Talk:Tai Tuivasa

UFC walkout music

I wanted to put the following on his article but it was reverted for not being relevant. Do you think a truncated version of the following is appropriate for Tuivasa's article? I think this is what makes his fighting persona unique:

With the exception of UFC 243 on October 9, 2019, Tuivasa has walked out to unique and light-hearted songs. The following are songs used for his walkout music in the UFC in chronological order along with the dates he walked out to them:

• "A Thousand Miles" by Vanessa Carlton (November 19, 2017)
• "The Horses" by Daryl Braithwaite (February 11, 2018)
• "My Heart Will Go On" by Celine Dion (June 9, 2018)
• "What About Me" by Shannon Noll (December 2, 2018)
• "(Everything I Do) I Do It for You" by Bryan Adams (June 8, 2019)
• "Spot the Difference" by ONEFOUR (October 6, 2019)
• "Dreams" by Gabrielle (October 24, 2020)
• "You're Still The One" by Shania Twain (March 20, 2021)
• "Wannabe" by Spice Girls (July 10, 2021)
• "Barbie Girl" by Aqua (December 11, 2021)
• "Girls Just Want to Have Fun" by Cyndi Lauper (February 12, 2022)

References

• Comment: Every fight for every fighter that is a walkout that is trivial stuff - Wikipedia is not a Directory. Cassiopeia talk 22:24, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment*: I disagree with you on this one. It's like his shoey being mentioned in the article that makes him unique. The walkout music deserves a mention at least in the personal life section on his article. I don't know why you are considered an authority for this. Update: crazy - you have been editing UFC articles for five years. Marty2Hotty (talk) 14:09, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
• Comment* I have editing Wikipedia for 5 years and I am also one of the trainers for counter vandalism and new page reviewer in Wikipedia. For such, it is NOT an authority but I have some knowledge on what is relevant and significant and what is trivial. Shoey is mentioned in the personal life section because it has been mentioned many many times in the media and it is uniquely his but not the walk out songs. Many fighters have different walk out songs and many are from the local/home/country song which means something to him but not relevant enough or significant enough to be included in the article. Remember Wikipedia is an enclyopedia and not every info should be included in it. Cassiopeia talk 21:53, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment: I have had this account for 13 years, but I have not been as active. I feel his walkout songs are unique enough to have had articles written about them which shows his distinct personality because all fighters do not come out to that type of music, so I think it deserves at least a sentence or two, but I'm not going to fight you on it. I have better things to do, haha. There are so many articles with trivial information. You should look at some professional wrestlers' articles. Marty2Hotty (talk) 15:51, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment: Pls do not add the info back again. No consensus here for trivial info in MMA pages. Cassiopeia talk 07:41, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

mma stats discrepancy

tai tuivasas stats on sherdog (the source that is cited in the article) are 14-5, yet on sites such as ufcstats and espn (among many others that are easy to find but too numerous to list), his stats are 15-5.

there are also fights on his record on espn that are dated differently than they are on sherdog (which date is correct?)..

for example, espn has his earliest fight vs. simon osborne dated april 17, 2012, while sherdog has it dated july 06, 2012.

espn also has his fight vs. john hopoate dated march 18, 2013, and sherdog has it listed as december 01, 2012.

this was a victory for tuivasa, so where or if this bout gets listed has bearing on whether he is seen as having 14 or 15 wins.

sherdog has the john hopoate fight listed as a "pro exhibition", and whether it actually occurred on december 01, 2012 or march 18, 2013, it would still have been his fourth fight, as his third fight vs. eric nosa was dated november 09, 2012 on both sites, and im prettysure fighters dont usually perform pro exhibition bouts after already being 3-0 in their professional careers (im not 100% positive on that, but it does sound extremely counterintuitive).

i guess the point im hoping to make is that, by the time he fought hopoate (whether it was in december 2012 or march 2013), he was well past "exhibition" status as he had already won his first three professional bouts by that point (with john hopoate being listed as his fourth victory on espn)

at first i was thinking sherdog might have the john hopoate fight listed under pro exhibition because it was an "australia regional" event, but then i realized the simon osborne fight was also an australia regional event and both sites have that fight listed as tuivasas first professional fight.

sherdog and espn are usually both pretty accurate, and im having a rather difficult time trying to reconcile tuivasas stats between these two sources.

with the majority of other sources seemingly reporting identical to the stats used by espn, getting to the bottom of this has become even more difficult.

im basically at a loss trying to figure out to how to proceed, or if in fact, any action is even necessary.

if somebody could take a quick look at/possibly get a handle on this, i would really appreciate it.

i dont want to just go in and edit the stats and change the cited source, but it looks a bit like sherdog might be fallible here.

im not 100% positive, so im posting this topic in search of advice/assistance.

i tried to explain everything i have found to the best of my ability, i hope it is clear enough and makes sense to whomever reads this.

if you read this and have any thoughts on it, please ping me or tag me or whatever when you reply so i get notified.

thanks in advance. Snarevox (talk) 09:05, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Snarevox All MMA fighter fight records in Wikipedia are as per Sherdog based on Wikipedia MMA guidelines as thus we used Sherdog info. UFC is affiliated with the fighters and ESPN is associated with UFC as they have business contract in place so they are considered not independent source. Cassiopeia talk 08:53, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@Cassiopeia: thank you for responding and clarifying that for me..

i wonder if sherdog is aware of the difference(s).. it would be unfortunate if a victory was essentially taken away from an athlete merely due to an oversight/mistake.

i also wonder if something such as this might have the potential to have a negative effect on future betting lines or monetary opportunities for the fighter..

like maybe the odds might be 2 to 1 if they had 15 wins but since only 14 are listed, now the odds are 3 to 1... or if maybe they could get a $1 million dollar payday for a fight with a 15-5 record but since it says 14-5, they would possibly earn less..

those situations are purely hypothetical of course, but i would want all my stats if i were him.

which brings me back to the question of sherdog and wikipedia being the only places i could find that dont have him at 15 wins... if they (sherdog) did in fact make an error, how does that affect their credibility as a reliable source (if at all)? and if a single error doesnt translate to a negative impact on wikipedias perception of that sources overall reliability, how many errors is a source allowed before their credibility does become different, lesser, altered??

would a sources first error perhaps be noted and then like a three strike rule implemented before any actual action is taken beyond the initial notification of the source that a discrepancy had been discovered?

im just spitballing here, i guess im basically just trying to verify accuracy/integrity while at the same time making sure a living person gets the credit they are potentially due.

either way, it really isnt a big deal to me, but i do think a reliable source should be reliable at all times and needs to be alerted if there is even the slightest possibility that they could be hosting erroneous data.

thanks again.. Snarevox (talk) 20:34, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Snarevox It could be Sherdog make an error or they didnt receive certain info from the fight organization. Either way, we can not use UFC or ESPN info as they are associated with the fighters (ESPN has contract with UFC). When the record is corrected in Sherdog, we will updated accordingly. Cassiopeia talk 01:53, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Cassiopeia: ok im super confused as to why you would remove those four equals signs from around the "title" of my talk topic?

i figured out that on the mobile site, if there is more than one talk topic, their titles must all be bordered by the same number of equals signs for them all to be displayed without having to select "desktop site" or "read as wiki page", otherwise only the topic with the least number of equals signs is displayed..

so if you were trying to hide my talk topic, removing those equals signs effectively did the exact opposite, it hid the other topic and only the one i started is displayed.. at least thats what it did on the mobile version.

on the desktop version or on mobile + read as wiki page, it just made the font size of the title of my topic larger than the title of other topic.

i only added the equals signs back because i couldnt figure out why both topics werent showing again, when i spent quite a bit of time to make sure they were both being displayed before.

i didnt even realize you edited my topics title the first time because you didnt say anything, i wasnt trying to purposely undo your change.

anyways, i contacted sherdog and i provided them with an extensive explanation as to what i found along with a list of 11 urls that all have the same dates and stats and are all equally contrary to sherdogs, and by extension, wikipedias position.

i am hoping to either hear back from them one way or the other, or possibly even see the correction at some point.

since this is still ongoing as far as im concerned, and even if it wasnt, i dont see why you would be so insistent on those equals signs being removed from the title of my topic on the articles talk page when the effect is so minimal? again, as far as i can tell, all your edit did on the mobile version of the page is remove the "ufc walkout music" topic from view and display mine, and all it did on the desktop version or read as wiki page is make the title of my topic appear larger than the title of the other topic.

so im confused as to why its such problem if i add back those four equals signs to make the titles of both topics on the talk page display and be a uniform size??

seriously, please enlighten me because i really dont see the point, and if i am missing something here, which i feel as though i must be, it isnt obvious to me.

i didnt add anything to the article, so i dont see why you would tell me not to "add the information back", when all i added back was a minor font size change to the topic title of a discussion that i personally started about discrepancies i found.

"no consensus for trivial info" would be fine and make total sense if i actually added something trivial to the article, but i didnt add anything to the article, trivial or otherwise.

whats trivial to me is why you made that edit, and why the way i had it is such a problem?

i asked a question in a section on the page reserved for asking questions or talking about what seems to be more than one instance of incorrect information on a website that serves as wikipedias de facto "reliable" source for sitewide information and statistics about the subject being discussed.

when i noticed the other persons "ufc walkout music" topic wasnt being displayed on the mobile version of the site, i added a few equals signs to my topics title to fix the problem.

i have never had somebody edit a talk topic like that to try to hide it or whatever it is you were actually doing or trying to do.

even if i asked a stupid or wrong or way more in depth question than this one, people would always just explain why their position is what it is and why its right, and then thank you and have a nice day, end of discussion.. the topics are never changed, and to this day are most likely still right where they were when we finished talking.

i was simply trying to clean up the way the talk page looked and make both of the topics display nicely on my mobile.

after sitting here and thinking about for a bit longer, the only reason i can think of that would make sense for you to remove that and warn me not to add it back like that, is if you saw it and you actually thought it was something that i added to the article, instead of realizing that it was just my topic title on the talk page... but i also dont want to presume to know why someone else did what they did or what they may or may not have been thinking about when they did it.

im not trying to come off as harsh or rude or argumentative, this is simply a situation i have never encountered before and im trying to understand it so i can hopefully avoid it in the future.

please advise at your earliest convenience, thanks.Snarevox (talk) 08:36, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Snarevox Good day. First of all, I have added 4 colons at the beginning of your paragraphs (addition colon (:) from the previous discussion message thread of this message title (mma stats discrepancy) for one space to the right when the message starting to separate the messages from different editor(s) on different time for easy reading as this is the Wikipedia protocol for talk page communication. As per your question, it you look at the top menu on this page or any page when editing, you will see "paragraph", click on it and there will be "Heading, sub-heading 1, sub-heading 2, etc...) to choose from. We use "Heading" When a new discussion for the discussion title, in this case is "mma stats discrepancy" and if there is several issues in the same discussion title then a "sub-heading 1" can be used. I have changed "UFC walkout music" to heading which it suppose to be, and you will see only two = on each side to house the discussion title. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 11:07, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@Cassiopeia: greetings and salutations.. i was actually aware of the add a colon +1 standard (you may notice i added two when responding to your initial reply), but as i usually operate on a tiny little mobile screen, anything beyond three colons starts to get ridiculously difficult to read.. and as far as any "menu" goes.. again, im on a mobile and apparently not afforded such luxuries by default.. i did enable some editing tools at one point which probably had something like that, but it made everything really clunky and slow to respond, so i turned it back off. as far as our conversation about sherdog, i spoke with one of their editors and i received a very in depth written and visual explanation as to why they list the things they list in the places they list them. i still find it a little strange that they seem to be the only ones living up to these "strict" standards, but that is neither here nor there. case closed. happy holidaze! Snarevox (talk) 05:53, 17 December 2022 (UTC)