Talk:Chad Ford

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Science and Academia / Sports and Games

	Biography portal 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 science and academia work group.
	Sports portal This article is supported by the sports and games work group.

Journalism

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism 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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Source on Vescey comment

A note regarding sources from the creator of this article:

I can’t find the NY Post article online anymore where Peter Vescey referred to Chad Ford as “Chad Fraud”, but it did happen, and someone who does a little more investigating would be able to confirm this. If you do a search on Yahoo! for “Peter Vescey” and “Chad Fraud”, you’ll come across a few websites that make reference to when Vescey referred to Ford as such, so I’ll use that as proof that this incident did occur. Beisnj 05:18, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding my last edit, I fixed some grammar and added the Peter Vescey comment. Again, a search online easily backs up this statement. Furthermore, the person who edited this article and removed the comment has only made one edit at Wikipedia, and it was to the Chad Ford article. It almost leads me to believe that the editor was Chad Ford himself, a friend of Ford's, or a biased admirer of Ford's. Beisnj 07:16, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Intriguing journey

Mr. Ford has had an interesting life. What are his basketball credentials? -Amit

Criticism paragraph

I have removed this paragraph. It was based on a blog comment and an opinion piece, and also suffered from original research. If there is valid criticism of Ford then it will need to be properly sourced. Kevin (talk) 22:52, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chad Ford. 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/20060823001650/http://sports.espn.go.com:80/keyword/search?searchString=Chad_Ford&rT=sports to http://sports.espn.go.com/keyword/search?searchString=Chad_Ford&rT=sports

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 22:27, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Chad Ford. 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/20120424185504/http://academics.byuh.edu/DOMckayC/board to http://academics.byuh.edu/DOMckayC/board
Corrected formatting/usage for http://sports.espn.go.com/keyword/search?searchString=Chad_Ford&rT=sports

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 10:51, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Chad Ford bio

^{This post and initial reply were originally posted on User talk:TonySt and have been copied here to centralize the discussion and keep it visible for all editors} Hi Tony

It seems like there's been so back and forth with us on Chad Ford's page. I removed the reference for three reasons.

1. The articles you cite only reference a Reddit post. There is no independent reporting on those citations about the accusation. 2. More importantly the accusation was made without evidence. A Reddit user found changes on the ESPN Draft Rankings. Without evidence they made an accusation that Ford made the changes. Ford denied it. ESPN said they found no evidence that Ford did it. The Reddit user, nor any of the articles cited, provide any evidence that Ford did it. 3. Wikipedia isn't in the business of publishing accusations about people without evidence. If you think that the ESPN Draft Rankings change needs to be published, it should live on ESPN's page. That part about the rankings changing is factual. But there are no facts pointing to Chad Ford making the changes. 4. As this issue seems to pop up occasionally throughout the years, I would suggest locking the profile again for a while. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5930x2908 (talk • contribs) 02:07, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello User:5930x2908! I'm going to copy this to the talk page of the article to keep the conversation centralized there. If you'd like to reply to me, please reply there, and (if desired) leave a copy of your reply here as well if you'd like.

I appreciate you reaching out. I read your edit comment from your reversions and after checking the sources listed I changed the wording of that part of the article to better follow Wikipedia's Manual of Style -- specifically MOS:ACCUSE. In a nutshell, it says we should try to avoid words like "accused" -- and as written I don't think the original wording of the section ("suspected") followed that guideline. I updated the wording to only reflect the facts which strictly meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy:

In 2015, Ford's draft boards from 2009 through 2013 were discovered to have been retroactively altered to make them appear more accurate than they had been. Ford denied any involvement.

I don't think there's any dispute of the material facts in that phrasing -- most of the wording is essentially a paraphrasing and shortening of the official ESPN statement, which is quoted in the cited sources (highlight emphasis mine):

After reviewing the post on Reddit today, we have found that changes were made manually to Chad Ford's NBA Draft prospects rankings. We have not been able to determine who made the changes, or when. We have talked to Chad Ford, who strongly denies any involvement, and based on his past work and professionalism, we believe him. Our review will continue but it is unclear at this time if we will be able to ascertain who was responsible.

In your talk page post, you labeled the draft boards "ESPN Draft Rankings" that may be better suited to "live on ESPN's page", but even the official statement above is unambiguous that these were "Chad Ford's NBA Draft prospects rankings". Looking at this from a neutral point-of-view, it is very difficult to find issue with the wording, weight, or placement of the two sentences buried in the middle of this article. —tony^{st (talk)} 03:10, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]