Talk:Fantasy basketball
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of a WikiProject to improve Wikipedia's articles related to Basketball. For guidelines see WikiProject Basketball and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ. |
[edit] Dispute over external links
Attention editors: do ***** NOT ***** delete the four external links from this article (Office NBA Fantasy Games on nba.com, Fantasy Basketball at the Open Directory Project, Fantasy Basketball Leagues at the Open Directory Project, Fantasy Basketball Federation). They WILL be undone !
I will be revising this page the week of 18 Feb 08 back to it's premorphed & relevant form which was an aid to Fantasy Basketball players. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.42.72.220 (talk) 17:32, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- Please stop spamming your links, you are breaching WP:NOT, WP:COI, WP:EL and WP:NPOV. Thanks, Gwernol 18:52, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- The point is not to be an aid to fantasy basketball players; the point is to be an encyclopedia article about fantasy basketball. In the interest of showing WP:CONSENSUS, I agree with User:Gwernol. Acdixon (talk • contribs • count) 18:59, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
It is indeed a shame that you are acting in the manner of a self-righteous Wikipedian. As someone who is not only a credentialed member of the press but a Fantasy Basketball insider it is (or was as per you I am no longer allowed to edit this page) my intention to revamp this page to better inform and contribute to Fantasy Basketball players knowledge and enjoyment of the game including 1) sources that are and have historically been useful in informing Fantasy Basketball players (for which I have a list of external links to which I have a vested interest in none), 2) Varied league types, formats, guidelines, and settings (which I had originally in the article with no links but for some reason have over time also been deleted), and 3) Lists and Suggestions of "How To's", etc of running, joining, or playing in a Fantasy Basketball league (again with no external links in this area). However you would prefer that active as well as potential or interested Fantasy Basketball players (not Baseball mind you) not have access or be made aware this information. I have not edited any pages on the "Boer Wars" for example, as I am not knowledgable enough in the area to be qualified to do so, yet in this area where I am you feel that you have a better grasp of what is useful to Fantasy Basketball players without having that knowledge or understanding, including external links to DMOZ (who's links have become quite outdated as well a a number are no longer valid - how that is relevant or beneficial to anyone I have no idea) and an "advertising" link to NAB.com's Office Fantasy Games (not NBA the news source mind you). It was my understanding that part of Wiki's function or purpose was to "inform" and "educate", however I did not realize that had changed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.42.72.220 (talk) 20:06, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- First, no one questioned your credentials. Second, no one questioned the usefulness of your links to fantasy basketball players. Third, no one said you couldn't edit this page. The only thing anyone did was cite established Wikipedia policies that they believe your edits violate. (BTW, your original comment about not removing these links and how they "WILL" be reverted smacks of WP:OWN as well.) If you can cite a policy that supports your position, please do. If other editors agree with your position, they are welcome to express their comments here as well. We will try to work toward a solution that works for everyone, consistent with the policies of Wikipedia. We ask only that you remain WP:CIVIL during the discussion (no more "self-righteous Wikipedian" comments.) Acdixon (talk • contribs • count) 21:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
There are certain links that need to be added, some deleted, and some revised... For example, NBA Office Fantasy Games should eb modified to NBA.com period, otherwise it's just an open advertisement to their commercial venture. DMOZ should be dumped altogether as their links are mostly inactive. USA Today (specifically Player Salary Database) amooungst others as more and more league are using a Salary system of some sort, which init of itself should be a topic in the article.
- The comment regarding Links undone & WP:OWN , that came directly from the Wiki article on Fanatsy Baseball (not my own doing, but then that should be deleted from that article as well). - The "self-righteous Wikipedian" is a direct quote from WP:COI which I was referred to in Gwernol's note above (again, not my own phrase or doing). - As for no one questioning the usefulness of your links to fantasy basketball players, I was advised that no additional links were warranted, and that the validity (or lack thereof) of the present links was immaterial. - I was indeed told that I couldn't edit this page (in fact there is a Red Hand Stop Sign message her from Gwernol with a "Final Warning" for me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:75.42.72.220) - Am I mistaken about links being warranted on any article, Fantasy Baseball Wiki article has Yahoo Sports, ESPN, Sportsline, Sporting News, etc. Should these not be deleted as well and DMOZ inserted in their stead if that's the case or Wiki Policy ?
I am very passionate about Sports and Fantasy Sports, and what truly bothers me is the time and effort that was put into developing this article which remained in tact for years with external links to pertinent Fantasy Basketball sites (like the USA link mentioned, Fantasy Tools links and explanations, stats links, etc , etc) were all removed the end of 2007. Why ? The article was useful to everyone involved or interested in becoming involved in Fantasy Basketball. I have a number of people ask me regularly "where can I find this, how do you do that" etc and it was much easier and informative for them to go the the Wiki article (as other sportswriters I know did as well). The article was useful, and now it's been pared down and "admined" for lack of a better term into a shell of what it was. If the page is no longer useful or topical, then why have it ?
It is not my intention to be uncivil, however it is frustrating to be told what is and isn't warranted in the article by someone who is not experienced in the field. I felt like I was a History Professor being advised by a Math Professor what was a valid course plan for my History course.
Thanks for listening, FBF Commish
