Talk:Todd Bertuzzi/Archive 1

Archive 1

someone should mention something about the incident in which he was suspended ten games for leaving the bench during a fight

• Done, but more could be added.--Scimitar ^parley 19:46, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Edits by 154.20.170.147

I don't have a problem with you adding what you're adding, personally, because I really couldn't give to sh*ts about Bertuzzi or the 'Steve Moore Incident'. Hockey really doesn't interest me. I am removing your edits because you clearly do not grasp the concept of weasel words. When you use phrases like, "some people say" or "media outlets say", you're presenting hearsay information by way of weasel words. When you add the sentences, use phraseology that indicates WHO said WHAT, and what exactly they said. Quote them. As it is, this whole thing is moot because nowhere in your sources is it mentioned that there is discrepancy regarding WHY they held the meeting, only that they did. When you provide a quote that isn't attributed to yourself, or to someone who heard somebody's brother say something, then I will stop reverting. Please know, however, that I am not dreading you finding the quote - I look forward to it. Just don't bullsh*t. --DarrenBaker 06:18, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

You should read your own link to Wiki's definition of weasel words as you don't seem to quite grasp its meaning. You should also click on the embedded links following pieces of information to read their citations. 154.20.170.147 01:09, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Please do explain, oh anonymous one. --DarrenBaker 17:53, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I suggest you read the neutral point of view tutorial, and drop the personal vendetta. If you don't care about Moore or Bertuzzi, and aren't really interested in hockey, then why have you made editting these entries a personal project that you're obviously heavily emotionally invested in? 154.20.170.147 16:35, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

It would be wonderful if you would stop posting vaguely, and tell me why I'm violating the NPOV standard by removing blatantly POV material. --DarrenBaker 17:23, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Like I've already stated, you should click on the embedded links following pieces of information to read their citations. "Chambers said the "exceptional calling together of the selection committee" was prompted by some media concerns raised over the three athletes participating in the Games." [1] I would appreciate it if you would return this piece of information to the article where it rightfully belongs. I also believe that you owe me an apology. 154.20.170.147 07:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

An apology? I believe I owe you exactly (sharp intake of breath) fuck all. You have a quote which can and should be added to the article, but you didn't add the quote to the article properly, you added it using weasel words. I have repeatedly and very correctly pointed this fact out to you, but you keep telling me to read the damn weasel words article, which you very clearly didn't. Here's how you added the 'media concerns' bit:

"While some news sources claim the committee had concerns stemming from the Steve Moore incident and Bertuzzi's probationary status [2], others claim it was prompted by concerns raised by the media.[3]"

I have emboldened the weasel words, just so you remember how you used them. Now, just in case you only skimmed the article on weasel words, or if you are in fact blind, here are some examples taken directly from the article:

Here are some weasel words that are often found in Wikipedia articles:

• "Some people say..."
• "...is widely regarded as..."
• "It is believed that..."
• "It has been suggested/noticed/decided..."
• "Some people believe..."
• "Many people say..."
• "Critics/Experts say that..."
• "Some historians argue..."
• "Considered by many..."
• "Accusations..."
• "Apparently..."
• "Allegedly..."
• "Serious scholars/scientists/researchers..."
• "Mainstream scholars/scientists/researchers..."

Now, I will go add your good quote in a proper way. Pay attention to how I add it, so that you don't continue to pollute the WikiPedia with your weaselly ways. Learn it. Know it. Live it. --DarrenBaker 15:29, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. 154.20.170.147 09:39, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

My pleasure. --DarrenBaker 15:09, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

The "Steve Moore incident"

I don't think it's too much to ask that information pertaining to this incident be kept within this section, and that it be kept as objective as possible. Also, using terms such as "best known for" or "reputation as" is severely subjective and reflective of an expression of a personal point of view rather than being factual. Oystergumbo 07:35, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

I would like to see some proof that "the majority of fans" approve of his reinstatement and some mention of the fact that Steve Moore hasnt played since.

Removed, and done. 154.20.170.147 03:31, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Article still very biased

The tone of this article is still very biased towards Bertuzzi (refered to as "Todd" in at least one sentence). For example, a laundry list of forgiveness is presented without a contrary list of people who do not forgive him (e.g. Moore who wanted the suspension to continue).

Then unbias it. If you have factual information to add, then nothing is stopping you from adding it. However, if it's a bunch of delusional and libellous crap (like we've seen quite a bit of on this page), then expect it to be deleted. 154.20.170.147 08:07, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

I've tried to be as fair and unjudgemental as possible, using neutral language, and quoting where possible. DarrenBaker 06:18, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

It is quite clear that instead of falling straight down after stepping on the stick (which slid out sideways, leading him to fall straight down, which would have led to him probably dragging Moore down by his jersey), he used his left arm to push the top half of Moore's body over. Bertuzzi admits to it. It couldn't be clearer, and any apologetic editing is really just that - apologising for a really bad decision. DarrenBaker 20:20, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

"Bertuzzi admits to it." Source? 154.20.170.147 03:20, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, I would imagine the guilty plea is a nice source, as well as his reinstatement apology. --DarrenBaker 15:20, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not an outlet for your imagination. Please restrict your entries to verifiable and factual information. 154.20.170.147 04:31, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. I have, as you can see in the article. --DarrenBaker 04:33, 23 December 2005 (UTC)