Talk:Muhammad Ali/Archive3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Nomination for U.S. Collaboration of the Week

Please vote for Muhammad Ali at Wikipedia:U.S. Wikipedians' notice board/USCOTW. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 16:14, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Cassius Clay vs. Doug Jones revisited

I removed a part of the article that claimed that Doug Jones "beat Clay to the punch throughout the fight" from the article a few months ago, and now its back, so I removed it again. This is a POV statement, implying that Jones deserved the decision. I've seen the fight myself, I thought Clay won. My opinion on who won the fight doesn't belong in the article, but neither does this person's.-1/18/06 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.187.203 (talk • contribs)

Point taken, but it would be helpful if you place part of the reasons for the change in the edit summary rather than leaving it blank. I almost reverted it because of that. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 22:12, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

The Sports Illustrated Quote

Editor Seicer has been removing a quotation from Sports Illustrated, claiming it is libellous and not sourced. The citation has been provided, and from my reading, the text in the article is a fair extract of Ali's own words. How can a quotation of a man's own words from a good source be libel?

“ Now the two old friends sit together again, watching the video of a new documentary that Bingham has brought over. It is called City at Peace, and it is about black and white kids trying to get along. When one of the girls in the video laments that whites go in one car and blacks in another, Ali nods knowingly. "Nature's way," he says, "nature's way."

Bingham tries to dispute this, pointing out that the whole thrust of the documentary is that the races can get along better if only they know each other better. But Ali is having none of that -- and never mind that he lives his life race-blind. Bingham shrugs. It's the old Black Muslim philosophy. "I don't argue with him on religion," Howard says. "What's the point of that?"

 ”
July 13, 1998 interview in Sports Illustrated

Uucp 21:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

The opinion "his belief in segregation" is straight libel and the quote's placement in a section about Islam makes it contextually libelous. This text will simply not be allowed.
Further, it is known that Uucp, AnimeSouth and various IP's are colluding on this libel against Ali and causing other disruption in the Wikipedia. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 21:28, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
First, I have no idea who AnimeSouth or these other people are. Your accusation again me is nasty and unfounded.
Second, I do not believe you can libel somebody by quoting their own words, which is all this article does.
Third, what is "contextual libel"? I have never heard the term. Google has zero hits. I can't imagine there is a wikipedia policy against it, whatever it is. Uucp 21:33, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
It's clearly obvious you are pushing your point -- see WP:NPOV. You clearly do not follow WP:LIVING and cannot cite sources accurately. As for the article, after reading the paragraph you wanted to insert, you conveniently left out the paragraphs following up to that. How nice; try harder next time to push your agenda. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 21:36, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Nowhere in the article does it show Ali saying he believes in segregation. This text is a clear attack on Ali and his religion, which violates WP:NPOV and WP:LIVING, and WP:CITE is violated as well, as the quote doesn't even back up the opinion you are desperately trying to keep in the article. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 21:40, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
From the original article that the three suspected sock's have been adding, it gives a clear indication that Ali was a racist with how the "Sunni Muslim philosophy contributes to his belief in segregation." I have yet to see that in the article, or any mention; this blatant WP:NPOV pushing is a direct violation. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 21:43, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I believe that the edited text we are working towards on the main page is an improvement. Your nastiness above, however, is uncalled for. I have no POV on this; I am just trying to make a better article. You may be right that some people with an agenda are trying to add POV to the article. This does not mean that everything they want to add is necessarily wrong. This particular point is well sourced, interesting, and material. Uucp 21:45, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Even if stripped down to the straight quote, it is libelous in that it colors Ali's religious beliefs in a narrow, biased manner. It isn't even clear exactly what Ali means. Therefore, it is muddled! This text is simply not going to stay. Time to move on. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 21:52, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I lost all good faith when several anonymous IP addresses and several users (whose edit was the same body of text over and over with no discussion prior) vandalised the article, violating WP:LIVING, WP:CITE and WP:NPOV. Before you commit anymore changes, let the discussion at WP:ANI, WP:3RR and here continue; in the future, please introduce new materials here if they are controversial. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 21:54, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Steve "The Man" -- are you honestly accusing Sports Illustrated of being biased against Ali because of his religion? I doubt any publication in the world has been more supportive of the man. The article is quite unambiguous -- Ali believes that some forms of segregation are part of the natural order. What's the big deal? Uucp 21:57, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
You directly took text, manipulated by inserting wording that would lead others to believe he was a segregationist, and then continued to insert it in via socks that circumvents several policies on Wikipedia. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 22:00, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
The only rationale behind placement of this text is to exert a bias against Ali and his religious beliefs through misuse of a quote. Therefore, it will be summarily removed on a continuous basis. The matter is closed as far as I'm concerned. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 22:02, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
You are out of line accusing me of ever using a sockpuppet, or ever making an edit to advance a POV. My only interest here is improving the article.
Sports Illustrated quotes Ali saying something segregationist, and a good friend of Ali confirming that he has some segregationist views. If this were in the National Enquirer, you would be right to doubt it. However, it's in Sports Illustrated, which publication dotes on Ali, and we have to assume they're quoting him fairly. Unless you know Ali better than Bingham does, this material should be included. Uucp 22:07, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
OK, not entirely closed. You're also violating WP:NOR. The article does not say "Ali believes that some forms of segregation are part of the natural order." Clearly, this is an attempt at an anti-Islamic screed, and that's a *very* big deal. Now, it's closed. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 22:08, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Umm... how does the article's quoting Sports Illustrated count as original research? Uucp 22:11, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
When you take it out of context, add in your own speculative comments, and pass it off as original research. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 22:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
What original research is there in the article? What "speculative comments" How is the material in the article "out of context"? Are we talking about the same text? Uucp 22:15, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

(I don't know about the libel.) The claim "Sunni Muslim philosophy contributes to his belief in segregation" does not obviously follow from the cited article. The article text is not very clear, and the phrases "segregation" and "Sunni Muslim" does not appear. One might guess from the anecdotes told in the article that MA believes in segregation, but it is not directly stated anywhere. And there might be a connection between that belief and his Black Muslim connection, again it is not especially clear from the text alone. The jump from "Black Muslim" to "Sunni Muslim philosophy" as a reason is not supported at all.

Even if MA believes in segregation, it is a question if that fact is of encyclopedic value. If the SI quote is the strongest statements for segregation he has made, it hasn't. It is only encyclopedic, if it is part of his public persona. If it is, the best bet would be to mention any segregation activities in the section talking about his Nation of Islam involvement. Definitely not the "Conversion to Sunni Islam" section, which is complely unrelated.--Per Abrahamsen 22:20, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

My interpretation of the quote is entirely different, but I'm not going to insert my original research any more than anyone else is allowed to. My take is that Ali is saying that kids naturally seek to be with others who look like them. This isn't an endorsement of segregation, but rather an opinion about how kids naturally act. Mere inclusion of this quote in the context of Ali becoming a Sunni Muslim, with the quote's muddled meaning, constitutes a biased coloring of Ali. Again, this isn't going to be allowed, so why is our time being wasted? The effort to include this is akin to racism, and that obviously is an effort doomed to failure. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 22:21, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

The only person here who is biased is you. Muhammad Ali is an admitted segregationist by his own quote. How is that racism? And how dare you accuse Uucp of sock puppetry. Merely because someone else agrees with my viewpoint gives you no right to wrongly accuse someone with absolutely no evidence. "This isn't going to be allowed." Who gave you the right to allow or not allow obvious facts in wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Animesouth (talk • contribs)
From the article, it does not state that he is a "segregationist." Please quote where it states that. user:Uucp and your IPs all create the same edits, by reinserting vandalism that goes against WP:LIVING, WP:OR and WP:NPOV again and again. Coincidence? I think not. Please see WP:ANI. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 05:13, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't believe user:Uucp is the same person as the one behind the other accounts inserting the quote. Unlike the others, he has a significant edit history, and a more mature style.--Per Abrahamsen 08:10, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Animesouth Seicer (talk) (contribs) 12:54, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
But it's strange that Uucp would back the exact same libelous language. How could two separate people make the same baseless argument for a opinion-based commentary added to a selective quote? Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 14:08, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

It is not strange in the least. He merely reverted the removal of the quote, as the stated reasons for the removal were far from obvious. He explicitly explained that in the edit summary, something none of the other accounts bothered to do.--Per Abrahamsen 14:46, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

From the WP:COI page: "...the removal of reliably sourced critical material is not permitted." -Animesouth 16:39, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Your biased interpretation of a source is original research and therefore it's not allowed. Beyond that, calling it "critical" material for an overview of Muhammad Ali is laughable. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 18:07, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

List of things to do

Why is there no mention of Ali's arrest after refusing to fight in Vietnam? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.243.47.55 (talk • contribs)

Probably should be covered if it isn't already. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 22:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Can we get a list of people in Ali's "entourage" as it is mentioned in the article?

You know, you could add in some information... it is a project open to anyone :) Seicer (talk) (contribs) 23:53, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, it's hard for me just to help with the discussion —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.243.47.55 (talk • contribs)

No problem. You should register an account with Wikipedia and contribute. It's actually quite simple and I can help out with any questions you may have. WP:HELP is a starting place. Let me know on my talk page if you have any questions. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 01:22, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Cool, I'll think about it.

Ranking in heavyweight history

Professional Heavyweight boxing champions Rocky Marciano and Jack Dempsey should be included as potential threats to Ali’s perceived status as “the greatest.” Personally, I do not believe they are “greater” than Ali but I do not believe they are necessarily inferior either. But I do acknowledge the prominence of the belief that Ali is the “greatest,” just as this neutral article should acknowledge how Dempsey and Marciano are often considered the “greatest.”

Verification

“I can’t just say Ali was the greatest because there were so many great fighters out there. I can’t say he was greater than Marciano, Louis, Dempsey, and everyone else.” -Larry Holmes

This is a direct quotation from the January 18th issue of the Columbia Daily Tribune.

  • Also, based on the extensive Woroner survey and the NCR 315 analysis, Dempsey and Marciano were determined to be the top heavyweight champions in history, with Marciano being the better of the two. While I do not consider this a completely accurate deduction, it does reinforce the prominence of the belief.

And without a doubt, Marciano should be included. His record speaks for itself. He is the only the undefeated/untied heavyweight champion professional boxing has ever known. And while this does not automatically deem him the “greatest” in history, it does effectively verify his mention on this article as a potential contender for such an honor.

Please take this argument into consideration when deciding what information you will include in the article. Thank you.

Thedeparted123 03:13, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

The verification above is not really substantive enough, but the bottom line is that if you want better coverage of Rocky Marciano, work on his article, rather than trying to compose comparative text in this one. This article is about Ali, and should concentrate on Ali. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 03:43, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I understand that this article is about Ali. I am merely suggesting that if Joe Louis is included, than Marciano should also be mentioned alongside of him. His outstanding record is just as strong of an indicator as a tile awarded by the International Boxing Research Organization or Ring Magezine . It is substantive verification.

And from the Holmes quote and the Woroner/NCR 315 analysis, you can clearly see that Jack Dempsey is also often viewed in the same light as Marciano, Louis and Ali. However, I do understand his exclusion due to a lack of concrete evidence to substantiate such a belief. He has nothing like the greatest heavyweight record in history or a title issued from a major boxing institution like the International Boxing Research Organization or Ring Magezine to show for this perceived status. Thedeparted123 04:11, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm starting to think we should have a separate article on heavyweight boxer rankings. At some point, we just have to draw the line on how much extraneous info goes into this article (or the articles for other boxers). If anything, a separate article will keep all the debates and controversy bottled up without tying up the individual boxer articles. We probably should just keep the ranking info in this article about Ali's rankings alone, and drop Joe Louis and anyone else, with the possible exception where we have a major source that says it was difficult whether to place Ali or somebody else at the top -- in that case, it would be natural to mention the other boxer. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 04:31, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

That sounds like a reasonable soulution. I think I came across a similar page at one point, but I was unable to locate it again. Thedeparted123 04:44, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

There is a listing of heavyweight champions, and this debate could possibly be put in that category. However, I don't know that it would end the situation on individual boxers' pages. If Ring magazine calls Ali the greatest, I think that is a good point to put on Ali's page. As Stevietheman says, it may be a good idea to mention only this and not worry about debating the issue on the Ali page (or the Louis page or the Marciano page, etc.).
However, I contend that any attempts to say that a boxer is "considered the greatest" must be backed up by some citation and the designation labeled as such. For instance, I think it is improper to say that "Ali is considered the greatest HW champ by some." Instead, "Ring magazine ranked him as the best HW of all time" would meet Wikipedia's neutrality standards. MKil 14:44, 25 January 2007 (UTC)MKil
I am no longer disputing the "greatest by some" position. I think we are in agreement here. I think we should just state how Ali is ranked in various notable ranking lists, and leave it at that, perhaps referring to another spot where rankings are shown comparatively. I think it has by now become rather obvious that doing comparative ranking reviews in the individual boxer articles is unsustainable, in that it is a source for perpetual conflict. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 15:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

The fact that substantive verification is needed for one to be referred to as arguably the greatest is no longer disputed. The inclusion of Ring Magazine’s ranking as the greatest heavyweight is no longer disputed. The fact that having the greatest record can be considered substantive verification, I think is no longer disputed. What we are trying to determine now is should the other contenders who are not the subject of the site be compared to Ali when they are not being directly compared. Bottom line: Should Louis and Marciano be compared to Ali on this site. They both have substantive verification be considered contenders for the greatest status, but it draws irrelevant debate that locks down the site. I vote for the debate be moved away from the individual fighters' pages, and the section comparing the perceived greatest be removed unless it is referencing Ali specifically.Thedeparted123 22:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Should we put something on the page listing heavyweight champions? I think this may be the proper forum for discussing this. MKil 04:37, 26 January 2007 (UTC)MKil

Okay, then there are two reasonable solutions to this problem.

Either we remove the entire section by 1) denying a Marciano mention 3) removing the Joe Louis reference 3) and relocating Ring Magazine’s ranking of Ali to the top of the article

Or, if you want to sustain this section, than we would allow anyone with substantive verification to support their perceived title as the greatest. In this case Ali should be admitted because of the Ring Magazine ranking, Louis should be admitted because of the International Boxing Research Organization’s ranking, and Marciano should be admitted due to his record’s ranking, the Woroner/NCR 315 ranking, and the Holmes quote(which also lists Ali, Louis, and even Jack Dempsey as the other possible contenders). Thedeparted123 04:10, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I like how the site is presented now. However, I wouldn’t mind seeing Ring Magazine’e ranking of Ali at the top to proved emphasis. Thedeparted123 04:55, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I thought we already concluded this, but this section should talk about Ali's rankings only, whether he's #1 in one list or #5 in another one. Comparative ranking discussion belongs in a centralized location (separate from, but linked to from this article) to list all the rankings for all boxers together. This article needs to stay focused on Ali, unless, as I said before, there is a clear, referenced contention for a top position in some ranking. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 05:53, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm with Stevie. Let's just mention Ali's ranking here and move the other list of greatest heavyweight champions elsewhere. The question is, where do we put it? MKil 16:01, 27 January 2007 (UTC)MKil
I have two words on the matter - "Super Fight"... Check-Six 06:03, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Inspiration for Rocky...

This is a very minor edit, but on the Rocky DVD, Stallone talks about seeing the Ali vs. Wepner fight in person, not on TV. I've edited the article to correct this. Joshuaxls 11:36, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure about this? Ali-Wepner took place in Richfield, Ohio. I don't think Stallone, who was a struggling actor at the time in, I think, New York (or L.A.) traveled to Ohio to watch the fight. Every version I heard was that Stallone scraped together some money to go see a closed circuit broadcast of the fight. What exactly did he say on the DVD? MKil 03:12, 12 February 2007 (UTC)MKil

I saw a book in a bookshop today entitled 'Rocky: The Ultimate Guide' by Edward Gross and as I was browsing through it it quotes Stallone as saying he attended a close circuit broadcast of the fight, not the actual fight. Wadey4 10:22, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Wallpaper

Does anybody know where I can download a large version of Ali standing over his defeated opponent? ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RatherBeBiking (talk • contribs) 02:46, 15 February 2007 (UTC).

word changing

I have changed word Orthodox Sunni to sect. there is nothing Orthodox in it . Khalidkhoso 03:08, 16 February 2007 (UTC)]

Boxing style

A separate section dealing with Ali's unorthodox boxing style would, I think, add a tremendous amount to this article. There are bits and peices sprinkled about dealing with it, but there just isn't enough here about his style. -Toptomcat 13:03, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, as long as it's well-cited. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 20:02, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

When were his exnuptial daughters Miya and Khaliah born?

any information about their mothers? What were the circumstances of his forming a relationship with their mothers? Were they women he met through his involvement with NoI? In his capacity as a layperson? or as a minister?

Equal coverage of all children & wives/partners is suggested. DavidYork71 22:47, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

What were the events precipitating his apostasy from NoI and taking up Sunni Islam?

DavidYork71 22:47, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

1974: His Real Greatest Year

To me, Muhammad Ali is the Greatest Boxer who ever lived. Want more proof? Try 1974, Now Ali was 7 years removed from being stripped of the Heavyweight Title because he stood up for what was right for him. When he returned to boxing in 1970, he was rusty after a 3 and a half year layoff and he had to regain the heavyweight title the hard way and my god he did. His victories over Joe Frazier and George Foreman earned a place in boxing history for Ali, he won a lot of sports awards that year including this one. His regaining of the Heavyweight Title in 1974 earned Ali an award for Athlete of the Year by ABC's Wide World of Sports. Now that Ali fanatics was his real greatest year ever!!! Joey Chesnavich 13:44, 21 February 2007

Ali The Poet

Ali is the author of the worlds shortest poem, although he is given little or no credit for it. He delivered it during a Harvard University graduation speech. Officially it was untitled, though entitling it Ali would not be inappropriate. The poem is "Me, whee!". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.155.61.120(Slliks) (talk) 18:38, 28 February 2007 (UTC). Slliks 18:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)Ralph P. TaylorSlliks 18:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

i am not sure which poem but that poem (Ali's) is a variation of another poem. I can't remember who off the top of my head. Ali's poem is "Me We" i am pretty sure, not "Me WHEE" Aka khan 01:59, 15 March 2007 (UTC)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aka khan (talk • contribs) 01:59, 15 March 2007 (UTC).

Inconsistency

Just a quick note, in the info box it says that his style is orthodox, yet the first line of the text says that he had a highly unorthodox style. KingStrato 00:12, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I had noticed that as well, but I don't know enough about boxing or Ali's style to reconcile the two. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 01:18, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
In boxing, "orthodox" usually means a right-handed stance. Most fighters use this stance, so it's the norm. I believe that is what the info box means when it says "orthodox." However, the usage of "unorthodox" in the text probably means that Ali's style of boxing was unusual. So his stance is orthodox but his style is unorthodox. I changed the infobox to reflect this. MKil 20:38, 26 March 2007 (UTC)MKil

In-line citations

Would anybody mind if I put page numbers in from Thomas Hauser's book? This article could be a GA if you really wanted it to be. andreasegde 22:39, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Inconsistancy regarding date of diagnosis

The date in which Muhammad Ali was diagnosed with Parkinson's has not been properly specified and instead has been referred to as "the early 1980s."

Fixed it, and corrected the disease to Parkinsonism syndrome. andreasegde 17:59, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Ali after Manilla and Freddie Pacheco's departure

There isn't really any substanitive proof to state that Ali had declined after the Thrilla in Manilla. Most of it is speculation, and thus the inclusion of the claim that both Ali and Joe Frazier were never the same after the Thrilla in Manilla fight violates Wikipedia's rules of neutrality. I personally think the sentence should be removed. Ali's few subpar performances towards the latter end of his career can easily be attributed to lack of training and/or overconfidence due to the fact he was the world champion at the time.

Also there are multiple conflicting reports as to why Muhammad Ali's fight Doctor Freddie Pacheco left Ali's entourage, some stating Ali's slowed reflexes, and others stating that Pacheco took tests of Ali that revealed damage to Ali's kidneys. Perhaps it would be better to generalize the statement rather than give a clear cause, such as "Freddie Pacheco left Ali's team in the late 1970s after it became clear that boxing was taking its toll on the fighter and when his warnings that Ali should retire were ignored." This information should be either revised or deleted as well.

This unsigned post was written by Rumble74.

Fixed citation for Pacheco and why/when he left. andreasegde 10:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Worst boxing decision ever!?

Can someone please give me the link to the article or source that says this? (Unsigned)

It's POV, and if it's unreferenced, it should be deleted forthwith. andreasegde 10:22, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Did he win or lose?

The text says:
Ali would retain his title until a February 1978 loss to 1976 Olympic champion Leon Spinks, notable due to Spinks' lack of professional experience (only seven fights going). In the September rematch in New Orleans at the Superdome, Spinks' cornerman Georgie Benton walked out of the ring after the 6th round, later commenting that he did not think the fight was on the level. Ali was given a 15-round decision over the disoriented Spinks. Then on June 27, 1979, he announced his retirement and vacated the title.
shouldn't it be "defeat over"?
--Ben T/C 22:48, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I would say that the whole paragraph is POV, unreferenced, and should go. andreasegde 03:50, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

New page in catalan

Muhammad Ali's article's name has changed to Muhammad Ali (boxador), The updated link to catalan wikipedia must be "Muhammad Ali (boxador)". Please, someone change it in the languages link's list, cos the source is protected. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.23.215.111 (talk) 17:19, 22 April 2007 (UTC).

Cassius Marsellus (Marcellus) Clay

Would one of the editors please check and correct the spelling?


140.226.57.214 20:14, 14 May 2007 (UTC)cu00dj

Music

It may be a minor episode in a great life, but it is a part of the picture, and I put in a mention of Ali's 1960s release of Stand by Me as a single. I do not remember the precise date (though I was able to check the release date of the "I am the Greatest" Columbia album as 1963). I have seen one soul website quote the release date for the single as 1966, but I remember hearing both the Ali version and the Kenny Lynch version of the single played on the same episode of the UK BBC program "Juke Box Jury", and the Kenny Lynch article quotes 1964 as the date of release of Lynch's version, so 1964 seems more likely (at least for the UK release). I am not certain enough of the date to put that in the main article, though. It would be good if someone could verify a more precise release date and update the article accordingly. Messagetolove 19:53, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Cancelation of the Liston fight

It says that the first Liston fight was almost canceled because they saw Ali with Malcolm X in Miami. First, there is a gramatical mistake there (overlookedthis- ...). Second, I couldnt find anything on the web about this and it cites no reference, not even a book. I'm not touching this for now, leaving it to someone who has actually read a book about Ali or is a big fan of him (I know nothing of Ali). Outsid3r 21:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC) EDIT: This is the date that line was added: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Muhammad_Ali&diff=next&oldid=130217354 That same edit put the words ".........which being an old farmboy has always made me glad..." into Malcolm X's mouth which I couldn't find anywhere on the internet. That makes me think thats a suspicious edit.

       Ok, I'm removing those words myself since noone has bothered giving his/her expertise in the subject.Outsid3r 01:36, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't know about what Malcolm X said, but I think that the

near cancellation of the Liston fight is detailed in the autobiography "The Greatest" (with Richard Durham). Someone needs to check, though. Messagetolove 06:16, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

All I removed was "History has largely overlooked this" which is quite harmless. The almost-cancellation of the fight still remains there, although I still insist that someone provides a reference, even just a book title. To say that "they wanted to deny someone the right to the World Heavyweight Champion title because he was seen with a black man that peacefully defended the rights of people with color in the US and later worldwide" is a pretty harsh speculation and should NOT pass unedited. Outsid3r 21:43, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Is he the greatest boxer the world has ever seen?

No problem for me. I just wanted to say that there is a general reference to the incident in that book,

since you asked for a book reference. I didn't (and don't), want to get into political issues. As to the postscript question, which I presume came from you, I am no boxing expert, but I saw at least on TV, most of Ali's fights ( from the first Liston fight), and he was the best I saw. I don't think you can compare boxers, or athletes in general, from different eras. But Ali must have had a higher world profile than any other sports personality. Messagetolove 06:40, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Of course the postscript question did [not] come from me :) . If you check the discussion history, it came by an IP: 221.128.134.155 . Then lets add "The Greatest" as a reference and if anyone has anything against, let them correct it. Its useless getting into deep bureaucracies when some kid can come later and make a pandemonium of the article.Outsid3r 05:15, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
I located my copy of "The Greatest: My On Story" by Ali, with Richard Durham (this is the version published in the UK in 1976, by Mayflower books). The story of the "almost cancellation" of the first Liston fight is detailed on pages 121-138 of that book.

Messagetolove 21:44, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Foreman Change

Ali knocked out foreman at the end of the 8th round, not the 7th. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.253.24.27 (talk • contribs)