This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Biography: Sports and Games This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by the sports and games work group (assessed as Low-importance). Algeria Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Algeria, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Algeria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project.AlgeriaWikipedia:WikiProject AlgeriaTemplate:WikiProject AlgeriaAlgeria Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Boxing This article is within the scope of WikiProject Boxing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Boxing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BoxingWikipedia:WikiProject BoxingTemplate:WikiProject BoxingBoxing WikiProject Boxing "To Do": → Help pick the next article for collaboration. FA Noms: Review: New: Expand: Hasim Rahman | Gabriel Elorde | Gerry Peñalosa | Ike Quartey | Joel Casamayor | Jean-Marc Mormeck | Odlanier Solís | Yuriorkis Gamboa Collaborate: Boxing Discuss: Annotate: Muhammad Ali | Sugar Ray Robinson | Oscar De La Hoya | Jack Dempsey | Rocky Marciano | Joe Louis | George Foreman | Roy Jones Jr. | Marvin Hagler | Lennox Lewis | Evander Holyfield | Manny Pacquiao | Érik Morales Assess: Create: Olympics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Olympics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Olympics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OlympicsWikipedia:WikiProject OlympicsTemplate:WikiProject OlympicsOlympics Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Women This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women Women's sport: Boxing Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's sport (and women in sports), a WikiProject which aims to improve coverage of women in sports on Wikipedia. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Women's sportWikipedia:WikiProject Women's sportTemplate:WikiProject Women's sportWomen's sport Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Women's boxing task force.

For you all thinking it's a bold move, we're here to talk. Now, I ask to you: why (maybe) every athlete on Wikipedia has a "normal" intro with no arguments about his/her sexual behavior while this (Imane) has to? gtp (talk) 11:28, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I sympathise with the motivation but I don't think this works. First up, we are meant to avoid "Controversies" sections whenever possible. Secondly, the "controversies" are included throughout the rest of the article so having the section introducing it near the end seems back to front. It would be confusing for a reader, reading this for the first time.

Now, I'm certainly not here to argue that the "controversies" are anything other than artificially created misogynistic bullshit (with maybe a little racism sprinkled on for seasoning) but we do have to explain them without endorsing or overplaying them. I think we need to put some, (maybe not all?) of this back in the lead. The advantage of this is that it provides context for the content that follows and also makes sure that anybody who only reads the lead (like a lot of people do when they are in a hurry) learns that there is absolutely no evidence that any of the allegations are true at all.

One other thing that can be done to help is for editors who are good with sports articles to expand the coverage of her sporting activities so that this nonsense doesn't unfairly eclipse her achievements. DanielRigal (talk) 12:33, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I really appreciate your answer and consideration. What's more the fact you didn't "aggressively" revert even if you could. Anyway, my answer would be very simple and surprising and seemingly bad compared to your well explained argument. Simple: lots of Wikipedians and, in particular, occasional editors to Wikipedia are sex-addicted people. Everything they do, think is lead by sex or sex-sublimation. I'm really tired of this and, sometimes, I will "fight" those edits again and again.

As for this particular situation, there is also the negligence of who makes a surprise that one female boxeur (now professional) will seem quite androgyno, masculine. WTF, she's a punching girl! It's clear she didn't play with Barbies...As well as women in rugby, women power lifters etc. The surprising, enciclopedicity, would be if Miss Universe will seem a male, not a boxeur!

What's more, all claims started from disq. from World cup/championship sanctioned by Russia, ok? Russia, Putin, (obv. not everybody, not generalizing) a bunch of psychopathic pedophiles who aimed to have done some (vodka-influenced) "post-URSS" experiments on this babe. Final? With long hair she appears more feminine than half of ladies we can find out there.

All this to say, I'm not here to censure the controversy, just I'll fight to "detach" that label from her name, by pushing it in proper section. Peace. gtp (talk) 14:29, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the newly created "controversies" section because it's just a repeat of what's covered in the article. No comment on the rest. Here's the diff of what was removed just in case there is disagreement about it. M.Bitton (talk) 22:41, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted it back to the lead. It's not excessively repetitive and, it is, unfortunately, the main thing she is notable for, and so it has to be in the lead, although maybe not in this much detail. The lead should summarise the body. Given the extent to which she has been lied about we can't de-emphasise this. We can't "detach that label". What we can do is make sure that even the most casual reader is told from the start that none of it is true. --DanielRigal (talk) 01:18, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"it is, unfortunately, the main thing she is notable for". This time, I totally disagree with you. It could be, in your fantastic world where people follow news 3x each-day, but for majority of the world 3 Billions indo/chinese she's nobody. Maybe for some chinos she's the one who punched their girl, so well known for the gold medal instead that for androgyne appear. (Also their chino-girl was not a kind of a chick, honestly) gtp (talk) 07:19, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not fighting, since edit warring would result in further more claims to her controversies, which could result in losing the way to may goal. Anyway, if you all were more honest, per coherence (since she's well known), you would change the "is an Algerian athlete" with "is a controversial public figure due to claims by Russia on her genes and by one Italian girl who got punched by her". Apologize my sarcasm, but you experienced editors are often wise politic. correct when it advantageous, while popular when it's not. gtp (talk) 07:37, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]