This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

I've began to notice a big discrepancy in this category in season infoboxes for teams. Since there seems to be inconsistencies I think we should settle on a single format for all the boxes to follow. I've come to like the idea that the round be stated that the team made it to and their elimination record be listed underneath. Examples of this model can be found in the '95 Bulls and '11 Miami Heat season articles. Details such as the team that eliminated them can be found/explored in playoff and Finals articles and are superfluous to the infoboxes in my opinion. Banan14kab (talk) 04:58, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable.—Bagumba (talk) 06:07, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Shold we include NBA Development League statistics in the stat line? I would say yes. Though they are not the highest league in the US, they do add important information to an article. Thoughts?--TM 14:09, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't personally have an issue with this, particularly as the stats are easily verifiable, but they should be separated from NBA stats and not interspersed in my opinion. Rikster2 (talk) 14:14, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

It shouldn't be included, because NBA D-League is not a professional league. It also doesn't add any important information as many players from that league are bench warmers in the NBA for most of the time. – Sabbatino (talk) 14:25, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Sabbatino, The NBADL IS a professional league though.--TM 14:59, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Different sources, different opinions. Whatever this league is, its stats are not important at all as it means nothing, because you can be a star there and a nobody in the NBA. Top leagues are what is important for player's career. – Sabbatino (talk) 15:48, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Sabbatino, can you provide a source that indicates that the NBADL is not a professional league? The same could be said about playing in any different league. A star in Europe can bust in the United States and vice versa. That doesn't mean that the statistics are not important to a player's career.--TM 17:42, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

You're missing the point, but I'll try to explain. NBA, ACB, LNB Pro A, BSL, VTB, Serie A or even KLS with LKL – all these are top leagues. Aside from those being top leagues, teams from those leagues play in top international leagues such as Euroleague or Eurocup. No-one cares how a player played in NBA D-League, LEB Oro, Serie A2 or any other second-tier league as they're irrelevant. It is silly that you brought European basketball to this, because U.S. and EU basketball systems are totally different (or any other continent for that matter). As for the link to NBA D-League not being professional, how about this? It clearly states – The NBA Development League is the NBA’s official minor league. I don't see any indication which says that's a top or professional league. If you want this issue resolved, I advise you to make a voting poll to see what people think as that will be easier than discussing. P.s. I'm not bashing you or anything. You wanted my opinion – you got it. – Sabbatino (talk) 08:05, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Minor leagues are quite often professional. The link you and I both cite says that the league is professional. What is the NBA Development League? The NBA Development League, also known as the D-League, is a professional basketball league that was created to help players achieve their dreams of playing in the NBA"]--TM 10:26, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

The point shouldn't be whether it is a professional league or not, which it is, but rather is it necessary to clog up stats sections of NBA players with D-League stats. I personally don't think so, especially if it's a one-game assignment stint or something similar. But for Jordan Mickey, for example, I can see the benefit considering he spent the majority of the season with them. It should be situational and common sense should be utilised i.e. does this players D-League stats really have any value? DaHuzyBru (talk) 10:57, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

First good comment. If we decide to include NBA D-League statistics then it should have a guideline which says that a player must have played at least 20 games in one season in the NBA D-League. Then I wouldn't have no objections. – Sabbatino (talk) 12:10, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

D-League players don't make much money, but they do get paid: [1]. That said, I wouldn't suggest that anyone add D-League stats unless you are willing to maintain them over time. The average drive-by user probably doesn't care about the D-League and won't bother to help update the stats. Zagalejo^^^ 20:17, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

This kind of table was added to Jordan Mickey article by the creator of this discussion. Totally unnecessary until the discussion is over. – Sabbatino (talk) 20:26, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

I agree with Zagalejo on the rationale for generally not adding D-League stats. In the worst case, the basketball-reference.com external link on most NBA players' articles has a link to D-League stats, [2]—Bagumba (talk) 20:27, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

For the Jordan Mickey example (above), he was a NBA D-League All-Star. Assuming the D-League AS is notable (it seems to be in all the infoboxes), a brief stat line in prose seems like a better idea than a stat table, which would only invite tables to be added to non-AS player articles.—Bagumba (talk) 20:49, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

@Namiba: It appears to be 4 vs 1 on this topic. I have gone ahead and removed the d-league stats table from Jordan Mickey. Like Sabbatino stated, it shouldn't have been added until further discussion had been had here. DaHuzyBru (talk) 05:01, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

I have noticed that many players are shown on old teams in their "Main Photo" on wiki. For example, Paul Pierce is shown on the wizards, Kevin Garnett is shown on the Celtics, Jeff Green is shown on the Celtics, etc. I believe these pictures should be updated to represent their current team. The "main picture" for Paul Pierce should be him on the Clippers because that is his current team. I am NOT familiar with how to properly use a picture/JPG from the internet and insert it onto the page in the correct spot (at the top of the InfoBox). Real People were at these games or photshoots and actually took these pictures so how would someone update the Wiki Page without running into copyright issues. No, I am not going to be able to take an up close picture of all these NBA stars, but some people do it for a living and post them online. If I save a picture from Google images and provide the source, shouldn't this picture be usable. Again, I am not an expert in the field of uploading pictures properly, but I would love to be informed on how to do so.

How do you guys feel about the need to update the players "main picture" to show them on their current team? How would I go about using images from online and uploading them to wiki? --RichieConant34 (talk) 23:04, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

@RichieConant34: Ideally, we would have the most recent image. However, we can only use images where the copyright has explicitly been released, per Wikipedia:Copyrights#Guidelines_for_images_and_other_media_files. Unfortunately, this is not the case with most images that you find on the Internet. If a free photo exists, searching Flickr is usually your best bet. If you see a non-free one on Flickr, you could also ask the user if they would be willing to Commons:Flickr_files#Changing_licenses change their license. Good luck.—Bagumba (talk) 23:06, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

I know I've run across this before with Fox Sports, but I figured I'd document this for future reference. I'm wary of FoxSports.com as a reliable source for confirming transactions. My most recent experience is with Jeremy Lin. I just saw this ESPN article from today that says that "sources" say he will not exercise his option. However, when I looked at the Wikipedia article, it says unconditionally that he declined his option already, and cites a FoxSports.com source from June 7.

The FoxSports.com article says: "Point guard Jeremy Lin declined his $2.2 million player option with the Charlotte Hornets on Tuesday, making him an unrestricted free agent." However, a link in the article is to a Twitter post that says "Charlotte G Jeremy Lin will decline $2.2 million player option to explore unrestricted free-agency, league sources inform @clevelanddotcom."[3] It seems that FoxSports.com took a lot of liberty in writing the article as if it was official when the Twitter post is clear that it was not.—Bagumba (talk) 08:00, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed the unofficial report from Lin's article.[4]—Bagumba (talk) 08:05, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

I think FoxSports.com is a reliable source, just not for transactions. I don't think ESPN can be held any higher than Fox Sports though. It depends on the situation and the author. DaHuzyBru (talk) 08:08, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Maybe I have selective memory, but I don't remember many instances where ESPN wouldn't preface with "according to sources" or something similar. At any rate, WP:RSBREAKING would say to not base anything off just one source.—Bagumba (talk) 08:14, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

That ESPN article does say though "Facing a Wednesday deadline". We aren't going to get a Hornets press release saying he didn't opt in. That's the best we're gonna get most likely. DaHuzyBru (talk) 08:15, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

There are a few players who are highly likely to be picked in this week's draft (and who already meet WP:GNG) who could use articles. If articles aren't written before Thursday's draft, history tells us that they will be low-quality, hastily-created stubs as soon as they are picked. But if anyone wants to take the initiative, Patrick McCaw, Chinanu Onuaku, Robert Carter (basketball), Sheldon McClellan and Isaiah Cousins all appear on multiple mocks, with McCaw typically showing up as a first-round pick. Would be great if someone could take these on before Thursday. Rikster2 (talk) 12:14, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

I'll try to create the articles of McCaw, McClellan and Cousins before the draft happens. But probably I am just going to create one of these three. Borikén (talk · ctb) 08:41, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

@Borikén: Thanks for starting Patrick McCaw and Chinanu Onuaku. FWIW, it usually helps to cite a few independent sources that demonstrate that the subject meets WP:GNG. School sites aren't indy. This helps stave off spending time on potential WP:AFDs.—Bagumba (talk) 02:10, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

I am in the middle of debate with another editor regarding Lakers 2nd round draft pick Ivica Zubac. @Bozalegenda: believes the infobox should not show he plays for anybody honestly. I believe(d) initially that it should reflect him playing for the Lakers. Now that I have thought about it, I believe it should be showing he plays for either the Lakers or Mega Leks since he is still under contract with them. I would like some additional input because we stuck in a bit of a gridlock.--Rockchalk717 19:38, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

If a player isn't signed with anyone, we generally list them under the NBA team that owns their draft rights. Is Zubac signed with Mega Leks? If yes, what is the reason to not list him there?—Bagumba (talk) 20:31, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Actually I have found the answer, yes he is under contract with them until 2018 so the 2018-2019 season is the earliest he can play for the Lakers.--Rockchalk717 21:19, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi y'all. So I'm not completely familiar with this project's best practices for articles, so I'd love some feedback on my proposed split-off of part of Sacramento Kings. If you feel like, please take a look and chime in at Talk:Sacramento Kings#Split proposed. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 15:57, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Some bios of former NBA players have leads that fail to summarize the subject's notability. Take Delonte West, whose lead read that he "is an American professional basketball player who last played for the Texas Legends of the NBA Development League. He played college basketball for Saint Joseph's University." No mention of playing in the NBA at all. I've seen this in other bios I've checked and it's odd. Leads should state all top-league teams played for, simply adding to it if a player changes teams. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:30, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, that's the way a lot of leads have developed over time. Many leads only mention the player's current team, and the only time anyone will edit the lead is when he changes or leaves a team. There's always room for improvement. Zagalejo^^^ 03:10, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Today one user started adding flags to NBA teams' rosters. If I remember correctly they were removed in the past (I might be mistaken). Any thoughts for or against this? – Sabbatino (talk) 11:25, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

After taking a better look it looks like the roster template still shows the Nationality tab even if nationality is removed from the table. Can I assume that it should be listed in the roster table? – Sabbatino (talk) 16:02, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Looks like someone decided to add nationalities to Template:NBA roster header. All is reverted. – Sabbatino (talk) 04:25, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

This IP edit on List of relocated National Basketball Association teams caught my eye and led me to New Orleans Pelicans and Charlotte Hornets articles, and this citation Charlotte Hornets Name Returns to Carolinas within the Pelicans article. Broadly, in 2014, the Charlotte Hornets 1988–2002 history was removed from the New Orleans Hornets/Pelicans and reassigned to the Charlotte Hornets. There is very limited discussion of these particulars on the team article Talk pages.

The general issue I'm seeing is the NBA doesn't control the facts, just how they choose to present their historical records, marks, and similar. So I think we're in a limited situation requiring footnotes (infobox in particular) that state the NBA doesn't recognise the actual history. Feedback expressly requested, as I have limited familiarity with the particulars.

Areas for follow-up:

1. Revert this edit re relocated franches, but include new "† In 2014, the NBA transfered the Charlotte Hornets 1988–2002 history from the New Orleans Hornets/Pelicans to the Charlotte Hornets

2. Then similarly update the New Orleans Pelicans infobox with

• Charlotte Hornets 1988–2002†
• New Orleans Hornets 2002–2005; 2007–2013
• New Orleans/Oklahoma City Hornets 2005–2007
• New Orleans Pelicans 2013–present[1][2]

† In May 2014 the NBA transfered the Charlotte Hornets 1988–2002 history to the Charlotte Hornets

3. I think the Charlotte Hornets infobox is correct as-is, re

• Charlotte Hornets 1988–2002; 2014–present
• Charlotte Bobcats 2004–2014[1][2])

4. and let the agreement on above resolution(s) determine any equivalent changes to New Orleans Pelicans all-time roster and Charlotte Hornets all-time roster.

What say you? UW Dawgs (talk) 16:27, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Reliable sources (NBA, Hornets and Pelicans franchises, independent sites like basketball reference.com) grant the "old" Charlotte Hornets history to the "current" Bobcats/Hornets franchise. Wikipedia should reflect sources. Same as Cleveland Browns and the NFL. Rikster2 (talk) 16:46, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Previous consensus was clear to keep all history that took place with old Charlotte Hornets with the current Charlotte franchise (Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_National_Basketball_Association/Archive_25#Charlotte_Hornets_records_and_history). As for List of relocated National Basketball Association teams, I think there should be some mention somehow that the Pelicans were considered to be relocated at the time, but were later deemed a new franchise.—Bagumba (talk) 16:54, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

The related Category:Tennessee Volunteer NBA players has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page.

Rikster2 (talk) 12:27, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I noticed the Denver Nuggets infobox and other team colors were recently changed from light blue and yellow to Navy blue and yellow. I think this is incorrect, as the light blue color is generally their main color, as it is the color of their away jerseys and they don't even have a Navy blue jersey. It also makes it very indistinguishable from the Utah Jazz, as the colors are almost, if not exactly, identical. If someone with access to the color templates could please change this back, that would be much appreciated. And can we also change the colors of the Portland Trail Blazers please? I think black with a red accent would look much better than red with a silver accent. Generally, the infobox colors reflect the teams away jersey (i.e. Knicks, Warriors, etc.), and their away jersey is mainly black with a little red. Once again, that would be much apprectiated. Thanks. --Miamiheat631^Talk 20:56, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

I completely agree. Module:Basketball_color/data is where you change the colours. I already changed the Denver Nuggets colours back to what they previously were; I noticed the change yesterday and was probably going to change it anyway. —DangerousJXD (talk) 21:34, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

This is the official Nuggets' color scheme and since it's official, colors should be changed back. – Sabbatino (talk) 04:13, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

More importantly, white on light blue fails WP:COLOR, as the contrast is not WCAG AA or AAA compliant.[5].—Bagumba (talk) 04:42, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I have reverted myself, although you should have just done it yourself. I don't like getting involved in this area and have only gotten involved when I notice something that I think is a glaringly horrendous colour change. I reverted the colours to what they had always been thinking it was uncontroversial. I am essentially removing myself from any further discussion on this. Carry on. —DangerousJXD (talk) 04:44, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

The Nuggets have had their same color scheme for the last 8, 9 years and it hasn't magically changed. It is completely indistinguishable from the Utah Jazz. Can we at least switch the colors around or something to be able to tell the difference between the two teams? Or switch the Jazz' secondary color from yellow to green? I think that fits them more. --Miamiheat631^Talk 12:42, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Navy blue doesn't even represent the Nuggets like light blue does. They haven't had navy jerseys since '02 except for an alternate jersey a few years back and the light blue color is what's mainly seen on their website, in their arena, and everywhere else with Nuggets branding. I really think it needs to change. --Miamiheat631^Talk 12:46, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Do you have a proposed combination whose contrast satisfies WP:COLOR?—Bagumba (talk) 19:10, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

No, I don't. But you can't possibly, in any way, be ok with the fact that the Nuggets, Jazz, and even the Pacers share the same colors here when their color schemes are so freaking far apart. Seriously, for a second just disregard the stupid color thing, navy blue doesn't represent the Nuggets does it? This isn't the late '90s. Colors shouldn't have to comply with the color-blind or whatever the hell that's meant for if it compromises accuracy. These colors aren't accurate, plain and simple. --Miamiheat631^Talk 20:23, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Words identify the team for most readers; the color is there to make it pretty, it is not the sole means of identification. If certain colors make the text unreadable for some, WP:COLOR suggests using different colors. My guess is light blue will always make for a contrast that is harder to read; at best, it could be used as a border color, but I think the current implementation in navboxes don't allow for a border color that is not also used as a background/foreground. See Template:Denver Nuggets:

Ideally, light blue could be a border around the navy blue, except the current implementation takes the border color (gold) and uses it as a background for the other text. You'll probably need a template editor to make modifications to allow for a separate border color.—Bagumba (talk) 21:22, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

@Charlesaaronthompson: re this edit and this edit. UW Dawgs (talk) 22:11, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Here's a thought: instead of adding another border color, could we instead use  black  as the second color at Module:Basketball color/data, and then revert the Nuggets' colors back to where they were so that the color order is: 1.  light blue ; 2.  black ; 3.  yellow ; 4.  navy blue ? Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 22:19, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

That would at least be WCAG AA (but not AAA) compliant.[6]—Bagumba (talk) 22:26, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

I really like what @Charlesaaronthompson: did on the Nuggets page, just changing the font color to black. I think that looks much better than the current color scheme. Navy blue really isn't a Nuggets color. I would be fine if it were kept like that. --Miamiheat631^Talk 18:00, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

An IP editor (@65.131.155.51:) added an infobox to many of the annual NBA playoff articles, which created Prev/Next links atop the page Special:Contributions/65.131.155.51. Another IP editor @2601:282:300:98:CDF8:877:7A04:C9A7: then reverted those edits Special:Contributions/2601:282:300:98:CDF8:877:7A04:C9A7. Both were done without comment/edit summary.

I find the idea of linking annual tournament articles (including << Prev, Next >> links) via infobox to be utterly obvious, helpful to readers, and consistent with similar articles in other sports:

• 2010–11 NFL playoffs
• 2010 NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Tournament
• 2010 NCAA Women's Division I Basketball Tournament
• 2010 Major League Baseball season#Postseason (MLB folds the playoff content into the regular season article, but those articles use infoboxes to allow Prev/Next navigation)

NHL alone has no infobox:

• 2010 Stanley Cup playoffs

Any thoughts? UW Dawgs (talk) 23:38, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Did Erick Green sign with Olympiacos? This article has gotten a lot of activity lately and I'm not sure what to believe. Jrcla2 (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

It's not official yet. I reverted it to last good version. – Sabbatino (talk) 04:30, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

It is official now. Rikster2 (talk) 10:45, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

RTagoe33 has been repeatedly re-adding unsourced stats from random games into Kobe Bryant without an edit summary or any consensus.[7][8][9] Kobe's got a lot of "clutch" games in his career. Do people feel there is context to keep these games too?—Bagumba (talk) 17:13, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

This user edtis Los Angeles Lakers-related articles for most of the time. I remember not long ago, he was edit warring with everyone on the Lakers article when he decided to change headings without even discussing with people. As for these stats, they are not notable to be included. I would understand if Lakers trailed and won G7 of some stage in the playoffs (or some other notable performance), but not this. – Sabbatino (talk) 17:57, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes, if there was some meaningful context added in prose, it could be relevant. Otherwise, it's one of many cool stat lines from his career.—Bagumba (talk) 18:03, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Is there any opportunity to standardize the title strings within Category:American Basketball Association navigational boxes as either "ABA" or "American Basketball Association?" Right now, we do both Now post edit, we are more consistent:

In particular, this appears odd when stacked, such as on Artis Gilmore#External links where we get what appears to be random, alternating strings. It would seem to be better to standardize the titles if at all possible.

And because nothing is ever easy, we also have the newer Category:American Basketball Association (2000–present). Based on American Basketball Association (2000–present), perhaps the following title should be appended with " (2000–present)":

Thoughts? UW Dawgs (talk) 03:31, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Done per WP:BOLD, less "teams" and "seasons" which seemed better spelled out. Revert, dicuss as you see fit. UW Dawgs (talk) 01:02, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Looks good to me. oknazevad (talk) 01:05, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

It seems like every year we get deeper into Summer League stints being updated as if they were real deals. Can we come to some agreement about when the team colors and entry in the team history are added to a player's infobox? Being on (for example) the Mavericks' Summer League team is NOT the same as being on the Mavericks. It is a showcase to allow rookies to get work in and to possibly find a player or two to add to training camp where they then can compete for the last couple of spots on a roster. I recommend that the infobox is updated and team roster template added (though not the team category, which is added once they appear in a game) if:

• They have been signed to a deal that is specifically announced on the team site (like Marshall Plumlee, Briante Webber, Rodney McGruder this year). This would be an actual article, not "Orlando Magic release summer league roster signings"
• They are a drafted rookie appearing on the team roster but NOT under contract with a non-US team.

What do you guys think? It's getting out of hand. Rikster2 (talk) 16:09, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

I agree with your recommendations. It's otherwise undue to equate a Summer League stint with a regular season one, and I don't recommend doing what WP:NFL does with infobox annotations like "Offseason and/or practice squad member only" (e.g. Michael Sam).—Bagumba (talk) 17:06, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

I used to worry about making sure Summer League teams stayed out of infoboxes, but there are just too many players to keep track of. It usually sorts itself out once they go on to sign pro deals in Europe or wherever. We have attempted to police this every year, and every year we agree Summer League stints shouldn't be listed in the infobox. That being said, the general public and NBA followers don't know about this practise and/or don't care about Wikipedia norms. I wouldn't lose sleep over it, Rik. DaHuzyBru (talk) 08:39, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Right, but we get obsessive about when trades and FA signings are reflected and numbers.Why such a lower bar for people who aren't on the team? We should set the standard and then there is something to point new users to so they can start to learn. Rikster2 (talk) 11:33, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

I agree. Summer League teams should be kept out of players' infoboxes. – Sabbatino (talk) 13:26, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Rik, there has always been a standard. Us experienced editors know not to have Summer League in the infobox. That's always been the case since I've been around. It's just a matter of who of us is going to police it. I, for one, do not bother with it. Do you? If I come across a page with Summer League in the infobox, I'll removed said info. However, I'm not going around checking like I do with actual signing, trade rumors etc. DaHuzyBru (talk) 15:12, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure Rikster2 wasn't implying that we are all required to actively patrol it. It's good to know what the consensus is, independent of that.—Bagumba (talk) 00:00, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Summer League ends Monday anyway. No way these players should show NBA team affiliation after that unless they have actually signed a real deal. Others can do what they want, I plan to remove SL info unless there is an official signing. Rikster2 (talk) 00:09, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

I see that some articles in prose (not tables) are linking to an opponents' season-specific article, not the general team article. For example in Kobe Bryant, "San Antonio Spurs" is mentioned 6 times by their full same, and each time linked to a season article, not the general team article. I have the following concerns:

1. WP:EGG: "San Antonio Spurs" would lead one to think they would see the general team article, not a season specific article, which is contrary to the goal of following "principle of least astonishment".
2. Redundant: Seeing the text "San Antonio Spurs" multiple times is redundant, when it can be shortened to San Antonio or Spurs in subsequent mentions.
3. WP:OVERLINK: Seeing "San Antonio Spurs" linked over and over gives the appearance of overlinking, even if each one is to a different season article. Believing it's overlinked, since there is no consistency between articles, readers are likely to ignore and not click on it anyways, defeating the purpose of linking to begin with.

I think it's nonintuitive and unproductive to have such linking. Is there any consensus to link each opponent every time they are mentioned, and linking to the season specific article and not the general article?—Bagumba (talk) 20:59, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

I know TonyTheTiger likes that style of adding specific team season links in player articles to avoid OVERLINK (I assume). However, this user has been adding that style incorrectly IMO. I see you also reverted their addition to Pau Gasol [10], as I did twice as well [11] [12]. I think the specific season link is fine for TonyTheTiger's style (i.e. "On January 4, 2016, Turner started in place of an injured Avery Bradley and posted a 12-point, 11-rebound double-double against the Brooklyn Nets."), but not for every listing of a team name (i.e. "On July 18, 2014, Gasol signed with the Chicago Bulls."). Per your explanation Bagumba, "he signed with the team, not the team's season". DaHuzyBru (talk) 08:48, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Additionally though, I personally don't add specific team season links in player articles, I'm just not totally against TonyTheTiger's style. Perhaps if he could shed some light on his reasoning, we'd get a better understanding behind the practise. DaHuzyBru (talk) 08:52, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

To be clear, I'm fine with linking season-specific articles e.g. 2016 NBA Finals to other season-specific articles e.g. [[2015–16 Golden State Warriors|Golden State Warriors]]. In that case, there will generally only be one link needed per team mention. However, it becomes a problem in bios if the same team is listed multiple times, and WP:EGGy what the reader would expect it to link to, especially when there is no obvious convention across articles (even with WP:NBA).—Bagumba (talk) 23:05, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

• I use links to team season articles when the relevant content is at that location. I.E. X player scored 60 points on Month DD, YYYY against Team Foo. Well he did not score those points against the historical franchise. He scored the against the YYYY-YY Team Foo which had a specific roster and coach. If the reader wants to know who he scored the points against, it is the article for that specific team with those specific players that contains the content that the reader is looking for. When a player gets drafted by a team it is by a franchise.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:21, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • It's not an issue if it's a one-time link to an opponent. In the case of Kobe Bryant described above (and perhaps others), it's confusing if the same team is mentioned multiple times and linked in each instance, when generic text like San Antonio Spurs makes it seem like an WP:OVERLINK because there is no established convention to link the season article each time.—Bagumba (talk) 15:44, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
    • Emphasis on seem like. Yes it can confusing to link the reader to the articles that have the relevant content, but is it better to send them to articles that don't have the relavant content? I have been doing this on the college and NBA level for years and don't recall having been reverted to avoid confusion. It is especially important in the one-and-done era of college basketball to do this since the main players from a team can vary from year to year. Take a sentence like this from Nik Stauskas: "The 2013–14 team was eliminated in the elite eight round of the 2014 NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Tournament by Kentucky as Stauskas led all scorers with 24 points." Do you remember which set of Kentucky players were on that Kentucky team if I don't link to the correct season article. Similarly, a sentence like this from Juwan Howard: "Howard became just the second player in Washington franchise history, after Bernard King, to post back-to-back 40-point games (against Boston on April 17, 1996, with 40, and at Toronto on April 19, 1996, with 42)." Do you remember whether these were scrub Celtics and Raptor teams or not? The team season article tells you who the actual opponent was. If we are going to link an opponent at all, we should tell the reader which one it was.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:50, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Is there any criteria in adding notable players to team's lede section? Recently one user added Mo Williams to the Cavalier's lede section and he keeps arguing that he belongs there, while I'm opposed to such addition, because Williams didn't achieve anything significant with the Cavaliers or any other team with that matter. He also didn't spend much time with the team to have any kind of distinction among others. In the meantime, that user thinks that, because Williams was an All-Star for one occasion, he belongs there. Any thoughts? – Sabbatino (talk) 08:35, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

There isn't anything project specific that I know of. Generally, article content should adhere to WP:DUE, giving proper weight to material. So the debate seems to be whether a one-time All-Star bears mentioning in a lead. In the case where there is WP:NOCONSENSUS, the guideline says "a lack of consensus commonly results in retaining the version of the article as it was prior to the proposal or bold edit."—Bagumba (talk) 08:52, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

He's not significant to the Cavaliers' history for now. He didn't spend much of his career there. He didn't set any record like, for example, Lebron James or others. He didn't achieve anything while playing for other team/teams like Kevin Love. Therefore, I'm sure it's not a good idea to include him there. Any other editor can say something about this? – Sabbatino (talk) 18:47, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Feels like you could make that case that except in really rare cases you shouldn't necessarily have individual players in the lead. Or at best it should be HOF-level players who are deeply associated with the franchise. (Jordan with the Bulls, Duncan with the Spurs, Magic with the Lakers, etc) Rikster2 (talk) 18:56, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

I agree with this. We should set really high standards for any players mentioned in the lead. Otherwise, people will never stop fiddling with the lists. I'm not sure if this was a step in the right direction, though. At least "All-Star" can be easily defined. "Legend" is too subjective. Zagalejo^^^ 04:11, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

There's a great rule for NHL articles (although this only applies to player's debut and last games) – Played in Multiple all-star games... or was named to the First or Second Post-Season All-Star team (there are many players who played in one token all-star game (ie. Garth Butcher) who are not notable, if you do it twice that means you must have had some importance), but this should be slightly changed to fit the NBA articles. – Sabbatino (talk) 04:45, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Kevin Love didn't set any record while he was with the Cavaliers, so are you going to remove his name too? – Kalope

If you read what I wrote instead of picking what you like then you would understand what I meant. Love was a 3× NBA All-Star, 3× All-NBA Second Team member among other achievements when he was playing for the Timberwolves. He didn't spend much of his career with the Cavaliers, but at least he was already notable before joining them. No comments are needed about LeBron James or Kyrie Irving, because they have multiple different awards. And what does Mo Williams have? One NBA All-Star appearance? How is that significant? There are about a hundred better players with the same achievement as Williams, but they don't get credit for being All-Star players. – Sabbatino (talk) 04:45, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

I've got a question about Template:2016 Summer Olympics China men's basketball team roster. Why is Wang Zhelin listed with the Memphis Grizzlies, while Zhou Qi is listed with his Chinese team? Is either player expected to come to the NBA this year? The players' articles add further inconsistencies. In his article infobox, Zhou is listed with the Rockets, while Wang's infobox shows him with his Chinese team.

I'm pretty confused.

Thanks! Zagalejo^^^ 16:45, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

There's no indication that these players will come to NBA this year (or maybe ever). There's not a single NBA or any source for that matter, that mention these players' coming to the league this year. Despite them being listed on Rockets' and Grizzlies' rosters, they should have their pre-NBA team for now, because NBA teams rarely update their rosters during the summer and they always list draft picks, no matter what. – Sabbatino (talk) 17:14, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Actually, in terms of Zhou, I just found this, which suggests he can't come over until 2017. Zagalejo^^^ 17:41, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

I have finally hastily edited and winnowed down the thousands of images that I took at the 2016 McDonald's All-American Boys Game to about 200. I am welcoming feedback on which images to use for each of the 24 players in various articles. Please stop by at Talk:2016_McDonald's_All-American_Boys_Game#Image_voting to select preferred images for each player.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:07, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

I know you guys may think this is an unrelated issue, but keep in mind that the top 3 picks in the 2016 NBA draft still have a McDonald's All-American Game image as their main image.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:15, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

• Hey folks, thanks for contributing toward consensus building on these images. 18 of the 24 players now have an image supported by a majority of respondents. I would still appreciate some feedback on Bam Adebayo, De'Aaron Fox, Jarrett Allen, Josh Jackson, Markelle Fultz, and Sacha Killeya-Jones who remain difficult decisions. Recall that the top 3 guys in the 2016 NBA draft, 2 of the top 3 in the 2015 NBA draft and a total of 21 players in those two drafts (plus Cliff Alexander who went undrafted) had our MCDAAG images as the main image on draft day. Thus, this set of images is important to the project as a whole. I especially encourage people who have commented on some players, but not all of these 6 that remain undecided (DaHuzyBru, SantiLak, Bagumba, Jorgeriverez) to please consider them. These pictures are very likely to be our representation of these players on their NBA draft day (whether they are drafted or not).--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:19, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks to Rikster2--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:50, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

I have nominated the 13 Philadelphia Sports Hall of Fame navigational boxes for deletion. Please see the discussion here. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 16:41, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

When I started including recruit boxes in bios many other editors started doing so as well. Now, I see a trend of people removing these boxes from articles. E.g., here Bagumba at D'Angelo Russell. More recently, this edit by an IP, it was removed from Glenn Robinson III, which is a page I watch. I personally find the boxes to be a good summary high school content such as how highly he was regarded. Does the project have a policy on this type of content.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:46, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

I think they are fine for college season articles, but find them bulky for bios and redundant to some info already in the infobox. Moreover, they are also often unsourced, or using malformed urls. I usually find a sentence or two of prose with relevant rankings is more elegant for bios.—Bagumba (talk) 00:35, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Bagumba, For most players who were highly recruited, one or two sentences will not summarize their high school rankings. You might be able to describe "Scout:5/5 stars Rivals:5/5 stars 247Sports:5/5 stars ESPN:5/5 stars" as "a 5-star shooting guard", but what one sentence summarizes "Overall recruiting rankings: Scout: 13, 2 (SG) Rivals: 18 247Sports: 16, 1 (KY) , 5 (SG) ESPN: 13, 1 (KY), 1 (SG)"?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:37, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Furthermore, they are no better sourced in college team season articles than in bios. Also they are no more bulky than statistics tables which are equally wide.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:05, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Bagumba, Can you please respond.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:19, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

My main contention with the table in bios is that they are bulky. One header row for only one row of data for the bio subject, as opposed to potentially multiple players for a team article, seems awkward. Height, weight, position, and hometown are somewhat redundant to the infobox already in a bio. Per state rankings are overly detailed. I think something like at T. J. Leaf, "A consensus five-star and overall top-20 recruit ...", would be ideal for most readers. It can be fine-tuned more, but a table with all its present minutiae seems undue for a bio (and perhaps even a team article, but let's focus on bios). Thanks.—Bagumba (talk) 00:37, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

The height and weight in high school are not that redundant with height and weight as a pro. Many people grow a lot after high school, especially weight-wise. The reason the rankings parameters exist is that the content is of encyclopedic interest to the readers. Removing the detail is similar to removing stats tables that can be summarized in prose. We could say so-and-so is a 5000-point scorer and 3000-rebound guy and eliminate stats tables, too.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:04, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Some stats are more important than others, so it's not an all-or-nothing proposition. Let's see what others think.—Bagumba (talk) 02:20, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

The discussion can be found at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Basketball#"Current team" listed on Olympic rosters. Thanks. Rikster2 (talk) 12:36, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Most NBA teams bring 18 player into training camp. I see Portland has 17 on their roster at NBA.com. I see no news that Alexander has been released. The last news was he was cut to make cap space and then added to the summer league roster. Help welcome.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:03, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

If the last action was to be waived and there has been no announcement since that he has re-signed for at least training camp then he is a free agent. A summer league deal is not a full contract. Rikster2 (talk) 19:42, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

There is a discussion underway at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Basketball#Naismith HOF templates about the need for 2 navboxes associated with this honor. Please take part. Rikster2 (talk) 10:10, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Could someone please help me out here with this user adding ridiculous slanderous BS to Andrea Bargnani's article. Take a look at this. Is this not completely unnecessary and poorly written with poor tone? Citing Bleacher Report, which is in no way a reliable source, and stating he is "the team's most hated player" and quoting in caps. Surely I'm not the only one who finds this to be complete nonsense and cringe worthy information. If anyone else agrees, perhaps back me up with a revert as I do not want a one-to-one edit war here with this user. DaHuzyBru (talk) 19:22, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

 Done – Sabbatino (talk) 05:22, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

I also removed some text that was a copyvio, taken word for word from the source.—Bagumba (talk) 08:29, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Why the colors of the Mavs are different in the infobox of the article and in Module:Basketball color/data? #007DC5 (article), #005DC5 (module) Seriesphile (talk · ctb) 09:47, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Correct colors restored in the article. Some IP user keeps changing them to incorrect colors. – Sabbatino (talk) 10:55, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Why the colors of the Mavs are different in the infobox of the article and in Module:Basketball color/data? #007DC5 (article), #005DC5 (module) Seriesphile (talk · ctb) 09:47, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Correct colors restored in the article. Some IP user keeps changing them to incorrect colors. – Sabbatino (talk) 10:55, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

What's the deal with nationality tab in these tables (or similar)? All of these tables state that Country X is the nationality when in fact it should say, for example, American or similarly. Same goes for NBA draft articles' tables where it is stated that Australia is the nationality. Any feedback is welcome. – Sabbatino (talk) 10:35, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Please weigh in at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Basketball#Revised_WP:NHOOPS_guideline. Thanks. Rikster2 (talk) 02:32, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Seems like we need to define what sources can and can't be used for this. Recently Casper Ware was added with RealGM.com as the source. RealGM isn't a reliable source on its own. For articles, the standard has been that the team needs to announce or add to the roster, with some leeway if this doesn't happen but the transaction appears on NBA.com's transaction tracker. It feels like this should be the minimum standard for this list and that the standard should be the same for articles and the transaction list to avoid confusion. Further, I would just reiterate that RealGM.com should not be considered a "reliable source" - they make WAY too many mistakes with place of birth, report transactions without final confirmation, etc. Rikster2 (talk) 16:00, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

In my opinion, this should be treated like every other basketball article – only team's or league's official press release should be considered as reliable. All other sources are mostly rumors and speculations. RealGM and Sportando are the two sources that I think should be avoided. – Sabbatino (talk) 16:16, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Maybe start a project subpage with notes on contested sources? I had flagged FoxSports.com a while back also as being bad for transactions. At any rate, 99% of transactions are confirmed or die in a few days. There no benefit to WP to be in a hurry to break news.—Bagumba (talk) 03:37, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Not to toot my own horn, but from 2013–14 to 2015–16, I was the main daily updater/contributor to NBA transactions lists and I only ever used NBA.com press releases i.e. only official signings/trades/waivers were added. I decided to retire from this season's one to focus on other areas and boy has the standard dropped. With various contributors to the 2016–17 page (mainly random IPs), the sources used are going to be random and inconsistent. In my experience, RealGM often comes up with their own transaction dates that are inconsistent to other sources. My main source for basketball news and transactions is Hoops Rumors and they occasionally cite RealGM as being official, which I find strange i.e. Hoops Rumors cites Casper Ware's signing as being official based off RealGM [13]. Too much weight is placed on RealGM – it should never be go-to source IMO. But with myself out of the picture, there is limited moderation at the 2016–17 page, so it's going to naturally be messy. DaHuzyBru (talk) 13:03, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

I think we first just need to have a common understanding of when transactions are updated and keep it consistent across pages (transaction page, team pages, player pages). I think there has been a clear consensus that the team announcing or adding to a roster is the trigger for player pages, though I understand the argument that the NBA.com transaction tracker should be considered "official" (sometimes it is a little ahead of the team announcement. I think third-party sources of any kind should be avoided, but agree with Bagumba that we should highlight sources that are particularly inconsistent. I find RealGM (and Sportando) to be good sources for information directionally, helping know what to search for, but they need to be corroborated by better sources. Rikster2 (talk) 13:34, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Seems like we need to define what sources can and can't be used for this. Recently Casper Ware was added with RealGM.com as the source. RealGM isn't a reliable source on its own. For articles, the standard has been that the team needs to announce or add to the roster, with some leeway if this doesn't happen but the transaction appears on NBA.com's transaction tracker. It feels like this should be the minimum standard for this list and that the standard should be the same for articles and the transaction list to avoid confusion. Further, I would just reiterate that RealGM.com should not be considered a "reliable source" - they make WAY too many mistakes with place of birth, report transactions without final confirmation, etc. Rikster2 (talk) 16:00, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

In my opinion, this should be treated like every other basketball article – only team's or league's official press release should be considered as reliable. All other sources are mostly rumors and speculations. RealGM and Sportando are the two sources that I think should be avoided. – Sabbatino (talk) 16:16, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Maybe start a project subpage with notes on contested sources? I had flagged FoxSports.com a while back also as being bad for transactions. At any rate, 99% of transactions are confirmed or die in a few days. There no benefit to WP to be in a hurry to break news.—Bagumba (talk) 03:37, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Not to toot my own horn, but from 2013–14 to 2015–16, I was the main daily updater/contributor to NBA transactions lists and I only ever used NBA.com press releases i.e. only official signings/trades/waivers were added. I decided to retire from this season's one to focus on other areas and boy has the standard dropped. With various contributors to the 2016–17 page (mainly random IPs), the sources used are going to be random and inconsistent. In my experience, RealGM often comes up with their own transaction dates that are inconsistent to other sources. My main source for basketball news and transactions is Hoops Rumors and they occasionally cite RealGM as being official, which I find strange i.e. Hoops Rumors cites Casper Ware's signing as being official based off RealGM [14]. Too much weight is placed on RealGM – it should never be go-to source IMO. But with myself out of the picture, there is limited moderation at the 2016–17 page, so it's going to naturally be messy. DaHuzyBru (talk) 13:03, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

I think we first just need to have a common understanding of when transactions are updated and keep it consistent across pages (transaction page, team pages, player pages). I think there has been a clear consensus that the team announcing or adding to a roster is the trigger for player pages, though I understand the argument that the NBA.com transaction tracker should be considered "official" (sometimes it is a little ahead of the team announcement. I think third-party sources of any kind should be avoided, but agree with Bagumba that we should highlight sources that are particularly inconsistent. I find RealGM (and Sportando) to be good sources for information directionally, helping know what to search for, but they need to be corroborated by better sources. Rikster2 (talk) 13:34, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Anyone else is tired of certain user running around with AWB and creating thousands of redirects or de-linking places in infobox as here or here? I know that Rikster2 and Oknazevad showed their displeasure with such actions. However, that "special someone" keeps going the same path even after we wrote on his talk page that he should refrain from such actions. – Sabbatino (talk) 09:16, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

The redirects for article names (especially the team names) I support see MOS:NOPIPE which indicates you should try to use redirects instead of piping when possible, but the unlinking I don't think should be done. -DJSasso (talk) 10:34, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

I agree with Djsasso. Using redirects is fine, especially since franchise names may change again in the future. That said, I find it funny that the same bot changes [[NBA]] to [[National Basketball Association|NBA]]. I can go either way on de-linking as I often delink countries. Removing state after major cities in infoboxes and rosters is bogus, though, and doesn't actually have support of MOS as a practice. Rikster2 (talk) 11:35, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Yeah its the removing state I was meaning with the delinking. -DJSasso (talk) 11:46, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm not talking about team redirects as I don't have a problem with that either. I mean redirects like this when awards, season-specific teams (All NBA-Defensive or similar) and similar stuff is converted into a redirect. And de-liking cities is just nonsense. This was discussed with him multiple times and other users made it clear that tables and infoboxes should be left alone. At first he stopped that for some time, but later he started doing the same thing all over again. – Sabbatino (talk) 12:43, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Yeah even those All star links are ok per the Manual of Style link I posted above. -DJSasso (talk) 14:14, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Just as an FYI, the "letter" field in the basketball biography infobox (which is also the NBA biography infobox). The "bbr" parameter now links to the appropriate basketball-reference.com without needing the letter parameter. I have been removing these as I make other edits, but would welcome other editors doing the same. Thanks. Rikster2 (talk) 15:51, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

I placed the list of first overall WNBA draft picks as a nomination as a featured list. Any comments you could provide would be appreciated. Thanks --Pink Fae (talk) 17:31, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Help is needed at Michael Carter-Williams' article. IP users keep adding that he is playing for the Bulls after reports about the possible trade surfaced. I'm already at 2 reverts so I'm almost out. – Sabbatino (talk) 13:36, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

I semi-protected that article and the Tony Snell article. Zagalejo^^^ 15:31, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. – Sabbatino (talk) 18:32, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Today one user changed the founding dates of several NBA and NHL teams. There's already a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey. However, I want to ask about it here. Which date is considered the founding date – announcement of expansion/relocation or FIRST season played? – Sabbatino (talk) 15:26, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

P.s. This also concerns WNBA's team articles. – Sabbatino (talk) 16:36, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Granting of the franchise, such as seen in the NFL team articles. It starts business operations, mass hiring, draft and player planning in full, merch, etc. UW Dawgs (talk) 16:45, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

So 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 edits are correct? – Sabbatino (talk) 17:02, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Official teams' media guides list first season of play as team's founding date. I suppose we should follow what official sources tell us as always. – Sabbatino (talk) 18:27, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

I stumbled upon these edits by an IP account, they did not explain the changes, so someone should have a look. IP accounts should not be changing these without at least an explanation, right ? Thanks, - Mlpearc (open channel) 02:58, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Today, I noticed that the Cavs current roster only includes 14 players instead of the normal full complement of 15. After bouncing around the internet for a while, I finally decided to just compare http://www.nba.com/teams/cavaliers with the list of 14. It turns out that despite a month old retirement announcement, the Cavs still have Mo Williams on their roster. What is proper protocol here?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:33, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

This is my version, which I believe is what is really happening. He's retired, but not yet waived.--Cheetah (talk) 22:10, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

I have changed it. As of today, Mo Williams never filed his retirement paperwork with the league, so he's considered an NBA player.--Cheetah (talk) 22:16, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

DaHuzyBru is one of the most productive editors at WP:NBA. He constantly helps keep content on pages up to date. However, I have begun to notice a broad pattern of edits that are counter to WP:V and take Wikipedia back 10 years to the days when readers viewed wikipedia as unreliable because people could put anything on a page without regard to any sourcing policy. Here are three types of content contributions that I think are counterproductive. There are probably other types too, but I don't have time to go through all of his edits.

1. He takes content that is clearly marked as [citation needed] and rearranges it so that readers can't tell. E.g., this change last night to Anthony Davis.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:46, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
2. He adds content citing recaps that do not support the factual content added. E.g., this change last night to Jakob Pöltl.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:46, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
   1. He notes that the box score is just one click away, but this is no different than linking to a home page and saying if you know which link to go to the content is right there.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:47, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
3. He adds wikilinks that have no content related to the topic of the content added. (see the Cleveland Cavaliers link which is irrelevant to the content). E.g., this change two nights ago at Ron Baker.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:46, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
   1. N.B.: He has pointed out that I may be in the minority regarding this third type of edit involving team season articles. I have piped to 2016–17 Cleveland Cavaliers season because that actually has summary content about the game and content about the team that he opposed, whereas linking to Cleveland Cavaliers serves no purpose because the most relevant content about the team that he opposed will change over time (I.e., the coach will change and the arena name will likely change on that page, but remain constant on the team season article). I understand that it takes a lot more work to use team season articles, but I can't imagine that there is really a preference to use a wikilink that has no relevant content regarding the fact at issue.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:46, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Do we really want prolific editors with a preference toward making WP less reliable to continue doing what they do?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:46, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Tony - Have you sufficiently taken this up with DaHuzyBru directly before bringing this here? We can discuss all of these practices, but it feels like good form to first go to the editor and try to hash them all out with them directly. With respect to #3, I don't think we have ever had any discussion of linking season article vs. team article. In the long run, individual games are rarely that important so I don't see much value in linking the season article vs. the team. Otherwise, you could over time have a player like Baker with ten different "Cleveland Cavaliers" links while never playing for them. I don't see that as overly valuable to the reader, but I also don't have a strong stance against using season links. Rikster2 (talk) 15:32, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Rikster2, Baker may not be the best example as a rookie. Maybe look at Anthony Davis. In each of the last three seasons, he has done notable things against the Denver Nuggets. The value in the team-season article versus the team article is not tremendously high, but each article has a brief summary of who the leaders of the opposition was in the game table and further content on the opposition in the rest of the article. The team article is worthless. Nothing to see and no reason to link to it.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:14, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

The team article (linked once) isn't worthless. It defines the team for the reader. Like I said, I don't think individual games matter that much. In ten years I think very few readers are going to be searching Wikipedia for a summary of an individual game. Just my two cents and again, I don't care that much. Rikster2 (talk) 00:37, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

@Rikster2: This style of linking was discussed at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_National_Basketball_Association/Archive_31#Linking_to_opponents_w.2F_team_article_or_season_article. Didn't seem to be consensus to either remove or continue at the time.—Bagumba (talk) 06:31, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Time to defend myself, I guess...

1. "He takes content that is clearly marked as [citation needed] and rearranges it so that readers can't tell" – are you suggesting I do that regularly based off one edit? Cheers, Tony. It's not hard to find a ref that can support it if it's true – I wasn't the one who originally added the info, I just moved the non-controversial info to a more appropriate place.
   1. I am not going to troll all your edits. I edit a few dozen guys' pages. I rarely post facts with a ((fact)) tag rather than a IC. Thus, I don't have a lot of data in this regard. However, this instance along with all the other types of ridiculous decisions not to link to the facts is a big problem.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:14, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
2. "He adds content citing recaps that do not support the factual content added" – This is a dilemma, I admit. This has come about because, for some reason, NBA.com no longer do game recaps like that have done for the past however many years. They used to have game-by-game home pages for each game (like this), but now everything is through NBA TV [15], which do not have recaps. Before, one link would cover all bases because the recaps, boxscores etc were all on one page. I'm now using ESPN (by default; the next best thing), where you have to click elsewhere for the boxscore. I am now incorporating ESPN recaps and NBA.com box scores.
   1. This is not a dilemna. We have to link to the page that has the content. If a fact is not in the recap, don't use it as the WP:IC. An IC is suppose to contain the source for a fact. Again. This is not a dilemna. There is no other option than to link to the page that has the fact.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:14, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
3. "Do we really want prolific editors with a preference toward making WP less reliable to continue doing what they do?" – "Opinions are like assholes. Everyone has one". I'm sorry you feel I am making this great website "less reliable". My style for updating player articles following games and in general has been consistent for many years now. I've never had anyone blatantly call-out my work before, let alone bring my case to WT:NBA! Does anyone else want to voice their opinion on my editing style? Meanwhile, I'm going to continue doing what I'm doing. DaHuzyBru (talk) 15:36, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
   1. You seem to have not responded to number 3, other than by cursing. But if that's the best you got, that's the best you got. Also, note that I am here in part because you said I am in the minority, which I presume means there was some discussion here.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:14, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

There's nothing here that really merits a public flogging, especially not point 3, which is not a WP:V issue. DaHuzyBru has done a lot of good work over the years. Modern NBA stats are easy to find, so any disputes about those should be easy to resolve with a little bit of research. For example, at NBA.com, you can sort a player's game logs to find his career highs. (Granted, NBA.com is often unusable for me, but you can also poke around basketball-reference.com to find similar info.) Zagalejo^^^ 13:21, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

• I don't use NBA.com that much. I use ESPN because I can rely on it when I am doing NCAAF, NCAAMB, MLB, NFL and NBA. However, I just pointed out that this edit added a link that does not work for me. I don't know if I need league pass or something, but we should not expect readers to have league pass.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:21, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Personally, I add inline citations for 95+% of my edits. That being said, WP:V says "any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material." Is there reason to challenge these edits? I typically grant an editor like DaHuzyBru a lot of leeway because I rarely find his additions to be factually incorrect, citation or not, and he's already better than average with citations (even if's not at an FA level). In the rare cases I find mistakes, I correct them, and presume it's a good faith error (as I expect others to do w/ my mistakes).—Bagumba (talk) 05:33, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

• Bagumba, Zagalejo, and Rikster2, since you have chimed in here regarding reference/link sufficiency here, I need your feedback on whether my 17:21, 29 October 2016 concern is a problem for you. Please note where you are signing in from and your operating system and browser. My problems are from Chicago, in WIndows 10 through Firefox. On his User talk page [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DaHuzyBru&curid=33833417&diff=746806670&oldid=746802243 DaHuzyBru mentions he is editing from Australia and has to modify links. We need to get him feedback to determine if I am having an isolated problem.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:59, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
  • That link doesn't work for me, either. (I'm also in Chicago.) But NBA.com does indeed work differently in different countries. I was reading a Reddit thread about that just the other day. That's not especially helpful for Wikipedia purposes, but on the other hand, it doesn't seem fair to make overseas editors go through a lot of hoops for the sake of an American audience. (Especially when we're just talking about game recaps.) We do allow non-English sources, and print sources, which are not going to be accessible to all readers. Zagalejo^^^ 15:13, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

I realize now that "watch.nba.com" in Australia is likely "nba.com/leaguepass" for the US. It's stupid, and I dislike the Australian modifications. When dealing with NBA-related updates, I edit as if I live in the US i.e. removing ".au" from espn, adding accessdates based on US WST (by 3pm my time, it's finally 12pm in California for example) and using US English. I wasn't aware watch.nba.com didn't work in the US and will no longer add such links into Wikipedia (as well as removing any watch.nba.com that I previously added when I come across them). DaHuzyBru (talk) 17:08, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Making a few tests over VPN, I'm finding exactly what's already been observed. In the US, game URLs look like http://www.nba.com/games/20161028/WASATL, while I saw in Asia it looks like https://watch.nba.com/game/20161027/WASATL. Apparently the "watch" url triggers a redirect to League Pass in the US.—Bagumba (talk) 05:17, 31 October 2016 (UTC)