User talk:Bagumba/Archive 1

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Aboutmovies (talk) 06:27, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Kobe Bryant
How is it sufficient when on Michael Jordan's page it has it in the info box? Why are you against it being in Kobe's page? And who gave you the right to say that alone is sufficient? When I stated valuable reasons why it should be there.ScottieAngelo (talk) 10:35, 14 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Better for you to discuss with general public in the article's talk page. I was simply being bold.  My right stems from being an editor such as yourself.  Ultimately, it is the community that will form a consensus, and any one editor's opinion, including my own, is just one step to ultimately reach it one way or another. Bagumba (talk)

Reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:04, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject NBA invite
— Chris! c / t 06:20, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Lebron James
Hi, please don't write on my discussion page, as you did earlier today. Thanks!!!Mexicomida (talk) 21:40, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Not a problem if you are now aware of adding unsourced claims on living living people. Bagumba (talk) 22:49, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Gold Gloves
Good call, I missed fixing that one. Cheers. &mdash; KV5  •  Talk  •  12:15, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

LeBron James/2010 Sports Jerk Award
Considering that the READERS of the Tank McNamara comic strip voted LeBron as the 2010 Sports Jerk of the Year, I'd say that's cultural enough (and how can one link multiple references to the strip anyway?) TyVulpine (talk) 03:22, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
 * if you can show reliable sources so we don't need to rely on original research you would have a better case. Bagumba (talk) 03:54, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

The comic itself is reliable. How much more reliable do you need? I can link to the comic, and to the Facebook page where people cast ballots, and I'll bet you'll STILL says it's "unreliable"... TyVulpine (talk) 03:58, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
 * assume good faith. nobody disagrees thAt the comic exists. WhAt is needed is reliable source that says why reader should treat it significantly since it is a fictional award. Please place any further discussion on article talk page. Thanks Bagumba (talk)|

Third Opinion: Clare Balding
Thank you for providing such a carefully considered third opinion so swiftly, it certainly helps. Alistair Stevenson (talk) 11:35, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Cookie
 Thank you so much for the barnstar. I greatly appreciate being of assistance to the issue at hand. Enjoy this warm fresh cookie while you edit to improve wikipedia and all the articles you find of interest.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 12:55, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Citations for Micheal Fitzgerald
Hi, I am really trying to update the citations you requested for Micheal Fitzgerald. Please can you give me a little time to complete the edits as I've already noticed the revision was reversed before it was completed. Thanks in advance Hunterscarlett (talk)

Hi, I have updated further the Micheal Fitzgerald article. Please can you confirm you are satisfied that Mich"eal" & Mich"ael" are one and the same. Mich"ae"l is an English transltion of Mich"ea"l when the writer has not known that Mich"ea"l is a valid Gaelic native name. This is requiring far more of my student time that I had expected. I'm trying to move on with other contributions to Wikipedia. Hunterscarlett (talk)
 * No, the article still has not demonstrated that the actor and the race driver are the same people. I added back the dubious tag that you removed without resolution.  Please read WP:DBTF to see the potential danger of piecing together sources based purely off of a persons name.  Please understand that we have to be able to verify the facts, even if what is written may be true in real life per WP:V.  Also, since this deletion review is being done by others and not just myself, you may want to direct your comments to Articles_for_deletion/Micheal_Fitzgerald.  However, I can answer any personal questions if you prefer.


 * Aside from whether these are two people or one, the main problem with the article is that notability has not been established and the article relies mainly on non-independent sources. —Bagumba (talk) 00:09, 31 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Instructions noted - all talk now on Micheal Fitzgerald article discussion page. Hunterscarlett(talk) 01:57, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Ching chong article
Hi, although we disagree on many points we both likely agree that a good article about this phrase would be nice. I suggest trimming off the quote parameter for any online source that someone can simply verify themselves and only use it for offline sources where there really is a dispute about what is presented. I am bias of course so have stayed away from the article. I feel that someone, whoever the main writer there, had some point they needed to express but unfortunately was going about it in the wrong way. Fruit (slang) is an example that might help, it doesn't try to lay blame as much as simply inform. The whole top of the article is information about where and possibly why the phrase was used. Then it lists usages. O'Donnell made a mistake, scene over but the comments about the mistake speaks towards the impact and significance of the phrase itself and peeled into a paragraph minus the blaming could be very good and benefit all concerned. It also helps other people understand that even though they didn't known how hurtful their words were, they still did hurt and explain possible reasons why. People who don't care about O'Donnell or whichever person in the example, may never even get that far but they likely will read the top several paragraphs if they are neutral and concise. In any case I wish you the best and I hope to see that article really come together. Jnast1 (talk) 21:44, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Regarding the use of the quote parameter in citations, you seem to have missed the discussion on your edit in August 2010 at Talk:Ching_chong. Per Template:Cite_news, "Adding a quotation can help locate online copies of the item using a text search, especially if the original link goes dead". This concept is is also reiterated at WP:LINKROT.  I agree that Fruit (slang) is further along, but the beauty with the WP community is that it will improve over time (WP:IMPERFECT).  Editors have managed to remove all the unsourced trivia references to its usage in a movie, TV show, etc. Cheers. —Bagumba (talk) 07:31, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Again, what happens on the ching chong article is pretty much out of my hands, I've tried to address the issues so wherever the article goes from here is wherever it goes. As for the quote parameter you might also note that it is merely an optional one, what you do on the ching chong article is no longer of my concern but I refuse to let the O'Donnell article serve as the cursed goat sent to sacrifice to make a point. i have a feeling it shouldn't be in the article at all but if it must be there in needs to be kept at a minimum. On the ching chong article the O'Donnell content is certainly a notable and appropriate example even if presented poorly. On the O'Donnell article it simply did not figure greatly into her life as the two main controversies did. Jnast1 (talk) 10:10, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

3O for Austan Goolsbee
Thanks for your help in providing a third option. I was hoping that you could clarify the intended meaning of it? Thanks very much. - Pictureprovince (talk) 12:10, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

RfC/U Corbridge
Hi Bagumba. Wanted to let you know I mentioned you in a WP:RFC/USER regarding user Corbridge. You're obviously welcome to weigh in, but mostly wanted to give you a heads up. Arbor8 (talk) 17:47, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for updating the documentation for Template:Infobox NBA biography. I know that I promised to do that when I started the discussion, but I just came back from unplanned wikibreak. Anyway, thanks for your help, really appreciated. — MT (talk) 13:16, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Well done! (I wasn't looking forward to doing that.) Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 05:46, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Shaquille O'Neal page
Hello, Baguma. Good catch on the O'Neal page: I did not intend to eliminate the page protection. An oversight. Cheers. Wikiuser100 (talk) 03:25, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries. We're all here to catch each other's mistakes. —Bagumba (talk) 16:56, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Kobe Bryant – Shaquille O'Neal feud
Just want to know how you find all these sources? I tried to find references for the Scary Movie 4 sentence but wasn't able to. Also, you did a great job sourcing the article. Keep up the great work. Cheers.— Chris! c / t 18:45, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Can't say it's anything more than Google. The one from the Chronicle was just a matter of luck while skimming through results on the search of the previous quote in the article.  I usually just look for sites I recognize to sift through all the crud. Then, I gave up on the previous quote, and I think I just went "scary movie 4 kobe site:latimes.com" For LA-related stuff, I usually limit to latimes first to improve quality and to limit number of results. —Bagumba (talk) 20:22, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Also, I am wondering if I should create an infobox to show how many championships or awards Bryant & O'Neal has won. I think it is a good idea, so readers can compare both players without having to read the prose.— Chris! c / t 21:40, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm wary since the "feud" is more about their personal dynamics and not a comparison of who is better. The comparison is also difficult since they play different positions and they have always been at different phases of their career. —Bagumba (talk) 22:26, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Well if I am to do this, I am certainly not going compare statistics like total points/rebounds since they play different positions and can't be directly compared this way. I just think that readers may be interested to know who has won more championships or MVPs.— Chris! c / t 23:20, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Aside from 1 championship and maybe a few AS games since Kobe is younger, it's probably similar. But yeah, might be helpful. The other thing, and maybe we limit it to their time together, is to bring up points brought up in the article like points scored and games played.—Bagumba (talk) 01:22, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
 * If you really don't like the idea, then it is fine. I am indifferent anyway. Their number of championships/awards are indeed very similar. But just to give you a sense of what I had in mind, here it is. :)— Chris! c / t 02:29, 28 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm not crazy about it, but not violently opposed as it is if you want to get consensus from others. I think my biggest fear is it turning into a bigger indiscriminate list like FG%, Ft%, All-D teams, etc to support one side vs another, esp for stat-buffs if it is not based off of sourced comparisons. —Bagumba (talk) 05:08, 28 April 2011 (UTC)


 * The article looks pretty complete with adequate sourcing. With some more copyediting, it could be a Good articles.— Chris! c / t 00:21, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, reads less like a tabloid with some actual sources. Some quotes can probably be summarized, but its good to have the raw info for now. I'm gonna be mostly offline for the next couple of months, so my contributions will be dwindling. —Bagumba (talk) 00:29, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

NSPORT
Thanks for your note. I saw you have left a link of past discussions which I will look into, and yes I realise a lot of work went into NSPORT. Thanks also for commenting on my wording changes. Eldumpo (talk) 18:28, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Bryant
Many days of news coverage does not automatically make something notable in a person's bio. There was no enduring notability for this incident that it has to be added in the Bryant article. Truthsort (talk) 08:47, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I think WP:WELLKNOWN applies here, but its subjective if this is notable. Perhaps its WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS, but I always find it interesting that minute things like single game stat lines or covers on video games dont get questioned as much as non-sports incidents with arguably more significant coverage such as this.  Anyways, it is up to WP:Consensus. Cheers. —Bagumba (talk) 15:53, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It would apply if it was notable. However, I don't believe that is the case. As I said, the amount of media coverage for a brief time period does not make it notable and the punishment was did not equate to anything out of the ordinary, as $100k fines have occurred several times in the NBA. After the fine, everything went away and no further actions were taken. Truthsort (talk) 05:56, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Brandon Crawford
Materialscientist (talk) 00:02, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK issue
Hello! Your submission of Brian Dallimore at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! —Brian Halvorsen (talk) 00:19, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Brian Dallimore
Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Deron Williams
What I posted is common knowledge and non-disputable fact. This should not be removed.173.216.232.76 (talk) 19:41, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but consider me one of the uninformed. WP:V states "that all quotations and anything challenged or likely to be challenged be attributed in the form of an inline citation that directly supports the material." Thanks. —Bagumba (talk) 19:47, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Well I am not getting into an argument over it. But what I posted is basic common knowledge and is non-disputed. It is like saying the NBA is the pro basketball league of USA and having it removed because of no source.173.216.232.76 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:49, 21 July 2011 (UTC).
 * The official Eurocup website's article on Besiktas for the upcoming qualification round -> - as you can see, Besiktas will play in the qualification phase of the Eurocup, which is the second level European league, after the Euroleague ->  - just so you know that I am not making this up.173.216.232.76 (talk) 20:33, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I wouldnt assume anyone is making it up. Part of WP:V is people being able to find out where the information came from so they can read up more and maybe add more info based on the sources.  That being said, this information is more important for the Beşiktaş men's basketball team article, but there might also be consensus to have it in Deron Williams if you want to try to re-add the text and citations. Cheers. —Bagumba (talk) 21:04, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
causa sui (talk) 21:48, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
causa sui (talk) 04:43, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Very nice thing to say!
Thanks for the lovely barnstar. It's been a big wikiweek for me. Today I did the first three non-admin closes I actually understood completely (even a marginally contentious one). Then just for trying to keep the discussion on topic at DRV I get this nice bauble? From someone I disagree with on the merits? Too sweet. Havin' fun and getting treats anyway. Just like Halloween when I was toddler. Thanks for making my wikiday. BusterD (talk) 22:57, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Re: Atlanta Aliens
Why do you want to tear the house down while it's still being built? Tom Danson (talk) 13:18, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Discussion continued at Talk:American Basketball Association (2000–present). —Bagumba (talk) 17:12, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Rawlings Gold Glove Award
There is already a preponderance of information in the lead of Rawlings Gold Glove Award. Continually adding criticisms of the award is giving undue weight to them, since there is a limited space due to this being a list and not an article. Additionally, could you please format your references the same as the rest of the list? This is featured content and all of the formats need to be alike. Thanks. &mdash; KV5  •  Talk  •  11:09, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I was conscious of this being a featured list, but I have also been bold in trying to improve it by providing a neutral view of the award regarding criticisms that exist more with this award than any other in MLB.  On the one hand, one paragraph out of eight in the total page seems reasonable.  But as you noted, the lead is bulky with the overall text of the page—excluding the lists themselves—is in the lead, instead of the lead summarizing the body.  One solution, if size becomes unmanageable, might be to have a separate article and a separate list.  This would need a broader consensus for a major change of a featured list.  I am open to other suggestions as long as information is not lost.  Perhaps text can be better summarized while not losing any meaning?
 * Apologies on the reference format. I was especially cognizant to add references and not use a bare url and to include the publisher in a featured article;  however, I overlooked that this article did not add wikilinks for the work and publisher fields which other articles sometimes do.  I will remember to note the existing style with regards to wikilinks in citations in my future edits in featured articles. —Bagumba (talk) 16:14, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Another option would be to have a section of prose before the list (for an example, see Major League Baseball Rookie of the Year Award). I'd be happy to discuss the options on the article's talk page. &mdash; KV5  •  Talk  •  21:42, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: Atlanta Aliens deletion
C'mon, let's be reasonable here...if merging will save it from getting deleted, then I'm all for it... Tom Danson (talk) 18:01, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The proposal to merge has been there for a month and you have opposed, and indicated that there was not enough participants (3). Since the AfD has already been created, we may as well see if there is more input and a stronger consensus can be formed. —Bagumba (talk) 18:08, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. If no consensus is reached, then I suggest you just leave it until their season gets underway and a good portion of their schedule is played.  However, if nothing happens then, then we can nominate it again. Tom Danson (talk) 18:14, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

2010 NBA Finals Game Summaries
Hi, there. I am in the process of cleaning up the 2010 NBA Finals article in the hope that I could transform it into Featured Article status. Do you have any tips for improving the article. As you can see, I already fixed the introduction to the article, summaries for Games 4 and 7, Broadcasting, and Impact and Aftermath sections.Birdienest81 (talk) 23:17, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your efforts to provide balanced and thorough coverage of the games in the series. For the game summaries, I would suggest that more secondary sources are used for their analysis of key points in the game as well as providing context of the overall series.  Usage of play-by-play logs as a primary source should be minimized, as any analysis which is done supported solely by primary sources could be considered original research.  For example, in the Game 7 text, words such as "falter", "struggles", "turning point", "spectacular" would be considered OR as it's analysis by WP editors of the play-by-play.  Moreover, it might be argued that the mention of certain plays over others is not neutral.  This could all be avoided by citing secondary reliable sources that provide the analysis and identification of the important plays.  Also, at times the current play-by-play detail obscures some key points.  For example, in Game 7, its not obvious (except in a brief early mention in the lead) that Bryant struggled shooting, but led in scoring in 4Q and had a lot of rebound.  Also, the Lakers as a whole dominated in rebounding.  Strive to summarize the highlights and important points of the games based on cited analysis, leaving readers who want the intricate details to go to the actual sources used. —Bagumba (talk) 00:35, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Mike Sholars
Sir.

Your comment regarding Greg Sholars is False... He is an EIGHT TIME NCAA DIV. I ALL-AMERICAN Sprinter for TCU, He is Also a 4 Time NCAA Div. I National Champion and a member of TCU´s Hall of Fame. This is CLEARLY STATED in the No. 10 Reference, as are All other Facts in the Article Supported by Viable References — Preceding unsigned comment added by EuroNews (talk • contribs)
 * I think there is a misunderstanding. There is no dispute of Greg's accomplishments, but there is no source cited that supports that they are related as brothers.—Bagumba (talk) 01:02, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Sir This has never been disputed by Greg Sholars... Feel Free to Contact Greg Sholars to  verify, the Brothers are close.

We wish the article to be un-touched — Preceding unsigned comment added by EuroNews (talk • contribs) 01:29, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * There is no ownership of articles, and the burden is on editors adding content to make sure it is verifiable. Thanks.—Bagumba (talk) 01:33, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

user talk notices
Thanks for the boilerplate. I've been here a while and have a pretty good idea how it works. I don't generally put a talk message after the first reversion, because most detrimental edits are once-offs, or from dynamically assigned IP addresses. de Bivort 17:22, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries - see you around. Keep up the good fight at Jeremy Lin! de Bivort 18:59, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Eddie Lacy
Bagumba -- I understand we disagree about the notability of the Lacy article. That's fine. We have often disagreed. But your removal of portions of the article sourced to an article written by Larry Burton appears driven by an agenda to support your view at the AfD. Larry Burton is not some amateur blogger. He is a professional, credentialed sports writer and a member of the Football Writers Association of America. His bio can be viewed here. Cbl62 (talk) 02:48, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure we dont always agree, but in a quick sampling of the last 10 AfDs we both voted on, we did agreed on 6 of them. Sorry, no agenda other than improving WP, which we have different opinions on balancing perceived impact vs number of sources. You are right on Burton, he is an expert even though the article is on a generally unreliable site.  I missed that, and thanks for reverting my bold and in hindsight incorrect edits.  Lets assume good faith on both of our parts. —Bagumba (talk) 05:07, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. I agree with the sentiment on assuming good faith.  As for Bleacher Report being "a generally unreliable site," I'm not sure.  I've not used it much in the past, but it appears that there are a number of solid correspondents who write for the site.  If they do, in fact, have a mix of contributors (some actual sports writers, some not), I think we will need to evaluate content from that site on a case-by-case basis. Cbl62 (talk) 05:14, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I would almost treat it as self-published, since BR itself does not exercise editorial control. So if the person is an expert, fine.  It does, however, say "Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer", but I would only apply that to athletes personal lives and not their sporting career. —Bagumba (talk) 05:22, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Where do you see the indication that Bleacher Report exercises no editorial control? I was looking for some guidance on that.  I've noticed that the Los Angeles Times has begun carrying pieces from Bleacher Report, and I'd be surprised if they take content that lacks editorial control.  According to this source, "Content created by the Bleacher Report editorial community is regularly syndicated to such leading media outlets as CBS Sports.com, the Los Angeles Times, NHL.com, Hearst Newspapers, USAToday.com, and Telegraph.co.uk."  Also, this source indicates that Bleacher Report as of March 2011 "is taking their content policy much more seriously now, and that they've become much more stringent and rigorous when it comes to quality control."  With $22 million in recent financing, they've also hired several professional staff writers and a professional editorial team as reflected here and here and here. So whatever may have been true about the site in 2009 may not be true any longer.  05:40, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I knew it was a big coup for them to get Rob Neyer from ESPN. They do seem to be the new model in journalism of blogging as opposed to traditional newspapers. I posed the question in a review discussion before, but nobody had a response, and I searched on WP and most discussions had shot it down as unreliable as anyone could write on it.  Newspapers, it could be argued, screened which article from BR to publish.  However, I see these content standards on BR site now, which I never saw the last I looked.  So maybe a new consensus can be formed.  Good, they do have a lot of good content.—Bagumba (talk) 06:05, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Even with enhanced content standards, I suspect a case-by-case approach may be appropriate. Articles published on the site by professional, credentialed sports writers or others who are recognized as experts should be fine, even more so with the enhanced editorial control.  But articles posted by true amateurs remain dubious. Cbl62 (talk) 06:17, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Late night brain fart, Neyer was SBNation.—Bagumba (talk) 06:33, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Adrian Battles
Hello. I have started a thread regarding the addition of content related to Adrian Battles at 2010 Green Bay Packers season that you may be interested in. You can find the discussion here.  Eagles   24/7  (C)  21:13, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Steve Crosby
Hello! Your submission of Steve Crosby at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! StAnselm (talk) 00:59, 17 September 2011 (UTC) StAnselm (talk) 00:59, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for San Diego Super Chargers
Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Steve Crosby
Materialscientist (talk) 16:02, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Delivery Man Award
Thanks for updating the Delivery Man of the Year Award. Did you happen to notice who won the monthly award for September 2011? I don't see that anywhere? – Muboshgu (talk) 20:58, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Putz. Didnt see anywhere on Google. Had to go to MLB press releases, and even there its crazy that there is a distinction between MLB and MLB.com press releases (it was under MLB).  Did you want to update it?  I'm currently looking into when the annual award ceased being through fan vote.—Bagumba (talk) 21:15, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Ha, when I saw the word "putz" I thought you were insulting me for some unknown reason. :P I'll update the monthly award. Any insight you find on the changing in the voting process would be great. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:21, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Career baseball records
Hi Bagumba. I understand your concerns regarding the clarity of distinguishing career and single-season records, especially in regards to non-baseball fans who may visit the page. However, I'm basing my rationale off precedence in the featured article of Mariano Rivera. In the records section, there is no mention of "career" records. It seems that denoting "Most saves" is enough to imply he has the most saves ever. In contrast, a single season record can be distinguished by the fact that the stat is followed a small script year denoting the season in which the record was achieved, along with the note "in single season." Thus, it would appear to be fairly clear, provided the reader refers to the year next to the stat to determine a single-season vs career record. Hence, if no year is provided, it becomes obvious that the record is an all-time career one. Cheers.—Bloom6132 (talk) 14:38, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Shaquille O'Neal is made a Freemason "At Sight" - June 11, 2011
Are these links valid for proof that Shaqu

Shaquille O'Neal is made a Freemason "At Sight" - June 11, 2011

Brother Shaquille O'Neal

Made a Mason at sight

Welcome Richard Dreyfuss and Shaquille O’Neal into the Fraternity

Shaq the Freemason

If this isn't sufficient for justifying adding the tidbit that he has joined the Fraternity, then I have no idea how to prove otherwise. I'm very Wiki illiterate, and I would appreciate direct guidance, rather than links to Wiki standards that have even more links to research. I'm only trying to add to O'Neal's bio, not rewrite it.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kentuckymason (talk • contribs) 16:20, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * We need the article to be accurate and fair, and give proper weight to what is in included. O'Neal has a lot of interests, we do not necessarily mention all of them.  The ones we do mention are from reliable sources that he has no relationship with, and there is sufficient coverage to presume that they are notable.  The fact that mainstream sources have not reported this will make most editors skeptical that this is important to mention.  I am only one person, so if you can get enough people to support your edit, it goes in. —Bagumba (talk) 10:30, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

— Preceding comment added by Bagumba (talk • contribs)
 * Unfortunately things such as this are not covered by the mainstream media, I can only assume that's because only a handful of celebrities become Freemasons these days. Based on the lack of support and the inability to verify it through other means, then I guess it's best left out off the page. Thanks for the guidance. KentuckyMason (talk) 15:00, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Nolan Ryan
His streak of consecutive MLB seasons played was only 25. 1968-1993. Yes, he did play 26 seasons, just not 26 straight seasons. He played 1966 1968-1993. Mjhammerle123 (talk) 06:23, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Its not intuitive, but you need to add 1. Consider 2010–2011, it looks like 2011 - 2010 = 1, but its clear that its 2 years.  So you need to subtract then add 1.  Therefore, 1993 - 1968 = 25 + 1 = 26. baseball-reference.com lists his total number seasons as 27, not 26.—Bagumba (talk) 06:55, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Yep. I (re-)modified the article. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 07:28, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

You're right. Sorry. I just wasn't adding it right.

WP:MLB section note
Thanks for that! Staxringold talkcontribs 23:55, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

mos on nicknames in lead
I don't consider shortened versions of people's names to be nicknames, hence I prefer removing them from the start of articles. I haven't found anything in the MoS one way or the other, and in those cases I prefer getting rid of them as they seem odd. Of course, nicknames that have no relation to real names I'd keep up. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 01:50, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Re basketball infobox
Just curious, what does this edit do, exactly? User:LOL had made a lot of tweaks to the infobox (often at my insistence) to handle various super-specific situations (eg, guys who played in the NBA, ABA, and Europe). I'm curious what kinds of effects your edits will have. Thanks. Zagal e jo^^^ 05:25, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Ed O'Bannon wouldnt show NBA profile in infobox because it specified "league" with no value i.e. "league = ". If you didnt specify "league" at all it was working, but if you specified but left blank it wasnt.—Bagumba (talk) 05:54, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, OK. Thanks for the explanation. Zagal e jo^^^ 05:56, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * BTW, i tried to make it so nothing that worked before was broken. In fixing things that never worked before, I could open up a new set of problems for those broken pages, etc profile now visible, but profile not encoded correctly because of apostrophes in names, qualifiers at ends of names like "Bobby Jones (basketball, born 1951)".  But I figure its worth it to get more things working.—Bagumba (talk) 06:01, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * That's cool. Zagal e jo^^^ 06:42, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

UCLA Blue
The links you added, don't get close to the type of coverage envisaged by WP:GNG, I am happy for a redirect to a line or two in the main UCLA page if that is OK with you ? Mt king  (edits)  03:52, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd say to keep based on an other stuff exists argument, and my not being sure if a different consensus exists for colors. Many other color articles fall into the same situation as this one.  Otherwise, I'd like to suggest that you use  and  on the relevant pages, and start a discussion to reach a consensus. Cheers.—Bagumba (talk) 05:51, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

deadlinks
Thanks for your help. With a little more poking around from your lead, the legal status seems a little shaky; but I'm glad to live with it for now. If the self-proclaimed "independent coverage" site really wants the piece scrubbed from the web, they seem to have that option available to them. And you were right: I think the piece had already been tagged "dead", but I was basically just winging it to remove the tag. Thanks again! Swliv (talk) 01:27, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Need assistance regarding a user who continues to troll Cung Le articles
Hi, I just wanted to know if you can help edit or help me contact someone regarding a specific user who refuses to acknowledge any proof that I have provided regarding a recent error by the UFC. I know we have had our difference with the Jeremy Lin article, but I believe it was only for the betterment for Jeremy Lin's wiki. However, there seems to be an issue with a specific user who continues to revert and troll Cung Le's article and I'm requesting assistance and I think you can help.

The specific user in question is Glock17gen4. His only evidence is a picture based on a mistake by UFC production, where MMA fighter Cung Le has already responded that he did not know about on his twitter, yet Glock17gen4 refuses to accept that and continues to revert Cung Le's Nationality as a current Vietnamese national.

I have provided significant proof in both discussions at the UFC 139 and Cung Le's articles. Please take a look. Cung Le has acknowledged both his American nationality and his Vietnamese heritage (especially with the 3 striples flag which represents the fallen Saigon). I hope you can help. Both his website at CungLe.com and UFC.com profile describe him as a Vietnamese-American and he quoted as calling himself an American Wushu champion. Glock17gen4 seems to not understand the differences between Nationality and Ethnicity. He continues to only use that one picture as his proof. PinoyFilAmPride (talk) 23:29, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I am settling this situation right now. — cyberpower ( Talk to Me )( Contributions ) 00:26, 23 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry I wasn't able to look at this sooner, as I was out for holidays. The article lists him  as American, so there doesnt seem to be an issue currently.  In the future, one alternative to edit-warring would be to use the  template and start a discussion.  Sorry I couldn't chime in sooner.—Bagumba (talk) 03:08, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * This situation has been resolved. However it left me, User:PinoyFilAmPride, and User:Glock17gen4 blocked indefinitely because of oversight issues. — c y b e r p o w e r   ( Talk to Me  ) ( Contributions  )     01:08, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Question regarding bibliography
Can you take a look here? thank you in advance.--Arnaugir (talk) 22:16, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry!
Oops, sorry for breaking the ref at the Jeremy Lin article. I thought there was a bot that automatically fixed those refs, but I guess it's not working anymore. Zagal e jo^^^ 04:48, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries. The article is in need of a good copyediting on his rookie season.—Bagumba (talk) 04:52, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Qualcomm
Good move back. Before I saw that, I had left a followup note to the previous mover which I will restate here: "It is not wikipedia's purpose to act as a lackey for corporate whims. A redirect was the right way to handle this nonsense." If this were a long-term commitment, it would be a different story. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:41, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Pujols... Oops, my bad
I was under the impression I was being the good guy when I was reverting the Pujols page to reflect his status as a new Angel. I see this is not the case and Wikipedia's rules make sense. Didn't mean to be a troublemaker.

Also -- I don't quite understand these talk pages, so apologies if this is going to the wrong place.

GET TO DA CHOPPAlly yours,

Belowenter (talk) 19:38, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem. You are encouraged to be bold and help improve articles. Occasionally, you will make a mistake in good faith, no big deal.  However, one of the few rules is to discuss if anybody objects to your edits; dont just keep adding it back and edit war. Thanks.  You have found my talk page just fine.  There are also talk pages for articles, like Talk:Albert Pujols, for discussing specific articles. Here is more info on using talk pages.  Hope you continue editing here.—Bagumba (talk) 19:55, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * For just a hot second, I thought maybe the Angels deal had not been finalized and that there was still hope the Cubs could get him. HA! :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:32, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Sports transaction template
Wow, I was completely unaware of that template. That'll be extremely useful in the future, as I've lost count of how many coaches' articles I've updated regarding new hires this season alone, so there will be many more to come in the coming years. Thanks for making me aware of the template. --Kevin W./Talk•CFB uniforms/Talk 21:27, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * NP. I just created it the other week with all the MLB and NBA signings.  Its a compromise to people inevitably putting the tentative news in.—Bagumba (talk) 21:32, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. Well, it was an extremely good idea to create it. Is it just me or has this year's coaching turnover rate been higher than past years'? --Kevin W./Talk•CFB uniforms/Talk 21:33, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

TUSC token 158857b3e72a8046540ef1dda6c0c6f9
I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * 2012 San Diego Padres season (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to John Baker


 * Yasmani Grandal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to John Baker

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:41, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Thomas Suluk
Hi there, I've responded to the issue you raised at this DYK nomination. Thanks for picking it up!  Arctic   Night  15:16, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Heya, I've fixed the second issue. Thanks,  Arctic   Night  15:08, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Malcolm Thomas (basketball, born 1988)
Orlady (talk) 08:02, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

1995 UCLA template
Hey, I just removed Kris Johnson from Template:1995 UCLA Bruins men's basketball navbox. He doesn't have an article and probably shouldn't in my view (not notable). Not all players from a team should appear on the Navbox, just those notable enough for Wikipedia. Just wanted to be above board because I know you're a good editor and I'm sure you put him on in good faith. Take care. Rikster2 (talk) 20:42, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Are redirects not appropriate for navboxes? Kris was an OK college basketball player, not sure if he played professionally in a notable league overseas.  I'm guessing that playing for UCLA and in a large market like LA as well as being the son of an All-Star, WP:GNG could be satisfied if one looks hard enough.  That being said, I wont be looking to create an article in the immediate future.—Bagumba (talk) 23:55, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Not really. At the heart of it, navboxes are navigation aids between articles.  at WP:CBB we've kicked around who should be on or off for years and are now consistent with college football - that only those meeting notability standards should be on.  Johnson is pretty borderline, IMO, but might pass GNG.  My suggestion is to wait and see if you get the urge to create his article and add him then.  Cheers! Rikster2 (talk) 04:44, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Another Link to Shaq's Joining Freemasonry
I know this wan't make a difference in posting evidence that Shaquille O'Neal is a Freemason, but I thought you might want to see it anyway.

[http://Shaq%20Admits%20hes%20a%20Mason%20and%20shows%20his%20Ring!%20Bling! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyxHY0ZCjqA]

KentuckyMason (talk) 15:44, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Setting a then-record
Hi! You may be interested to see this. --Doradus (talk) 18:50, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Shark fin soup
Josha68 (talk) 18:43, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Quick ?
Hi Bagumba --

Thanks for the link to the Wikipedia tutorial - it was very helpful. Can you tell me what the numbers in parentheticals mean here from the watchlist?

(diff | hist). . mb Talk:Joe Paterno‎; 00:31. . (+298) . . SineBot (talk | contribs)‎ (Signing comment by AVR2012 - "- →Paterno's Motives: ")

Thanks
 * No problem. Again, welcome. +298 means the file size increased by 298 characters.—Bagumba (talk) 01:11, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Deleting comments on talk page
Hi. I deleted an edit request of my own on a talk page - can't we do this? It had been rejected and I resubmitted it in a different format. Thanks.--AVR2012 (talk) 10:26, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Time to review edit requests ?
Hi Bagumba - I made an edit request a couple of days ago for the Paterno bio to include a quote from the NYT interview regarding the rationale behind Paterno's firing (the quote was from a trustee name kenneth frazier). I made some changes to it along the way. Do you know how long it takes an editor to review these? So far it's still pending. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AVR2012 (talk • contribs) 21:56, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * It depends on the article and level of participation. One thing to remember is that there is no deadline. You can also canvas interested parties to broaden participation.  Paterno is a complex subject right now, so editors might also be spending more time deciding how to proceed.—Bagumba (talk) 18:59, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Gotcha. I just wasn't sure if it would every get looked at (I'm an anxious type). Hopefully I can learn some patience here.  --AVR2012 (talk) 21:47, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * No prob.—Bagumba (talk) 21:53, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Editor's admission of bias?
While I've got you here can I ask another quick questions? If an editor (in a message to my user talk page but NOT to the talk page of the disputed bio) tells me they are sympathetic to the subject of the bio, can I mention this (respectfully) in the bio's talk page in response to some of the editor's changes that seem overly biased in support of the bio subject? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AVR2012 (talk • contribs) 23:07, 30 January 2012 (UTC) --AVR2012 (talk) 23:09, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Everyone is free to edit and comment as as they see fit. Personally, I assume good faith that an editor is capable of neutrally editing, as we all have our own opinions. If you choose to comment, be civil and avoid personal attacks.—Bagumba (talk) 23:23, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Jeremy Lin's ethnicity
I wish to encourage you and support your use of the phrase "first ... of Chinese or of Taiwanese descent." Myself, as someone who clearly identifies himself as being Taiwanese-American and NOT Chinese-American, it is best that Wikipedia stays neutral in their description of a sports hero. There are political distinctions for placing oneself in one or the other category. But it's inappropriate for a third party to thrust an innocent into such politics. The politics of China is a very complicated subject. Both governments want to claim Lin. Let them. Let the citizens of each be able to. Wikipedia should not be placed to take fire for a position on such politics, nor Jeremy. He is a young man of great talent. People should become fans for his abilities and avoid the politics.

In the discussion, there is some use of "and" instead of "or" in the above statement. "And" is its own political statement. "Or" is more encompassing. "Or" allows for one or the other or both to be true. "And" only allows for both to be true and is a reflection of the Beijing interpretation. So, it's also important that you stick to the use of "or" in your sentence.

Best,

(Sorry, I wish to stay out of the public eye on this.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.203.63.26 (talk) 03:19, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your input. The current wording is "or", which I support. I understand it is a touchy subject with the use of "Taiwanese" or "Chinese".  However, the current wording uses "descent" meaning ancestry.  There is no dispute that his parents were in Taiwan, and that either they or their parents were from China.  I believe "descent" makes it non-ambiguous, and it makes no difference whether Lin associates himself with either.  Finally, and this has no bearing since the wording with "descent", he personally has no preference: "You can call me a Taiwanese basketball player, a Chinese basketball player or just a basketball player," Lin added.—Bagumba (talk) 06:02, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

got it now, thanks
Brhiba (talk) 18:01, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Jeremy Lin
Could you elaborate on this edit summary? And just doesn't sound right at all. Aren't we trying to suggest that Davis' injury halted the Knicks' plans to waive Lin? Zagal e jo^^^ 22:42, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Davis' injury opened up a chance for Lin to play for sure. NY was still looking at picking up other players and releasing Lin.  I'm sure Davis had to affect their decision to keep Lin, but I havent found anywhere that directly says that.  I was just trying to establish the background of what opened up the opportunity for Lin to get minutes.  Any improvements to wording based off that background is appreciated.—Bagumba (talk) 22:49, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I added a little bit about the Feb 3 Celtics game to provide some more context. Zagal e jo^^^ 23:23, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Jeremy Lin and Asian-American players
I left this message on my Talk page, but I think I may have replied incorrectly so that you could get a message that I did respond. I see that the emphasis on him being Asian-American has been resolved. Anyways, I was involved in putting the label of Jeremy Lin being the first American of Chinese or Taiwanese descent originally on Wikipedia. I would like to propose another sentence in future purposes just in case Asian-American wants to be emphasized even more, but I want to let you know first and see what you think. I notice that there are a few users who want to make note of Jeremy Lin being Asian-American as well. I do like the sentence there that states he's one of the few, but what do you think of the sentence "Jeremy Lin is currently the only active Asian-American player in the NBA?" There are no sources to back that up but if we went by the current list of players listed on the Wikipedia page, he gets it by default. But on the other hand the other Asian-Americans that were listed are currently not active. The only person that I can think of is Nate Robinson, who claims to be 1/8th but that would be really reaching. Anyways, what do you think? I just thought it would also make it notable if people want to put more emphasis on him being Asian-American and being the only current active Asian-American player in the NBA says it all. PinoyFilAmPride (talk) 02:46, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:V states, "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth". If its not mentioned in a reliable source, it cant be verified, even if it is true. The other consideration is due weight; if few or no sources mention it, we shouldnt make it seem like a bigger deal than it really is.    The lead already says he is American, then it says he is one of few AA in the league, then it again says he is first American of Taiwanese or Chinese descent.  If a reader still can't figure out he is an American of Asian descent, then its not the words on the page that is the problem.—Bagumba (talk) 07:02, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Lin
I think you're just inviting trouble with this edit. I know that you're attributing the idea to other sources, but people are going to wonder why Corey Gaines and Robert Swift aren't "Asian enough". The previous wording was a lot safer, IMO (though I didn't restore the part about Misaka being fully Asian). Zagal e jo^^^ 22:31, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I see your concern, but thought it was better to show the attributed and dominant position. From what I can tell, it is WP:OR to call Gaines and Swift AA. I dont think we gain by hiding information, as opposed to fairly presenting POVs.  WP:DUE says "articles should not give minority views as much of or as detailed a description as more widely held views."  IMO we shouldn't suppress info on Gaines and Swift, and Lin being the fourth is a widely held position.—Bagumba (talk) 22:58, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Do the sources call Lin the fourth because they've decided Swift and Gaines don't count, or are they simply writing out of ignorance? (Remember that the LA Times called Lin the third Asian American .) Even if we don't use the phrase "Asian American" to describe the two, they are still "Americans of Asian descent". Zagal e jo^^^ 23:07, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * LAT saying third is example of a minority view, that is refuted by the examples in the other sources. I remember seeing one source a while back about descent from grandparents, but would have to find it.  In any even, there isnt a clear cutoff that I know of;  again, I was deferring to the dominant position and the fact I've never seen Swift or Gaines mentioned in the conversation.—Bagumba (talk) 23:12, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * There is this article, which, admittedly, might just be building off the Wikipedia article. Zagal e jo^^^ 23:20, 21 February 2012 (UTC)'
 * A minority view, nonetheless, and it talks about descent and not Asian American. I'd still rather present all perspectives than avoid the subject, specifically since there is a clear dominant view.—Bagumba (talk) 23:35, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, again, note that our article currently says "Americans of Asian descent" to refer to those various players. But anyway, you do have to admit that the definition of "Asian American" is open to interpretation, correct? I just feel that your wording gives undue weight to one specific definition. It may be true that more sources use that definition, but I don't know if they're just parroting each other, or if they actually thought things through. There are lots of mainstream sources who are calling Lin a rookie, so I wouldn't necessarily trust all those people to make nuanced decisions about ethnic classifications.
 * The current wording in the article is perfectly factual, and it also leaves open the possibility of other cases that aren't mentioned (like Nate Robinson), which is a good thing. Zagal e jo^^^ 02:53, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * To play devil's advocate, we could say that any dominant view is due to sources "just parroting each other, or if they actually thought things through." Still your concern is what, if any, cutoff is there for a person's ethnicity: is it 1/2 (1 parent), 1/4 (1 grandparent), etc.  It seems the sources are cutting it off at 1/2.  Is there a clear definition?  I personally dont know.  It seemed accurate to say what most sources are saying, while listing in a footnote the people that weren't counted.  Neither this wording or your reverted wording is incorrect.  While I respect you concern, my preference is to give readers more accurate information, especially when there is a dominant view, and have them make their own decisions regarding conflicts, as opposed to not presenting the information at all.  Still, if I haven't swayed you by now, I guess I'll let it rest unless more info surfaces.—Bagumba (talk) 16:17, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Quotes on Jeremy Lin
Hey, the same editor kept removing the blockquotes on Jeremy Lin. I revert him as well but to no avail. Please join the discussion I started on the talk page regarding this. I invited him to discuss but he did not respond so far.— Chris! c / t 06:22, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've commented.—Bagumba (talk) 06:47, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for Mar 2
Hi. When you recently edited Left-handed specialist, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Closer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:46, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Clipper Darrell
Casliber (talk · contribs) 17:02, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Players of color in the NBA
Hello! Your submission of Players of color in the NBA at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:47, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I tweaked your article a bit. If you like what I did I will try to push this further.  Don't throw the baby out yet. --Ishtar456 (talk) 00:58, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm going on vacation, another reason I semi-backed off. I think its an interesting topic, so I fully welcome your involvement.  You may want to look at Talk:Players_of_color_in_the_NBA as there are some that want to rename the article. Cheers. —Bagumba (talk) 03:33, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Jeremy Lin quotes
If you're going to put this kind of edit on my talk page, then at the very least I'd expect that you also put it for the sake of consistency on the other user's talkpage.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jeremy_Lin&diff=480629641&oldid=480599974 Your other edit here of reverting information without explanation on the talk page is tantamount to vandalism. Please stop this.]Festermunk Festermunk (talk) 15:20, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Same exact comment he put on my talk page, only with different diffs. I've reported this user for edit warring. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:55, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution
I've mentioned youhere as a participant in our on-going dispute regarding the inclusion of box-quotes in the Jeremy Lin article. Festermunk (talk) 16:48, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for List of San Diego Chargers Hall of Fame inductees
The DYK project (nominate) 21:12, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(sports)
Hi. As you've previously participated at this discussion, I'd like to invite you back to see if we can wrap this up and come to a final decision. Thank you. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:39, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Stanisch
I've reverted your addition of Stanisch to 1948 BAA Draft because the criteria for Other picks section specifies that the player must played in at least one BAA/NBA game. In the last NBA Draft FL nomination, the issue was briefly discussed. However, I wouldn't be opposed to a complete list of draftees if anyone would be willing to do the extra work to add them. For now, I don't see the reason why Stanisch should be on the list of other picks when the other 61 picks are not.

Anyway, great job on the List of UCLA Bruins in the NBA. For years I have been thinking of creating such list for several schools but the only precedents I found are List of xxx in the NBA Drafts, which I'm reluctant to create since they do not include undrafted players. — MT (talk) 04:32, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for catching that. I admittedly didn't read the criteria :-(  I was going to start adding UCLA drafted players who never played in NBA to "List of UCLA Bruins in the NBA" and found him missing. I only created the UCLA list after seeing enough sources to pass WP:LISTN, though I'm sure other top colleges like Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, etc. have similar sources that talk about the group as a whole.—Bagumba (talk) 04:52, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Greetings from Clemson!
Hi there! My name is Rosaria. I'm a student at Clemson University, and I'm currently working on a page for one of our basketball players. I see you have been editing Michael Jordan's page, so I was hoping you'd be able to give me some advice or feedback. I've just started it, and it is under review here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Tanner_Smith_(basketball_player) I was also hoping you might be able to offer some advice on uploading an image. I'm not really sure about the process to go through to find the licensing for the image I want to use for the infobox. If you have words of wisdom, I would love to hear them. Thanks! :) BeNiceMurphy (talk) 14:25, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Cy Young
Cy Young did not lose 316 games, as you claim. He lost 313 games in his career. Major League Baseball lists that very fact. Please stop correcting the information that I keep changing. Your information of 316 games lost is incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nutsaboutclara (talk • contribs) 20:37, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Jackson Williams
The reason I moved Jackson Williams to his own page is that the info regarding him is excessively long for just being a "quick blurb" about a prospect. It's certainly long enough to have his own page or should have some excess fat taken off of it. (saint0wen (talk) 02:15, 6 April 2012 (UTC))
 * Thanks for following up. I would opt towards trimming a lot of the specific game details (that are also unsourced). Standalone articles must satisfy the notability guideline, which is not specifically tied to the length of the text.  I dont believe there is enough independent coverage in multiple source to justify a separate article.—Bagumba (talk) 02:20, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Agreed =) (saint0wen (talk) 04:04, 6 April 2012 (UTC))

Template:Did you know nominations/Players of color in the NBA
I have provided a further review on this article.  Harrias  talk 19:30, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Race and ethnicity in the NBA
Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:03, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Your HighBeam account is ready!
Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know: Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 20:33, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Your account activation code has been emailed to your Wikipedia email address.
 * Only 407 of 444 codes were successfully delivered; most failed because email was simply not set up (You can set it in Special:Preferences).
 * If you did not receive a code but were on the approved list, add your name to this section and we'll try again.
 * The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
 * To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1; 2) You’ll see the first page of a two-page registration. 3) Put in an email address and set up a password. (Use a different email address if you signed up for a free trial previously); 4) Click “Continue” to reach the second page of registration; 5) Input your basic information; 6) Input the activation code; 7) Click “Finish”. Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive.
 * If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi.  Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
 * A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate
 * HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
 * Show off your HighBeam access by placing on your userpage
 * When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Trevor Hoffman
Hey. Just wondering if you're considering a future FAC run with Hoffman. I think it would do fairly well, so long as a Peer Review is done first (this way there's a pair of non-baseball eyes on it beforehand). Wizardman Operation Big Bear 12:42, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm probably more interested in improving Tony Gwynn in the short term. It would be good if Hoffman was brought to FA at the latest before he is eligible for HOF. Thanks for inquiring.—Bagumba (talk) 21:54, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Any interest in creating a few UCLA basketball articles?
Bagumba- I'm working on a number of college basketball projects, including creating articles for all notable members of NCAA championship teams. I have probably created 10-12 articles for starters or key players on Wooden dynasty teams and there are only a handful left. Knowing you are a UCLA fan, I thought that you might be interested in helping. The players left are: Jack Hirsch, Fred Slaughter, Kenny Booker, Larry Hollyfield and Tommy Curtis. All of these players received significant press coverage during their years at UCLA. Any interest? Rikster2 (talk) 01:22, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
 * From what I can tell, none of these played in the NBA, correct? I wouldn't mind help creating stubs, but these appear to require more work to demonstrate GNG to a minimal level.  Otherwise, I still have stubs for ex-Bruins Bob Myers and Reeves Nelson that are on the back of my to-do to expand.—Bagumba (talk) 01:51, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Whatever you can do, if not I'll just do them when I get to them. Thanks Rikster2 (talk) 11:33, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm working on Curtis.—Bagumba (talk) 03:31, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Done with Tommy Curtis. Time consuming, as I always end up writing more than I originally intend to.  Dont think I'll be getting to the other ones any time soon :-) —Bagumba (talk) 23:40, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Nice work. All help is appreciated.  I am trying to get all the champion templates complete before the season starts.  The UCLA templates are getting close, so obviously that helps things. Rikster2 (talk) 00:05, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Continued vandalism from user
Please check User talk:VideoGamePhenom's talk page. The message relayed several times in the past is not getting through. Zepppep (talk) 08:26, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I figured with the recent low-rated warnings from others, such as yourself, I better not push it too far. To me, there's no reason a registered user should have as many low-level warnings as they have had posted. I would be far more tough on users such as this one but saw experienced users, such as yourself, used low-level ones. Zepppep (talk) 02:49, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Typically the level escalates if a warning is issued regarding a repeat issue. If it is a totally different issue, the level starts at the lowest level for that type of issue as it is  assumed the user honestly did not know. In this case, a level-3 vandalism warning was already issued in June.  Hope that makes sense.—Bagumba (talk) 02:58, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Great, got it. Thank you! Zepppep (talk) 03:03, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * FYI: Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents.—Bagumba (talk) 19:54, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Until you're better paid... Zepppep (talk) 09:24, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * That would be a whole different ballgame.18:05, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Babe Ruth Home Run Award
Are any of the winners from 2010 onwards known? Have they even been announced? Right now, it seems like the award has just completely vanished. I tried Google searching it, but the results I've gotten are either pre-2008 or focussed on the Babe Ruth Award. Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 07:38, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I have not found any mention of new winners or current status of the award or its creators.—Bagumba (talk) 15:18, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
 * This site talks about the award, which was apparently invented by a fan. Several interesting pics in their banner. My favorite is where they either flipped the picture or Ruth decided to bat right-handed one time for the Braves. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:27, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
 * already cited, unless they have updates since.—Bagumba (talk) 15:58, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, I just wondered about the credibility of a site with a picture of Ruth batting righthanded and the catcher being lefthanded. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:28, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Key fact
Not sure if you caught my question amidst all the text but was still wanting to know whether you thought winning one Gold Glove Award would be considered a "key fact" by you? Zepppep (talk) 04:45, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Responded.—Bagumba (talk) 17:14, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Herbert Mols
Thanks for understanding the "spirit" of where I'm coming from. I've been using Wikipedia as a source for my own personal research and do NOT want to compromise the information in it. I'm 66 (Almost a Ludite) with several thousand pages of documents and photos of original materials regarding this era in Cold War Basketball (1948 - 78). These were to me in 1986 when my father, Herbert Mols, died suddenly at the Empire State Games which he co-founded. I will read your guidlines and will do my best in the future to work within the guidelines that contributors must deal with when adding real unvarnished substance to a story. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GaryMols (talk • contribs) 21:05, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
 * It's understandably difficult when you know things are a fact and would like them reflected in Wikipedia. I'm glad you understand that other editors, not knowing the information, need verifiable reliable sources to corroborate text. Feel free to ask if you have further questions.—Bagumba (talk) 22:06, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

A few questions
Hello there. 1) Who decides the frequency of talk page archiving? 2) On what basis do some of these articles get included within the purview of WikiProject Baseball? I don't see any sort of criteria for inclusion. 3) I've "only" gotten 2 others to comment on a thread at the talk page ("How (and when)...); is it safe to say I should take a hint and realize silence is consensus? I have checked some of the article lists talk pages and seen some of the editors weigh in moons ago but eventually their involvement sort of withered away... Zepppep (talk) 03:32, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Archiving: Consensus is used. You should discuss on project talk page if you feel there is an issue. 2) Project: Editors tag articles with WikiProject Baseball that they feel are related to baseball.  If you see errors, fix it. 3) Silence: I usually state up from if I am using "silence"; since it is the weakest form of consensus, dont be too offended if consensus changes.—Bagumba (talk) 17:25, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Appreciate it, as well as your comments re: active player definition! Zepppep (talk) 04:40, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Talk page template for Wikipedia as a press source
Hi. As someone who seems to have some interest in this area, would you mind please commenting at Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia as a press source. Thanks very much. -- Trevj (talk) 12:05, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Now see here!

 * User_talk:The_Blade_of_the_Northern_Lights Pumpkin Sky   talk  22:30, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Good to see everyone is ready for the season opener.—Bagumba (talk) 23:06, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

An invitation for you!
Happy editing! AutomaticStrikeout 20:39, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

RfA?
I've been trying for a while to think of a good candidate to nominate for adminship and I'm not sure what took me so long to arrive at your name. Personally, I think you'd make a fine administrator (you've been here long enough, have a decent edit count, plenty of article experience and I don't recall you ever causing trouble). If you don't object, I'd like to nominate you. AutomaticStrikeout 17:55, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Flattered by the praise. For better or for worse, I'll open my record up for analysis.—Bagumba (talk) 18:41, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll take that as a yes. It may take me a while to figure out all the formatting, but the best way to learn is to fight through it! AutomaticStrikeout 18:42, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes that was a yes :-)—Bagumba (talk) 18:43, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * A couple questions: 1) Do you know of any interested, potential co-noms? and 2) Do you want me or you to transclude the RfA onto the main RfA page after you answer the questions and accept the nomination? I'm going to assume I should refer to you as "he" and not "she." Correct me if I'm wrong. AutomaticStrikeout 18:53, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I may be unavailable for the next little while. However, I have started the nomination page here. AutomaticStrikeout 19:12, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I believe that as soon as you answer the three questions, I can transclude the RfA. AutomaticStrikeout 20:34, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I am working on it. Will let you know when I am done, and you can look it over to be sure you still want to proceed.—Bagumba (talk) 20:37, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Alright, thanks for the quick reply. I have to make dinner today, so I may be gone when you finish. If so, feel free to transclude it yourself. AutomaticStrikeout 20:40, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm done. Let me know if you have any final suggestions.  I'm not in a hurry, so you can transclude it.—Bagumba (talk) 21:21, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I think we're good to go. AutomaticStrikeout 21:28, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I lost track of your orig questions. 1) Co-noms: I have no interest in soliciting, no I have no response. 2) Transclude: You can proofread and then transclude if it is fine. 3) "he" is correct and will save you from using the neutral "(s)he" everywhere—Bagumba (talk) 21:30, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I believe I overlooked something, I think admins are supposed to have e-mail enabled for their account. AutomaticStrikeout 22:59, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I have it. Is there a reason you think I dont?—Bagumba (talk) 23:02, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * It isn't mentioned in the sidebar for you, at least not that I can see. AutomaticStrikeout 23:07, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I have received email from others before. I don't see the option on your account, so I think only users who have this enabled can see it on other users. This seems to be what WP:EMAIL says as well.  To double-check, see User:Wizardman.  I see the email option on his sidebar.—Bagumba (talk) 23:18, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Your theory must be correct because I don't see it. Thanks for the clarification. AutomaticStrikeout 23:40, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Just a matter of hours now. I didn't expect it to go this well. AutomaticStrikeout 18:04, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit notice template
Hi there. I am hoping to create a template to be used for baseball list articles, per discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball, similar to what has been in the discussion for hockey articles (here). In your opinion, shall I go about creating a template on a designated template page, or shall I put the example template on the project page? (I understand comments, yea's and nay's shall go on the project page.) Thanks for any advice (I sought comment from the editor who informed me of edit notices, but that editor has not responded so here I am bugging you.) Zepppep (talk) 11:15, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Check out this. Any thoughts are appreciated! Zepppep (talk) 13:30, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The notice seems a bit too long; if it's not short and simple, people are less likely to read it. I think each page should pick the reference that is used.  For example, List of Major League Baseball players with 2,000 hits should list that source under "References".  Next, the list should only be updated from stats on that source page, not from piecemeal updates.  For example, if baseball-reference.com is used, the bottom of the list says to look here to get the date of the last games included.  MLB.com is not so obvious when the list was updated (i.e. real-time or end of day).—Bagumba (talk) 16:26, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I've shortened the edit notice. I've also implemented B-R.com to the 2k hits page. (Not done with that article, however, but I feel getting the edit notice finalized and in place is of higher priority.) Zepppep (talk) 01:40, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Instead of generic instructions, have specific instructions on how to update this page. If I was a brand new editor in Wikipedia, what do I need to do so people wont have to fix my edits (what source do I use, whhat dates do I need to update and where do I get it, etc)?—Bagumba (talk) 02:33, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, will do. I can see using the hockey edit notice as guide is not helping make this easier! Zepppep (talk) 02:50, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Updated. Improved at all? Zepppep (talk) 03:20, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Hope you dont mind me editing your user page. I tried to make it generic in case the refs or format of the article changes, while making it specific enough so people know what to do.  I decided to remove the instructions like using preview button which are generic to WP editing.  Modify or discuss as needed.—Bagumba (talk) 19:09, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Nope, I don't mind at all. It looks great. I'll take it to the project page so others have a chance to comment on it. Zepppep (talk) 01:40, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

An invitation for you!
Happy editing! Electric Catfish 13:35, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

List entry criteria
I'm wondering if the discussion at this talk page can be wrapped up, as consensus appears to be made and the last comment came 10 days ago and the discussion opened up 20 days ago? Zepppep (talk) 14:29, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I think you know the answer. Be bold!—Bagumba (talk) 16:28, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I've been bold at Kenny Lofton with changes discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball. An editor believes consensus was not reached there and has reverted my edits 2x (even though I added each ASG link in the article's "Highlights" section). Zepppep (talk) 01:28, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * To avoid canvassing, you should post to the project.—Bagumba (talk) 01:31, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * No opposition had been raised and no comments added for 2 weeks; therefore, I thought discussion was closed and didn't think I was canvassing for a discussion that was currently taking place, but rather one that is dead. Regardless, I have posted a comment to the relevant project Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball talk page section. (Instances like this is why I tend to ask, because it can be surprisingly challenging to figure out when to be bold around here and when to ask. Aye...) I guess what I could've done is closed the discussion. Zepppep (talk) 01:40, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The worst thing that can happen with being bold is someone disagrees. IMO better than sitting on ones hands.—Bagumba (talk) 02:29, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

ANI Discussion notification
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. AutomaticStrikeout 18:01, 1 September 2012 (UTC)