Talk:Stalwart Esports

Addition of PUBG roster.

I'd request for the addition of the pubg roster under the pubg division. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1010460097 This is the link to the removal edit. My reason for this would be:- Since roster details are very important factor of an sports/esports team, they should be present there. Also looking at other esport organisations they have mentioned the rosters there. Thanks. Abhayesports (talk) 16:39, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

For anyone who needs reference to few other articles might check Team SoloMid's Current Roster section. Abhayesports (talk) 16:47, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Discussion about this edit is ongoing at the user's talk page: User_talk:Abhayesports#COI. Given the unreliability of the source + possibly being out of date, I would not re-add the material. Alyo (chat·edits) 16:52, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Have replied with the reason, removal of freestyle lineup was correct because they were disbanded but this information should be added because they're signed for next 1 year and they will be playing upcoming majors for us. The announcement of their signing will be made soon. Abhayesports (talk) 16:56, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Are you suggesting Wikipedia should carry details that you personally know to be true, but which has yet to be published? I hope this is not what you mean. We are not here to help you promote your client's business interests! Nick Moyes (talk) 00:18, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Nick Moyes, No No. The roster has already been announced and even published to news articles,(https://www.sportskeeda.com/amp/esports/news-indian-pubg-mobile-team-stalwart-esports-teams-pakistan-based-team-flex-esports-pmco-pakistan-2021-spring) by "announcement will be made soon" i was replying to ALYO that we will be soon extending our term with this lineup. Abhayesports (talk) 05:40, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

• Also If anyone would like to understand this edit request in a simpler way, read my last reply here:- (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Abhayesports?markasread=212821013&markasreadwiki=enwiki#Verifiability)
  

Abhayesports (talk) 05:40, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

What leads you to believe that Sportskeeda is a reliable, independent source for use on Wikipedia, Abhayesports? That is a recapitulation of a press release from Stalwart Esports. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:07, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

No doubt, Sportskeeda isn't a reliable source for wikipedia, i agree to that. But what i meant was it is atleast a far better source then what has been quoted for other esport organisation's rosters.
1. Own website (tsm.gg) used here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Team_SoloMid#Current_rosters
2. Own website (cloud9) used here- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud9#Current_rosters
3. No source at all here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fnatic#Current_rosters
4. Twitter as a source used here- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G2_Esports#Current_rosters
These are just 4 org's I've quoted here,Not just this, 100% literally all of the esport organisation on wikipedia don't have reliable sources at all for their Current Rosters Section. Abhayesports (talk) 08:04, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

@Abhayesports: The fact that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS in various articles, based on unreliable, insider sources, does not justify their use here. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not your personal tool for PROMOTION. I am very concerned that this article is already bloated with insider trivia, and that you seem all set to fill it with more. Nick Moyes (talk) 08:42, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Nick Moyes could you explain what made you think I'm here to fill the article with promotional content? Also roster's serve as important part of an esport organisation how does it promote the subject? Isn't it more of like incomplete information if the roster's aren't there? I am very sad to see the issues related to this particular article. I am ready to co-operate in full capacity, but there should be a valid reason to justify the removal of roster's from this particular organisation while as the other organisations have it. My apologies if it sounded rude. But i haven't violated any wikipedia policy I'm just stating reasons that are mentioned in the relevant policy documents,i understand and i am completely aware of the fact that i being an editor with Conflict Of Interest with Stalwart Esports i have to make sure i follow 100% of the wikipedia policy and that's the reason i am not able to completely state all the policies because i am still reading them, but i can notice that policies are being cited for this particular article only while as for other's they're being skipped. Also thanks for giving me reference to WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS I'd read it completely first and then state my reasons in compliance to the policy.

Warm Regards

Abhayesports (talk) 09:42, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

@Abhayesports: You ask: "could you explain what made you think I'm here to fill the article with promotional content?" That's easy to address. You have declared you are being paid by Stalwart Esports to edit their page. In your own words: "... i am here to update and improve the information related to Stalwart Esports And Zeyan Shafiq because of the incorrect and vandal edits done by spurious people.". That sounds like you have a strong interest (see WP:SPA) in promoting this organisation. That together with various other sockpuppet activities on related pages, leads me to wonder whether some past and/or current editors here have been/are using Wikipedia for their own promotional purposes, and whether you might or might not be the next new editor to do so. Whether you are doing that yourself, I reserve judgement at this time. Thus far you have followed policy - thank you for making edit requests (and for learning to indent). But undue focus on minutiae in any new and minor article like this one tends to draw administrator attention, as did your question at the Teahouse. You also (wrongly) state: " there should be a valid reason to justify the removal of roster's from this particular organisation while as the other organisations have it.". That seems to be like trying to justify one bad thing by saying other bad things happen. That's not OK. It is actually necessary to turn your question on its head and ask you - or any other editor - to justify valid reasons for including certain potentially trivial and temporary content in the article under question when it is both hard to keep a Wikipedia article up to date and very easy to link to an external website which is well-maintained and kept topical. WP:NOTDIR gives some examples of this, and WP:EXTERNAL LINKS explains how those links can be reasonably included. I am simply urging caution to all editors not to think Wikipedia's encyclopaedia entries are here to be expanded to include every minor detail, whether promotional or otherwise. A balance and a consensus is always important, and it is quite common for such material to be removed if it is deemed irrelevant WP:FANCRUFT. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:37, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Alright, i get that. But again " You have declared you are being paid by Stalwart Esports to edit their page." is not true. There's a thin difference in between working at a company and being paid for editing wikipedia. Again I'll repeat, i was asked to keep an eye on anything related to us on wikipedia since there's been a very large vandal campaign against us here as visible from the history. I was asked to do it because i have had experience of liquipedia and i was happy to do/volunteer for it. Liquipedia is same like wikipedia, you don't get paid for your contributions there. " I am simply urging caution to all editors not to think Wikipedia's encyclopaedia entries are here to be expanded to include every minor detail, whether promotional or otherwise. A balance and a consensus is always important. " To this I'd just say that roster's in an esport organisation can not be considered as minor details. It's more of an important part just like in terms of player's of a football club. You can't serve information about a club without mentioning who the players are.

Moreover i think it's just getting very confusing here and you being an admin must know the policies better and if you think they're deemed to be unfit for an entry here, you certainly should remove this request. Thanks for all the information. Abhayesports (talk) 15:48, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

I haven't even looked at your request, nor hardly read the article, as it doesn't interest me. I have no idea what a pugb roster/pugb division means, nor does it matter to me; I was simply responding to your own comment which I was worried might verge onto promotion about something that was yet to be published, but which you seem to know all about. That suggested inside knowledge and possible promotion. But please don't fall into the trap of believing that because it isn't explicitly in your written job description to contribute to Wikipedia that you aren't actually getting paid to edit here. You are. It's not a case of a thin difference; there's no difference whatsoever! If you or anyone else are representing or employed by your client or your company - or even simply doing them a favour - then you have a clear conflict of interest and you are getting paid, whether you believe you are or not, so a formal WP:PAID disclosure is always expected in such situations, and edit requests should be made, as, thankfully, you appear to have done here. Nick Moyes (talk) 17:10, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

I am having a same discussion with another editor at my talk page, you can certainly question anything there, but i know the difference in between being paid for my work at stalwart and volunteering here at wikipedia. I think it's being referred because i seem to be only attached to Stalwart Esports and Zeyan Shafiq which makes it look like a Single Purpose Account and hence makes me look like if i was being paid for it, I'll be looking forward to contribute to other articles as well.Abhayesports (talk) 18:30, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

• Closing Request:- I'd like to request for the closing of this request after the clarification by ALYO with ref to this answer (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Alyo&diff=prev&oldid=1010862553). The comparision with TSM wasn't appropriate and since TSM has old rosters and they've achieved a lot they are fit to be included here, While as Stalwart's roster's are still new and would need to achieve things before getting updated here. Might be after this roster play's the upcoming Major's and performs good and achieves some notability which might be deemed to be fit for wikipedia. Warm Regards. Abhayesports (talk) 05:19, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Maintainence Tag's

I've removed the COI tag because no major contributor of the article is associated with the subject. Hums4r who had a COI has already been globally locked. Abhayesports has addressed the COI on their user page – but they're again not the major contributor. I believe COI tag is completely irrelevant here. Regards ─ The Aafī on Mobile ^(talk) 08:00, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

• FANPOV, Removed this Tag. as per the discussion w Toddy1 Here, The Roster wasn't backed up by WP:RS and hence wasn't important or significant to be added here, It Depicted a Fan's POV. So removed the roster and the tag because all other things are backed by Citations. Abhayesports (talk) 08:42, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello. POV is a separate issue to WP:RS, and the article still reads like it is written from a fan's perspective. The COI issue is not just about the blocked account of Hums4r, since Abhayesports is an (improperly declared) paid editor for the company. Therefore I think that restoring the tags is warranted. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle (talk) 11:25, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello Toddy1, As per the conversation here regarding the orphan tag Toddy1 Talk Page, i linked Stalwart to main space and waited for a week and today removed the orphan tag from the page, but MrsSnoozyTurtle has added 2 more tag's which were earlier removed. I'd like to request you to look at this because if i remove it, it might be considered as an edit war.

Hello Mrs Snoozy, Regarding PAID COI :- I'd like to inform you that i am not the author/creator of this article. I never added any information to the article's mainspace and i always propose the change via Talk Page. I don't want to put this in because it wound sound like a lie but I don't get paid for this i don't know why would someone pay you to specifically maintain your wikipedia presence? I do it just because i have wiki markup experience, but again i don't want to use this as a point here. I might be a Paid Editor according to Wikipedia's policies but i am not the major contributor to the article.

Regarding FANPOV:- Alyo has edited this article multiple times and so did many more editors, as per to me all unsourced material has been already removed infact i myself removed the Free Fire roster last time just because i felt that it isn't suitable on the pedia and if you feel there's anything else that is unsourced you should remove it rather then putting up tag's multiple times repeatedly.

Also you put up these tag's last time and they were removed by other editor and not me. Warm Regards Abhayesports (talk) 12:43, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

I've removed the fan POV tag upon further trimming--I don't think there's anything else that wouldn't belong on any esports org page. Insofar as the COI tag is meant to flag for cleanup (which I believe I've done), rather than serve as an indefinite warning that a COI might exist (which belongs on the talk page if anywhere), I'd lean towards removing that too. MrsSnoozyTurtle do you have any other issues you'd flag before doing that? Alyo (chat·edits) 14:04, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello Abhayesports. I suggest you read WP:NOPAY, because it seems that this applies to your relationship with Stalwart Esports. Even though you are not the creator of the article (that is Hums4r, who has been blocked for sockpuppetry), you have still made 5 edits to it.

Also, I think your accusation that I am edit warring is unfair. Instead of casting unproven assertions on this Talk page, could you please either take it to the proper place for investigations, or withdraw your accusation? Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle (talk) 08:17, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

MrsSnoozyTurtle Hello, by edit warring i meant that these tag’s were earlier removed but put up again by you. The term that i used “Edit Warring” might not be civil but i did not know about it, I apologise for the same. Peace.-Warm Regards--Abhay EsportsTalk To Me 08:45, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, apology accepted. Please be aware that "edit warring" has a specific meaning on Wiki and is a serious accusation. All the best, MrsSnoozyTurtle (talk) 07:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

MrsSnoozyTurtle, Understood, will prevent this. -Warm Regards--Abhay EsportsTalk To Me 08:57, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Archive really necessary?

Is an archive really necessary at this point? Per User:MiszaBot/config: Before setting up automatic archiving on an article's talk page, please establish a consensus that archiving is really needed there. As such, I'm removing the template until there is a consensus. There's barely anything on this talk page, and having a bot scan this page seems like a waste of resources atm. Pbrks (talk) 01:08, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

If there is an archive it should be called Talk:Stalwart Esports/Archive not User talk:Stalwart Esports/Archive-- Toddy1 (talk) 06:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Toddy1 and Pbrks, I Guess the talk page is messy, i mean when you access it via mobile it is bit confusing to address the real query. But anyways if you feel like it's not necessary no problem. And Toddy 1, My bad i messed up with code there i directly did a copy paste from the bot config page. And As far as consensus is required the last active discussion has been resolved yesterday i guess. -Warm Regards--Abhay EsportsTalk To Me 08:56, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

At present, all the comments are recent and should not be archived.

Nevertheless, I believe that setting up an archive bot is the right thing to do. I had a very painful experience in September-October 2012 concerning a dispute where a user started editing and replying to old comments, changing the order of comments, putting his headers over other people's comments. Eventually admins explained that if only the talk page had had automatic archiving, most of the grief and stress could have been avoided. The time to install automatic archiving is before you need it. (It is rather like fire safety precautions, it is best to install them before the building catches fire.) I suggest:

• Minimum threads to retain = 3
• Archive date=181 days

-- Toddy1 (talk) 09:46, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Toddy1, yeah lol, that’s what I thought. I mean why to keep the page messy if it can be archived. It will allow new queries to be found easily. And not just this page, many, too many talk pages out there are very messy. They should be archived as well considering that many editors use mobile to edit just like me most of the times and a messy talk page is just difficult to read.-Warm Regards--Abhay EsportsTalk To Me 10:58, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Toddy1 and Abhayesports: Automatic archival does take computing effort to check if archiving is needed daily, however small, but if we had this mindset for every talk page with a bit of discussion, that would add up. I believe that automatic archival should be used when a talk page has semi-regular activity, but otherwise, manual archiving should be used. For reference, auto archiving was tagged on Talk:Cloud9 and Talk:Natus Vincere, and I certainly think those talk pages should be archived manually. In regards to this page, perhaps it should be automatically archived, as there has been quite a bit of discussion since the article's creation a couple of months ago. However, whether or not it will continue at this rate, I'm not sure. Pbrks (talk) 14:29, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Pbrks, i was guided to the automatic archive, can you share relevant links on how to archive manually? -Warm Regards--Abhay EsportsTalk To Me 14:48, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Manual archiving is what I do on my talk page--I cut content from my page like here and then paste it onto the archive subpage, like this. While I don't have strong opinions about this, I don't think this page needs automatic archiving. It's very likely that now that many of the early issues have been ironed out, discussion on this talk page will slow as the page stabilizes. This is what happens on the vast majority of pages. And at present, I think the contents of the talk page are still helpful for any editor trying to understand how and why the page looks the way it does. Alyo (chat·edits) 19:05, 29 March 2021 (UTC)