Talk:Jay Wright (basketball)

Untitled

I don't like the title of the section- "Players who were coached by Wright who went on to play in the NBA". Technically... Dorsey, Ellington, Hibbet, White, etc can all be added to this list next year because they were coached by Jay on the '07 Pan Am team. Miketown (talk) 21:06, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

On what basis do you assert that he was a Villanova fan as a kid?

Not me who wrote that, but JW is on record in at least 10 interviews this month alone saying that he was... just do a simple google search, im sure youll be satisfied. Pepeeg 06:30, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Why was the "Bucknell University Alumni" tag removed?

Updated to show his Rochester experience as an assistant coach rather than a head coach. Ref: http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050325/SPORTS09/503250415/1007/SPORTS SN14534 3/24/06

The references to the impact of Professor Ed Maloney on Wright's life were removed as they were filled with un-cited and unsourced quotes and anecdotes, such as this inconsistency: Jay Wright graduated from Bucknell in 1983, when relatively few people had email, yet it was cited in an unsourced quote that Ed Maloney sent recommendation emails on his behalf.

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 08:13, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus, not done. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 23:49, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

---

Jay Wright (basketball) → Jay Wright – Jay Wright the basketball coach is much more wellknown than Jay Wright the poet. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 20:16, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

• I was inclined to say no, but the page views are 8:1 in favor of this Jay Wright. Since there are only two on the dab page, a hatnote should be sufficient. Support. Dekimasuよ! 23:02, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose - minor sports figures will always get more page views than major poets, but Google Books shows that the Black American poet is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC subject in books. Given this the current classic WP:TWODABS solution of a dab for two articles is evidently working. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:09, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose in agreement with In ictu oculi. --ColonelHenry (talk) 16:28, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
• Strong support. The current setup is making people's lives suck a little more because it's taking them longer to get to the article they want. I cannot see any reason to make their lives suck. Therefore, let's let them find the article they actually want first. Red Slash 22:06, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
• Support per nom. Page views show readers have a clear primary topic in mind. Or we could screw them because Google obviously has the answer. Hot Stop talk-contribs 00:29, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

How exactly does "(basketball)" wikt:screw readers looking for a basketball player? Take an iPhone user with no drop downs for search, how does "(basketball)" suck? Page views suggest "(basketball)" is working. The corresponding "(poet)" disambiguator already protects basketball fans from landing on the poet's page. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:27, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Because people would type in "Jay Wright" and expect to get the far better-known coach. Red Slash 00:28, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Plus, there's no reason to limit Google search results to just books. How about checking Google news (news sources are reliable after all)? I have a sneaking suspicion which Jay Wright would get more hits through that. Hot Stop talk-contribs 04:10, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose. There's no primary topic... the basketball coach wins hands down on page views, but that poet wins hands down on long-term significance. Andrewa (talk) 05:29, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Are you kidding, Andrewa? Or you, Xoloz? On what basis do you conclude that someone who writes poetry is inherently more significant than someone who coaches and leads young men? Red Slash 22:34, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
    • No, not kidding at all. Perhaps I should clarify... I didn't mean that everyone who writes poetry is more significant than everyone who coaches and leads young men. That's what you appear to have thought I said, but I didn't mean that at all. I simply mean that this poet is far more significant long term (and note that qualification, it's from the guideline) than this leader of young men, on the evidence so far. And similarly, I hope you don't think that every leader of young men is more significant than every poet. I've done both in fact, sometimes even both at once, but neither my youth work nor my songwriting has been deemed worthy of a Wikipedia article as of yet. (;-> Andrewa (talk) 23:47, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
      • The move request has been closed, but I want to apologize here for my incivility. I'm sorry; that was a completely inappropriate way to talk. I apologize, Andrewa. Red Slash 01:25, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose per Andrewa. Page views are not solely determinitive of primary topic status. An encyclopedia has dual obligations, to both popular culture and enduring academic significance. In this case, to balance those two interests, disambiguation at the base title is appropriate. Xoloz (talk) 20:22, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.