Talk:Julian Edelman

Is Edelman Jewish?
There's certainly been speculation (for example, Lenny Bruce when guest hosting on ESPN's Mike and Mike, and on a lot of message boards). That said, there is no reliable source, as required by WP:BLP, to answer the question one way or the other, so WP:BLP dictates that the question should be set aside until we have a verifiable answer. Samer (talk) 16:29, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * He is not Jewish. He was raised Christian and mother was not Jewish.  Enigma msg  01:23, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * He at most has a Jewish great-grandfather (see his ancestry here). All Hallow&#39;s Wraith (talk) 21:26, 2 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Edelman does not seem sure about his own religious affiliation. Despite describing his own visit to Israel as "life-changing," he still seems unsure about his religious affiliation, even when directly asked about it an interview with E:60. He reportedly describes himself as "Jew...ish." Patsfan2014 01:07, 18 November 2015 (UTC)


 * He self-identifies as Jewish, and has stated so in an interview. http://www.timesofisrael.com/in-super-bowl-matchup-pats-have-israel-connections-cornered 2604:2000:E010:1100:65BD:F36B:FE46:5C57 (talk) 22:20, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Re: dropping of charges
I added more detail from the statement; it goes a bit further than simply saying that they couldn't prove that Edelman was guilty of the crime with which he was charged, but that there wasn't enough evidence to establish that a crime happened at all. Samer (talk) 06:00, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The evidence is he didn't commit a crime at all,
 * "According to the district attorney's office, the review of the surveillance footage from the incident suggested that Edelman approached a woman on the dance floor and took her hand briefly. The review concluded that the physical contact was fleeting and did not meet the elements of any crime."
 * He was innocent. --Conor Fallon (talk) 18:17, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Julian Edelman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121128170354/http://www.boston.com:80/sports/football/patriots/2012/11/19/julian-edelman-enjoys-career-day-patriots-rout/wAoIkBACLpG9a7zsO08hvK/story.html to http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/2012/11/19/julian-edelman-enjoys-career-day-patriots-rout/wAoIkBACLpG9a7zsO08hvK/story.html

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 21:52, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Baby references
Do we really need seven references for the birth of his daughter? Samer (talk) 00:46, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Julian Edelman. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110511213325/http://www.patriots.com/news/index.cfm?ac=pressreleasesdetail&pid=47072&pcid=47 to http://www.patriots.com/news/index.cfm?ac=pressreleasesdetail&pid=47072&pcid=47
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131017061734/http://www.patriotledger.com/sports/pros/x578417121/Secondary-education-continues-with-Patriots-for-versatile-Edelman to http://www.patriotledger.com/sports/pros/x578417121/Secondary-education-continues-with-Patriots-for-versatile-Edelman

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:44, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Sexual harassment allegations
Greetings. Please discuss the dispute over the sexual assault allegations here, or take it to WP:BLPN. I've fully protected the page, and temporarily removed the content due to BLP considerations; as it's disputed negative information on a BLP. That is not to say the content definitely can't be included, but a consensus is needed to resolve if and how it should be included. Please let me know if you have any questions about dispute resolution. Thanks, S warm   ♠  20:58, 26 April 2018 (UTC)


 * The point I'd made earler, on the editor's talk page, is that this falls under WP:BLPCRIME. Edelman isn't "relatively unknown", but the same principle applies; it was a one-time allegation which was not sustained by evidence, and was dropped. For Wikipedia's protection, we don't include such allegations in biographies of living persons, unless they have massive coverage from other reasons (e.g., allegations against Cosby). This one didn't qualify. Regards, Tarl N. ( discuss ) 22:03, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Tarl has explained his position reasonably, would you like to respond? S warm   ♠  22:08, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * My main point is that if a similar allegation is allowed on Peyton Manning's page, why is it not allowed on Julian Edelman's page? There was a consensus a while back that content of that nature would not be allowed on either page, so why has that changed now for Manning?  It seems as if different standards are being applied, which is wrong.  Manning's allegation was a one-time situation as well.  He wasn't convicted.  There was national coverage of Edelman's incident when it occurred.  If you don't want to include the allegation of Edelman on his page, then fine.  However, you need to remove it on Manning's page as well, yet, I was challenged on that earlier.  A double standard is clearly being applied here.  Dsaun100 (talk) 04:25, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for commenting. Nothing is black and white, and the sole fact that similar information is included on another article does not mean it must be included in this article. Uniform standards aren't ever enforced between articles flawlessly; this project is built on local compromises and consensuses that differ from article to article. As an uninvolved administrator, I am telling you that this is a gray area. There is no clear cut "right" side. Your content is disputed, in spite of the fact that similar content is included on another article. Understand? You've given your opening rationale, and it's been disputed. You have to move forward, rather than repeatedly reinsert it with the same rationale. Now, you have the opportunity to make a counterpoint, propose a compromise, ask for a third opinion, take it to the BLP noticeboard, start an RfC, or let it go and move on. Just forget about the other article for a minute and focus on this specific dispute. S warm   ♠  08:13, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
 * That same logic could be used for removing the content. Taking it out has been disputed.  Instead of repeatedly removing it with the same rationale, move forward, and move on.  Bringing up the other article is important for context, so it shouldn't be ignored.  Here's the compromise I offer:  I'm willing for the allegation pertinent to Julian Edelman be removed, so long as the allegation pertinent to Peyton Manning be removed.  If you disagree, then I'll go to the BLP noticeboard, given the shifting consensus on this topic.  Dsaun100 (talk) 20:22, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:BRD. When you make a BOLD change, and it is REVERTED, you then DISCUSS. The change remains out while discussion is in progress. It is not wild-west of making any changes you want and then fighting off all opposition. There is a clear presumption that the status quo ante is held until consensus is reached. Tarl N. ( discuss ) 21:01, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
 * You also don't continue to make reversions to make a point. This wasn't a case of a wild-west of changes, so please spare me the hyperbole.  You didn't address my compromise either.  Do we have a deal, or do I need to go to BLP noticeboard?  Dsaun100 (talk) 21:17, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
 * That's not how this works, and now you're getting into WP:IDHT territory. Articles are governed by consensus, and you can't form a local consensus on an unrelated page. You do not get to tie content on another article into this content dispute here. If you want the content on the other article removed, you go to that article and start an RfC, but here, you need to drop the stick and focus on what policy-based reasons the content here should be included. If you can't do so, I will place editing restrictions on you. S warm   ♠  01:04, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
 * How am I getting into WP:IDHT territory? I simply offered a compromise, and now, you're taking this personally and making threats, which is bordering on WP:ADMINABUSE.  You should be careful.  I was giving a previous example that was agreed upon for both pages.  That was my point.  Also, what's this alert that I received on my page?  Did you actually impose editing restrictions?  Dsaun100 (talk) 03:22, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
 * You're not listening to anything I or Tarl are saying, and instead you're still standing behind the ultimatum that this article be the same as an unrelated one, when that premise was disputed from the very beginning, and you're refusing to move forward in dispute resolution. That is unreasonable, and I assure you I am not "threatening" you, but warning you as an uninvolved administrator. The alert on your talk page is a mandatory prerequisite to imposing discretionary sanctions, just read it. S warm   ♠  17:04, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I've read it. For somebody who's taking this personally, I'd like to know what constitutes an "uninvolved administrator." You're the one not listening. I just offered a compromise, and instead of addressing it in a constructive manner, you decided to "warn" me.  Talk about being "unreasonable."  You, nor Tarin N., have offered a compromise.  I opened a dispute on the BLP noticeboard, which you can view here:  Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard.  Somebody offered a suggestion that I think is reasonable.  Instead of creating a section for the allegation, due to WP:WEIGHT, how about putting the information in an already existing section?  In this case, Edelman's "2011 season" would seem appropriate, given that's the year the allegation occurred.  If you disagree, then offer a compromise of your own.  Dsaun100 (talk) 19:48, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, this is all I was asking. S warm  ♠  19:15, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I see a lot of comparisons between other pages, so I'd like to point out other content exists. Julian Edelman is Julian Edelman. He's not Peyton Manning, Kobe Bryant, nor Bill Cosby. We should avoid comparing how similar info is presented in those articles, due to the wildly differing factors between their careers and cases. Lizard  (talk) 01:30, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

I thought Julian Edelman had a 4 game suspension
It just happened today. Bryce12o4 (talk) 22:03, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * If you have a reliable source, and you didn't add the information to the article, then you have no one to blame except yourself. Get on it! -- Jayron 32 01:42, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * As best I can tell, all the headlines say "he is facing", and in the fine-print, he's appealing, so it doesn't taken effect yet. So at this point, he is not suspended. If anyone has a better reference, please correct me. Tarl N. ( discuss ) 01:44, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Indeed, I see someone has taken an article saying those exact words, and replaced the title with "has been suspended". I'm going to remove that edit, because the reference cited does not support the assertion. Tarl N. ( discuss ) 01:47, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Edelman surprised a young girl with Super Bowl tickets after he learned she was bullied for playing football
Hi, Can you please share any feedback you may have about placing this news item into the article? Vwanweb (talk) 19:55, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 February 2019
2018 season states JE11 is 4th all time post-season receiving yards. He is now 2nd all time after Superbowl LIII.

Reference: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/rec_yds_career_playoffs.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.61.175.155 (talk) 14:42, 4 February 2019 (UTC)


 * The edit was correct at the time it was made (after the AFCCG). I'll fix if it hasn't been changed already. Samer (talk) 02:57, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Fight Against Anti-Semitism
The Meyers Leonard anti-Semitism incident is on Julian Edelman's Wikipedia page, but the DeSean Jackson anti-Semitism incident isn't on Julian Edelman's Wikipedia page. Could someone add it? JumperZ69666420 (talk) 03:52, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Wife
IS JULIAN EDELMAN IN A RELATIONSHIP 2600:100A:B02E:77C7:BD2A:CDA0:E9AE:A6C9 (talk) 20:06, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Linguistics in the Digital Age
— Assignment last updated by Fedfed2 (talk) 00:54, 9 December 2023 (UTC)