Talk:Kyle Neptune

Gameday attire

Blueblueredred, please explain why the Gameday attire should be included. Right now there are seven sources in that section. The first is about Jay Wright retiring. The second is about Jay Wright being well dressed and doesn't mention Neptune. The third is about Jay Wright not wearing suits during March Madness and doesn't mention Neptune. The fourth is a not too serious opinion piece in the Villanova student newspaper. The fifth is a local Philly basketball blog that briefly mentions that the Villanova president wants Neptune to wear a suit. The sixth source is actually just a duplicate of the fifth. The seventh is just a tweet from a former Villanova player that essentially is saying that Neptune should wear suits. I'm not seeing how this is encyclopedic.  Bait30  ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 01:14, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Everything in here is factual and relevant to the topic.

1 jay wright retired and the reason he provided was burnout

2 when Jay retired, he was wearing athleisurewear

3 prior to the burnout, he was long considered among the best dressed coach in the game

4 the athleisurewear was extremely controversial (there are many other stories confirming this)

5 when Neptune was hired, he was instructed to wear a suit and not wear athleisurewear

6 this was viewed as a positive

this is relevant and is important knowledge for this subject domain. It is verified. Please do not vandalize this page anymore. Thank you. Novanation1985 (talk) 08:47, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Of the 6 points you listed, 4 of them were about Jay Wright and 2 were about Neptune. The sources you provided are not considered reliable sources per WP:RS. As such, the section seems WP:OFFTOPIC.  Bait30  ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 00:32, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Seems WP:UNDUE. —Bagumba (talk) 01:27, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

@Novanation1985: I see that you have restored this text again. Please be aware of the policy WP:ONUS:

While information must be verifiable for inclusion in an article, not all verifiable information must be included. Consensus may determine that certain information does not improve an article.

Feel free to establish consensus for its inclusion. Thanks. —Bagumba (talk) 01:57, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

@Bagumba, it's clear there's a deadlock here and I don't want to continue to go back and forth and edit war. Would an RFC be warranted to solve this?  Bait30  ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 04:26, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

No need. There is one person (bait) who doesn’t like it. But to those within the community that this public figure represents, this is a big deal. Error on the side of inclusion. It’s not some random aspect of this role as Villanova coach, it was heavily reported among major media sources. More information is better. What is the point of deleting it (besides bait being overly “hall monitor’ish”)? Novanation1985 (talk) 04:34, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Only one editor has supported this so far in this discussion. That's not consensus. We can give it another week to see if there is more discussion. More from WP:ONUS:

The responsibility for achieving consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content.

—Bagumba (talk) 04:50, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

What defines “consensus”? I mean, it’s clear that it’s an issue among the community represented by this article. One person doesn’t like it so now there has to be a petition to include it? Not like most wiki readers are going to engage in the talk discussion because they don’t know that bait is on a campaign to exclude it (for whatever reason). Novanation1985 (talk) 05:40, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Consensus. Regards. —Bagumba (talk) 05:50, 3 March 2024 (UTC)