Talk:Temba Bavuma

Content dispute

@Yadplayz and Smashedbandit: Can you two please discuss changes here instead of constantly reverting each other? It's not constructive to keep going back and forth like this, and if you continue it could mean you both get blocked for edit warring. OliveYouBean (talk) 10:46, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

@Smashedbandit you just mentioned that the opinion of a "random journalist" and "some twitter users" does not matter. And you were saying how this place is about adding facts instead of personal opinions but it looks like you're removing what I write because you have your own personal opinion about what I wrote and you're dismissing all of it. Isn't that just hypocritical?! Yadplayz (talk) 10:50, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm not removing what you said because of my own personal opinions, I'm removing it because it is not relevant information at all. A simple line about how Bavuma was out of form and his place was questioned but he was then backed by his coach to remain as captain is more than sufficient. Smashedbandit (talk) 10:53, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

And the fact that you think its not relevant information is your own personal opinion. There's nothing that says it isn't relevant information. You can't just have what you would like to see on the page. Nothing I mentioned there was wrong or corrupt. Yadplayz (talk) 10:55, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

@Yadplayz: please stop editing the page until there's consensus on what the content should be. Per WP:BRD it's best to have a discussion when your edits are reverted instead of continually reverting back to your preferred version. Also when you talk on talk pages, can you please WP:INDENT your messages? OliveYouBean (talk) 11:10, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

I've removed the references that just source information from Twitter, which isn't really a reliable source. I do have concerns that the content doesn't reflect the sources very well. The Sports Rush ref doesn't mention racial quotas at all, and the sportscafe.in source doesn't call him a "quota player", just mentions that racial quotas might play a role in his selection. I think it's fair to mention criticism of him in the article (if it's clear where it's coming from) but I don't agree with the way it's put in there right now. OliveYouBean (talk) 11:26, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

exactly I have no issue mentioning he is in poor form at the moment, because he is, but adding the that some people think he's a quota player (a term that has been used in a racially derogatory way many times) just feels completely unnecessary. Smashedbandit (talk) 11:31, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

@Yadplayz All cricket pages go based off the CricInfo classification so that there is uniformity on the site and reduces ridiculously debates like this with people having their own subjective view on what is or isn't a top order batsmen or all rounder or whatever. Further, I don't know why you feel the need to include a section about how random twitter users call Bavuma a quota player. A simple line talking about how Bavuma isn't in form is all that is required. Smashedbandit (talk) 11:19, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

And then again, its clearly obvious that someone who regularly bats at the top 3 isn't a middle-order batsman anymore. Terming him as a middle-order batsman still would be outdated. And those "random twitter users" according to you are there to prove my point that Bavuma is currently being judged negatively by several people across the globe, whether they are well known or not. Yadplayz (talk) 11:25, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

It doesn't matter what's "clearly obvious", what matters on Wikipedia is what can be referenced to reliable sources. In this case, the source used calls him a middle-order batsman, so that's what Wikipedia should go with. OliveYouBean (talk) 11:28, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Once again, it is not up to you to decide how a batsmen is classified. This is incredibly frustrating mate because I've explained to you that all pages follow CricInfo to avoid this subjective debate. Also idk why you keep mentioning where he bats in limited overs cricket where he has batted almost exclusively 4-6 in first class which is the middle order. Smashedbandit (talk) 11:28, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

@Yadplayz You need to stop editing the page without addressing my points and engaging in good faith. This is not your own personal page. Smashedbandit (talk) 11:34, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Okay then, stay content with calling a batter who clearly bats at the top-order in limited overs cricket as a "middle-order" batsman. He doesn't even bat at 5 or 6 in first class cricket anymore. I thought Wikipedia would actually point out practical facts instead of copying everything from sources even if its clearly outdated. And I'm not only one who had changed his batting position here to a top-order batsman here before. Several others did that too. There's a reason for that. But if that's how the rules are, then sure. I hope people actually manage to figure out what's true and what's not because this is misleading. Yadplayz (talk) 11:35, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

For what it's worth, this is why I don't think the article should clarify at all beyond just "Batsman". It's all arbitrary anyway. OliveYouBean (talk) 11:40, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

And how come you're editting my points without engaging in good faith? This isn't your personal page and you're now showing off a horrible attitude while doing the exact same things you're telling me not to. Cool down for once because you don't own this page either. Yadplayz (talk) 11:37, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

@Yadplayz Could you please explain why adding the fact that some people consider him a "quota player" is at all relevant? Why can't the page just have a line about how has been out of form and that his coached backed him into the World Cup Smashedbandit (talk) 11:40, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Could you please explain how adding additional information about him isn't relevant? This page is all about him and there's nothing wrong in keeping anything related to him visible here. Yadplayz (talk) 11:42, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Do you have a reliable source showing a particular person (preferably somebody whose cricket opinion actually matters e.g. a former player) calling him a "quota player"? OliveYouBean (talk) 11:43, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

@Yadplayz Answering my question with a question. Wonderful. And the reason I don't think its necessary is because the idea of a "quota player" has a racist past and has been used to criticised the selection of black players in the South African side. You have yet to provide a source that shows anyone of note that has called him this. We don't need to add what any random person thinks about him. Smashedbandit (talk) 11:46, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

And that's exactly why I linked to the tweets. People all around the globe, whether you like it or not are calling him a "quota player". Do you honestly believe he would ever make it to the T20I side without that? And there's nothing racist about admitting it or stating how people feel about that. I understand it is something sensitive because of the history of South African cricket, but at present, someone like Bavuma being in the side has angered multiple people and there's no shame in admitting that. The world isn't made up of just 2-3 famous individuals, views of the public does matter. Yadplayz (talk) 11:50, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

And no. But there have been former cricketers who have called him a weak link in the team as well as criticised him. And he is getting called a quota player by several people across social media. That's all I wanted to mention. Yadplayz (talk) 11:53, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

And you have yet to give a reliable source on the whole issue of Bavuma being a quota player. An article on tweets does not count as one. Smashedbandit (talk) 11:58, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

I may be wrong on this but it seems like a terrible idea to just add the opinions of what people online think. I'm sure there's a lot of people online that think Kohli or Smith or Root is overrated or whatever. Do you think their opinions should be included in a wikipedia article. I have no issue with including a line about how there have been concerns about Bavumas form and how his selection has been questioned but there is just no reason to include a racially loaded term like "quota player" in it. Smashedbandit (talk) 11:55, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Smashedbandit. It's not appropriate in a WP:BLP to include criticism from social media. I think we should leave that out and stick to any criticism that can be attributed to WP:RS. OliveYouBean (talk) 12:00, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Whether or not players like Root,Kohli Smith etc are overrated isn't a major concern. But Bavuma being in the South African side does raise questions and it is being discussed. The "quota player" tag is something that is being used on him by the public. Personally, I don't see it as racist but rather people trying to make sense of why he is there. No one calls Rabada or Ngidi by that term. Yadplayz (talk) 12:00, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

It doesn't matter what "the public" says about him, people say many things. What matters is what can be attributed to reliable sources. OliveYouBean (talk) 12:04, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Like I've said numerous times, I have no issue with including a passage about Bavuma's poor form. I even wrote a paragraph about how he had come under fire for batting poorly but he doesn't need to be called a quota player. And just forgot the whole race angle with that name, its just an insult and name calling a player. Smashedbandit (talk) 12:04, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

He still gets picked on the basis of the quota system though. And personally, I do think the longer he stays in the side, the more his team will be hurting. Him getting out early today was a blessing in disguise however, as it allowed the following batsman Rilee to make the best use out of the powerplay. Most people know that he truly is a liability to South Africa. Even you yourself might know this deep down mate. Fact is, he never was in form in T20 cricket. Has just a single fifty and that too against Ireland, Average of about 22 with a strike rate of around 120? Imagine leaving Reeza for that, or even Rassie if he wasn't injured. And while his ODI average is 40, his strike rate since he was appointed captain has been below 80. In modern day 50 over cricket where scoring at high strike rates is the norm, he actually won't really be benefitting his side much in that format either. His test average is 34 which isn't anything spectacular but it has improved in the last couple of years, I'll give him that. Truly speaking, he is only suited for one format, and I can see why he gets called as a "quota player". But seems like you seem to view that as racist and would rather not see it being mentioned. Go ahead then. People don't need Wikipedia to know what he really is, its clearly obvious and out there for the world to see through his performances on field. Was a waste of time here. Do what you want, won't make a difference to how he is being perceived. Yadplayz (talk) 12:14, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

I think you've made it pretty clear you just have a personal vendetta against this player and came to this page to attack him. I think the edits made by this user should be reverted Smashedbandit (talk) 12:19, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

I agree that the edits seem to be more coming from a place of personal opinion than trying to reflect reliable sources. I don't think reverting is the best way, because some of the content is good and should stay, but I think at least removing the parts of the criticism that aren't supported by sources because as it stands it's excessive. I'm happy to just take out the sentence that mentions racial quotas and leave the rest as is. OliveYouBean (talk) 12:23, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

And just adding this, his List A average is extremely mediocre at only 31. Which further indicates his ODI average has a good chance of dropping further too as he plays more. And you'll see even more people calling him names. Just saying, not that its relevant anymore. Yadplayz (talk) 12:20, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

@OliveYouBean:Cheers mate. Thanks for all the help and have a great night. Smashedbandit (talk) 12:29, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

None of the edits I made are wrong. But then again, whatever you do from now on doesn't really matter much. You can call me out having a personal vendetta against this player, I can easily say you sound like a strong supporter of this player. None of my edits were wrong. If the "quota player" part hurts you, you can revert it. I think the rest should stay. Yadplayz (talk) 12:23, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

glad we could reach a consensus Smashedbandit (talk) 12:24, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Is he really of 133...gettingany mistakes these days on wikipedia, who the hell is doing that.

Age is written here 133. Other day i saw some wrong information on many pages. Does wikipedia check facts before publish anything. 47.15.38.62 (talk) 09:43, 21 October 2023 (UTC)