Wikipedia:Peer review/Juwan Howard/archive3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Juwan Howard

Previous peer review
(more info)

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…

The last FAC suggested a PR, TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:44, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Comments some quick things

The Rambling Man (talk) 16:36, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Comments Slogging through this one; I'm down to the beginning of his college career. Here are my comments so far. Most of them are of the "you might want to" variety instead of the "this really needs to be addressed" variety.


  • "Howard and the Fab Five reached" Technically, it was Howard and the other four members of the Fab Five. Otherwise, it sounds like there were six of them. I know that's kind of nit-picky, but you could just drop "Howard and" and say "The Fab Five reached".
  • "as freshmen and sophomores" Another nit-picky thing – from this, it's not clear to the unfamiliar reader whether the Fab Five was a mix of freshmen and sophomores or you are referring to their collective freshman and sophomore years. (I remember them, so I know they came in as a unit.) You could address this in a couple of ways. On first mention, you could call them the "Fab Five recruiting class" or something of a similar ilk that indicates that they came in as a unit. Alternatively, you could say they reached the NCAA Championship game during Howard's freshman and sophomore seasons, which is not as specific, but would still be technically correct. I would also understand if you decided to leave it as is. This is a pretty minor thing, but I'm trying to approach the article from the perspective of someone who knows nothing about Howard or the Fab Five.
    • This is something that is important to get right as fewer and fewer up and coming readers actually remember the 1992 and 1993 basketball seasons. It is a really important thing to get right. Let's stay with this until we get it right.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:58, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
      • I think you've got it now. It is depressing to think about the fact that most up and coming readers don't remember this, but I just barely remember the Fab Five – mostly because of them beating the Mashburn-led Cats in the Tournament – and I'm thirty now. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:27, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
        • I was in the Superdome when Weber called timeout. I also spotted Mashburn on Bourbon Street that weekend.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:12, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
          • I was sick for Webber when that happened. My dad was never a fan of UNC because of Dean Smith's use of the Four Corners offense back before the shot clock era, so we were pulling for Michigan in that game. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 22:31, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
  • "Howard played six-and-a-half seasons for the Bullets/Wizard franchise and three full seasons for the Houston Rockets but no more than two seasons for any other team." First, Wizards is missing an "s", I think. Second, the non-NBA literate reader may not realize that the franchise changed its name. You could rephrase with a parenthetical (i.e. "for the Bullets franchise (renamed the Wizards in 1997)". Finally, this sentence makes it seem as though his tenure in Houston immediately followed his stint with the Bullets/Wizards. Including the years he played with the Rockets could help.
  • "During his rookie year as a professional," This kinda strikes me as awkward. What about "During his rookie year with the Bullets,"
  • "averaged 19.3 points per game, but has only averaged 17 points in three of his seasons since." Maybe "only averaged 17 points per game in three", just for accuracy.
  • "The 2005–06 NBA season was the most recent in which he was a starter." Seems unnecessarily wordy. How about, "He was most recently a starter during the 2005-06 NBA season."
  • Late addition: "Despite the sanctions and forfeited accomplishments from 1992 to 1998 by the Michigan Wolverines men's basketball due to the University of Michigan basketball scandal," Something about this doesn't read right. I can't put my finger on it, but there has to be a clearer way to express this. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 22:35, 10 May 2012 (UTC)


  • "She did not want to raise her child. Thus, Howard was brought up by his maternal grandmother, Jannie Mae Howard, who adopted him." Why not combine these? "She did not want to raise her child, so her mother, Jannie Mae Howard, adopted him."
  • "During recruiting visits by college coaches such as Lou Henson, Joey Meyer and Steve Fisher, Jannie Mae Howard did most of the questioning." Maybe mention what schools these coaches were from.
  • "His grandmother died a few hours after he announced that he would attend Michigan. After her fatal heart attack, Howard moved in with his high-school coach, Richard Cook." Could be combined. "Howard's grandmother died of a heart attack a few hours after he announced that he would attend Michigan, and he moved in with his high school coach, Richard Cook." Also not sure why there is a hyphen between "high" and "school".
  • "Howard has no siblings and is not close to his biological parents." This might fit better somewhere in the first paragraph, perhaps at the end or right after mention of his adoption.

Sophomore year:

  • "highly prized by college basketball coaches" Is this phrase needed? Isn't it kind of implicit in the definition of "blue chip"?
  • "The Chicago Public High School League coaches choose an annual roster of the best performers each season." Presumably, this is the "All-Chicago Public School League team" mentioned in the next sentence. If so, I don't think you need this sentence. The only really unique information in it is that the team is chosen by the coaches, which you should be able to integrate into the next sentence.
  • "(tall basketball players)" This parenthetical seems unnecessary (and made me chuckle a little).
    • This was requested by a non-basketball reviewer in a previous review. The problem is that there is no Big man (basketball) link.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:02, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
      • Wow. I've been trying to look at this from the point of view of someone unfamiliar with most basketball terminology, but even I thought this would be OK. To me, it seems unnecessarily condescending to the majority of people I would expect to be reading this article. Although perhaps a bit too specific, would it be accurate if we changed "big men" to "power forwards", "post players", or "power players" and dropped the parenthetical? Acdixon (talk · contribs) 18:04, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
  • "He was involved in controversy for receiving a second pair of sneakers at the camp." This seems unnecessarily vague. I thought it was some kind of amateurism issue when I first read it. Later, I discovered he was apparently accused of stealing the shoes. If that's right, we should just say here that he was accused of stealing them. The subsequent sentences adequately explain the circumstances.
    • I think it is a combination of amateur issue. I think you are only allowed one pair of shoes in general unless there is a defect. Howard somehow got a second pair that was issued later that seemed stolen.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:02, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
      • Well, if there were potential amateurism issues, it seems like we should at least strike a glancing blow at that as well, I think. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 18:04, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
  • "he became ranked as one of the top 10 underclassmen in the country." By whom?
  • "which marked Howard's achievement of his goal" This phrase seems unnecessary, and you could make a weak case that it is WP:OR or WP:POV.

Junior year:

  • "As Howard and Tom Kleinschmidt entered their junior years, some sources listed Kleinschmidt as the number one junior in the state. Others considered Howard the top prospect." This seems like a really awkward way to say that scouts were split as to who was the better junior between these two. How about something like "As Howard entered his junior year, some sources listed him as the best junior basketball player in Illinois, while others ranked Tom Kleinschmidt ahead of him."?
  • "Howard was said to be leaning toward playing for DePaul or, because of his admiration for Thomas, for the Illinois Fighting Illini." Who said he was leaning this way or that? Also, there has been no explicit connection made in this article between Thomas (presumably Deon) and the University of Illinois. This puts the burden on the reader to draw the connection.
    • How is it now?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:54, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
      • Better, but this part still seems a little clumsy to me: "where he matriculated in 1989". First, we have three potential "he"s in this sentence: Bell, Howard, and Thomas. I think it might be better to name Thomas again, even if he is the name closest to the pronoun. Also, the Illinois Fighting Illini is a team, not a school; I'm not sure you can "matriculate" to a team, although I obviously get what you are saying. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 20:03, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
  • "Others invited included Kleinschmidt, Donnie Boyce, William Gates, Billy Taylor, Rashard Griffith and Howard Nathan." Is this relevant?
    • I just have a preference to establish context by saying who other star players were at the time. I can remove that sentence if you like.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:56, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
      • Well, this is just a peer review, so it's not like it will really affect anything either way. Just wanted to let you know that it seemed less than relevant to me. I'll strike the issue, and you can decide whether my observation merits any action. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 20:03, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
  • "Although Howard was perceived as one of the top Chicago prospects at that time, the best Chicago-area prospect was Glenn Robinson of Gary, Indiana." I get the difference between Chicago and the Chicago area, but you might specify that Howard was perceived as one of the top prospects in the city of Chicago just to make the distinction clear.
  • "Howard's top six possible schools were Michigan, Nevada-Las Vegas, Kentucky, Marquette, Arizona and Dayton." This is a little confusing since it comes so close on the heels of another list with nearly the same number of schools. I realize that the intervening sentences probably represent at least a few months of time, during which his list changed, but it's still a little jarring. Since most of the schools are the same, could you just say something about him dropping Michigan State and Illinois and adding UNLV?
    • Thanks.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:08, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
      • "Among Howard's top possible schools he dropped Michigan State and Illinois and added UNLV." This reads awkwardly to me. If a date is available, you might just say "By [month], he had stopped considering Michigan State and Illinois and added UNLV to his list of potential college choices." Something like that, anyway. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 20:03, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
        • Look at the dates. One is only 2 weeks after the other.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:31, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
          • Ah, missed that. I still edited the sentence a little because it still seemed awkward to me. Revert if it doesn't work for you. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:56, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
  • "some felt Webber and Robinson were his equals as prospects" Who?
  • "Howard was Illinois' number one recruit" But according to the most-recently-mentioned list, he had already dropped Illinois, right?

Senior year:

  • "In the final days before his senior season decision regarding his college basketball team decision" This needs to be cleaned up to avoid repeating the word "decision".
  • "He had also made an official visit to Dayton." Why not past tense?
  • "he decided not to hold a press conference to announce his decision" I guess this kind of implies that most recruits ranked as highly as he was do that, but you might consider saying it explicitly anyway.
  • "Although the official signing period was set for November 14–21, 1990, he selected Michigan on November 2." Since this was before the signing period began, I assume he verbally committed to Michigan on November 2 and signed a NLOI later. If so, it should be stated that way.
  • "is said to have influenced King's decision to enroll there" Said by whom?
  • "Howard's signing made up for the inability of Steve Fisher, Michigan's head coach, to recruit Eric Montross the prior year" This seems like an opinion to me. Whose is it?
  • "He was also selected to the All-Area team. He was also..." Repetition. These two sentences can probably be combined anyway.
  • "Only eight of the top 25 Chicago Public School League players passed the test." You don't really "pass" the ACT. Should probably say something like "achieved a qualifying score".

Hope to have more soon. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 17:34, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Here's the college stuff.

Freshman year:

  • "there was already talk that at least four of the five freshmen would be starting before the season ended." You mentioned Howard, King, Webber, and Rose earlier, but Jackson has only been mentioned in the lead to this point, as far as I can tell.
    • Yes just the lead, but the WP:CAPTIONed picture is right next to the statement. Should I name all 5 here?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:03, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
      • Definitely somewhere between the lead and here. I was surprised not to see him show up in this sentence from the Senior year section: "With Jalen Rose, Webber, Howard and King, the Michigan recruiting class was considered to be the best in the nation." Was Jackson a late signee or something? Acdixon (talk · contribs) 16:39, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
        • He was not really a late signee. It seems that he may have committed before Webber according to the Michigan Daily. I think he was the lowest rated of the five as a prospect and overlooked in some press accounts as a result.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:02, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
        • See this for more perspective.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:07, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
          • OK, I get that. Still, what if we altered the sentence from the Senior year section to say something like "With Jalen Rose, Webber, Howard and King – along with Ray Jackson, a less heralded prospect – the Michigan recruiting class was considered to be the best in the nation." That gets Jackson's name in there so the "five freshmen" remark makes sense later. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 17:03, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
  • "by double digits" Could be a little colloquial. Maybe "by double-digit margins"?
  • "during which the Fab Five" Previous to this, the only mention of the "Fab Five" moniker is in the lead. If anyone knows who coined the title originally, that would be a good way to introduce it somewhere prior to this sentence.
    • I see no attribution of the nickname at Fab Five (University of Michigan).--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:07, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
      • OK. I still think the nickname needs to be mentioned prior to this in the body. How about augmenting the first sentence to read "there was already talk that at least four of the five freshmen – dubbed [or nicknamed] "The Fab Five" – would be starting before the season ended."? Acdixon (talk · contribs) 16:39, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
      • It is currently in the lead of the section. Keep in mind that they were not actually dubbed the fab five until after they played and excelled together.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:13, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
        • I didn't realize they weren't given the nickname until after they got to Michigan. In the absence of an attribution for who coined the nickname, this will work. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 17:03, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
  • "all but two Wolverines points" Maybe "all but two of the Wolverines' points"?
  • "the Final Four round of the tournament" I know "Final Four" could be considered jargon, but this phrase really sounds awkward to me. I'd just drop "round of the tournament". If "Final Four" is a problem, just say "National Semifinals".
  • "Nick Van Exel, who became the starter in the middle of the season," When Van Exel became a starter for Cincy seems to have very little to do with Howard or Michigan's game against Cincy.
  • "Howard endured dehydration from stomach cramps and a fever that necessitated that he receive fluids." Maybe reword to something like "Howard was suffering from stomach cramps and a fever and received fluids to combat dehydration." I assume they were IV fluids, and we should probably specify that if so.
  • "threw a turnover" Never heard this used before. Maybe he threw a pass that resulted in a turnover.
  • "2-to-1 turnover-to-assist ratio" Isn't it much more common to express this is an assist-to-turnover ratio?

Sophomore year:

  • "there were reports that during the 1992 summer a controversy had arisen when three Wolverines were found to have been paid $300 to participate in a charity basketball tournament" There are way more words than necessary in this sentence. How about "media reports alleged that three Wolverine basketball players were paid $300 each to participate in a charity basketball tournament in mid-1992"? A month-year combination would be better, but I think the MOS says to avoid meteorological seasons, since they are opposite for our friends south of the equator.
  • "Furthermore" How about "The reports further alleged that"?
  • "The following season" Because we've already mentioned the beginning of Howard's sophomore school year, it is unclear whether this refers to the 1992-93 season (Howard's sophomore season) or the 1993-94 season (Howard's junior season). Might be best to just specify dates instead.
  • "As a sophomore member of the 1992–93 Wolverines," Haven't we already established that he was a sophomore?
  • "Meanwhile, the Chicago vocational team that he led to back-to-back city Final Fours fell to successive 4–20 and 4–21 records without him." Was he the only major player the team lost in those two years? I know Howard was good, but this could potentially be "correlation without causation". It seems out of place in the middle of a paragraph about Howard's sophomore season at Michigan anyway.
    • I could move it to the end of the paragraph or I could remove it from the article entirely. Vocational certainly didn't lose any other players of his caliber. He was at the first team All-American level.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 12:21, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
  • "Howard acquired a million-dollar disability insurance policy" I'm thinking "purchased" is the more appropriate verb. Is this even noteworthy, though? I'm sure a lot of players do it, and I'm not aware of Howard ever having to use it.
    • WP is suppose to summarize the press not analyze whether the press should have published stories.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 12:24, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
      • Agreed, but if we included everything the press published in this article, we'd probably have a game-by-game breakdown of every game he ever played in. Unless this is exceptional for some reason or had some effect on his career, I don't see the need for it. If you are set on keeping it, though, be my guest. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:03, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
        • To me it is exceptional that it was reported. If a lot of players do it, it is exceptional to see it reported.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:58, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
          • Striking as "agree to disagree". This is just a peer review. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 12:58, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
  • "As a freshman and sophomore, he was not only united with the Fab Five and future NBA player Riley, he was teammates with Rob Pelinka." So? Who's Rob Pelinka? Did being teammates with Howard affect either of them in a meaningful way later in life?
    • Content moved to beginning of Freshman season, where it is more topical.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 12:37, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
      • Sounds better there, and "future NBA personalities" is an adequate descriptor. In the modified sentence, though, you might say "he not only joined the other members of the Fab Five". Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:03, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
        • Are you suggesting changing "where he was not only united with his fellow freshman that would soon be known as the Fab Five" to "he not only joined the other members of the Fab Five". I stated above that they did not get this nickname until after they excelled together.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:02, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
          • In light of your recent edits, this is no longer applicable. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 12:58, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
  • "Howard held Jamal Mashburn in check defensively, while contributing on offense" What does it mean that he held Mashburn in check? Did Mashburn not score? Did he not get a shot off? Was he 10 points below his average? 20? And what does it mean that Howard "contributed on offense"? That could mean he hit one free throw, or even that he made one assist.
    • I have added quotations to the footnotes. I don't know at what points in the game Howard was guarding Mashburn, but Mashburn posted 26 points and Howard's defense was lauded in the press. Mashburn was shut down most of the second half, which must be when Howard defended him. On offense, Webber and Rose combined for 45 of the team's 81. A key free throw late and a key field goal early are mentioned in the articles. Please advise.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:07, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
      • The specifics in the Adande article seem like a good way to go. Something like "Although Kentucky forward Jamal Mashburn scored 17 points against Michigan in the first half of the 1993 NCAA Tournament semifinals, Howard held him to 9 points in the second half, and he not make a field goal in the last 12:36 of regulation; Chicago Sun-Times sportswriter Jay Mariotti wrote that Howard did "a terrific defensive job" on Mashburn. Mariotti [or Adande] also mentioned an early field goal by Howard and a free throw he made late in the game as key plays in the victory." You can massage it however you like, but something along these lines, I think. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:03, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
        • I have no source stating that Howard guarded Mashburn in the 2nd half. We just know that Mashburn scored a lot early and Howard was credited with a great defensive effort. The change you suggest is truly unsourced.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:26, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
          • Didn't the quote from Mariotti specifically say that Howard guarded Mashburn? From the footnotes: "...Juwan Howard , the steady, bullish center from Chicago who did such a terrific defensive job on Jamal Mashburn..." Acdixon (talk · contribs) 17:08, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
            • Yes, but it is not clear that he was not also guarding him when he scored 17 in the first half.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:12, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
              • OK, this is straying a little too far away from my original concern, which is that saying Howard held Mashburn "in check defensively" while "contributing on offense" is much too non-specific and colloquial. If we can't fix it using my suggested rewrite above, you can propose something, but I think this one really needs to be fixed before the article goes to FAC. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 12:58, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
  • "against the 33–4 1992–93 Tar Heels" Too many consecutive numbers. Pipe this link to read "North Carolina Tar Heels". Given that this is the 1992-93 season, it's highly unlikely they played the Tar Heel team from any other season in the tournament.
  • "During the championship game Howard picked up his second personal foul with 9 minutes 42 seconds remaining in the first half" The unfamiliar reader may not realize that a player only gets five fouls and that many coaches sit a player with two fouls on the bench until the second half to protect them from fouling out. Did Fisher do this with Howard? Did he continue to miss time in the second half with foul problems? Did he foul out?
    • I added a short phrase, but the reader can just click on the link. I also added a quote to the footnotes.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:23, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
      • I guess I'll strike this, since the source goes into little or no detail about how the foul trouble affected the second half. Passing strange, that. The source article really seemed unfinished to me. I kept looking for a link to go to the next page of it. Oh well. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 17:08, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
  • "After the season, Webber and Howard were invited to try out for the United States national basketball team that would compete at the 1993 World University Games and Under-22 World Championships." Did Howard make either team? If so, how did he do?

Junior year:

  • "After Webber left for the NBA" May be better to specify that Webber left for the NBA after his sophomore year.
  • "against a victorious Arkansas team" This is a really weird way to indicate that Arkansas won the game. I had to re-read the sentence to figure out what was meant.
  • "The following day" Given that we don't say what day Howard announced, this qualifier doesn't mean much.
  • The discussion of the Michigan scandal is scattered in two different places, making it hard to follow. Since nothing really came of it until after Howard left college, I think it would be fine to give it its own section at the end of his college career, even though reports were apparently surfacing before his sophomore season. The details of the scandal and Howard's role in it are a little hazy. On first mention, it seems he only appeared at some summer camps, and we are told that might be an NCAA violation. When the scandal is next mentioned, there is a grand jury involved and we have stated as fact that Howard received money (for something, we don't know what) although it wasn't very much. We also know that his All-American designation was not forfeited (is this before the term "vacated" came en vogue?) but we don't know why. Knowing the NCAA, they never said why, but even that might bear mention.
    • The controversy during his sophomore year is not related to the scandal. Thus, I don't think the scandal is currently spread out. I am not sure it deserves its own section in his bio because he was not implicated.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:00, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
      • OK, that wasn't clear to me, so it might not be to the casual reader, either. Might be worth a sentence explicitly stating that the two were not connected. Also, it feels like there are some "loose ends" here. In the Sophomore year section, we don't know what became of the allegations that Howard appeared at a summer camp. We know that it was a possible violation of NCAA rules, but we don't know if he was cleared, found guilty, penalized or what. Then, in the Junior year section, we know that he didn't testify and that he wasn't believed to have received "large amounts of money". We don't know if he was accused and not found guilty, accused but not penalized because the amount he was found to have accepted was so small, or not charged at all. Also, as mentioned, we don't know why his accomplishments were not forfeited. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 11:49, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
        • It sounds like you are asking for details about not news. There is no story when a person is found not to have done anything worth being punished for. There was no further story about the sneakers. I could put in a line "In my research on his biography, I found no subsequent stories about the sneakers" or something else ridiculous, but the story ends with the detail we have here. Keep in mind how detailed this high school and college section is compared to almost any other basketball players biography that I did not write. Ordinarily stories about summer camps and such are not included in most bios. The fact that you have 80% of such a story is a lot.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:55, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
          • Oh, I think I wasn't as clear as I should have been. No, I'm not talking about the sneaker issue during his high school career. That's documented quite sufficiently. I'm talking about the summer basketball camps that he and some other Michigan teammates were alleged to have improperly attended in the summer between his freshman and sophomore years in college. It's mentioned in the Sophomore year (college) section that those might have been NCAA violations, but no further detail is given. Since we've apparently been talking past each other on that, let me also ask if that is connected to the booster scandal mentioned later. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:44, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

More later. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 18:57, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Scouting report:

  • "He was also regarded as the rock-solid, rebounds-and-defense power forward in contrast to his flamboyant teammate Webber." This is a really odd sentence. The previous sentence establishes that he was a great defender, so the first part doesn't add much and includes the potentially POV and non-encyclopedic descriptor "rock-solid". The second part purports to contrast Howard with Webber, but it isn't clear how being a great rebounder and defender contrasts with Webber being "flamboyant". Those aren't mutually exclusive; I'd argue that Dennis Rodman was both. You might just drop the whole sentence.
  • Worth linking "Rock of Gibraltar"?
  • "His consistency was described by a Chicago Tribune journalist poetically as" Is the journalist worth naming in the text? You know more about that than I. Also, I'd drop "poetically" as POV.
  • "The Baltimore Sun noted that he is a power forward" Should be "noted that he was", unless this is a direct quote, in which case, it needs quotation marks.
  • "The Baltimore Sun said, "Not only can Howard post up, he passes effectively and is able to hit a jumper up to 17 feet," adding that he "also is an excellent position defender"." We already have a quote from the Baltimore Sun up-paragraph. Do we need two? If so, should they be together in the paragraph?
  • "However by 2001, some regarded him as a high-priced, under-achieving player." Who? Considering that he was being praised during the previous season, we probably need to know who is offering the conflicting opinions here.
  • "but not a natural small forward" Why were they talking about him as a small forward. Everything in the article so far has described him in a power forward/center role.
  • "according to Kiki Vandeweghe, the general manager of the Denver Nuggets, in 2003." Can you work in the fact that Howard was playing for the Nuggets when Vandeweghe made the comment?

Early Washington era:

  • "the NBA was without a collective bargaining agreement" Maybe "NBA players and owners had not yet agreed on the terms of a new collective bargaining agreement"? An agreement is between two parties, and they are not named in the statement as-is.
  • "rumors swirled about possible trades" Too generic. Try "rumors swirled that Howard's draft rights could be traded to another team", or something of that ilk.
  • "Carlos Rogers signed" Signed what? With who? I know, but the casual reader might not.
  • "last first-round selection" Maybe "last first-round draft selection"?
  • "While holding out, he was rumored to be part of a package deal with Calbert Cheaney and a first-round draft choice for Scottie Pippen." "Package deal" is a little bit of jargon. Might want to work the word "trade" in there somewhere. At least, it seems this sentence and the next should be moved directly after the statement that trade rumors were swirling around him.
  • "Webber was traded from the Golden State Warriors to the Bullets on November 18 for Tom Gugliotta and three first-round draft choices. Webber had also sat out training camp and the first eight games of the season." Maybe combine to say "Webber, who had also sat out training camp and the first eight games of the season, was traded from the Golden State Warriors to the Bullets on November 18." I don't think it matters much in this context who he was traded for.
  • "Howard posted impressive numbers once he became a regular" A regular what?
  • "February 11, 1995, NBA All-Star Game" The wiki-linking is odd here. I know it was the 1995 game, but I'd just link "NBA All-Star Game".
  • "became the first NBA athlete who entered the draft early and still graduated with his academic class" This would function better as the first sentence of the next paragraph.
  • "Howard had promised his grandmother on the final day he saw her alive that he would graduate." Try to unify this and the previous statement about his promise to his grandmother.
    • Done.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:18, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
      • Good, but it still reads a little rough. How about separating the promise from the sentence about his major. Just have a stand-alone sentence like "On the last day Howard saw his grandmother alive, he had made her a promise that he would graduate," or "By graduating, Howard fulfilled a promise he had made to his grandmother on the last day he saw her alive." Something that avoids having to repeat some form of the word "graduate" twice in the same sentence. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:21, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
  • "he quickly realized how much leisure time the multimillionaire players had and decided to do something productive instead of find ways to spend his new riches." This sounds like something he told to someone. Who was it?
    • Not sure about this sentence. I think it is summarizing the following sentence, which I have changed.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:18, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
      • I think this would work best as "He told Mitch Albom that, when he made it to the NBA, he quickly realized how much leisure time the multimillionaire players had and decided to do something productive instead of find ways to spend his new riches. "I knew if I kept pushing it off, I'd never get it done," he said." Something like that. Otherwise, the first sentence sounds like original research. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:45, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
  • "he took summer classes in 1994" Worth trying to work in that this is the NBA off-season?
  • "He feels it makes him a better example when he serves as a speaker about staying in school." Why present tense? Who did he say this to?
  • "in spite of" Should be capitalized; starts a sentence.
  • "1995–96 was Howard's best season" Add "statistically". Making the Finals last season might be his best season in his mind.
  • "He kicked a water cooler across the court and was fined $5,000 for making an obscene gesture." Any idea what motivated this display?
  • "After averaging 17 points per game as a rookie and more than 22 per game in his second season, Howard became a free agent." It isn't until later that we learn that the Bullets waived him. For half of this paragraph, I was wondering why he was a free agent after signing a 12-year deal. Bring these facts together sooner.
    • How is it now?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:56, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
      • Still a little ambiguous. We know that "the Bullets made some salary cap transactions", but we still don't get that one of them was waiving Howard. I think including the fact that they did so for salary cap reasons is important, given that the previous paragraphs talk about what an awesome season he had the year before, but I still think we need something explicit about what made him a free agent. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:21, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
        • I think this has been taken care of.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:24, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
          • That helps. I'm assuming we're steering clear of explicitly saying he was waived by the Bullets for a reason. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:44, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
  • "its legal pursuits of Howard" Why plural?
  • "Pat Riley could have been suspended for the season" Mention that Riley was the coach.

Plugging along... Acdixon (talk · contribs) 23:14, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Late Washington era:

  • Four times in this section, we are told Howard "accumulated" a certain number of double-doubles. Some variation in terminology is desirable.
  • "The Bullets became the Washington Wizards after asking fans to vote on the name." Wasn't there a reason for the name change? Something about the Bullets name promoting violence? It should probably be briefly mentioned. The year should also be mentioned, even though it is in the section title.
  • "Howard's only NBA playoff appearance in his six plus seasons with the Washington franchise came during the 1997 NBA Playoffs, when he averaged 18.7 points and 6 rebounds while playing 43 minutes per game." I would move this sentence to the end of the paragraph and rephrase it appropriately.
  • "After Lynam coached the Bullets to a 22–24 record, the Bullets hired Bernie Bickerstaff, who posted a 22–13 record." You might explicitly state that Lynam was fired.
  • "At the beginning of the 1997–98 season, the Wizards relocated from the US Airways Arena to the MCI Center." Does this have any effect on Howard or the rest of the article?
    • We are just dealing with a team in transition that is changing names and arenas. I think the reader should be presented this content and allowed to draw his or her own conclusions.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:50, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
      • Still seems a little off-topic to me, but this is defensible reasoning. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:21, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
  • "Over the course of the 1997–98 season," This is the second time in as many paragraphs this phraseology is used. One of them, at least, should probably be changed. "During the course" is less wordy.
  • "Howard, who injured his ankle, played in no games between February 5 and March 17." Seems wordy. How about "Howard injured his ankle and was unable to play between February 5 and March 17."? I'd also move this to immediately follow his season averages.
  • I know this would make the preceding paragraph short, but I think the accusation of sexual assault merits its own paragraph.
  • Do we know Webber's lawyer's version of the events? The accuser's?
  • "many of the 40 so party attendees" I assume this is supposed to say "40 or so", but that seems too colloquial. I'd use "approximately 40".
  • "A grand jury heard testimony from the accuser and many of the 40 so party attendees but neither of the players" This reads awkwardly to me. Maybe more like "Neither Howard nor Webber testified in the case, but approximately 40 of the party attendees appeared before a grand jury before..."
  • "Howard filed suit against the woman; he sought" Unnecessarily complex. Try "Howard filed suit, seeking..."
  • "Melissa Reed, the accuser," Since we have the name, it should probably be stated on first mention.
    • O.K, but are you sure. The sources don't seem to mention the name until they got to court.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:36, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
      • Unless there is some legal issue of which I am unaware, I think it's fine. At the time, the media was probably cautious about giving the woman's name (or they may not have known it) until after the trial started. We're now well past the events in question, and it's likely that everything that is going to come out has come out. As long as the sources explicitly say she was the accuser and the one who filed suit, I can't imagine what the problem would be. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 17:47, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
  • "In November, Howard was awarded $1 in compensatory damages" Do we know why it was only $1?
    • Clarified a bit.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:39, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
      • That really just shifts the question to "Why did he only seek $1 in compensatory damages?" I realize we may not have the answer to that question. I suspect it might be that he just wanted the guilty verdict to clear his name and didn't need the money, but if we had some reliable source that said that, we'd obviously be better off. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 17:47, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
  • "After the 1998–99 NBA lockout, the Wizards posted an 18–32 record." Might mention that the lockout shortened the season.
  • "The team started out 13–19 under Bickerstaff and was 5–13 under Jim Brovelli." Again, probably need to mention explicitly that Bickerstaff was fired.
  • "Howard, a vocal detractor of Bickerstaff, said the coach was not able to make proper in-game adjustments." Not sure "detractor" is the right word here. How about "Howard was a vocal critic of Bickerstaff throughout Bickerstaff's tenure as coach, saying the coach was not able to make proper in-game adjustments."?
  • "according to a journalist from the Chicago Tribune." Worth mentioning who?
  • "his fifth for the Wizards since last being named an All-Star" Oddly worded. I assume the point is to emphasize that he had not been an All-Star in several years despite his high salary. Maybe say something like, "Five years removed from his only All-Star appearance, Howard was nonetheless the fourth-highest-paid player in the NBA during the 2000-01 season, behind..."
  • "On December 31, 2000, Howard, in a game against the Detroit Pistons, posted his career high of 15 free throws." An exceedingly random statistic.
    • Are you suggesting the article would be better without this fact.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:58, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
      • Maybe. It's hard to say an article could be better with less information, but the fact seems really out of place here, although I realize this is where it goes chronologically. A career high is typically a notable thing; I get that. But is it standard practice to note a player's career high in free throws in every FA class NBA player article? It seems like a much less important statistic than a career high in points, rebounds (for big men), or assists (for guards). Acdixon (talk · contribs) 12:12, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
        • It also gives us non-trivial content for the pre-trade part of that season.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:33, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
          • If you feel it adds value, I won't quibble over it. It just seemed odd to me. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:46, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
  • "Michael Jordan, who had become part-owner of the team," In order to trade someone, he would have to be majority owner, right?
    • Not sure. Why do you think so? Why is it relevant?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:57, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
      • If he didn't have a majority stake in the ownership, he would not be able to make the trade of his own volition; he could be vetoed by the other owners, or some of the other owners – enough to make a majority – would have to agree to it as well. Only a majority owner could be solely responsible for a trade. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 12:26, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
        • Would you like to suggest a change to the content in relation to this "fact".--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:58, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
          • If we can confirm that he was majority owner, I think we should say "Michael Jordan, who had become majority owner of the team". If not, I think we should leave Jordan's name out of it, since he couldn't have been solely and personally responsible for the trade unless he was majority owner. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 12:12, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
            • I have incorporated his title "Wizards' head of basketball operations", which should explain his influence.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:39, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
              • I'll strike on that account, although I'm still not sure the HOBO has the authority to do trades on his own. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:46, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

More soon. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 21:12, 13 May 2012 (UTC)


  • The "accumulated X double doubles" phrase occurs in this section as well.
  • "The Mavericks advanced past the Utah Jazz 3–2 before falling to the San Antonio Spurs 4–1 in the 2001 NBA Playoffs." Suggest leading with mention of the playoffs to make the transition between the regular season a playoffs smoother. Also suggest specifying that these are games in a series, not points, as well as the length of the series, since some folks may not realize that the first round was a five-game series and subsequent rounds were seven-game series at the time.
  • "The Utah games marked the only time Howard played for a team that won an NBA playoff series." The first time, not the only time, right?
  • "Howard slammed Spurs guard Derek Anderson to the floor" What's the context? A hard foul on a layup? A fight?
  • "he did not start all his games played." Maybe "he did not start every game he played in".
  • "All non-starts occurred between November 21 and December 11" "Non-starts"? Can we come up with a better term? "Bench appearances" maybe? Also, do we know why he went to the bench and then returned to the starting lineup?
  • "Don Nelson's Mavericks posted a 57–25 record ... after trading Howard," I think "after trading Howard" is only meant to modify the bit about the playoffs, but it could be read to say that the Mavs also posted a 57-25 record after trading Howard, which clearly isn't the case.
  • "On March 25, 2002, he scored his 10,000th point." Since the previous sentence doesn't mention Howard at all, I suggest using his name instead of a pronoun here. Also suggest adding "career" after "10,000th". You could also perhaps name the opponent and say how many others had scored at least 10,000 points at that time, if that information is known.
    • Rearranged, added details and ref.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:51, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
      • Would still be nice if we knew how many others were on that list at the time, just for context, but it's not a deal-breaker. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:58, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
  • "Howard attempted to punch Al Harrington and Jermaine O'Neal" Again, what's the context? What motivated the attempted punches?
  • "which caused the NBA to suspend him on October 25, 2002" A little wordy. Perhaps "earned him a suspension" or "and he was suspended as a result". I see that the suspension was two games. Was that determined at the time of the suspension or was it an indefinite suspension that was lifted after two games?
  • "He then signed as a free agent with the Orlando Magic on July 16, 2003." Since this is a new paragraph, suggest omitting "then" and using "Howard" instead of a pronoun. Do we know the terms of his contract? Did the Nuggets try to re-sign him? If so, do we know why he chose Orlando instead? If not, do we know why not? Did he have other suitors?
    • Added what I could find.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:00, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
      • I assume the bit about "was believed to be" is because the terms of the deal weren't publicly reported. Might try to work that in, since the casual reader may not realize that it is a common occurence in the NBA. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:58, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

More to come. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 21:30, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Houston era:

  • "Maurice Taylor started the first 16 games of the season for the Rockets." Maybe mention that Taylor had been the starter during the previous year for the Rockets, which was the case, if I recall correctly.
  • "His limited physical activity impaired his medial collateral ligament rehabilitation." The novice reader might not connect the knee injury mentioned earlier with the MCL. Maybe relate that it was an MCL injury on first mention.
  • "as well as the last time that he started at least half of the games in which he played" Given the first part of this sentence, maybe simplify to "and the last one in which he started at least half of the games in which he played".
  • "The Rockets acquired Shane Battier, who started all 82 games." I assume this means they acquired him the previous off-season, which should probably be made more clear. Also, Battier typically plays small forward. Why is his acquisition linked to Howard's not starting at power forward?
    • I believe he plays the three and the four. In truth, I don't know why Howard was relagated to the bench, but I thought it might have something to do with acquireing Battier. I will try to dig through some Houston Chronicle articles and get a better feel for this.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:31, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
      • The first article I pulled clearly has Battier at wing.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:48, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
        • OK, looks like you removed this, which is probably for the best, given that we can't draw a direct connection between Battier's acquisition and Howard not starting. The two might be connnected, but it would take some explanation as to exactly why, explanation that perhaps only Jeff Van Gundy could provide. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:57, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
  • "This streak coincided with Yao Ming's absence from the lineup." I'm assuming this was due to an injury. If so, state that. Also, this could be combined with the previous sentence to say something like, "Howard only started 38 games, including 32 consecutive starts between December 26, 2006, and March 3, 2007 while center Yao Ming was injured (or was out of the lineup with a whatever injury)."
  • "four games to three" In a previous paragraph, this was "4 games to 3". I can't keep straight what the MOS says about numerals vs. spelled-out numbers, but this article has enough of both that you would be well-served to get an expert on that to go over the article.
  • "his salary continued to be perceived as outrageous." By whom?


  • "He was looking forward to playing with Kevin Garnett." This was probably something he said in an interview somewhere; we should probably say where. Also, this sentence and the next could probably be combined.
  • "Howard agreed to terms with the Dallas Mavericks on October 30, 2007" What were the terms (yrs/$)?
  • "until the 31st" Not sure what the MOS says about the "st" appellation, but since it was the next day, why not just say that?
  • "but was later released when the Nuggets made a three-for-one trade" Might state that this trade put the Nuggets over the 15-man roster size limit for folks unfamiliar with such things.
  • "seven minutes and three seconds and seven minutes and forty-two seconds" This would almost certainly be easier to read as "7 minutes, 3 seconds and 7 minutes, 42 seconds".
  • "In his role" Given that he just signed with a new team, this doesn't have much meaning without some more explanation.
  • "He more than 20 minutes on January 28" Missing a word here. I'm assuming the word is "played" and comes after "He".
  • "the night after Gerald Wallace suffered a left-lung collapse" Might consider explaining the linkage between Wallace's injury and Howard's increased minutes. Also, might tell how Wallace suffered the injury, since a collapsed lung isn't exactly a common basketball injury.
    • Is this what you want?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:40, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
      • Yes on the Wallace injury. (I remember that play; it was nasty.) If ESPN noted that Howard replaced Wallace in the starting lineup, I think we can just say that it happened without noting what the other sources said. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:28, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
        • Look at the ESPN box score. It also says he did not start.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:39, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
          • Hmm. So the narrative from one ESPN article says he started, but the box score from ESPN says he didn't. Odd. OK, since there is uncertainty, maybe we should just say something like "Howard played extended minutes on January 28, the night after Gerald Wallace suffered a left-lung collapse as well as a non-displaced fracture of the fifth rib from a flagrant foul by Andrew Bynum, logging 24 minutes and scoring 9 points." Doesn't have to be that exactly, but something similar, I think. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:19, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
  • "in his only start other than his first game as a Bobcat" Simpler as "in only his second start as a Bobcat".
  • "a season-high 30:39" Again, check with a MOS expert, but I would assume this should be rendered "a season-high 30 minutes, 39 seconds".
  • "On September 17, 2009, Juwan Howard signed" Repeating his first name is probably unnecessary.
  • "On December 22, Joel Przybilla injured his knee. That night Howard had his first double-double of the season." Again, explicitly state how one affects the other, if possible.
    • Is it sufficient to state that Przybilla was a center?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:23, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
      • "You might also extend the sentence to say something like "On December 22, center Joel Przybilla injured his knee in the first quarter, yielding additional minutes for Howard." Hopefully, the sources would support that. Even if they don't explicitly say it, it doesn't really seem like WP:OR to me, but use your best judgment. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:19, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
  • "Howard came to terms with the Miami Heat for the veteran's minimum salary" Which was? For how long?
  • "for escalating an altercation the night before" Any idea about the details?
  • "The Heat ended up reaching the NBA Finals" How about just "The Heat reached the NBA Finals"?
  • Now that the regular season is over, you might consider including his regular season averages, although I understand if you want to wait until the playoffs are over.
  • I got your ping about noting Howard's tribute to the Fab Five. I have added something, but could not find much.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:34, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
    • That's probably sufficient. Just thought it was worth noting here. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:11, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Personal life:

  • "that he continues to own" Maybe "that he still owns".
  • "where he intended to build" Assuming he never did and that we don't know exactly why, but obviously if we do, we should say.
  • Do we know anything more about the relationship between Howard and Markita Blyden?
  • "He finished his senior season" Should probably restate "Howard, Jr." or "Juwan, Jr." here.
  • "They have a son Jace who was born in late September 2001. They have a second son Jett, who is two years younger." These two should probably be combined somehow.

Almost done. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 01:57, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Other endeavors:

  • I can think of lots of better titles for this section. "Humanitarianism" (or "Humanitarian endeavors"), "Philanthropy" (or "Philanthropic endeavors"), or "Charitable work" (or "Charitable endeavors") all tell us more than the present title and tell us where to find the details of the humanitarian work mentioned in the lead.
  • "He has been recognized as one of the "Good Guys in Sports" by The Sporting News" In what year? Or in multiple years? This could be something to include in the relevant sentence in the lead.
  • "at no fee to the kids" Maybe "at no charge to participants"?

Popular culture:

  • Personal note: I'm really put off by the "popular culture" title because I see so much garbage crammed under these sections, generally speaking. You might consider calling it "Film and television appearances" which is more specific and avoids the stigma associated with pop culture sections.
  • "Howard had a small role in The West Wing" Non-U.S. readers may not know what this is. Suggest "Howard had a small role in the television drama The West Wing".
  • Do we know any details about these other appearances? It seems strange that the West Wing appearance gets its own paragraph, while all the rest are lists. At the very least, we should separate the "Beyond the Glory" and "The Fab Five" appearances by saying that he appeared as himself in these two. At present, we don't even communicate that "Beyond the Glory" is a documentary. The other appearances should at least give the details about what genre the show or movie is and what Howard's character's name was. Some basic details about the character would be nice, if available.
  • "Howard also appeared in the 1994 basketball film Hoop Dreams." Why isn't this mentioned first, since it comes first chronologically?


  • Why doesn't the legend appear above the college section? It looks like the same abbreviations are used.
    • The college section has a lot more columns. Should I eliminate some of the columns?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:42, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
      • Yeah, I think it would be sufficient to give the same stats as for the pro table. Then, one legend can do double duty, and I don't think the important stats are all that different between college and pro ball. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 17:03, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
        • I will have a look at some other articles. I will probably look through this year's draftees and see what they are using for their college stats. Those are probably going to be the closest to what we want.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:39, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
          • Totally fine with that. Just struck me as odd that one table had a legend and the other didn't. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:24, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
            • I looked at the lottery picks and about three of them are using the NBA player legend. Also Meyers Leonard had a customized legend for his college stats. I went with the NBA legend. Should I remove the extra columns. Also, the source did not provide SPG and BPG although it gave steals and blocks. Do I need to add these per game stats.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:24, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
              • If that seems to be what other articles are doing, that's what I'd do. I would keep the per game stats, though. That's a better way of comparing players, I think. Taking the number of steals and blocks and dividing them by the number of games shouldn't be WP:OR; that's just math! :) Acdixon (talk · contribs) 12:23, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
                • I converted blocks and steals to per game.
  • In the 2007-present section, we're told "[The 2007-08 season] was the only season in Howard's career in which he did not start in a single game." Yet, in the table, I see zero starts for the 2008-09 season, the 2010-11 season, and the present season (so far). How do these two fit together?
    • It currently says "This was the first season in Howard's career in which he did not start in a single game."--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:44, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
      • Must have been changed in the interim. No big deal. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 17:03, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Overall, this was an enjoyable read with several minor problems, but nothing major that I see. Let me reiterate the need for a MOS expert (particularly one familiar with the numerals vs. spelled-out numbers aspect) to go over it before you bring it to FAC again. I didn't spot check references or pay much attention to images, but the prose doesn't strike me as being far from FAC-ready. Good luck getting the bronze star. You obviously deserve it for the work done on this article. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:22, 15 May 2012 (UTC)