Cannabis Sativa

Content deleted Content added
Muboshgu (talk | contribs)
→‎Edit warring: new section
Line 108: Line 108:


I see you made some corrections but the Speedo quote needs to be corrected also: "we cannot tolerate behavior that is contrary to the values of this brand FOR A LONG TIME" Maybe leave out the phrase I put in all caps or change in another way to make sense [[User:Beaglemix|Beaglemix]] ([[User talk:Beaglemix|talk]]) 17:22, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
I see you made some corrections but the Speedo quote needs to be corrected also: "we cannot tolerate behavior that is contrary to the values of this brand FOR A LONG TIME" Maybe leave out the phrase I put in all caps or change in another way to make sense [[User:Beaglemix|Beaglemix]] ([[User talk:Beaglemix|talk]]) 17:22, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

== Edit warring ==

{{u|Sy9045}}, Wikipedia runs on editor consensus, and {{u|Jackhammer111}} has raised a concern with your edit. Per [[WP:BRD]], you were bold, then reverted, so we must discuss. Instead, you're [[WP:3RR|edit warring]] and likely to be blocked. I see from your talk page that it wouldn't be the first time. – [[User:Muboshgu|Muboshgu]] ([[User talk:Muboshgu#top|talk]]) 21:29, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:29, 22 August 2016

Good articleRyan Lochte has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 28, 2011Good article nomineeListed

Insufficient lead / personal section for a GA

I just stopped by this article to link to a new article on Bro (subculture), and I see this article mentions nothing about his personality, TV show, etc. in the lead. I get that this article was listed as a GA in 2011, but if it's not being properly maintained, it can lose that status. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:29, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And reading the article a little closer, while his swimming career is well covered, items like the TV show and his personality get too little attention. These are all details that are post-Olympics and post-GA promotion, but need to be worked on. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:34, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan Lochte

(This is first time Ive ever contributed info. Know that if I have done so incorrectly it was not intentional. Ty)Ryan Lochte wins Michael Phelps in Michael Phelps's first time back into the competitive pool in Mesa, Ar., yesterday. Lochte beat Phelps in the 100 Fly. with the second fastest time in the world, this year, 51.93. Phelps finished at 52.13. They are both rivals and longtime friends. LynnAbear (talk) 09:05, 25 April 2014 (UTC) <abc 15>[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Ryan Lochte. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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 20:36, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ryan Lochte. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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 12:26, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Robbery" ...

Ryan Lochte said these guys came out with a police badge, no lights, no nothing, just a police badge. He did not say they "were dressed like Rio de Janeiro police officers." I can't find that quote anywhere but reporters are interpreting that to mean they were police impersonators. Can we find real actual quotes and interviews saying exactly that? Otherwise I'm skeptical of this statement misinterpretation and misquote which could be the basis for alleging he's intentionally fabricating a story when he's just explaining or interpreting the event poorly. Without a quote, I propose taking that sentence down. (Opmeto (talk) 06:32, 19 August 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Seems there are some questions about Lochte and his buddies getting robbed in Rio by "fake" cops. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/18/world/americas/ryan-lochte-rio-olympics.html 2601:547:1203:1414:B964:3ECC:EFCD:38A5 (talk) 19:40, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article says that two of the swimmers have admitted to fabricating the story. But, that's just the AP quoting an anonymous source in the police department. Given that the swimmers claim to have been assaulted by people wearing police uniforms, the police have a clear motive to lie about that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cefulmer (talk • contribs) 19:10, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

... actually, it seems like the "boys" (and, by the way, this Lochte "boy" is age 32) have a clear motive to lie. And, in fact, some of them have indeed admitted to lying. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 00:48, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They have a clear motive to lie. Police interrogation tactics of manipulating them to testify against each other in exchange for their freedom and no charges. The police edited the video and went out of their way to cut out the right side of the video where someone approaches the taxi and reaches into the vehicle. Probably as it appears to corroborate their story that someone showed a badge and held them at gunpoint. Feigen stands by his story and is being extorted to donate $10,800 for freedom. (Opmeto (talk) 03:19, 20 August 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Regardless of your misrepresentation of what plea bargaining is the fact is that Feigen agreed to pay to have the matter dropped. It happens thousands of times a day in American courts as well. There is video that shows things being thrown out of the bathroom and at least two of the pissing on the ground just beyond the space between the buildings. If you agree to testify against a co-conspirator for a reduced sentence you are not being manipulated. In fact if what you testify is found to be untruthful you get charged with perjury. They've even admitted what they did. Why would you continue being an apologist.?Jackhammer111 (talk) 20:52, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gas station robbery fabrication is not just an 'incident'

It's a major part of who he is now, with stories like this one. As such, it deserves to be part of the lede paragraph and not buried in the body of the article.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 12:33, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The heading "Gas station incident" is not appropriate. It seems like it is trying to "soften" what it really is. It's lying; fabrication; false accusations of robbery; international deception; etc. We need wording that is a little more in line of what actually happened. "Gas station incident" seems to be non-neutral and a white-wash. Any suggestions? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:26, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I changed the header title, and upgraded the section level. Feel free to adjust further. Gap9551 (talk) 19:18, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 20:53, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Someone already added a summary sentence to the lead. Gap9551 (talk) 19:16, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Spadaro, you're being biased. They were extorted at gun point for money, they were drunk, probably didn't understand what was going on in Portuguese. The police are making allegations that strike as a cover up that they totally trashed the bathroom and that they were knowingly negotiating with alleged interpreters present and that someone eventually pulled a gun because they were aggressive and dangerous and that they intentionally fabricated everything. It's too many assumptions that are favorable to police which have a history of extorting people, including a Jujitsu Olympian 3 weeks before the Olympics. Why are you so eager to make so many assumptions with out hard facts? Holding someone up at gunpoint and taking money from them is not legal, even if you believe you're rightfully owed that money. It's extortion. Holding someone at gunpoint is only acceptable when there is a special class of a felony or violent eminent danger which there did not appear to be. I say change it back. (Opmeto (talk) 05:37, 21 August 2016 (UTC))[reply]

What are you talking about? The swimmers themselves -- including Lochte -- admitted that they lied. The three others admitted this. And Lochte himself admitted it, using "softer" language (saying that "I over-exaggerated", instead of using the terminology "I lied"). So, again, what are you talking about? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 16:34, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You read all the testimony from everyone? Where is it? Testimony is often forced and manipulated by the police. You separate everyone and force the weaker ones to tell them what you want to hear or they'll face charges. That does not always result in truthful testimony it often results in throwing people under the bus with fabricated stories in exchange for lighter treatment.
He was drunk. People don't remember things when they're drunk and intoxicated. You can be in a state of total diminished capacity while appearing to interact with people, but you're not there. His account of what happened could have been truthful, as far as he could remember. 4 people often have different accounts of an event, especially when intoxicated. None of that proves that he's a liar. He may have exaggerated somewhat about small details, but a lot of people do that. His overall testimony was relatively honest which doesn't make sense if he's supposed to be fabricating a huge plot. He's kind of an air head. He's even being manipulated in interviews.
I was assaulted and my testimony was a mess, but overall with a truthful intent. When hospitalized I was supposed to have had lengthy conversations that I have no recollection of because I had been drugged. You could take a video and then according to you, I'm the biggest liar on earth. You're not being objective or reasonable. You seem kind of naive. (Opmeto (talk) 04:33, 22 August 2016 (UTC))[reply]
He himself admitted that he lied. What part do you not understand. Let me repeat that: He himself admitted that he lied. Got it now? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 05:27, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Recounting a story incorrectly and entirely fabricating a story, intentionally, are two different things. The police have alleged that there was this big conspiracy to fabricate an event that never happened. It seems more to me the police are manipulating the situation to cover it up and smear them. Police are well trained in that. They released an edited video and removed the assailant from the video that reached into the taxi probably with a gun or badge, some kind of threat. They held their hands up after exiting the taxi and further, were forced to get on the ground and give money at gun point. Lochte said he was uncooperative when they said get on the ground which looks like what happened in the video. Why would he say that if he's fabricating a story to make himself look good? In hindsight, admitting that parts of the story were exaggerated, namely that the gun was pointed to his forehead when it may not have come in direct contact with his forehead, is not the same thing as intentionally lying about the whole story. People don't remember things like a video. Experiments have shown that people need proper sleep to remember an event. I myself have needed some time, sometimes days to years to remember that something I testified to was slightly different from what I remembered. In dealing with testimony you start to realize that all testimony has some degree of exaggeration in it. A real talented lawyer or police officer knows that and uses that to their advantage. That does not mean he made a false police report, in fact, they said he did not report the incident to them, they found out on the media. Even more reason to change the headline back to Gas station incident. (68.238.227.189 (talk) 13:12, 22 August 2016 (UTC))[reply]
OK, thanks. They all admitted to their lying. Not sure what part is hard to understand (except that you have an agenda here). Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 15:27, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

False police report during 2016 Olympics

Ryan Lochte said "These guys came out with a police badge..." The reporters and headlines interpreted what he said as police impersonators. Someone edited it twice that in the interview he said 4 men "dressed as Rio de Janeiro police officers." He never said that in the interview. It doesn't even ring true. Even the gothamist article selectively quotes fragments in the headline. The article is not a direct quote but an interpretation by the author "Jen Chung" in her first paragraph and can only be attributed to her, not Lochte. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Opmeto (talk • contribs) 14:17, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The last paragraph of this section (false police report) needs to be edited for grammar, etc..seems like it was translated from Portuguese and these translations often need to be changed a little to make sense in English Beaglemix (talk) 17:05, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For instance, it says "the Speedo" instead of just Speedo Beaglemix (talk) 17:09, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see you made some corrections but the Speedo quote needs to be corrected also: "we cannot tolerate behavior that is contrary to the values of this brand FOR A LONG TIME" Maybe leave out the phrase I put in all caps or change in another way to make sense Beaglemix (talk) 17:22, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

Sy9045, Wikipedia runs on editor consensus, and Jackhammer111 has raised a concern with your edit. Per WP:BRD, you were bold, then reverted, so we must discuss. Instead, you're edit warring and likely to be blocked. I see from your talk page that it wouldn't be the first time. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:29, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Leave a Reply