W
Active Editors
Back to Profile

User Talk: Centurion Seraph

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.

J. J. McCarthy


Hello, as you can see in: MOS:MORELINKWORDS ↗, it's okay to put more words inside a piped link to make it clear which page the link will take you to. As you're doing it (<code><nowiki>national championship ↗</nowiki></code>), it appears like the link to College football national championships in NCAA Division I FBS ↗. So using <code><nowiki>national championship in the 2023 season ↗</nowiki></code>, it's pretty clear which page is linked.

No other conferences have awards named after player. For example, the SEC doesn't have an award named Jackson–Walker Running Back of the Year, it's common sense, as you can see in: WP:COMMON ↗

It's not necessary to use the <code>#Results</code> to indicate McCarthy's three championships, because isn't a broken link, as you can see in: WP:NOPIPE ↗. This also applies to the Griese–Brees Quarterback of the Year, as you said yourself, we should keep the links simple, so by using <code><nowiki>Griese–Brees Big Ten Quarterback of the Year ↗</nowiki></code>, you are contradicting yourself, making a link longer than necessary and breaking that rule.

Lastly, I ain't part of anything that you cannot be too, if I told you that you could be banned it's because you're breaking rules, always try to follow them, you can find it on pages like: WP:MOS ↗, WP:REDIRECT ↗ and some more.

Have a nice day =)

Links



Hi there. If you're linking to Big Ten Quarterback of the Year ↗,https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Russell_Wilson&curid=21143591&diff=1225640381&diffonly=1&oldid=1225501147 ↗ just encode it as {{code|Big Ten Quarterback of the Year ↗}}, dont pipe it as {{code|Big Ten Quarterback of the Year ↗}}, per MOS:NOTBROKEN ↗. Keep up tbe Big Ten edits. —Bagumba (talk) 02:51, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

:Okay thanks, I didnt know that was possible. Can any other Big Ten awards newly encode like that now, that previously couldn’t? Centurion Seraph (talk) 11:32, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
::If the term looks like something that other pages would also want to link directly to or if it looks like a useful search term, just create a redirect if it doesn't already exist (Wikipedia:How to make a redirect ↗). —Bagumba (talk) 15:23, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started



Hi Centurion Seraph. Thank you for your work on Big Ten Running Back of the Year ↗. Another editor, Voorts, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol ↗ and left the following comment:

{{Bq|1=Please remember to tag redirects that you create per WP:REDCAT ↗.}}

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{code|<nowiki>{{Re|</nowiki>Voorts<nowiki>}}</nowiki>}}. <small>(Message delivered via the Page Curation ↗ tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)</small><!-- Template:Sentnote-NPF -->

voorts (talk/contributions ↗) 21:37, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

:Yes, my apologies!! Tell {{Re|Voorts}} I said thank you! Centurion Seraph (talk) 22:36, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
::No problem. Happy editing, voorts (talk/contributions ↗) 22:51, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Discussion notifications



It's great that you involved the wider WP:NFL ↗ about the situation with McCarthy's lead. A note for the future is to be aware of WP:FORUMSHOP ↗. It seems there was already ongoing discussion at McCarthy's talk page. It would have been better to point editors to discuss over there (also see WP:CANVASS ↗), instead of duplicating some points and fragmenting the discussion. Regards. —Bagumba (talk) 23:33, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

:That was not what I was trying to do at all. Jweiss asked if we thought we should go to wikitalk in the middle to end of the discussion. I asked cbl to help when I brought up wikitalk, and he dismissed my comments. I tagged all the editors, its not fragmented. I dont understand how you think I am trying to inappropriately influence anything? Even when I try and do the right thing, I get accused to doing something intentionally wrong. I did not know you couldnt go from a local talk page with 4 people to WT, Im sorry. I dont understand how I would point people over there without posting anywhere else, like WT. Im not knowledgeable enough i guess, because thats all I wanted to do.Centurion Seraph (talk) 23:51, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
::Sorry, it wasn't an accusation as much as it was an FYI to consider for the future. I don't think you were doing it to get an advantage, but other people might be more of a stickler for the letter of the law, esp. in a heated discussion. —Bagumba (talk) 00:00, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
:::Okay. Thank you. I will make a note not to in the future. Centurion Seraph (talk) 00:29, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message



<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">40px ↗</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the '''2024 Arbitration Committee elections ↗''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All '''eligible users ↗''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee ↗ is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process ↗. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans ↗, topic bans ↗, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy ↗ describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates ↗ and submit your choices on the '''2024|poll}}|voting page ↗'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:54, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>

</div>
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/09&oldid=1258243804 -->

January 2025




25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Hi Centurion Seraph! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of :Jahmyr Gibbs ↗ several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy ↗ disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages ↗ to try to reach consensus ↗. If you are unable to agree&#32;at {{TALKPAGENAME:Jahmyr Gibbs}} ↗, please use one of the dispute resolution options ↗ to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. ''You have attempted to add the same information to the infobox 5 times now, and you've been reverted by myself and another user. This is considered edit warring and you should seek consensus on the talk page instead of repeatedly making a change to your preferred version.''.<!-- Template:uw-ewsoft --> Hey man im josh (talk) 17:31, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

:Please also note that running into each other on multiple pages and disagreeing, in of itself, is not considered WP:HOUNDING ↗ (your accusation of such can be found {{diff2|1267977649|here}}). I'm very clearly a Detroit Lions fan, hence the Gibbs page being on my watchlist, and the list in which we disagreed (List of NFL annual interceptions leaders ↗) was something that I nominated and helped to promote to featured list ↗ status, which is why it's also on my watchlist (as are all the annual stat leader pages). Hey man im josh (talk) 17:37, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
:Noting the relevant diffs for you attempting to add this information to the infobox 5 times at Jahmyr Gibbs ↗: {{diff2|1267683774|1}}, {{diff2|1267685898|2}}, {{diff2|1267686853|3}}, {{diff2|1267962951|4}}, {{diff2|1267973320|5}}. Two of these were reverted by another user, while the most recent 3 attempts were reverted by me. As previously mentioned, this would make Gibbs the only person to have this information highlighted in their infobox. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:42, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
:You are hounding, this all stems from disagreements we have had where you didnt get your way on the NFL talk page in 2024 (and your own talk page). You are clearly holding a grudge, and you can see I’ve edited my own edits to try and improve the information. It is listed in a note, that is not the same thing, and is clearly relevant and worthy of inclusion. Ill add to the other players for consistency. Does this make you feel important? Centurion Seraph (talk) 18:05, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
::@Centurion Seraph: I'd like to remind you to WP:AGF ↗, because I wasn't aware that we had literally ever communicated with one another. I'm actually perfectly okay with "not getting my own way", so long as that's what consensus dictates, which is probably why I don't remember this so called disagreement of the past. The information you wish to be added is already included in the body of the article, but it's not standard to include the information you're attempting to add. Gibbs' infobox should be following the standard formatting that all other pages follow, and adding to every page doesn't resolve the issue and magically make your edit warring okay. You're welcome to propose the addition and get consensus for this information to be noted in NFL player infoboxes, and I urge you to seek it out at WT:NFL ↗ if you feel so strongly about it. With that said, it's not one of the "main stream" sort of stats that we would typically include in infoboxes. Such as that we don't typically include the annual scrimmage yard leaders in player infoboxes. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:15, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Danny Wolf



I just saw your edit summary. I did not make a “Jewish dog joke,” that’s ridiculous. I was saying that your thinly-veiled insinuation of possible antisemitism was poorly placed. If you want to see why I delinked countries and religions, try reading MOS:OVERLINK ↗ where countries and religions are specifically called out as items not to be linked. I would have done the same for the United States and Christianity (for example). Rikster2 (talk) 21:23, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

:I initially wrote “I disagree with these. More knowledge, less hate.” Clearly meaning, the more people know about something the less hate there will be in the world. If you took that as a “thinly-veiled insinuation of possible antisemitism”, then that was was already in your thoughts. You responded with this “I am afraid yi7 are barking up the wrong tree citing hate. Common terms like countries and religions do not need to be linked, the6bare known”. I apologize if that was a poor choice of an idiomatic phrase, combined with the typos it seemed like an intentional joke. Centurion Seraph (talk) 22:17, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

::In what universe are typos intentional? And, no, Israel is not treated differently than other countries and Judaism is not treated differently than other faiths. I am pretty sure I also de-linked the United States at the same time. You saying “more knowledge, less hate” sounded like you were accusing me of making edits (to bring the article to meet WP:MOS ↗ by the way) influenced by some statement about Israel or Judaism. Maybe choose your words a little more carefully in the future if that was not what you meant. Rikster2 (talk) 22:23, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
:Says the user who made a Jewish dog joke. It says intentional joke, not intentional typo. I also never claimed it was treated differently or made any claim, other than you finished with a joke. You see the conversation in front of you. Centurion Seraph (talk) 22:31, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
::That’s just it man, I didn’t make a “Jewish dog joke.” Is that even a thing? Wouldn’t occur to me. It’s not a joke, it’s just a common saying indicating you had the wrong idea about my intentions. And it was offensive because you did not assume good faith ↗. At least that is how it came across. Rikster2 (talk) 22:37, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Do you think you can make me a article, for more information on text me on instagram at @_jo313_



Can you make me a article 2601:406:4685:8FD0:5CB7:83A2:174E:C06 ↗ (talk) 05:08, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message



<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;flex-basis: 40px">40px ↗</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the '''2025 Arbitration Committee elections ↗''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2025|end}}-1 day}}. All '''eligible users ↗''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee ↗ is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process ↗. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans ↗, topic bans ↗, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy ↗ describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates ↗ and submit your choices on the '''2025|poll}}|voting page ↗'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:00, 18 November 2025 (UTC)</small>

</div>
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2025/Coordination/MM/08&oldid=1322758940 -->

2025 Michigan Wolverines



Not sure what your rationale is for reverting citation needed tags. We have certain sections that lack needed citations. I went through and identified the specific parts needing citation. A generic tag on the article does not effectively communicate/identify what needs citing. Importantly, much of the tagging concerns factual assertions about living persons, raising WP:BLP ↗ issues. I intend to reimpose the citation needed tags, at at a minimum, where BLP issues are present. Instead of removing the tags, how about adding citation? Cbl62 (talk) 22:13, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

:That is exactly my thoughts. How about adding the citation. They are abundant and easily available. You claim constructive edits in the lead, but cant be constructive otherwise? Im sorry I dont mean to be abrasive, but should you not implement the changes you wish to see and have cited. You have edited that page numerous times before , and the team seasons each year prior. As well as other programs across the NCAA. I dont understand lighting that entire specific page up, and only that page, outside the normal or standard for other similar pages (years and programs) with an overkill of citation needed. Centurion Seraph (talk) 22:31, 31 December 2025 (UTC)
:: There is nothing "normal or standard", nor appropriate, about unsourced content on Wikipedia. To the contrary, it is one of Wikipedia's core principles/pillars that content must be sourced. That concern is exacerbated even further when the content makes facutal claims about living persons. It would be appropriate to delete the content altogether, but I took a significantly less draconian response by adding "citation needed" tages to the specific content, almost all involving living persons, that needs citing. Cbl62 (talk) 00:48, 1 January 2026 (UTC)
:: See WP:PILLARS ↗ - top level core policies of Wikipedia: "All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy with citations based on reliable sources, '''''especially when the topic is''''' controversial or '''''is about a living person'''''."
:: See also WP:BURDEN ↗: "Facts or claims without an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports[b] them may be removed. They should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source."
:: See also WP:REMOVEUNSOURCED ↗. Cbl62 (talk) 01:09, 1 January 2026 (UTC)
:::I suppose you’re incapable of applying the changes you wish to see. Centurion Seraph (talk) 01:11, 1 January 2026 (UTC)
:::: The obligation is on the person who puts the information in the article. Much of it is pure trivia/cruft, e.g., the quarterback assistant -- no, not the quarterback coach, not even the assistant quarterback coach, but a low level staff position called the "quarterback assistant". People get way too carried away with including deep dives into athletic department staff, stuff that is not particularly consequential of encyclopedic. If you or someone else thinks this informatio is worthwhile, at a bare minimum, you or they need to include citations to a reliable source. Don't ask me to source such nonsense. Cbl62 (talk) 03:18, 1 January 2026 (UTC)
:::: By the way, and on a more congenial note, Happy New Year, fellow Wolverine fan! Cbl62 (talk) 03:19, 1 January 2026 (UTC)
:::::I did not add that information, or near anything else on that page. I do hear your concerns though. Happy New Year! The end to the day got a little better for us following the Cotton Bowl ↗. Centurion Seraph (talk) 04:00, 1 January 2026 (UTC)
:::::: It would have been cool to have 3 Big 10 schools in the Final 4, but I won't shed any tears for the Buckeyes. Cheers! Cbl62 (talk) 04:39, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Fred Jackson



I am in the middle of a rewrite. Please hold off until I finish. Then edit away. Cbl62 (talk) 03:39, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

:Youre also editing over things I just recently added and referenced, and replacing with some incorrect information. Centurion Seraph (talk) 03:42, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
:: Please cease and desist. I have now added an "in use" tag. You are free to edit again when I am done and remove the tag. Cbl62 (talk) 03:48, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
::: I am actually fixing factual errors that have been in the article for years. His years of service at various schools was completely wrong. What errors do you contend I have made? If you are correct, I will gladly fix. Cbl62 (talk) 03:59, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
:::: You continue to edit despite the "inuse" tag. You have created multiple edit conflicts and loss of my edits. This behavior is a direct violation of our guidelines and is unacceptable. Cbl62 (talk) 04:02, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
::::This page was brought up in a public discussion because I was inuse editing it. You have made dozens of errors. Erasing dates, adding wrong degrees, teaching jobs, playing dates, deleting sources. Youre throwing your weight around on a article you only noticed because i was actively editing it. Now you want to erase and rewrite the whole thing, and claim I can no longer edit because you showed up, adding false info? Centurion Seraph (talk) 04:05, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
::: Agree to disagree. Cbl62 (talk) 02:41, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
::: The statement is attributed to his brother, no? Have you seen other evidence of his completing for QB with the Eagles? There are also claims by Jackson that he played QB in the WFL for Detroit. I've yet to see verification for that either. There seems to be a lot of exaggeration, and I intend to root it out unless verifiable sources are found. Cbl62 (talk) 04:32, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Fred Jackson lead


The lead should summarize his full career, yet you have struck everything about his coaching career elsewhere. Please stop doing that. Cbl62 (talk) 01:29, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Claimed consensus



In your edit summary, you state: "The standard and consensus is add the University." On that basis you have eliminated from the lead links to the specific programs for which Jackson worked and replaced them with generic school links. Can you point me to the "consensus" you are referring to. I've always understood that the more specific and precise like is preferable. It is certainly more useful to the reader to link to the program for which he worked rather than the University as a whole. Can you please clarify and provide a link to your claimed consensus? Cbl62 (talk) 03:21, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
::* So the answer is "no", you can't cite a discussion where a supposed consensus was formed. I continue to believe that the more specific link is best when the coaching positions are first mentioned in the body of the article. (There is no redundancy as the infobox is NOT part of the body of the article.) The more specific link takes the reader to an article that is more likely to be helpful and informative, moreso than a generic article on the university. That said, we have much more important issues to sort out on the Jackson article given the mountain of misinformation you insist on inserting into the article. Cbl62 (talk) 14:39, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
::*:I don't think there is a consensus on a strict style here. My MO is to mention he school first and then the team later when more details are explored. I get the argument about most specific links, but the college of university, not the football program, is the legal entity that hires coaches, makes contracts with them, and pays their salaries. The one thing there is consensus not to do is to display the school but link to the football team. That's very Easter-eggy and poor form. We should always be clear about whether we are discussing the school or the football program. Jweiss11 (talk) 22:37, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Fred Jackson coaching years at Flint SW and Toledo



Please stop fucking with the dates. You are wrong, and it is clear.

Contemporaneous sources from ''The Flint Journal'' show that Jackson was head coach at Flint Southwestern High school from 1978-1979. There are also contemporaneous sources showing he was not hired at Toledo until January 1980. Please utilize your reading capability and actually read the sources. Your knee jerk reversions of cited and accurate factual information is getting really tiring. Cbl62 (talk) 05:11, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
Jesus fucking Christ. Even after being provided all of this clear, unambigous and contemporaneous sourcing, you've reverted again. You should not be editing here. Cbl62 (talk) 05:37, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

::: Despite my adding and showing all of these contemporary sources, he's reverted yet again. This is absolutely crazy. I am going to bed now and flying from Bogota to northern Colombia in the morning to enjoy some sun and sand. I hope User:Jweiss11 and/or User:WikiOriginal-9 can step in and deal with this situation in my absence. Cbl62 (talk) 06:05, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Edit warring



{{tq|Please stop edit warring. It is clear: it said he was so terrific he found himself at the state awards banquet in 1968. Youre deleting sourced material}} How's that? I removed your blatant misrepresentations of the article written by Jackson's brother-in-law, which does NOT say that Jackson was given all-state honors at the 1968 banquet. Indeed, the other source which does refer to all-state honors says he received those honors in 1965 and 1966 -- years before the 1968 banquet. Accordingly, your trying to mix the two sources to assert he received all-state honors at the 1968 banquet was a stunnig misrepresentation of the historical record. My changes eliminating your misrepresetnation is NOT edit warring; to the contrary, it is a process made necessary by your constant efforts to add falsehoods and exaggerations to the article. Notably, you did not and do not dispute that your additions misrepresented the source, and you have now re-factored your content. Cbl62 (talk) 20:49, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Your Walter Payton claims



You reflexively reverted my edit about your Walter Payton claims moments after I made it. You did so with no edit summary. Your reversion erased all of my content showing that the claim is almost certainly false. Let's discuss the matter constructively. Here are the reasons behind the edits that I made:
:* I moved the claim to a different place in the article, figuring (1) the purported claim of being teammates with Payton, even if it were true, is not so key to Jackson's playing career that it should be included in the opening paragraph of the long section on Jackson's playing career at JSC, and (ii) it fits best as a matter of editorial process in the discussion of other claims about Jackson purportedly playing for JSC in 1971. Why do you think it is so important it needs to be in the opening two sentences? Don't you agree it fits better in the discussion of the 1971 season?
:* I added context raising doubts about the assertion. In particular, I added the following which you removed:
<blockquote>Some non-contemporaneous accounts also claim that Jackson was a teammate of Walter Payton at Jackson State. However, the claimed connection with Walter Payton is contradicted by the facts that Payton did not play for Jackson State until 1971 whereas (i) there are no contemporaneous records of Jackson playing for Jackson State in 1971, and (ii) Jackson during the 1971 season was coaching high school football in Flint, Michigan. Jackson was, however, teammates at Jackson State with Payton's older brother Eddie Payton ↗.</blockquote>
: The foregoing offers IMO a balanced presentation. It preserves your assertion that that the two were teammates, but it provides additional context. Why do you believe it is appropriate to delete this important contextual information?
: Please let's discuss. Cbl62 (talk) 13:27, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

:1) you continue to shift information away from sources and/or seemingly, knowingly delete sources as you did today with David Jones. That Payton bit was also attached the the TMD reference as a secondary source, and directly fits the possible timeline listed above it in the introduction
:2) the paragraph you wrote was a direct duplicate of listed paragraph above it of information regarding 1971 disputed season; and there was some unsourced information.
:3) I believed it to have been another duplicate from the reference citation it had already been it prior. Centurion Seraph (talk) 18:10, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
:: 1) I did not intend to delete any of your sources for the Payton claim; I believe I added them both to the spot where I moved the Payton discussion. My point with the "split-and-move" is that the identity of the coach who recruited Jackson is relevant in the opening of the JSC section, but the supposed teammate-ship with Payton does not and should be shifted to the part of the JSC section that deals with the 1971 season -- the season in which they were supposedly teammates. I am still hearing no objection to the "split-and-move" just an objection to deleting sources (which I don't think I did, and which I am happy to correct if that was done).
:: 2) My passage about Payton (the block quote set forth above), including noting that he was actually teammates with Payton's older brother Eddie Payton ↗, was plainly not in any way a duplicate of other content. To show some good faith here, and in light of your error, please either restore the deleted content yourself or confirm here that you have no objection to my doing so. Cbl62 (talk) 01:10, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
::: I guess that you do not want to restore the content. I will go ahead and do it. Per this discussion, I will make sure that your sources are preserved. Cbl62 (talk) 22:05, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
:::: Will do it in the morning in case you decide to do it yourself?
:: No thought/explanations as to how/why contemporaneous reports from 1971 could have been accurate but a year early? Cbl62 (talk) 22:32, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Your 1967 season claim



Another point to discuss. I struck your sentence saying there were no sources showing that Jackson saw game action in 1967. As noted in my edit summary here ↗ explaining: "striking sentence saying there are no reports of Jackson playing in 1967 ... nobody claims otherwise, and it was common for freshman to play for the freshman team rather than the varsity in those years ... so an affirmative assertion, as here, that there are no sources saying he played as a freshman is not even remotely pertinent." You immediately reverted my edit with no edit summary and no comment. Please let's discuss. Given the fact that noone is claiming that he played for JSC until 1968, why in the world do we need to include this disclaimer of sources on 1967 playing time? It seems completely without purpose. Cbl62 (talk) 13:51, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

:You directly assert that he was a sophomore in the above in what seems a likely error. He would have had to attended JSC in 1967 as a freshman. There are zero sources from 1967 to 2026 that say he was at JSC in 1967. In addition to the fact, if he enrolled at JSC in 1967 he would hav graduated high school at 16, had his entire freshman year of college at 17 and graduate at 20. That timeline and the fact zero sources ever stated he was at JSC in 1967 warrant the inclusion. Im not saying its false or erasing sophomore Centurion Seraph (talk) 18:15, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
:: The source says he was a sophomore in 1968, and that makes perfect sense. The Wisconsin source says he won all-state high school honors in 1965 and 1966 (presumably his junior and senior years in high school), and it thus makes sense that he would have been a college freshman in 1967 and a college sophonore in 1968. That sequence follows and fits like a hand in a glove. As for his being 17 when he enrolled at JSC, two possibilities: (i) many people (myself included) started college at age 17 -- nothing shocking or out of whack about that, or (ii) having been writing/editing sports biographies for a lot of years, I can tell you it is not at all unusual for athletes and coaches to shave a year or two off their year of birth. Either way, I don't see anything extraordinary about a 17-year old freshman, and your sentence about no coverage of him in 1967 sticks out in the article like a sore thumb, likely confusing readers since there is no claim by anyone that he played for JSC's varsity in 1967. IMO it significantly reduces the quality of the article -- and with no net benefit to the reader's understanding of Jackson. Cbl62 (talk) 00:54, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 11



An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kim Barnes Arico ↗, a link pointing to the disambiguation page MBWA ↗ was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:28, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Michigan Men's Basketball



Hey Centurion Seraph.
Curious why you undid my edit on Michigan Basketballs records? Vacated wins do not count. Michigans Official NCAA Tournament record is 63-27 because of the seasons that were vacated. Sparty1301 (talk) 23:04, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

:This isnt an official NCAA article, this is a Michigan basketball article; that is not elusive in showing wins have been vacated. The article has more than sufficiently shown that records include asterisks and vacated wins. The postseason section & by the numbers too show this. The article includes the actual games they played for recording accuracy. Every sourced record also shown includes the wins as such Sport Reference ↗ and U of M ↗ (before today’s win). To do otherwise becomes misleading the way the article is laid out and sources list information, as well as difficult to maintain accuracy. It also seemed as a rival fan you had motive to disrupt the consensus the community of this article has adhered by. Do you have a source showing that ‘official NCAA tournament record’? Centurion Seraph (talk) 23:48, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Edit warring



You're making a bad habit of edit-warring to enforce and maintain local infobox standards you created on articles you happen to care about, like Dusty May ↗, without regard for prevailing standards and consistency with thousands of other analogous bio articles. This happened the other week at Fred Jackson (American football coach) ↗. Jweiss11 (talk) 00:50, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

:Show me the standard to list every conference. You are the one clearly trying to enforce a made up consensus through edit warring your way Centurion Seraph (talk) 00:52, 30 March 2026 (UTC)
:Mind you now, I edit the Big Ten coaches and others conference coaches records. None are listed. You are deliberately trying to enforce something you know doesnt exist to force your edit. I kindly kept it, just in condensed format. Centurion Seraph (talk) 00:58, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

Edit warring (2)



30px|alt=Stop icon ↗ '''You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war ↗, according to the reverts you've made to :Dusty May ↗.''' This means that you are repeatedly reverting content back to how you think it should be, despite knowing that other editors disagree. Once it is known that there is a disagreement, users are expected to collaborate ↗ with others, avoid editing disruptively ↗, and try to reach a consensus ↗ – rather than repeatedly reverting the changes made by other users.

Important points to note:
# {{strong|Edit warring is disruptive behavior ↗ – regardless of how many reverts you have made;}}
# {{strong|Do not engage in edit warring – even if you believe that you are right.}}
You need to discuss the disagreement on the article's talk page ↗ and work towards a revision that represents consensus among everyone involved. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard ↗ or seek dispute resolution ↗ if discussions reach an impasse. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection ↗. {{strong|If you continue to engage in edit warring, you may be blocked ↗ from editing.}} <!-- Template:uw-ew --> --Hammersoft (talk) 17:48, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

2025–26 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team ↗



Please have a look at updates I have made to 2025–26 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team ↗ while it is current.-TonyTheTiger <small>(T / C ↗ / WP:FOUR ↗ / WP:CHICAGO ↗ / WP:WAWARD ↗)</small> 21:44, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

:Okay, sounds good. I will look it over tonight or tomorrow. Centurion Seraph (talk) 00:41, 9 April 2026 (UTC)
::Should we change the background to another color (maize) for the team leader on each stat? I see a lot of season articles do that.-TonyTheTiger <small>(T / C ↗ / WP:FOUR ↗ / WP:CHICAGO ↗ / WP:WAWARD ↗)</small> 11:52, 11 April 2026 (UTC)
:::Yeah I have seen that half do format like that, but Im personally not in favor of it. I find the wikitable’s function is to show the team leaders. It directly does and will sort all the leaders, so it seems redundant. As well as a bit busy and distracting to read. Centurion Seraph (talk) 16:13, 11 April 2026 (UTC)
::::Good to see you at the parade today! Tony The Tiger ↗ Centurion Seraph (talk) 16:15, 11 April 2026 (UTC)
:::::It was a nice drive from Battle Creek, Michigan ↗.-TonyTheTiger <small>(T / C ↗ / WP:FOUR ↗ / WP:CHICAGO ↗ / WP:WAWARD ↗)</small> 17:12, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 6



An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kim Barnes Arico ↗, a link pointing to the disambiguation page MBWA ↗ was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:36, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Paradise, Nevada



Hello, rather than edit warring about a topic, it might behoove you to do a little research. The article on Paradise, Nevada ↗ can give you some background. Furthermore here are some sources you could take a look at, to see that the city limits of Las Vegas do not extend to MGM and Mandalay Bay, and rather that they fall within the Paradise town limits:


See also Unincorporated towns in Nevada ↗, where you will find that areas such as Paradise are not simply census desginations, but rather reflect the governmental (psuedo-)entities that are established by state law. Toohool (talk) 21:31, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

:Yes, I am aware. I was born and raised in an unincorporated town. You would not use that for the formal address/location though in this case. Las Vegas is the assigned physical address, not just the mailing address. Even so, is it not getting too particular if you have to read a map and make a personal judgement call to establish that as the official address (located in Paradise). There should be ample sources stating Paradise, yet they all list Las Vegas as the location. This is a well known establishment. Why differ from the official website of the venue and every other address and location associated with the venues in question? Centurion Seraph (talk) 21:57, 7 May 2026 (UTC)
::If you know about unincorporated towns, I don't know why you're talking about it like these locations are disputable facts. The city of Las Vegas has defined boundaries, and the town of Paradise has defined boundaries, and a point in space can exist only in one of those boundaries or the other. That's not an "assigned physical address", that's the laws of physics. The only thing that's "assigned" about it is the mailing address, which USPS has assigned as "Las Vegas" for all points in Paradise and the other nearby towns. That's important information if you're trying to mail a letter to the arena, but Wikipedia is not a directory ↗, so we don't list mailing addresses. Toohool (talk) 21:28, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
:::Where does it say we don’t list mailing addresses in the '''not a directory''' link? The majority of addresses which I see are just that. Including when there is a different township location. The precedent being set is personal investigation is more reliable than the listed address from the actual venue/site, with no sourcing in the article needed. Secondly lets not act like their address for the building is outdated and archaic, meant for sending letters. It is their listed address and in every maps database for addresses and coordinates, and other formal listings of their venue. Im disputing that you havent sourced anything with Paradise listed. If you want to override their listed venue address, you should pull their tax information or some source listing Paradise as the address of the venue. Not a map. The laws of physics have nothing to do with man-made boundaries, that change and have different origin dates. The county assigns addresses, not the USPS. & at times they dont follow logic. Centurion Seraph (talk) 12:54, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
::::You can check Clark County Assessor property records ↗. Input an address like 3950 S Las Vegas Blvd (Mandalay Bay). It will show you the city or town in which that address lies. There's no personal investigation about it, it's a simple fact that if you have a map that shows you a boundary, and you have a certain point of interest, you can see if that point is in those boundaries or not. Toohool (talk) 04:36, 12 May 2026 (UTC)
:::::Wikipedia, the way you are formatting, is the only place that doesnt include Las Vegas as the address/location. Including the venues themselves. So yes, if it is going to be highly unconventional, citing a source for Paradise to counter the listed location by venues should be obligated in these instances. Centurion Seraph (talk) 23:00, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
::::::I linked 20 sources in this thread already, including in the immediate comment you just replied to. Do you not believe that Clark County knows the boundaries of the cities and towns within its jurisdiction? Toohool (talk) 23:35, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
:::::::You can clearly see I told you about the Clark County tax info before you mention anything. Im trying to help you. You need to source the information on the article you have stating Paradise is the address/location of the venue. Not my talk page. That is not sourcing or using citations correctly. Centurion Seraph (talk) 00:00, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
:::::::& that map image you are trying pass off as Paradise is the Las Vegas Strip. Centurion Seraph (talk) 00:01, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
::::::::The fact that the sky is blue does not need to be sourced. There is no legitimate dispute as to the veracity of the statement. If you feel so strongly that it needs to be sourced, then you can add the source, instead of repeatedly edit warring to introduce inaccurate information to the page. Toohool (talk) 00:13, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
:::::::::You just deleted a source contradicting it, the venue, as well as google maps, apple maps. If you are saying that its common knowledge that this venue is Paradise, equal as to knowing the sky being blue, then you are trolling. Im not sourcing the information you are imputing without citations. Centurion Seraph (talk) 00:23, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
::::::::::You have countless sources above, but all you have to do is look at the very page you are trying to link to, Las Vegas ↗. In the infobox you can find the map of the city limits, where you can plainly see that it does not contain any of the venues in these articles. Anyone who follows that link can see that you're replacing correct information with inaccurate information. At this point you're just playing an WP:ICANTHEARYOU ↗ game and editing disruptively, apparently to make some point. Stop it. Toohool (talk) 19:18, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Strange wording



Sorry, but {{tq|Boumtje-Boumtje was called up to attend the national junior minicamp}} doesn't really sound grammatically correct to me. What is a "junior minicamp"? Which country is he representing? Does that not sounds strange to you? I don't even see that specific wording in the source, so how is it the formal way? JTtheOG (talk) 04:51, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

:It does say USA and United States both in the same paragraph.<br>
:What are Men's Junior National Team Minicamps? ↗
:Joaquim Boumtje Boumtje — USA Basketball ↗ Centurion Seraph (talk) 04:59, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
::{{tq|In October 2025, Boumtje-Boumtje was called up to attend the national junior minicamp held in Colorado Springs, Colorado.}}
::Okay I see what happened. You included the strange wording, presumably a mistake ↗. You reverted my corrections and fixed it yourself before publishing, cleaning up the grammar and adding in the country. And now, instead of simply saying so, you're attempting to gaslight me into believing the new text was the original text. Cmon man... why can't we just all love basketball together. I apologize for not closely reviewing the new text, but there's no need for this. JTtheOG (talk) 06:16, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
:::The only strange wording is what you wrote being unorthodox and abnormal. Im not sure why youre acting like I insulted you or did something obnoxious. You keep poking with the “strange” comments, then you added cn tags to hound me on other separate articles of Bowman and Dampier. News flash, you have you have to be one of the best players in the country to be invited for the USA team. That is self explanatory. It also says in the first article their class. Nobody is gaslighting you. We can love basketball and each other. Centurion Seraph (talk) 10:34, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
::::The original wording was strange in more than one way, which is why you fixed it. That’s not poking, that’s how Wikipedia works. And yes, every claim in fact should be verified by a source, so thanks for adding them. G’day, JTtheOG (talk) 18:40, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
:::::I agree, the original wording by you was strange and I fixed it. I added multiple verified sources on each article and you knit-picked. Any reason why you didnt add them elsewhere on the Erick Dampier ↗ page, given the overwhelming lack of sourcing everywhere? Please refrain from
:::::Hounding ↗ when you get your feelings upset. Still not sure how I managed that. I spoke plainly, short and mundane; you didnt read the edits or look at the page in question before you went off the rails, claiming a plot to gaslight you. Nor did you check USA Basketball what they actually call their camps, the one source that matters. You chose a foreign source not in English and doubled down. Yours truly, Centurion Seraph (talk) 19:01, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
::::::Brother, you literally modified your own original text, which I've shown you twice already, and then responded as if you hadn't made those errors. Also, {{tq|Correct use of an editor's history includes (but is not limited to) fixing unambiguous errors or violations of Wikipedia policy}}, such as unsourced additions ↗ to BLPs ↗. Thank you, JTtheOG (talk) 19:45, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Puerto Rican vs American



Puerto Rico fields its own FIBA national team, so yes, if it applies it can be listed here. Similar to Scottish/Welsh and British Rikster2 (talk) 14:08, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
:BTW, it is also a nationality ↗. Rikster2 (talk) 14:10, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
::That is because of the IOC and FIBA. It has nothing to do with nationality. Please highlight where you see Puerto Rico listed as the recognized nationality. Puerto Rico is an unincorporated territory of the USA. They can have citizenship through Puerto Rico, but they cannot have a Puerto Rican nationality. Im not going to fight you, but this is 100% wrong to say Puerto Rican nationality. As you say, they are Americans.
::PR1 ↗
::PR2 ↗ Centurion Seraph (talk) 15:11, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
:::The article for the governor of Puerto Rico, Jenniffer González-Colón ↗, says Puerto Rican politician (not American politician). <span style="color: blue">'''''~WikiOriginal-9~'''''</span> (<span style="color: blue">'''talk'''</span>) 18:51, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
::::What exactly is that supposed to prove? That’s like saying the governor of Texas is a Texan politician. It certainly doesnt say Puerto Rican under her nationality. Are you saying she is not an American national citizen?
::::GONZÁLEZ-COLÓN American politician ↗
::::Yaxel was born of two Dominican parents in Puerto Rico and lived for two years while she was in college. He was given American nationality and moved to USA. He does not hold a post or job in Puerto Rico. Would you label him a Puerto Rican basketball player or an American basketball player, even if intentionally being defiant and ignoring his American nationality. Centurion Seraph (talk) 19:25, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

I have NEVER called you a “Jewish dog”



You are completely full of shit. If I recall, I believe I used a common idiom such as “no dog in the fight” or something like that (I don’t remember or care). I certainly would not use any kind of insult around a person’s religion. Rikster2 (talk) 16:24, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
:Ah, I see - I said you were “barking up the wrong tree.” Hard to believe you would insert religion into that, but you did, “congrats.” Rikster2 (talk) 16:27, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
::Sorry, I meant to say in a joke. So congrats, you didnt explicitly, but I find it hard to believe that isnt what you meant a Jewish dog joke. Thats half the quote and no context anyways. Centurion Seraph (talk) 16:42, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
:::Jewish Dogs ↗ Centurion Seraph (talk) 16:48, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
::::No, there was absolutely no anti-semitic intent from my edit summary, and anyone who wants to look at the edit history of the Danny Wolf ↗ article is free to do so. You accused me of hate based on an edit where I left a plain summary (that certain terms did not need to be linked) and my response was that you were “barking up the wrong tree” by insinuating it. That is a super-common phrase for someone drawing an incorrect conclusion, which you did, and seem to still do. You should maybe take a breath before posting things, you seem to get very angry for no reason. Rikster2 (talk) 16:53, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
:::::Is that this version of the “angry black man?” As to invalidate and dismiss. Im not sure how youre reading that Im angry. Youre cussing and insulted to begin with. Centurion Seraph (talk) 17:06, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
::::::lol, you crack me up man. No, you just seem to get very emotional editing WP. also, you can stop with trying to pin racist or anti-semitic statements to me. I am very happy to get an admin involved and am fully comfortable with their reading of all of my relevant comments. These back and forths would not reflect well on you to an unbiased observer. Rikster2 (talk) 17:18, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
:::::::Feel free. Centurion Seraph (talk) 17:28, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
link=|25px|alt=Information icon ↗ There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents ↗ regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.&nbsp;The thread is Personal attacks by User:Centurion Seraph ↗.<!--Template:Discussion notice--><!--Template:ANI-notice--> Rikster2 (talk) 18:00, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

June 2026


<div class="user-block" style="padding: 5px; margin-bottom: 0.5em; border: 1px solid var(--border-color-base, #a2ab91); background-color: var(--background-color-warning-subtle, #fef6e7); color:inherit; min-height: 40px">40px|left|alt=Stop icon with clock ↗<div style="margin-left:45px">You have been '''blocked ↗''' from editing for a period of '''1 week''' for making personal attacks towards other editors ↗. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions ↗. </div><div style="margin-left:45px">If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks ↗, then submit a request through the unblock wizard ↗ or through <span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:Special:MyTalk|action=edit&section=new&editintro=Template:Unblock/editintro&preloadtitle=Unblock+request&preload=Template:Unblock/preload&preloadparams%5b%5d=}} your talk page]</span>. &nbsp;<span class="gfSarekSig">SarekOfVulcan (talk)</span> 18:37, 26 June 2026 (UTC)</div></div>
<!-- Template:uw-aoablock -->
:What was the personal attack if you dont mind? Centurion Seraph (talk) 18:39, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
:I guess we come from different walks of life ↗. Maybe you have not had to deal with it, but you saying I attacked him is the biggest joke. Clearly one user on there also thought it was a poor joke. I never called him a racist or anti-semitic. Centurion Seraph (talk) 18:50, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
::You completely misunderstood the common "barking up the wrong tree" idiom and then wrote {{tpq|If you took that as a “thinly-veiled insinuation of possible antisemitism”, then that was was already in your thoughts.}} Two big mistakes. Please ponder this during your block. Cullen328 (talk) 19:48, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
:::Jewish Dogs ↗ Centurion Seraph (talk) 19:50, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
:Jewish Dogs ↗. Centurion Seraph (talk) 19:46, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
:User talk:JTtheOG#h-It's funny-20260619163800 dont you think its ironic that @WikiOriginal-9 and @Rikster2 are communicating in tandem (beforehand) on how to get me banned further? Is this not an issue regarding the OP (Rikster2)? They are watching my talk page, talking about me together and you dont think this is premeditated instigation? You guys can ban indefinitely ban me if this is how Wikipedia operates. @JTtheOG you all need to study Puerto Rico at a bare minimum. Centurion Seraph (talk) 20:37, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
::Here we go. What did I say about Puerto Rico that was wrong?... JTtheOG (talk) 20:45, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

I have reblocked you with talk page access removed, but without extending the block at this time. If you want to file an unblock request before the block expires, please see the Unblock Ticket Request System ↗.<span class="gfSarekSig">SarekOfVulcan (talk)</span> 20:53, 26 June 2026 (UTC)