Talk:Tyson Fury/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Semi-protected edit request on 26 August 2017

Within the section headed "Relinquishing world titles and ban", change "...and allow him..." to "...and allowing him..." RiDomDan (talk) 10:15, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Done DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 10:25, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Christian Hammer No Contest

As part of Fury’s settlement with UKAD his win over Christian Hammer was nullified and is now a no contest. Would someone be able to update his fight record please, I don’t know how? Thanks. Numerous media stories confirm this but here’s a direct source: https://ukad.org.uk/news/article/UKAD-and-Mr-Tyson-Fury-and-Mr-Hughie-Fury-issue-joint-statement — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:BC3B:E600:8F8:CDB5:7C13:4A9B (talk) 01:16, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Thing is, it's just one source by UKAD. Fury's record on BoxRec makes no mention of it, nor do most mainstream media, or the BBBoC, or the WBO (their current heavyweight rankings fail to list Hammer as having an NC on his record). Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:11, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Maybe Boxrec simply hasn’t updated it yet. There are plenty of reports about the decision, but I listed UKAD because they are the direct, primary source. It was their decision to make the result a no contest, which Tyson Fury (and Hughie) accepted as part of their legal settlement with UKAD. They are the authority on this matter, regardless of whether or not others have updated their records.

It’s not been very well publicised but here’s some mainstream media articles that mentions the no contest (again UKAD being their source):

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/general/boxing/tyson-fury-steroid-uk-anti-doping-backdated-ban-christian-hammer-rematch-a8106516.html

http://www.skysports.com/boxing/news/12183/11168985/tyson-fury-licence-will-be-considered-in-january-after-ukad-ruling — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:BC3B:E600:B967:8D76:CE87:D593 (talk) 18:07, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Granted. Whilst there are reliable sources to support UKAD's ruling, it now becomes a WP:WEIGHT issue. Until mainstream media and fight announcers (including TV graphics) widely start including the NC on his record, we cannot only go by UKAD. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 19:35, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Is Tyson Fury the lineal heavyweight champion

He repeatedly states that he is, as does his promoter Frank Warren. Whilst he vacated all of his titles at the end of 2015, it is unclear whether the lineal championship was vacated. Of course he was stripped of The Ring Magazine title, although we are recognising that as different to the legitimate lineal championship. William Sand (talk) 13:20, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

The lineal championship isn't a physical belt per se, but more of a timeline of 'the man who beat the man'. As no one has beat Fury - who beat Klischko to earn the title - he is, rightly or wrongly, the lineal heavyweight champion. Craig (talk) 16:11, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 July 2018

Change rounsd to rounds because spelling is incorrect. 38.97.97.99 (talk) 16:34, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

 Done Thank you for pointing that out! DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 16:43, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

RfC - Tyson Fury lineal champion

The consensus is against calling Tyson Fury the reigning lineal champion.

Cunard (talk) 01:08, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

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.

Should Tyson Fury still be regarded as the reigning lineal champion? Naue7 (talk) 00:20, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

–

No. He claimed he was retired publicly three times in between the Klitschko win and the Seferi comeback. All three lineal championship-awarding organizations -- TBRB, Cyber Zone, and Ring -- list their heavyweight championships as vacant. He also failed a PED test, which by itself is enough to have his title vacated by TBRB and Ring.

Joshua vs Wilder is the lineal fight at heavyweight. They are listed as the top two fighters in the division by BoxRec, Ring, TBRB, ESPN, etc and between them they hold all four major belts and the IBO.

If you're going to try to argue Fury is still lineal after his retirement(s), by the same reasoning you'd have to say that Terence Crawford is the lineal welterweight champion. Pacquaio was the lineal champion, then he retired and thus vacated it. But he unretired seven months later and lost to Jeff Horn, who then lost to Crawford.

Nobody considered Horn the lineal champion for beating Pacquiao, and thus nobody considers Crawford the lineal champion for beating Horn. This is despite the fact that Pacquiao was only inactive for seven months, while Fury was inactive for two years and seven months. 2601:283:4302:4C2E:65A5:CD77:1048:DC3A (talk) 01:30, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

• No the "lineal" title is somewhere between fancruft and trivia, and doesn't appear to be supported by any reference in the article. power~enwiki (π, ν) 03:22, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
• No. It's not a real title. He's just a guy who caught an old champion on a bad day and has done little before or since. His team will call him lineal champion to big him up but it's nonsense. Even if it was a real title, the idea that someone can stop boxing without losing a title and will then be regarded as the world champion forever is ludicrous. --Michig (talk) 06:58, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
• No Though I think this is trivia a bit. He could be called lineal champion until declared inactive as being accurate, I suppose. But not "reigning." Collect (talk) 14:07, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
• It's an interesting question nonetheless. The network channels and even the fighters themselves are calling Fury the lineal champion. Retirement is hard to define as many famous fighters verbally stated they've retired before their actual last fight. Is there any 'offical' word on when a lineal title is vacated? How is the next lineal champion chose if they don't beat the former champion? Interesting discussion. Coventryy (talk) 17:04, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
• If the lineal title is vacant then the only way to crown a new lineal champion is if the consensus top two fighters in the division fight. At heavyweight, Joshua and Wilder are the consensus top two. ESPN, BoxRec, TBRB, Ring, etc all agree on that.

As for who actually keeps track of the lineal title, presently it's either the Transnational Boxing Ratings Board or Cyber Boxing Zone. In the past, before De Le Hoya bought them, it was Ring magazine. And all three sources presently list the lineal heavyweight title as vacant.

Fury is only being called lineal right now to help hype up his fight with Wilder. Wilder vs Joshua is the lineal fight unless one of them loses or gets jumped in the rankings before they fight each other.107.77.165.9 (talk) 19:48, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

• No – if we go by the TBRB, he abdicated the throne by declaring himself unfit for competition, and effectively retiring (multiple times). Mac Dreamstate (talk) 16:14, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
• No, because if Wikipedia names him as lineal champion then if someone beats him they would 'automatically' become the lineal. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:21, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
• No Per just abotu everybody here, pretty good arguments against. (Summoned by bot) ^Thanks, L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 14:19, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
• He's still being called the lineal champion because he is still 'the man who beat the man', is undefeated and now active again. The man who beat the man will always have a claim to the lineal title unless they get beaten. I don't think he ever officially seriously retired either, but it's hard to argue that any fighter that has been inactive for 2 and a half years should still hold any title. I have to say the comment by Michig is pathetic though, you've brought personal opinion and bias into it when we are supposed to be impartial here. Besides, the quote "He's just a guy who caught an old champion on a bad day" is laughable and shows you know nothing about boxing. I suggest you start by having a little look into WHY Klitschko appeared to have off night and you might not make yourself look that stupid on the subject again. Lorenzo9378 (talk) 17:24, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

• You could really have made your statement without resorting to personal insults, but instead you've made yourself look childish and petty. --Michig (talk) 17:54, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
• You could really have made your original point without resorting to personally insulting the fighter in question with your own opinion instead of remaining impartial (an opinion which made you look not only "childish and petty" but also pretty clueless), but you failed to do that so I called you out on it and you can't take it lol, you best crack on with that research. Lorenzo9378 (talk) 18:54, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

• See WP:NPA. --Michig (talk) 19:10, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
• See WP:NPV. Lorenzo9378 (talk) 16:18, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

• WP:NPV is about editing articles, not expressing opinions on a talk page, which is exactly what an RfC is for. --Michig (talk) 16:38, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
• So you're saying your personal opinion on a fighter and one of his fights should count towards whether or not we regard him as the lineal champion on here? Lol righto. Lorenzo9378 (talk) 18:19, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Before this descends into insults, we should consider two things:

• Mainstream media is (unfortunately) giving widespread credence to Fury's claims of still holding the lineal title—they're all parroting the same thing. When it comes to sources in number, there's certainly enough support for it.
• However, the credibility of said mainstream media (those which are not specialised in boxing) should be in serious doubt, per WP:NEWSORG. I don't care if it's The Independent or The Guardian (i.e., not a tabloid like The Sun), I refuse to acknowledge them as an authority on boxing unlike the TBRB, The Ring, and perhaps Dan Rafael for ESPN. If the mainstream media continously parrots an oversimplification such as Fury's spurious claims to the title, both WP:NEWSORG and WP:DUEWEIGHT need to be carefully applied. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 18:51, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

• It's already descended into insults thanks to 'Lorenzo'. Anyone is free to disagree with my opinion, but there's no need for that behaviour. The fact is 'lineal champion' is not an official title, is open to debate who should be considered lineal champion (as recently done in an article on the subject in Boxing News), and shouldn't be mentioned in the article as if it is an official title. Had Klitschko been forced to defend against the best challengers a few years earlier, maybe he wouldn't have been 'the man' any more - sadly the days of one recognized world champion and meaningful ranking of challengers (and mandatory defences against them) is long gone. --Michig (talk) 19:10, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

• Talk about clutching at straws, if what I said was a "personal attack" then you have also personally attacked me with your response, and also you personally attacked the fighter in question with your own opinion instead of remaining neutral, which there is no need for either and that is where this started if you remember, yet you still haven't addressed this but instead are choosing to ignore it, I wonder why that is? Lorenzo9378 (talk) 16:18, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

• You're only making yourself look worse continuing this line of argument. I'm not responding to every point you make because your contributions here are largely personal criticism of me simply because I expressed a different opinion to you, and are irrelevant to the discussion. --Michig (talk) 16:38, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

• Like I said, you could have made your point about him being out the ring too long to hold a title without saying "He's just a guy who caught an old champion on a bad day", that bit is purely your opinion and is irrelevant to the discussion. Lorenzo9378 (talk) 18:19, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

• Anyway moving on, in a way I like many others do still see Fury as the lineal champion, if The Ring had not stripped of their title earlier in the year and he still held that then there would be a very strong argument that he is still the official lineal champ also, but perhaps we should look at this being the point in time where he officially lost the lineal title as well as The Ring title. Also if and when he wins a world title again I would regard him as two time world champion, and I think this is important as the media are still calling him the lineal champ but I'm pretty sure they'll also call him a two time champion if wins another world title including if he does so whilst remaining undefeated. If we were still to call him the lineal champion now and he were to win another world title whilst remaining undefeated then that would officially only be one title reign and not two. If he did that he would effectively still be the lineal champion anyway but not officially, that will be reserved for when the fighters that are #1 and #2 in the division at the time are scheduled to fight, then both the vacant Ring and lineal titles would be on the line. Lorenzo9378 (talk) 16:18, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
• Everyone is entitled to their own opinion about who the lineal champion is. I never considered Fury to be a lineal champion because I never thought Wladimir Klitschko was the lineal champion. As for what belongs in the article, if The Guardian or another reliable source calls him the lineal champion I think it's reasonable to say that the The Guardian considers him as such. I don't think it should say that he vacated the lineal title because he and many others would say he didn't.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 17:13, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
• Here's a link to the Boxing News article I mentioned above: [1]. I agree with most of it, but disagree with Wladimir Klitschko being considered the lineal champ necessarily. He was the best out there for a time, but if that made him lineal champion, it's just more evidence that it's a meaningless term. If you trace the line from when we last had a single recognized dominant world heavyweight champion, you end up at Lennox Lewis, who retired in 2003 while still the champion. You then have two branches, the WBA 'Super' route that takes you to Wladmir Klitschko, and the WBC route that takes you to Vitaly Kilitschko, and ultimately Deontay Wilder. The trouble then is, the IBF, and later the WBO titles became more accepted as genuine world titles, so the concept of a 'lineal champion' became a nonsense. Individual world titles became more numerous and less prestigious, and sanctioning bodies became more and more bizarre in permitting their champions to keep defending against inferior challengers, who got top 15 rankings with no explanation. Nobody could really be considered 'the man' after Lewis because nobody was consistently fighting the best challengers any more. So what about Fury? He beat one of the two men who at the time were considered genuine world champions, one considered by most to be the more genuine world champion of the two, but one who at 39 was considered by respected boxing commentators to be showing his age and well past his best (see the newspaper reports of the Klitschko-Fury fight if you don't believe me). Whether Fury deserved a shot at Klitschko is debatable - he hadn't really beaten any of the other top contenders, but rankings by sanctioning bodies have become a joke in recent years (see his cousin getting to be no.1 WBO challenger without beating anyone better than Fred Kassi as an example). Was Klitschko still 'the man' at that time? He certainly wasn't the man that beat 'the man' - he never beat Lewis and he never beat his brother. Fury was then stripped of his (real) titles after failing a drugs test, so was no longer a champion at all, and no, he isn't the lineal champion any more than he is the King of the Gypsies, and any more than Lennox Lewis is still the lineal champion. Fury never beat 'the man who beat the man', but promoters like to use terms like 'lineal champion' when they have no genuine titles on offer, and others will pick up on them. He has since come back to boxing and beaten two men that would have been too lowly-ranked to interest even David Haye in his comeback fights. At the end of the day, the whole concept of lineal champions is now meaningless. There is no single line of succession of 'the man that beat the man' since Lewis retired. Fury didn't vacate or get stripped of the lineal title, because you can't vacate or get stripped of a title that only exists in people's heads. We can mention that his promoter bills him as the lineal champion, or that some sources refer to him as the lineal champion, but that's all, and it shouldn't be anywhere near the lede. --Michig (talk) 19:13, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
• Sorry but I wasnt quite done here - The rankings system is flawed no question about it, money talks basically. None of the santioning bodies have any consistancy with calling mandatories or even eliminators. Fighters get put in the rankings just to justify them being chosen as the next opponent of a title holder. But before all these corrupt sanctioning bodies came along what did we have? We had The Ring and World (lineal) titles, they are the longest standing so of course they mean something. The lineal championship goes back to the 1880s, there have been several breaks in the lineage. For example when Marciano retired there had to be a new champion, so Patterson fought Moore for the vacant titles. That's why it makes no sense to say there hasn't been a lineal champion since Lewis, he retired so there has to be a new lineal champion at some point. Wlad Klitschko fought Chagaev for multiple titles including the vacant Ring title so the vacant lineal was there also. It would have been between Vitali and Wlad for who would end up as lineal champ but Vitali had his first retirement and by the time he had returned his brother was already fighting for the lineal title. It is funny how you mention Wlad was past his best for Fury citing articles that were written AFTER the Fury Klitschko fight, eveyone is an expert after the fight yet I seem to remember about 90% of people before the fight saying that Klitschko would beat/knock out Fury. Klitschko was undefeated in 11 years and coming off one of his career best performances against Pulev, he didn't look great against Jennings but that was mostly down to style match up more than anything else as was the case with Fury. The truth is they didn't want give Fury any credit. These are usually the same idiots that claim Joshua fought a better Klitschko than Fury, despite Joshua having home advantage where Fury didn't and the fact Klitschko was coming off an 18 month lay off and a loss when he fought Joshua and you said he was past his best when fought Fury, which one is it?? Klitschko looked good against Joshua because they were evenly matched, he looked poor against Fury because Fury was a level above and completely outclassed him, it really is that simple. As for the suggestion that Fury was unworthy of his shot against Klitschko, can you name another fighter that fought three eliminators to get their shot? His fights against Johnson and Cunningham were both eliminators then he could have fought Pulev to be mandatory for Klitschko but chose to fight Haye instead which never happened in the end, then he fought the Chisora rematch which was a final eliminator. Whether we think these guys are any good or not doesn't matter the fact is thats where they were at the time and Fury had to beat them to earn his shot. As you also said, Klitschko dominated a weak era and avoided fighters, but Fury was the one he avoided most of all. Fury was mandatory by both WBA and WBO and Klitschko had to fight him or vacate/be stripped, so in all honesty it is ridiculous to suggest Fury was unworthy of his shot against Klitschko and even if you think he wasn't, surely he proved that he was by winning the fight and winning it convincingly.....Lorenzo9378 (talk) 19:56, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
• First made the above edit on this IP in error but here is proof that this is Lorenzo9378 if needed 88.104.240.201 (talk) 20:04, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
• Springs Toledo, one of the founders of the Transnational Boxing Rankings Board, on the TBRB site writes about Fury "Is he the lineal champion? Sure, but he is no longer the true champion ... If he wants to wave the honorary “lineal” tag, let him. But it’s only an abstraction and a distraction."--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 19:14, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

To recap, TBRB and CBZ no longer consider Fury the lineal champion. Their rationale being that he retired and was stripped after failing drug tests. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 00:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

The TBRB does not call their champions the lineal champions.

The Cyber Boxing Zone's list is their opinion, but it is just an opinion, not fact, and not a very widely cited opinion.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 16:50, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Y'know what I'm tempted to do? Start an RfC calling for the complete removal of lineal titles altogether from boxing articles. No mention of them in the lead, record table, or title boxes. Maybe some kind of explanation on the list of lineal boxing world champions article regarding the ambiguity and widespread disagreement about who has held/is holding the titles, but that's it. No longer should WP be a soapbox for all these parties with an agenda. I can't be the only one who's thought of this. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 21:33, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

You would have my support. The whole List of lineal boxing world champions article is based on the CBZ website, which seems a rather dubious basis for an article to me. A lot of the titles out there may be fairly meaningless and awarded by sanctioning bodies that leave a lot to be desired, but unlike the lineal title, at least they're real titles. --Michig (talk) 21:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Admittedly I used to be fond of the lineal champions article, but due to all these Fury/Álvarez/Pacquiao shenanigans over the past few years, I can see that it's become merely a platform for weekly edit-warring by everyone with an interpretation. I was never comfortable with it being based largely on CBZ, but I did like their upkeeping of historical lists prior to the 2010s. They're meaningless now, though—they still list Pacquiao (from the third Bradley fight) as lineal welterweight champion, which would mean Crawford holds it today. And you're right—the ABC belts are at least genuine world titles with official histories. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 21:55, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

My daily plea—we should remove all mentions of the "lineal" heavyweight title from everywhere except the prose, and apply this to all other boxers' articles. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 16:59, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

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 2 November 2018

Tyson Fury is the most decorated current active heavyweight in the uk with 15 belts. Caco006984 (talk) 14:09, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 14:15, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Decorated meaning he has won the most belts. He has won English Title, European Title,Irish Title,British Title, Commonwealth Title,Who International, ,Who inter-continental,IBO World Title, Inc world title, WBA World Title, WBO world title, The ring title , Lineal Heavyweight Championship. This amazing achievement should be recorded. Demixleighx95 (talk) 10:22, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

The proof is on the Wikipedia page but it's not clear that he has won the most but later vacated them due to mental health issues. Demixleighx95 (talk) 10:24, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/boxing/37634849 Demixleighx95 (talk) 10:26, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 November 2018

120.17.78.140 (talk) 13:10, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Retired

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 13:36, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 November 2018

Tyson Fury holds a professional record of 27 wins 1 loss. 79.75.246.82 (talk) 23:23, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 14:32, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Fury vs. Wladimir Klitschko

Please correct the spelling of "Klitschko" in the second and third lines of the second paragraph. 203.196.41.161 (talk) 05:23, 30 November 2018 (UTC) Editrite!

Bad Quality Main Photo

The quality of the main photograph is quite crumby. Does anybody know of a source for a recent photograph that is better quality/higher resolution? Raoulduke25 (talk) 21:03, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Somebody has stepped up to the task. Thank you! Raoulduke25 (talk) 23:09, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 December 2018

add Tyson dosser fury as his name Jampot34 (talk) 18:21, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Alucard 16_{❯❯❯ chat?} 18:22, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Could we also add that Fury got banned from wikipedia because he was making changes to Wladimir Klistchko's profile

Mental health advocate?

Can someone please acknowledge how he has spoken about mental health and raised awareness to in sports at the sport awards joe Rogan podcast and many interviews like the interview after the wilder fury fight. Demixleighx95 (talk) 10:07, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

WBC DRAW CONTROVERSY?

Can someone discuss the fact that many many people believe he won the fight and it was a very controversial draw? Demixleighx95 (talk) 10:08, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

CHANGE PHOTO?

Can we not change the photo of Tyson Fury to the new Tyson Fury In 2018 on his comeback not the Tyson Fury of 2017 who had mental health issues obesity issues drug and alcohol issues. He has made a comeback and has changed quite drastically x Demixleighx95 (talk) 10:30, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

PREMATURE AND NAMED AFTER BOXER MIKE TYSON

I SAW that someone tried to make this change in 2015 but itdidnt have any sources or evidence Tyson Fury was born premature weighing just 1lb. and his father NAMED him after Mike Tyson, boxing's undisputed heavyweight champion at the time. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/boxing/46369616 Demixleighx95 (talk) 10:36, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

MENTAL HEALTH

More should be said about what he as experienced and what he is doing for others.

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/general/boxing/tyson-fury-vs-deontay-wilder-fight-profile-background-bio-when-where-preview-prediction-news-a8662376.html Demixleighx95 (talk) 10:51, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Bio update please

ON TYSON FURYS BIO IT SAYS HE VACATED HIS BELTS DUE TO MEDICAL INVESTIGATION WE NOW KNOW THAT THE MEDICAL INVESTIGATION WAS BASICALLY HIM HAVING MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES AND THIS SHOULD BE SAID AS IT WELL DOCUMENTED.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/boxing/37638479 Demixleighx95 (talk) 10:59, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Edit request

Please remove Category:Irish Travellers as he is now in the newly created subcategory Category:Irish Traveller sportspeople. --2001:BB6:A32:6E58:24B4:B0C7:1B03:EB6A (talk) 05:20, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

 Done with thanks, NiciVampireHeart 00:42, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 April 2019

On 12th December 2017 UKAD (United Kingdom Anti-Doping)issued a two part punishment to Tyson Fury as a result of him failing a urine test that showed elevated levels of nandrolone metabolites. The first part of the punishment was a backdated ban. The second part of the punishment was that " In accordance with UK ADR Article 9.1, the result of Tyson Fury’s fight on 28 February 2015 against Christian Hammeris disqualified, and any and all titles, prize money and ranking points that he secured as a result of his victory in that fight are forfeited"

As a result Tyson Fury's true boxing record is 26 wins, I loss (by disqualification), I draw. The full transcript of the UKAD ruling can be found here: https://www.ukad.org.uk/assets/uploads/Files/2017/Tyson_and_Hughie_Fury.pdf attention is drawn to section 3 "Disqualification of results" Michaelsloyan (talk) 22:12, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. I see that this was discussed previously further up the page (§ Christian Hammer No Contest) and was not changed then. Please discuss here on the talk page. Ping to User:Mac Dreamstate who participated in the previous discussion and may know more about this subject than I do. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 13:27, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

I'm still not seeing any altered results to his record by the BBBofC, BoxRec, TBRB, The Ring, or any other mainstream media publications. Until they widely agree that Fury has an NC or DQ on his record, we can't go by a UKAD ruling alone. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 15:11, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 Jun 2019

Please can you reduce the size of the word "and" in line with the other text under 'Notes' of fight number 28 in section 'Professional boxing record'? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.4.239.164 (talk)

 Done ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 19:39, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Why exclude IBO title?

Of recent, a number of boxing articles have been edited and reference to IBO title in the main section have been deleted from them. Some of them include Anthony Joshua, Tyson Fury and Andy Ruiz Jr. Since a few of these are semi-protected, this needs a section in the talk section.

My question is why remove the reference? The boxers mentioned above won the IBO title and even mentioned them among the list of titles they held. If the IBO title is considered minor (which is worth a debate), it can be stated as being so. In fact, the Joshua article mentions regional titles such as British and Commonwealth, but not the IBO title which was included earlier in the article but cunningly deleted thereafter.

Please provide a reason for deleting the reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.200.228.63 (talk) 12:57, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

That would be me. It was my little experiment to see if we on WP could de-emphasise that pesky organisation and only acknowledge the big four titles (who, don't get me wrong, aren't any better), but thanks to the braindead media who insist on parroting the notion of five world titles, discussion will be needed at the Project. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 15:33, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

I am sorry but 'pesky', 'braindead' etc would be at most your opinions. Maybe IBO title is not a major world title, but are lineal and Ring magazine titles real? Fury did hold the IBO title and he did vacate it, we can't change facts. There is no need to call it a major title, but it should be mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.200.228.63 (talk) 07:09, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

We should include any (real) titles a boxer holds in my view, i.e. any title awarded by a recognized sanctioning body. --Michig (talk) 06:35, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

If the IBO is good enough to be listed in the 'Professional boxing record' section, then it should be listed in the main. Also, the IBO is recognised by BoxRec and the IBHOF. Squared.Circle.Boxing (talk) 11:05, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Early life

Fury is also related to retired boxer Andy Lee, there's plenty of references to find. Also, if there's a mention of renowned gypsy bareknuckle fighter Bartley Gorman, it should be noted he's related to Uriah Burton, another renowned gypsy bareknuckle fighter. Squared.Circle.Boxing (talk) 10:57, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 September 2019

Fury should be acknowledged as the lineal champion on his record FLAMINGTWIG56 (talk) 20:54, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Previous consensus, formed at Talk:Tyson Fury#RfC - Tyson Fury lineal champion, was against the inclusion of this. A new consensus to the contrary would need to be obtained prior to insertion. NiciVampireHeart 22:06, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Fury in WWE

Subject has now made two appearances over WWE's last three shows, getting into a worked physical altercation on the second of which, setting up a match on their next PPV event. Definitely warrants a mention on it's own now. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 13:00, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

As per BRD seek consensus first. I oppose inclusion as per WP:NOTNEWS.

News reports. Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion. For example, routine news reporting of announcements, sports, or celebrities is not a sufficient basis for inclusion in the encyclopedia. While including information on recent developments is sometimes appropriate, breaking news should not be emphasized or otherwise treated differently from other information. Timely news subjects not suitable for Wikipedia may be suitable for our sister project Wikinews. Wikipedia is also not written in news style.NEDOCHAN (talk) 13:41, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Floyd Mayweather Jr. has his appearances in WWE mentioned on his page, why not here? Fury has clearly made preplanned appearances in order to set something up further down the line. The section added simply details these appearances, these factual events. Seems more than worthy to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Squared.Circle.Boxing (talk • contribs) 14:07, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Mayweather appeared several times, including Wrestle Mania. I'm not saying that Fury's WWE stuff will never be notable, I'm just saying that I don't think it is so far.NEDOCHAN (talk) 14:38, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

This is not a one-off guest appearance. There is nothing routine for a boxer to start working for a professional wrestling company. It's like Usain Bolt joining a football club. Even if he never appeared in WWE again, this would still be worth a sentence in the bio - if Fury cameoed in the Game of Thrones TV show, or a new Avengers movie, or acted in a Phantom of the Opera musical, or played in the French Open tennis tournament, it would go in his biography. As this is 3-1, I am restoring the content. starship.paint (talk) 15:10, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

I remain of the view that this is news and should not be included, yet accept that it's been discussed and there's consensus for inclusion.NEDOCHAN (talk) 16:42, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Why did you delete the info about the "brawl", Nedochan? Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of the wwe muck myself! But the BBC mentioned the "brawl" so why shouldn't we? NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM (talk) 15:45, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Ben Davison

Ben Davison should get a mention somewhere here as he's Fury's trainer. Anyone got any ideas on where to put it?

Semi-protected edit request on 10 December 2019

Tyson Fury has had a confirmed fight for 22nd Feb 2020 with Deontay Wilder and I wanted to add this to his professional boxing record as I've done with Deontay Wilders page. Jamescm1997 (talk) 17:30, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 17:53, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Southpaw or regular.

I think one might argue he should be listed as both. Leejames2 (talk) 06:42, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 January 2020

at the section of other ventures it should be added as Tyson Fury also practices by masturbating 7 times a day for Deontay Wilder boxing rematch. 118.35.196.183 (talk) 05:29, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. No, the source just says that he claims this, not that it's true. But also, just no. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 14:45, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

References

}

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• GYPSY KONG TYSON FURY.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:51, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Tyson Fury He's Back Press Conference.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:37, 23 February 2020 (UTC)