User talk:Zeng8r/Archives/2017/January

Tampa, Florida
I see that you reverted my edit at Tampa, Florida, to add back the unsourced content I had removed. Regarding the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, the table you added says they were founded in 1976, but the Tampa Bay Buccaneers article says they were established in 1974. Also, your edit says that the Tampa Bay Rays were founded in 1998, but the Tampa Bay Rays article says that an ownership group "was approved on March 9, 1995", and the team was "established in 1998". Also, you added that the Tampa Bay Storm was founded in 1987, but the Tampa Bay Storm article says that the team "relocated to Tampa Bay in 1991, changing its name in the process". This is why I delete most large, unsourced edits that contain a lot of numbers and dates. Could you please take a moment to add sources to your edit (per WP:PROVEIT), or revert your edit? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 01:19, 10 January 2017 (UTC)


 * If you take the time to look more closely at the article history, you'll see that I did not add the Tampa sports table; I reverted your removal because it was a nice addition to that section. If you take the time to look more closely at those team articles, you'll see that the years listed are when those teams first took the field. This can easily verified by clicking on the individual team names in the table itself, but as a lifelong Tampa resident, I already knew that the dates were correct. Sourcing every one of those years is unnecessary and would make that simple table look cluttered. It's fine the way it is, imo. Zeng8r (talk) 02:10, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I've challenged your edit for reasons explained above and you have indicated you will not be reverting or adding sources. I will be removing the table as unsourced content.  Thank you.  Magnolia677 (talk) 02:15, 10 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Does it matter to you that the "reasons" you gave above are based on your misunderstanding of both the editor who added the information and the information itself, as I already explained? Thankfully, a more sensible editor agreed with me at the article. Zeng8r (talk) 03:01, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * So the original editor had a misunderstanding; then the "sensible editor" who agreed with you changed one of your incorrect dates; and you live there so you're the expert on all things Tampa. As an experienced editor you should appreciate that when you add this sort of half-correct original research it makes Wikipedia less reliable to its readers, and undermines the hard work of other editors who take the time to support their edits.  The Tampa article is all yours.  Magnolia677 (talk) 03:29, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

It wasn't "original research" and it wasn't incorrect; it was a nice addition with one potentially confusing column heading. An experienced editor like yourself should appreciate the fact that new editors (like the one who added the table) don't always make perfect contributions, and that if you instantly revert their work instead of working to improve it, you're likely to turn new editors into former editors. Anyway, I fixed the heading in question to clarify what the years indicate, so there's no longer any possible confusion. Zeng8r (talk) 03:42, 10 January 2017 (UTC)