Talk:Bodacious (bull)

Untitled

there are several sites online that say bodacious died on may 16 2000, rather than 1999.

one for example; http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?GRid=10529&page=gr —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lrenh (talk • contribs) 06:06, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

bodacious can soryuken?

"down, forward, down+forward punch move"

?.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.153.192.157 (talk) 23:13, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Much of the article looks like original research. Few of the facts are supported by any source. Gab4gab (talk) 15:31, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Bodacious (bull). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110629144940/http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2000/May-25-Thu-2000/sports/13649438.html to http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2000/May-25-Thu-2000/sports/13649438.html
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110713111708/http://www.jodeurbrouck.com/articles/riding/index.html to http://www.jodeurbrouck.com/articles/riding/index.html

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

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

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

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:35, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Links look like good source and are working. Left a note on your talk page about them. Dawnleelynn (talk) 17:57, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Okay I think this is what I need to do to say that the archive links are good and verfied-but first I had to add the Title attribute which was missing for some reason & throwing an error messsage.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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

Dawnleelynn (talk) 03:08, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

rodeo circuits

montanabw (talk · contribs) Please see this link at the end. Just a thought about the labeling of the World Finals for the PBR and PRCA. This will come up often so let's agree? I think we already concur that saying PBR World Finals is fine. I had PRCA Wrangler World National Finals in an edit I did in this topic and you removed the PRCA and the Wrangler from in front citing "commercial labeing which changes." Just to get on the same page it's been called the Wrangler National Finals Rodeo since inception in 1959. And prefixing with PRCA is the same as prefixing with PBR, it lets someone not familiar with the bullriding circuits know that this finals is for the PRCA rodeo circuit, which is not commercial labeling. However, I am not married to including Wrangler. But I would make a case for keeping PRCA in front when needed to make it clear which circuit the finals are for. Let me know what you think. Thanks for your consideration! And if I have explained things you already knew, please excuse, I have no way to know the depth of your knowledge. http://www.prorodeo.com/prorodeo/wrangler-national-finals-rodeo Dawnleelynn (talk) 17:05, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

I fouled up tossing the PRCA bit. I made a mistake there, sorry! As far as the commercial labeling for Wrangler, a Google search shows it going both ways (up where I live, people just use NFR for news reports). (And criminy, right now it is "Wrangler National Finals Rodeo presented by Polaris RANGER®"- when will it end?) We get this a lot in horse racing and at that project it is a pretty longstanding consensus that WP:NOADS applies unless there is no way to avoid it. For example, we have Kentucky Derby, not the Kentucky Derby sponsored by Yum! Brands. On the other hand, we're stuck with something that is just plain named with a sponsor, like the Staples Center or Petco Park, commercialism and all, at least until they rename it. Does that make sense? To be fair, one reason is that sponsorships often change and we got sick and tired of constantly moving and renaming articles, which isn't the case here. If you are OK with just re-adding PRCA, I'm OK restoring it! Montanabw^(talk) 17:48, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

montanabw (talk · contribs) oops forgot the user tag -- Thanks, I'm totally onboard with what you said. It all makes complete sense. When I was working as a tech writer, we had all kinds of methods to avoid moving and renaming in our products when working on our documentation. I have your back there. I don't know why the PRCA has Wrangler so integrally tied into the NFR but it's in their website URL, in their Twitter handler, and they use it on their website as part of the name in the content. But, like I said, not married to it and let's leave it out. But I have seen rodeo topics include it since I started working around so will remove when come across. Agree on just prefixing with PRCA. That won't change. The bulls get sponsorships added and removed from their names too, so that can be a hassle. Poor Cooper Tires Brown Sugar! lol. Thanks much! Dawnleelynn (talk) 18:01, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

LOL! Montanabw^(talk) 04:01, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Please add only cited sources

45.47.168.184 (talk · contribs) As per WP:CITE, please add new material that is backed up by a legitimate source. The source that is already there, is an article by the PBR, "Who's the greatest?" It does not contain most of the information you have added in. Your content, even if true, still needs to be backed up by a source that verifies it. It cannot ride on the back of another source. I spent a lot time rewriting in this article to get it 100% accurately cited. I am not trying to keep it from being edited, but the edits do need to have reliable sources. Also, the lead in section should not be that long. You also removed pertinent content that I wrote that was backed up from my source. I'm totally happy to discuss these edits. I know no one owns an article, even if they did write a lot of it. I'm just acting as a steward of the article in good faith now. I'd like to take the article to good article status in the future. I know it's too long and needs some more rewriting yet. dawnleelynn^(talk) 16:02, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Also, I actually need to cut down the size of the intro, it's still too long. dawnleelynn^(talk) 16:20, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

I feel I may have been too harsh. I want you to know that you wrote some really interesting material and I would work with you to get into the article. dawnleelynn^(talk) 16:48, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Rewrite of the Article

I am rewriting this article in a sand box on my User Box. That's why I added the template. My mentor editor is overseeing the rewrite, who has over ten years on Wikipedia, and has done many good and featured articles. If you have anything to contribute or would like to see, please comment here on this page. You can view the progress on my sandbox and comment on it here at this page section. Thanks for your patience. It was a very long article and really was not benefiting from editing here and there...too much repetition and sections spread out all over. So we are just doing a WP:TNT. dawnleelynn^(talk) 20:44, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Sources

I found these:

• [1]
• [2]
• [3]
• [4]
• [5]

They all appear to have a pretty fair amount of info. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 21:44, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Took a whack

I took a big whack at the structure of this. I tried not to separate content from their sources, but a couple were unavoidable and I flagged them for cleanup. Hope this massive whacking helped break loose the logjam of transitioning this article from the old structure to the new one. Montanabw^(talk) 05:25, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Your many edits on Bodacious - a few need sources

68.192.121.73 Your call on the edit that said the Thomas & Mack Center was not right is exactly true. It was the MGM Grand Arena. And you could have provided the source really quick by plucking it out of the History section of the PBR article that provides the source for all three venues that the PBR has used. But, I did it for you. Regarding Bodacious' years active, we will keep them from 1992-1995 in all Three places that I have it mentioned. The outs in 1996 he was kept officially retired so it does not count. But good thought. And it's great that you have found this 1996 YouTube video of Bodacious. It must be somewhat new. Anyway it's a terrific source. I didn't revert it, but I need a source for your intelligence on when Scott Breding was injured by Bo. There is nothing to backup that day and round number in the current sources, and you didn't provide one when you changed it. I will try to look for one, but maybe you can find it too. After all, it's your edit, thanks. We must all do the work when we edit. I know providing sources can be frustrating sometimes. But Wikipedia is pretty serious about it, you know? It's great that you have all this knowledge, and I absolutely want the articles to be correct. Thank you for the good input into an article I just WP:TNT. dawnleelynn^(talk) 06:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Error under "1991 amateur season" heading

Tried to fix it, but just under the first paragraph it says [8][4] while linked to no text — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.54.167.26 (talk) 11:45, 2 March 2022 (UTC)