Talk:Alexander Legkov

Doping

It's abundantly clear that his medal was stripped for alleged doping. Russia's viewpoint that he didn't dope is significant and Legkov may have been goaded into doing it by state actors. Thus 86.191.230.87 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)'s addition contravenes WP:DUE and WP:BLP; even in the (IMHO likely) case that the doping allegation proves to be true, the tone conveyed by using the word "cheated" is not acceptable, as it is unnecessarily defamatory.--Jasper Deng (talk) 18:33, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

What utter nonsense. What utter and total nonsense. The medal was stripped for doping, PERIOD. The weight of the evidence was adjudicated by the judging body in question and he was found guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. By your standard, we'd have to also call convicted murderers "alleged" murderers because their families still claim he was innocent. And furthermore, not as if it really matters, but Russia has provided no exculpatory evidence or argument whatsoever other than to make a blanket denial of state sponsored doping (in fact, Russia claims that those caught cheating SHOULD BE PUNISHED and, to the best of my knowledge, have not questioned Legkov or other stripped medallists' cheating - I believe that claim, like your nonsense claim that he was stripped for 'alleged' doping, to be ENTIRELY a figment of your imagination). Whether or not Legkov was "goaded" into doing it is irrelevant. He WAS FOUND GUILTY OF DOPING VIOLATIONS AND THE ALLEGATIONS *WERE* PROVEN TO BE TRUE BY THE RELEVANT ADJUDICATING AUTHORITIES. Moreover, the idea that this is not "cheating" is laughable. Doping IS cheating and I provided an explicit link to an Olympic doping page which says that in their view it IS cheating. Furthermore, the term "cheating" is widespread when it comes to doping rulings ("Lance Armstrong: Usada report labels him 'a serial cheat'") It is not defamatory to say that a bank robber robbed a bank. it is not defamatory to say that somebody who was convicted beyond reasonable doubt of doping had engaged in cheating - THAT IS THE CORRECT TERM! If you can't agree to this, we're going to take this into higher level arbitration, since you are, frankly, engaging in unnecessary dilution of the article, possibly because of your own political biases. Moreover, the KEY point of the cheating is that it denied certain others, who, unless adjudicated otherwise, are presumed to be clean, rightful recognition as Olympic medallists. As the number of cheaters in sports is relatively few, the fact that somebody has chosen to cheat BECOMES THE MOST SALIENT PART ABOUT THAT PERSON. Nobody cares about Boris Onichenko any more except in the context of HIS cheating - the fact that he cheated - by a rigged epee - is right there in his wiki header. Similarly, it is important and necessary to identify stripped medallists a) as cheaters and b) to identify those who they denied a medal or recognition if and where that happened as that is THE MOST SALIENT PART OF THEIR STORIES.

No one is denying that the IOC stripped his Olympic medals for doping violations, Boris. That is already mentioned in the article. You can add a sentence about it to the lede if you want, but please write it in proper English and with a neutral and professional tone (i.e. simply state the facts). Your previous additions were unacceptable because they written with a accusatory tone and in poor English that reflects badly on an Encyclopedia. Bennv3771 (talk) 05:17, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Court of Arbitration for Sport found there was insufficient evidence doping rules were broken and the IOC's decision was overturned [1]. Regards, Ratipok (talk) 15:04, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Ok? Congrats? Bennv3771 (talk) 15:38, 1 February 2018 (UTC)