User talk:Sbaio/Archive 2019

SPI still open
Hello Sabbatino. See Sockpuppet investigations/Eimukas22. You commented there. It looks like nobody has closed it yet and no clerk has gone into it any further. Your last comment was on 8 December. It's my guess that nothing will happen unless someone (perhaps you?) Has the time to look at a bunch of diffs to see if they are disruptive. Certainly there is some resemblance in interests between the account you name and Eimukas22. But are the new edits actually bad edits? There was some documentation of bad behavior in the original February 2017 complaint, such as posting unsourced data and rounding data values unnecessarily. If you think you won't have time to work on this any more, let me know and I can propose closing the repeort with no action. The other problem is the lack of recently-active registered accounts (from the last 3 months) to compare against with the CU tool. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 18:18, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reaching out. I saw that in December 2018 and do not really know what to do at this point, because I have not edited since 24 December 2018 due to some business in real life, and I am not sure when I will be able to get back to editing. – Sabbatino (talk) 08:31, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Edgaras Jankauskas
Since you had only four edits after my message, i thought maybe it was stuff you had to take care of with urgence and then Christmas/New Year's Eve came and along with it a well-earned "wikirest". However, i see that now you are again editing at "full blast" (so to speak), so again i ask politely: why do you think i don't deserve the slightest reply regarding this issue, please?

Attentively --Quite A Character (talk) 23:48, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * For your information, I only edited yesterday, because I am in fact busy and found some free time to make edits. In addition, your behaviour looks like harassment since you keep writing here even after I archived all the content from 2018. The Soviet republics are always listed for people born in the Soviet Union, because all the Soviet republics had their own governments and could do whatever they wanted, while people in Moscow just maintained the order. I cannot write more at this time, because I have other things to do. — Sabbatino (talk) 09:00, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Apologies if you think I am harassing you, not my intention the slightest. I had/have no clue where to write but here if the content had been archived (if I wrote in the space of my previous message, I feared you would not be aware of it).

Case closed as far as I am concerned, I will not bother you anymore regarding the issue nor will I re-revert to my preferred version. Thanks. --Quite A Character (talk) 09:27, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Detroit Red Wings
I apologize. I just saw that most of the other NHL teams' pages had their state as well as the city, so I thought I could help. I will leave it alone now. Thank you for notifying me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikury2004 (talk • contribs) 16:10, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Dan Marino
Including NFL records in tables is not a new thing. It's much easier to see stat records highlighted in a table than read through an exhaustive list. Obviously, this is subjective and we shouldn't go overboard on the tables, but I think it improves the readability of the page and is not that obstructive. Also, his "record" section is a mess and needs work.

I think we should stop putting season records in stat tables as 1. they make the stat tables look terrible on mobile (it bloats the rows, and makes the table appear larger than it should be), and 2. they aren't strictly QB or any other positions stats, they're team stats. Also I wouldn't bother putting the tie column in there if they don't have any ties (like Marino). I'm also not a fan of the "sort" tables, as on desktop it makes the tables look huge and for whatever reason, it always sorts the lowest stat first, which isn't very useful, and you have to press it twice to get the highs. Besides, by bolding career highs, readers already know what the "best" season is.

Anyway, I'm not going to edit his page again until we reach a consensus. I'd like to avoid edit warring.

Thanks,

Bigmoe797 (talk) 22:00, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Including too many statistics is not good and his list of records is not that exhaustive. The season record is included, because the current statistics format uses the "NFL QB stats start" template, which was created specifically for quarterbacks. If you want to reach some kind of consensus then it would be better if you started a discussion at WT:NFL since that is where NFL-related discussions take place. – Sabbatino (talk) 22:32, 10 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I don't think having a one-size-fits-all approach to stats sections is necessarily the right answer. Obviously, the essential stats like pass yards and TDs always go, but I think we should include stats when they are noteworthy or exceptional but not when they are unremarkable. For example, I would imagine QBs like Wilson, Roethlisbergher or Rodgers have pretty bad sack rates, so I wouldn't bother noting them. Also if there are "too many stats" in the table, I would first get rid of Marino's rushing stats, because no one cares about those—even if it's not part of the QB template. This doesn't have to be so bureaucratic. Bigmoe797 (talk) 00:39, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Bidiectionality on Black Sabbath/Heaven & Hell
Hey there. Just to clarify on the inclusion of navboxes on the Black Sabbath/Heaven & Hell articles. Per WP:Bidirectional, if any article is included in a navbox, then the navbox needs to be included on that article. Therefore, the Heaven & Hell navbox belongs on those various pages which it includes. Just wanted to clarify and avoid an edit war. Happy editing! — DLManiac (talk) 23:00, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for explaining it, because it was not clear why you added those templates. It would be good if next time you wrote something in your edit summary or pointed to some policy (WP:Bidirectional in this instance). – Sabbatino (talk) 19:47, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hashtag Thumbs Up Emoji ;) DLManiac (talk) 02:33, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

NBA expansion
NBA's plans for expanding a team in Mexico was in the 90s time-period. Since then, Mexico has formed their own top-tier league which has FIBA Americas recognition. In other words, the mentioning of the new Mexico-based league was alluding to how things has shifted since that initial 90s proposal.

Nonetheless, I have refrained from reinstating that statement. But I have removed your WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH and mentioning of other sports' leagues and Europe which are far more unrelated and offtopic than my own addition. DA1 (talk) 16:22, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The creation of a top tier league in Mexico is unrelated to the NBA. In addition, the original research statement was added by someone else so stop accusing me of adding it. All I did was reverting to the last stable version. – Sabbatino (talk) 16:25, 24 January 2019 (UTC)


 * When someone reinstates a previous statement, as opposed to merely removing mine, that implies an endorsement of whatever it is that he/she chose to reinstate and that is how it's recorded on the page's history. Nonetheless I accept that it was an oversight rather than an active endorsement on your part now that you've clarified.


 * Also reading back on the article, it seems it doesn't even state that they've wanted to start an NBA franchise in the 90s but rather that they've held games overseas since the 90s. The wording seems to be WP:DUEWEIGHT, because I don't see any reference to the NBA stating they are considering Mexico City for expansion except for their second-tier G League. Unless there is some other references speculating on Mexico City by a primary source, the wording for the section may need to be changed. DA1 (talk) 16:38, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

My apologies
I know the privacy policy, but what I was referring to was the mere mention of her having children in her info box, which was the intent of the reversion. I missed the date removals which yes, were completely in line--Fradio71 (talk) 16:42, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
 * No worries. – Sabbatino (talk) 13:32, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Pistons logo
Hi, I'm contacting you because you recently reverted my edit on Detroit Pistons, which I had to restore in my belief that a reversion doesn't apply here for the following reasons:

1) You stated: "we don't use such formatting"; well, I must tell you that I used the current format of Template:Infobox basketball club (you can take a look).

But the most important thing, when you reverted the edit focusing on an infobox template, also reverted the replacement of the Pistons logo that I had previously uploaded to Commons as a PD-textlogo image (in fact, it's exactly the same logo transferred).

2) According to NFCC, "Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created...."

If you want to discuss this issue with me, you're welcome but please don't hurry to revert before checking what the edit consisted of. Thanks,

Fma12 (talk) 12:12, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
 * There is no mention about the usage of the Template:Start date and age in the Template:Infobox basketball club. In addition, the NBA pages follow a different convention than other basketball pages. The NBA pages also used to have a different infobox than other leagues until their merger so there is nothing wrong in keeping the old parameters there, because they function through a redirect. As for the logo, I mistakenly thought that you replaced it with a png file format, which is obsolete if a svg version exists. However, I do not understand why you could not keep the same name for the file and name it strangely. Consider moving it to a correct and more meaningful name. – Sabbatino (talk) 17:01, 3 February 2019 (UTC)


 * I didn't have any good experiences moving files to Commons with the same name. That's the reason because I decided to upload files with a slight change of name to avoid superpositions with the "old" files. In the case of the Pistons logo in particular, I didn't name it "strangely" so the current logo was launched in 2017 (sources: 1, 2. I usually include the year of release within logos names (in case I know that information, of course). - 23:04, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Media information in NBA team templates.
Hello Sabbatino (talk), I was wondering as to why you removed the media information from National Basketball Association (NBA) team templates? Please explain. Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 03:36, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
 * It was done per this discussion back in the autumn of 2018. Please read the discussion and if you have any questions then ask. – Sabbatino (talk) 19:54, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Election result templates
Hello Sabbatino. Quite aside from our disagreement about coding, just an FYI that templates shouldn't be created for election results tables – not only are they unnecessary (they're usually only transcluded once, but even if they are required to be transcluded elsewhere, this can be done using the #section-h function (see an example here), but they're also prone to vandalism as few people have them on their watchlist compared to articles (and you'd be surprised how many IPs seemingly take great pleasure in randomly changing numbers in results tables).

There is currently a drive to delete these templates, and all but one of the ones you just created were actually only just deleted at TfD. As such, I've put them up for deletion again. Cheers, Number   5  7  15:42, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I was not aware of any TfDs for such templates. But tell me one thing – why the Template:2009 Lithuanian presidential election is not nominated for deletion? I see that it has two transclusions, but there is a tag at Politics of Lithuania (one of transclusions), which says that section is outdated. That means that the 2014 template should be put in that section and the 2009 template should be nominated for deletion if I understand it correctly. – Sabbatino (talk) 15:50, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
 * And speaking about vandalism (IP or user), I have all the pages (and their talk pages), templates, categories on my watchlist and I keep order in all of them. – Sabbatino (talk) 15:52, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't know – perhaps it was just missed when the nominations were being done. Ironically I was in the middle of TfDing it when you wrote this message. I have just updated Politics of Lithuania using the trick mentioned above, so no templates required.
 * I appreciate that you might have them on your watchlist, but if you stop editing, then no-one else is likely to, plus there's the chance you will miss edits being made. Cheers, Number   5  7  15:57, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Clay Matthews III
From Cite web: publisher: Name of publisher; may be wikilinked if relevant. The publisher is the company that publishes the work being cited. Green Bay Packers, Inc. is the non-profit company that publishers Green Bay Packers content. Also, not sure why you feel the need to make a bunch of changes to the Cite web template that don't change its appearance. I.e. changing  to , etc.  « Gonzo fan2007   (talk)  @ 20:21, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note that at the bottom of packers.com, it says COPYRIGHT © GREEN BAY PACKERS, INC. Also, I fixed the typo you are referencing. « Gonzo fan2007   (talk)  @ 20:24, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * And then it clearly says that "Corporate designations such as "Ltd", "Inc.", or "GmbH" are not usually included. Not normally used for periodicals. Omit where the publisher's name is substantially the same as the name of the work (for example, The New York Times Co. publishes The New York Times newspaper, so there is no reason to name the publisher)." In addition, I am not changing the format of the "Cite web" template, because I prefer it. It gets changed, because that is how the "cite web" template is formatted in the "Cite" section at the top of the editing window. In addition, by the looks of it, you act like you own the page and revert instantly when you do not like something, which is not how it should be. – Sabbatino (talk) 20:28, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Regardless, when you make an edit using any type of software assistance, you own those changes. Your edit just came across as pointless, mostly rearranging fields in a cite template and making an edit that had no substantial change to how the text is viewed. I'm sure you can understand that is how it appeared.
 * In my opinion, Green Bay Packers, Inc. is a unique enough case that the "Inc." is warranted in the Cite web template, since it is the only team with this type of ownership structure. You are welcome to disagree obviously, and if you want to change it back, go for it. I'll be done editing it for now. « Gonzo fan2007   (talk)  @ 20:55, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Nobody owns anything on Wikipedia. You are not a new editor so you should now that. In addition, I am not making edits "using any type of software" since the tools are right here in the editing window (you do not have to download anything to have them) and they are accessible to any editor. Moving on to the Packers' ownership structure. Is it unique? Yes, but that does not mean that it should go against documentations, policies, guidelines, etc. – Sabbatino (talk) 21:22, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Please stop lecturing me about WP:OWN. You're being borderline condescending. I have disengaged. If you want to make your edit, go for it. I'm not going to edit war over it. « Gonzo fan2007   (talk)  @ 21:26, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I am not lecturing you about anything. If you are so annoyed about my statements then do not reply. It is simple as that. – Sabbatino (talk) 21:46, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Giannis Antetokounmpo
Hey. Just wanted to point out that the Nigerian note at Giannis Antetokounmpo has been moved and swapped and changed so many times that I dare say it will happen again. It is a contentious topic, with many feeling having Nigerian in the lead is essential. I agree with not having it there. DaHuzyBru (talk) 06:32, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I am aware of that, but thanks for pointing that out. It would make sense listing him as "Nigerian-Greek basketball player", but I doubt there are any sources about him having the Nigerian citizenship. – Sabbatino (talk) 07:49, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Just so you know...
I usually give myself one revert if I object to the edit summary given for why I was reverted, and usually by the time I get reverted again, if at all, I understand why and can respect it. If I don't, then I usually start discussion.

Your edit summary the second time around on 2018-19 NHL season was perfectly reasonable, and I understand now.  danny music editor  oops 18:25, 19 March 2019 (UTC)


 * On the other hand, your revert of my edit to the Lightning I object to. How is that an unacceptable OR violation? What else could "Bolts" possibly reference here? That is so easy to determine (and not of a subjective nature) that I don't think it really requires a source.  danny music editor  oops 18:27, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Regarding the Lightning's name and nickname. While I initially thought about writing something that it could have a different meaning, but a quick search on Google gave the answer quickly. Yes, it refers to what you meant and I added a source to the page. However, I feel that the "nicknamed" formation better applies to people as can be seen on Wayne Gretzky's page "Nicknamed "The Great One", he has been called "the greatest hockey player ever" by many sportswriters, players, and the league itself.", while for teams it is better to use the "The team is often referred to as" formation, which looks more formal. In addition, looking at FA and/or GA pages helps determining on what should be used. – Sabbatino (talk) 19:33, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Jason Kidd
That was quick, man! Thanks for the source. :) – Red Sox Fan274 (talk ~contribs) 12:36, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Regarding /wiki/Neringa_Venckienė
Good day,

I saw that you left a tag on a page I created about Neringa Venckiene.

I saw you wrote that it's "written by the subject or someone connected to the subject". I'm not connected to the case but I have been following it since it started. And I don't see how she could be the author, since she's in prison.

Regarding the neutrality, what do you think should be changed? Could you give me a few suggestions and I'll try to fix it the best I can. I tried to show information from both sides (and I linked sources).

Thanks for the help — Preceding unsigned comment added by PepsiwinsCoke (talk • contribs) 23:31, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I did not state that you were connected to the subject. That tag is placed when there are concerns that it might be true, but nowhere did I write that it was true. In addition, are you connected to ? I am asking, because it is strange that other made the majority of its edits at Venckienė's page. The "Pedophilia case" and "Political persecution" sections look like a timeline of events and they might lack neutrality. The images added to the page are not your "own work" as you try to claim and therefore, they are subject to WP:COPYVIO. Also, please be sure to read MOS:WTW and WP:MOS in general before making any further edits. I am not going to elaborate on Venckienė's case, because I am pretty sure that our opinions will differ. – Sabbatino (talk) 08:09, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

2019 New England Patriots season
Regular season

Is suppose to Be NBC Sunday Night Football not NFL on NBC Sunday Night Football the NFL on NBC Should be on the Left not on these right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RuthSmith95 (talk • contribs) 14:01, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Do you even know the basics of grammar? Because it is hard to understand almost every edit made by you. In addition, the correct name of the event is "Sunday Night Football", which I fixed. – Sabbatino (talk) 22:26, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

NHL userboxes
I missed the discussion where consensus was reached to have only two NHL team colors in userboxes...could you link me to it, please?
 * What discussion? An editor does not need to discuss it to make a change as long as it is consistent. The WP:NHL takes a minimal approach regarding colors, navboxes and other things, so I decided to make it consistent with the WikiProject's stance/preference by leaving the two main colors of the teams' in the userboxes. The two main colors can be seen at the top of the teams' infoboxes, navboxes, game logs, etc. In addition, I know that you created the majority of the userboxes, but that does not make them your "own". – Sabbatino (talk) 18:40, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

April 2019
Icewhiz (talk) 19:45, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Just want to know if this notice is tied to my contributions at Jonas Noreika? I thought this message was posted on many editors' talk page, but after looking at your contributions, I see that I am the only editor who received this. Care to explain the reason for posting this notice? – Sabbatino (talk) 19:57, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I have alerted many editors to the EE DS regime - the notice is merely informative.Icewhiz (talk) 20:00, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I understand that, but having a notice minutes after my edit/edits is rather strange. – Sabbatino (talk) 20:10, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Magic Johnson's abrupt resignation
Hello, I have noticed you have twice sanitized the the departure of Magic Johnson from his executive role at the Lakers.

What he was did was absolutely out of the ordinary and should be included in the description of his departure. All three references speak on the unusual circumstances of his resignation.

Is there a reason to not mention it?
 * Do not WP:ACCUSE me of what I was not part of. While the first time I did the change, the second time it was a completely different user. In addition, "abruptly" is WP:EDITORIAL and has no place here since this is not a personal blog and journalists can write whatever they want, but that does not mean that it should be here. – Sabbatino (talk) 05:30, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Look, I didn't accuse you. I asked you.

Moreover, it is not editorial. When a person unexpectedly leaves their job, and it is a public occasion it is abrupt. That is objective fact. And it belongs.

Thank you though for your thoughts. SJCreecy (talk) 06:23, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Stanley Cup playoff series leader
Hi Sabbatino, I'm not quite sure how the "series leader" should be worded in the game log sections in the articles of the teams that are currently playing in the Stanley Cup playoffs. Should it be worded, "St. Louis leads series 1–0", or "Blues lead series 1–0"? I got confused when I saw how it was worded on the Islanders article. Thank you for clarification. Yowashi (talk) 23:30, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * It is definitely inconsistent as different formations are used for all the teams. In addition, to the formations mentioned by yourself, it can also be "Blues lead 1–0" based on the older seasons. I just changed to what was used in the last Islanders' playoff season. You could start a discussion at WT:NHL about it, but I doubt anyone will have any interest in it. All three formations (two listed by you, and one listed by me) seem correct, but we should use just one of the three to make it easier for everyone. After looking through the pages of all qualified teams, I believe that "St. Louis leads 1–0" formation would be the best option for us to be consistent. – Sabbatino (talk) 06:04, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Gregg Popovich Coaching Tree
Hello Sabbatino (talk), I was wondering as to why you removed the coaching tree section that I added to Gregg Popovich's page? Did I do something incorrectly? Please explain. Thanks! (Hinckleycoldstorage (talk) 07:34, 26 April 2019 (UTC))
 * We do not add "coaching trees" per consensus at WP:NBA. – Sabbatino (talk) 08:06, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Ah that makes total sense then! I wasn't aware of WP:NBA, so apologies for violating that rule. If I may ask, is there a reason for not adding coaching trees for NBA coaches? Or a discussion about it somewhere? I personally feel it's quite interesting, especially considering the recent trend in hiring away assistants from successful teams, but also understand if this has already been discussed somewhere/sometime else. Either way, thanks for the reply and explanation! (Hinckleycoldstorage (talk) 21:13, 26 April 2019 (UTC))
 * I will have to look into it since I remember that broader discussions took place but cannot remember where (the discussion at WT:NBA cannot really be called as such). If I remember correctly, the reason for not adding the "coaching trees" is because such list are WP:OR at best. While we can find some mentions about Popovich's coaching tree but the same cannot be said about some other coaches so it was decided that it is best to keep them out for all coaches. – Sabbatino (talk) 17:37, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Got it. I appreciate the reply and the info! For what it's worth, I used basketballreference for the coaching tree I made for Pop's page, citing only coaches that had served on his staff. Not sure that helps the cause either way, but figured I'd mention it since I can't remember if I left a source citation anywhere (I modeled the format off of the coaching tree sections of some NFL coaches, which didn't use sourcing, so it's possible that I didn't leave any citations anywhere). Anyways, thanks again for the replies and the info! Cheers! (Hinckleycoldstorage (talk) 20:54, 1 May 2019 (UTC))

Lakers season
So what about on what happened during the season? LeBron, Ball, and Ingram injuries? The good start in the beginning of the season till after Christmas? Lakers and Luke Walton parted ways. And Magic stepped down. It's on ESPN breaking news etc. Really the only thing that's not official is the head coach signing. Sports Fan 1997 (talk) 23:36, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Frank Vogel just got officialed, it's all set Sports Fan 1997 (talk) 01:03, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
 * You need to source your additions. After all this time you did not learn to do that, which just show that you are not willing to do it and that you are in the wrong place per WP:NOTHERE. In addition, stop using talk pages as WP:NOTFORUMs as you have been doing for a very long time. – Sabbatino (talk) 04:17, 14 May 2019 (UTC)


 * @Sabbatino you can literally see it on tv and articles if you watch sports, ESPN just alerted it last night what else does it need to proof? Get real. Sports Fan 1997 (talk) 11:21, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
 * First of all, since you are being WP:RUDE, I suggest you read WP:HTBC before continuing to discuss anything with anyone. Secondly, since there is a WP:V policy (one of the most important policies on Wikipedia) it means that every transaction should and must be sourced. Thirdly, just because something is shown on TV or written in some website, that does not mean that it is official unless the team announces it so I advise you to read WP:SPORTSTRANS, which clearly says that a transaction is complete when the team announces it. In addition, injuries, incidents and other related things must also be sourced per Wikipedia's policies. I have already mentioned both Walton and Vogel where needed, but it looks like you did not even look at it and just came back here to show your hostility. – Sabbatino (talk) 16:16, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

@Sabbatino I want to explain on how the injuries happened, I had it on here when LBJ, Ball, and Ingram were injured. It got erased. Sports Fan 1997 (talk) 21:52, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
 * https://www.si.com/nba/2019/03/09/lonzo-ball-shut-down-remainder-season-ankle-injury-lakers
 * https://www.si.com/nba/2019/01/20/lonzo-ball-lakers-point-guard-ankle-sprain-out-nba
 * https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2823689-lakers-news-brandon-ingram-out-for-season-shoulder-injury-caused-by-blood-clot
 * https://hoopshype.com/storyline/brandon-ingram-injury/
 * https://www.si.com/nba/2019/03/09/brandon-ingram-lakers-injury-update-out-season-dvt-arm
 * https://www.sbnation.com/2018/12/25/18155932/lebron-james-injury-update-groin
 * https://www.nba.com/article/2018/12/25/lebron-james-locker-room-possible-groin-injury
 * https://www.si.com/nba/2018/12/25/lebron-james-groin-injury-lakers-warriors-christmas-day-nba
 * Out of these source only SI and NBA are considered reliable. SB Nation and Bleacher Report are questionable, while Hoops Hype is just a rumor mill and is not reliable in any case. Nevertheless, every mention about injury or any other information related to the subject needs to have a reference next to it. – Sabbatino (talk) 09:15, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

NBA and NFL
Please stop deleting my edits. I would not consider them trivial. I also don't appreciate you saying that they are disruptive. I got the idea from the World Series Champions page. I would appreciate it if you would talk to me first before deleting my edits. Thank you.
 * Per WP:BRD it is you who should have started a discussion after the first reversion of your content. It is better to start discussion at WT:NBA and WT:NFL so that other members of the projects would give their opinion on the matter. – Sabbatino (talk) 17:30, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
 * @Sabbatino you were the one who first reverted my edit. I would appreciate it if you would not put the burden on me.
 * Please read the policy before restoring the content. It is up to you to start a discussion. – Sabbatino (talk) 17:33, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
 * since you clearly know more about this I would appreciate it if you started the discussion.

2019 logo
I sought a third opinion on the WNBA logo. Notifying you per their instructions. -SusanLesch (talk) 17:16, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Grand Duchy of Lithuania
Hello, you just reverted my edit on GDL page. GDL did not have separate governement, but just separate offices. Marcelus (talk) 19:26, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * There is a source about separate governments and it is up to you to find a source that states otherwise. – Sabbatino (talk) 21:26, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Actual quote from the cited source: "Despite uniﬁcation, the Union of Lublin prevented the extinction of Lithuanian political identity through retention of separate ministries, armies, treasuries, and legal codes as well as the control of royal estates in Lithuania by the magnate elite. The result was the maintenance of a strong feeling of Lithuanian identity as a political nation among nobles who were, paradoxically, increasingly Polish in speech and culture. Lithuanians were determined to maintain their autonomy, no matter how much they polonized, and full separation remained a possibility", so author used just better wording, "ministries" sounds better than "offices", but certainly does not mean "government". Marcelus (talk) 22:38, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I changed the statement at the page per this talk page's clarification. – Sabbatino (talk) 07:26, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Kenny Anderson (basketball)
hello, I spoke with Kenny and he was ok with it because it was a big deal to him. He is ok with people knowing about the positive free showcase he started. We had young men coming from several different States and Canada competing for a opportunity to continue education and play basketball. A few young men are going to be getting scholarship money.
 * "Talking to Kenny" does not mean that content can or cannot be added to Wikipedia. You need to provide sources for your claims per WP:V. – Sabbatino (talk) 12:51, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Term: "The Silver and Black"
Raiders.com under their history. They are called "The Silver and Black". I did originally, as I always do leave a reference and source. I notice others edit or create on wikipedia.org, and aren't verifying information rendered. I can assure you as I am a Raiders fan for decades, that the information I give is true.

Thank you for your time and efforts Mr Sabbatino in this matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Technicalitycatcher (talk • contribs) 19:19, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Please show where are they called "The Silver and Black". I am looking at the "History" section of the Raiders' website at this very moment and "Silver and Black" has more mentions than "The Silver and Black". In addition, "being a fan for decades" does not verify your claim. A person can be a fan for many years and still not know certain things. – Sabbatino (talk) 19:27, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Illawarra Hawks colors
Hello. Could you please add black to the Illawarra Hawks team colors at Module:Sports color/basketball, because it is one of their main colors (on both jerseys and logo). Example:


 * ["Wollongong Hawks"] = {"EC2227", "FFFFFF", "000000", "FFFFFF"},
 * ["Illawarra Hawks"] = "Wollongong Hawks",

I am requesting because you tweaked their colors earlier. Thank you. Sportzeditz (talk) 20:17, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅. – Sabbatino (talk) 18:41, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Can you please also add the team colors for the South East Melbourne Phoenix (Australia)? Here they are, as listed on the team article:
 * ["South East Melbourne Phoenix"] = {"332F2C", "FFFFFF", "B1EE11", "FFFFFF"},
 * Sportzeditz (talk) 20:08, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Pinging in case you missed the above request. Thank you. Sportzeditz (talk) 03:43, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Ryan O'Reilly
Hello Sabbatino, Ryan O'Reilly is from Seaforth, Ontario, not Varna. On Sportsnet during the game 5 broadcast of the Stanley Cup Finals, there was a small interview video where they asked him for his hometown and his favourite hockey player. He then responded with Seaforth, Ontario and Wayne Gretzky. Also, he played both minor hockey in Seaforth and went to school in Seaforth. He has also announced that he will be taking the cup home to Seaforth, NOT Varna. With all of this proof, I can conclude that he is from Seaforth. I realize that there have been some articles saying he is from Varna, but the man himself said Seaforth so I will take his word. PS I am actually from Varna, so trust me I would say Varna if it were true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schwarziestars (talk • contribs) 13:32, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
 * You did not show any proof. Therefore, your cbanges have again been reverted. You must back up your claims with written sources per WP:V. – Sabbatino (talk) 03:45, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

2019-20 Washington Capitals season
PM800, has shown 'no interest' in discussing anything with me. Either he doesn't understand that NHL teams appoint 'at least' 3 players with letters or he's just being a 'blank'. I've noted that he created the article & so this 'might' be a case of WP:OWN. -- GoodDay (talk) 16:10, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
 * After further inspection it looks like you might be right about WP:OWN. – Sabbatino (talk) 16:19, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Howdy Sabbatino. I don't know if you're an administrator or not. But, PM800 may need a 'block', to get him off my back. GoodDay (talk) 18:48, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I am not an administrator, but I hate it when some nonsense pollutes my watchlist. – Sabbatino (talk) 19:03, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I've reported him to WP:AN. If only he'd communicate with me or anybody else. GoodDay (talk) 19:04, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Lightning roster
is now annoying me at Template:Tampa Bay Lightning roster, with no attempts to contact or communicate with me. This could be leading into WP:STALK territory. He's not even using edit-summaries. GoodDay (talk) 15:27, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I wrote at user's talk. However, since this is between you two, I recommend you to report him at WP:AN3. – Sabbatino (talk) 16:22, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
 * The free agency period will begin in about 24 hrs, at which point there'll be several changes across all 31 rosters. So, I'll let this one go. GoodDay (talk) 16:24, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Your choice. However, the fact that the user is most likely not aware of his wrongdoings will not solve the problem and the edit warring will just continue. – Sabbatino (talk) 16:26, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Indeed. I hope he mends his ways, though. There's few editors out there, who are as patient as I. GoodDay (talk) 17:48, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

New KK Crvena zvezda logo
Hi, Sabbatino. You had updated File:KK Crvena zvezda logo.svg. As of June 2019, KK Crvena zvezda has a new logo. There are two gold stars above the shield. Would you be able to update it? Thanks. --IndexAccount (talk) 16:19, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I cannot complete your request, because I am busy with work-related things and cannot make regular edits. – Sabbatino (talk) 19:05, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Why aren't NFL conference championships considered an highlight or award.....
Winning the NFL's NFC/AFC conference championship has always been considered an achievement. They get rings. They are conference champions, so it is definitely a highlight and the team wins a trophy and a trip to the Super Bowl. It makes no sense at all that a player's wiki page doesn't display the accomplishment, especially since it is the NFL. There is nothing "too trivial." about winning a conference title and making the Super Bowl. How about you explain to me how Jim Kelly can get recognized for his conference titles (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Kelly), but not Cam Newton? If Newton had a SB title, I can understand not recognizing it since the SB would cover it. However, he didn't win it that year, so it should be displayed on his page.
 * The AFC/NFC championships are not listed in the infobox, because of the WP:NFLINFOBOXNOT guideline. I have also removed the conference titles from Kelly's infobox as it was inserted by an edit-warring editor. If you have more questions then please ask them at WT:NFL since people from there made this guideline. – Sabbatino (talk) 04:39, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

WNBA 50–40–90
I just re-added Elena Delle Donne's joining the 50–40–90 club to that page. The Associated Press (see the byline) specifically noted that EDD met all the criteria, and ESPN (which largely rewrote the AP story) explicitly used the phrase "first in WNBA to join 50-40-90 club" in its headline. IMHO, I think that citations by national media outlets should qualify for adding EDD. — Dale Arnett (talk) 08:11, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I previously removed it, because there were no sources. Thanks for adding the sources (ESPN and WNBA). However, I still think that this addition should be discussed at WT:NBA. I already wrote my concerns in the edit summary when making the revert so I am not going to repeat it here. I started a discussion at WT:NBA so please give your opinion there. But I also must inform you that I might not reply instantly, because I have been busy with other things for the past three months so I cannot edit Wikipedia daily as I used to. – Sabbatino (talk) 12:00, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

reverts
regarding your reverts to various NFL teams with your explanation "unexplained changes": it's actually explained quite well if you read the edit summary. They were general formatting fixes (as stated) - if you had questions, your could have come to my talk and asked. You could have actually looked at what the changes were, then checked the WP:MOS; where you would have seen that the changes made were the preferred formatting of wikipedia articles. You could have clicked on the links provided in the edit summary (they are there so you CAN see the WHY of something being changed. You would have seen that the script is there to use in general formatting fixes of common mistakes as specified in the MOS.  You should be aware that these types of scripts are vetted quite thoroughly by the programmers and generally have community consensus. If you feel there is an error of some sort in the script, you can even file a  bug report to have it investigated.  This particular script has been in general use since 2011, so it's likely that it is acceptable, don't you think?.  If there was something specific in the article that had consensus I'm fine with reverting that part  - (link please). If there is something in the NFL project that says to ignore MOS formatting - I'll even accept that, (link please) General note: local consensus does NOT trump global consensus - but I won't argue that if the project feels strongly about something.

I'm not going to file an WP:ANI report, and in fact I'm not even going to revert your edits. (though hopefully you will fix them yourself). But try to be a bit more prudent in your reverts in the future please. — Ched (talk) 12:20, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Blocking me for reverting you would be admininstrator rights' abuse (of course you removed it, because you should know better not to write that). Moving on to the matter... Using scripts is helpful, but not always. For example, why did you change the date formats on the New York Jets' page? The American pages use the "July 1, 2019" format, but you changed it to "1 July 2019" for some reason. Another thing, why did you remove the color boxes from those NFL teams? We always list them (this also applies to other sports' teams), but you again decided to remove them completely. In addition, in some instances you changed the — to – for no obvious reason when the tables use —. Regarding the overlinking, through years the were some other editors who removed a link to a city, for example, Los Angeles. We always link it on the first mention and then we look at it carefully, because if it helps the reader then we repeat the link somewhere else in the same page. Telling me to fix the reverts is bad faith, because as an administrator, you should know about the WP:BRD policy, which quite clearly indicates that it is your duty to discuss the proposed changes if you get reverted and not the opposite like you are implying. I recommend you to settle down, because you should know that hostile attitude will not help anyone. I will also not reinstate the proposed changes at this moment, because I am no longer editing regularly like I used to due to my business obligations as I have very little time to do other things (editing here is included), but I will look into it when I can.– Sabbatino (talk) 13:16, 26 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Blocking for disruptive editing is never considered "admininstrator [sic] rights' abuse" - still with such WP:AGF comments as "settle down" and "hostile atittude [sic]", it doesn't appear that continued discussion would be productive. I'll leave you to your business obligations. — Ched (talk) 16:44, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I see that you forgot what disruptive editing is so you should read it again. Additionally, you have no right to belittle/insult me for no reason as you did with your last remarque. It just shows that it might have been a mistake to give you administrator rights if you are breaking the policies/guidelines yourself. Finally, not answering my questions indicates that you never intended to discuss anything here and just came to show your frustration. – Sabbatino (talk) 06:33, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

1994-95 Seattle SuperSonics season
Hey, he's at it again. .-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 15:16, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Hey, why do you keep changing the page? Wikiacontribbutor (talk) 01:44, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
 * There is a format, which should be followed and the color codes used in the template are taken from the team's website. In addition, you do not own the page so everyone can edit it. – Sabbatino (talk) 06:48, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Heya
Heya Sabbatino. Apologies if I came back at you a little strong in the WP Ice Hockey talk page. I obviously have strong feelings on the subject of plagiarism so the comment struck a nerve with me. I know we started with a disagreement about the "first goals of the season" thing and then the discussion escalated, but you and seem like fine Wikipedians, so hopefully we can all put it behind us. Cheers. — Hunter Kahn 00:41, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
 * No problem. I should have phrased my observations better. I did not meant to accuse you, but looks like you thought otherwise. Just for the record, since English is not my native language I sometimes do not think before writing certain statements (I mean, I think about them in my native language and that can get confusing). – Sabbatino (talk) 12:02, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Poland-Lithuania: Representation in Fiction
I disagree that this addition is trivial. The remembrance of things past is of an import, especially in present-day central Europe of the politics of remembrance. The cited authors aspire to show the multicultural and multiethnic character of Poland-Lithuania, instead of claiming it for this or that modern nation-state. You reverted my reverting without discussion. I added the above explanation to my original reverting. Hyrdlak (talk) 20:12, 16 October 2019 (UTC)Hyrdlak
 * Please read WP:BRD, because it is clear that you are unfamiliar with that policy. When you get reverted, you must start a discussion on article's talk page, which is Talk:Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. In addition, when you restored the content, I had the right to revert it again, because I restored the last stable version, which was before your additions. Consider taking the matter to the article's talk page since other editors will be able to see it and give their input. – Sabbatino (talk) 09:52, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 * OK, will do. Hyrdlak (talk) 15:04, 17 October 2019 (UTC)Hyrdlak

Userboxes
If you're not an admin, you have no valid authority of which to warn me. No, your edits have nothing to do with WP policy, but personal taste. If it was about policy, you would edit them all to be in compliance. Instead, you only edit userboxes that interest you. This is wrong. No, I will revert the userboxes back to the format that actually shows the team's branding, not your opinion that is unrelated to sports fandom. It's you is edit warring, as the format for the userboxes was set before you ever got involved with them. Either you re-edit ALL the userboxes or you do none of them.

If you were consistent, you would edit ALL the sports teams userboxes. It's clear you hover on the ones you have an interest in, which is very few of them compared to the number which exist. No, you're only using your personal interpretation of these policies to bully others.

James Miko (talk) 23:18, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Since it is clear that you are not going to comply with policies/guidelines, I am going to report you later today. Take care. – Sabbatino (talk) 05:17, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

I wasn't worried about you reporting me. As I said, if it was about a policy, you would change ALL the userboxes, not just the ones you're interested in. "It hurts my eyes" is a personal complaint, not a policy consideration. James Miko (talk) 21:35, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * You clearly do not understand what MOS:ACCESS (specifically MOS:COLOR) and MOS:NAVBOXCOLOR policies mean. Even WP:UBCR mentions the same policies that I mentioned in the prior sentence. In addition, a user does not have to be an administrator to issue warnings so you should re-read every policy/guideline yourself before accusing other editors of being disruptive. I also do not have to edit every other userbox that exists in Wikipedia (nor do I have time to edit all of them) so stop acting like you are the owner of every single userbox. – Sabbatino (talk) 14:17, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

I am the designer for most of the boxes, which should all be uniform. Userboxes are not articles, which is why you're having a hard time with an admin taking your complaints seriously. I will keep reverting your edits because they're inconsistent with team branding. I knew your threats about me being banned were empty before you made them. Admins had decided before the WP:Access has no bearing on sports team userboxes. James Miko (talk) 15:51, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * For the record, nowhere did I say that you will be banned so stop making stuff up. Being reported does not necessarily mean being banned. In addition, it is clear that you openly admit to being the WP:OWNER, which is bad faith. "Admins had decided before the WP:Access has no bearing on sports team userboxes." – when was that? Care to point to a discussion? Administrators cannot override any policy/guideline unless there is a community-wide discussion. Additionally, team branding has nothing to do with Wikipedia so stop trying to look superior to other editors. I will act in bad faith and will restore the MOS-compliant versions and I do not really care if I get banned, because it is you who started it. So you either discuss it or we both get into trouble. Your choice. – Sabbatino (talk) 17:07, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

"I will act in bad faith and will restore the MOS-compliant versions and I do not really care if I get banned, because it is you who started it." This statement proves you are the disruptor. No, I didn't start this, as you should have left the userboxes alone as they existed in the first place. These userboxes existed for many years before you started your disruptive edits. My designs are the original ones, and have been for several years. There is consensus for these original designs. You interpret ADA compliance in a way the guidelines do not state. Not every word has to be the color white. Team branding has everything to do with these userboxes. Otherwise, we would have random green boxes for Yankees fans or purple ones for the Steelers. The whole point is accurate team colors, which you don't care to research. The colors are from official team websites and the abbreviations from websites. You have no sources for the colors and abbreviations you use. Because you fail to use formal colors and abbreviations, my edits are the superior ones. There would be no "battle" if you had not appear as some "johnny come lately" with established designs made by multiple users, not just me. You took it upon yourself to make changes that destroy the integrity of the original designs. It's you, the disruptive editor, who makes ad hominem attacks. James Miko (talk) 02:23, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

NHL Standings
Please help me out. I noticed a significant change in the way the NHL Conference Standings are presented in the individual Team pages. Was this discussed? If so, please direct me to the discussion.Juve2000 (talk) 03:31, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I am not aware of any discussion since I do not edit as much as I used to. You could probably try asking at WT:NHL. – Sabbatino (talk) 06:16, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Map in history of Vilnius
The map is wrong. First of all article says: "During the second half of 19th and the beginning of 20th century Vilnius also became one of the centers of Jewish, Polish, Lithuanian and Belarusian national rebirths. According to the 1897 Russian census, by mother tongue, 40% of the population was Jewish, 31% Polish, 20% Russian, 4.2% Belarusian and 2.1% Lithuanian", yet map don't show single Polish person on this territory. This is simply untrue. Also it is well documented that Russian census of 1897 is not reliable for this region, German census of 1916 showed that 50% inhabitants of this land was Polish. So it is intentionally misleading to use 1897 data. Also map completely ignores Russian zemstva census, which puts the number of Poles in Vilnius Governorate on 17,8 and in Vilnius county on 47%, in Trakai county on 11,2%.

Also border labelled "Polish claims during referendum 1920" is wrong, first of all Poland claimed lands with undoubtely Polish majority in the west and free access to the sea, not prepartition borders, and not German speaking parts of Prussia. Also it wasn't referendum, but plebiscite.

The map is simply wrong, misleading and shouldn't be used. Marcelus (talk) 15:46, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
 * The fact that you once again misinterpret content does not make a map wrong. Look at which section it is added and then try to understand why it is there. Census is irrelevant to the section where the map is added. – Sabbatino (talk) 17:26, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't understand. The map is wrong, provides wrong, misleading informations, shouldn't be a part of encyclopedic article Marcelus (talk) 20:59, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * The map is in the section about the conflict between Lithuania and Poland. Census of 1897 (or any other census for that matter) has nothing to do with it. – Sabbatino (talk) 21:49, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Are you playing stupid? Map that shows false number of Polish people in the area is very much misleading preciesly in the context of Polish-Lithuanian conflict! Marcelus (talk) 18:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Seeing that you are starting to use insults just shows that there is nothing left to discuss with you. If you cannot understand a simple map and its source, then a good question is if you are competent to make edits on English Wikipedia. – Sabbatino (talk) 21:21, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I didn't insult you in any way. The map is wrong, it is based on bad source, but also it fails to represent it properly. Just look at the Trakai county on this map: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Polska1912.jpg, you cleraly see it have 23,2% of Poles, yet it is not marked on the map in any way Marcelus (talk) 21:40, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 23.2% is not Trakai County, because that is Kaunas County. Trakai County is 11.2%. – Sabbatino (talk) 22:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Ah sorry, my mistake, but still map is wrong in this regard Marcelus (talk) 22:30, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Deleting the parameters
Don't do this plz. It will be needed than page will be translated. ·Carn !? 04:52, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * First of all, please get familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Secondly, per template's documentation – the parameter should not be used if the source is in English, because this is the English Wikipedia. Thirdly, it appears that you lack WP:COMPETENCE to edit in English so just stick to Russian Wikipedia. – Sabbatino (talk) 07:08, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Your answer seems rude to me, if it’s not difficult for you, I would ask you not to communicate with me in that tone.
 * Template's documentation says "When the language is "English" (or "en"), no language is displayed in the citation." Thus, the restored by me parameters in no way interfere with the laconic display of the source. However, when translating an article (and articles are often translated from English Wikipedia) and copying sources, these parameters will be displayed and will be useful.
 * Wikipedia in English is part of the Wikipedia international project, let's not forget about it. I look forward to informative comments from you.·Carn !? 10:57, 29 November 2019 (UTC)


 * If you doubt that such a practice is normal for Wikipedia, here are 202,928 confirmations of my position.·Carn !? 11:05, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * First of all, please remember to WP:INDENT your replies. Moving on to the subject, the parameter should not be used if the source is in English, because this is the English Wikipedia (I already wrote this in my last reply). Just because the usage of the parameter in the citation templates (for example, cite web) is wrong on many pages that does not mean that it should be used everywhere. In addition, your example does not show anything relevant, because it also includes parameters from the infoboxes, tables, text from prose, etc., which are completely different from the citation templates. So next time try to look more carefully at what you are trying to show. Furthermore, it looks rather strange that you came out of nowhere and made a revert to a page that you never edited before, which gives the impression that your revert was a retaliation for the AFC Championship Game page. Reverting something in retaliation is WP:BADFAITH. – Sabbatino (talk) 13:46, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * as you may see, i know how to WP:INDENT, this was not format error for you to edit (you can see that example number 4 from the rule is suitable for my edit). But let everything remain as you like, there is no need to cling to the little things, we must be kind to your colleagues on improving Wikipedia.
 * English Wikipedia means Wikipedia in English and does not mean at all that when developing consensus it is not necessary to take into account cross-project issues.
 * Indeed, I looked through your delete edits to make sure that you are a conscientious user. What I was convinced of. Obviously, our views on how to act correctly in the case under discussion diverge. Could you confirm your words "per template's documentation - the parameter should not be used if the source is in English" with specific links? If this is true, then we have no subject to dispute. (But keep in mind that this parameter is not specified in the template template "Most commonly used parameters in horizontal format" does not mean that it should not be set at all).
 * About AFC Championship Game (upd) Los Angeles Clippers page. There is no articles WP:OWNERSHIP, so when I saw that something could be improved, I did it. You have deleted a parameter set by another editor. As I see, since September there has been a tacit consensus on the issue we are discussing and I just returned the status quo.  what do you think about removing the parameter from the link you added?·Carn !? 15:07, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * To begin with, what WP:OWNERSHIP are you talking about? I have not mentioned it once so stop imagining things. About the language parameter, there have been discussions through the years about its usage, but I cannot show you any discussions, because I do not remember in what year they took place, but I have seen them in the past. Secondly, what do you mean with "You have deleted a parameter set by another editor."? And what do you also mean with "As I see, since September there has been a tacit consensus on the issue we are discussing..." ? Could you show it? Because I am eager to see what you are talking about. Additionally, why would you ping a user who is not related to this issue? Is that your other account? Because if it is, then I must warn you that you are not allowed to have two accounts per WP:SOCK. – Sabbatino (talk) 15:24, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't have other active accounts in enwiki. Only . Feel free to check.
 * The article code existed for a long time in the state in which it was made by different editors. You decided to change it. I reverted you and started this discussion. I think you should not have reverted back before we agree. Azure1233 made this edit in September. With  parameter in it, that you have deleted.  made this edit in July.
 * I do not insist that you change the code back, but so far I do not consider your edit to be consensusish, because, unfortunately, I have not seen the discussions that you are talking about.
 * About WP:OWNERSHIP - i'm talking about your phrase "strange that you came out of nowhere and made a revert to a page that you never edited before", as if the fact that you edited this page gives you some extra powers. I hope we have finished throwing wikilinks to rules at each other?·Carn !? 16:09, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * "The article code existed for a long time in the state in which it was made by different editors. You decided to change it..." – just because some users tend carelessly use tools for adding citations that does not mean that something existed for a long time. So do not accuse me of wrongdoings, because I have been editing English Wikipedia for about six years and I know a bit more than you do. Regarding the WP:OWNERSHIP issue, which does not exist in this situation, you took my thought completely out of context and just decided yourself that I am claiming something to be mine, which is not the case. In addition, it is evident that you do not understand what talk pages are meant for and went completely off-topic so I advise you to read WP:TALK before continuing. Because at this point – the discussion is not going anywhere since you failed to address the issue and just turned to accusations about my edits. The discussion is over until you understand how to use talk pages. – Sabbatino (talk) 17:01, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Ambox notice.svg There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. ·Carn !? 17:43, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Update
I pinged you on OM talk page. Have you seen the message? I expected a yes or no answer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DiorandI (talk • contribs) 12:05, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Black Sabbath (album)
Hi. Following your logic of WP:STATUSQUO, I have restored the revision that had stood for six months prior to SolarFlash's controversial removal this month. Please be consistent in your use of such a rationale in justifying content changes. Thank you. isento (talk) 21:43, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Good point. I have not edited the page for a long time so I did not go back that far. I only saw your and SolarFlash's dispute and just restored the most recent version, which was until your additions. – Sabbatino (talk) 21:46, 10 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Your input to the RfC would be appreciated. SolarFlash has again reverted to his preferred revision, and his recent history demonstrates a compromised sense of WP's core values when dealing with subjects of his fandom and an intensity, if not hostility, to those opposing his content changes, as demonstrated by unfair ultimatums and reductivist, neglectful responses to my attempts to reason with him at the article's talk page. (Along with the RfC I took the initiative to open recently, I also tried to communicate to them in a previous discussion concerning their initial attempts to remove a particular genre.) I feel like the merits of my explanations and responses to him have not been taken seriously or addressed much, if at all, and an outside opinion of the content dispute is needed, especially by outsiders to the subject whose judgment won't be clouded by partiality or an enthusiast's point-of-view. Thank you. isento (talk) 22:01, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
 * @Isento aka Dan56: This is essentially about YOU attempting to add "goth rock" as a genre to the infobox. @Sabbatino, restore stoner rock until the rfc is over if need be, I honestly don't care. But if you're eager to discuss recent editing histories @Isento aka Dan56, let's talk about your attempt to rig the rfc you initiated. The discussion was incorrectly labeled by you as an attempt by me to remove content, when the dispute actually stems from an obvious attempt by you to add content, content which was subsequently challenged, and here's the proof: . By phrasing it as an attempt to remove content, the likely and expected failure to reach consensus would mean that your edit gets to stand. That's downright deceptive and in very bad faith. SolarFlash (talk) 23:13, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Relocated teams
The Clippers awards I'm ambivalent with you removing, since the Clippers really have no history to brag about, and don't have retired numbers or Hall of Fames with McAdoo. And OKC and Sonic have different names, and Seattle will claim their history back if they ever get a team. Otherwise, I don't think it's as simple as which former team have their own article, but maybe there's no other cases like this anyways. Cheers.—Bagumba (talk) 15:57, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The Clippers might not have any player that has won the MVP award but they still have plenty of them. In addition, both teams have different names just like "And OKC and Sonic have different names..." and the fact that both teams have their own pages would justify the removal of the individual Braves' awards since those are different franchises. Too bad I cannot find any online media guide for the Clippers to see if they claim the individual Braves' accomplishments as their own. We could consider asking this at WT:NBA, but I am not sure if editors will give their opinion there. – Sabbatino (talk) 16:14, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * In the NBA, aside from the Charlotte Hornets moving to New Orleans and then the Charlotte Bobcats changing their name to the Hornets and getting all of their history back from the New Orleans franchise, teams have usually kept their history. But a precedent might have been set when the NFL Cleveland Browns relocated to Baltimore but couldn't take their history. Getting back to the Clips, strange no media guide. However, in the Clippers 2019–20 opening night game notes on p. 15, it says "The Clippers are competing in the franchise’s 50th season and 36th in Los Angeles in 2019-20", which would cover Buffalo.—Bagumba (talk) 17:05, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I am aware of the Hornets/Pelicans and Browns/Ravens situations. I suppose questions about the Clippers should be asked at WT:NBA, because it is clear that we have different opinions and it would be better to get input from other editors instead of trying to figure it out by ourselves. – Sabbatino (talk) 17:58, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I can live with your Clippers change. I was just saying their situation is more the exception (lack of notable history and their not promoting McAdoo) than a general rule. But if you want more input, feel free to post. Happy Holidays and New Year.—Bagumba (talk) 00:38, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Michael thomas
My image of Michael Thomas is better than the one you reverted it back to. It is more recent and you can actually see his face. Both images are of similar quality. LaDanian1000000 (talk) 17:39, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * It is not better. The older image from his college days is better since it was taken with a camera, while your image was taken by pressing the "Print Screen" button on your keyboard. You ought to search for a better image at Flickr but be aware of the licensing. – Sabbatino (talk) 17:46, 23 December 2019 (UTC)