Talk:Daryl Morey

Untitled

Where was Morey born? 72.23.122.118 (talk) 03:58, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Is it worth mentioning that Daryl worked at the MITRE Corporation from 1997 until 1999, leading research in the domain of Knowledge Management? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.82.86 (talk) 13:58, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Section title for HK comments

Flaughtin reverted the section title from "Hong Kong comments" to "Twitter comments", and the edit summary cited that the paragraph mentions that Morey "has also tweeted about trump."[1] Yes, he did tweet about Trump before, but the coverage has been overwhelmingly about his Hong Kong comments. In this case, it's really immaterial whether the comments were on Twitter, Facebook, in a press conference, etc. It's the subject of the comments that is defining.—Bagumba (talk) 11:00, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

@Bagumba: I changed the title back to its more generic form in part as a way to temper down the emotions around the issue - getting specific about material (i.e. the title) that has such a place of prominence is just going to further inflame the affects of the of readers the who are going to be arriving at this article with a passionate state of mind in the first place. Given that, I'd say that the currrent version (pro democracy twitter comments) is even worse.

Can you also explain these two edits (#1, #2) of yours? The reason why I dont agree with #1 is that the MSN article just mentions the trump tweet in passing, the main point of it is about the hong kong tweet - hence the word "note". I also disagree with #2 because there is a categorical difference between the people's republic of china and the republic of china when it comes to politics (and especially political issues of this sort that deals directly with things like this, freedom, human rights, etc); this (at least) is my impression of how similar debates on other articles over the naming issue between these two places have been resolved. I understand that you are an admin, but given the nature and context of this issue (we can both agree that this whole thing is a major political issue that is going to attract lots of attention to this page) I have, for now, reverted those two edits of yours. I am obviously open to debating your two edits further but getting the wording is going to be key, especially in these next few days. Flaughtin (talk) 23:29, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

@Flaughtin: My edits were not in an admin role; they don't have any higher standing than anyone else's. Per WP:SAY, "noted" can give the undue impression of importance over "wrote". Regarding PRC, the name of the WP article has been a long-standing China. No need to be more "formal" here. There's undoubtedly lengthy discussion that led to the stable page title. Regarding using the title "Twitter comments" to "temper down the emotions", titles should be neutral and concise. Referring to "Twitter" is superficial, as HK is the core subject. It's not polarizing like "pro-democracy" or "anti-sovereignty comments". Cheers.—Bagumba (talk) 23:47, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

@Bagumba: i was under the impression that your input had more weight becuase you were an admin so thanks for clearing this up.

Per WP:SAY, "noted" can give the undue impression of importance over "wrote". I had the opposite reading, the term wrote per WP:SAY is a generic one - meant to convey objectivitiy, so saying that the MSN article wrote the thing about the trump tweet gives the impression that that was the main issue (obviously it isnt, the article itself makes that clear). That said i'll try to sidestep this issue completely by presenting it as fact (which it is - his trump tweet is still on his twitter ffeed)

Regarding PRC, the name of the WP article has been a long-standing China. No need to be more "formal" here. There's undoubtedly lengthy discussion that led to the stable page title. I still would disagree with this, I think we do need to be formal given the context. It's political which is exactly what defines the difference between these two terms. If anything else, there's also a pragmatic reason to get specific about this: preventing future edit warring over the terminological issue. I could understand if this policy/guideline applied to any other article genre though.

It's not polarizing like "pro-democracy" or "anti-sovereignty comments". Well we can agree on that. I've went ahead and changed the title to Hong Kong twitter comments (i am ok with settling on that)Flaughtin (talk) 00:26, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

OK, there's probably a subtlety that I missed about HK w.r.t. "China", so saying PRC to highlight the government involved is probably in the spirit of MOS:NC-CN, which deals more with China vs. Taiwan. However, perhaps the part of the Rockets relationship might more appropriately use "mainland China" as opposed to PRC.—Bagumba (talk) 00:50, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Done. Flaughtin (talk) 01:43, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

I tweaked some parts that were gov't related to use PRC.—Bagumba (talk) 04:35, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

@Flaughtin: Twitter is a proper noun, hence it should be "Hong Kong Twitter comments". However, one could construe that to mean a HK branch office of Twitter, or HK Twitter as a separate corporate division. We could go with "Hong Kong comments on Twitter" or "Twitter comments on Hong Kong", but I still maintain that plain "Hong Kong comments" is concise, succinct, and neutral. I'll leave it to you (or others) on how to handle Twitter. Cheers.—Bagumba (talk) 04:43, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Ive went with twitter comments on Hong Kong. Keeps best with the discussion (about keeping things generic) above. Flaughtin (talk) 05:30, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Separate page for twitter comments?

There's a pretty detailed Chinese Wikipedia page (https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019%E5%B9%B4NBA%E6%92%91%E6%B8%AF%E4%BA%89%E8%AE%AE%E4%BA%8B%E4%BB%B6) on that subject. So far there's no English version yet. Should the section relocate to that page? Meng Yibai (talk) 18:15, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Seems premature to know if it passes WP:NEWSEVENT yet. Too bad there isnt an existing article like NBA marketing or NBA in China. There is a quasi-alternative at National_Basketball_Association_criticisms_and_controversies#2019_Hong_Kong_protests, if this becomes less about Morey directly.—Bagumba (talk) 23:53, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

@Bagumba:It has become less about Morey but NBA (or even debate on freedom of speech). I firmly welcome you to express your opinion in the Splitting proposal.Mariogoods (talk) 10:15, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

I propose that sections Twitter comments on Hong Kong be split into a separate page called Morey Twitter comment controversy. The content of the current page seems off-topic and these sections are large enough to make their own page. As far as I know, public figures in both China side and America side has spoken for their opinions (in America side, Hilary and Trump?). OR speaking, I believed it shows the conflict between China value and America value. Mariogoods (talk) 10:08, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

I'd say WP:AVOIDSPLIT, continue growing this if needed, and wait few more days and see where this goes. Because this is ongoing, I think there a tempation to ignore WP:NOTDIARY and go into play-by-play details (e.g. gratuitous quotes) if this was a separate article. Ultimately, WP:NEWSEVENT needs to be met. If you think is has, go for it. Another option is to put this in 2019–20 NBA season, where it can be more than about Morey.—Bagumba (talk) 10:42, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

As I said before, there's already a fairly long article in Chinese about this event. I think perhaps this can be added somewhere to the articles about 2019 Hong Kong protests. The Chinese version is called "NBA supporting Hong Kong (protests) incident". Meng Yibai (talk) 15:37, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Meng Yibai, I agree we should not split, per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:RECENTISM. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:41, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

I agree that we shouldn't split until it settles down a bit. But still I think we should consider splitting if it has long term fallouts (like China's permenantly banning the Rockets). Also, apart from tweeting an image and issuing a short statement, the events afterwards have little to do with Morey. I think it's a bit like like writing about the first World War under the page of Danilo Ilić. So if this incident goes on for a while, I think the section should be split. Meng Yibai (talk) 15:50, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

This has been going on for over a week with continuing fallout. The tweets by LeBron yesterday have attracted significant criticism and controversy. This doesn't seem like it's going away any time soon. Strongest possible support for splitting. Jdcomix (talk) 12:46, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

I agree with you. As far as I know, the thing has been depicted by Chinese media as the example of alleged double standard and "fake" freedom of speech. Mariogoods (talk) 04:36, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 October 2020

For when Morey's hiring to the 76ers president job is confirmed. 72.93.211.58 (talk) 09:41, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: It seems to be unreliable breaking news at this point. Feel free to provide a reliable source when it is confirmed on the record.—Bagumba (talk) 10:24, 29 October 2020 (UTC)