banned for match-fixing, he was tried of rape, he was tried again for sexual assault so the article can't just omit these. If his snooker record is wrong then correct it, and if you want to balance the article by including information about how the kiss-and-tell girls have set up other men then add it but make sure you include a source. I'm a Quinten fan and the game was better for having him, but a lot of bad things happened in his life which have to be documented, but that's not to say his side of the story shouldn't be told.

My suggestion is that you go through the article and correct the snooker facts first because those can be clearly verified before altering anything else. If you save the page after each individual change it will allow other editors to just revert the edits they disagree with rather than everything. Betty Logan (talk) 10:35, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

he does not remember what tournament his 145 was in, he never broke his foot in a parachute jump it was a crash while racing super bikes another mistake of the tabloids he is scared of hights and how about correcting the fight with johny magee another obvious mistake you can view it on utubve with the link i posted.

It's impossible to tell if someone got their nose broken form watching a video and all the references say Hann got his nose broken. If the newspapers got it wrong then Wikipedia will have to stay wrong, because it can't publish one thing when all the sources contradict it. If you could find just one source for each of the things you claim they can be incorporated into the article, but it can't changed just because Quinten disputes some of it. Betty Logan (talk) 09:06, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Removal of sourced information

i was in dublin for that fight hann won it easily and magee's nose was bleeding like a fountain its pretty obvios if you watch the clip —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.100.231.241 (talk) 10:31, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Over the last few days an editor is mysteriously removing large chunks of referenced information without giving an adequate reason or discussing his edits on here. After giving an editor a 3RR warning an anon has turned up out of no-where and started excising the same information. We need to keep an eye on the article because the editor is obviously persistent and isn't willing to discuss his problems with the article rationally with other editors. Betty Logan (talk) 05:31, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

well i have spoken with him and the only things that really annoys him is the irish journalist lied about the fight and now most people read it and believe that why dont you put up the link as then people can make up there own mind?, and also the articles about the court cases as they are so biased aven though he was found not guilty, my mother told me not to hit woman is condesending and i believe reported as a tongue in cheek joke by the tabloids. as if that was any reason why he was found not guilty there were real reasons for that that were not news worthy. as for the match fixing he does not care about that and states it was the best thing that even happened to him. i guess life is not always fair and nothing changes in regard to his coverage by any media outlet. as for changing any snooker related info no media coverage is online to reference it so it will always stay in correct here as he is not in the news anymore and that was never really the reason why he was famous to begin with

The truth doesn't matter on Wikipedia - you have to think of it as a collective of published information (original research is expressly forbidden). If the Irish journalist lied then there isn't much that can be done about that unless you can find a contradictory published source. As for his trial, we can only include what was published which unfortunately are the more salacious aspects. The most important details are there though - he was acquitted and the accuser was caught lying. As for the snooker facts, there are many websites out there, I am sure there must be something on those about Quinten. For instance if there is a match report on the BBC of the semi he reached then at least the article can say he reached a semi and reference the report. Betty Logan (talk) 15:57, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I've adjusted some of the facts. SportingLife has records of most of the matches so if you can recall which match he made his 145 break in then we can fix the high break and add a link to the match report.Betty Logan (talk) 16:47, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

removed as there is no referenced material —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.2.149.117 (talk) 08:21, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Insertion of factually incorrect information

There has been some recent edits ([1]) by anonymous editors involving the insertion of information that directly contradicts the information provided by the source (http://www.breakingnews.ie/2006/02/14/story244688.html). Please do not replace sourced information with unsourced information. If the cited information is incorrect please provide an alternative citation for the correct information. Betty Logan (talk) 15:13, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

The article has been protected, and will be every time unsourced content is added. If the current claim in the article is incorrect then we need another reference to back it up otherwise it cannot be altered (see WP:V). If a counter claim can be found it will be incorporated into the article so time would be better spent doing that than edit-warring. Maybe another video can be found of the event where the judges actually annouce the winner, since nothing is clear from the video that has been put up in regards to who won and who had their nose broken. Betty Logan (talk) 12:19, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Looks pretty convincing to me: [2] Betty Logan (talk) 12:42, 12 September 2009 (UTC)