Talk:Kobe Bryant/Archive 6

Filey
On that article it says that Bryant lives there. Is there any evidence for this? --Dionysos1988 (talk) 02:20, 12 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Nope, and the rest of the Filey section could really use some references. — LOL T/C 02:27, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, thank you.--Dionysos1988 (talk) 15:29, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 69.105.97.185, 25 April 2010
kobe's contract is 83.5mil not 87mil

69.105.97.185 (talk) 08:11, 25 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Requests to edit semi-protected articles must be accompanied by reference(s) to reliable sources.
 * I suggest you get an account, so you can help us improve articles more easily. Best,  Chzz  ►  08:41, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

EDIT REQUEST
The test preceding footnote [16] says "to due so." It should read "to do so."
 * Fixed, thank you.  Enigma msg  20:34, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Good image
I stumbled across this at commons. It seems like a pretty high quality photo that we should consider using.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:35, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

EDIT REQUEST
Kobe does like the comparison between MJ. During the 2008 season he made it appear as though he didn't but lately he has changed his tone saying "it's better if you just mention of group of all-time greats" therefore you should take off the saying about Kobe disliking the Jordan comparison. Also, mention things about how Kobe is the greatest basketball player ever. A lot of people believe he is, so don't down him with this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KWLakers (talk • contribs) 21:06, 25 June 2010 (UTC)


 * If you can provide some reliable sources for his new attitude, I'll add it in the article. As far as one of the greatest ever, I'd like to add it, but every time it is put in someone removes it for being bias. --Ted87 (talk) 21:36, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Any greatest claim is biased. Please see our Neutral point of view policy to see why. Wikipedia's job is to reports all facts to readers, not to tell them who is the greatest.— Chris! c / t 22:03, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

1996 NBA Draft
The claims made by Selena Roberts have been contested by other writers.  Enigma msg  20:06, 27 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Added. Thanks. --Ted87 (talk) 06:50, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Main Wiki Photo For Kobe
You guys need to change the pathetic header photo for Kobe and put something that make him look unique. He looks tired, not a good picture. Please change it by putting something with more of a smile or passion from Kobe. Thank You. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djtripleblaze (talk • contribs) 08:55, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Rap Albums
Why is there no mention of Kobe's albums he's released? I think they would be of some significance, don't you? Thanks. Habitblame (talk) 02:56, 6 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Maybe. However, he never actually released his album. --Ted87 (talk) 03:26, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

CAN WE ALSO INCLUDE IN CAREER ACHIEVEMENTS SECTION THAT HE IS ALSO AN OLYMPIC GOLD MEDAL WINNER, plus the world championship.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.205.4.179 (talk) 09:47, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Kobe Bryant 81 point game pictures
Uploaded these pics not too long ago and thought it would be great for the article, but User:Jimarey kept removing these images from the article, not sure why exactly since he doesn't reply to anyone in his talkpage and refuses to even do a summary. Anyone for or against these images being placed in the article? --  ĴoeĴohnson | 2  06:20, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Unless someone has a valid reason for removing it, you may as well restore it.  Enigma msg  17:29, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Restored images back into the article. --  ĴoeĴohnson | 2  22:39, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Personally, I'd like it better if it were just the scoreboard. I don't see the left picture as really adding much. But that's just a personal opinion, and I don't feel strongly enough about it to get bent out of shape over it. Certainly, preference should be given to the position of edit who is actually trying to discuss the issue over that of the editor who is steadfastly refusing to do so. Mwelch (talk) 02:05, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Agree. The left image adds nothing to the article.— Chris! c / t 02:11, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me either way. --  ĴoeĴohnson | 2  09:24, 17 July 2010 (UTC)--Bellsprout723d (talk) 04:07, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

The left picture doesn't add much. And if you could zoom in on the scoreboard so you could see Kobe's 81,that would be good too.

Kobe Bryant Best Laker
There are facts out now that although Kobe may not be the most popular Laker of all time he is the greatest Laker... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.84.98.110 (talk) 20:51, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

I think Magic and Kobe have been some of the most popular Laker players of all time. When it comes to the greatest Laker though, I'd have to say Magic Johnson because he's been the only Laker to play any position. --Heidyfd (talk) 02:33, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * We need reliable sources that are verifiable as original research is not allowed.—Bagumba (talk) 18:54, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Player of the Decade and ESPY Awards
On Michael Jordan page he has his espy awards and being named player of the decade under his career highlights and awards. So why cant Kobe Bryants page have him being named the player of the decade and the espy awards under his career highlights?Lakers 2010NBAChampions (talk) 00:55, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I would suggest to add it, but it not be the lead section. Bagumba (talk) 01:36, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Kobe bryant is not considered the best basketball player of all time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.116.83.233 (talk) 01:31, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Edits needed
On Michael Jordans page he has his ESPY awards and being named player of the decade under his career highlights so add all of Kobe Bryants espy awards and being named player of the decade under his career highlights. His page is great and the jersey sales were mentioned in his lead for awhile before someone deleted them. A players popularity is to be noted as well. Since it shows his marketability and being the face of his/her sport. If you don't like showing jersey sales thats fine but the page isn't being vandalized by showing them in the lead. So please don't make any unnecessary edits. Thank you-Lakers 2010NBAChampions (talk) 06:30, 31 July 2010 (UTC)


 * If year-by-year jersey sales were in the lead section of the Jordan article, then they were out of place there too, and whoever removed them did the right thing. Recall that the primary way in which editorial decisions are made here is by consensus. This addition to the lead section has been now been reverted by multiple editors, strongly suggesting that the consensus of this article's editors is that year-by-year jersey sales are not lead section material. Yes, it does speak to marketability, so I suppose it is worthy of being mentioned in some capacity somewhere in the article, and I believe it already is; if you feel a bit of expansion of that part of the article might be appropriate, perhaps that might be more acceptable. But again, the consensus here seems to be that the lead section is not the place for such detail. Mwelch (talk) 07:37, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Other achievements
In my opinion other achievements other than the official NBA or NCAA achievements shouldn't be mentioned in the infobox, perhaps it's better to be added to List of career achievements by Kobe Bryant. Having non-official awards and honors would make the infobox longer and when you start adding the awards by notable media such as TNT and SportingNews, other people will start adding awards from other media, and sometimes from non-notable media. I suggest only official achievements from NBA, NCAA, FIBA should be listed here. This should be applied to all players, not just Kobe Bryant. Michael Jordan's other achievements have also been removed from his infobox. Also, most of the Best NBA Player ESPY Award winners don't have their ESPY award listed in the infobox, so it should also be applied here. — Martin tamb (talk) 13:48, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed— Chris! c / t 19:20, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

You showed no real good reason but fine. I don't want to argue. Though I still felt like it was a major achievement but I will not use my opinion. It is about what is best for the page.ScottieAngelo (talk) 21:12, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

2008 NBA Finals
This page had how Kobe Bryant and the Lakers lost in the 2008 Finals. Yet on Lebron James lead section it only mentions how he lead the Cavs to their first NBA Finals and not how they lost. There's nothing wrong with that but Kobe Bryants page should be treated the same. As on Magic Johnsons page it says how he appeared in 9 Finals not how he lost 4 of them. In the lead section on Jerry Wests page it mentions nothing about how he lost 8 out of 9 NBA Finals. Kobe Bryants page should be treated the same. He is an All-Time NBA Great just like Magic and Jerry West. Lebron James isn't a All-Time NBA Great yet but his page is treated as such. Again I have no problem with that as long as Kobe Bryants page is treated the same. Thank You-ScottieAngelo (talk) 01:41, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The wording here was fine, and read more smoothly than your version. The Lakers did lose in 2008. The solution to your problem is to propose changes to the other articles. Zagal e jo^^^ 07:30, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The leads to Magic and West mention that they appeared in X number of Finals and won Y. Kobe's lead goes into more detail of specific years.  I wouldn't have a problem with summarizing Kobe's lead similiarly, but it doesn't seem neutral to state he "led" them to Finals in a given year to euphemistically say that the Lakers' lost in the Finals. Bagumba (talk) 17:35, 18 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Seems like the recent edit by is a continuation of POV push by sockpuppets,  , and  .  I'm changing back to previous wording before the sockpuppet edits.—Bagumba (talk) 07:03, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Hopefully this won't be needed, but noting for future reference that was found to be another sock for the same Finals-style edits. The latest incarnation was also overloading Lakers-specific achievements into the lead and infobox, while censoring mention of feud with Shaq in the lead (there are other threads on that as well).—Bagumba (talk) 01:40, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Edit Request
The second paragraph of the page lead spells the past tense of "lead/led" two different ways. Additionally, I recommend the Shaq-Kobe Feud page to be listed under the "See Also" section. misterultimatum (talk) 16:11, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I added the Kobe/Shaq fued to the see also setion. I'm not seeing what you mean by the lead/led difference, though --Ted87 (talk) 09:48, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I just checked the history. It looks like it was corrected before you got to it. misterultimatum (talk) 12:08, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 65.66.227.12, 11 November 2010
edit semi-protected

65.66.227.12 (talk) 05:59, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed.  —  Jeff G.  ツ  06:30, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Stevenpope23, 19 November 2010
edit semi-protected

i would love to edit Stevenpope23 (talk) 13:42, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Due to this being a high-profile page and concerns about libel, this page has been protected from editing by new and unregistered users. You are free to suggest specific changes on this talk page. You can also contribute 10 edits to other articles and wait 4 days. Then you will be able to edit the article under your current account. Thanks. -Atmoz (talk) 14:35, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Stevenpope23, 22 November 2010
edit semi-protected

Stevenpope23 (talk) 13:42, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

2010-2011 season stats loS ANGLES lAKERS 12-2

PPG 25.6 AST 4.8 REB 5.2

FIELD GOAL% .430 3PT% .302 FT% .885 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevenpope23 (talk • contribs) 14:15, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: As the 2010-2011 season is ongoing, I don't think it's a good idea to post and continually update stats. -Atmoz (talk) 17:43, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Erase sexual allegtions charge formt he beginning
The beginning of an wikipedia sportsman article should be about his sportiv achievemts.His sexual assaults case is a discrace to an encyclopdie such as wikipdia.I can be moved to the persoanl life section.I will erase that part in one week is the persons responsible with the article don't do it before. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neohertz (talk • contribs) 17:42, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Merged lead
I merged the final paragraph (involving his accused sexual assault) with the second paragraph. It makes it more chronologically complete and the allegation doesn't stand on its own. Any thoughts or opinions? --Ted87 (talk) 02:18, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 68.195.185.233, 4 December 2010
Second paragraph, second sentence "A heated feud between the duo and a lose in the 2004 NBA Finals led to O'Neal's departure following the 2003–04 season. " "lose" should be "loss"

68.195.185.233 (talk) 00:49, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I've fixed it. Zagal e jo^^^ 02:11, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Mattzhou, 12 December 2010
In Kobe Bryant's main description, 'Bryant currently ranks fourth and twelfth on the league's post-season scoring and all-time scoring lists, respectively.', when in fact he has currently surpassed John Havlicek, making him now eleventh, rather than twelfth. Refer to List of NBA scoring leaders http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_National_Basketball_Association_career_scoring_leaders

Mattzhou (talk) 04:45, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, done— Chris! c / t 05:31, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

An Old Football Team
an image of [Kobe] some years ago.


 * No, it cannot be used because it is unfree.— Chris! c / t 05:01, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

yes, you can use it if you want,because the original photo is mine, and if you want i ll send u also the negative .--LupusInFabula (talk) 18:09, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Then, you got to show that you release the image to the public domain. Simply saying it is yours doesn't work. If you have question, please ask Media copyright questions.— Chris! c / t 20:18, 24 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Besides copyright issues, how do we verify that Kobe is in this picture? I can't even tell where he is. — LOL T/C 00:45, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

1)Who added it?--->[Can it be used?] — Preceding unsigned comment added by LupusInFabula (talk • contribs) 10:29, 23 December 2010 (UTC) Things That I Never Said . My comment was only a suggestion,an idea to improve the article .You can chose if my comment is useful or not to improve the article, but i think that you should nt erase it.Because... 2) What I wrote was all true. 2-a)An Old Football Team.True .The picture shows a typical disposition of a Footbal/Soccer team pre or post match.That structure that you see in the picture is the Botteghelle ,an old multi-sport center usually used in the 80 as mini Football/Soccer center. 2-b)An image of some years ago.Also this it is true. 2-c)Why my comment is related with the article? why the comment should nt be erased? because the picture shows Kobe Bryant when he was 8 . who do you think that kobe bryant is? maybe that man with the hat (which instead is Joe Bryant)? You can simply enlarge the pic or you could buy a pair of glasses. 3) If you need a documentation for the picture or a document showing that in the picture there is Kobe Bryant ,I have both. 3.1)Picture Copyrigth Documentation - After 20 years the copyrigth picture (according to local laws) should return to the material person who made the picture, in this case i.The problem is that the old copyrigth holder was my ex newspaper, now i don t know how and If the picture was classified but if as i think the picture was not classified as artistic picture or as a picture containing sensitive data ,the copyrigth should return to me(it was a simple amatorial photo).I can simply send an email to newspaper to solve this problem, but the documentation won t be on english, then what must i do?,How can I demonstrate you that the documentation that i ll show you is not something "home-made"? 3.2)Document showing that in the picture there is Kobe Bryant-It is easier i could scan a old page of my ex-newspaper ,but the documentation won t be on english, then what must i do? sorry--LupusInFabula (talk) 14:17, 26 December 2010 (UTC)


 * The problem with scans is that we can't tell whether the documents are authentic or whether the scans are manipulated. If there were a reliable and verifiable archive of the newspaper article, then that would be much better.


 * I also have an issue with the image quality. The resolution is so small that I can't make out any face detail, particularly on the darker faces, so it's impossible for me to recognize Kobe in the picture.  While I appreciate your attempt to contribute with the photo, I don't really see it improving the article. — LOL T/C 21:46, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Turkish Airlines endorsement deal - and the dreaded "c" word
C for controversy, that is. Something more should be mentioned in the article rather than just the bare bone fact about the endorsment deals existence. There are currently a large number of news reports related to this. Reports express surprise that Turkish Airlines would want to choose as their "face" a person who has no connection with Turkey, and who has never even set foot in Turkey. However, most of the reports concentrate on a controversy that the endorsement deal means that Bryant is endorsing the polices of the Turkish state (Turkish airlines being a state-owned airline, and thus an arm of the Turkish state). There are ongoing protests by Armenian groups urging him either to drop the deal or make a public statement about the Armenian Genocide to dissasociate himself from Turkey's official position that the Armenian Genocide did not happen. 93.97.143.19 (talk) 03:02, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * This dispute about him signing a deal with Turkish Airlines isn't that notable in terms of the subject Kobe Bryant, so I don't think it deserves any mention in this article. The relevant policy applicable in this case is WP:UNDUE. It states that "An article should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject. For example, discussion of isolated events, criticisms, or news reports about a subject may be verifiable and neutral, but still be disproportionate to their overall significance to the article topic. This is a concern especially in relation to recent events that may be in the news."— Chris! c / t 03:59, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The deal means much more to Turkish Airlines than it does to Kobe Bryant. I kinda doubt Bryant meant it as a political statement. Zagal e jo^^^ 05:16, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

I currently see over 1,200 news articles on the controversy when searching for Kobe Bryant and Armenian community on Google news. Over 1,200 articles makes it unisolated, especially since it's being covered by the majority of major media outlets worldwide, including: Huffington Post, New York Times, BBC, CNN, AND Hurriyet Daily News (Turkey). kkhach
 * The issue is not the availability of sources. The issue is WP:UNDUE. Please read the above comment.— Chris! c / t 19:59, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Let me emphasis why you are wrong. Please try to be objective and understand: in this case, Kobe Bryant is from Los Angeles, home of about 700,000 Armenian-Americans. This makes it a controversy that must be noted, especially since the endorsement is with the government of the country who perpetuated the Armenian Genocide and because he was very vocal about the Genocide in Darfur. This clearly has an affect on his image and there has been significant and NON isolated media coverage of his endorsement. How do you define disproportional the overall significance? Kobe Bryant has had numerous other endorsements, if the line about Turkish Airlines is important enough to be mentioned, then the backlash against it must be as well. kkhach —Preceding undated comment added 01:15, 12 January 2011 (UTC).
 * No, actually let me explain why you are wrong:
 * "Kobe Bryant is from Los Angeles, home of about 700,000 Armenian-Americans. This makes it a controversy that must be noted" No, what determines what goes in an article is notability, not by the number of people who are upset about certain thing. While this event is in the news right now, it is hardly an event with historic significance. This will be forgot in a month or two. Also, Kobe is not "from" LA. He is just playing for a team that is "from" LA.
 * "This clearly has an affect on his image" No, I don't think so. This is not even comparable to the rape allegation which did affect his image.
 * "if the line about Turkish Airlines is important enough to be mentioned, then the backlash against it must be as well" The line about Turkish Airlines is mentioned because it is directly related to Kobe. The same can't be said about the backlash.
 * And "How do you define disproportional the overall significance?" Easy. This is about Kobe, so only things directly related to him should go in. This whole controversy is marginally related to him.
 * Finally, WP:UNDUE is a policy and should be followed. If you really like to mention this whole controversy, I suggest you write about that in Turkish Airlines instead of here.— Chris! c / t 02:39, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

First of all, you're definitely being bias now. What makes the rape scandal so different from the Turkish airlines scandal? How do you assume that this will be forgotten in time? People don't talk about the rape anymore as much either. History remembers things based on what was written and this is mentioned and written in different media sources: the same media sources covered that covered the rape scandal, the same TV time was given to it, and the same thousands of articles were written about it. Just because you feel that it will 'be forgot' in a month or two, does not make it true. Is it safe to say you are less interested in it? Yes. What makes something more scandalous and note-worthy?

Second of all, "No, I don't think so" doesn't make you right. I think a lot of things, but not all of them are correct. How is the backlash against Kobe Bryant not related to Kobe Bryant? It's not against the Airlines, its against Kobe. Vague terms like "marginally related" are not convincing enough. What I'm showing you are the facts. Now on the other hand, writing this in Turkish Airlines is marginally related because the controversy isn't against the Airlines, it's against Kobe's endorsement. Quoting Wikipedia policies is easy, but the truth is, they don't apply in this case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kkhach (talk • contribs) 08:48, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Are you serious when you try to equate this Turkish airlines thing to the rape scandal? The rape scandal made national headlines and is still remembered by many people today. Go around and ask everyone what is the #1 controversy Kobe involved in. I bet everyone would say the rape allegation. If you really don't think this will be forgotten soon, we can resume this discussion a year later and see if people still remember. Also, what you shown me aren't facts but your opinion as well. Sure, you can dismiss what I said as bias, but the thing is what you said is bias too.— Chris! c / t 21:36, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Personally I see no merit in including it. Bryant signing an endorsement deal with an airline that is owned/run by a government that denies the Armenian Genocide seems a little to far removed from Bryant's own notability. If anything it falls on recentism: Recentism is writing or editing without a long-term, historical view, thereby inflating the importance of a topic that has received recent public attention and possibly resulting in: Articles overburdened with documenting controversy as it happens. --Ted87 (talk) 22:07, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

loss to Cleveland
The text on the loss to Cleveland was deleted with explanation "not sure how the cavaliers loss after breaking their losing streak to the clippers, then playing the lakers, has any historical signifcance here." Multiple verifiable source (I used four, there can easily be more) made it significant citing the Cavs' overall record, losing 37 of 39, and previous 50+ pt loss to Lakers. Wikipedia states that verifiability is the key, "not whether editors think it is true." Unless this article is a Bryant PR page, a meaningful article needs to also point out his struggles and for Bryant historians, it will be interesting how he and the team recover. If there is consensus that regular season games where no records are set are not notable, I think there is a lot in this article that needs to be cut for consistency. Personally, I dont think that should be the direction, but neither do I think we censor failures and setbacks that get significant coverage. This could turn out to be insignificant a few months or years from now, but I think it is more important to record these now and revisit later. Bagumba (talk) 21:33, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I tend to agree with you. It may not have historical significance in the future, but it is like you said better to "record these now and revisit later". IMO, the loss to the Cavs is notable considering they lose to a team that had the historic losing streak and a team that they previously beat by 50 points. Although, it can be argued that this fact should go toward the Lakers article than to here.— Chris! c / t 21:53, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll also add it to the Lakers article. The reason Bryant is involved is because some of the sources pointed out Bryant's off performance as well, and there was mention that he had the flu earlier. Bagumba (talk) 22:02, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I guess I'll defend JoeJohnson2 here. Any competent sports historian will be able to revisit these stories later if they do turn out to be notable. We don't need to worry about things falling into the memory hole. We do need to think about WP:NOTNEWS, and readability. Too many details about regular season games will make readers feel overwhelmed. Zagal e jo^^^ 02:23, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not tied to it being here as long as we are consistent and neutral. However, nobody objected to the note about the Boston game which I also added that had less coverage than the Cavs loss. And there lots of other equally (in)significant regular season items (the occasional triple double, "clutch" shots, etc) in the article that need to be handled similarly if the decision is not to include this.  Any guidelines in NBA project? Bagumba (talk)<
 * I think NOTNEWS should apply to positive news as well as negative news. I'd remove the bit about the Boston game, and probably a few other things. If I didn't comment on those before, it's mainly because I wasn't paying attention. :) (I usually don't review your edits, because I know you're a good writer and have a good head on your shoulders. I probably wouldn't have said anything now if not for the talk page discussion.) Zagal e jo^^^ 06:22, 22 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Will need to hear from Chris (and any others) to form consensus. Here's one more comment though :-) What I find is that die-hard fans tend to load up articles when things are going well, but you rarely see adversity or key turning points in the articles because same fans dont have as much inspiration for bad news or maybe don't want it mentioned.  While we can research and add later, the reality is its harder to find and more time consuming later, which means it usually will not get done. Not to mention a lot of online sites start making old articles available only for pay, and how many of us are going to the library? So if Lakers get knocked out early in playoffs, there will be little news about what happened this this year aside from a stat line and some if we are lucky some selective momoents based purely off of memory (a different type of recentism). A lot of these record stats about this X,000 milestone or youngest record for XXX dont even get as much unique coverage and different discussion as the Cleveland loss, so even "notable" records are really not that notable based on number of sources.  Bagumba (talk) 07:03, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think it merits mention. If Kobe had a really horrible game maybe, like if he went 1-15 or something. In all honesty there is a lot of tangential information in this article already, so in comparison to whats in there it might not look bad, but thats just because this article needs a little pruning imho. AaronY (talk) 01:51, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Kobe is also known as the Black Mamba
Kobe Bryant is also referred to as "The Black Mamba" but it doesn't say it. I think it should day Kobe Bryant AKA The Black Mamba is... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.54.108.210 (talk) 03:09, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
 * IMO I don't think nationally people refer to it that often like "D-Wade", "KG" or "Mailman". It is mentioned under Kobe_Bryant. Bagumba (talk) 04:01, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes actually people say it a lot more than you think Bagumba.--Bellsprout723d (talk) 23:28, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry Bagumba, I was just getting kind of annoyed because it didn't mention that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bellsprout723d (talk • contribs) 00:41, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

If the article is going to mention the "Black Mamba" nickname, mentioning that he gave it to himself is probably also a good idea. It is not common practice to give oneself a nickname - doing so is notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.20.133.164 (talk) 19:08, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Edit request from Msg4, 28 February 2011
Change kobe being 8th on all time NBA scorer's list to 7th -- he just past Elvin Hayes tongiht.

Msg4 (talk) 04:31, 28 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Pictogram voting wait.svg Already done Already changed in the third paragraph "Bryant currently ranks fourth and seventh on the league's post-season scoring and all-time scoring lists, respectively." If it appears anywhere else in the article I didn't notice, please feel free to put a request back up. One note though, please provide a reliable source when requesting edits like these in the future. Shell   babelfish 07:22, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request
Although it says where he ranks in scoring in the post-season,it does not say that he ranks seventh on the all-time leading scorers list.I think that should get changed.Here type in this link:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_National_Basketball_Association_career_scoring_leaders.Thank you,--Bellsprout723d (talk) 04:17, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request
Although it says where he ranks in scoring in the post-season,it does not say that he ranks seventh on the all-time leading scorers list.I think that should get changed.Here type in this link:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_National_Basketball_Association_career_scoring_leaders. Thank you,--Bellsprout723d (talk) 04:21, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

The article does say it. First sentence in the 3rd paragraph:

Bryant currently ranks fourth and seventh on the league's post-season scoring and all-time scoring lists, respectively.

--Ted87 (talk) 04:51, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

I am sorry, I didn't see it. Sorry I wasted your time.--Bellsprout723d (talk) 00:30, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 76.76.238.2, 11 March 2011
Bob Pettit's name (towards the end of the article) is spelled wrong (should have two t's in the middle, not one as in the article, as you can confirm by clicking the link).

76.76.238.2 (talk) 08:52, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Done Bagumba (talk) 09:30, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

$100,000 fine for insult of referee
Should Mr. Bryant's recent $100,000 fine for insulting a referee be mentioned in the article? Here's a link to a JP story: US: NBA-League fines Bryant $100000 for anti-gay slur. I have not yet located a news story which quotes just exactly what he said, so are we waiting until more details are available? -- 110.49.241.140 (talk) 00:41, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Not really relevant to a biographical article on Kobe Bryant, no. Phil Jackson's "Brokeback Mountain" slur was removed from his article awhile ago for being trivial, I see no reason why this is worth a mention either. Tarc (talk) 17:24, 19 April 2011 (UTC)


 * At this point, its debatable if the incident had enough impact based on number of sources for inclusion here. I am neutral, but could be convinced otherwise if more sources are found. It is currently in 2010–11 Los Angeles Lakers season, as its an article about a smaller scope, one season, and it impacted the Lakers organization also. If there is more sustained coverage in the future, this could be revisited for this article. If someone were to WP:SPINOUT an article on Bryant's public image, it would be notable there too. —Bagumba (talk) 18:16, 19 April 2011 (UTC)


 * How common are fines of that magnitude in the NBA? -- 110.49.227.55 (talk) 23:51, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
 * This has happened a number of times before for various incidents although rarely on players. Still remember Dan Gilbert's letter to LeBron. —  Chris! c / t 00:34, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request: It should be "You play. I cook. Anybody can cook"
In the Turkish airline commercial Kobe actually says "You play. I cook. Anybody can cook", not "I play. You cook. Anyone can cook" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.252.136.1 (talk) 05:41, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Doesn't seem that notable for his biography. Consider adding it to Wikiquote instead —Bagumba (talk) 05:47, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough, just thinking that at the very least the current misquote should be removed from the Wikipedia entry (even though it was quoted from a source article that misquoted the commercial) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.252.136.1 (talk) 06:13, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I didnt realize it was already in the article. I removed it as WP:Run-of-the-mill.

Edit request from 156.3.63.105, 4 May 2011
156.3.63.105 (talk) 19:34, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Guoguo12  --Talk--  19:43, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 156.3.63.100, 1 June 2011
156.3.63.100 (talk) 20:46, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Crazymonkey1123 (Jacob) T or M/Sign mine 04:09, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Lakersfan111888, 13 June 2011
In the information regarding Kobe Bryant and his sexual assault case. The employee worked at a lodge in Cordillera, Colorado and the hearings were all done at Eagle Colorado, not Edwards. It is clearly sited on the wikipedia page "Kobe Bryant Sexual Assault Case", amongst other places

Lakersfan111888 (talk) 05:42, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: The hotel's website actually does say Edwards: For the time being, I've purposely made the location less precise. I'll let others hash things out. Zagal e jo^^^ 06:06, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Reference #1
The link does not work. 8-1-2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.213.144.39 (talk) 01:44, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I replaced it with an Internet Archive copy. Unfortunately, a lot of NBA.com links no longer work, due to the lockout. I'm sure there are lots of other links in this article that need to be replaced. Zagal e jo^^^ 02:37, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Kobe's high school junior stats
I found Kobe's stats as a junior: 31.1 points, 10.4 rebounds, 5.2 assists, 3.8 blocked shots and 2.3 steals. It might be useful in the article. Source: source — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skrzeczu94 (talk • contribs) 12:26, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from, 21 October 2011
yes

Celticsfolyf0313 (talk) 08:39, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed.—Bagumba (talk) 09:00, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Neutral "Player Profile" section
The above sourced statement was removed without an explanation. Being that this single sentence was the only criticism of Bryant in the section, and is probably the biggest (only?) knock against his illustrious career, it seem to be due weight to have it mentioned in the article. I will add it back with POV-statement tag to invite discussion to gain consensus.—Bagumba (talk) 21:51, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Eh, I'm not crazy about it. No matter how you word it, it comes across as a non sequitur. NPOV doesn't mean we must have some sort of negative material in there somewhere. I don't see anything similar in, say, the Michael Jordan article. Zagal e jo^^^ 01:05, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I see User:Ivan Greber has already reverted you. Hopefully, he'll come by and explain. Zagal e jo^^^ 01:09, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: Ivan Greber reverted a few weeks back, which is why I started a discussion.—Bagumba (talk) 01:31, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, I see its the second and latest unexplained revert you are referring to.—Bagumba (talk) 02:23, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, Jordan by the end of his career was considered more "godly" than Bryant. While Jordan early was considered sort of a ball hog as well, it was probably erased by a few passes to his "supporting cast" in Finals games.  The WP:OTHERSTUFF comparison to Jordan is more a reflection of lack of criticism on Jordan than it being inappropriate.  Perhaps when the Shaq–Kobe feud is summarized a bit more in this article, this will not seem as far out of context.  I agree some massaging is needed on current wording, but I feel its inclusion is needed for a full understanding of Bryant's playing style.—Bagumba (talk) 01:31, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
 * When was the Abbott article originally published? I'm a little confused about that. Zagal e jo^^^ 01:36, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Jan 2011. Was the citation unclear?—Bagumba (talk) 01:41, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, no, it's fine. I think I just misinterpreted it as January 2012. (The Abbott article is still getting comments today, which also threw me off.) Zagal e jo^^^ 02:05, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Jordan in Young, Black, Rich, and Famous was credited with elevating the status of the ballhog—Bagumba (talk) 02:03, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Not too surprised (although, in that context, it seems to be considered a good thing). Zagal e jo^^^ 02:10, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
 * For Jordan, his legacy is that it is positive. For Bryant, there are a few detractors. Some sources that refer to Bryant as "ball hog":  Reuters LA Times The art of a beautiful game.  Definitely, its a minority position. However, it would be a disservice to readers to not put a sentence on Bryant's shooting tendencies to put it into context.—Bagumba (talk) 02:16, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm more concerned with the presentation of the fact than anything else. After hearing about all the awards Bryant has won, and all the respect he has from GMs, readers will be confused when they read that some writers still don't think very highly of him. A sentence like that needs a little more context. Maybe we could include it in a broader discussion about Bryant's relationships with his teammates. Zagal e jo^^^ 03:52, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

The thing about that article is its stats go back to 1996. It has been since 2001 he was voted "player they most want taking the shot with the game on the line", not before. It dont list assists in the last 24 secs or how many passes the players made in the last 24 secs. Also thats in past tense his career is not over would so it should be "ESPN in 2011 noted that Bryant during crunch time in his career rarely passes the ball and misses twice as many shots as he makes." A writer(Henry Abbott of ESPN.com) that works for ESPN said and wrote this, not ESPN. But the stats on this are too hard to verify so it cant be added. Theworm777 03:46, 18 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theworm777 (talk • contribs)
 * "stats on this are too hard to verify": I dont think we need to do original research on this and re-verify the stats presented in the article. SI.com and nbcsports.com also refer to Abbott, so it does get coverage outside of ESPN. Here's a back-and-forth between Abbott and and an LA Times writer on the subject. Slate did a separate piece questioning Bryant's clutchness. The LA Times acknowledges the existence of late game stats and attempts to put it into context. While I agree the original wording should be softened, the amount of coverage indicated there should be some mention to Bryant's shooting percentage in the "clutch" and/or the general uncertainty on how to quantify clutchness.

To say he rarely passed in the last 24 secs of close games is something that would take alot of work to verify. Passes arent even a stat and are not logged in a box score even. The stats in this article dont show passes or assists. Most of the time he is the one the coach wants to shoot the ball anyways so he is not suppose to pass. Theworm777 04:19, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Abbott's article says "over a five-year period, he mustered 56 clutch shots, to go with one assist)." The article also includes a link to 82games.com which shows assists. How do you propose the information in the sources in this thread be presented in the article?—Bagumba (talk) 08:44, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps we can make the "ball hog" statement more unbiased, for journalistic purposes? You can say that he is deemed a ball hog at times, but counter it with "if willing, he is a good passer and playmaker", as evidenced by his assists averages, his playmaking prowess dating back on his "8" days, and his double-double capabilities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.191.58.39 (talk) 10:17, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

2011 All Star Game
Since Kobe Bryant suffered a concussion and a broken nose in the third quarter of the 2012 All Star Game when Dwyane Wade fouled him across the face, would this be added on his page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kglight (talk • contribs) 20:06, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Definitely should go in 2012 NBA All-Star Game. Unless he misses time or affects his play, it seems insignificant here.—Bagumba (talk) 00:44, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

The Mask
We should have a picture of him in the mask. Even if it does not go here it belongs in the Lakers season article. Here are some candidates: --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:37, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) http://www.flickr.com/photos/keithallison/6963489357/in/set-72157629172864326
 * 2) http://www.flickr.com/photos/keithallison/6963555825/in/set-72157629172864326
 * 3) http://www.flickr.com/photos/keithallison/6963559171/in/set-72157629172864326
 * 4) http://www.flickr.com/photos/keithallison/6817451288/in/set-72157629172864326
 * 5) http://www.flickr.com/photos/keithallison/6817480540/
 * I don't have a strong preference, but I'd probably go with the first one. At this point, I think it would be better to leave it out of this article; it's not clear how much long-term importance the mask will have. But a picture in the season article would be fine with me. Zagal e jo^^^ 04:48, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

2010 FIBA World Championship gold medal
Kobe wasn't on the 2010 US National team competing in the FIBA World Championship. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_FIBA_World_Championship_squads#.C2.A0United_States — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.103.40.221 (talk) 02:58, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Correct. I've removed it. Thanks! Zagal e jo^^^ 04:09, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

EDIT REQUEST
Kobe Bryant in the 2012 NBA All Star game surpassed Michael Jordan(262) as the all time All Star game scoring leader at 270 points. http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22748484/35003543 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Breezyroses (talk • contribs) 05:24, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * That's mentioned in the article under "Chasing the sixth championship (2010–present)". Zagal e jo^^^ 05:56, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit request
"Bryant has started in every NBA All-Star Game that has been held with fourteen All-Star appearances". In 2010 he didn't play and was replaced by Jason Kidd. So in fact he did not start that game. He was only selected to play but did not play. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skrzeczu94 (talk • contribs) 13:15, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Corrected to convey that he was selected by fans to start those games.—Bagumba (talk) 15:19, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Kobe body weight
I'd agree he has to be in the 200s, but in this latest article he is quoted as saying he's only 180 lbs. Was he joking? And should an edit be made?

http://tracking.si.com/2012/12/13/kobe-bryant-carmelo-anthony-lebron-james-toughest-player-guard-knicks/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.21.140.164 (talk) 17:43, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hm, that's odd. Why is "180 pounds" in brackets? That implies the quotation was altered by the writer. In any case, 205 is still his "official", listed weight: http://www.nba.com/playerfile/kobe_bryant/. Players' weights are going to fluctuate throughout a season, so he might indeed weigh less than 205, but the infobox does say "listed weight". Zagal e jo^^^ 18:04, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

All Time Ranks
Kobe recently became the youngest player in NBA History to score 30,000 career points. That is a huge achievement and should be added to the lead. It should also be noted that he is the only Laker player to join the 30,000 point club to score all 30,000 while wearing a Laker uniform. And he also recently became the Lakers all time steals leader, and all time leader in field goals made. (Surpassing Magic & Kareem Abdul-Jabbar) It should also be noted hes 9th all time in field goals made, 15th all time in steals, and 41st all time in assists.James edwin (talk) 03:29, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The "youngest player" milestones are a product of high school players previously not being able to go straight to NBA. They are usually only mentioned at the time of the milestone  and then when someone passed it. Fine to mention in body, but not worthy of the lead. Since he is the Lakers all-time leading scorer, any number he achieves will implicitly also be the first for a Laker, so no additional mention is needed. Points are more notable than FGs or FTs as far as scoring, so I would suggest mentioning those secondary scoring stats in List of career achievements by Kobe Bryant instead.  As far as all-time NBA rankings, top-10 should be the cutoff for the lead, and only for major stats.—Bagumba (talk) 20:29, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Whether he achieved it or not because he came out of high school he still broke a historic NBA record, that was decades old. So yes it is worth mentioning. Not to mention hes only the fifth player in NBA history to join the 30,000 point club. His scoring achievements doesn't stop at being the Lakers all time leading scorer. Clarification is needed because Kareem was a Laker and is the NBA's all time leading scorer. Not to mention Wilt Chamberlain and Karl Malone wore Laker jerseys. And it should be stated that aside from being the Lakers All Time leading scorer Bryant is also the Lakers All Time leader in steals and field goals made. (Respectively 15th and 9th All Time) Mention he is the franchises all time leader and just add where that ranks all time.James edwin (talk) 02:55, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I believe it can go in the body (and most of it already is) but isn't significant enough for the lead. Remember, non-basketball people read this too, so we don't want to overload with stats in the lead either.  We can see what others think to form a consensus.—Bagumba (talk) 04:17, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

It seems to be a no brainier but okay.James edwin (talk) 06:52, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I've reconsidered on the youngest 30K, and added it to the lead.—Bagumba (talk) 09:01, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

I am perplexed about your recent edits that persist in adding to the lead:
 * 1) Undue mention of all-time lakers ranks on in steals, FGs. These are not mentioned in sources as much as his being their all-time scorer.
 * 2) Putting greater weight in his Lakers accomplishments than his more notable overall NBA feats. There are more people interested in basketball and the NBA than the Lakers specifically.
 * 3) Redundantly saying he is 5th player to score 30,000 when it's already stated he's the 5th leading scorer in NBA history, and he was youngest to reach 30,000
 * 4) Record in Madison Square Garden, which is unimportant in comparison to his many other feats
 * 5) Removing mention of notable feud with O'Neal
 * 6) Frequent mention of number of Finals he has played when number of chmpionships is most notable

Moreover, there are still grammatical errors that others have reverted before. May I suggest that you get consensus on changes here first, and we can then work on proper grammar for the wording to be added/changed.—Bagumba (talk) 05:06, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the Madison Square Garden record just seems too New York-centric for the lead. And I don't know why we can't just clearly say that he lost a couple of Finals. The recent changes obscured that fact by emphasizing total appearances instead of the results. People lose games in sports. That's life. (Actually, we've had that conversation before: Talk:Kobe_Bryant.) Zagal e jo^^^ 05:35, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry where does it say Kevin Durant or Lebron lost? You know since people lose in sports. If your gonna mention it outright why is it only on certain pages like James Harden and Kobe Bryant? Yet not on Kevin Durant or Lebron James?James edwin (talk) 02:38, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The leads to the Durant and James articles don't even mention the Finals series that the players lost. Those leads are simply structured differently. They're nothing like the lead you're proposing, which is purposely vague. Zagal e jo^^^ 03:09, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, I see you've just added something to the James article. In general, I don't mind what you've added, though you end up repeating some stuff that's already been said. Zagal e jo^^^ 03:11, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Very well. I'm done editing on Kobe Bryant as long as Wikipedia stays consistent.James edwin (talk) 03:17, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Content removal
Please do not remove notable information from the lead, i.e. summary of the Kobe Bryant sexual assault case. Per WP:UNDUE, "Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represents all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources." The case has its own article and was a significant aspect of the subject's life, therefore his biography. Dan56 (talk) 03:23, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Its not significant in my opinion because with no conviction it doesn't seem notable. Nor has it had any lasting impact on his marriage, career, marketability, or life in any regard. It has its own article, so why should it be in the lead when it has had no long term impact on his life or career?? James edwin (talk) 03:34, 7 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Again, we're not the one's who decide that. I dont even know how any of us can know the lasting impact. The weight given to this case is decided by what has been published by reliable sources, "in proportion to the prominence" of each viewpoint. Per WP:LEAD, the lead should "summarize the most important points—including any prominent controversies". Dan56 (talk) 03:38, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Very well. I understand now. Thank you.James edwin (talk) 03:44, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

At the beginning it says Kobe has played for the lakers his entire career and led them to 5 championships. It should say he has led them to two championships and was a support player when Shaq led them to three championships. user:joey08_bucket

Edit request on 7 January 2013
Kobe Bryant recently got an Official Twitter account. I suggest you to add it to the External Links. Here is the URL http://twitter.com/kobebryant Dnlsrl (talk) 23:30, 7 January 2013 (UTC)dnlsrl

Dnlsrl (talk) 23:30, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template.His official website is already listed, which has links to facebook and twitter. Per WP:ELNO, inclusion of twitter accounts are discouraged. There was a related discussion at Wikipedia_talk:External_links, generally that WP is not a link farm. I have no strong feeling on this. Some will argue it is behind the times as far as social media, but Wikipedia talk:External links would be a better forum to discuss.—Bagumba (talk) 23:58, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit Request re Wilt & High School
Might want to mention that Kobe Bryant scored more total points in his high school career than did Chamberlain. Mwprods (talk) 17:33, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * It was already in Kobe_Bryant.—Bagumba (talk) 20:10, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Finals appearances in lead
There are recent edits again to mention Finals appearances in the lead in addition to Bryants numerous actual championships. In the past, there was no consensus for attempts at adding this by sockpuppets, as discussed at. More recently, there was no consensus a couple weeks back at. I will remove again, and it should not be added without consensus.—Bagumba (talk) 02:03, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

So we only mention conference titles in football? Like for Tom Brady and Peyton Manning? What makes an AFC Championship more notable than a Western Conference title?James edwin (talk) 02:42, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Other craps exists sometimes and we operate on consensus and not edit warring.—Bagumba (talk) 03:32, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Again is other crap exists your only point? And a less than objective consensus? James edwin (talk) 03:39, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Opening paragraph
Per WP:OPENPARAGRAPH, the first paragraph of the lead should mention "Why the person is significant". The recent edit to add his high school career, draft day trade, and remove his all-time scoring ranking is counterproductive from someone who does not know Bryant and who might only read the first paragraph from gaining familiarity with Bryant's core notability. I am restoring to an earlier version of the opening paragraph, and the other information is in the lead, just not in the opening.—Bagumba (talk) 02:13, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

It seems pointless to put his career accomplishments before his franchise. Its like reading a book backwards.James edwin (talk) 02:39, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Feel free to gain consensus for you viewpoint.—Bagumba (talk) 03:33, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Again it's hard to reach a consensus when there's no one commenting and also if the ones who do comment seem to not be objective.James edwin (talk) 03:37, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Feud with O'Neal
It seem to be a major part of his career. I am not sure why recent edits keep removing mention of this in the lead.—Bagumba (talk) 02:15, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The feud is notable enough to be in the lead.— Chris! c / t 02:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Notable enough? It had NO lasting impact on his personal life or career.James edwin (talk) 02:41, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * In this recent article, he says the lesson from that feud have helped with Howard. Look at the 143 citations in Shaq–Kobe feud to gauge the amount of sources that think it is notable.—Bagumba (talk) 03:24, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't really care anymore but both Bryant and O'Neal said it was hype made up by the media. And that O'Neals departure was due to him asking for money Dr. Buss wasn't willing to pay him.James edwin (talk) 03:30, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Adding franchise records to career accomplishments section
Again franchise records are listed for Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, and Drew Brees. Do we put more stock in football franchise records than basketball? Not to mention NBA All Time records?James edwin (talk) 02:45, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for discussing. Unfortunately, WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS is not always the best argument. In this case, outside of the niche of Lakers fans, his accomplishments at the league level are more notable and should be given due weight in the lead and infobox. The lead already mentions he is the all-time leading scorer in Lakers franchise history. The other less notable franchise records can be in the body and List of career achievements by Kobe Bryant.—Bagumba (talk) 02:58, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Its a very good argument in this case. It seems that what applies to almost every other page doesn't apply to certain ones. Talk about lack of consistency. It has nothing to do with catering to Laker fans. It's about listing a players franchise records for his franchise. Since the Lakers are the greatest franchise in the history of basketball it seems it would make those records noticeable enough to list in the section. There's no reason not to add them. James edwin (talk) 03:10, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * List franchise records ... why? Because other crap exists and your biased opinion that "the Lakers are the greatest franchise". I've stated my point. Your arguments have not convinced me, and you are the only one in support. If there is consensus, it will be added.—Bagumba (talk) 03:28, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Why is it crap? If its crap why does it exist? And like the Yankees in baseball the Lakers are highly recognized as the greatest basketball franchise. At very least the best since the NBA ABA merger. That's not being biased that's stating a fact. So combine the fact franchise records are on several other pages and the fact in this case its for one of the most successful franchises in professional sports history it seems to be worth noting. Its at the very least a compelling case. How can we reach a consensus with barely anyone commenting?James edwin (talk) 03:35, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The lead section and the infobox can only cover the article's most important aspects. We cannot include everything. Just because the Lakers is one of top basketball team doesn't mean we should overload the introduction with every piece of info. I understand that we want some degree of consistency among similar articles, but every article is different and we have to consider each one differently.—  Chris! c / t 03:52, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Accuser's name
The name of the woman who accused Kobe Bryant of sexual assault has never been formally released. Unless there is a citation, I don't see why it should be included, nor why it should link to page "Kobe Bryant sexual assault case," which does not list her name.Danamariewiki (talk) 17:50, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Accuser's name
The name of the woman who accused Kobe Bryant of sexual assault has never been formally released. Unless there is a citation, I don't see why it should be included, nor why it should link to page "Kobe Bryant sexual assault case," which does not list her name.Danamariewiki (talk) 17:50, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I am surprised to see that her name is mentioned here, but not in the Kobe Bryant sexual assault case article. Some established media outlets, like the Rocky Mountain News, did publish her name, although others apparently chose not to. As far as I can tell, none of the references currently cited in the article use her name. I wouldn't be opposed to removing it from the article, although realistically speaking, the cat is already out of the bag. Zagal e jo^^^ 00:55, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Can we get a new default pic for this guy?
Maybe something like this: Pic

It's been way too long. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.54.224.13 (talk) 10:17, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Most of the images you find on the internet are copyrighted. Anything that is added to the article would have be to available under an appropriate license. See Image use policy. Zagal e jo^^^ 01:03, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Music addition
In the music section it should be mentioned that in 2012 rapper Chief Keef put out a song called "Kobe" inrefernce to Kobe Bryant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.246.80.178 (talk) 18:31, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 February 2014
i would like to update the main picture

Sinc456 (talk) 01:22, 18 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Vague requests to add, update, modify, or improve an image are generally not honored unless you can point to a specific image already uploaded to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons that you would like included on this article. Please note that any image used on any Wikipedia article must comply with the Wikipedia image use policy, particularly where copyright is concerned. Thanks, -- El Hef  ( Meep? ) 02:07, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 February 2014
Please change Kobe Bryant's main wiki picture to this http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GUKZEyl0sqY/UHjvCmsUVqI/AAAAAAAARG4/B7NpVGK_Fqk/s1600/act_kobe_bryant.jpg

Sinc456 (talk) 02:47, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Not done: No evidence the image meets Image_use_policy.—Bagumba (talk) 02:52, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Edit Request - Philanthropy
edit semi-protected — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hazeltrack (talk • contribs) 21:30, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello,

Could someone make the below edits to Kobe's Page? I work with his Foundation.

Thank you!

In 2006, Bryant and his wife Vanessa launched their Foundation to enhance the lives of young people through cultural and educational experiences. The Kobe and Vanessa Bryant Family Foundation (KVBFF) is dedicated to improving the lives of youth and families in need, and encouraging young people to stay active through sports. KVBFF has partnered with a number of Los Angeles-based organizations including Step Up on Second, My Friend’s Place and United Way. Bryant has served as the honorary chair of United Way of Greater Los Angeles’s annual HomeWalk for three consecutive years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hazeltrack (talk • contribs) 21:26, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 May 2014
Rap Artist 1980-2050 He began as a rap artist back when the du-dud-du-DMC wer hurr

Fradgo (talk) 17:51, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ". Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to any article. - Arjayay (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: as you have not requested a change.

Semi-protected edit request on 4 June 2014
Kobe Bryant broke his ankle on January 3, 2011. He was walking around downtown LA and slipped on a curb. TMZ captured this moment.

Sbxballer11 (talk) 01:50, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (e • t • c) 02:01, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Milestone
Please add he holds the record for the most missed shot attempts in NBA history.

http://www.lakersnation.com/lakers-news-kobe-sets-nba-record-for-most-career-misses/2013/01/10/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.251.165.109 (talk) 01:15, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Milestone
Please add he holds the record for the most missed shot attempts in NBA history.

http://www.lakersnation.com/lakers-news-kobe-sets-nba-record-for-most-career-misses/2013/01/10/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.251.165.109 (talk) 01:17, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

for your consideration,,,,,,,,,
kobe will soon pass Jordan on the all time list so this is for your consideration,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

5× NBA champion (2000–2002, 2009–2010)/ 7 time West champ 2× NBA Finals MVP (2009–2010) NBA Most Valuable Player (2008) 16× NBA All-Star (1998, 2000–2014) Most All-time/ GUARD 4× NBA All-Star Game MVP (2002, 2007, 2009, 2011) 11× All-NBA First Team (2002–2004, 2006–2013) Most All time 9× NBA All-Defensive First Team (2000, 2003–2004, 2006–2011) Most All-time All-time Leading Scorer NBA History /GUARD NBA Slam Dunk Contest champion (1997) 2× NBA scoring champion (2006–2007) Los Angeles Lakers all-time leading scorer Naismith Prep Player of the Year (1996) 1996 Gatorade Circle of Champions High School Player of the Year McDonald's High School All-American ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,what do you think,,,,,,,,,,,,,,--65.8.188.239 (talk) 13:39, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Bulleted list item — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.8.188.239 (talk) 13:41, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Too many images
I suppose this a good problem to have. MOS:IMAGELOCATION recommends to "avoid sandwiching text between two images that face each other". When viewing the article on a widescreen monitor (I'm using 1600x1200 resolution), the sections Kobe_Bryant, Kobe_Bryant, and Kobe_Bryant are having their text sandwiched. I'd suggest removing (or relocating to another section) File:Kobe Bryant 61 NYK4.jpg (pretty mundane free-throw shot), File:Bryant-Demsey.jpg (playing shot is preferred, apologies to the military), and File:Summer Olympics 2008 - Kobe Bryant.jpg (fall-away shot is more relevant to player profile). Input is welcome.—Bagumba (talk) 07:08, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Your recent reinsertion of the 2008 Olympics shot re-introduces the sandwiched text issue I described above. If you really feel  the image is that important, can we place the image somewhere else.  Or is there another photo it can replace? Personally, I prefer this one in the international section over the one of him looking over and jumping over the Chinese player, but you had insisted on both images back in October 2014.  Please discuss you concerns and objections to the MOS.  Thanks.—Bagumba (talk) 01:59, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
 * , I am not understanding the use of sandwich as it applies here. I too view at 1600 wide and although there is text with images on both sides of it. This is not what I understand the sandwiching issue to be. As I understand it sandwiching is when the images on opposite sides have so little text between them that as the viewing width shrinks from say 1600 to below 800 or 900 the images squeeze the text in a manner that affects readability because the images eventually get so close that there is no text between them. However, in this case, there is so much text between the opposing images that ass the viewing resolutions. With images at about 240px, this issue would occur as the viewing gets down to about 600. Sandwiching is not an issue up toward 1600 in any reasonable sense of impacting readability.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:29, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
 * "as the viewing width shrinks from say 1600 to below 800 or 900 the images squeeze the text in a manner that affects readability": In fact, it is the opposite. If you have a smaller screen, there will be less text per line, causing the next image to move down and avoid the sandwich problem. Remember, images are typically at the beginning of paragraphs.  If there is more text per line, such is the case with a wider resolution screen, the sandwiching will occur because there will be fewer lines needed to display the paragraph.  If on a smaller screen, e.g. try it on a phone, the sandwiching goes away. At least we can agree we are seeing the same thing now, though our interpretation of the MOS on sandwiching differs still.—Bagumba (talk) 07:48, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Continuation of image sandwiching discussion
Breaking off a new section for convenience. I'm going to place notice of this discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Images for further input on MOS:IMAGELOCATION in relation to images in this article. When viewed on high resolution devices, the right image at Kobe_Bryant is still sandwiching text between itself and the left image in the same section, as well as with the left image in the following section at Kobe_Bryant. Is there an issue with the placement of images in those sections or not? The MOS advises: "However, avoid sandwiching text between two images that face each other, or between an image and infobox, navigation template, or similar."—Bagumba (talk) 22:54, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't think that there's a problem with the image placement in the article as it presently stands. We don't know the characteristics (width, resolution, zoom level, etc.) of any user's screen except our own, and shouldn't attempt to guess them - what works best for one screen setup may be less than perfect for another. Screen resolutions and widths have a habit of increasing as technology develops, it may be impossible on some machines to arrange the text and images so that there is a clear vertical gap between the bottom of every image and the top of the following image. The intent of the guideline, as I see it, is to avoid the situation where in the page source, a left-aligned image is immediately followed by a right-aligned image (or vice versa), with no intervening text, which means that their top edges will coincide. This can be avoided by putting text after every image; here's the basic plan:  Notice the presence of blank lines; these help to associate each image with the related text. If images are carefully placed so that two images on opposite sides of the page are never adjacent in the source, it should be OK. -- Red rose64 (talk) 00:08, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Understand that there will always be readers with slightly different viewing devices. The question would be which screen resolutions should we be targeting for optimal viewing? Is it old tube monitors, phones, and tablets? I don't think my resolution is particularly high by today's standards for monitors and laptops.  The answer impacts how much text is expected between images to generally avoid the sandwiching issue.—Bagumba (talk) 00:44, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

I unborked the page layout - there were 5 image location issues on my browser alone. Plus, I think that image staggering looks really stupid - text sandwiching is almost unavoidable for a nontrivial number of browser+resolution+zoom settings when that many images are staggered. With the new layout, there's two instances where an image crosses a level 2 section line (i.e., creates a line break) on my browser; that's technically a layout issue, but they're not really an eyesore so I left it as is (if anyone actually cares that much about it, fixing the line break issue is pretty simple though). The infobox creates a line break at the first section anyway.  Seppi  333  (Insert 2¢) 03:44, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the bold attempt to improve this. I have some concerns with the new layout. Per MOS:IMAGELOCATION, "Multiple images in the same article can be staggered right-and-left." This seems standard in WP:NBA articles, as well as in other projects. It also states: "It is often preferable to place images of faces so that the face or eyes look toward the text." Under "Vertical placement", it says: "An image should generally be placed in the section of the article that is most relevant to the image." However, many images are now not aligned with the section covering the relevant timeframe. Finally, Manual_of_Style/Images advises that "images should not be set to a larger fixed size than the 220px default", but the size is now set to 300px.—Bagumba (talk) 06:38, 16 May 2015 (UTC)


 * There's only one way to guarantee that image staggering won't text sandwich, and that's placing 1 image per section which is fully contained within that section (i.e., sized accordingly). Consistent image placement in related articles, while I agree is desirable, is secondary to MOS compliance.  Gaze-text alignment and fixed width values for an image are also just a layout suggestion, hence the language "As a general rule..." and "It is often preferable..." in comparison to MOS:IMAGELOCATION which doesn't specify an exception ("However, avoid...").  I actually think the image width suggestion is completely asinine TBH; images should be sized according to their placement relative to text and surrounding sections as well as their purpose (i.e., diagrams should be large).  For example, amphetamine is a featured article (that status requires complete MOS compliance) and it has 3 images with widths of 540, 600, and 690 pixels - the last is over triple the suggested width, but it was sized for accessibility, not based upon an arbitrary suggested width.  I only chose 300 pixels because it placed all the images in roughly their original placement in relation to the text on my browser. There's no reason that it has to be 300 pixels, so feel free to adjust the template widths if you wish.  If the image positioning is an issue for any image, moving the image template to a better location or removing the problem image(s) and re-positioning it/them accordingly would also be fine, provided it doesn't violate a mandated layout guideline (e.g., no text sandwiching).
 * It's worth pointing out that every image on this page is missing a WP:ALT parameter - that needs to be fixed, as it's a MOS requirement.  Seppi  333  (Insert 2¢) 08:46, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Bryant's workload
This recent edit left a cryptic edit summary of "TMI" while removing half of a sentence. Not only did it awkwardly introduce "however" into the middle of a sentence, it cause a WP:NPOV issue by overemphasizing one bad game and a low shooting percentage while removing his workload in minutes, shots, and scoring before needing to be rested. Today marks the stats' 4th or 5th day of continuous coverage. Surely this provides context for his currently being out, and summarizes his production through the first third of the season. 1/2 a sentence is TMI?—Bagumba (talk) 22:10, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 March 2015
The following quote by Kobe Bryant, already included in the below section, demonstrates that Kobe Bryant recognises that the victim did not feel she consented to sex. That means Bryant did not verify informed consent. That's not a rape allegation, that's rape.

"Although I truly believe this encounter between us was consensual, I recognize now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way I did. After months of reviewing discovery, listening to her attorney, and even her testimony in person, I now understand how she feels that she did not consent to this encounter."

24.201.229.100 (talk) 17:12, 8 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. —  19:49, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Change ===Sexual assault allegation=== to ===Sexual assault=== (because it's not an allegation—see below)

Change "The allegation tarnished Bryant's reputation" to "The assault tarnished Bryant's reputation..." (again see below)

24.201.229.100 (talk) 17:12, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: The first proposed change is original research. Also WP:BLPCRIME is of importance here. As for the second, the two pieces of text you provided are identical. Stickee (talk) 05:20, 9 March 2015 (UTC) Stickee (talk) 05:20, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

The definition of rape, according to the FBI, is currently “Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.” Prior to 2012, the FBI's definition of rape was, “The carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will.”

Kobe Bryant said the following while speaking publicly about the woman he raped: "Although I truly believe this encounter between us was consensual, I recognize now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way I did. After months of reviewing discovery, listening to her attorney, and even her testimony in person, I now understand how she feels that she did not consent to this encounter."

There's no original research. Kobe Bryant recognises that the woman did not feel she consented to the encounter. Per the pre-2012 definition of rape, the encounter happened "against [the victim's] will". And per the updated definition, it happened "without the consent of the victim." So why does the wikipedia article call it a rape allegation rather than a rape, and why are you suggesting it's original research? The crime—sexual assault—took place whether or not Kobe Bryant immediately realised it did or not. If the driver of a large vehicle unknowingly hits a pedestrian who is in a position the driver can't see very well and the pedestrian dies, the driver is not absolved of the crime simply because he wasn't aware he struck someone and killed them. A driver has a responsibility to be aware of his surroundings, drive carefully, and be especially vigilant about the spaces around his vehicle he knows to have poor sightlines to. Likewise, people have a responsibility to gain informed consent from the people they have sex with. "I didn't know" doesn't mean the crime didn't happen.

To deny it as sexual assault and state, in an encyclopaedic resource, that it's just an allegation of sexual assault, is to cast doubt that a crime took place. That sort of rape apologism shouldn't exist on such a resource. Wikipedia isn't an NBA spokesperson with a spin agenda—it's a communally-maintained encyclopaedia. The article can acknowledge that Kobe Bryant is an accomplished basketball player, but that he is also a rapist. He says so when he acknowledges that an encounter took place without the victim's consent. Whether he knew it at the time it occurred or only realised it a year later isn't germane to documenting it as verified rape or just an allegation.

Again, there's no original research here. I just read Bryant's quote where he clearly acknowledged he recognises his victim did not feel she consented. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.201.229.100 (talk) 15:38, 9 March 2015‎ (UTC)


 * Kobe Bryant said "I now understand how she feels that she did not consent to this encounter." This is neither proof that he raped somebody nor an admission of guilt. Pishcal  — ♣ 16:51, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Pischal - he acknowledged that a sexual encounter took place and he acknowledged that his victim did not feel she consented to the act. So the encounter is not in dispute, and her lack of consent is not in dispute. That there's no legal admission of guilt doesn't mean it didn't happen. It just means it didn't go to court. But again, there's a verbal admission: "I now understand how she feels that she did not consent." Can we stop letting rapists off the hook?

Out of every 100 rapes, only 32 are reported to the police, only 7 lead to an arrest, only 3 are referred to prosecutors, only 2 lead to a felony conviction, and again, only 2 will spend a single day in prison. But that only 2 lead to a felony conviction doesn't mean that more rapes didn't happen. Or does it to you? Cultofdecay (talk) 17:12, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * "Can we stop letting rapists off the hook?": Wikipedia is not a place for advocacy. Stickee (talk) 23:49, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

21:37, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Image layout
As a result of the discussion above at, the layout of images in this article was changed. The original concern with avoiding images being sandwiched, as recommended at MOS:IMAGELOCATION, was addressed by stacking images together and placing them exclusively on the the right side, as opposed to previously having images on both the left and right, and having images placed in a section that was relevant to the image.


 * Layout options
 * 1) Previous layout:
 * 2) Modified layout (stacked, all on right side):

MOS:IMAGELOCATION concerns:
 * "It is often preferable to place images of faces so that the face or eyes look toward the text": Some images would need to be on the left.
 * "An image should generally be placed in the section of the article that is most relevant to the image": This would preclude all images being stacked together.

Option 2 is a different convention than that used in other WP:NBA articles. I'm still thinking that the solution to the sandwiching issue is Option 1 but with fewer images as needed; it's not 100%, as there will always be wide monitors that have sandwiching of images. However, IMO, Option 1 is visually appealing for the most readers. Interested in others' opinions.—Bagumba (talk) 17:46, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: Notification of this discussion placed at WT:NBA.—Bagumba (talk) 17:51, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: Notification of this discussion placed at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Images.—Bagumba (talk) 17:54, 21 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Stacking all of the photos under the infobox, or anywhere else, is bad. In fact, stacking is bad generally.


 * Placing all of the photos on one side of the page is horrible layout.


 * Breaking up the main body text by placing a photo gallery in the middle of the article, especially when accompanied by large blocks of white space, is very bad.


 * ✅ Alternating photos from side to side is better -- generally works best below the infobox; otherwise text can be pinched between a photo and the infobox.


 * ✅ Photos of people should face toward the interior of the page -- to the extent possible.


 * ✅ Photos that are of variable shapes and sizes contribute to a more interesting layout.


 * ✅ Photos should not be too large; they should never overwhelm the text or squeeze it into "pinched" shapes.


 * ✅ Photos should be adjoining to that portion of the text which they illustrate -- to the extent possible.


 * ✅ If you have a surplus of high-quality free image photos, consider a gallery of thumbnails at the end for those photos that are not used in the infobox or main body text. Recognize that you may not be able to use all of the available photos.  If not, pick the best.


 * ✅ Every photo should have a caption.


 * That is all. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 18:40, 21 May 2015 (UTC)


 * The way it's done really doesn't matter - that's not really the core issue, which is MOS compliance. If you'd prefer the former, the question to ask isn't "which layout do we want?" - "it's "which images should we delete?".  Once you can get it down to one image per subsection, you'll be able to guarantee text sandwiching won't occur even if every image is staggered, and at that point you can just make the change to the layout.  Seppi  333  (Insert 2¢) 20:38, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 * the question to ask ... "which images should we delete?" Agree on deleting images. I had done that, but one of the images was subsequently restored, reintroducing the sandwich issue.—Bagumba (talk) 03:01, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Convenience break, no. 1
Here are 10 to 12 leading candidates of photos that should be removed from the article:

1.
 * Remove - Inferior resolution quality revealed when image is enlarged. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:49, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

2.
 * Remove - Inferior resolution quality plainly visible. Photo subject matter (Kobe at movie premier) is also largely irrelevant to an article about a NBA basketball player.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:49, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

3.
 * Remove - Inferior resolution quality of TV screen shot from a camera phone. Text pictured in photo is almost illegible even when enlarged.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:49, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

4.
 * Remove - Inferior resolution quality revealed when image is enlarged. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:49, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

5.
 * Remove - Inferior quality image. Photo subject matter is also low priority (Kobe talking to crowd).  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:49, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

6.
 * Remove - Inferior quality image. Apparently included solely to show Kobe in Olympic Team USA uniform.  It's also redundant: there is a better quality photo of Kobe in his Team USA whites.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:49, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

7.
 * Remove - Nice head shot of a smiling Kobe, and I might suggest it for the infobox photo -- but for the fact we already have an excellent face shot of Kobe in the infobox, in action. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:49, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

8.
 * Remove or demote - Pensive shot of Kobe during shooting of Sprite commercial? About as low priority as it gets -- illustrates nothing in particular.  If it must be kept, demote this image to a photo gallery of thumb shots at the bottom of the article.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:49, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

9.
 * Remove or demote - One post-Olympic gold medal photo with president Bush and two post-NBA championship photos with president Obama. Yeah, I know everyone wants to show Kobe with Da President, but all three are unflattering staged photos of grown men grinning like school children for the camera (including the presidents).  Moreover, Kobe is famous enough as a basketball player that he does not need to be shown with his arm around the president just because . . . .  If these must be kept, demote these three to a photo gallery of thumbs at the bottom of the article.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:49, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

10.
 * Remove or demote - Action shot of Kobe wearing face guard/nose guard after breaking nose. Unflattering, and Kobe is unrecognizable in the photo.  If it must be kept, demote this image to a photo gallery of thumb shots at the bottom of the article.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:49, 22 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Some of the photos lost context when they were stacked together, but may be more relevant now that they have been restored to their previous locations. I have no personal preference whether these specific photos stay or not, other than images help break the monotony of large blocks of text.—Bagumba (talk) 01:45, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Convenience break, no. 2

 * I prefer alternating images. If there is pinching, the solutions are to either reduce the number of images or begin to incorporate Template:Multiple image to pair the placement of images in certain locations.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:39, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 * My main concern is the image size, 300px is too big and distract the readers from the text. Forgive me if I am too lazy to read the previous discussion, but what's wrong with 220px image size? — MT (talk) 04:52, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Martin, there are several problems with the photo selection for this article:
 * 1. First, there are simply too many full-size photos than can be reasonably accommodated in article of this length, and in keeping with our guidelines for good layout and design;
 * 2. Several of the photos are of poor quality, either in composition or resolution;
 * 3. Several of the photos are redundant, essentially illustrating the same things.
 * The solutions are straightforward: (1) removing some photos altogether, especially the low quality ones, and (2) relegating others to an end-of-article gallery of thumb-size (100px) images. When we have good quality photos, there is no reason to use them all, and there is no reason to use crappy photos when we have good ones.  And, yes, 300 pixels for an infobox photo is too large, and probably too large for most other uses in Wikipedia articles.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 05:09, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

There seems to be a rough consensus that there are too many images in this article, and they should not be stacked. I'm going to restore the images to their placement before the stacking, and I am going to remove File:Summer Olympics 2008 - Kobe Bryant.jpg to resolve the one sandwich issue I see. Discussion can continue on other cleanup.—Bagumba (talk) 01:32, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I only count 4 text sandwiching issues now, so 1 appears to have been fixed. I censored 3 images that are creating text sandwiching on my browser. Those images or 1 of the adjacent images needs to be deleted.  Seppi  333  (Insert 2¢) 05:56, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Making good progress.—Bagumba (talk) 06:54, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
 * If images from different sections appear close together in the source, use a template at the end of the section to ensure they don't sandwich - it looks tacky in cases where it does prevent a text sandwich (i.e., it creates vertical white space to prevent left/right image overlap; otherwise, it doesn't affect appearance), but it will solve any potential sandwiching problem.  Seppi  333  (Insert 2¢) 20:53, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 July 2015
kobe is changing his position to Shooting Guard/Small Forward

2601:C8:0:DE06:9546:662B:CC3B:924D (talk) 03:47, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: Thanks for the request. Articles typically list a player's primary position. He's always played some at SF, even some PG, but he's been primarily a SG.  If there's a trend once the season starts, we can see if there is consensus to change it.—Bagumba (talk) 04:03, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 September 2015
2.49.157.236 (talk) 14:36, 13 September 2015 (UTC) ok look im swaggy yor not If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ". Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 15:14, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: as you have not requested a change.

Adding Kobe's Signature to his Wiki Page
I think we should add Kobe's signature to his wiki page. Why you ask, well why not?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.141.101.48 (talk) 06:17, 30 November 2015‎ (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 November 2015
We should add Kobe Bryant's signature (autograph) to his Wikipage.

50.141.101.48 (talk) 06:23, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: You'll need to first upload an image of it that we can use. The image will need to meet all the applicable guidelines before it can be included. -- ferret (talk) 19:08, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 February 2016
The lakers won 119-113 not 113-110

124.182.3.84 (talk) 08:21, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Actually 119–115.—Bagumba (talk) 09:14, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 March 2016
It says that Kobe has the NBA record for 18 consecutive All-Star appeareances. He does own this record but the consecutive appeareances are 17. (He has 18 appeareances, 1 in 1998 and 17 between 2000-2016)

Joaol5 (talk) 04:56, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
 * ❌ what it says is that he started every All-Star Game for a record 18 consecutive appearances, not that he appeared in the All-Star game for 18 consecutive games. i.e. he played 18 and started 18 - Arjayay (talk) 09:01, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 April 2016
Please add that had Bryant gone to college he would have chosen the University of North Carolina, per a 2013 interview with Jimmy Kimmel. Kobe Interview

98.27.56.3 (talk) 14:09, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. It conflicts with another source that says he would have attended Duke.—Bagumba (talk) 17:44, 14 April 2016 (UTC)