Talk:Dennis Rodman/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Celebrity Mole

I've never watched the show so I don't know the rules on it. But is the line shocking many since he did not take a single note while participating on the show actually supposed to say "a single vote"? MK2 15:53, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

In the show they have to figure out who the mole is, the person who is paid to make the team lose money, they take Notes on the person they suspect, and he didn'take a single note.

Clarification

Article says "However, his increasingly erratic off-court life, including a brief but heavily-publicized relationship with Madonna, and on-court antics, such as dying his hair," - which makes it sound like he dyed his hair whilst on court. I assume that isn't the case, but I don't really know anything about him.Can someone clarify the sentence? --bodnotbod 21:34, 16 January 2006 (UTC)


Can someone add text regarding his friendship with Jack Haley, especially on the Spurs? San Antonio acquired Haley solely to keep Rodman in check.

"I don't give a shit"

Perhaps it should be added to the wikiquote page.. he loves saying it! :-D The magical Spum-dandy 14:32, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

How many children?

Is there someting wrong with my ears? I just heard on NBC he "fathered 126 children"? Anyone?

Never hit a stranger's kid - it might be your own. Aragorn2 19:09, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

"Mixed parentage"?

I'd heard that Rodman's father is black and his mother Filipina. Is this true or was the Filipina his step-mother? Has anyone heard something like this before?Jlujan69 00:04, 17 May 2006 (UTC)


"Are slated to play" games

Somebody who knows for sure if both the "upcoming" exhibition games that would have happened in the past month needs to update this. 

StaticElectric 06:55, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

"Outrageous Behavior"

This is a fudge to get out of saying transvestite or cross-dresser. Any other man who wears women's clothing in public would be called either of those things, what's up with Rodman? He too NBA for that?

I can't believe there's no mention of his bisexuality in this article either! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.139.185.103 (talk) 11:29, 4 March 2007 (UTC).

Sexuality

Shouldn't his alleged bisexuality be discussed. Manic Hispanic 03:06, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I was surprised that it wasn't even mentioned briefly in the article, considering that it's one of those "controversial" things that he's famous for. I've always thought that it was one of the more fascinating things about him, his alleged bisexuality that he has only alluded to a few times. I recall him making statements about sexual experiences he's had with men, but don't recall where. Perhaps it was on his MTV show? Gypsywitch13 00:01, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


Maybe someone should rename Misc. to "Trivia"... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.122.244.15 (talk) 13:05, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Detroit Pistons

"In 1988, Rodman seemed to show even more star potential, crashing the boards more and defending better than before."

I'm not terribly familiar with basketball, and thus don't really know what the bit in bold means. Perhaps we could rephrase that in such a way that is clearer to the unknowledgable reader?Dxco (talk) 03:16, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Good article nomination (WP:GAC)

I have just totally rewritten this article to make it a good article. The nomination page is here (scroll down). Constructive input is appreciated. Onomatopoeia (talk) 20:48, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I am not a GA reviewer, but I think that standard citation templates should be used for references.—Chris! ct 22:03, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
It's not a GA or even FA requirement. As long as the citation format used is consistent it's fine. Chensiyuan (talk) 06:13, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Dennis Rodman GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dennis Rodman/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Lead
  • Needs serious expansion. Should be at least three paragraphs per WP:LEAD.
Done —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • (born May 13, 1961 in Trenton, New Jersey) rmv Trenton, New Jersey from brackets per WP:DATE.
Done —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Early life
  • "considered one of the worst areas in those times." Worst areas of where? Dallas, Texas, America?
It was worst part of Dallas. —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • "A factor may have been his height as he measured only 5'6" as a freshman in high school and did not know how tall he was when he graduated in 1979." Second part of sentence doesn't make sense. Who didn't know how tall he was? Rodman? His coaches?
Deleted the weird parts. —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • "under 6 feet tall to 6'8"" inconsistency of styles, i.e. would suggesting using {{convert}} to these and 5'6" above.
May be a good idea, but IMHO his height is only mentioned 3 or 4 times, and it is consistent as far as I see now —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Someone nice edited it in. —Onomatopoeia (talk) 18:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
  • "Rodman then worked as an overnight janitor at Dallas Fort Worth International Airport, he grew from under 6 feet tall to 6'8" and decided to give basketball another shot." Run on sentence, needs splitting or a conjunction between the two clauses. "Then" also isn't the best word to use - it doesn't have the right impact.
Rephrased —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • "A family friend tipped off the head coach of Cooke County College in Gainesville, Texas." Family friend of who? Rodman or the head coach? Who was the head coach?
The source (nba.com) is not more precise, sorry. —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • "Then, he transferred to Southeastern Oklahoma State." "Then" is redundant.
Done —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Pistons
  • "Still, the season ended on a positive note, because his girlfriend Annie bore him a daughter named Alexis." Very informal and I'm not sure that it means the season ended on a positive note.
Done —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • "After this disappointment," This strictly says the birth was a disappointment. I don't think you mean this.
Heh, done —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • "Although it was feared that the loss of Mahorn – mediocre in talent, but high on hustle and widely considered a vital cog of the “Bad Boys” teams – would diminish the Pistons’ spirit, but Rodman seamlessly took over his role." First clause starts with although and the last with but - doesn't make sense.
Restructured the phrase —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • "After winning his second ring," I presume this is for the NBA finals title? It needs to be explained for the non-NBA fan.
Done —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • 1990-91 season is very short especially to say it's his first season of starting.
Done. Inserted a lot more info on that season. —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Last paragraph could do with breaking into season-by-season as above. Otherwise it's tough to read.
Done —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • "At that moment I tamed my whole life around." Is tamed correct? Or "my whole life around"?
Done, it's is NOT a typo, but sounds weird. I added a [sic] —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • "He got his wish on" Get is a poor verb - see it's huge list of definitions - I would suggest finding an alternative or re-writing, e.g. "His wish was granted on."
Done —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Spurs
  • "after having missed 19 games." Either "after missing 19 games" or "having missed 19 games".
Done —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • "with freshly minted" Does this means he just won the award? Also needs to be hyphenated.
Rephrased more clearly, he just won the MVP award —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Bulls
  • "also helped by the fact that his best friend Haley was also traded to the Bulls." also x2
Done —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • "Ever controversial, Rodman made negative headlines after a head butt of referee Ted Bernhardt during a game in New Jersey on March 16, 1996." This must have had some repercussions? Was he fined? Was he banned? In some sports this would be a lifetime ban. How come this didn't happen?
Clarified: Rodman just had to pay 20k but was not seriously sanctioned, which was controversial —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • "However, he made more headlines for his notorious behaviour: on January 15, 1997, Rodman was involved in another notorious incident during a game against the Minnesota Timberwolves." notorious x2
Done —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
It still has notorious twice in the same sentence. Peanut4 (talk) 23:16, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Fixed. —Onomatopoeia (talk) 18:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Twilight
  • "but only played in 23 games and was then released" Then is redundant.
Done —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Personal life
  • "laughingstock" Is this really one word?
Seperated —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • "and finally had his first sex with a prostitute;" needs rewording, either "first sexual experience" or "first had sex"
Done —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)


General
  • Numerals and units should be broken by a non-breaking space, e.g. 27 children.
These still need to be done. Peanut4 (talk) 23:19, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Done. —Onomatopoeia (talk) 18:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Seasons and scorelines should use endashes not hyphens, per WP:DASH.
Done —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Numbers less than ten should be spelled out rather than in numerals, per WP:MOSNUM.
I hope I caught all. —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • No need to link dates any more.
Done —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Are there any images? Some sections are tough to get through without anything to break them up.
Inserted some which seem relevant. —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
It's good to see some. I'm not sure how relevant some of them are though. I would keep them for now, and if you plan on expanding further, take further input either at peer review or a possible FAC. Peanut4 (talk) 23:19, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Some copy-editing is needed a little, particularly the use of "then", "there", overuse of "also" and possible overuse of "Rodman" in some sections. I would suggest giving the article a good read through or getting an independent editor to do so.
  • How about a "Style of play" section? I'm not sure if they are used in other basketball players biographies?
Done: Player Profile —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Very nice section. Well balanced, which can be a problem with these. Peanut4 (talk) 23:19, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

There's a lot to do, but I'll put it on hold for now. Peanut4 (talk) 00:22, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the extremely precise and well-written review. I have incorporated many of your constructive proposals, see above. —Onomatopoeia (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Went trhough it a 2nd time and inserted many " " and copyedited this and that. Hope it worked. —Onomatopoeia (talk) 18:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Pass. And a good pass. It meets all the GA criteria, and is overall a good read. I especially like the new player profile section. If you were to try and go for FA status shortly, I would suggest getting some help, partly at peer review, and maybe a copyedit to tighten up and improve the prose. Also, as I said above, the images could do with a going over. All the best with future improvements, though. Well done. Peanut4 (talk) 19:07, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

WOO-HOO!! Thanks for the precise, detailed review and the many constructive proposals. They certainly helped the article, and even a 19-GA guy like me learned quite a lot. For FAC, I would certainly need some additional help, but it is possible to achieve that golden star. Thanks for your work, it is appreciated. —Onomatopoeia (talk) 19:51, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Celebrity Championship Wrestling

In 20008 Rodman took part in the tapings for Hulk Hogan's CMT Reality show Celebrity Championship Wrestling. Because it was pretaped, it has been revealed online that he went on to win the CCW title and was the focul point of the show. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.86.225.71 (talk) 12:44, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Double team ver1.jpg

The image File:Double team ver1.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:14, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Pictures?

Do we really need pictures of other basketball players who are connected to Dennis Rodman on Dennis Rodman's page? Like in the first few sections of the page........97.118.242.53 (talk) 03:58, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Two changes needed

"They swept the Washington Bullets and soundly beat the Atlanta Hawks in five games, but bowed out in seven matches against their archrivals Boston Celtics in what was called one of the physically and mentally toughest series ever. He feuded with Celtics guard Dennis Johnson, taunting him in the closing seconds by waving his right hand over his head.' First i think he should be changend to rodman just for the sake of the article flowing better, and secondly what game did Rodman taunt Johnson in? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.144.219.58 (talk) 01:59, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

"Prototypical bad boy"

Shouldn't this be "stereotypical"? James Dean was the prototypical bad boy... Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:37, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Automated heading

"Rodman is known for his controversial behaviour, such as being a vegetarian " made me laugh. what's so outrageous about that? 

- Vegetarianism is communist and anti-American, did you not get the memo?

Dennis is NOT a vegetarian and he regularly eats meat.Polscigeek (talk) 00:12, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Is this original work? RickK 03:36, 3 Nov 2003 (UTC)


Why is written as if he died or something?

What are you referring to? wonders Aragorn2 19:08, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Veggie... or not?

why isn't it said he is a vegetarian and a big promoter of green lifestyle?

I couldn't find any sufficient proof of Rodman's vegetarianism (except multi copy-pasted lists of famous vegetarians, without references), thus I question article's category of American vegetarians he belongs to. Moreover, I have stumbled upon such text:
In January 2006, Rodman appeared on Celebrity Big Brother in the UK. He entered the house at approximately 2200 on 5th January. He took into the house with him a pack of "extra large" condoms and did not pack any underwear. He also ate a ham sandwich on his first night in the house, thus quashing previous rumours that he was a vegetarian. (source)--Sigurdas (talk) 04:57, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Dennis is NOT a vegetarian and he regularly eats meat. He is good friends with Pamela Anderson who is a big time promoter of PETA, and he has done a lot of work to help their cause, but he isn't a vegetarian.Polscigeek (talk) 00:04, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Hall of Fame

His career (especially his performances in the Finals) seem worthy of the Hall of Fame - I don't seem to remember him in though - does anyone know anything about this? Has he been nominated? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.197.240.53 (talk) 04:48, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Dennis is eligible for the Hall of Fame for the 1st time in 2010. And he will be on the ballot.Polscigeek (talk) 00:20, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Marriage

Dennis married Michelle Moyer in 2003. She isn't mentioned in this article. Just Carmen. I have provided links that states he was married. There is quite a bit of info listed included that he has 2 children with her Trinity and D.J. Take what you want from it.

http://articles.latimes.com/2003/may/14/local/me-rodman14

http://www.biogs.com/bigbrother/rodman.html

http://www.contactmusic.com/new/xmlfeed.nsf/mndwebpages/rodman.s%20marriage%20melts%20down

http://64.90.166.18/Report-Former-NBA-Star-Dennis-Rodman-Arrested-for-Domestic-Battery

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13639813 

stingstungme (talk) 21:21, 27 August 2008 (UTC)stingstungme

Dennis is married to Michelle Moyer and has 2 children as stated in this section.Polscigeek (talk) 00:10, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

DUI

It could be mentioned that Dennis was charged with DUI at least twice.[1] [2]

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 871x (talk • contribs) 01:07, 16 May 2009

Ya, he is on Celebrity Rehab 3 supposedly serving out the terms of a court order due to his DUI convictions. Should this not also appear in the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.170.32.41 (talk) 17:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I have added referenced information about the DUIs, Dr Drews show, and other rehab events. -- Mikeblas (talk) 20:45, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Part of personal life should be merged with early life.

Its random that his personal life is down there when a good portion deserves to be at the top. 134.29.246.211 (talk) 20:58, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


Do a search for "they they" - this is an error. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.16.222.180 (talk) 06:50, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Semi Protection

Why is this page semi-protected?--Adam in MO Talk 02:43, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Check the log. This is a biography of a living, well known NBA player that was receiving fairly frequent vandalism. If you would like the article to be unprotected, please ask WP:RFUP. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:49, 5 March 2010 (UTC)


Citations needed

Dennis was known for several unusual habits that separated him from other players and probably went hand in hand with his eccentric personality and his relentless desire to become the best rebounder he could be. He was known to literally spend days on end in gyms and weight rooms - sleeping in the rooms during his rest time - training and coordinating his muscles. He also turned rebounding into a science as much as an art form: he was known to watch many hours of game footage to study and annotate how each player in the league shot the ball and the different locations that the rebounds frequented for each player's missed shots due to the different physics that goes into each player's unique shot. This studying paid off in games when he was able to correctly anticipate where the rebound would be much more frequently than other players, thereby gaining ideal positioning to grab the ball. Dennis also practiced at and had an incredible talent at tipping the basketball multiple times to himself, so that on plays when a rebound was contested with an opposing player, he could essentially out-tip the other player in order to secure possession of the ball. Rodman would literally do anything to secure a rebound, including resorting to dirty play, or more commonly, sacrificing his body. For instance, on plays when the ball was headed out of bounds and appeared to be all but lost, Rodman would dive into the sideline crowd to grab the ball and call timeout or throw it back into play, even when his team would have regained possession had the ball gone out of bounds. On other loose ball rebounds, he would frequently dive upon the floor to secure the rebound, sometimes when there was no opposing player nearby the ball.[citation needed]

In 14 NBA seasons, Rodman played in 911 games, scored 6,683 points and grabbed 11,954 rebounds, translating to 7.3 points and 13.1 rebounds per game in only 31.7 minutes played per game.[3] His career rebound percentage, which is an estimate of the rebounds collected by one player out of all the rebounds that are available while that player is playing in the game, is 23.4%, a record by a wide margin (the next closest player, Swen Nater, is nearly 3% lower). In other words, he accounted for almost one-fourth of the rebounds that happened by either team while he was on the floor. Another way of looking at this is that he accounted for close to half of his own team's rebounds while he was in the game.

NBA.com lauds Rodman as "arguably the best rebounding forward in NBA history and one of the most recognized athletes in the world" but adds "enigmatic and individualistic, Rodman has caught the public eye for his ever-changing hair color, tattoos and unorthodox lifestyle".[4] On the hardwood, he was recognized as one of the most successful defensive players ever, winning the NBA championship five times in six NBA Finals appearances (1989, 1990, 1996, 1997, 1998; only loss in 1988), being crowned NBA Defensive Player of the Year twice (1990, 1991) and making seven NBA All-Defensive First Teams (1989–93, 1995, 1996) and one NBA All-Defensive Second Team (1994). He additionally made two All-NBA Third Teams (1992, 1995), two NBA All-Star Teams (1990, 1992) and won seven rebounding crowns (1991–92-1997–98) and finally led the league once in field goal percentage (1989).[3] However, he was recognized as the prototype bizarre player, stunning basketball fans with his artificial hair colors, numerous tattoos and body piercings, multiple verbal and physical assaults versus officials, frequent ejections, and his tumultuous private life.[4] He was ranked #48 on the 2009 revision of SLAM Magazine's Top 50 Players of All-time.Hoops gza (talk) 19:59, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject LGBT studies (Rated GA-class)

Why is this artcle tagged to WikiProject LGBT studies? 121.73.7.84 (talk) 12:44, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Height (2)

Before games, when starting line-ups were presented, Rodman was always reported to be 6 feet 8 inches tall (2.03 meters). He is definitely taller than Michael Jordan, whose height is officially reported to be 6 feet 6 inches. You can see the difference in the picture if you follow the link below: http://img530.imageshack.us/i/rodmanjordanhug.jpg/ I believe that almost any basketball fan can confirm, in retrospect, that Rodman's reported (listed) height of 6'8" visually corresponds to the listed height of other players. There seems to be a double standard when reporting players' height: one with boots on and the other without. Please choose only one standard. Either Rodman is 6'8" or Jordan is 6'4". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.253.185.155 (talk) 01:19, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 184.152.88.204, 3 July 2011

  • Chicago Bulls #91 retired

184.152.88.204 (talk) 20:33, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. If you have a reliable source, please change "answered=yes" to "answered=no" and provide that source here. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:11, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Copyvio Alert

Okay, here's what it said before I changed it:

  • On November 5, 1999, Rodman and his then-wife, Carmen Electra, were charged with misdemeanors after police were called because of their loud fighting and screaming. Each had to come up with $2,500 in bail money and were ordered to stay at least 500 feet away from each other.

And here's what the source says:

  • On November 5, 1999, Rodman and his wife at the time, Carmen Electra, were charged with misdemeanors after police were called because of their loud fighting and screaming. Each had to come up with $2,500 in bail money and were ordered to stay at least 500 feet away from each other.

That is a blatant WP:COPYVIO, and if there's one instance of it then there is a possibility of more existing in this article. I'll look into it, but I'd appreciate any help from any of the main contributors to this article. It could affect its GA status if it is a pervasive problem or the copyvios are not fixed as soon as possible. Thanks! Doc talk 21:21, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

  • I've found and corrected two additional copyvios in the same section. This entire article needs to be examined for possible additional blatant copyright violations. Doc talk 01:06, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
I struck the above as it seems that one IP editor recently added the copyvios to the section.[1] As I've never edited this article before, I was unsure of its history. Better safe than sorry... Doc talk 01:27, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for catching those. I had the article watchlisted, but I didn't look too closely at those particular edits. I probably should have; the people who like to add information about athletes' arrests are some of the worst copyright offenders around.
That said... I wasn't involved with the GA push, so I can't say for certain that there aren't any other copyvio problems. Zagalejo^^^ 05:02, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for responding: the article is probably okay (after discovering that all the edits that sent up the "red flag" were from the same IP editor at the same time). I stumbled across this in a typically random way: I saw a commercial on TV featuring Carmen Electra, remembered her dating Rodman, then went to the article. Quite by accident, I noticed the first copyvio after checking the source. The next two in the same section gave me quite some concern even before I delved into the article's edit history. It's odd how an article can be improved with good references... and a little "too much" from those references. Cheers, Zaga :> Doc talk 07:26, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

self-contradiction

In the last paragraph of the "Chicago Bulls" section, Rodman's marriage to Ms. Electra is "invalidated after just 10 days," but down in "Personal life" we have her filing for divorce in April. A marriage declared invalid cannot be subject to divorce, so one must be wrong. In any case, it doesn't really make sense to report on the same event twice, though I understand that the context the first time is the controversy generated during that period of his career. Does anyone have further knowledge and, preferably, better sources? Chick Bowen 03:51, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes invalidation and divorce are different, but conceivably Ms Electra's lawyer went ahead and tried to file for divorce anyway! Chensiyuan (talk) 13:42, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
In December 1998, Rodman said he was still married: [2]. He did apparently file an annulment, but I guess he didn't go through with it. The article quotes him as saying, "Whatever. . . anybody said -- she conned me or anything like that -- I don't think you have to be intoxicated or drunk to marry someone as beautiful as Carmen Electra." Zagalejo^^^ 23:53, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for clarifying and removing the inaccurate statement. Chick Bowen 15:29, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

NBA.com historical playerfile

Here's an archived link, for future reference(since the NBA lockout is screwing everything up as far as NBA.com goes): [3] Zagalejo^^^ 22:49, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Rodman Construction LLC

Dennis Rodman like made an investment in some company that like is dying now. or somthing. This should be in the article because i was looking for it ... and it wasn't here. But then I found it. Plz add. ty. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.124.64.147 (talk) 01:01, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

NBA Player Statistics Table

Something is messed up with this table. I'm afraid to tinker with it, as I'd likely mess it up more. If someone can fix it it would be appreciated. Joefromrandb (talk) 14:13, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

It was screwed up with this edit. I don't wanna tinker with it either, but at least we know who to ask about it. Doc talk 15:19, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

marriages

recently a woman claiming to be his first ex-wife "annie" with whom he has a single daughter appeared on pawn stars selling some of his old jerseys for money. She claimed they were dating for 5 years and married for 3 (yet in wikipage it stating like a 1 year tops of marriage). and someone please verify that is it 1 year not 3 years as she is clamiing. It was on the most recent pawn star episode that airred on the 21st of january 2013. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.56.231.72 (talk) 20:39, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm looking into it. So far, I can't find anything else to verify the 1992 date. Zagalejo^^^ 22:37, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Ugh, this is giving me a headache. Every article I find seems to give a completely different timeline for things. Zagalejo^^^ 22:45, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
I give up. I just reworded things to avoid specific dates. Every thing I read says something different. This, for example, says they got married in 1991 and divorced in 1992. Both Rodman and Bakes have written books, although I don't know if any of the books would clarify things. Zagalejo^^^ 23:15, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi guys. Yes, I watched that episode of Pawn Stars where Annie Bakes said they were married "around three years." It was good. Haha. But her claim is simply not true; I knew it as soon as the words came out of her mouth. I'm sure she didn't want to admit she was married to him for such a short time. ;) And of course that can't be used as a reliable source anyway. A few days ago, after a lot of frustration, I finally found what I consider to be very reliable sources about the marriage start and end dates. I made the edit (again) a few minutes ago because I noticed someone had removed it. But I just noticed that Zagalejo reverted it, which I don't understand or agree with. My edit, which I made a few days ago, said: "Rodman married Annie Bakes in September 1992 on the fourth birthday of their daughter Alexis (born 1988).[26] They divorced on June 4, 1993.[62]" Zagalejo replaced that with the more vague: "Rodman's first wife was Annie Bakes.[26] They divorced in the early 1990s.[25]" First, the part I wrote about them getting married in 1992 on the daughter's fourth birthday is completely sourced from ESPN, and Zagaleojo even uses the same source. The ESPN story says, "Rodman's life encountered a tailspin in May 1992...That September, on his daughter Alexis' fourth birthday, Rodman had married Annie Bakes." So there was no valid reason to change that sentence. For the second sentence, the Lodi New-Sentinel article flat-out says they were divorced on June 4, 1993, and the article was written just seven days after that. And Zajalejo used that source, also! Haha. So my edits are not only reliably sourced, with the same sources Zajalejo used, so there's no dispute here. Zagalejo must've overlooked those statements in the sources. Therefore, I'm reverting to the correct, sourced content. --76.189.109.147 (talk) 04:59, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Are there any other sources to support the ESPN and Lodi New-Sentinel claims? Besides the People magazine link above, I found other sources that say they were divorced in 1992, eg [4], [5]. One thing I found on ProQuest even says that Rodman was seeking a divorce in April 1992 (before September, when ESPN says they were married). (Sharp, Drew. "Rodman Files Suit for Divorce". The Detroit News and Detroit Free Press [Detroit, Mich] 25 Apr 1992: B3.) Zagalejo^^^ 05:09, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Also, I left those sources in the article only to support the general claims that they were once married and then divorced. It's not an ideal solution, but I figured we needed something. Zagalejo^^^ 05:10, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
It's possible that the 1993 date from the Lodi New Sentinel is correct, and that there were still loose ends to tie up after the proceedings in December 1992. But I'm pretty sure the September 1992 date is wrong. I found another source, from August 1992, that says, "Divorce papers were filed earlier this year, but Rodman has spent the summer trying to make the marriage work." (Corky Meinecke. "PISTONS' RODMAN CAN'T SEEM TO MAKE UP MIND". KNIGHT-RIDDER NEWS SERVICE. The Salt Lake Tribune [Salt Lake City, Utah] 09 Aug 1992: D10.) Zagalejo^^^ 05:15, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Also, from March 1992: "He is married with a daughter. His courtship with Annie Bakes, a model from Sacramento, was turbulent, with Bakes publicly threatening him with a paternity suit before they married." (Heisler, Mark. "Never Out of Bounds No One Can Rebound Like the Pistons' Dennis Rodman,Who Uses His Desire and Quickness to Get the Ball". Los Angeles Times (pre-1997 Fulltext) [Los Angeles, Calif] 15 Mar 1992: 3.) Zagalejo^^^ 05:22, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Zag, I have to say... you're funny. You must be very sleepy. :p Both sources, which are very reliable and mainstream, give the specific dates I added, so there's no issue here. Of course there were "issues to tie up" after December 1992... that's only when Bakes left him. Divorces can take years, so this one was relatively quick. Anyway, we have a great source that gives the specific day which is what we as editors hope to find. Of course there are many articles that give a year only, or don't even give a year, but we when we have a reliable source being more specific, that's a gem source. Do you have a link for the Salt Lake Tribune info? They're wrong and I've never heard an other media say that, but I'd be interested in seeing it. Now I have a very important question for you: Are you really Ashton Kutcher, and trying to punk me? Haha. --76.189.109.147 (talk) 05:25, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
I can't find the Salt Lake Tribune article for free online; I got it through ProQuest. I could email it to you, if you don't have access to such resources. It does clearly call the September 1992 date into question. Zagalejo^^^ 05:31, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
You sound like a really nice guy (I assume guy), but it makes no sense to use the same two sources as me, yet remove the date content used in those very sources. And they're not weak sources; they're mainstream. So unless and until there's consensus that there are better sources, please stop reverting. Thanks. --76.189.109.147 (talk) 05:34, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
The newspaper articles are just as "mainstream" as the other ones. I don't see why we should arbitrarily decide that some are correct while the others are wrong. My proposed edits to the article are a compromise while we try to work things out. Do you want me to email you the ProQuest articles? Yes or no? Zagalejo^^^ 05:38, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
No, there are many, many newspapers and other sources that are not mainstream; ones that are unknown and where the editorial oversight is in question. You cannot "compromise" when we are using the exact same sources and those sources verify the content being discussed. I am not comfortable providing my email address to someone I don't know personally. Sorry. You would need to provide reliable sources that can be looked at by other editors which would prove that the current sources are wrong. At this point, we have two reliable sources, that can be accessed by all editors, which verify the content. ESPN is about as good as it gets with regard to covering athletes. And the Lodi article gave a full date - day/year/month - which is very telling. They could've been vague, but they weren't; and they wrote the article right after that date, not months or years later like most of the other sources. So that sourcing is about as good as it gets for specific dating. --76.189.109.147 (talk) 05:43, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
All of those newspapers mentioned above are major, well-known papers, and would count as reliable sources. There's no requirement that a source be immediately available for free on the internet. The articles exist, and have been archived. If you go to a library, I'm sure someone can pull them up for you. (You might even be able to access them yourself, by checking your public library's website.) You can't claim to win an argument by refusing to look at additional sources. It is possible that ESPN or the Lodi article got something wrong; mainstream media sources do make mistakes from time to time.
And again, I wouldn't have retained the ESPN and Lodi links if I had a better solution, but this is a complicated situation, and since those sources did still support the less-specific claims I was making, I decided to leave them in. Stop fixating on that part of my edits. Zagalejo^^^ 05:53, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry but they're reliable sources and they fully support the content. IMO, the "unreliable source?" tags are totally inappropriate because they're being misused. I believe any experienced editor or admin will say those two sources are obviously reliable. I believe those tags are only supposed to be used for sources where there would surely be a lot of editors who'd question their reliability. And it makes no sense that you're using that tag for sources you yourself are using. And any opinions one has about reliable sources being wrong about the content they contain violates WP:OR. But, again, I think you're a nice guy; a nice guy that happens to be incorrect in his thinking on this. :p --76.189.109.147 (talk) 06:34, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Even if a source is generally reliable, that doesn't mean it is infallible. Major media sources do get things wrong. (For example, look at the whole Manti Teo thing!) I have found newspaper articles that clearly contradict the timeframe presented in the Wiki page, so someone got something wrong. Zagalejo^^^ 06:46, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Haha, you're right... the reporting on the Manti Te'o debacle is mind-boggling because of the huge number of inconsistencies. It's one of the craziest stories I can ever remember. In terms of confusion, it beats the Rodman married/divorced issue 10 times over. :p Anyway, I'm glad we've resolved the matter via our own talk pages. I'll leave it in your hands. :) --76.189.109.147 (talk) 09:59, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Moving forward

I've only quickly looked through this thread, and haven't actually looked at any of the sources mentioned. This appears to be the classic case described in the essay Wikipedia:Inaccuracy, where generally reliable sources may be unreliable for specific claims, as evidenced by the conflicting claims in these sources. Which one to believe? Unless there is consensus on which ones are more credible, I would suggest either:

  1. Wording it generically, with a footnote explaining the conflicts with relevant sources cited. See Steve Novak regarding his birthdate as an example.
  2. Explain the specific conflicts in the text itself with cited sources; no indirect explanations in footnotes.

I would suggest #1, as specifics about dates of his marriage are minor to his overall notability. Finally, a gentle reminder to all to avoid edit warring, especially the three revert rule.—Bagumba (talk) 07:27, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Bagumba, thanks for sharing your thoughts. I understand what you're saying; however, the other editor has provided no sources that we can look at which disprove the reliable sources currently being used; ones that both of us are using. WP:INACCURACY, as you acknowledged, is an essay and, frankly, has quite a bit of nonsense in it. But the good parts allude to extreme or clear-cut examples of innacuracy. I realize that reliable sources don't necessarily need to be visible to editors, but when there are visible reliable sources available that verify specific content, then ones that cannot be seen by other editors should not override them. However, if consensus can be obtained for using one of your suggestions instead of the current content, I would of course be happy to concede to that solution. Finally, as I said previously, I think it's very convincing that the two reliable sources give "extremely" specific start and end dates for the marriage. One says they were married in September 1992, on the daughter's fourth birthday. And the other says they were divorced on June 4, 1993, not 1993 or even June 1993, but the complete date. So both are as specific as a reliable source can be, whereas all the sources alluded to by the other editor are vague, not specific, which is a good indication of uncertaintly in their information. So for now, we have very reliable sources (inappropriately tagged to imply they're unreliable) which verify the specific content. --76.189.109.147 (talk) 07:58, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Without knowing if the specific dates were retrieved from court records or from a quote, even exact dates can be questionable. Though your facts are verified to be from a source, the question per WP:RS is whether they are reliable in the context that they being used. Zagalejo did provide some conflicting sources in the discussion above, though they may not have been added to the article yet. For what it's worth, I've never had a problem in the past with the accuracy of Zagalejo's edits. As you don't have the same benefit of my past experience, I can only ask that we all assume good faith. We all want an accurate article, but we may have different ideas on how to achieve it. Hence, the need to discuss to reach a consensus. As for offline or subscription sources, WP:CITE is clear that they can be as good, even if not as convenient, as free online sources. Perhaps use of the quote parameter in {{cite news}} would address your concerns?—Bagumba (talk) 08:34, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
I have just posted a comment on Zagalejo's talk page, which you'll see will resolve this matter. Thanks so much for your great input. --76.189.109.147 (talk) 08:56, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
I've just self-reverted my preferred content and replaced it with Zagalejo's preferred content. Whatever you guys think is best is fine with me. My big hesitation in making any changes was the fact that those two reliable sources were so extremely specific about the dates, where as all/most other sources are much more vague. Thanks. --76.189.109.147 (talk) 10:18, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Just an update. I took a look at Rodman's book Bad As I Wanna Be, and he does say the marriage took place in September 1992. He also said it only lasted 82 days, although I'm not sure exactly what he means by that. (Did she simply leave him at that point, or were they officially divorced?) I haven't been able to look at Bakes' book, Worse Than He Says He Is, and it might take a while before I get a chance. But I'd be interested in her version of events. If the thread starter is correct about what she said on Pawn Stars, she seems to remember things differently. We can't just dismiss what she says and assume Rodman is correct until more research is done.
The fact also remains that there are newspaper articles about a divorce that predate September 1992. I considered the possibility that ProQuest got the dates wrong, but that is not the case, since the articles do reference things like the Pistons playing the Knicks in the playoffs and the Dream Team being selected. There's still a chance that the writers misunderstood something, but I can't say anything for sure at this point. Zagalejo^^^ 00:30, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Nice work on your research. Yes, the talk about his "82-day marriage" was famous, but that's the number of days they actually lived together as a married couple. The divorce wasn't finalized until several months later, in June 1993. Also important is the fact that many people falsey assumed they were married long before they actually were. This is because they had been a couple for five to six years prior to getting married, and both of them have mentioned that fact. I've seen more than a few articles that incorrectly refer to them as being married prior to September 1992. The reporting on his marriage to Carmen Electra is extremely similar, where it's very often referred to as a nine-day marriage. It's just not true. Yes, that's the amount of time they were physically together and when Rodman filed for an annulment, but the divorce wasn't finalized until five months later, in April 1999. On a personal note, I know a couple that separated in the early 2000s after several years of marriage. Their divorce proceedings lasted for eight years before it became finalized! Haha. But when someone asks either them, "How long were you married?" they do not include all they years after they separated. Good luck on your continued research! --76.189.109.147 (talk) 11:50, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
I just read the verifiability guidelines. There's something very important to consider. In the lead of the policy, it says "When reliable sources disagree, present what the various sources say, give each side its due weight, and maintain a neutral point of view." In this matter regarding the Rodman-Bakes marriage/divorce dates, the policy clearly instructs us that if there are other reliable sources that contradict the ESPN and Lodi News-Sentinal stories, then those can also presented. However, because the content about the couple being married in September 1992 on their daughter's fourth birthday, and divorced on June 4, 1993, is indeed reliably sourced, it should not be removed simply because other sources say something different. The only option, per the policy, would be to merge in what the other reliable sources say, and cite them. For example, it could say something like: "Rodman's first marriage was to Annie Bakes, which ended in divorce in the early 1990s.[cite] While some publications reported that the wedding was on their daughter's fourth birthday in September 1992 and they divorced on June, 4, 1993,[ESPN cite][Lodi News-Sentinel cite], other reports gave different start and end dates for the marriage.[cite][cite][cite] It was stated in Rodman's autobiography, and widely in the media, that the marriage lasted 82 days,[cite] but that was only the amount time that Rodman and Bakes actually lived together." --76.189.109.147 (talk) 18:28, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
The issue with reporting "both sides" is that there are multiple different timelines floating around, and lots of vagueness, so anything that really gave justice to the contradicting claims would be very wordy. It would also be tough to decide how much weight to give to each claim. The wording in the article right now isn't wrong, it's just non-specific. I'd still prefer to leave things as they are until someone gets a chance to look at Bakes' book. I am committed to figuring things out; it just might take a bit of time.Zagalejo^^^ 20:05, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Zag. If there are "multiple different timelines floating around, and lots of vagueness", then simply summarize that fact, just as I did in the example text above. But you need to cite those differences. And if you're not ready with the cites yet, and are still doing research, then I feel you should just put back my content until you are ready because what you're essentially doing is editing based on your personal preferences rather than adhering to the Wikipedia policies. Your strategy is to wait until you have all the data and then add the content. But you're not supposed to do that. We edit based on what we have at the moment. My reliable sources are not vague at all; they're very specific. Simply removing the specific dates given in very reliable sources (ESPN and Lodi) and replacing them with very vague information should not be done, per WP:NOTTRUTH and WP:SOURCE. Those policies tell us to leave the sourced content in place; not to make them more general while you look for other sources. The bottom line is that it does not matter one bit whether the September 1992 and June 4, 1993, dates are wrong because that information is reliably sourced. Therefore, by policy, those are appropriate to include in the article. Remember, "Verifiability, not truth". This situation is no Dewey Defeats Truman; far from it. And for the record, from everything I remember those marriage and divorce dates are indeed correct. --76.189.109.147 (talk) 21:43, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
By the way, I don't understand why you say it would be very wordy to explain the contradictions and difficult to give due weight. I already told you how to do it, with this example: "Rodman's first marriage was to Annie Bakes, which ended in divorce in the early 1990s.[cite] While some publications reported that the wedding was on their daughter's fourth birthday in September 1992 and they divorced on June, 4, 1993,[ESPN cite][Lodi News-Sentinel cite], other reports gave different start and end dates for the marriage.[cite][cite][cite] It was stated in Rodman's autobiography, and widely in the media, that the marriage lasted 82 days,[cite] but that was only the amount time that Rodman and Bakes actually lived together." We don't need to write a book about it; after all, it's just one tiny piece of Rodman's life. I think my suggested text is a reasonable way to address the contradictions without giving too much attention to this brief event. It incorporates my text with yours; read the first sentence, it's your version that's in the article right now! All that my example does is add on the ESPN and Lodi info, along with a good, general explanation of the contradictions. Simple. Problem solved. Just put it in and move on. If you need to alter it a little, go for it. If you find more specific info later, it can always be merged in. ;) --76.189.109.147 (talk) 22:21, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
I would suggest explaining the conflicting sources in a footnote. Presenting viewpoints would be more appropriate for a debate where there is no right or wrong per se (e.g. politics). In this case, they married and divorced on specific dates, there are official records to prove it somewhere, but nobody is claiming to have cited them.—Bagumba (talk) 01:40, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
"Verifiability, not truth" is a controversial guideline and has been widely debated in recent years. (Ask Jimbo Wales himself: [6] - just as an example of a recent discussion.) Waiting until people have gathered all the facts is a good practice; there's no deadline to add the material to the article. Your proposed text does pose some problems. For one, I've only seen one source (the Lodi paper) that provides the June 4, 1993 date, so it's misleading to write that "some publications" reported that date. Also, the last part ("that was only the amount of time that Rodman and Bakes actually lived together") is little more than an educated guess. Zagalejo^^^ 02:35, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Well, that discussion isn't exactly recent (late 2011), but what Jimbo said about "Verifiability, not truth" alluded to content that most people know to be false or impossible. Basically, he's talking about editors who choose to ignore the obvious. It doesn't have an apples to apples connection to this situation. And I'm sorry, but waiting until all the facts are gathered isn't the way Wikipedia works, unless it's a recent event. Most editors edit independently; most edits do not go through a lengthy discussion like this, or any discussion at all. As far as the Lodi paper being the only source that has the specific dates, that's fully to be expected. Complete divorce dates are not common. Further, there are relatively very few sources about any aspect of the divorce. So the fact that we do have a very reliable source which gives the specific date is what we as editors hope for. And my suggested text doesn't say "some publications" reported the divorce date; it says some publications reported the wedding date and the divorce date. But that's a red herring; the wording of any part of that text can be cleaned up. I just wanted to throw out a suggestion to end this. Exactly what you wrote is in my suggested text (combined as one sentence), and I added the contradiction statement after that. You said you've read reliable sources that address the contradictions, so just attach them. You're probably never going to find another reliable source that gives the exact divorce date, or even the daughter's-birthday-wedding-info, so let's just present what we have. No reader is ever going to look at those two sources and say... hey, those sources aren't reliable. In fact, they'll say those are really quality sources. But even if someone questions it, we'd have the additional text that addresses the very vague contradictions. That's the part that gets me, there are zero other sources that give even a specific date (for the marriage or divorce), yet we're allowing them to overpower two reliable sources that do give them. I think I've made an exceptionally reasonable compromise to solve this; it addresses the contradictions and provides good sources. Readers can judge for themselves. --76.189.109.147 (talk) 03:13, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
When the ESPN reporter wrote in that article that they were married on the daughter's fourth birthday, there's no way he pulled that extremely specific information out of thin air. He must've gotten that from someone very reliable source or ESPN wouldn't have published it. It's so odd in its specificity that it has to be accurate. And we have no reason to doubt a source like ESPN on something like this. It's not like they're predicting a future trade. And the same really holds true for the Lodi paper; they gave the exact date of the divorce; just a few days after that date. So, again, they must have had a very reliable source or they wouldn't have printed that. If the article was years later, maybe. But it was published a few days later. We have to use common sense and combine it with the fact that those two sources are indisputably reliable. --76.189.109.147 (talk) 03:24, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
I just noticed that the reference about their daughter Alexis was removed when you reverted the parts about the marriage and divorce dates. I assume that was inadvertant on your part. There's no dispute about Alexis. And one funny thing is that on Pawn Stars, Annie Bakes was pawning one of Rodman's NBA game-worn jerseys that had an inscription to Alexis on it, which included something like "Daddy will always love you". I couldn't believe that Bakes was selling it. ;) She got about $4500 for four or five of his jerseys. Anyway, the content about them having a daughter named Alexis should be put back. Thanks. --76.189.109.147 (talk) 03:41, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
What is in the article currently is not perfect, but I also am not in support of the current proposal. It seems to give undue weight to sources arbitrarily because they give exact dates. Since there are conflicts, and none of the sources explain how they resolved the conflict, I treat them all the same, especially since there isn't one date that is dominant among the sources. That being said, the main issue is that there is currently no consensus to change the current wording. Persuasive discussion can still change that, but we are not there yet. I still propose a compromise to footnote a short summary of the conflicts.—Bagumba (talk) 03:47, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
How can it be undue weight when I'm saying both sides should be included? All the other sources are very vague, so I'm giving them as much weight as possible for a source that isn't more specific. And keep in mind that we have yet to actually see any of the other sources, so it's hard to get perspective on what they indicate. My suggested wording is just that... a suggestion. It can be improved. But all I am suggesting is including what the sources are telling us. ESPN and Lodi say this... while these other sources say that. Nothing is being hidden or favored. I am treating them all the same. So there's no undue weight. For now, I agree with your proposal to footnote a short summary of the conflicts. And their daughter needs to be re-added. Thanks for your input, Bagumba. --76.189.109.147 (talk) 03:57, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Bagumba, could you propose a wording for a footnote? I did add the daughter's name to the personal life section, but didn't say anything about her birthdate, because that's connected to the disputed timeline. To 76..., I do agree that we can't give undue weight to something just because it is precise. Something can be very precise but still completely inaccurate. Things get misunderstood, misinterpreted, etc. I've been monitoring NBA articles for several years, and there have been numerous debates over things like birthdates.
Again, the sources I have mentioned do exist, and are certainly accessible through a library. Lots of public libraries will let you access newspaper databases through their websites with a library card number, so you might be able to access some articles right now. Zagalejo^^^ 04:13, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Here's a January 1997 article from the Chicago Tribune that also backs up that daughter Alexis was born in 1988 (the other source says her fourth birthday was September 1992).[7]. It also says that Rodman and Bakes divorced three years earlier; it was actually three and a half from the date of the story, but they don't mention halves in newspaper articles. Also, here's an archive of the paper's stories in which Rodman was written about.[8] --76.189.109.147 (talk) 06:08, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Here it is... the best proof of all that Alexis was born in September 1988, again from the Chicago Tribune.[9] The story was written in mid December 1988 and says she's two months old. Perfect... she was born in late September (several fan-type sites say September 28) so she was 2 1/2 months old. No question she was born in 1988. I'll re-add the year (but not the month). --76.189.109.147 (talk) 06:20, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Proposed text

Zagalejo: Regarding your request for me to come up with the proposed text, I'll respectfully decline for now. I'm familiar with the high level issues being discussed, but don't want to dig into the details right now. I think you two are in agreement about what are in the sources, but just differ on how to present them. I do think I can help facilitate by laying out some suggestions, and one of you can come up with the actual text and citations. Here are some options for a footnote.

  1. Do Rodman and Bakes have their own version of the timespan? If so, just present both in the footnote and mention in passing that other sources are also not consistent.
  2. Provide ranges in the footnote, e.g. the earliest and latest they were married according to any source, along with the shortest and longest duration of how long the marriage lasted. Is it even consistent whether they got married or before their child was born?

—Bagumba (talk) 02:35, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

  1. The answer seems to be yes, although Bakes has apparently said several different things, and I'm not sure how Rodman defines his terms.
  2. There are several different timelines that I've seen, plus other sources that implicitly contradict the others without giving a clear range. I do think the sources are consistent that the daughter was born before they were married. Zagalejo^^^ 03:22, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
    Should we go with option 1 then?—Bagumba (talk) 03:26, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
That might work. We could briefly say what each one says in their books. Zagalejo^^^ 05:18, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Divorce dates

What is the standard convention for stating when someone gets divorced. Is it the official date it was finalized, or the date it was filed? This is tricky in divorces that span years, which might have been the case here. Different interpretations might be the reason for the differing reports, not to mention people's divergent memories.—Bagumba (talk) 01:40, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure about that, but it is a good thing to get clarified. It's possible that even the June 4, 1993 date is too early, and that the paperwork wasn't completely wrapped up until, say, 1995. Zagalejo^^^ 02:38, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
I am sure. Without question, it is the date it is finalized (by a judge/court in the U.S. and most other countries). Unfortunately, I know way too many people who've gone through the process. Until it's finalized, it's a legal separation, and the couple is only "going through a divorce" e.g. the divorce process. See divorce. The Rodman-Bakes divorce process took about five months before it was finalized. Also, in the U.S. there is a waiting period before either person can get married again, so it's not completely over until that waiting period ends. Haha. ;) --76.189.109.147 (talk) 02:41, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Found this page on the divorce process if you're interested. --76.189.109.147 (talk) 02:48, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
On this subject, I just found this, from a review of Worse Than He Says He Is: "Among the inaccuracies, she claims, is the length of their marriage. He wrote it lasted less than 90 days, and she says the divorce took 11 months to finalize." (Phil Rosenthal. "Ex goes from 'Bad' to 'Worse'". Chicago Sun-Times. April 22, 1997.) That does seem to contradict what she supposedly said on Pawn Stars (unless people were mishearing her.) It would also contradict a whole bunch of other things. Zagalejo^^^ 02:49, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Here's a HighBeam link: [10] Zagalejo^^^ 03:00, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Well, it just gets more complicated. Here's something from a USA Today review of the same book, which suggests yet another timeline: "They married in September 1991 and were officially divorced in August 1993." [11] (Rodman's ex takes her shot: [FINAL Edition] Oldenburg, Ann. USA TODAY [McLean, Va] 30 Apr 1997: 02.D.) Zagalejo^^^ 03:06, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
I thought this thread was just about clarifying when a divorce is a divorce. It will be very difficult to discuss the content issue if it moves back and forth between different threads. Interesting info, though. Yeah, he said less than 90 days, which lines up with the fact that the "82-day marriage" theme was a huge gossip piece in the news back then. Rodman even put it in his book, specifically referring to 82 days. But of course that's just the amount of time they lived together as a married couple. And Annie Bakes was obviously fibbing on Pawn Stars when she stammered and said... uh, we were married about... three years. Haha. I doubt she would tell the store clerk that they were together for only 82 days and then she split. Haha. --76.189.109.147 (talk) 03:17, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

CNN Interview

A user recently reverted an addition regarding Rodman's CNN interview in which he exploded with rage in an attempt to defend his visits to North Korea. This has gotten significant coverage in other news outlets and I believe is very significant. This should be included in the article. yonnie (talk) 03:57, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

North Korea

As I mentioned in this edit summary [12], I thought upon reading it the statement that Rodman was the first American he had ever met was dumb, considering AFAIK and a quick check of his article confirms, it's widely believed Kim was educated somewhere in Europe in international schools and even for someone who may have lived a sheltered live there, it's hard to believe they'd never met another American as a student or teacher. So I checked the source and it seems one of the sources we used (IBtimes) itself notes the same thing. While we could say the whole thing (that some reporters suggested this but it doesn't make much sense), it seems to me it's unnecessary to mention such a trivial detail which says more about the media (that it wouldn't occur to them that if Kim spent several years in international schools in Europe he's probably met an American before) than about Rodman or Kim. I left in the other statement which says Rodman et al were the first known Americans. You could argue this is true since there is some dispute over where Kim was educated so it's difficult to say who he may have met before. However it seems to me that what the source [13] is actually trying to say, and what's a more significant detail is that Rodman et al are the first Americans Kim is known to have met since he started being place to take over from his father and definitely since taking over (for which it's fairly plausible they may not only be the first known but the first Americans). Perhaps a source could be found which actually says this rather then getting in to odd stuff which hinges on Kim's formative years and where they were spent? Nil Einne (talk) 15:48, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Can someone familiar with the article add something about the visit to North Korea in the lead? Surely that is more notable than Celebrity Mole? Starship.paint (talk) 08:12, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
How can he have met Kim Jong Un in 2013 when it was claimed that Kim Jong Il Died in 2011?

Semi-protected edit request on 18 September 2014

Please remove the comment about the visit to ISIS. The root source behind all four citations is a National Report article (http://nationalreport.net/dennis-rodman-isis/), which is satire. 18.203.1.212 (talk) 05:55, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Done. Thank you for bringing this to our attention. Meatsgains (talk) 06:06, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

ISIS hoax

Why is adding this not notable enough? Because it just is? Yup69 (talk) 07:45, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

A report published September 17th, 2014 by the National Report reported that Dennis Rodman is leaving the United States to talk with leaders of ISIS. Rodman's representative said the report is total crap, saying the retired basketball player is in Hong Kong for business meetings.[5][6][7][8]

Not afraid of women

I can't edit the page because it's protected.

This line needs to be removed: "Rodman was so insecure around women that he thought he was homosexual in his teens"

The source says the opposite: that he was afraid of men. Interviewer's question: "So you were afraid to be around men, and you were surrounded by women in a platonic way." White Anunnaki (talk) 16:20, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Gossipy lead

The third paragraph of the lead doesn't belong there but, at best, in the personal life section. It makes the article look more like a tabloid than a proper encyclopedia. White Anunnaki (talk) 17:09, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

It can probably be toned down a bit in the lead. However, his tabloid following is definitely part of his notability, and deserves an overview in the lead.—Bagumba (talk) 17:58, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Would you say that it's the gossips that are notable (on par with his career), or the fact that the tabloids follow him that is notable? White Anunnaki (talk) 16:53, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Dennis Rodman. 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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 13:13, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 March 2016

Please edit "After the 1997–1998 NBA season, Rodman and Malone squared off again" in the section on World Championship Wrestling. Should be "After the 1997–1998 NBA season, Rodman and Karl Malone squared off again", adding Karl Malone's first name. There is an earlier mention of Karl Malone, using his full name, but this mention is so much later to be confusing. Jolsterobertson (talk) 18:10, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Not done: Since there is an earlier mention of Karl Malone's first name, a second mention isn't necessary, unless we're distinguishing him from a different Malone. (Moses Malone isn't mentioned.) – Muboshgu (talk) 18:13, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Picture for infobox

Since other pictures are posted in the article showing Dennis Rodman why is there no picture in the infobox? It would help recognize the person upon first accessing the article? I have searched the archive and found no reason for the lack of picture. Ralphw (talk) 00:02, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

A bot deleted the previous one the other day since it was deleted from Wikipedia, apparently due to a lack of information regarding copyright status. I added the one from lower in the article, although this could be changed if someone prefers. It might also be a little tall for an infobox image, so perhaps it could be cropped or another more square image added. Tonystewart14 (talk) 05:07, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

protected edit request, the article makes no mention of the film/documentary Dennis Rodman's Big Bang in PyongYang

In 2015 a documentary was released about Dennis Rodman's trips to North Korea, mostly focusing on the basketball game he played during Kim Jong-Un's birthday. The documentary was titled "Dennis Rodman's Big Bang in PyongYang". It was directed by Colin Offland. The IMDB page for it is here: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4598848/?ref_=ttpl_pl_tt. Again, I thought this should be added to the section on Rodman's North Korea visits. I can't edit the article myself. 67.85.241.72 (talk) 07:42, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Dennis Rodman. 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:36, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 January 2017

Changes in the request done
In "Post-NBA years" section after the sentence "In November, he played one match for Torpan Pojat of the Finland's basketball league, Korisliiga.[31][51]" add following sentences:
He was team's best scorer making 17 points and grabbing 6 rebounds against Espoon Honka. The match had 7,420 spectators which is current record in Finland's basketball league.[9] Ropero12 (talk) 19:38, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Sir Joseph (talk) 21:26, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Rodman Pleads Guilty To DUI
  2. ^ Dennis Rodman pleads no contest to DUI
  3. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference stats was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  4. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference nbacom was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  5. ^ http://www.tmz.com/2014/09/20/dennis-rodman-isis-hoax-not-meeting/
  6. ^ http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/news/dennis-rodman-denies-plans-to-meet-with-isis-leaders-after-satirical-report-goes-viral-9746662.html
  7. ^ http://www.jpost.com/Not-Just-News/Dennis-Rodman-is-not-going-to-the-Middle-East-to-meet-ISIS-leaders-375948
  8. ^ https://screen.yahoo.com/wochit/dennis-rodman-im-not-meeting-145922515.html
  9. ^ Finnish Basketball League Topo–Espoon Honka, Finnish basketball association, korisliiga.fi, November 6, 2005, Retrieved January 4, 2016

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Dennis Rodman. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:50, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Dennis Rodman. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:03, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 June 2017

For less ambiguity, I think that the word "seriously" should be moved in the first sentence of this section as follows:

After getting suspended for the rest of the 1996–1997 NBA season, Rodman seriously took up his hobby of professional wrestling seriously and appeared on the edition of March 10 of Monday Nitro with his friend Hollywood Hulk Hogan in World Championship Wrestling (WCW). At the March 1997 Uncensored event, he appeared as a member of the nWo. His first match was at the July 1997 Bash at the Beach event, where he teamed with Hogan in a loss to Lex Luger and The Giant.

66.215.170.71 (talk) 22:11, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Done Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 22:51, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dennis Rodman. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:51, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dennis Rodman. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:16, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Division of Pistons Section?

In the section division of 2.1.1 (1986-1989 seasons) and 2.1.2 (1989-1993 seasons): Why divide the section there? Considering that he became a regular starter in the 1990-1991 season, I would think that it would be a more appropriate cadence point.

Although I didn't make any edits, I suggest moving the 1989-1990 content into section 2.1.1. Gprobins (talk) 22:48, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Mistake in North Korea visits section

The bottom of the section reads "Rodman visited North Korea again in June 2018, stating "I'm just happy to be a part of" the 2018 North Korea–United States summit and "because I think I deserve it. I think that I brought awareness to a lot of things around the world. And I think North Korea has given a lot of people this opportunity to do this conference now and I hope it is a success."[135]"

This is incorrect, Rodman visited Singapore, where the summit was held, not North Korea. Can someone remove this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.42.128.33 (talk) 22:37, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Twilight Years section word choice error

"disinterested" should be "uninterested"— Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎2601:42:1:3950:d8ea:3f9c:3c70:9d64 (talk) 00:33, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Fixed—Bagumba (talk) 09:49, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Pyongyang Times-esque copy

"Non-basketball awards World Humanitarian Special Award, 2015. For his contributions into helping create peace and trying to unite North Korea and the USA." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.83.168.149 (talk) 03:39, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

First paragraph

Can one of y’all switch the position of the 2nd and 3rd sentences in the first paragraph - his fierce defensive and rebounding abilities are more known than the teams he played for. AfroWorld33 (talk) 23:17, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Kudos!! AfroWorld33 (talk) 07:36, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 October 2020

There is no citation for how he acquired the nickname worm.

I have a citation from Rodman's interview in Playboy June 1997 page 59 which says he got the nickname worm because of "the way he wiggled playing videogames"

interview source: https://www.playboy.com/read/playboy-interview-dennis-rodman @Ganbaruby: 

Tomnz74 (talk) 10:15, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
@Tomnz74: I've added a source for the nickname. Is the Playboy interview available online? We could probably expand upon it in the body. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 10:31, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
Other sources say pinball, so I'm going with that one. It's in the early life section now. Thanks! ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:37, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 December 2020

Please correct the word 'enstranged' to 'estranged'. Mutya.raghuram (talk) 04:34, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

 Done. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:40, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 February 2021

In the third sentence of Family, under the Personal life section, please change "infidelites" to "infidelities." Danman1979 (talk) 02:50, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

 Done. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 03:06, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 April 2021

Dennis Rodman appeared in the first season of Tosh.O 2600:1702:4190:FAD0:4879:5722:EBEE:A631 (talk) 13:13, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:21, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

"and unofficial US Peace Ambassador to North Korea"

As this is "unofficial", it's meaningless and unsourced. Especially since it refers to an honorific title Rodman doesn't have, I think this should be pulled. However, I don't want an edit war so I'm seeking some consensus or re-wording. Kickstart70TC 02:35, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 July 2022

Add 2000 movie "Cutaway" as "Turbo" to filmography. 41.113.175.121 (talk) 07:45, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 03:28, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

WCW Bash at the Beach 1995

Dennis Rodman made an appearance at WCW Bash and the Beach 1995 assisting Hulk Hogan in the shows main event. This should be added to his pro wrestling career section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.196.76.206 (talk) 23:01, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Conspiracy Theory

The Washington Post makes a very good argument that Rodman is acting as an unofficial envoy for Trump, and does not propose any implausibly widespread collusion which would mark a conspiracy theory. Any reference to a conspiracy should be removed from this article.

That's just an opinion. Wiki works off of RS's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.111.29.1 (talk) 03:40, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Any reason personal info is pushed all the way down to the professional wrestling section?

I understand that that is where the relevant Info block to his wrestling wrestling record should go, but why is also the info block for parents, spouses, children, etc all the way down there? That should be at the very top of the article. Deliusfan (talk) 22:29, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dennis_Rodman/Archive_1&oldid=1148852076"