text:
Fred Rouhling

Fred Rouhling (born 24 January 1970) is a French rock climber and boulderer, noted for creating and repeating some of the earliest grade sport climbing routes in the world, including Hugh in 1993, the first-ever French  sport route. Rouhling is also known for the controversy from his proposed grading of for his 1995 route Akira (climb), which would have made it the world's first-ever 9b-graded sport route; 25 years later, it was graded at.

Early life
Rouhling grew up in the small French farming town of Le Panissaud. His neighboring village of Vilhonneur has a limestone quarry (which supplied materials for the Statue of Liberty). Twenty minutes away is the larger town of Angoulême, where limestone crags overhang many of the roads, with the best-known being Les Eaux Claires ("The Clear Waters"), with 15 to 20-metre overhanging extreme routes that require strong fingers to manage the small pockets used to ascend them; and contains nationally-regarded extreme routes such as La Crépinette (1983), France's first. Rouhling began to climb in school, and by age 19 was climbing at when the world's hardest routes were then at.

Hugh, first 9a in France
In the early 1990s, Rouhling had moved to the south of France for college where he also had access to the leading sport climbing venues of France. Rouhling made the first ascent of UFO, the first in the Calanques, and then completed Les Spécialistes Direct at the Verdon Gorge. Les Spécialistes Direct was a variation on Jean-Baptiste Tribout's famous 1987 route, Les Spécialistes, which was bolted earlier by Alain Robert; with the downgrade of Les Spécialistes to 8b+, Rouhling's ascent remains the first 8c route in the gorge.

Returning home in 1993, Rouhling wanted to create different routes from the long steep stamina crimpy routes of the Calanques and Verdon. At his local crag of Eaux-Clairs, he freed a line he called Hugh with a double-overhanging bulge that required little footwork. Having climbed it, he made the route harder by filling in holds and chipping-out new ones that he graded at. At the time, there were only three known 9a routes in the world. Hugh was repeated in 2001, and by Dai Koyamada (2002), and Sébastien Bouin (2020), confirming the grade of 9a, the first 9a in France.

The use of chipping to create new extreme routes was not uncommon then in France, and included examples such as Antoine Le Menestrel's famous Buoux route, La Rose et la Vampire. Some major North American routes also relied on chipped holds for their development, with examples such as The Phoenix in Yosemite, and Just do It  at Smith Rocks. In a 2021 documentary, Rouhling said that finding natural new hard routes is difficult (particularly of the overhanging roof style that he was attracted to) and that the chipping of new "hardest" routes was far more widespread than was understood; Rouhling also noted that other leading French climbers had manufactured such routes in their own local quarries for their development and training.

Akira controversy
Home again in 1995 as his wife was recovering from back surgery, Rouhling began work on a new route he called Akira (climb) in the Vilhonneur quarry. Akira was a 65-foot long low horizontal roof (only circa 12 feet off the ground), that he estimated had an bouldering problem, with a final 20-foot  vertical section beyond the lip (the only part for which he used a rope); such a route was unprecedented as a sport climb at the time. On completing Akira, belayed by his recovered wife, Rouhling graded it at. At the time, nobody had climbed 9a+ (Chris Sharma would climb the world's first consensus 9a+ in 2001, and the first consensus 9b in 2008). In 1997, Rouhling added another chipped route at Eaux Claire, L'autre côté du Ciel, a spectacular high roof, that he graded at.

Rouhling faced an unprecedented level of personalized attack for Akira. Leading climbers publicly challenged his integrity, and various unsubstantiated theories were promoted about Rouhling and his routes. Those that tried Akira, failed to climb it. In 2004, Climbing sent Pete Ward (a future American Alpine Club Board member), to interview Rouhling over several days, and see him on his routes. Ward could not opine on the grade but verified that Rouhling was able to climb his routes as they were. Ward also believed that Rouhling should have classed Akira as a boulder problem rather than as a sport route. Ward was able to debunk several of the criticisms about Rouhling and Akira, and expressed a positive view of Rouhling from the interview process.

In 2020, Seb Bouin climbed three of Rouhling's routes in his local crags and found two of their grades accurate at 9a (Hugh and L'autre côté du Ciel), however, he felt Akira was also a "hard 9a", and that the roof was at. Bouin said: "Anyway this route is hard", "and quite unbelievable for the 90's". Rouhling was disappointed at the downgrade and felt that the requirement to hang from a pinch hold in the roof at the first crux, while familiar in contemporary extreme routes, was novel in 1995, and was why no climber of his generation could send the route. In 2021, the climbing database 8a.nu agreed that changes in equipment and techniques for roof climbing could explain much of the downgrade. In 2022, climbing author Sam Anderson attributed some of the vilification of Rouhling to the fact that at the time, he was not considered "the world's best climber", and thus would not be accepted as the person who climbed "the world's hardest route".

Return to climbing
After Akira, Rouhling's wife Celine needed brain surgery for a life-threatening illness, and Rouhling largely abandoned extreme climbing for a number of years to focus on his family and young children. In 2001, on his wife's recovery, Rouhling repeated Fred Nicole's Bain de Sang, that – after Fred's brother François – was the second-ever repeat of a 9a-graded route in history. In 2002 and 2003, Rouhling visited Switzerland's leading bouldering areas repeating several of Fred Nicole's most notable problems including several up to (e.g. Eau Profonde), and one at, with E la nave va.

In 2004, Rouhling established his fourth route above 9a with Mandallaz Drive at, and in 2007 he added a fifth with Salamandre at. Rouhling did not use any chipping to create these new routes, they were natural. In 2007 Rouhling went on bouldering trips with French climber Romain Desgranges to Rocklands, South Africa and to Joshua Tree, California. In 2010, the pair went on a bouldering trip to New Zealand where Rouhling repeated Chris Sharma's 2005 problem, Archilles last stand, which was Rouhling's 100th boulder ascent above.

In 2009, one of the main online databases for extreme rock climbers, 8a.nu, asked the question "Is Fred Rouhling the best ever FA [first ascent] climber in the world?", noting that Rouhling's combination of first ascents for the hardest sport climbs and hard bouldering routes ranked him #3 in their All-Time High Combined rankings.

In a 2021 interview, Rouhling said that he then only climbed a few times a year and that while as a climber, he was very disappointed with the reception to his 9a routes, as an artist (he sculpts in his spare time), he was very proud of his creations, and the emotions and engagement that they still aroused in the climbing community.

Personal life
Rouhling is married to Céline with whom they have two children, Hugo and Chloe.

Rouhling sculpts in his spare time.

Redpointed routes

 * Salamandre – Double Cache crag, Saint-Pierre-en-Faucigny (FRA) – 2007. First ascent (natural route, no chipping). First repeat by Baptiste Dherbilly in 2017.

 * Mandallaz Drive – Allonzier-la-Caille, (FRA) – 2004. First ascent (natural route, no chipping). First repeat by Baptiste Dherbilly in 2021.

 * Bain de Sang – Saint Loup, (CHF) – 2001. Third ascent of Fred Nicole's 1993 route; at the time of Rouhling's ascent, there were only four known 9a routes in the world.

 * L'autre côté du Ciel – Les Eaux-Claires (Charente), (FRA) – 1997. First ascent. Rouhling almost entirely manufactured the route by chipping out the holds (a practice at the time but since shunned). First repeat by Seb Bouin in 2020 who agreed it was 9a, but felt that a kneepad (which he did not use) could make it easier.

 * Akira (climb) – Vilhonneur (Charente), (FRA) – 1995. First ascent. Rouhling used some chipping and hold filling to create the route. He estimated it at 9b, the world's first-ever 9b (and even 9a+) at the time, and created one of the most famous grading disputes in sport climbing history. First repeat by Seb Bouin and Lucien Martinez in 2020 who assigned the route a "hard 9a" grade.

 * Hugh – Les Eaux-Claires (Charente), (FRA) – 1993. First ascent. First-ever French 9a-graded sport route and fourth 9a in the world.  Rouhling chipped out some new holds and filled in others to create the route. First repeat by Alessandro Lamberti (2001), with many others including Dai Koyamada in 2002, and Seb Bouin in 2020 who also confirmed the grade of 9a.

 * Empreinte – Double Cache crag, Saint-Pierre-en-Faucigny (FRA) – 2008. First ascent (natural route, no chipping). Rouhling proposed 9a+; first repeat by Baptiste Dherbilly in 2021 said 8c+.
 * Non à la Bombe  – Saint Loup, (CHF) – 2001. Repeat of Fred Nicole's 1995 route.
 * Archipel – Les Eaux-Claires (Charente), (FRA) – 1997. First ascent. First repeat by Dai Koyamada and Yuji Hirayama in 2000 (and first repeat of any Rouhling route above 8c+) who confirmed grade.
 * Kami – Les Eaux-Claires (Charente), (FRA) – 1994. First ascent. First repeat by Pierre Bollinger in 2001.

 * La voie du Charpentier – Allonzier-la-Caille (FRA) – 2005. First ascent.
 * Les Spécialistes Direct – Verdon Gorge (FRA) – 1994. First ascent, and first 8c in the Verdun Gorge. Variation of Jean-Baptiste Tribout's famous 1987 8b+ route, bolted by Alain Robert.
 * UFO – Massif des Calanques (FRA) – 1993. First ascent.

Boulder problems

 * E la nave va (Traverse) – Lindental, (SUI) – 2003. First repeat of Fred Nicole's 1994 boulder traverse problem.

 * Soumission – Le Bourrinoire, Haute-Savoie, (FRA) – 2006. First ascent. Route was subsequently destroyed, along with Romain Desgranges's classic, Kaiser Sauzé 8C+.
 * Eau Profonde – Kesslerloch, Schaffhausen, (SUI) – 2003(e). First repeat of Fred Nicole's 1997 boulder problem.
 * Broadsword (Traverse) – Lindental, (SUI) – 2003. Repeat of Fred Nicole's 1995 boulder traverse problem.
 * Va piu via (Traverse) – Lindental, (SUI) – 2003. Repeat.
 * Joyeux Leon (Traverse) – La Balmaz, (SUI) – 2003. Repeat of Fred Nicole's 1992 boulder traverse problem.
 * Le voyage du Crabe (Traverse) – Saint-George, (SUI) – 2003. Repeat.
 * Prophécie – Saint-George, (SUI) – 2003. Repeat.

title: Fred Rouhling


text: User talk:66.51.213.202

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:66.51.213.202


text:
Talk:Glenn McGrath

awards
How do you put Glenn McGrath's name in the bowlers who have taken Bowlers who have taken 5 wickets in a Test innings 25 times or more box?--Rickster89 00:44, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Done AlbinoMonkey 00:53, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Glenn McGrath's name needs to be put in the Bowlers who have taken 300 ODI wickets box and I don't know how to do it.Rickster89 11:07, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image
Put this image up but it was reverted. Surely its fair use to have one low res tv screenshot that we took ourselves in an article? Astrokey44 11:45, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Sorry, I should have put a note on the talk page when I reverted it. My understanding is that a TV screenshot is only fair use when talking about the TV programme, not when talking about the person depicted. That's what it says on Template:Film-screenshot anyway. Stephen Turner 12:04, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

 * How about if it were put under this template? Template:Screenshot It just says screenshots in general there, although it does say theyd prefer a more specific template. And I also found a sports article which uses a pic under the film-screenshot template: Joey Harrington It would just be nice to get rid of all these black head silhouettes on all the cricket articles :/ Astrokey44 12:56, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

 * I see you changed the template and then put the picture back. I don't think you've understood the issue here. We're not talking about Wikipedia policy, but about the law. Changing the template doesn't make the use of any images more or less legal. Only parliaments and courts can do that. The template is just a guideline to Wikipedia editors about the state of the law.

 * For a discussion about a very similar issue (but with magazine covers instead of TV programmes) see Wikipedia_talk:Fair_use. So I'm afraid I've reverted your changes to Template:Film-screenshot. I'm not trying to be difficult here, although I realise it may seem like it. I too would love to see more photos of cricketers. It's just that we have to be very, very careful to stay on the right side of the law. As Wikipedia becomes one of the most high-profile sites on the internet, we are also at increasing risk of being sued for multiple copyright infringement.

 * Stephen Turner 08:32, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

 * The thing is about that template, is I doubt it was put together by anyone who knew the law very well, its just someone strung a few words together, and now you accept it as fact because its in a nice little box. I seriously doubt Glenn McGrath is going to sue us over a tiny, low resolution image of him when Google image search reveals for instance "Results 1 - 20 of about 2,230 for glenn mcgrath". Most blogs and sites out there would copy a image like this without even thinking about it. Astrokey44 12:31, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

 * I concur with everything Stephen has said. These templates are not just a few words strung together without anyone considering their contents. Have a read of Image copyright tags and the associated talk page to get an idea of the issue. There is a process of review and consensus before a image template is put into use, and some (in the case of Screenshot) get deprecated from time to time.  Yes there are websites out there that no doubt use copyright photos, but they are breaking the law.  We can only speculate that the owner of the copyright of such a photo may not bother chasing dozens of smallish websites up but may choose to go after Wikipedia because it is so well used. ---
 * ok fine then, but any screenshot appears to be able to be used with Template:Screenshot (instead of template film screenshot), which I have now added to the photo
 * No you can't. This is the reason that we (by "we" I mean WP:WPFU) are in the process of rewriting all of the fair use image tags.  Screenshots from television programs can only be used for commentary on the television programme itself, regardless of what tag they're tagged with.  We're in the process of rewriting the tags to indicate what uses are valid under fair use, but we just haven't gotten around to Template:Screenshot yet.  I also agree with Stephen Turner's and Ianbrown's comments above.  JYolkowski // talk 14:48, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * How was I supposed to know you havent hadnt got around to changing it? I notice that you have changed it now, so fair enough (now) I guess Astrokey44 15:37, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Too much text
Too much text in this article, should be more subheadings. another job for Vines or Turner. thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.56.65.6 (talk • contribs).

 * I agree it could use a couple more subheadings Astrokey44 10:58, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

McGrath and racism
Im curious, why isnt there anything on the incident(s) where McGrath called Jayasuriya a 'black monkey'. This kind of racist behaviour/attitude seems to come built in in every australian, nevermind the australian cricket team.

 * So add it, complete with references and noting that McGrath denied the claim. Please try and keep your comments relating to the article rather than irrelevant and insulting reflections on an entire nation. --Robert Merkel 06:45, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Making this type of sweeping generalisations ensures that the author of such statements cannot be taken seriously. Where are the references and citations?  If you are going to try and bring these sort of comments up why don't you back them up with facts rather than supposition and hearsay?Jonesy 02:11, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I can't not say this. I'm disgusted that your comment has been left on the discussion page for this long despite making a sweeping racist claim about the entire population of Australia without even signing it. Whoever you are, whatever you think of Glenn McGrath, you are all that and then some. Ironic isn't it? And Jonesy, it doesn't matter if it happened or not. Why argue with him about references and citations when he is a blatant racist? Can we please get rid of this discussion? It doesn't deserve to be here. --Grinning Idiot 13:44, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Accusing someone of being a racist whilst making a sweeping generalisation about an entire country yourself is incredibly hypocritical. Whatever you think of Glenn McGrath, or the Australian cricket team (the dislike of which is partly fuelled by jealousy, if we're honest) to slag off the Australian people because of it is not on. 87.74.28.177 14:40, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I have added the incident complete with reference form an australian source 194.168.3.18 13:10, 19 October 2007 (UTC) Tazzcricket

From what I remember of all the Australians it was only ever Darren Leeman who called anyone a 'little black monkey', and he was punished for it. The Night Walker —Preceding comment was added at 14:12, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually Roshan Mahanama wrote in his autobiography that McGrath had racially insulted Sri Lankan players and that the Sri Lankan team on that tour to Australia was constantly subject to racist chants from the spectactors. Oh and you can't deny that there are major racism issues in Australia, with Indians being beaten up and even killed thesedays. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.231.106.120 (talk) 22:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Image, II
I have uploaded Image:GlennMcGrath.JPG, but the original looks fine. If anyone wants to swap/add them both somewhere, go ahead. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 06:33, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates

 * Vote for McGrath —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hamedog (talk • contribs) 02:48, 5 January 2007 (UTC).

Sarwan controversy
I'm curious as to why there's not more coverage of what was said between McGrath and Sarwan in 2003. It was such a highly publicised event.

McGrath's remarks were confirmed by sources to have been lewd remarks involving Sarwan and Lara. They were thus homophobic in nature. By contrast Sarwan was confirmed to have simply made lewd remarks about McGrath's wife, a standard rebuttal which had nothing to do with Jane's battle with cancer at the time. McGrath's reaction, where he was caught on camera threatening to rip Sarwan's throat out, was heavily criticised at the time, and rightly so. Even Glenn apologised for it and said it was unacceptable.

And yet, despite all that, it's a sidenote in this page. No offence, but considering the page is moderated by Australians, it just seems a little biased to cover that controversy up. The least someone could do is add a footnote to the bit that mentions the Sarwan incident linking to this page: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/13/1052591796226.html —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.9.34.254 (talk) 11:01, 28 April 2007 (UTC).

I think to have a section of this article detailing his onfield controversies would be to categorize him as a controversial figure. There have been a couple of incidents. Maybe they should be mentioned in passing, but who among us would look squeaky clean on wikipedia if we all had a section detailing every ugly thing we had ever done? BTW, given what McGrath had been going through with his wife's illness, if I was Sarwan I would've had the brains to leave her out of it completely. I'm impressed that he apologised - Sarwan should've known better.--Grinning Idiot 14:02, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

To be fair, I think noone would doubt McGrath has been a controversial figure. Not that that's necessarily a bad thing; all great players have been controversial at one time or another. It's the passion to be the best that sometimes spills over.

Bringing "brains" into it or saying "Sarwan should've known better" misses the point. There's no thought behind sledging; it's mindless banter. If it had malicious forethought then few players would be able to remain friends off the field. Funnily enough Sarwan and Glenn remain good mates, by all accounts, and Glenn hasn't blamed Sarwan for his remarks, accepting that no matter what, making violent threats is wrong. Mentioning the wife has always been a traditional sledging tactic. If anything I would say considering what was going on with his wife, McGrath should've avoided sledging knowing full well that she might be brought into it by someone in the heat of the battle. He knew his mental state, and if he couldn't take it, he shouldn't dish it out. 84.9.33.200 11:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

 * I don't think there would be any bad blood off-field. But I have to disagree with the above comment.  Sledging should be bound by some code of ethics.  Just because you have a weakness doesn't mean you can't sledge - it's part of the game.  The obligation works the other way.  You need to be more clever.  Talk about his mother or his sister.  Talk about his brother if you're that way inclined.  But like racism, some things should be left alone.--Grinning Idiot 15:57, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

 * Sarwan wasn't targeting that weakness though. I doubt he even considered it. Whatever Sarwan said, he certainly didn't mention Jane's condition, and Glenn clearly overreacted. Considering his own teammates seemed to agree he overreacted, and Glenn himself was said to be embarassed by his behaviour, I'm not sure why anyone would defend it. The behaviour was flagged by the ACB. There's no taking away from the fact he's been a fantastic player but he's also clearly a fiery character whose indiscretions should be part of his bio, just as Warne's controversies are. 87.74.28.177 18:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

 * I wouldn't say "Your momma's so fat that in her high school photo she was the whole front row!" if I knew your old lady died last week. Reference to her death is of no relevance.  Sarwan was out of line.  And Glenn probably did overreact.  It's one of those emotional situations in which anything can happen.  I don't think McGrath was anywhere near as controversial as Warne though.  --Grinning Idiot 16:20, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

 * You're right, reference to her death isn't of any relevance, I didn't suggest it was. What is of relevance is whether you were even thinking about that at the time. In the heat of battle, as a professional sportsman where the pressure is on, you block out all off-field factors. You have to if you're to focus on the job at hand. Don't forget, Sarwan didn't intiate the conversation, he responded to a comment by McGrath. We're talking split-seconds of thinking time here. If Sarwan was so out of line why did not one of Glenn's teammates speak out about it publically? As for comparing Warne and McGrath in terms of controversy, it depends whether you mean on-field or off it. Off it Warne takes the prize, but on the field of play, McGrath definitely does. 87.74.28.36 18:38, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Possible difference of opinion, but that's that. As for Warne vs McGrath - fair call.  Agreed.--Grinning Idiot 15:03, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Fair play, difference of opinion, it's what makes the game great. In fact I must admit that having read your argument, and thought about it, perhaps having a section dedicated to what have been maybe two or three notable controversial moments in a career like McGrath's would be a little unbalanced. That's why when the article went back to being unprotected, I just added a footnote to the Sarwan incident (for anyone who wasn't familiar with it) and left it at that. Best to allow people to form their own opinions on it.87.74.3.97 22:09, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I have expanded it every so slightly to show that it wasn't run-of-the-mill sledging, but I agree it should be left like that. Anyone interested can click on the news article that is ref'd to there, any more inclusion might be classed as unbalanced. SGGH speak! 19:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 February 2015
Shoots elephants in Africa

122.148.179.248 (talk) 00:56, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

❌ Requests should be specified in the form "change X to Y" or "add Z between P and Q", and must provide a reliable citation. Also, this content is already in the article. Joseph2302 (talk) 01:15, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Glenn McGrath. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120323161526/http://www.ausport.gov.au/ais/history/awards/best_of_the_best to http://www.ausport.gov.au/ais/history/awards/best_of_the_best

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:32, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Glenn McGrath. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090414162206/http://stats.cricinfo.com:80/ipl/engine/records/bowling/best_career_economy_rate.html?id=3519;type=tournament to http://stats.cricinfo.com/ipl/engine/records/bowling/best_career_economy_rate.html?id=3519;type=tournament
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080721223908/http://www.randomhouse.com.au/Books/Default.aspx?Page=Book&ID=9781741667196 to http://www.randomhouse.com.au/Books/Default.aspx?Page=Book&ID=9781741667196

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:48, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Glenn McGrath. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://stats.cricinfo.com/ipl/engine/records/bowling/best_career_economy_rate.html?id=3519%3Btype%3Dtournament
 * Corrected formatting/usage for https://web.archive.org/web/20061002000955/http%3A//observer.guardian.co.uk/osm/story/0%2C%2C1559800%2C00.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930031406/http://www.hindustantimes.com/cricket/Playersprofile.aspx?PlayerID=1952 to http://www.hindustantimes.com/cricket/Playersprofile.aspx?PlayerID=1952
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070103190556/http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=80021 to http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=80021
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080915164707/http://www.news.com.au/story/0%2C23599%2C24094309-5017352%2C00.html to http://www.news.com.au/story/0%2C23599%2C24094309-5017352%2C00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:08, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Glenn McGrath. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928043131/http://www.cricmania.com/cricket/DB/score/user/us03/type/T/base/0 to http://www.cricmania.com/cricket/DB/score/user/us03/type/T/base/0

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:26, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Glenn McGrath. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150317045943/http://www.icc-cricket.com/cricket-world-cup/stats/records/player to http://www.icc-cricket.com/cricket-world-cup/stats/records/player

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:03, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Glenn McGrath


text:
Talk:Perfect season

etc.
This is the original content of the article (at the time termed "The Perfect Season", complete with quotation marks):

 * The Perfect Season is a term used to describe the 1972 Miami Dolphins football team. They went undefeated (17-0) and capped it off with a 14 -7 win over the Washington Redskins in Super Bowl 7. They were the first team in NFL history to go undefeated and no other team has been able to duplicate this feat. The 1985 Chicago Bears came close, losing only one game that season to, believe it or not, the Miami Dolphins.

It seemed to me that this said nothing substantive that wasn't in the article on the Miami Dolphins. It could I suppose be used within an article on "Perfect seasons" (in all sports, in all nations). -- Hoary 05:08, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree with that last idea, but until someone is willing to write that article, it's silly to have an article like this. I just redirected it to Miami Dolphins in the meantime. --zenohockey 01:55, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Good move. Hoary 02:55, 2005 Jan 3 (UTC)

 * It doesn't look like the St. Joseph's season is a perfect season, it looks more like propaganda. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.221.134.43 (talk) 17:02, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

 * A full list is now up including those with perfect seasons including the playoffs and those who nearly had a perfect season. St. Joseph's Hawks had a perfect regular season but not into the playoffs, it appears. - Taospark (talk) 00:28, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Remove teh '07 Patiots
Just another pretender. But definitely the worst 18-1 team of all time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.85.159.87 (talk) 14:24, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The worst 18-1 team is still a team that goes here, sorry. - Taospark (talk) 06:37, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Perfect _losing_ season
Does anybody have some info on that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.56.198.223 (talk) 14:33, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

The 2007 Miami Dolphins are 1-14 right now and if they drop the next game, will be fairly close. I haven't heard of any 0-14 or 0-16 teams but it's possible in the pre salary cap days. - Taospark (talk) 02:53, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

 * Alright, the 1976 Tampa Bay Buccaneers have that honor although it was during the 14 game regular season. There have been 10 other teams that have gone 1-13 or 1-15 since the NFL merger in 1970. - Taospark (talk) 03:10, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

The 0-14 Bucs were an expansion team then. In mean time, the honors for being perfect losers went to the salary-capped 2008 Lions for going 0-16 (after winning all preseason games, similar to the 1972 Dolphins losing all). Rumor has it the toothless Lions meet to drink champagne after the final winless team scores a W. -- Matthead Discuß   02:58, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Should Shula's criticism of the 2007 Patriots be included?
In a nutshell, Shula said that the Patriots' perfect record should "come with an asterisk" due to the Spygate scandal earlier in 2007. Should I include this or would it be creating a potential edit war between football fans on the issue? I'll leave it here as a note if someone else wants to include a mention of this.

References are here and here. - Taospark (talk) 00:26, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

 * I've deleted the section on the "spygate" incident under the 2007 Patriots, under the logic that the "spygate" incident is better placed in the article about the 2007 Patriots' season.

 * In other words, looking only at their record, the Patriots had a perfect season in 2007. If a reader is interested further, he/she can read about their season in that article.  I don't think this article is the place for criticism or comment about any of the teams involved except in very substantial circumstances --- for instance, if the NFL had overturned the results of the game, or something along those lines.  As it is, the game in question went down as a win for the Patriots, and they ultimately kept their record. - 72.128.89.194 (talk) 08:11, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikepedia was created to detail "facts" about subject(s). The 2007 season for the New England Patriots has a laundry list of "facts" In the section termed, "Perfect Season," facts about the matter should be documented. It is the 'perfect forum' to detail the facts about the 2007 season with direction or links to additional information. Let's not eliminate crucial amd critical facts in this section to create a 'perfect picture' when such a blurring 'fact' of the matter is present. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.60.227.92 (talk) 19:33, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

 * I agree completely, but any criticism or controversy related to the 2007 Patriots' season (perfect or otherwise) has to do more with the 2007 Patriots (who happened to have a perfect season) than the subject of a perfect season in general (of which the 2007 Patriots are just one of several teams from many different sports). 209.83.112.209 (talk) 20:51, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

2007 New England Patriots did not have a Perfect Season
In the end, it should be edited that only the 72 Dolphins went undefeated. Being undefeated in the regular season means nothing. --66.229.89.202 (talk) 04:49, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree...they should probably be moved to the first entry in the "almost perfect" section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.193.191.202 (talk) 05:33, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I second that. You must separate the Dolphins as the only team with a complete perfect season. The Patriots had a perfect REGULAR season, which, we all agree, is not a perfect season at all as they went 18-1, losing the final game (that really matters).201.86.144.110 (talk) 05:39, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree the Patriots did not have a full "perfect" season they lost one game and now need to be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.75.83.11 (talk) 01:37, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

 * I've felt this too. "Perfect season" encompasses the regular season and postseason. The 2007 New England Patriots season article is about the entire season. This is what Perfect Season means. The Dolphins should be the only team included here.► Chris Nelson Holla! 01:40, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

 * They've been moved down to the Perfect Regular Season section alongside the Bears and Browns who did the same already so that should do it for any sports fan slapfights over the category.- Taospark (talk) 06:40, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

NC State 1973: Perfect
Before anyone gets their knickers in a bunch over the inclusion of NC State's 1973 season under college basketball, be it noted that they accomplished perfection, even if they didn't win the national championship, in that they won every game they played. Just because a team was deemed ineligible for postseason competition doesn't mean they didn't have the perfect season. Wjmorris3 (talk) 19:22, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * There was a sub-section before for teams that had perfect regular seasons but didn't make it all the way. But it's not a big deal right now because no one has their knickers over it, at least until March. -68.237.91.154 (talk) 12:13, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

"Other North American sports leagues"
This article is called "Perfect Season", not "List of best seasons in professional sports". Therefore, surely we must treat achievements like the 1998 Yankees' 125-50 season or the 1995-96 Red Wings' 62-win season as irrelevant and remove them from the article. Aspirex (talk) 13:37, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Perfect season for pitchers
The top of this article defines a perfect season as "going unbeaten and untied through the season" - in other words, winning every game played. Is it fair, on the same basis, to say that a pitcher can qualify for a "perfect season" when many of his results are no-decision. By analogy with a tied game, that pitcher as failed to win the game if he has a no-decision. Aspirex (talk) 14:31, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm no expert on baseball, but I don't think a no-decision is really equivalent to a tie. The inadequacy of the the win–loss record for comparing pitchers is exactly the reason the save and hold statistics were created. cmadler (talk) 15:43, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Sparta Prague 2009/2010 season
Well, season wasn't perfect, but they didn't lose. 30 matches = 16w, 14d. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.95.253.60 (talk) 13:41, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Early perfection
What about teams that, once they secured home field advantage for the playoffs, choose to rest their starters in the remaining game(s)? The 2009 Colts could be an example, 14-0 just like the 1972 Dolphins. Being good enough to be able to do that is kind of perfect, too. The dumbest thing is probably to go for a perfect regular season while risking injuries to players and an early exit in the playoffs. -- Matthead Discuß   02:43, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Soccer
There is an incorrect claim regarding Germany's performance in the 2007 women's soccer world cup. While they did not concede a single goal, they did draw once against England in the group phase, thus technically falling short of a narrow definition of a perfect season. Hobbitschuster (talk) 00:59, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Add NCAA womens Hockey
There is no section for NCAA women's Ice hockey (US college), where the 2012-2013 University of Minnesota team was Unbeaten and Untied(though two playoff games did go to OT) National champions, and the 2015-2016 Boston College were unbeaten and untied through the regular season, before losing the title game. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.230.104.26 (talk) 00:56, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Perfect season


text:
Northland College

Northland College may refer to:

 * Northland College, Kaikohe, New Zealand
 * Northland College (Wisconsin) in Ashland, Wisconsin, U.S.
 * Northland Scholars Academy, formerly Northland International University, Northland Baptist Bible College and other names, in Dunbar, Wisconsin, U.S.
 * Northland Community & Technical College in Minnesota, U.S.

title: Northland College


text:
Talk:USS Arizona Memorial

Picture of Japanese Sailors manning the rails
That picture is INCORRECT. Those sailors are NOT manning the rails. Their ship is docked and you can clearly see the concrete ground. They are disembarked. For anybody who doesn't know what manning the rails actually means, there's a wikipedia article. 69.111.188.61 (talk) 06:36, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Quite right, glad you caught that error and removed it  JGHowes talk  -  07:02, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Italics

 * Should Arizona be italicized in the memorial name--USS Arizona Memorial--as is done when the ship itself is referred to--USS Arizona (BB-39)? Neither the NPS webpage nor any other I could find with google did so, but they didn't italicize the ship either.
 * —wwoods 05:10, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Tears of the soldiers
Dou you guys want a picture of the tears of the soldiers? For the ones who don't know, the oil tank of the Arizona releases small black clumps of oil from time to time and they are called Tears of the soldiers. I have a picture... Matthias Aubin 14:20, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * That would be nice. It would show what all the hubub is about. I personally wouldn't mind seeing it either. TomStar81 00:28, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I have some pictures of the "Tears" that you can use here. I'll offer any of those pictures for use here under the "Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.5 License". I'd put the pics in myself, but I don't have time right now to deal with the formatting issues (maybe I'll try later). Anechoic Man 00:46, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Isn't that "sailors", not "soldiers"? I've put a picture on the page clearly showing the oil slickJGHowes 15:03, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Dedication date?
Does anyone know the day and month of the memorial's dedication? — Eoghanacht  talk 23:48, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * It was dedicated on Memorial Day, which used to always fall on May 30.— Eoghanacht  talk 19:14, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Pilings/Islands
I haven't been able to find any explanation of what the six pilings or small man-made (looking) islets that continue in a line from the wharf where the USS Missouri is docked. Are they a part of the Arizona memorial or are they something else, perhaps related to a larger Pearl Harbor memorial design? Manys 07:28, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

They are mooring keys(not sure if that is how they are spelled). The harbor crew would tie off the ships to them, just like you would tie a small boat to the dock. Bunns USMC 16:04, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

They're called Quays. Anechoic Man 00:47, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Oil Concerns
A National Geographic special outlined a major concern about the fact that the Arizona is corroding more quickly than expected and it might suddenly let go of the millions of gallons of oil still on board. So instead of a quart a week like it leaks now, you'd have a major environmental disaster. The quandry is that it is also a tomb for a lot of fallen sailors and not something that is easily tampered with. I wonder if this article should at least briefly touch on this concern. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.91.175.180 (talk) 00:16, 8 December 2006 (UTC).
 * It should. --89.53.7.27 (talk) 23:51, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

 * I've added this with a citation to the Natl Geo article.  JGHowes talk  -  00:51, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

The Memorial's commemoration
Is the Article correct in stating that, "The USS Arizona Memorial has come to commemorate all military personnel killed in the attack on the island of Oahu"? Previously, it said "Pearl Harbor". The Memorial actually has inscribed only the names of the Arizona crew lost - perhaps someone could clarify the accuracy of this statement and cite a source? JGHowes 00:01, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The attack was more than Pearl Harbor, but "come to commemorate" is suspiciously vague to me - is that what the tour guides are saying now (I don't remember hearing it myself), or does everybody on base "just know", or what? Let's insist on a source, and delete otherwise. Stan 15:36, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

 * According to the National Park Service's website (external link to this article), "The USS Arizona Memorial has come to commemorate all military personnel killed in the Pearl Harbor attack," so I've changed the article back to that. JGHowes 22:40, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Merge - still has work to do
I see that USer:Reywas92 merged the shipwreck article with the memorial mainly by cutting and pasting. Unfortunately it needs more work to better integrate the two articles. In fact, the overall memorial article looks like it could use a good edit. I'm still working on my pet project of National Natural Landmarks, but could someone start looking at improving this article? Thanks dm (talk) 23:09, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Gallery images
I’m not quite sure the reason why the gallery includes images of seemingly irrelevant flags. Now, I know that Americans like to slap a flag on every corner and that’s fine, but I don’t see how the images Image:IMG 8924.jpg and Image:UssArizona-flag.JPG have anything to do with the article. They are good quality images, but they could literally come from anywhere (despite their claims from being shot at the site) and add nothing specifically to the article. To me, it would make just as much sense putting in an Imperial Japanese in with the bunch, seeing as they had just as much to do with the event as the Americans did (sounds absurd - and would probably ruffle a few feathers - but is really no different to including these flags). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dupz (talk • contribs) 10:19, March 18, 2009
 * The flags are part of the memorial. If this article was about the attacks on Pearl Harbor, I guess it wouldn't make much sense to have them included. But since this article is (or, should be) about every aspect of the memorial, it seems only fair to include images of the various parts. They aren't just random images of flags, they are images of parts of the memorial. Mahalo. --Ali'i 13:58, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Two comments: because Wikipedia works by consensus, starting a proposal by a condescending put-down (e.g., "...Americans like to slap a flag on every corner...") is hardly going to gain you much traction with other editors. Secondly, as Ali'i notes, these two images indeed illustrate specific aspects/views of the Memorial site and thus add value to the article for the reader interesting in seeing the Memorial here.  JGHowes   talk  18:15, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Shipwreck merge
The merge of the USS Arizona Shipwreck article into this one seems to have been done poorly and has essentially left us with a lot of repetition. I propose removing all (including the info box) except the burial section, which can be integrated into the article somehow. Any objections?  raseaC talk to me 17:05, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Flagpole
The "Description" section contained a comment that the flagpole was once attached to the ship but is now attached to the memorial. I could not find any reputable source (official or news) to verify this information, so I removed the comment. (Those sources that do mention that the flagpole is attached to the memorial appear to simply have pasted content from the erroneous article.) The National Park Service's website states that the flagpole is still attached to the ship, which is why I believe people mistakenly think the ship is still commissioned. Wxkat (talk) 09:39, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Link to USS Arizona Memorial web site.
There is a (minor) problem with the link to the US National Parks Service official web site. The link that is currently in the External Links section of the Wikipedia article points to http://www.nps.gov/usar/ but this no longer exists and is currently being redirected to http://www.nps.gov/valr/index.htm. This page doesn't directly mention the USS Arizona at all, which confused me when I went to it, and I'm sure would confuse others.

As far as I can see, the restructuring has happened because the Arizona Memorial has become part of the "World War II Valor in the Pacific National Monument", but I'm not clear on the exact structure.

The best alternative link to this site that I could find was this: http://www.nps.gov/valr/planyourvisit/factsheet.htm, but I wanted to open this to discussion before making any change, since it's a pretty significant link for this article. 86.7.22.39 (talk) 11:31, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

New image
Could anyone upload a newer picture of the first image that says protected landscape or whatever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.130.187.220 (talk) 16:06, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Marines also died serving aboard Arizona
Marines are not Sailors; Sailors are not Marines.

I gratefully acknowledge the dedication and sacrifice of US Navy Corpsman who serve while attached to Marine units. While I cannot speak for Sailors, I'm sure many would feel the same about the service of their attached Marines. 73 of the 1,175 casualties were Marines and they deserve mention. I added "and Marines" to the opening paragraph. If you feel that 6% of the casualties is an insignificant amount not worth mentioning, I invite you to anonymously donate an additional 6% of your income to charity.

US Military date format
Per WP:DATETIES this article has used DMY formatting for years, and has been changed on the basis that it is run by the park service. The Dates for this US Military monument are clearly associated with the US Military date format. It should be maintained as such.  Scr ★ pIron IV 22:05, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * It's run and administered by the National Park Service, a civilian agency. The NPS uses MDY, as noted by their official web page. This is an article about the monument, not a military article.-- JOJ Hutton  22:12, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * It is jointly administered by the US Navy and the park service, and is a US Military grave site. It is as "military" as it gets; named after a combat veteran warship, commemorating said warship, jointly administered by the Navy, honoring 1,177 US military heroes who died there, 1,102 of whom are buried there. Tell me again about this civilian memorial.  Scr ★ pIron IV 22:25, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Got a source that its jointly operated because there doesn't seem to be one in the article? Even if it was so, the official web site clearly used MDY so the Wp article should as well. The article was originally MDY and was changed a few years ago without discussion. It should be reverted back to it's original date format.-- JOJ Hutton  22:55, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah, so it was appropriately corrected years ago, and was uncontested as such - is what you are saying? Just because the park service mops the floors and collects the tickets at the door does not make it a "civilian" memorial. US Military memorial = US military date format. US Military grave site = US Military date format.  Scr ★ pIron IV 23:09, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Back it up with a guideline. This is not a US military article.01:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Emperor visits appear contrary to fact
News reports suggest that Hirohito never visited the site. I can find reports that say Akihito planned a visit, but none that say he completed the visit.

I'm going to delete the uncited material until/unless a reference can be found. I forget if that violates edit norms, let me know if so. 173.174.51.6 (talk) 07:14, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on USS Arizona Memorial. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080513003745/http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=730&ResourceType=Structure to http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=730&ResourceType=Structure
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090724160911/http://www.arizonamemorial.org/locations/arizona-memorial-creating.html to http://www.arizonamemorial.org/locations/arizona-memorial-creating.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120123221922/http://www.pastfoundation.org/Arizona/ArizonaInterments.htm to http://www.pastfoundation.org/Arizona/ArizonaInterments.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090511102823/http://www.tearsofthearizona.org/ to http://www.tearsofthearizona.org/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:35, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Memorial closed
The memorial is currently closed due to damage to its dock. See

There seems to be no certain re-opening date. Should we add this fact and incident to the article? HiLo48 (talk) 11:02, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

 * If you have a reliable source that it is still closed three years after this incident in May 2015, then yeah, that should be added. - BilCat (talk) 20:15, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The National Park's website states it is open.  Scr ★ pIron IV 20:31, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

 * Well it's not. My observation was based on personal experience earlier this week. I was there. I knew I couldn't base an edit on that fact, but picked a lousy source. Sorry. Here's a better one - http://www.staradvertiser.com/2018/05/15/breaking-news/arizona-memorial-remains-closed-because-of-problem-with-loading-ramp/ HiLo48 (talk) 22:32, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

 * It looks like there were (at least) two separate closings 3 years apart, and perhaps some in between. The second source implies it was only closed recently, but it may be related to the accident 3 years ago. - BilCat (talk) 22:38, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

It's still closed!!!! And we are misleading people.
The lead says "...shuttle boats to and from the memorial" It's wrong! The memorial is closed. We should not be lying in the lead. HiLo48 (talk) 04:47, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

 * The boats are still in operation. You just can't get onto the memorial itself. And the information is still in the article, but in the proper place. Plans are to reopen the memorial by October, so the closure isn't permanent, which is what "closed indefinitely" implies to most readers, especially without wordy clarification. - BilCat (talk) 04:55, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

 * I used the word "misleading". I think you ignored it. The lead implies people can visit the memorial. They cannot. Correcting that elsewhere in the article is just plain silly. HiLo48 (talk) 04:59, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

 * You also accused me us of lying, but I ignored that too. - BilCat (talk) 05:16, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

 * I did not accuse you of lying. Where the bloody hell did you get that from? Discuss the article and its misleading content please. HiLo48 (talk) 05:21, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

 * Sorry, I meant to say "us", not "me", as in "We should not be lying in the lead." - BilCat (talk) 05:31, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

 * At that point I was referring to something said in Wikipedia's voice, of which both you and I are part. In the lead we effectively say that people can visit the memorial, then wait until later in the article to say they can't. That really doesn't make sense. The logical thing to do is say that the memorial cannot be visited at present, in the lead, and remove that content once it reopens. HiLo48 (talk) 06:10, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

 * Wikipedia isn't a travelogue. If this turns out to be a permanent closing, then we can change the lead. - BilCat (talk) 06:25, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

 * I truly cannot understand your position. HiLo48 (talk) 06:27, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

 * Perhaps User:Nyttend will have better luck explaining it to you, if he so chooses. - BilCat (talk) 06:33, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * WP:MOSLEAD: the introduction is supposed to report the most important information, including the general concept of how this memorial works. Can you demonstrate that this closure is a long-term major part of the memorial's history?  Any secondary sources on that, or will you just find primary sources like news reports?  Conversely, if we must mention the closure in the introduction, why not mention the hour and minute at which it was announced, and while we're at it mention the hours of the day when (ordinarily) the boats do not transport anybody because the memorial is closed for nightfall?  No: report the most important information in the introduction, not isolated incidents, and if you're foolish enough to think that you can plan your trip to a major tourist attraction merely on a Wikipedia article, it's your own fault if you get to Pearl Harbor and find that you can't visit.  Nyttend (talk) 10:47, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * No. Despite your mocking, insulting tone, I have not proposed anything but mentioning that it is currently impossible to visit the memorial. The memorial has been closed for over three months. We should not be misleading people. Now, try that again, without the demeaning personal stuff. HiLo48 (talk) 11:39, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

What does the BB stand for in Arizona BB-39
I have been looking for the information that shows what the BB stands for. I note that all Battle ships of that era had it but have not located what it means. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.5.54.61 (talk) 17:29, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 17:52, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 17:52, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Correction to number of crew entombed within the USS Arizona
According to the National Park Service the USS Arizona Memorial is the final resting place for 1,104 (not 1,102) of the 1,177 killed during the Japanese attack. Of the 334 surviving USS Arizona crew members, an additional 44 have been interned within the sunken remains.

https://www.nps.gov/valr/learn/historyculture/navy-casualties.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Douglas Bowser (talk • contribs) 21:11, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

"Pearl Harbor Memorial" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Pearl Harbor Memorial. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 11 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Mdewman6 (talk) 03:28, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:USS Arizona Memorial