![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
In awards section, the 1993 and 1994 awards are self reported by Beahm. No independent secondary source has been found yet. Unoc ( talk) 12:57, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
If this article is kept, then we do need to discuss the article name. I cannot remember where I saw the exact policy or guideline, but I believe it stated that we should not have honorifics in the title, especially if they are false. Tutelary ( talk) 04:57, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
I suggest we change the main infobox to Template:Infobox Twitch streamer. Dr Disrespect is primarily an entertainer, not a professional eSports competitor. The few tournaments he does enter are celebrity tournaments more than anything. -- SVTCobra ( talk) 21:45, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
Should there be a new sub section to discuss his twitch ban? Rather than discussing it in the main lead article box? Viewratio ( talk) 00:28, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
The event of the ban/suspension is covered for now in the career section. Please do not add it to the lede as it is a breaking report and we should not violate WP:BLP. If you have information with no source, please post it here on the talk page first instead of adding it to the article. Thanks. -- SVTCobra ( talk) 01:45, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi, Doc was indeed banned today SVTCobra, but there is no reason as to why so I feel it shouldnt be added in just yet. Link to a Polygon article here: https://www.polygon.com/2020/6/26/21304828/twitch-bans-dr-disrespect Thanks! Jiiiiiiii ( talk) 21:27, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Just like to remind you now of the two interviews he did this morning to be added: Interview with PC Gamer / Interview with the Washington Post (there's also analyzation by Forbes and YouTuber Jake Lucky if you need to). In both interviews, the former Twitch streamer insists that he still doesn't know the reasons or actions taken by the platform to ban him (with his final moments of live streaming having to do with "the state of the world" instead of what was about to happen); he also claims that he's not into any theory (like the fake Brime or his connection to conspiracy theorist David Icke) regarding his sudden ban and focused on his upcoming "Doc 3.0" personality. Appreciated. -- 2603:9000:A511:9E76:983E:58EA:BE0:53E6 ( talk) 17:19, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
I noticed that the template for Dr Disrespect changed from Twitch to YouTube given that he did a comeback on the latter. However, there is reportedly no exclusive deal (a la Ninja and Shroud) and he may go from one platform to another. In addition, if he even does return to Twitch one way or another, information on his stats on there should be kept for a record. Just saying, should he decide to stream on his website next, there won't be any dedicated template for that right away unless he ends up banned on YouTube. -- 2603:9000:A511:9E76:3CC1:9F8:D718:9293 ( talk) 19:19, 9 August 2020 (UTC) Just noticed that EoRdE6 changed it. I guess leave it as-is unless discussion overturns. -- 2603:9000:A511:9E76:3CC1:9F8:D718:9293 ( talk) 19:23, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
Again, unless he does stream on YouTube next Friday or starts to do so every weekday, the template may need to be kept as if he is still on Twitch (since that is where he became notable). Who knows if the Doc himself has seen this article? Otherwise, it's dead and not moving. -- 2603:9000:A511:9E76:3CC1:9F8:D718:9293 ( talk) 13:24, 10 August 2020 (UTC) Update: He did another live stream, which was focused on him becoming a partner of [Rogue Company] after tweeting to the developers that he is to develop a themed arena, to which they responded. Still waiting for someone. -- 2603:9000:A511:9E76:3CC1:9F8:D718:9293 ( talk) 15:46, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
Is there any evidence that there is a controversy around him making fun of chinese speakers? Some news company making a (clearly biased) article about it does not suffice. It's not a controversy if only one or two people are running with the story.
The idea that it is racist to make fun of the way human language #205 sounds relies on the claimant's implicit assumption that any speaker of that language is indeed "dorky" or whatever, making the claimant racist on the exact same basis as he accused the other of being racist. So it's not really believable that there is a controversy around this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blaghblahblah ( talk • contribs) 18:00, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
The first version of this section from August 2020 underwent several changes, indicating imho an editorial process that has reached a consensus. Nonetheless there have been several complete deletions of this section and subsequent reverts not only recently. But in result this paragraph was part of the article for most of the time.
As the main section title allready states, we are talking about a controversially viewed point. Therefore I don't think a whole section should be removed, but only additions or changes should be made.
Following this belief I will reintegrate this section. Regarding the concern of User:Grifteryaya, I will try to better clarify that the referenced Kotatko article contains mainly commentary. -- Murata ( talk) 08:38, 8 June 2021 (UTC)