Jump to content

User talk:Bagumba/Archive 20

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15←Archive 18Archive 19Archive 20Archive 21Archive 22→Archive 25

Administrators' newsletter – March 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2019).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • A new tool is available to help determine if a given IP is an open proxy/VPN/webhost/compromised host.

Arbitration

  • The Arbitration Committee announced two new OTRS queues. Both are meant solely for cases involving private information; other cases will continue to be handled at the appropriate venues (e.g., WP:COIN or WP:SPI).
    • paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org has been set up to receive private evidence related to abusive paid editing.
    • checkuser-en-wp@wikipedia.org has been set up to receive private requests for CheckUser. For instance, requests for IP block exemption for anonymous proxy editing should now be sent to this address instead of the functionaries-en list.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:12, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Mass TfD of NCAA standings templates

See discusssion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 March 4#Unused sports standings.-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 22:41, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Tom Brady edits

Hey, I'm just doing what I think is best. And what about you? You don't seem to be doing any better than me. Mk8mlyb (talk) 03:46, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Hey, why'd you do that? Okay, I'm not innocent here, I won't deny that, but I'm just one of the guys who's getting drawn up in this, and I'm the one who's taking the brunt of all this? I'll meet you at the other talk page. Mk8mlyb (talk) 05:23, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Basketball AfD discussions

Would you mind giving your opinion at a couple of AfD discussions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Basketball? Regardless of whether you'd vote keep or delete it'd be good to keep these driving to decision. Thanks. Rikster2 (talk) 14:16, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Done. Those Tar Heel ones remind me of my early AfD experiences with with Justin Watts and Leslie McDonald. I wonder if we could ever get project consensus to not rely on 247, SBNation, Fansided, team-specific fan blogs, etc. for notability (if not also reliability, NPOV) purposes.—Bagumba (talk) 10:07, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Protect Greg Brown (basketball)

Lots of IP vandalism on this one. Rikster2 (talk) 18:34, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Done.—Bagumba (talk) 00:07, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. I know what’s going on, there is a prominent high school recruit with the same name. Rikster2 (talk) 11:10, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Ok but can you change something about it Bc I don’t need any false information tagging along with my picture Greg.brown03 (talk) 02:04, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

He’s kinda irrelevant by the way Greg.brown03 (talk) 02:08, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

@Greg.brown03: There is no picture currently in that article. If you are referring to Google, you should send feedback to them that they are associating the wrong picture with the Wikipedia article. Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 03:13, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Game program

A tag has been placed on Game program requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either

  • disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
  • disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. A 10 fireplane Imform me 05:05, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for helping me retired the Portmannfire page — Preceding unsigned comment added by NicholasHui (talk • contribs) 16:39, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Complaint

Sabattino erases entire sections of text and you have nothing special to say, but when I blame him, you have a comment to make. Obviously you are not good at identifying a problem. You should rather advise Sabattino to correct his mistake.

The analytical mind is not given to everyone — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dave.paige (talk • contribs) 00:54, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

@Dave.paige: I understand that editing can lead to frustration. Follow Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 01:00, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Sabattino probably does not stay in Quebec City. If I make changes on the Videotron Center , Quebec City and Quebec City Summer Festival pages, it is because the leaders of these three entities have asked me to do so. And to make sure the information on these pages is correct. If you do not understand that you have a serious problem of logic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dave.paige (talk • contribs) 01:09, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

As I mentioned you are not very good in the analysis. forward me a link on conflict of interest prove your lack of logic. you are a person who is diverting the conversation on something other than the problem (Sabattino). you just look to be right. I just hope you do not run a business because the problems will never settle with a mindset like yours. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dave.paige (talk • contribs) 01:45, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Block

I strenuously object to you unilaterally overturning my indef without consulting me. I'm actually fine with a two week block. Or one week. Or one day. Or 30 minutes. Or 2 minutes. I have no desire to keep the user blocked for an extended period of time. This is not meant to be a draconian, unresolvable block. I'm simply looking for a concrete and permanent resolution to these chronic behavioral issues, in a GAB-compliant unblock request, because, for the fourth time now, they appear to intend on begrudgingly "serving their sentence" without actually changing anything, and that is not the purpose of issuing temporary blocks. The block can be as short they want it! This is not rocket science, the user can easily secure an unblock upon providing a satisfactory resolution to the issues we're having with them, and how to do that is all spelled out for them in the guide. But, they still appear insistent on blaming other people and ranting against "the broken system", they're obviously going in the wrong direction, so I'm absolutely stunned that you would allow the block to simply expire with no resolution. The block only has to last last as long as they continue to be obstinate and obtuse. Specifically, I'd be wanting to see a ban on reverting and a zero-tolerance/final warning status for personal commentary of any kind. I would like to ask that you reconsider your decision, because I do not think it's in the best interest of the project. ~Swarm~ {talk} 04:22, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

@Swarm: Apologies. I did not give you time to respond. From my perspective, revoking TPA seemed more appropriate; they had not requested an appeal in this instance, and blocked users should have some leeway to vent if they are not abusing the unblock process. At any rate, the user emailed me and seems unhappy with my change. I'm happy to revert to indef and let them "renegotiate" without my involvement. Would you want TPA restored also? Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 06:42, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
No worries and no hard feelings. I actually typed out most of the above message on the user's talk page, but with the additional notification that I was revoking their TPA and that they should email an admin or use UTRS if they're serious about submitting an appeal. I actually ended up edit conflicting with you, which frustrated me a bit. Definitely no TPA either way, we're on the same page about that. And I also agree that frustrated venting in response to a block is understandable, and should be forgivable in most situations. The reason I viewed this differently is because the user has had four temporary blocks issued in three months, and still seems unwilling to concede that they have breached the very fundamental concept that edit warring is not allowed. I genuinely don't think that a temp block of any length will be effective in resolving the issues. Additionally, I have observed a pattern in which they routinely revert edits with little or no explanation and no efforts towards discussion. I took that as an aggravating factor. To be clear, if you wanted to stand behind your action, I would not press the issue any further than simply expressing my disagreement. But, if you're genuinely okay with it, I would prefer to keep them blocked indef pending an acceptable unblock request. Best, ~Swarm~ {talk} 06:56, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
@Swarm: Again, apologies for being too hasty for cutting someone a break. I had the user on my watchlist due to a prior disagreement. Otherwise, I'm usually not patrolling blocks. In light of their dissatisfaction with my change to your block, I changed it back to indef so they can "negotiate" anew.—Bagumba (talk) 07:59, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
Thank you, sincerely, for your openness to criticism and your willingness to reconsider your own admin actions. This trait is far too rare, and I genuinely appreciate your willingness to reconsider your position when asked. You are the best type of admin. And, for the record, I really do appreciate the fact that you value leniency and restraint, and I wholeheartedly encourage you to retain that trait, even though I disagreed with you in this particular situation. Best regards, ~Swarm~ {talk} 08:11, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks

For the ping regarding this ANI thread. I had missed it completely even though I had otherwise been active on the board. Abecedare (talk) 08:27, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

@Abecedare: No specific action requested. I generally ping people whose names I mention as a courtesy, in the event I might have misrepresented anything. Cheers.—Bagumba (talk) 09:27, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Brady cites

Somehow, this seems appropriate... Tarl N. (discuss) 04:43, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

@Tarl N.: The internet is undefeated.—Bagumba (talk) 05:20, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
@Tarl N.: On a more serious note, any interest in working on related "greatest" perspectives at Joe Montana or Jerry Rice?—Bagumba (talk) 05:23, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
I don't see anything in the Montana lead. At most, I'd put a comment to the effect "Montana is one of the few quarterbacks consistently listed when ranking the best QBs in NFL history" (as you can see, I'm not generally a content creator, so my writing is stilted). As for Jerry Rice, the current statement seems reasonable. If I'd change anything to correspond with the sources, I'd try something like "Many argue for him as the greatest...", since those are the cites we have.
But unfortunately, I can't directly participate in this at this time - Spring Break is over, and the homework projects are piling up. Among others, proposing a Master's thesis (probably Considerations for using larger Galois Fields - and - in Reed-Solomon encoding systems), so my free time has sublimated. Regards, Tarl N. (discuss) 00:25, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Protect Avery Johnson?

A buyout probably coming, but sources are clear it has yet to happen. Rikster2 (talk) 22:06, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done—Bagumba (talk) 01:25, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

History of the Los Angeles Lakers

Having 'Rock bottom' in an article isn't neutral! It's seen in other teams articles

2013-14: 27-55

2014-15: 21-61

2015-16: 17-65

2016-17: 26-56

2017-18: 35-47

That's some of the lowest records the Lakers have ever had. How is that not considered at the lowest possible level rock bottom? The Speller (talk) 17:59, 23 March 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Speller (talk • contribs)

@The Speller: Please sign your posts, as you have been warned many times. Regarding your "rock bottom" characterization, it seems a continuation of your past tendency to write about the Lakers like a fan. If you find yourself unable to write neutrally about the Lakers, there are many other NBA areas you can contribute to. Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 17:52, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Joe Montana

Among the people who call Brady the greatest, some of them said that Montana was the greatest before Brady. Does that count? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mk8mlyb (talk • contribs) 04:38, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

@Mk8mlyb: Similar to Brady's article, we should limit it to reliable sources that do general analysis like "widely considered the greatest", "considered by many to be the greatest", etc. Part of concern on Brady's talk page was that Wikipedia should not take individual peoples' opinions and then make a judgement whether that means "many" held that opinion. Leave it to sources to make that judgement. For another example for Montana, NESN wrote: "The San Francisco 49ers signal-caller was seen as the greatest quarterback in NFL history for more than two decades until Brady joined him in the GOAT debate after piloting the New England Patriots to eight Super Bowl appearances and five titles during the first 18 years of his career." To me, there's no debate that the majority POV was that he was considered the greatest at least until Brady. The interesting thing is writing where he stands today. I think it's fair to say he's still in the argument for GOAT, and those sources I believe can be found. The question is do we write that "some consider him the greatest", or "many consider him the greatest"? Will need to see what the sources say.—Bagumba (talk) 09:29, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
@Bagumba: Also, remember that the statements "Brady is the GOAT, no doubt about it" and "Montana is still in the argument for GOAT" both state contradictory opinions. Either one of them is the undisputed GOAT (not possible) or both of them are equally in the argument for GOAT, which is the status quo. So yeah, that NESN source would be great to use. Mk8mlyb (talk) 22:29, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Range block?

Any chance of a range block for "37.230". See here, here and here. Cheers. DaHuzyBru (talk) 05:30, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

37:230* would be too broad. I instead blocked 3 smaller ranges for each respective IP for 3 months each. Seems this user bas been spamming for a long time, but let's start with this and see what happens.—Bagumba (talk) 09:07, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2019).

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Two more administrator accounts were compromised. Evidence has shown that these attacks, like previous incidents, were due to reusing a password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. All admins are strongly encouraged to enable two-factor authentication, please consider doing so. Please always practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
  • As a reminder, according to WP:NOQUORUM, administrators looking to close or relist an AfD should evaluate a nomination that has received few or no comments as if it were a proposed deletion (PROD) prior to determining whether it should be relisted.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:57, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

In need of a time-out

This guy. Rikster2 (talk) 22:23, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Blocked and protected.—Bagumba (talk) 01:06, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Protect Russell Turner (basketball)

Lots of IP vandalism today. Rikster2 (talk) 23:49, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

done—Bagumba (talk) 01:06, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Block evasion?

This IP is possibly our old Suns friend. Check user? DaHuzyBru (talk) 10:07, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

@DaHuzyBru: Since 2600:8800:980:23f0::/64 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) was already checkuser blocked by Bbb23, perhaps you can request them to check this 68.10.35.77 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) as well based on the Phoenix Sun interest overlap. Generally, IPs can't be CU linked to a registered account (Wikipedia:CheckUser#IP_information_disclosure).—Bagumba (talk) 04:34, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
There are a few ways to handle this. First, Bagumba, you can block this - or any other IP - if you're persuaded that it's AGPSF. Second, DaHuzyBru, you can file a report at SPI, with the understanding that reports about IPs at SPI often languish until the IP edits are too old to take any action. For example, I wouldn't block this IP because it hasn't edited since April 9. The disruption normally needs to be current and ostensibly ongoing.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:08, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
@Bbb23: For now, I'm AGFing that it's an IP based in Phoenix that happens to also be interested in the Phooenix Suns. I'd need more behavioral evidence than just common pages to call this a WP:DUCK. If a CU were filed and there was a match, would the results be published even if the CU checker did not block?—Bagumba (talk) 14:09, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
As you previously stated, we cannot disclose the IP(s) of named accounts. If a report is filed at SPI in the future, a CU should not be requested; if it is, it will be declined. The report would be decided on behavioral evidence.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:51, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
@Bbb23: I was suggesting that this current IP (68.10.35.77) be CUed against the previously blocked IP range (2600:8800:980:23f0::/64), not a named account. I was not making any claims about any named accounts. Is that possible?—Bagumba (talk) 14:57, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Ah. Seems like an end run around policy.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:00, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Tony Allen

The Grindfather is Tony Allen's nickname. It's cited in the main body of his page. Please explain to me how my edit is less than neutral. Otherwise, add a nickname to his profile section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.155.253.190 (talk) 23:28, 11 April 2019 (UTC) m

Hi, thanks for discussing this. It's ok to mention a prominent nickname. However when referring to people, like in the image caption, Wikipedia generally uses their last name.—Bagumba (talk) 02:02, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Players on 2-way contracts

Unlike G League assignments, these players are still technically on the G League team rosters until their deals are up. Two-way deals can be for 2 years. Jonathan Motley is an example of someone who signed a 2 year two-way deal with the Mavs. Upshot is we shouldn’t “close” the G League tenures of these players until their deals are up. Rikster2 (talk) 20:56, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the background.—Bagumba (talk) 00:16, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

WP:Verifiability - does a website that requires log in meets the verifiability criteria

Hello Bagumba,

I've just posted a question on the HelpDesk that I believe you are qualified to answer. Do you care to take a look at it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk#WP:Verifiability_-_does_a_website_that_requires_log_in_meets_the_verifiability_criteria?

Best regards, Coel Jo (talk) 22:13, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

I've responded there.—Bagumba (talk) 22:46, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks :) --Coel Jo (talk) 23:21, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular

Icon of a white exclamation mark within a black triangle
 Administrators must secure their accounts

The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:50, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2019).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • XTools Admin Stats, a tool to list admins by administrative actions, has been revamped to support more types of log entries such as AbuseFilter changes. Two additional tools have been integrated into it as well: Steward Stats and Patroller Stats.

Arbitration

  • In response to the continuing compromise of administrator accounts, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion amending the procedures for return of permissions (diff). In such cases, the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions; administrators found failing to have adequately done so will not be resysopped automatically. All current administrators have been notified of this change.
  • Following a formal ratification process, the arbitration policy has been amended (diff). Specifically, the two-thirds majority required to remove or suspend an arbitrator now excludes (1) the arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and (2) any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of communication.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

The Reviewer's Barnstar
This is for your valuable efforts for reviewing articles under pending changes protection. Thank you PATH SLOPU 07:51, 16 May 2019 (UTC)


Jason Kidd

I apologize for the addition of that info, the lakers have announced that he is an asssistant coach but contract details haven’t been released. So Idk if it’s technically official. Here’s a link that you can check out! https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/2019/05/11/lakers-frank-vogel-new-head-coach-jason-kidd-joins-staff/1178979001/. Hopefully this Helps out! -Mambagoat24 Mambagoat24 (talk) 15:15, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

@Mambagoat24: Thanks for discussing this. Since there is typically an official announcement for NBA signings, we generally just wait instead of relying on breaking news based off of anonymous sources. WP:SPORTSTRANS explains more about this. Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 16:20, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Lakers injuries

@Bagumba I've done added sources for all the injuries that happened during the season and y'all are still erasing the facts of what happened. Why? It needs to be on their that was big injuries that derailed the Lakers playoff chances. I don't think y'all want it on the article, just tell me Sports Fan 1997 (talk) 22:23, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

@Sports Fan 1997: I had left an edit summary with my change, along with some advice on your talk page. Please let me know if you have specific questions still. At any rate, I am just one opinion, and I do not speak for others ("y'all"). The onus is on you to achieve consensus for your changes if they are disputed. Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 01:32, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Jason Kidd 2.0

Got ya Mambagoat24 (talk) 13:25, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Protected page

It looks like Allen Iverson has been protected for years. Might it be time to try unprotecting it? I have not edited it, but might like to clean it up some. --2604:2000:E010:1100:ED97:35BB:CCA2:95DC (talk) 04:39, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

I reduced it to pending changes preotection for now. Let's hope for the best.—Bagumba (talk) 12:43, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. --2604:2000:E010:1100:F40C:4974:5CCE:2D29 (talk) 17:41, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

User:Jack Melucci

Hi Bagaumba. Since you indef'd this account, I thought you'd might want to take a look at this. I have no idea whether that edit summary is true. I thought about adding a post with a link to WP:BROTHER, but figured it might be better to leave things to an administrator. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:14, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: I left a note for the parent who blanked the page and left an edit summary.—Bagumba (talk) 01:56, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for taking a look. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:45, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
@Marchjuly: I saw your last post there, since it pinged me. Otherwise, I am not actively monitoring it, figuring the link I provided to Wikipedia:Contact us was sufficient if they needed follow up. Absolutely no problem with you going the extra mile. While I AGFed when I posted there, your BROTHER comment is still a possibility too. Cheers.—Bagumba (talk) 07:08, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
I didn't specifically mention BROTHER, but it's referenced by one of the pages I linked to. I figured whether that's really the case will be apparant sometime soon since most BROTHERS seem unable to resist the chance to try and show everyone just how clever they are. Regardless, my post was probably a bit of overkill, but at least now whoever is behind the account cannot claim that nobody tried to help them sort things out. Also, sorry about the ping; sometimes I just do it more out of habit that to attract someone's attention. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:10, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
@Marchjuly: No worries about the ping. My only point is that I'm not actively monitoring it. As a WP:VOLUNTEER, continue (or not) as you see fit. Best.—Bagumba (talk) 08:28, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
I think the BROTHER question has just been answered. That was faster than I expected. Anyway, thanks again for trying to help. — Marchjuly (talk) 11:40, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Mark Jackson page move

Votes evenly split but moved based on the move votes being more “policy based.” Bogus, should have been a no consensus. Same user who tees up all these moves just moved Kevin Johnson to “Kevin Johnson (basketball” because the page views were no longer highest for that page - which proves exactly why it is stupid to look only at page views for common names. Rikster2 (talk) 19:46, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Perhaps, they are hardcore and need to see opposers make a specific mention to a guideline like WP:PRIMARYTOPIC? If that was your intention (in RMs, I just assume that's what people implicitly mean), consider discussing with the closer. Maybe they will agree to relist.—Bagumba (talk) 01:05, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
OK, I left a note (albeit with low expectations). I felt like this one shouldn’t have been closed like that and that the Chris Mullin one closed too fast as well (though I agreed the final decision was the right one). Not sure what’s going on here. Rikster2 (talk) 02:23, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
I dropped a comment there too. In the grand scheme of things, an "incorrect" RM outcome has less impact than in other areas. I can live them as long as it wasnt a non-closer doing it. Re: Mullin, it was open a week, unless u think a relisting was in order.—Bagumba (talk) 02:37, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2019).

Administrator changes

removed Andonic • Consumed Crustacean • Enigmaman • Euryalus • EWS23 • HereToHelp • Nv8200pa • Peripitus • StringTheory11 • Vejvančický

CheckUser changes

removed Ivanvector

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC seeks to clarify whether WP:OUTING should include information on just the English Wikipedia or any Wikimedia project.
  • An RfC on WT:RfA concluded that Requests for adminship and bureaucratship are discussions seeking to build consensus.
  • An RfC proposal to make the templates for discussion (TfD) process more like the requested moves (RM) process, i.e. "as a clearinghouse of template discussions", was closed as successful.

Technical news

  • The CSD feature of Twinkle now allows admins to notify page creators of deletion if the page had not been tagged. The default behavior matches that of tagging notifications, and replaces the ability to open the user talk page upon deletion. You can customize which criteria receive notifications in your Twinkle preferences: look for Notify page creator when deleting under these criteria.
  • Twinkle's d-batch (batch delete) feature now supports deleting subpages (and related redirects and talk pages) of each page. The pages will be listed first but use with caution! The und-batch (batch undelete) option can now also restore talk pages.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:48, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Kawhi Leonard content dispute

There is a very disruptive content dispute and edit war happening at Kawhi Leonard. I'd just like your opinion at this point. I feel uneasy about it all, with User:Saad1008 now escalating it. DaHuzyBru (talk) 16:08, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Take a look at WP:HANDLE. If a revert or two didn't get the point across, start a discussion, and tag the relevant text while leaving a link to the discussion.—Bagumba (talk) 17:51, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Patrick McCaw

Patrick McCaw may need semi for a while. He is getting quite the attention. DaHuzyBru (talk) 16:09, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Done. Go figure.—Bagumba (talk) 16:17, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Re: Jerry West

Thanks for your help. I deleted the first message because after posting it I didn't see another message on your page that looked similar and wasn't sure if I had placed mine in the proper spot. Have a good day.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:5cc:4700:2786:85ee:d617:23b9:70d9 (talk)

Brandon Ingram trade

It seems like this trade is confirmed by now. Articles from the Los Angeles Times and The Guardian have said that this is true, and I think this edit is safe to make now. Elliott080212 (talk) 06:29, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

@Elliott080212: Thanks for discussing this. The trade cannot be completed until July 6 at the earliest.[1] There's also talk of delaying it for salary cap purposes. It'll happen when the teams finally announce it. Refer to WP:SPORTSTRANS on how these are usually handled. Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 06:37, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Brandon Ingram Page change

This is about the Brandon Ingram wikipedia change... my sources where correct, Brandon Ingram is going to the Pelicans. I checked the NBA website, the ESPN Instagram account, and I even checked the NBA Instagram account. So I've only messaged you to get my point across. I hope you have a good day Xxphantom21xX (talk) 13:36, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

@Xxphantom21xX: Thanks for reaching out. Generally, Wikipedia updates players after they went (past tense) to a team, not when there are reports of them going (in the future). See WP:SPORTSTRANS for more guidance. Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 13:52, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
Your work on sports Wikipedia hasn’t gone unappreciated. :) Trillfendi (talk) 16:46, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Jimmy Butler

@Bagumba: I thought I remember a rule change that lets NBA free agency start at 6 pm eastern which allows for contracts to be signed on June 30th. You mentioned on my Jimmy Butler edit that no contracts could be signed due to the July moratorium, but I thought there was a rule changing. I also glanced at that page, and if I am correct about the change, the that page needs an update. UPDATE: Did some further research after my *glance* at the other page, and discovered that no one (with some exceptions) can actually sign until July 6th if I read correctly. My fault, and please correct me if I am wrong anywhere else. Everybody does know this information though, so it seems appropriate to have up there. Also, just in, from Marc Stein, the Butler trade has some complications. Will keep an eye out — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahurrell61418 (talk • contribs) 03:52, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

@Ahurrell61418: Everybody does know this information though, so it seems appropriate to have up there. Wikipedia is not meant to be a breaking news outlet. Take a look at WP:SPORTSTRANS to see how deals are usually handled. There's also an ongoing discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_National_Basketball_Association#What_is_considered_an_official_announcement_of_a_sign,_trade,_waiving,_etc that you way want to join. Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 07:32, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

@Bagumba I looked at the page and it does make a lot more sense. Sorry for any trouble. It does say sources like Woj are credible and if they are “close” or ”expected to happen”, it is okay to edit a page. Woj has tweeted that the heat and Philly we’re finalizing a trade though, but taking into consideration the roadblocks in the trade, it makes sense to hold off on the edit for now. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahurrell61418 (talk • contribs) 12:47, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

D'Angelo Russell

According to Adrian Wojnarowski of ESPN

You may read it from the link of the reference below, that proves it...

But here's what the tweet from what Woj has said:

"The Warriors and Nets are on course to complete the sign-and-trade that will deliver All-Star guard D’Angelo Russell to Golden State on a four-year, $117M maximum contract, league sources tell ESPN. Kevin Durant and his camp had to help work deal to completion overnight.:

[1]

LuBuNightmareking (talk) 18:28, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

@LuBuNightmareking: Woj cites a "league source", which is an anonymous source. See WP:SPORTSTRANS for further explanation. Moreover, any deal cannot be completed at least until July 6, when the July moratorium ends.—Bagumba (talk) 18:33, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://twitter.com/wojespn/status/1145737810449768450

Administrators' newsletter – July 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2019).

Administrator changes

removed 28bytes • Ad Orientem • Ansh666 • Beeblebrox • Boing! said Zebedee • BU Rob13 • Dennis Brown • Deor • DoRD • Floquenbeam1 • Flyguy649 • Fram2 • Gadfium • GB fan • Jonathunder • Kusma • Lectonar • Moink • MSGJ • Nick • Od Mishehu • Rama • Spartaz • Syrthiss • TheDJ • WJBscribe
1Floquenbeam's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.
2Fram's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.

Guideline and policy news

  • In a related matter, the account throttle has been restored to six creations per day as the mitigation activity completed.

Technical news

  • The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Community feedback is invited.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:19, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Protection for following pages

Hi Bagumba, can you protect these pages as well: Ricky Rubio, Taj Gibson, Ed Davis (basketball), Bojan Bogdanović, Thaddeus Young. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 01:41, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

@Natg 19: Done.—Bagumba (talk) 04:34, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Jordan Bell

According to Chris B. Haynes of Yahoo Sports, Jordan Bell has agreed to sign one year deal for the Timberwolves please check for the article or NBA from B/R facebook page. 

Chaustria35 (talk) 10:37, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
@Chaustria35: Thanks for the mention of Haynes. I see that they attribute it to Bell's agents. The tricky part is that when sources say something like "agree to a deal" it's different than actually having already signed a contract. And technically, the Warriors could still match the deal. Also, the July moratorium is ongoing, and he would not be able to sign until July 6 at the earliest. At best, you could decide to add some prose that an agreement has been reached while citing a source that mentions his agents, but the lead should not be updated yet as if the signing has already occurred. Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 10:49, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
@Chaustria35: I added to the article that he signed an offer sheet (which is not the same as actually signing).—Bagumba (talk) 11:18, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

User adding flags, linking nationalities, removing middle names, etc.

Any thoughts on how to handle? It’s 3-4 IPs who are clearly the same person. Examples - 1, 2, 3. Thanks. Rikster2 (talk) 20:19, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Starting a discussion with the most recent IP, like you already did at User talk:94.66.220.198, is a good start. Hopefully they stay on the same IP and see it, since there's no other way to know if they are intentionally ignoring rules. Those are different ISPs, so a range block is not even possible. Protection would only be possible if their behavior is on the same articles. Let me know if I missed anything.—Bagumba (talk) 02:39, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
Still ongoing despite warnings Rikster2 (talk) 14:56, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
Blocked for 36h.15:33, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bagumba/Archive_20&oldid=1211793739"