Jump to content

Talk:B.J. Penn/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Return to the UFC section

Trench 17:36, 7 January 2006 (UTC) --- I've taken this bit out for now because it reads as if it's been lifted straight from a UFC press release or article.

=== Return to the UFC ===
Former UFC welterweight champion B.J. Penn will make his triumphant return to The Octagon in 2006. “It hasn’t even really set in yet,” said Penn of his return. “The UFC is definitely my home. It’s where I started, this has been building more and more, and as I was coming down here, it’s like I’m gonna fight tonight.”
“A lot of people feel that B.J. is still the champion and the great thing about him returning to the UFC is that hopefully, if Hughes wins against Joe Riggs, people will eventually get to see the rematch of the first fight,” said UFC President Dana White. Penn has just one thought when he hears Bruce Buffer announce Hughes as the UFC welterweight champion. “The second best fighter in the world, Matt Hughes,” said Penn.

If it hasn't been just taken from another source, then it needs cleaning up badly. "triumphant return" is not appropriate for example.

All boys are named Jay?

If all the Penn boys are named Jay, then is B.J. brother Reagan's first name Jay or what? (MgTurtle 04:11, 8 May 2007 (UTC))

UFC 74/Diego Sanchez

BJ won't be fighting Diego at UFC 74- http://www.sherdog.com/news/news.asp?n_id=8166 Thesaddestday 22:33, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Shaking hands with Sherk

I added the part in after he said he was dead because of what they did in the PPV —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.156.178.40 (talk) 10:30, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

FORMATING

Part of the article disappears, whichever part is immediately after the description of Penn's victory over Stephenson is not visible on the main page, and i can't figure out why. Please help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdjohnson920 (talk • contribs) 04:40, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Suggestion: Better Photo

I think a good biography article would include as the main photo a photo of the subject's face or at least a photo that includes a clear image of the subject's face. This is a good photo, but perhaps not appropriate as the main photo for the article. Sorry, but I don't have any suggestions for better photos, but I think they should be easy enough to find. cmdeans 14:39, 30 May 2008 (UTC)cmdeans

Agreed, there are better photos but it's hard to find one that is not copyrighted. -- MMAJunkie250 (talk) 06:48, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Penn's skills

i can't find a citation for the remarks i made about Penn's 'balance, proficent striking, high level of BJJ and general well rounded-ness' --Ecclesispastic2489 (talk) 12:19, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Jiu-Jitsu career highlights

1) It needs references.
2) Why the numbering? If it's supposed to be chronological, shouldn't him receiving the blue belt come before he entered a tournament as blue belt (nr. 2 and 6)? aktsu (talk) 20:23, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Fixed 2). --aktsu (t / c) 07:11, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

POV?

Malathion 08:14, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC) It is not POV to suggest that B.J. Penn's striking skills are effective, that he is pound-for-pound one of the best fighters in the world, or that Matt Hughes was a dominant champion before he was defeated by Penn. No knowledgable person can deny any of these claims and there is no controversy whatever about any of them.

You could say "such and such magazine says" and then quote reviews of his career or "he has an unprecedented record" and then quote his fight record to prove that it is unprecedented. But to suggest in a blanket way that he is pound for pound one of the best fighters in the world is inherently POV for an encyclopaedia article. The world is a big place with many differing definitions of fighting effectiveness. We can say that "so-and-so considers him to be the best MMA fighter" but we also have to say directly who says that so our readers can make up their own minds, we can't say it. Fire Star 01:14, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Malathion 21:02, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC) There is no need to include crackpot opinions in articles that are supposed to be informative. There is no reasonable interpretation by which you can conclude that Matt Hughes was not a dominant champion before Penn defeated him. If such a claim is labeled "POV" then you're going to have to go through wikipedia and include opinions of lunatics who believe the sky is purple or that aliens are reading our minds. Although I agree that some scrutiny is required here, the deafening lack of controversy about any of the claims made in the original article seems to indicate that they are NPOV. No knowledgable person who has seen B.J. Penn fight denies that he is an effective striker (scoring knockouts against your opponents should blatantly indicate the presence of effective striking) or that he out-grappled Matt Hughes (how such a claim could be regarded as controversial or POV is beyond me- watch the fight!).
I can understand your complaints about the "pound for pound" remark, but it is certainly true that he is widely regarded as one of the best pound-for-pound fighters. There are simply too many people who would characterize him as such to name them all, and naming only a few does not give the reader any insight about the overwhelming consensus that he is. Note that Wikipedia is not characterizing him as one of the best pound-for-pound fighters, but is only stating that he is widely regarded to be, which is perfectly true. Whether he actually is so great is a more debatable point- but whether he is widely regarded as great is not. Similarly, whether he is widely regarded as the best fighter in the 155-175lb weight class is not controversial, as his record has already asserted his dominance over the best fighters in that division. What you are suggesting is something akin to "Fedor Emelianenko is the undisputed heavyweight champion of Pride" is NPOV but you would think that "Fedor Emelianenko is the dominant heavyweight fighter in Pride" is somehow POV. Anyone who looks at the evidence will reach the conclusion that Emelianenko is the dominant heavyweight fighter in Pride and anyone who looks at the evidence will conclude that Penn is the dominant welterweight fighter overall. There is no reasonable basis by which you can contest either of those claims as all the evidence supports them entirely.
If that isn't enough of a standard for NPOV writing, then again, I suggest you go do some editing in the science articles on Wikipedia to include the opinions of astrologers, faith healers, and psychics.


Greetings. I don't dispute that Matt Hughes was an MMA champion. I don't dispute that B.J. Penn is one of the best MMA fighters. I guess what I didn't make clear to you is that I do object to the language used when those facts are reported in this article. This isn't Black Belt magazine. I'm a san shou fighter and a traditional MA instructor, too. I've fought in China, I know what I am talking about and I know what you are talking about. You need to cite your sources for an encyclopaedia article or I will continue to tone down what can be seen as hero worship.

I AM INTERJECTING HERE, FOR A MINUTE. WHAT IN THE HELL DOES YOUR (DUDE ABOVE ME) MARTIAL ARTS BACKGROUND HAVE TO DO WITH BJ PENN BEING A GREAT FIGHTER? WHY ARE YOU TURNING A DISCUSSION ABOUT BJ INTO A DISCUSSION ABOUT YOU? THAT'S LIKE ME SAYING THAT SINCE I BROKE MY HAND ONE, I OBVIOUSLY KNOW WHAT AN ORTHOPEDIC SURGEON IS TALKING ABOUT. LAME. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.241.143.189 (talk) 12:16, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Sentences like this one:
"Penn had established himself as one of the most talented submission wrestlers in his weight class."
and of course the
"...pound-for-pound one of the best fighters in the world."
These are typical problems for me. "The fighter with the most victories in his weight class" would be OK, "So-and-so says he is one of the best (or most talented) MMA fighters in the world" and then citing your source is acceptable, your, or my, opinion isn't. Personal opinions couched in sensational language can violate WP policy under both no original research and Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a soapbox precedents. To prove that your statements aren't personal opinion, and the burden of proof is on you, you are going to have to come up with names, dates and places.
Incidentally, the astrology and other New Age articles all have documented scientific rebuttals and criticisms in them. Fire Star 23:54, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Malathion 05:52, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC) For starters, I want to get rid of this "hero worship" nonsense. Right off the bat you already agreed that none of the statements I am making are controversial. If it's obviously true that B.J. Penn is the dominant welterweight fighter - and you do not dispute this point - then my stating the obvious fact should not be regarded as "hero worship". As it happens I am not particularly a B.J. Penn fan as I usually watch Pride fights. But it would be insane for me to describe him in any other way. Simply put, "It ain't bragging if it's true."
That said, let me look at the specific examples you cited:
"Penn had established himself as one of the most talented submission wrestlers in his weight class." My source immediately followed that statement where I noted that he won the blackbelt division of the Brazilian Jiu Jitsu world championships. If that isn't establishing yourself as one of the most talented submission wrestlers in the weight class, I'd like to know what you think would be.
"...pound-for-pound one of the best fighters in the world." Wiki articles are not research papers. If I am making statements that are as painfully obvious as the ones you are disputing, I don't think sources are necessary. It's plain to any observer that these statements are true. Now, it might be _better_ or _more informative_ to include sources just to give the reader more information. But since it is obviously the case that there is a popular opinion about him - and if you deny that I'd like to know why - I don't see how it is POV to state the plain fact, with or without sources. Do you dispute that there is popular opinion among knowledgable MMA fans that he is pound-for-pound one of the best fighters in the world?
Third, you seem to be editing out the part where I say that Penn displayed his superior grappling skills in the fight against Matt Hughes. I'd like to know how you think the statement that his grappling skills were superior is controversial or POV. If one knows anything at all about ground fighting, I would wonder how he could look at that match and conclude that the ground fight was anything but one-sided.
Wikipedia is not about truth, it is about verifiable information. 75.2.200.118

Malathion 22:50, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC) Although I appreciate efforts to expand the article, whoever made these edits needs to read up on NPOV language or leave their editorializing in the Sherdog forums. Wikipedia is not a place to talk about bandwagons or say things like "totally demolished" and whatnot. Thanks.

> Malthion, I wouldn't worry about what this guy has to say. I am a BJ Penn fan and critic and in my opinion this article is fair. Whoever this guy is he is not as familiar with educated articles as he thinks he is. Look at IBOH (International Boxing Hall of Fame) biographies, they feature similar accolades. Is it disputable that Penn is the best? Yes, but no one of reason and experience disputes that he is among the best. I would argue that if you were to say he is NOT of of the best P4P, then sources would be necessary. It's a matter of consensus judgement.

Trench 17:29, 7 January 2006 (UTC) --- I've not checked the edits since Malathion made his comments in April, but the article as it stands currently is neutral. The only statement I take issue with is the classic weasel term "BJ is widely regarded as the best pound for pound fighter in the world today." If you can attribute this to someone, a commentator or another fighter, then I have no problem with it. Otherwise it's up to the reader to decide after viewing his achievments and record, not wikipedia.

How can "widely regarded" be attributed to one person. Furthermore, what difference does it make if an announcer or another fighter says it and if an article says it. There is such a thing as implicit information.

Trench 23:33, 6 February 2006 (UTC) --- Which is pretty much my point exactly. If the article implies to the reader that BJ is pound for pound one of the world's best fighters, through his record and accomplishments, then that's fine. We can't just state it as a matter of fact and say "well, because it's true". As for the "widely regarded" phrase, the point is we shouldn't be using the term at all, (weasel terms), unless we're quoting someone directly.

"Career" / "Martial Arts Career" main section format

I changed up the "Career" section so that it no longer has 2 children: Martial Arts Background, and MMA. Because MMA heading needs a lot of children of it's own. Intead I changed "Career" to "Martial arts career", kept the Martial Arts Background, but got rid of MMA. This made all the MMA children now on the same level as Martial Arts background. I think this works better because now under "martial arts career" you have a chronologically ordered group of headings. Post here if you think otherwise.

Furthermore, I think for the time being the headins under Martial Arts Career are good, but maybe after he fights more, and if he keeps going back and forth between lightweight and welterweight, we may need to condense them. Floodo1 (talk) 23:16, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Auto review

The following is a review of quality that I asked for. We need to get this article to at least B status, so I have begun discussing improvements, please comment under the relevant point. THANKS Floodo1 (talk) 20:11, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

  • Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
 Done--2008Olympianchitchat 02:02, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Guide_to_writing_better_articles#Lead_section is what we should focus on. I checked and the introductory section mostly conforms to the lead section guidelines but could use improvemens according to this guide.
In this vein I have edited the first sentence to include the name B.J. "The Prodigy" Penn since that is the name he goes by in the UFC. Floodo1 (talk) 20:11, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
  • You may wish to consider adding an appropriate infobox for this article, if one exists relating to the topic of the article. [?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
 Done--2008Olympianchitchat 02:02, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
  • If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.[?]
 Done--2008Olympianchitchat 02:02, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 155 lb , use 155 lb , which when you are editing the page, should look like: 155 lb .[?]
 Done--2008Olympianchitchat 02:51, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), please spell out source units of measurements in text; for example, the Moon is 380,000 kilometres (240,000 mi) from Earth.[?] Specifically, an example is 155 lb.
 Done--2008Olympianchitchat 02:51, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
  • As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2][?]
 Done--2008Olympianchitchat 02:02, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Nate1481 12:11, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Rules change paragraph

Is the hole "In response to the incident, the rules of the UFC have been modified so that [...]" paragraph really relevant? It should IMO either be removed or summarized in a sentence or two. On another note, how long are we from GA? It would be awesome to finaly get the first WP:MMA-only Good Article (Lesnar doesn't count as he's GA mostly thanks to WP:PW). --aktsu (t / c) 03:16, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I think it should probably be moved over to the UFC 94 page. This is where it is most relevant. Furthermore it needs summarized and then linked to on GSP, BJ Penn, and UFC pages (under the "changes to rules" section on the UFC Page). It's VERY notable, something akin to Alex Rodriguez or Barry Bonds doing steroids and tainting their careers. Regardless of the NSAC's ruling it's pretty likely that "greasegate" (ugh what a horrible name) will go down "in history" as tainting GSP's win. Only time will tell, but I think it's very valuable for wikipedia to have a definitive (sourced) exaplanation. Not to toot my own hown here (so to speak) but I haven't found ANY account that lays it out as fully as the paragraph I put together. Again, however, I think we should get an outside type source, perhaps an expert, to weigh in on this for us, especially regarding the neutrality and tone of that section.
In any case it definately should be summarized in the Penn article because he is a relatively passive figure in the controversy, but it should remain to some degree because it's notable regarding that fight. Floodo1 (talk) 06:03, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Welterweight challenge section

-In order to get this article rated better we need to eliminate the late-breaking nature of this section. I added a lot of things right after the fight and i've gone back now to make it less like a blog or news post. It still needs some help with flew because I just made sure things are in a better order now, and I'm too out of it to make it sound nice. I added the parts about Penn and GSP fighting title defesne fights and then rematching.
-"greasegate". This needs cross-refereced to the Georges St-Pierre and UFC 94 pages, so that each contains the same account of it. I'm not currently sure what each has to say. In fact the accounts of the fight and reference to the rules being changed in response to the controversey also need to square up across articles.
-I'm wondering what we should do if this is the case, because it means he will have fought at lightweight, went up to middleweight for GSP rematch, then back down to lightweight for Florian, then back up to middleweight for GSP, and potentially back down to lightweight again. At what point are we going to want to say that each of these moves doesnt deserve it's own section with few paragraphs each, and we should merge them into a more generalized heading, with more paragraphs. So far it works to design the sections/headings around him switching weight classes, but this could be a problem. One solution to this is to sorta make "era's", with the most recent one beginning with his fight against jens pulver. I think it's pretty recognized that the Pulver fight marked a turn around where Penn started taking training much more seriously. Actually, he talked about it (without mentioning the Pulver fight directly though) in the UFC Primetime specials before UFC 94. I digress.
-Also I'd like to make sure no one has a problem with taking the rules change paragraph out, by moving it to the UFC article under the 'rules changes' section.
-Finally I think that Dana White's claim that the grease didn't effect that outcome is not neutral. He has a vested interest in defusing a controversy here. Besides my personal opinion here, I've read many people say or imply that even a small amount of grease would impact the fight, some of which is sourced in the pertinant references in the article.Floodo1 (talk) 05:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Pictures, we're gonna need them

If we're going to get a high rating for this page we're going to need pictures. I dont really know the guidelines for what pictures are allowed based on copyright or whatever, but we need to get some :) --Floodo1 (talk) 05:11, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

BJJ Background

I added that he got up to purple under Ralph Gracie. I was forced to use a questionable reference. It's from postings on Sherdog forums, but there are 2 people on there (the ones answering questions) who have first hand knowledge of the subject, as they personally trained with the people they're talking about. What they say also fits in with the things I know from people that have trained under Dave Camarillo.
Speaking of Dave Camarillo and Dave Terrell, idk how notable this might be (probably relatively notable in the BJJ world) that Camarillo, Terrell (sp?) and BJ all trained together under Ralph, and then all moved to new places right around the same time, basically when they surpassed what Ralph could teach them, or when they got tired of his teaching style (where Ralph is very aggressive and domineering). Each one is basically a legend within the BJJ community so maybe it's worth mentioning that how they trained together. However, as with all things Penn and pre-2000 it's basically impossible to find reliable non-copyrighted sources. Floodo1 (talk) 01:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Forums are generally a no-go no matter who claims to have posted. It was mentioned in another source though, so I replaced it. Training with Camarillo and Terrell is something what possibly could be mentioned, but without a source it's a moot point :\ --aktsu (t / c) 01:57, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

NSAC decision re greasgate

Since the accusations of greasing are mentioned, shouldn't the NSAC decision to take no action also be mentioned? See http://www.cp24.com/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20090320/090320_greasegate/20090320/?hub=CP24Sports Closetindex (talk) 00:21, 22 March 2009 (UTC)closetindex

As far as I understand it, they're still looking at the case and just haven't decided anything yet. But yeah, the article needs some work regarding that but I guess most people are awaiting the outcome before doing something. --aktsu (t / c) 00:26, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
They did have a NSAC hearing last week. Penn, his mother and his lawyer were there along with GSP's trainer, but GSP was not there. Keith Kizer seemed to imply that no action would be taken. I do not have a good source other than sherdog.com Closetindex (talk) 00:49, 22 March 2009 (UTC)closetindex
Guess you're right: "Following his own inquiry into the allegations, NSAC Executive Director Keith Kizer said he would not be filing any complaint against licensed cornermen Phil Nurse or Greg Jackson –- who both spoke at the hearing -- nor St. Pierre himself. An athletic commission member would now have to file a formal complaint against any of the accused before the action is taken any further'". I'll try to write something soon unless someone else does it first :) --aktsu (t / c) 01:00, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

GSP Fight

We need sources for the description of the fight. I can see that it will be hard to gain a consensus about what sorts of adjectives we should use to characterize the fight. As it stands it's pretty neutral, but phrases like "ground and pound onslaught" may be a bit overinflated...or maybe I'm just too much of a BJ fan :) In any case it's an entirely uncited paragraph Floodo1 (talk) 00:00, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree. And I'm not that big of a fan. Remember him laughing about GSP training in the snow as he lolled around on mini-vacation on a sunny beach? Insane.--2008Olympianchitchat 01:50, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Now the UFC 94 page lists the reason the fight ended is referee stoppage due to doctors advice or something. I'm going to do some research and synchronize BJ Penn, UFC 94, and GSP's page all to the same. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Floodo1 (talk • contribs) 18:39, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

It should be changed to a corner stoppage despite what the UFC 94 site says, anyone who watched the fight should have saw BJ Penn's brother signalling to the doctor that he was done, this was after the doctor looked BJ over and appeared to be satisfied that he was fit to continue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.41.111.111 (talk) 22:50, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree that it should be changed to a corner stoppage, regardless of what the UFC site says. Penn's cornerman clearly looked at the ref, gave a "stop it" gesture (his hand across his neck) and said "We're stopping". Penn even admits that his corner stopped it in the newest Countdown to UFC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.72.134.51 (talk) 18:51, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Asian heritage

BJ's mom is full Asian (mostly Korean), so that should be mentioned in the article. --Guitardude1945 (talk) 05:21, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Do you have a source for that? —LOL T/C 19:43, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Look under the "Personal Life" section on this wikipedia page. The link to that is [1]. "Penn's mother, Lorraine Shin, is a 3rd generation Korean-American." --Guitardude1945 (talk) 02:22, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately I can't confirm it with that site because I don't understand Korean. I don't readily know how to find trusted translators, so this could take a while. —LOL T/C 02:31, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Evidence of his Asian heritage is also provided in his home's newspaper in Hawaii: [2] --Guitardude1945 (talk) 04:24, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
And by mention it in the page, I meant create 2 categories for Penn: Asian Americans and Korean Americans. After all, if the Tiger Woods article has categories for every race that he's a part of, Penn should be as well. How can we make this happen? --Guitardude1945 (talk) 03:44, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

MMA Weekly

Penn is ranked currently #1 by MMA Weekly (http://www.mmaweekly.com/absolutenm/templates/topten.asp?articleid=8&zoneid=15) but the article has him ranked #3 by MMA Weekley. As the article is semi-protected, I cannot make the change myself. Somapsychotic (talk) 00:25, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

 Done. --aktsu (t / c) 00:51, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Links to George St-Pierre, Jens Pulver, Caol Uno and a few others are missing. Can't seems to find what "Edit" caused this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.236.189.83 (talk) 15:51, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Weight classes?

Why is there a section for weight classes on B.J.'s MMA record? Just wondering since no one else has this. (MgTurtle 23:19, 25 June 2007 (UTC)).

BJ has a tendency to jump around through various weight classes for...whatever reason. He's weighed about 163ish for the last several years, and at that bodyweight he has fought at 155, 170, 185, and 205. I like having the weight class of each of his fights in the table, because it adds some perspective to his fights. Tuckdogg 04:14, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey I just wanted to tell you that bj penns name is baby jay not jay dee, thats hes brother —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.54.24.152 (talk) 14:34, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

UFC 107

Should the fight be declared as TKO by cut or by Doctor Stoppage? 69.255.149.54 (talk) 20:06, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

BJ PENNS MOTHER

BJ Penns mother is actually native hawaiian and half korean. This makes BJ 50% Irish, 25% Korean, and 25% Hawaiian. http://www.bjpenn.com/forum/topics/my-ethnicity heres a link showing BJ himself saying this.Rgabriel808 (talk) 19:28, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

that would make sense if hawaii was a country, but it's not. it's a state. hence, penn's heritage is american. i was born in ohio but raised in michigan. that makes me amereican, not ohioanian. come on. smarten up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.241.143.189 (talk) 02:04, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Pics

We need more pics. Also why the hell didn't BJ winn against that loser Edgar? Seriously. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.164.106.100 (talk) 21:20, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism on BJ

So it seems someone made BJ's record unbeatable and made all losses to wins. I reversed the record back to normal, hopefully this vandalism doesn't continue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.111.152.162 (talk) 11:30, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

but in my oppimion he shouldnt have been able to beat matt hughes

Fillipino Heritage

noticed someone added filipino to his heritage that wasnt there before, so deleting that. Filipino is not an ethnicity it is a nationality, 97% of Philippines are of Malay stock, therefore will just stick with Malay and remove Filipino. --Jandela 17:57, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I've removed that sentence completely instead for being unsourced. hateless 02:41, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

he died shortly 2 weeks after —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.58.149.114 (talk) 16:38, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Age

His 2nd fight with Hughes in 2006, UFC stats stated that he was 29. Clearly the years don't add up if he's born in '78. (respond on my page). M4pnt (talk) 01:34, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from , 30 October 2011

Change BJ Penn *was* to *is a retired* because "was" refers to a person who has passed away. BJ Penn is still alive. Saffy21 (talk) 03:51, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. I have had a look through the article and am unclear as to what you are asking to change. Could you please clarify. Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 04:39, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

BJ trained with Ralph Gracie before he trained at AKA

The "Early Life" section sort of omits this, though it's touched upon in the next section. According to his biography, BJ first moved to San Jose to train at Ralph Gracie's school. After a year or so, he sort of moved around between AKA and Nova's Vegas school, before moving to Rio to train full-time at Nova. Ralph saw this as a betrayal, which spawned the feud between BJ and some members of the Gracie family. Tom Callos, who first introduced BJ to BJJ in Hawaii, was trained by Ralph Gracie; Callos gave BJ the introduction to Ralph Gracie. Dave Camarillo was also a student of Ralph's at the time; he was still a blue belt when BJ arrived and had not yet moved to AKA. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.218.238.27 (talk) 11:31, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on B.J. Penn. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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 IITalk to my owner:Online 22:53, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on B.J. Penn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:23, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on B.J. Penn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:18, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on B.J. Penn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:07, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:B.J._Penn/Archive_1&oldid=1248851201"