Talk:LIV Golf

PIF Investment portfolio
PIF's investment portfolio does not seem to have any direct relevance to LIV Golf, other than whataboutery, yet it has been persistently added. Additionally, mainstream reliable sources are not routinely listing PIF's investment portfolio in the context of LIV Golf, therefore it seems to me that nor should we, per WP:UNDUE. PIF should of course remain mentioned; it is only the addition of a list of select unrelated PIF investments (Boeing, FB, Citigroup, Disney, BoA, Live Nation, Berkshire Hathaway, BP, Uber) that would be reverted/removed. Thoughts please. wjematherplease leave a message... 08:27, 20 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Clearly not suitable for inclusion here (and even less so in the Greg Norman article). There is an article on the Public Investment Fund where it could be included. This article is about LIV golf, not a place to get into details of other PIF investments. Nigej (talk) 09:10, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Excessive quotations by Phil Mickelson
The article currently includes about 13 sentences directly quoting Phil Mickelson. I consider this excessive and approaching copyright violation territory. Why can't we summarize and paraphrase what Mickelson says, and only include a brief quote or two, when he says something that is not PR speak? Cullen328 (talk) 03:50, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
 * It's not just the number of quotations that is excessive – the entire Mickelson section is undue and should probably be reduced to a maximum of two paragraphs. wjematherplease leave a message... 09:32, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
 * It looks like WP:COAT to me. Should be removed in its entirety and if there is anything relevant that meets guidelines then include it on the page for Phil Mickelson. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:26, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Haven't seen anyone weigh in. It's a coatrack specific to his BLP so WP:ONUS would apply. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:09, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Unnecessarily Including Biased News Articles
I removed two sentences (under 2022 Season) that summarized two news articles about the July 2022 LIV Golf event in Bedminster, as the selective inclusion of those news articles was unfairly biased against LIV Golf. It would be just as inappropriate to highlight news articles unfairly biased in favor of LIV Golf. With news coverage and public discussion about LIV Golf becoming increasingly polarized, it is important that this page remain neutral in its delivery of information about the subject. Since Wikipedia is not a newspaper, this page should not act as a repository of daily news about LIV Golf. C.Tseytlin (talk) 08:11, 2 August 2022 (UTC)


 * You removed an entire section, not two sentences - I'm restoring. Tewapack (talk) 19:30, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I fully agree with your views about biased news on LIV Golf! and indeed that whole section SHOULD be removed or at least objectively reworded! Sansari (talk) 18:56, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Edit Request
Hello everyone, I'm Stan! I work for the LIV Golf League and would like to request a few updates to this page.

Can the following information be changed to the 2023 season section?

- Add the following sentence after the first sentence of the paragraph:

"In January 2023, the schedule for the second LIV Golf season was released."

-Remove "is propsed to" from the following sentence and replace it with "will"

"The season will consist of 14 no cut 54-hole tournaments."

- Add the following sentence to the end of the paragraph:

"There are several different locations and golf courses in the 2023 season, including new venues in the U.S., Mexico, Spain, Singapore, and Australia."

https://www.cbssports.com/golf/news/liv-golf-2023-schedule-dates-players-teams-tv-info-as-league-begins-second-season-at-mayakoba/

https://golf.com/news/liv-golf-finalizes-schedule-2023/

Thank you, I appreciate the community's time and efforts to updating and maintaining this page, and look forward to working with you!

LsG0202 (talk) 15:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ HouseBlastertalk 18:29, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Section on Reaction
Wikipedia and its editors should strive to remain objective and factual in the articles published. Wikipedia has become a fact force many of us rely on. Any "interpretation" or "influential reporting" in its content should not be allowed! This section on "Reaction" is firstly, way too high up in the article and only represents a certain group of journalists and not the World! It is offensive and hurts the feelings of those sports players that do not want to be pulled into a political conflict that has little to do with sports!

Should Wikipedia find it necessary to mention some of these "views" then please add it at the bottom under something like "controversy" clearly stating the views of both sides!

You don't want Wikipedia some day to be stamped as "one-sided" and someone would come up with an alternative, thereby you losing your objectivity and neutrality in stating facts ... and eventually your funding ...

And please filter out the views of prominent golfers' reactions, who are probably being paid millions by the "other side" to say what they are saying! Ridiculous! Sansari (talk) 18:52, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Obfuscation of ownership in the infobox
The infobox lists the owner of LIV Golf as "Public Investment Fund," which is the official name of Saudi Arabia's sovereign wealth fund. In my view, using this name, and not simply "Saudi Arabia," is obfuscatory. Such obfuscation could be construed as being in the public relations interests of the Saudi government, who have been accused of using LIV Golf for sportswashing. There are many controversies surrounding LIV Golf, but who owns it is not controversial.

I've been told by one editor that naming Saudi Arabia as the owner is factually inaccurate, but this is a rather absurd contention. The PIF is a state-owned investment fund and is therefore part of the government of Saudi Arabia. The precise way, and through what investment vehicle, the Saudi government owns LIV Golf is an administrative detail that should not be in a summary section like an infobox. - Will Refvem (talk) 16:46, 24 June 2023 (UTC)


 * You could probably change the link to Public Investment Fund of Saudi Arabia, which is more descriptive while still being accurate. I wouldn't have any complaints about that, while just changing the owner to Saudi Arabia does feel like an oversimplification, plus I do somewhat share the factual accuracy concerns. Skarmory   (talk •   contribs)  04:16, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Linguistics in the Digital Age
— Assignment last updated by Stutz23 (talk) 18:59, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Official World Golf Rankings
Seeking Official World Golf Rankings (OWGR) for participating professional golfers was formerly a goal of LIV. In a recent letter to players, the league's CEO, Greg Norman, advised that LIV would no longer pursue its bid for world ranking points. https://apnews.com/article/liv-golf-world-ranking-relegation-majors-7459ab02f956252752f956f3b547320d Meta Voyager (talk) 12:35, 16 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Interesting point. Should this be added to the article? Nowa (talk) 17:28, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
 * This information may be too time-specific to merit inclusion in the LIV article, but the topic of LIV's pursuit of OWGR rankings for its players is mentioned in the Organization section of the article. I noticed that the article is the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation course assignment for student editors and wanted them to have access to this updated information about LIV abandoning it's efforts for their events to be included in OWGR. Meta Voyager (talk) 18:23, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. Nowa (talk) 20:12, 25 March 2024 (UTC)