User talk:96.22.165.165

World heavyweight boxing championship records
Frank, I read your comments on the World heavyweight boxing championship records and agree with many of them. I'll add some of my thoughts there soon, but you can't call people names or you could be blocked from participation at Wikipedia. I also think your racism accusations are unjustified. I know it can be frustrating when you're trying to improve an article and it seems like someone is unreasonably trying to stop you, but you have to be respectful.--Jahalive (talk) 20:32, 11 May 2022 (UTC)


 * You're right. I apologize. By the way, I meant more "chauvinism" than racism. Just didn't think of the word at the moment. The person who answered me before, "Ivanchuck", or something such, admitted to me it was something common in Russia or Ukraine, obviously the place he is coming from. I had to conclude that indeed, it was essentially chauvinistic to try to manipulate facts as to make a fighter from his country as better, or superior, to another one, Joe Louis, who is well established, statistically, as one of the two best heavyweights ever. So, it was not meant as something strictly personal, but really as a reason why I felt (and why I still feel) that it is wrong to present facts this way. Joe Louis was the linear champion for almost 12 years IN A ROW. He defended the title successfully 26 times, notwithstanding countless so-called "exhibitions" (see his record on Cyber Boxing Zone), which were real (shorter, non title) fights, with 6 once gloves, no helmet, against the best contenders of his time. And he knocked many of them out. He also recaptured the title according to one organization, the British Boxing Board of Control, which proclaimed him the World Champion in 1951 when he kayoed Lee Savold (check the entry in his record on Boxrec), which should be also considered, if you do consider any of these alphabet soup belts Klitschko won during his career. So, by implying that Klitschko won over more opponents than Louis, or that his reign was longer (even though he was throughout years, not the linear or unified champion), by giving to these arguments a prominent position in the article, he is terribly misleading the profane when it comes to boxing history. I think it's very wrong. Idk how to express it without sounding frustrated indeed, but once again, I apologize if I do.
 * In any case, thank you for the comment, Jahalive. I will be more prudent and restrained in my comments in the future. - Frank Arouet 96.22.165.165 (talk) 02:52, 28 June 2022 (UTC)