User talk:Left guide

Superlatives

What's your take on the recent "one of the greatest" RfC close vs. Wikipedia:Aesthetic opinions? —Bagumba (talk) 07:39, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

@Bagumba: Hey, thanks for asking. The close says multiple reliable sources must report that a player is widely considered one of the greatest of all time, or similar phrasing. which appears to align well with the essay. Unfortunately, it seems very difficult to enforce in practice, since many editors are innocuously duped into the WP:OR trick of adding "widely considered/regarded" when seeing (or presented with) an arbitrary stack of sources that simply use the word "greatest", leaving aside the fact that said sources are often questionable and/or unreliable. I also find that sometimes sports editors can be very dogmatic, fanatical, and stubborn about this particular topic, so my mind has largely been off of it. I'm fine discussing it with you though, since you're always a cool level head even in hot topic areas (like MOS:CAPS for example). So how about you? What's your take? Left guide (talk) 08:10, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

Their later clarification was a bit looser. It seems to open up people collecting writers' individual opinions and then stamping it with "widely", the same ol Wild West. —Bagumba (talk) 08:16, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

@Bagumba: Honestly, it's always going to be the same ol' Wild West unless interested editors collectively prioritize policies over their personal beliefs and fandoms, which basically doesn't happen LOL. Sometimes, the least bad (and most time-saving) option is to simply draw the line in the sand, and say "no". Left guide (talk) 08:24, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

If the community at least agreed that sources should say "widely", I'd be OK. Otherwise, it's always a mess if editors find the sources they like and claim "widely" based on WP:OR and confirmation bias, ignoring the sources that contradict or don't even mention said player. I mean, you can't expect to find sources to explicitly contradict every fringe "greatest" claim, like Wilt no longer being widely considered the greatest. But do dig up those 80s quotes or OGs' current stories. —Bagumba (talk) 08:38, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

@Bagumba: Yeah, I agree with (and have previously thought about) most of that. It's probably something ultimately suited for one of the village pump pages. Or maybe find a way to add some clarity to the WP:AESTHETIC policy section. Left guide (talk) 08:45, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

Maybe I'm jaded, but I don't believe these types of domain-specific issues get much attention or insight outside of the project. And then any WP discussion gets stunted because all some people want to do is vote (and I don't mean !vote). —Bagumba (talk) 09:20, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

@Bagumba: Maybe I'm jaded, but I don't believe these types of domain-specific issues get much attention or insight outside of the project. You're totally right, especially with sports stuff, which is a big reason why I notified the NFL project about the disruptive roster position editor ANI, since it seemed like nothing would've happened otherwise. Basically everyone who meaningfully participated in that thread was NFL project folks, and I bet none of the ANI regulars knew (or cared) what the hell anyone was talking about regarding depth charts and such. There's also recent instances of ANI threads about boxing and Greek basketball that just died without action, and I've seen two or three ANIs from the hockey crowd in the last month that had a similar fate. But yeah, as to the last point, a lot of "consensus" in sports discussions is driven by popular vote or personal opinions; you're one of very few who seems to care about policy application. Left guide (talk) 09:48, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

and I bet none of the ANI regulars knew (or cared): Some might care if someone could explain it to them. But too many reports (not just sports) assume everyone else knows what they're talking about. —Bagumba (talk) 09:55, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

Bolding

I saw your bolding. At a glance, I think most user warnings seem to only bold with later or final warnings, whereas this sportstrans is an entry-level "you might not have known" FYI. Honestly, a lot of editors just do what they want, but the warnings are a necessary AGF to show we're not bitey. —Bagumba (talk) 06:00, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

@Bagumba: I was actually on the fence about asking you beforehand (but felt like doing so might've been bugging you), and went WP:BOLD (no pun intended) and did it anyways, so I was half-expecting you might challenge me on it. As for the edit itself, what would you think about either underlining or italicizing the phrase as a compromise? I still maintain that "confirming its completion" is a really important part that merits some sort of emphasis. Left guide (talk) 06:14, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

I think I'm institutionalized to think the 1st warning should be a calm introduction instead of "do this buddy", not necessarily that I think it's more effective. I leave it to your judgement. —Bagumba (talk) 08:20, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

@Bagumba: Italicized. Left guide (talk) 16:30, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Occasionally, these msgs do work.[1] You can ask them if the bolding did it LOL. —Bagumba (talk) 00:44, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

@Bagumba: I just did ask them, the boldface is an attention-grabber for sure LOL. Wait and see what they say, if no response maybe we can do a trial run with it and observe if it changes people's behavior, or at least brings greater awareness of the problem. Left guide (talk) 01:22, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

@Bagumba: We have our answer, back to boldface we go LOL. Left guide (talk) 08:41, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Did you know

... that your neutral notification might not be considered neutral? —Bagumba (talk) 04:25, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

@Bagumba: I'm confused? Left guide (talk) 04:28, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

My joke missed. NVM. —Bagumba (talk) 04:31, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

@Bagumba: Haha ok. No worries, it happens to me sometimes too. Left guide (talk) 04:33, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Though weirder things have turned out to be true, esp. re: caps. —Bagumba (talk) 04:39, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

@Bagumba: What do you mean? Left guide (talk) 04:39, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Oops. I should have just dropped the WP:STICK. So I joked that your post, which I do think is neutral, might not be considered neutral by others. And given everything around MOS, nothing surprises me on what people will claim. Hope that's clear(er). Otherwise, ignore (or even delete). —Bagumba (talk) 04:45, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

@Bagumba: I tend to think the more the merrier regarding community participation from interested/involved parties, which is why I sometimes notify WikiProjects of ANIs/AfDs/RMs/etc concerning their topic areas. A simple neutral notice without pings on a broad discussion page (as in not user talk pages) won't typically ruffle any feathers. Left guide (talk) 04:54, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Again, I do think it is neutral, which means this was a poor joke if it caused you to reflect. I am sorry. —Bagumba (talk) 05:05, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

@Bagumba: Apology accepted. :) Left guide (talk) 05:08, 27 June 2025 (UTC)