User talk:Bagumba/Archive 2

JSeau
You commented in an edit summary recently that BU did not make of formal request to autopsy JS's brain. The source I cited on that in turn cited a tweet from "Peter King" whom I came to conclude was Peter King (sportswriter) of Sports Illustrated. I went to Twitter. The address was @SI_Peter King+-. That's my only confirmation but it seemed probably on solid ground. I'll leave it to you for now to pursue if you wish. Thanks for working on this tough one. Swliv (talk) 16:58, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the followup. A later article clarified that BU did not formally request the brain: "Sports Illustrated clarified later Thursday that BU did not say that it had asked to study Seau's brain, specifically, but that the center attempts to examine the brains of all athletes who have died after taking part in contact sports."  It was reflected on King's twitter as well.  Sorry for the confusion.—Bagumba (talk) 17:03, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Only confusion maybe that you could have been a little more specific in edit summ. I was back here already to say you left the "BU request" assertion earlier in the CTE article itself; I'll go rework it out there if you haven't beaten me to it ;-). See ya. Thanks again. Swliv (talk) 17:10, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Apologies again on the edit summary. Thanks for updating the BU info into other articles.—Bagumba (talk) 17:33, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Me, again. I just checked back in on the articles again, did some more (smaller) bits, saw we were trading edits again. I saw for instance you'd started the BIRI redirect page which I hijacked for the modest (but I think useful) start-up article; and you had done a good deal of work on it since, too. It still feels a little marginal as an article but I learned more there today so on balance am still glad it's there. Any opinion on that? I haven't triggered a speedy delete at least, yet.

Also, more broadly, I wanted to make sure I hadn't stepped on any toes or, to use another metaphor, otherwise caused you any heartburn. It's "closer quarters" back-and-forth-editing than I'm used to; higher profile subject I guess, too. I hope no problems and I welcome comments/thoughts.

Thanks. Swliv (talk) 02:52, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * No worries. Nobody owns these articles, and the more editors there are the more likely it is that we get it right.  I haven't checked explicitly, but I'm confident there are enough sources for the article to meet WP:GNG.  Still, its always better to add those sources before someone gets the impression it might be worthy of deletion.  Keep up the work.—Bagumba (talk) 03:00, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of photo
(→‎Death: rmv good faith addition of pic: the aerial picture makes it too small to see any worthwhile details ... i thought the rocks were people)

If you click on the photo, and then go to full resolution, then you can easily tell they are people. Phil Konstantin (talk) 18:57, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I did exactly that before deciding to remove the picture. Even at full res, IMO it had limited value.  Ideally a picture could be cropped to avoid readers having to blow it up, but I dont think that would be much better in this case.  There would be a stronger consensus if someone other than yourself had reverted my removal.  That being said, I am not looking to edit war, and will let it be after having stated my piece.  Since the article is lacking photos, I suppose this is better than nothing in the interim.  Thanks for bringing this to my talk page.—Bagumba (talk) 21:33, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

The cropping of the photo was to show the people and the line of broadcast trucks. If you want to delete it, it is not a big deal. I just wanted to make sure you knew you could enlarge the photo. Phil Konstantin (talk) 22:54, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for fixing that ISBN at the Adam Morrison page. I thought the bot was saying the 6 was the problem. Zagal e jo^^^ 19:58, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
 * NP, I just clicked on the ISBN and saw that it failed. Its a good thing I didn't look at the bot message, as it is rather cryptic.—Bagumba (talk) 20:16, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Jeremy Lin
While I agree to the resolution we reached and thus believe no further edits need to be made to the sentence that was under discussion, as a point of interest I would like to disagree with your stance that Sportswriters (whose jobs are to write, and create interest in their topic) are somehow a more fair and unbalanced source than the stats--judging purely based on the box score, Lin was Not outplayed by Williams--than box score numbers. Lin's rise was a huge story, and, as such, media, particularly members of the New York press, were more likely to exagerate Lin's performances and achievements during the "Linsanity" period. This is evidenced no more by the fact that Lin was considered at the time to be one of Knick's best players. Few impartial basketball experts would make such a claim now, or claim that Lin outplayed Deron Williams in the game in question. I do not doubt that there were sports writers at the time who may have thought or declared that Lin outplayed Willims, but I believe you would be hard pressed to find a basketball insider or expert who would feel strongly enough that Lin outplayed Williams to warrant it being published in an unbiased, encyclopedic, resource. I have enjoyed this discussion and appreciate your willingness to compromise on the issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rupert'sscribe (talk • contribs) 16:49, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Speaking generally, points of view need to be verifiable. If differing views are identified, they are presented neutrally. Views not generally held can be OK if they are attributed. Through discussion and consensus, we managed to arrive at a fair balance.  Thanks for the followup.—Bagumba (talk) 17:03, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Junior Seau
I worded it that the way I did because "self-inflicted gun shot wound to the chest" is his official cause of death. If it was accidental it would be "accidental firearm discharge to chest" and official cause of death should be what's used.-- Rockchalk 717 20:05, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The discussion is continued at Talk:Junior_Seau.—Bagumba (talk) 22:52, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Request for review
Hi Bagumba! Thanks for your helpful advice regarding archiving sources. I was just wondering whether you could help review the List of New York Yankees owners and executives. I'm not the nominator, but I see that this list has been up there for more than 20 days and is in urgent needing for reviews. It appears that one or two more reviews in support will help this list pass as an FL. The FL director commented that "folks from the baseball project" should come and review the list, and since you are one of the most active and prominent members of the project, a quick scan through would be great. Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:07, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Been busy last few days. No commitments but maybe ... —Bagumba (talk) 04:14, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually I see that its already promoted.—Bagumba (talk) 04:16, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback Anomalocaris
—Anomalocaris (talk) 01:05, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Consensus?
In reference to Junior Seau: I'm not gonna touch it but for future reference 2 people agreeing over 1 person is not a consensus. The best thing would of been posting to the NFL wikipedia project talk page and invite others to join in. You also made the statement "Do we really need to be a slave to "official" verbage" the answer, on here anyway, is yes. Everything must be official. For example, when the Colts announced they were going to release Peyton Manning, an administrator protected the page because numerous people were making his infobox reflect him being a free agent before he officially was one. That's the point I was trying to make.-- Rockchalk 717 02:51, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * If you are referring to Talk:Junior_Seau, there were only two people that participated over a 9-day period to reach a consensus, so I'm not sure what you are referring to by "2 people agreeing over 1 person." I will also note that WP:CONSENSUS says "Any edit that is not disputed or reverted by another editor can be assumed to have consensus."  However, Consensus can change, and anyone is welcome to get support for a new one.  With the number of edits you have made on Wikipedia, I'm sure you were already aware that polling is not a substitute for discussion.  Thanks for bringing this to my talk page.—Bagumba (talk) 03:47, 21 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Re: Peyton Manning example, the issue seems to be more of verifiability and looking into a crystal ball than any WP mandate to use official announcements verbatim.—Bagumba (talk) 04:02, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

James Harden
Ok, I made a hash of James Harden. I cleaned up some but not following "the page James Harden (disambiguation) needs to point to the old disambiguation page that was deleted for the move."-- SPhilbrick (Talk)  16:15, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't James Harden (disambiguation) simply be deleted as no longer needed?-- SPhilbrick (Talk)  16:19, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I think if James Harden linked to another dab page from its hatnote it would be discouraged to have a user go from James Hardin (a dab page) to James Harden to yet another dab page to finally finding the right link. However, since James Harden only points to one entry in its hatnote, I suppose the worst case scenario is three clicks with or without James Harden (disambiguation).—Bagumba (talk) 16:53, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I see that you added the other James Harden entry into "see also" of James Hardin. I suppose that works too, with the downside of duplicating the entries instead of centralizing it into a dab page.  I suppose its the hatnote vs dab argument.  Again, with the minimum number of entries, it could go wither way.—Bagumba (talk) 17:05, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback message
I've left you another message. AutomaticStrikeout (talk) 17:15, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Kris Johnson (basketball)
Hello! Your submission of Kris Johnson (basketball) 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! Lihaas (talk) 05:32, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Kris Johnson (basketball)
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:04, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for San Diego Chargers retired numbers
Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Orlando Woolridge
Hi there BAGUMBA, VASCO from Portugal here,

sorry for removing the links display in this player's article. However, in six years of editing i have never heard of this, templates stuck together. Can you please arrange one template for NBA.com and another for the other site?

Thanks in advance, happy week - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 02:02, 4 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I've already fixed LINK#2, had no such luck with NBA.com. Could you please help me, keeping in mind the links look better separated? Thanks. --Vasco Amaral (talk) 02:15, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I took a look, but the changes were already reverted. The basketballstats template was formed by consensus at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_National_Basketball_Association. It is consistent with other sports templates like Baseballstats and Footballstats to group related stat sites together along with a note to casual sports fans about the common content contained in the sites. The basketball template is currently used on FAs like Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, Tim Duncan, You are welcome to form a new consensus at WikiProject NBA.—Bagumba (talk) 17:05, 4 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I edit mainly on soccer, so knew little (or nothing) about the consensus on basketball stuff. I am sorry to have caused any disruption, happy editing and keep up the good work - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 19:10, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * No prob. Thanks for being bold and then following up with discussion.—Bagumba (talk) 19:14, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Tony Gwynn
Great job improving the article! That's all. :-) -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 01:41, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for UCLA Bruins men's basketball retired numbers
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:09, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

An invitation for you!
This task force is still in a developmental stage and your assistance would be appreciated. Happy editing! AutomaticStrikeout (talk) 17:11, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Jeter FAC
Would you mind coming back to the FAC page to strike the comments I've dealt with? It's getting a little tougher to sort through what I've done and what I haven't. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:07, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah I notice you were just on vacation. No rush on this. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:15, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * My punishment for having so many comments :-) This was on my to-do list.—Bagumba (talk) 19:17, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

The Decision
Hello! I've reverted your move, which doesn't seem uncontroversial. Please see our primary topic criteria, of which one is "long-term significance" (when a topic "has substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term"). Feel free to propose the moves at WP:RM. Note that if there's consensus to proceed, all of these links should be updated beforehand. Thanks! —David Levy 01:03, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I see that you'd just begun updating the links when you noticed that the page move was reverted, so I assume that you're aware of that. :)  —David Levy 01:07, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem, I was just being bold.—Bagumba (talk) 01:09, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Yep, it was perfectly reasonable. I do the same thing.  (:  —David Levy 01:13, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your comments at my RFA! I'll eventually thank everyone, but you put a lot of effort into sticking up for me, so I figured I'd start here. Best! Zagal e jo^^^ 03:35, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Request for review
Hi there again, Bagumba! I was just wondering whether you could help review the 20–20–20 club list I nominated. I understand that you're probably busy, so there's no need to commit to anything and take as long as you need (as I have just nominated the list). A quick scan through would be great. Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 19:25, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

J. Lin
My fault there bro, I went to his page after seeing the reports and was weirded out after seeing his infobox hadn't been changed. I didn't know the official NBA rules about that crap, so that will be last NBA edit haha. ThurstAsh13 ( Malk  +  Montributions )  03:16, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Devil's in the details. No problem with you being bold.—Bagumba (talk) 03:18, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Lowry
Seems that someone got to it before me. But you're free to leave requests like that at my talk page. I can't always respond immediately, but I'll do what I can. Zagal e jo^^^ 00:05, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Junior Seau Beach Community Center and Bandshell
Hello! I see that you commented at the above AfD. Since your comment I have done a substantial rewrite of the article, and I would encourage you to take another look at it. Thanks. --MelanieN (talk) 16:01, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Retired numbers
Thanks for your excellent article on San Diego Chargers retired numbers. I wonder if you have ever considered doing a similar article about Padres retired numbers? There is a brief section at the Padres article, but I would love to see it expanded - especially with the wit and style you displayed in the Chargers article. Just a thought. --MelanieN (talk) 20:39, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Appreciate the feedback. Pads retired numbers is on my to-do list. My main focus for SD sports articles is currently on sprucing up Tony Gwynn and to a lesser extent LaDainian Tomlinson.—Bagumba (talk) 20:43, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

WT:NBA
You only commented on one of my two template issues yesterday. Would you be able to comment on the other.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:27, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I didn't comment on the other thread as I haven't personally used them. I mostly find the documentation for templates difficult to follow, so I end up copying from a working example in an article and modify.  In this case, since the three work together, if I didnt go to an actual article, it would be difficult to figure out just on docs how they should be used.  From what I could gather, any article that wanted to be verifiable should use the footer with the params for adding citations.


 * I rarely create articles for current college players. I worked on Andre Drummond when he committed to UConn, and didnt know about these template.  Probably wouldn't have made a difference if I had known, as ratings are not my thing.  Let me know if you have other questions.—Bagumba (talk) 05:02, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Re:Jordan Farmar
You're welcome sir. Feel free to remove this message as soon as you read.—Tamburello (talk) 00:51, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Steve Nash
Hi Bagumba - You're recent addition of an LA chapter to the "Steve Nash" page are much appreciated. However, I think if you re-read your source (46) you'll find that nowhere has Nash mentioned Messi in relationship to his selection of the number 10. The source website tag itself is misleading - the source only states that Nash will wear #10 "like Messi", and goes on to speak about Nashes admiration for Messi. As the source before (45) indicates, Nash only states that "#10 is the number of playmakers in soccer".

cheers, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wordscot (talk • contribs) 00:52, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I only added that Messi was a soccer player, the rest of the text was added by someone else. Since I'm not fluent in Spanish, I assumed good faith on the source and figured there would be English sources later.  I have no issue if you reword/remove.—Bagumba (talk) 01:08, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

kris johnson
The article most certainly did not reflect the wikipedia policy of a NPOV. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Levgardlane (talk • contribs) 05:21, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:NPOV says that views should be represented fairly; however, your edits completely removed without explanation all mention of negative aspects such as his brother's death which impacted his life, his gang involvement during his youth, his early weight issues,  temper, and drug suspension.  That appears to be closer to censorship.  Your edits also changed his birthdate contrary to an existing source.—Bagumba (talk) 06:02, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Zagal e jo^^^ 03:02, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Coincidence?
Check out this edit history and this user page. Zepppep (talk) 08:09, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * You seem to have legitimate concerns that you can report at WP:SPI.—Bagumba (talk) 08:51, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * But per blocking policy, I am not sure if a user is allowed to make edits using an IP address (one that has been blocked in the past)? Zepppep (talk) 09:26, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * See WP:EVASION. Looks like you made the request and action was taken on the accounts.—Bagumba (talk) 15:44, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
—Bloom6132 (talk) 16:59, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Tommy Curtis
Yngvadottir (talk) 08:03, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19
Hi. When you recently edited 2012 United States men's Olympic basketball team, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Robinson (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) 03:28, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
—Bloom6132 (talk) 07:28, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

User repeatedly threatening to edit well-sourced content
Hi, Bagumba. I'm writing because User:MishaKeats has said three times in this talk page discussion at "Heights of presidents and presidential candidates of the United States" that he will be changing the heights of two presidents (Bill Clinton and George W. Bush), even though that content is fully and reliably sourced, and has been there for a long time. I have attempted to explain to him why his proposed changes are not warranted, but he refuses to address my specific points or answer my questions, and has said he will no longer even respond to my comments. Yesterday, he stated three times that he was simply going to make his desired changes in six days. He seems to imply that he is willing to start an edit war with other editors. I suggested that he start an RfC since he is the one who wants to make changes to long-standing, well-sourced content. But he said no. Can you please help so that any potential problems can be prevented? Thanks! --76.189.110.167 (talk) 19:05, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Others might still respond in six days to help reach a consensus. Unless it actually happens, assume good faith that the user will not resort to edit warring. I would also suggest to post a notice of the discussion at the related WikiProject Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Presidents to seek others' opinions. Dispute resolution offers other advice on handling disputes. In the event the article is edited with information that you dispute, you could place the tag Disputed-inline in the article while the discussion continues in lieu of having the "correct" information and in the interest of avoiding an edit war.—Bagumba (talk) 19:34, 22 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I defintely want to assume good faith, but as I'm sure you read in the discussion, he disrgarded every point I made and repeatedly said he's going to make the changes anyway. He asked for comments, I gave them by presenting the facts of what's contained in the sources (his and the artticle's), but by his replies it appears it doesn't matter if what he wants to do isn't supported by the evidence. If the sources on both sides were somewhat balanced, I would understand. But the sourcing of the current content is overwhelming compared to what he's offering. If he changes it, he will be removing TEN reliable sources for his two or so sources. I was hoping you could comment in the discussion. Thank you. :) --76.189.110.167 (talk) 19:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I cannot currently commit to commenting, but you could post it to Third opinion for others who might be available now to provide a third opinion. I would also highly recommend posting to the the related U.S. Presidents project as the subject falls into their expertise. Through no fault of your own, sometimes editors need a different explanation from other people before it clicks, and having multiple editors weighing in aside from the two of you usually makes the "correct" interpretation clearer.  I think AGF can still apply here.  Good luck.—Bagumba (talk) 20:06, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, I posted it to the 3rd Opinion page. It says not to post there if there's more than two people involved, so I didn't put a notice on the U.S. Presidents project page. --76.189.110.167 (talk) 21:21, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Oops, actually I did put it on the project page. I forgot I had already done that. Haha. --76.189.110.167 (talk) 23:56, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Your reverts of my edits in Junior Seau
Hi Bagumba. The reverts of my edit you did in Junior Seau were fully sourced and don't violate proseline. The content I added summarized the big autopsy report that everyone following the story was waiting for. It was released two days ago. Your edit note said "sources dont mention any specific findings about his brain or mood in the autopsy only "no pre-existing natural disease", donation of tissue already mentioned". But actually, that information is sourced. The LA Times story alone says the autopsy "showed no brain damage", which has been the primary emphasis among many media sources,  and that Seau did not "exhibit the mood changes and irritability often associated with concussions and brain damage". So his brain and mood are indeed mentioned. Seau died in May and during the three months before the autopsy was released there was a huge amount of (unfounded) speculation about brain damage and concussions being a factor in his death. Well, the autopsy was finally released on August 20 and, therefore, it's vital to include that date. You removed it, so the article gives no indication as to when the autopsy results were released in relation to the date of death. Without the report's release date included, the article implies that it was released soon after the death instead of almost four months. And all the autopsy info should be the last paragraph in the Death section, instead of merged into the first paragraph. This is because if you look at that section now, as you edited it, the last two paragraphs include the content about the speculative issues that were being discussed while everyone was waiting for the autopsy results. So it's out of order. Well, the results are in, so that section should end with the autopsy results. In terms of proseline, the way I added the autopsy content does not violate it. As the proseline guidelines explain, "Perhaps one way to help determine the appropriateness of a timeline is to think about the degree to which the reader will benefit from knowing the exact date, time, and order of events." And there is no ongoing list of dates. There's simply a date of his death and a date of the autopsy release. This situation with Seau is not something that will keep being updated. It had a beginning (his death), a middle (all the speculation) and an end (the autopsy results). So what do we do about this? ;) --76.189.110.167 (talk) 23:25, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

P.S. When I made my edits yesterday, it didn't hit me that the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke is part of the National Institutes of Health. So that's why I included the sentence about the family donating the brain tissue to the NIH. When a lot of the media reported on the autopsy, they indicated how the family still wants the NIH to study the brain, even though the autopsy said there was no brain damage. IMO, that's an important piece of information. When they donated the brain tissue originally it's because they wanted to see if there was brain damage. But now that they know the autospy says no brain damage, it's very interesting that they still want the tissue studied. --76.189.110.167 (talk) 23:46, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for bringing your concerns here. I did not look at the LA Times article for those excerpts, as that version did not have the footnote next to the related text. That being the case, I thought it might have been original research, so I instead added "no pre-existing natural disease" with a source. The USA Today article said it "remains uncertain" if he had brain damage. Without the LA Times source, I thought it was irrelevant when the report was released;  I can see now how you thought differently. The LA Times article says, "Although an initial autopsy showed no brain damage to deceased football star Junior Seau, tissue from his brain has been sent to the National Institutes of Health for more advanced evaluation, officials say." That's open ended whether the NIH is expected to find anything different or not. Combined with the uncertainty mentioned in USA Today, I think there is still speculation about the cause of his death. Therefore, I still wonder if the timeline of the autopsy is needed.  The article currently reads like "He died on this date due and here is what we know about his death, and here is what is still unknown or speculated." How would you like to proceed?—Bagumba (talk) 00:02, 23 August 2012 (UTC)


 * You're very welcome. I didn't just want to edit it back without talking to you. :) So, yeah, that wasn't original research. Haha. I read the "no brain damage" result in many sources, as well as the "mood" info, but of course didn't feel it was necessary to include a lot of sources on those points because the LA Times is very respected/reliable and they got the info straight from the autopsy report. Here's some other sources that say no brain damage: An important point, also, is that if the autopsy had indeed found signs of brain damage it certainly would've been included in the findings and the media would've gone crazy in reporting it. All the headlines would've been like "Seau Had Brain Damage!" As far as the brain tissue the family donated, it appears that they dontated tissue once (a few months ago), and not again after the autospy results. But the way some of the media reported the tissue donation a few days ago made it sound like the family did it despite the autopsy results not showing brain damage. The confusion is because they failed to specify that the family had already made the donation months ago. In terms of how I would like to proceed. I think we should simply put all the new information (about the autopsy results) as the last paragraph of the Death section. So the section would have multiple paragraphs: P1: that he died and what we knew at that time. P2 and P3: all the info about the much-discussed speculative issues (other player's suicide, concussion, brain damage, sleep problems, donation of brain tissue). P4: Autopsy results with the date the report was released (to give readers a time reference, that it took four months). But IMO, none of the autopsy results should be mixed in with the first paragraph because it would be like merging the the last paragraph of a book into the first chapter, after everything in between was already explained. You are much more experienced in editing, so I'm sure whatever you suggest to resolve this would be great. What's your suggestion, my friend? ;) --76.189.110.167 (talk) 00:38, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * One more point. If it's later determined that Seau did in fact have brain damage, it can simply be added at that time. But all we know for sure at this moment is that the autopsy did not find any brain damage. There isn't one reliable media source reporting he had brain damage; only some speculation and implications that maybe the autopsy results are wrong. But of course we can't add content based on opinions, speculation or what may happen in the future. Sorry I forgot this part before. ;) --76.189.110.167 (talk) 00:44, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I've added back the text on autopsy findings and added additional source from U-T San Diego. I left the lack of suicide note in the first paragraph. I prefer grouping information together about his death, unless the timeline and blow-by-blow is critical.  Feel free to make any changes as needed.—Bagumba (talk) 02:32, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Nicely done. And I really liked how you clarified some of the content so there's no misunderstanding. You're a great writer and editor. Thanks! --76.189.110.167 (talk) 03:32, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Your RFA
Hi Bagumba, I have closed your RFA as successful — you are now an administrator. Please consider the guidance at New admin school, it'll keep you from ending up here. Good luck! WilliamH (talk) 21:34, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * congrats! If I can of assistance let me know. Dloh cierekim
 * Well, good luck with your new tools, and try not to end up in the aforementioned place like I managed to! Reaper Eternal (talk) 01:09, 28 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Congrats! Zagal e jo^^^ 03:15, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, you made it!

 * Re: your thank you note on my talk page: You are very welcome! I hope to make more nominations in the future, but I may never see the numbers be this favorable again. AutomaticStrikeout 00:38, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations!
Well done on becoming an administrator, and welcome to Team Admin. :) — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 21:47, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Congrats!
On behalf of Wikiproject Umpires and myself, congratulations on your successful RFA! Electric Catfish 01:04, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Re Records considered unbreakable.
I'll see if I could join the discussion on the talk page. As for "floppers" in basketball, if it is only one sportswriter opinion that the player is considered a flopper and there little else in sourcing to back it up, their names can be safely removed per our WP:BLP policies. Also congrats on your adminship. Secret account 04:07, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Your new tools
If you have any questions about the tools or just any concern, feel free to ping me. It wasn't til after 2 months that I figured out that TW had the block templates under WARN, so I understand how confusing all the shiny new buttons can be. I'm quite confident you will do a great job. Dennis Brown - 2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 00:35, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, and really do go to the new admin school, it will make life much easier. It doesn't explain everything, but it is a pretty good start.  Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 00:37, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Congratulations from me too. When you've got a minute feel free to blag stuff from my monobook, various kind people have put some very useful admin scripts there.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  08:30, 28 August 2012 (UTC)


 * And it's congratulations from him. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:14, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations
Congrats Bagumba on your successful RFA! I know you'll make an excellent and responsible administrator.

As a side note, could you have a look at the Golden Spikes Award list I nominated? It's been an FLC for 2 weeks, but not much feedback has been given. I tried notifying two extremely active members of WikiProject Baseball, but no action has been taken yet. And if it's not too inconvenient, could you convince Muboshgu to take a look at it (I messaged him, but no response yet). Your power of persuasion was what garnered his review for the 20–20–20 club FLC. Thanks and cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:08, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I can't commit but I'll keep it on my to-do.—Bagumba (talk) 18:22, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Giants2008 ( Talk ) 18:23, 28 August 2012 (UTC) — Chris! c / t 00:16, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh, also remember to add administrator to your user page. :) — Chris! c / t 00:19, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

At what point does it become feasible to propose that he be banned for good? AutomaticStrikeout 16:34, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The registered user is already indefinitely banned. IPs take a more extreme case since theoretically multiple people can be using an IP, or even static IPs can change. What did you have in mind?—Bagumba (talk) 16:38, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, as I understand it he's blocked indefinitely, not banned, which is different. I think it would be much harder for Carthage44 to ever come back if he got banned. AutomaticStrikeout 16:42, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Blocking is a way to enforce a ban. As the user cannot edit, he is effectively banned.  There is a concept of a standard offer.  The idea being that if an editor has really changed, why not let them contribute. Also see WP:BLOCK.—Bagumba (talk) 16:58, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, fair point. We'll see if he tries coming back in six months (at which point he'll have to explain this most recent block evasion), in the mean time I doubt anyone misses him. AutomaticStrikeout 17:08, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
 * To be fair, I think people respect his knowledge on the White Sox, but tired of the incilvilities.—Bagumba (talk) 17:16, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The user has denied and admitted sock puppetry (multiple times), but not admitted doing so until proof was shown. To me, it's a pretty easy case just by looking at the words and tone used in unblock requests, edit summaries, selective edits to the user's talk page, etc, without even having to look at the other things (block evasion, sock puppetry, etc.). Users with a sincere desire to admit any faults and to do (or not do) whatever it takes to get back on good standing (and adhere to the block period, and if it is lessened, so be it) are the ones where a change can be seen upon completion of a multi-week or -month block. WP will go on, even if roster template changes or info box color changes to one particular team aren't made on the hour. "The point" may take longer for one user to grasp than another. Zepppep (talk) 20:50, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Goal difference
Hi, Bagumba, as promised in my support for you at your RfA (congrats, btw), I am hereby bothering you about a sports article. There was an edit war on the article, and I got involved only as an admin. One of the participants, User:Dr. Vicodine, bowed out because he became annoyed with me, which leaves only the other editor as no one else seems interested. If you have a moment, could you take a look at the article? As I'm sure you'll notice, despite the tag saying more refs are needed, the article has zip. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, those are sports I as a typical American have little knowledge in. It mentions basketball, but I believe its more common in international play that in the US.  This article is IMO the typical abomination where someone takes a similar term in multiple sports and writes an article that both (over-)generalizes the concept and then becomes a dumping group for trivia about specific favorite sport of a given editor. Not much value I can add here unless I was interested in editing and finding sources and turning this into an set index article perhaps.—Bagumba (talk) 00:59, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, well, thanks for looking at it. I think I'll remove it from my watchlist so I don't have to look at it anymore. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 01:09, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case
Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Sockpuppet investigations/Bagumba for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. 94.12.133.144 (talk) 07:46, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Orthokine
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:04, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)
Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page. In this issue: Read the entire first edition of The Olive Branch -->
 * Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
 * Research: The most recent DR data
 * Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
 * Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
 * DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
 * Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
 * Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

--The Olive Branch 18:50, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Help!
Hi Bagumba! This IP user 68.81.192.142 has been trying to start an edit war with me on List of Major League Baseball hitters with two grand slams in one game. He's been constantly making personal attacks on my talk page (labeling me a 12 year old and falsely accusing me of "owning" the page even when ChrisTheDude also made significant contributions to the article), even after I justified my edits and warned him not to edit war. Could you please help mediate in this situation? Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 20:32, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I made exactly one edit to the page in question ten days ago, and two today, in which I removed a statement that was initially false, and then unnecessary and redundant. You threatened to report me after my first revert, then added an "edit war" template to my page. Your behavior demonstrates exactly what I stated, that you are immature and seem to believe you own that particular page.  68.81.192.142 (talk) 20:39, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm asking for mediation here, not more inflammatory remarks and personal attacks by you. —Bloom6132 (talk) 20:41, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, IP has done it again (albeit on his talk page. —Bloom6132 (talk) 20:53, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * LMAO. You are complaining about what I write on MY OWN TALK PAGE?  The only "mediation" necessary is for you to cease reverting attempts at correcting your poor use of the English language, and to cease categorizing a whopping TWO EDITS as an "edit war." 68.81.192.142 (talk) 20:54, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The fact of the matter is you were addressing me. Don't think you can write anything you'd like on your talk page.  Civility extends to all of WP. —Bloom6132 (talk) 20:56, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I ask you both to please be civil. Please discuss any differences on the article's talk page to reach a consensus and refrain from reverting each other's changes. WP:BRD is a good model to follow, and it's time to discuss and follow dispute resolution.—Bagumba (talk) 20:57, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Wes Chandler Message you left for me tonight
Bagumba,

I thought an external news source and link was enough and all that was needed to correct the Wes Chandler link that you removed. I have answered you on my talk page including the quote and the link to the news source which is Sports Illustrated, please let me know what else I need to do?

Thanks JoeyD2010 (talk) 07:16, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Just wanted to drop by and thank you for the help you have provided with sourcing and helping make the page on Michael Trope better and easier to read, I appreciate your time. Have a great vacation JoeyD2010 (talk) 06:18, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Ron Fowler
PanydThe muffin is not subtle 00:02, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Rivalry hating IP
has caused a lot of trouble and left a big mess to be cleaned up. Do you think it's block-worthy? AutomaticStrikeout 17:57, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I reverted removal of NBA category earlier, but didnt look into the other edits until you mentioned it. Some edits seem legit. I wouldn't support blocking without assuming good faith and starting a discussion on the user talk page first.—Bagumba (talk) 18:08, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I did that, but if this continues, he should be blocked quickly. He's created a big mess for others to clean up. AutomaticStrikeout 18:10, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Ichiro's hometown
I understand the definition of hometown. Ichiro Suzuki had grown up in Toyoyama, Aichi, which is independent town next to City of Kasugai. He graduated Toyoyama elementary school and Toyoyama junior high school then join Meiden high school in Nagoya. His home located in Toyoyama, Aichi not Kasugai, and he hosts Ichiro Cup Tournament every year in Toyoyama town, co-hosted by his supporters club in Toyoyama town. The hometown info on his MLB profile page is wrong. My hometown is Nagoya and it's nationwide common knowledge that Toyoyama is Ichiro's hometown, as Japanese Wikipedia of Ichiro and this NY Time article says.--Earthhpr (talk) 07:34, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * For verifiability, can you provide reliable sources that state where he was born? The NYT article says "The Ichiro Exhibition Room in the outfielder's hometown of Toyoyama, Japan."  It doesnt state where he was born. Also note that Wikipedia can not use itself as a source.  We can however, reuse sources cited by other Wikipedia articles.  Perhaps they exist in the Japanese WP, but I cannot read Japanese.  Feel free to identify them.—Bagumba (talk) 07:48, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

How about this article from Aichi Prefectural Government office "A Seeker on the Diamond", says "Ichiro was born in 1973 in Toyoyama, Aichi Prefecture.", and Ichiro commented as " The only time I get back to Toyoyama, where my parents live, is during the off-season". Local government is the only official evidence document holder for where a person is born, and they said Toyoyama is the hometown of Ichiro. Also this Seattle Times article says "Ichiro winding up as a pitcher for his Toyoyama Little League team at age 11". The Ichiro museum run by his parents is actually held at their own house, built by Ichiro. The local Ichiro fan club in his hometown Toyoyama in can be referenced in LA Times article back in 2001.--Earthhpr (talk) 09:13, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I also give you link of Japanese WP for Town of Toyoyama and it clearly says "Town of Toyoyama is known as Ichiro's hometown" and lists Ichiro as a noted person of the town, and it links to Japanese WP of Ichiro which also says his home town is Toyoyama, while Japanese WP of City of Kasugai does not list him. Actually I can find a lot of other reference documents and watched TV reports in Japanese which said Ichiro is from Toyoyama very easily, but find almost zero says he is from Kasugai, in Japanese language.--Earthhpr (talk) 10:12, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I also realized that Ichiro's MLB.com profile page says he was born in Kasugai, not his hometown. Town of Toyoyama is relatively a small town with 14,700 population and it don't have big hospital, then his parents might go to City of Kasugai, a relatively big city nearby with 306,000 population, to give his birth. He might be asked by Mariners or mlb.com simply as "Where did you born?" then he might answered where the hospital is - the birthplace. I cannot find any information on the Net which hospital he was born even in Japanese so far, but in anyway, all the information (I have linked some above) indicate that he grew up in Town of Toyoyama since he was born until age of 15 (then he moved to the dormitory of his high school in Nagoya), and his parents are still living in Toyoyama and running the Ichiro museum up until now. So Town of Toyoyama is the only, most appropriate town to call as his hometown. The article from Aichi Prefectural Government office "A Seeker on the Diamond" described as "Ichiro was born in 1973 in Toyoyama", but I guess they didn't do any research about the hospital but just expressed where he grew up in Toyoyama by that sentence, as that is a very common knowledge there, even nationwidely in Japan.--Earthhpr (talk) 17:31, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Anyhow I will add some description as he grew up in Toyoyama in "Early Life" section with references. Too funny I cannot find any information he was born (in hospital) in Kasugai at all in Japanese language, while all reliable information says he's from Toyoyama, including Mayor of Town of Toyoyama (funny he is also Suzuki).--Earthhpr (talk) 18:54, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Per WP:V, "Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it." It seems clear Toyoyama is his hometown. Unless other sources say otherwise, Kasugai is listed in reliable sources as his birthplace.  I know in some cases people use a more larger city as their birthplace since it is more recognizable.  In other cases, sources mistakenly use a person's hometown for their birthplace (e.g. Jeremy Lin). However, unless there are sources to verify the discrepancy, we should not do original research on where he might "actually" have been born.—Bagumba (talk) 19:03, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I will not revise his birthplace info on right column, but wil add descriptions he grew up in Toyoyama, went schools in Toyoyama and played little league team in Toyoyama with reliable references in Early Life section. It's too strange there are no information where he grew in WP. Regarding larger city for birthplace, My guess is Ichiro cannot tell Japanese people he was born in hospital in Kasugai (or somewhere else outside Toyoyama) - no information in Japanese - because he's kept saying and well recognized that his hometown is Toyoyama, for the honor of the town.--Earthhpr (talk) 19:21, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * This is the only English source I found that he was born in Toyoyama. All other sources either say he was born specifically in Kasugai or generically in Aichi prefecture.  Based on the number of sources, I'll assume Toyoyama is an error.  At worst, we could just say he was born in Aichi, with a footnote saying most sources say Kasugai;  however, based on the number of sources, I think you should get consensus on Talk:Ichiro Suzuki if you ever wanted to reconsider removing Kasugai.—Bagumba (talk) 19:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The Aichi Prefectural Government article I posted above also clearly says Ichiro was born in Toyoyama. I think all information which says he is born in Kasugai (or sometimes his hometown is Kasugai) on ESPN, CBSsports, CNNSI etc are just copy and paste the Mariners (and Yankees) official player profile info on mlb.com. Again, there is *NO* information in Japanese language that Ichiro's hometown in Kasugai, not even he was born in Kasugai. I will not change birthplace (hospital) infomation on WP, just because I cannot confirm it in Japanese at all, but will add descriptions of Toyoyama the hometown stuff then I will discuss in Talk:Ichiro Suzuki.--Earthhpr (talk) 20:15, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * There's also books that list him being born in Kasugai..—Bagumba (talk) 20:17, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Again all of them are copied info from mlb.com. There are no information *originated from Japan* which says Ichiro is born in Kasugai or his hometown is Kasugai. All the information originated from Japan (just like museum article) and/or written in Japanese language says he is born in Toyoyama and his hometown is Toyoyama. His birthplace and hometown are the matter of Japanese local stuff, aren't they?--Earthhpr (talk) 20:34, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The museum article makes no mention of his birthplace, only his hometown. I won't comment on the Japanese articles, as I am not literate in Japanese and am not familiar which are reliable. It is pure speculation which source may or may not copy from mlb.com unless they cite their sources. Again, I recommend to get consensus from others.—Bagumba (talk) 20:43, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Again and again, I will *NOT* change nor remove information of Kasugai as his birthplace on English WP. I will add description that he lived, grew up, went elementary and junior high school, played little league baseball in Town of Toyoyama in Early Life of section of it. I don't think it will not need consensus for the information I listed if it has reliable references, but I will explain it in Talk:Ichiro Suzuki.--Earthhpr (talk) 20:52, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Apologies for the confusion, as I prefaced my suggestion with "if you ever wanted to reconsider removing Kasugai." I understand you do not currently intend to pursue this. Thanks for discussing this. Cheers.—Bagumba (talk) 20:56, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I have put notes for explanation and request for info about Ichiro's birthplace/hometown issue on Talk:Ichiro Suzuki.--Earthhpr (talk) 01:51, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

AFD you may be interested in
Lance Easley, the official for the Green Bay-Seattle game has been nominated for deletion and since you participated in the other two applicable AFDs, so I wanted to give you a heads up. The discussion is here. Thanks--Go Phightins! (talk) 01:47, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Malcolm Thomas
Well, I'll just keep an eye on things. I get what you're trying to do, but hopefully, we'll have something conclusive in the near future. Zagal e jo^^^ 04:35, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

WP: College Basketball edit
That was definitely an accident on my part. Didn't even know I had done that! Oops! Thanks for reverting. ~ Richmond 96   t  •  c   01:59, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Can you block someone?
IP User 62.232.86.194 just came off a temporary block and is vandalizing pages again (Chris Paul). Can you block it again? Rikster2 (talk) 11:24, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Blocks on IPs are not as straight-forward, as IPs can be shared or reassigned and this current editor might not be the same as the previous one that warranted a block. Good faith is assumed unless the editing pattern matches.  I welcomed the IP, providing basic links on how to contribute constructively.  That said, Chris Paul seems to have a history of vandalism, so I re-applied semi-protection to the article.  Thanks for the heads-up and feel free to let me know or WP:AIV know if the IP falls out of line.—Bagumba (talk) 16:19, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. Rikster2 (talk) 17:57, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Malcolm Thomas
Hello.

A few days ago I edited Malcolm Thomas (born 1988). You removed my changes because "Wikipedia is not a crystal ball".

Well now it is official. So I edited it again and this time I ask you not to remove my changes.

--JumpToMe (talk) 15:21, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the update and adding the reliable source. Your copy-paste edit removed some earlier edits by myself and others unrelated to the signing, so I have manually restored the individual lines.  Please be careful with other's intermediate edits when copy-pasting in the future. Cheers.—Bagumba (talk) 16:46, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

New Wiki-subProject
Hi Bagumba, AutomaticStrikeout and I created the referees subproject off of the NFL Wiki-Project. Someone thought you might be interested, so I thought I'd drop by and ask. Thanks--Go Phightins! (talk) 19:40, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll pass, but feel free to ping me if you need any admin-specific help. I did have a question about notability, which I posted on the project's talk page.—Bagumba (talk) 23:43, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I responded there. AutomaticStrikeout 23:56, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Thomas edits
Hi Bagumba, Thank you for your comments. I corrected the Philanthropy section by correctly sourcing all of the facts I added to his page. I think this should remove concerns that it is not neutral because they are all correctly sourced. Did I correctly address all of the problems that made it seems nonneutral? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blogos (talk • contribs) 16:13, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I made a few more edits to the article and tagged a few statements that needed citations. I'm also leaning towards not listing most of the other notable people at some of those events, as they seem promotional without sourced discussion of their significance to Thomas.—Bagumba (talk) 17:07, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I will add the necessary citations to those two sentences. However, I'm not sure I understand why those would be promotional, I just took the information given as the event was described in the article in Slam Magazine. Could you explain further? Thanks! --Blog OS — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blogos (talk • contribs) 19:53, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
 * When I tagged it, the tone of the section seemed to be written like a press release for Thomas to raise his stature. Adding the sources help so there is no dispute of the facts. I think it is mostly cleaned up, and will reassess after reading the references.—Bagumba (talk) 20:05, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, this is helpful as I learn to add good research to Wikipedia pages. I see what you mean, one of the sentences was from an opinion website rather than a reputable website so I removed it. All of the other sentences seem to be supported by neutral news sources so I dont think it is problematic as it was before. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blogos (talk • contribs) 20:41, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I made a few more tweaks, but my concerns are mostly addressed. I didnt see "Ballin for Peace Tournament" in any of the sources, but verified it myself on Google. Verifiability is an important concept in Wikipedia.  Without it, it's hard sometimes for readers to know if an article is legitimate and the projects credibility is undermined when there is the perception of original research.  Keep up the work and happy editing.—Bagumba (talk) 21:01, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Sam Holbrook
If you're still around, could you please semi-protect the above page due to all the vandalism? AutomaticStrikeout 00:19, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Done.—Bagumba (talk) 00:32, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. AutomaticStrikeout 00:33, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * BTW, you might want to look at my RFA Support #7 comment about the use of "vandalism" :-)—Bagumba (talk) 00:37, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I get your point. There was plenty of vandalism going on there. AutomaticStrikeout 00:38, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I know what you mean. However, some might consider them opinionated but good faith edits, i.e. WP:OR ... maybe its only random ones I glanced at before protecting.  Anyways, it's nothing more than unsolicited advice on diplomacy that could come in handy one day.—Bagumba (talk) 00:43, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, I appreciate it. Just as a heads up, this won't be the first instance of umpire-related vandalism. It's the posteason and emotions are running high, so this will almost certainly happen again. Also, you might want to keep an eye on some other articles, perhaps including Infield fly rule. If they can't directly attack Holbrook's page, they just might go elsewhere. AutomaticStrikeout 00:46, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Will do, but I'm going to be out of the loop for the coming two weeks.—Bagumba (talk) 00:48, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, ok. Have fun! AutomaticStrikeout 00:49, 6 October 2012 (UTC)