Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Basketball Association/Archive 11

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

Template:NBAStartingPointGuards

Resolved: Template deleted—Chris! ct 00:17, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't see the practical reason for this template to exist. It requires constant update since the starting point guards change from game to game. I did consider tfd it but thought that I should bring it here first. Any thoughts?—Chris! ct 00:55, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't require constant update thanks to "as of"; however, every time it is updated, the editor must verify the starting point guards of the most recent games of all thirty teams (so that we don't have, for example, a situation where half of the template is from March and the other half is up to date). It's impractical to update, but if we have devoted editors who will constantly maintain it, then it could work. For what's it worth, we could avoid having to check all thirty teams by placing "as of ..." after every team, but that would be very messy. —LOL T/C 01:26, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Note: There's also Template:NBAStartingCenters. Another to think about is that not only do the starters change, but they also can switch (eg. A plays PG, then SG the next game). To have this updated would mean adding A to the PG template, then add him to the SG template, remove the other player, add the other player to the PG template...On and on it goes. As said, it's not practical. Also, it's subjective. You can have just two guards, and they both share the ball-handling duties. Or three forwards, and no center. And so on. Noble Story (talkcontributions) 11:06, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
Then do you think we should send these templates to tfd?—Chris! ct 17:57, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
Would not be opposed to it, no. Noble Story (talkcontributions) 23:47, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
I nominated them for deletion see this. Black'nRed 03:55, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, I forgot to do this.—Chris! ct 04:15, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Is playoffs part of a season?

An issue arises in List of Los Angeles Lakers seasons when I and User:SRE.K.A.L.24 argue about whether to italicize the row of 08/09 season. SRE.K.A.L.24 think that playoffs is part of the season, so the row should be italicize. But I think that it is not part of the season. That's why I want some inputs as to whose interpretation is correct.—Chris! ct 01:49, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Since the playoffs are included in the same row as the regular season record, and since the playoffs are not yet completed, you might as well use italics. I don't think there's an official answer as to whether the playoffs are considered part of the season, or something distinct. Zagalejo^^^ 03:07, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Would the season be complete without the playoffs? Every NBA fan would answer No. Obviously, for teams that are in the playoffs, their season is not done. So, yes, italics would be correct. Noble Story (talkcontributions) 03:16, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
I kind of agree both of you. Zagalejo is right on when he said that there is no official answer as to whether the playoffs are part of the season. But as Noble Story pointed out, a basketball fans would usually not considered the season to end when the playoffs has just begun. I guess I was wrong for thinking that the season is over when the regular season is over. Ok, thanks for explaining to me.—Chris! ct 04:38, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Was going to comment, but ehh...WP:EDITCOUNTITIS. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 04:59, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

SNIyer12

Has anyone else interacted with this user? He insists on mentioning minor NBA/NHL connections wherever he can (eg, [1], [2], [3], etc.) He even wrote an entire section about the New York Rangers in the 1994 NBA Finals article. Do people think his edits are appropriate? Zagalejo^^^ 03:20, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I did interacted with this guy several times and I never think his edits are appropriate. But he continued to add irrelevant factoids to articles despite talk page notices.—Chris! ct 04:43, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
IMO those look like pieces of connective trivia. In the case of the Bulls-Knicks rivalry, they may belong in a list; but in the case of the 1994 NBA Finals, I feel that they are just too unimportant (#3). —LOL T/C 05:01, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
I've talked to him about it twice, and he still continues on. In fact, that seems to be about his only purpose, to add these trivial notes about hockey to NBA articles. But whatever. I just revert them when I see them, and add yet another note to his talk page. Noble Story (talkcontributions) 07:28, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Andrés Nocioni/1

Please comment at Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Andrés Nocioni/1.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:58, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Fox Sports Detroit, why no tag?

Hi I'm not in this project but I was wondering: why does the NBA Project tag keep getting removed from Talk:Fox Sports Detroit? This channel is the exclusive local TV rights holder for the Detroit Pistons and I think it being on the project is beneficial. Also, the tags of every other sport it has rights for are still there. TomCat4680 (talk) 14:07, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Merge coach templates?

There has been an idea that was brought of at WT:HOCKEY about the merging their current head coach template and the coaches by team template. So, does anyone else think that {{NBACoach}} and {{NBA head coaches by team}} should be merged? Links to the coach lists (from the the second) could be added next to the coaches' names (in the first) instead of a link to the team. Every place these are used, there will already be plenty of links to the actual team article. We would slightly modify the heading of the first one just by removing "Current". The idea was created by — Twas Now ( talkcontribse-mail ), so big ups to him. The current NHL head coaches template is at Template:NHLHeadCoach. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 20:34, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

What are the benefits of the merge? I fail to see any.—Chris! ct 21:42, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
It is because the content is very similar. Which one would you rather have? -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 22:04, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I don't have a problem with this proposal. But wait for more comments before doing anything.—Chris! ct 22:38, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

This is how it will look like...

-- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 06:32, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I think this look better:

Chris! ct 18:12, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Cmon...everyone...just comment...want to get this done... -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 02:10, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Since no one opposes the merging of these two navboxes, then lets just install the original version (Chris') and merge it into Template:NBACoach. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 18:15, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Are you going to do it? Right now, they are still two templates.—Chris! ct 19:02, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

That was easy. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 01:48, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

2009 NBA Playoffs

I just notice the creation of 2009 NBA Western Conference Playoffs and 2009 NBA Eastern Conference Playoffs. I think both are content forks of 2009 NBA Playoffs because they share similar structure and contain the same basic info. I propose that we merge them back to 2009 NBA Playoffs. Any thoughts?—Chris! ct 19:46, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, anybody home... :)—Chris! ct 01:30, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
I think they should be merged to the main 2009 NBA Playoffs article. — X96lee15 (talk) 01:38, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Nah, the stats dump goes there. Nice to see which players got game highs for points, rebounds and assists.
If you people really insist, place it on AFD. –Howard the Duck 12:59, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
The afd are here and hereChris! ct 01:12, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Can you put it in the same place? It's essentially the same anyway. Thanks. –Howard the Duck 06:23, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

basketball picture help2

Here is the forward from LOL's talk page, please help me with it. Thanks


Basketball picture help

Hi LOL, I am not experienced or knowledgeable in doing this, so I was wondering if you could do it, even with using the fair use of pictures. Roger Mason (basketball) has an old Washington Wizards picture and not an update Spurs picture. Can you find a good one and put it on please, or get someone to do it? thanks ~ GoldenGoose100 (talk) 06:20, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not very good at finding appropriate images. I think fair use is unacceptable because of the 1st policy of WP:NFCC: a free equivalent could be created for Mason. Some of the guys at WT:NBA would be much better than me at fulfilling the request. —LOL T/C 06:44, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
thanks a million LOL, I'll forward that to them pronto. Keep up the good work :) ~ GoldenGoose100 (talk) 01:10, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

~ GoldenGoose100 (talk) 01:14, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, only free images can be used in our articles, so the image we have might not be perfect. Like LoL has said, you can only claim fair use if a free equivalent could not be found. And that is not the case.—Chris! ct 01:29, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
So in other words..... Sorry, I'm still not sure what all this fair use and content and whatnot mean. Are you saying we can't find any other free picture, not one, that can be used under the guidelines? ~ GoldenGoose100 (talk) 03:14, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Well, let me explain it again. If a free image already exists (and that is exactly the case for Mason since the Wizards image is free), then you cannot add another non-free image to the article citing fair use per our Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria.—Chris! ct 05:57, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
But Chris, my comrad, that's what I'm saying. Why can't we add another free image to that article? And by add, I mean replace that other free Wizards picture with a current free Spurs picture? What am I missing here? It seems that under the criteria, all that is left is to find a free replacement. ~ GoldenGoose100 (talk) 21:55, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I guess I misunderstood your comment. What you said is exactly right. Sorry for the confusion.—Chris! ct 00:52, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
woohoo! I'll try myself to find a free current replacement pic, and do some study on that free content and fair use on wikipedia. thanks for patience and help ~ GoldenGoose100 (talk) 06:49, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Moving pages

A ton of NBA-related pages were moved, but the people who moved them didn't bother to fix the redirects. I've just fixed like 10 and there are hundreds left. Please, if you want to move a page, check for what directs there and fix it. Enigmamsg 15:10, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I thought it was OK to just leave redirects as they are, unless they're unprintworthy. (WP:R#NOTBROKEN) Zagalejo^^^ 18:19, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
That's not the impression I got from the instructions you get when moving pages. Enigmamsg 21:03, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Template:NBA Awards

This navbox has been talked about many times over the past year or so, and I just want to bring this up again, well, since it really bothers me in a way that a robot might explode. Chrishomingtang, the creator of the navbox, said that the current version will let readers click on the links at the top of the page instead of scrolling down to. The problem with the current version of the navbox is that it covers a space that can fit one paragraph or two images in it (that's pretty big). Just look at NBA Defensive Player of the Year Award. Three images go all the way to the references. So, comments?

This is my proposed version:

-- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 06:45, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Many templates are like this, so how is this a problem? I don't understand.—Chris! ct 06:52, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Like I said, you could fit another paragraph or two images to replace the space. Also, most of the navbox with this format do not have images above or below their navboxes. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 07:11, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
No offense, but the reason behind taking away the convenience of the navbox just so we can add more image is imo lame and stupid.—Chris! ct 17:12, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
We're not going to take away the navbox, we're just going to move it to the bottom. It won't do anything bad for the readers at all. Scrolling only takes less than 2 seconds. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 00:20, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
That is exactly what I meant. Moving it to the bottom not only takes away the convenience, but also defeat the purpose of this navbox. Also keep in mind that having this navbox on top doesn't do anything bad for the readers either and could actually enhance the article by making things more convenient. I oppose to this proposal.—Chris! ct 05:10, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Convenience? It takes two seconds to scroll down. Purpose of navbox: "to group links used in multiple related articles to facilitate navigation between those articles." Doesn't defeat the purpose. Wikipedia:NAVBOX#Advantages states: "reduction of clutter in that area of the article before "References" and "External links"." The current navbox does not do that. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 05:26, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Having it on top takes zero second. Which one is more convenient? Also Wikipedia:NAVBOX#Advantages compares having a see also section and using navbox, which doesn't even apply in this case because we are already using a navbox.—Chris! ct 05:46, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

If you guys want to keep the navbox at the top, use shorter names, like "Bill Russell NBA Finals Most Valuable Player", instead use "Finals MVP". –Howard the Duck 07:31, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Why? It won't do anything except for shortening the name. In that case, it sounds kind of bogus, no offense. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 15:21, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
It would be space-saver when it's along with the text and not at the bottom. –Howard the Duck 13:54, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Nice new version, though I still would support it to the bottom, but o wells...nice idea! -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 19:10, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Article naming

Resolved: Articles moved. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:37, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I was wondering if List of 2008–09 NBA transactions should instead be List of 2008–09 NBA season transactions. The reason why is because it sounds more accurate and some readers thinks its 2008 and 2009 instead of the actual season. Comments? -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 02:19, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I guess you are right.—Chris! ct 02:37, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
I guess I'll just move all the season transaction pages to include the word "season" in it. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 18:18, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 Done -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 00:35, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Employing Template:NBA Year

Would anyone be opposed to having this template completely replace all of the text that is similar to [[1999–2000 NBA season|1999–2000]] or [[1999–2000 NBA season|1999]] or 1999–2000? —LOL T/C 11:58, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Go ahead.—Chris! ct 16:58, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
I don't really think we need to do it for every single NBA related page. Mistakes could easily be made when using this template, so I recommend employing this only to lists that have NBA seasons in them, especially the FL ones. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 18:18, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
The need for this to exist is to make things convenient. I don't think we should stop using the template just because mistake can be made. Of course, mistake will be made when this is first implemented, but I don't see how that is serious enough to stop using templates.—Chris! ct 18:54, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Need Help Linking NBA Final Pages

If you were to go to see for instance the 1985 NBA Finals page there will be a link that goes to 1984 and one that goes to 1986. These links will be seen at the top of the page. The problem is these links are not set up for the earlier NBA Finals like say 1956. I am trying to set this up but am having trouble getting the links set up the same as the 1986 example. Help needed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ballay05 (talkcontribs) 06:14, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

The NBA Finals won't be at the Template:In the news anymore...

...at least not that easily. There has to be public upheaval of some sort for it to be included. Same for the NHL. –Howard the Duck 06:36, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

User:Rdicicco2

I am concerned that this user is keeping on inserting a heading "2007: The Bryant-James Era" into the NBA article. I have already reverted several times because it is very pov. And also there is no evidence suggesting that this era would be known as the Bryant-James Era in the future. Thoughts?—Chris! ct 00:41, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Does anyone has an opinion on this?—Chris! ct 05:37, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Agree, it's very pov, Bryant-James era could be true in the future, but I think is still to early to say that, imho 'era' means a significant period of time, while we were only few years ahead of 2007 and both Bryant and James have only won MVP and Conference Finals once. Martin tamb (talk) 05:53, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Proposed change to WP:ATHLETE

There is a proposed change to WP:ATHLETE found here. Interested individuals are invited to comment. Grsz11 17:38, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

NBA awards - nationality

I just found out that JustSomeRandomGuy32 deleted all the notes regarding about the award winners' nationality. I am also totally confident that Chrishomingtang is going to probably oppose to the removal of those notes. Just want to know if anyone thinks that the massive deletion of notes about the nationality of players is a problem. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 03:12, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

JustSomeRandomGuy32 also deleted the Nationality column on all NBA awards articles. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 05:16, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Whoa! What the f*** just happened? Excuse my language but this definitely requires some sort of discussions. I am not going to revert just yet, but I am starting this discussion here.—Chris! ct 01:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
The NBA isn't an international competition. Players don't represent any country in competition. Nationality information has no place on those lists. It's no different than adding age, height, or any other personal information. Also the flags violate WP:MOSICON. They served no purpose other than decoration. JustSomeRandomGuy32 (talk) 01:54, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
3 of the Big Four recognize their international player, and most of them do represent their country in some way (ie. Yao Ming). Also, the use of flags in lists aren't much of an issue, compare to using flag icons in articles. I, to be honest, don't really care if the nationalities are on the NBA awards, but I still think that you, JustSomeRandomGuy32, should've asked WP:NBA before removing that much information on the lists.

I also have an idea of putting the award winners' positions, like in the NHL awards articles. That's all I have to say. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 02:09, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I brought it up here a month or so ago - got some support - very little response. It's in the most recent archive. You don't see nationality info here or here, or here. Position, meanwhile, is relevant. JustSomeRandomGuy32 (talk) 02:24, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Are you referring to /Archive 10#Nationalities / WP:Flag? That was three months ago. I see just one supporter for the removal of flags, none for nationality, and one opposed to both. We shouldn't be citing other Wikipedia articles because it'll turn into a counting game; after a quick search I've found other articles with nationality columns. —LOL T/C 03:07, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
User:JustSomeRandomGuy32: You can't just suddenly remove content without consensus at all per WP:OWN. This holds true even if a discussion has little response. I've also stated my position many times before so I am not going to do it again.—Chris! ct 05:35, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Umm...I just said that o.O. Hey, you know what, I think the NBA should really have an "NBA International Player of the Year Award". Hmm.... -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 05:42, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
This discussion is laughable. Just some random guy thinks he owns Wikipedia, that's all. The WP:CONSENSUS policy was created just for situations against people who think they WP:OWN articles. There's no consensus for removing nationalities; hence, they should be in the pages.--Crzycheetah 06:20, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
I make one edit and suddenly I own it? JustSomeRandomGuy32 (talk) 06:22, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

You made 10-15. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 06:22, 1 May 2009 (UTC) On the same topic. Plus, mass-deletion. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 06:23, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

You know what? whatever.... put it all back - let the articles look ridiculous and have loads of information that has nothing to do with the article.... i don't care anymore... Because it makes perfect sense to say in an article listing the NBA Defensive players of the Year that player X is also an NBA champion at another point in his career and was born in another country. Good work Wiki editors. JustSomeRandomGuy32 (talk) 06:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. O wait...this is just minor, JSRG32. Don't take this seriously. It's just that some people have different opinions than others, and that's just how it is. We hope you really do continuing editing on Wikipedia, and hope you'll gain more experience with, well, arguing for consensus. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 06:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Keith and Chris are both in the top five of the list of Wikipedians by featured list nominations, so they probably know what constitutes a good list. The articles may look "ridiculous" to you, but not to others. Also, sarcasm is really helpful. Readers might also want to stop the WP:OWN accusations. —LOL T/C 06:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Since nobody bothered to read the Wiki policy being violated here - I'll copy/paste it from Wikipedia:Manual of Style (icons)#Use of flags for sportspeople: Flags should never indicate the player's nationality in a non-sporting sense; flags should only indicate the sportsperson's national squad/team or sporting nationality. No NBA player represents their country in NBA play. Nationality information oes not belong on these charts. It's very simple. Nobody has made a case for them belonging, other than the fact that they're already there.... JustSomeRandomGuy32 (talk) 19:22, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

OK, I'll support JustSomeRandomGuy32. I'm not crazy about the nationality columns in these lists, and I'd also like to get rid of the nationality field in the infoboxes and templates. You have too many complicated cases like Ben Gordon, Chris Kaman, Joakim Noah, etc, and things will probably get more confusing in years to come. You can't always pigeonhole someone into a single nationality. It's better to discuss topics like nationality and citizenship within the body of an article. Zagalejo^^^ 19:46, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I just saw an ip reverted User:JustSomeRandomGuy32's edits. For the record, I didn't revert.—Chris! ct 23:05, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm just going to restart what I suggested. Would anyone oppose to adding the position of the players on all the NBA award articles? -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 18:35, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Comment I don't think the nationalities should be on the awards pages, but I think JustSomeRandomGuy32 should have brought this issue here first before removing the columns. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:49, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

LOL. No one replies to what I have to say, but someone replies to what we've been talking about for the past week. Chris and I already told JSRG32 to have brought this up here on WT:NBA before removing all the notes and the column. So, anyone opposing on adding a Position column on all NBA award articles? -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 19:01, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure about this. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:05, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
I think it would make sense for some, such as All-NBA Team, NBA All-Defensive Team and NBA All-Rookie Team. For others, such as NBA Sixth Man of the Year Award, I'm not sure whether this would add to reader's understanding of the subject. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:09, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
I did. It's in last month's archive. JustSomeRandomGuy32 (talk) 18:54, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
(So you did. I don't think you were entirely in the wrong, although you could have brought up that archived discussion with whoever was reverting you. There doesn't seem to be a consensus on the issue, but it seems as if the MOS advises against the usage of flags in this manner. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:05, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
So MOS advises the usage of flags?—Chris! ct 19:12, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Oops. I meant "against". Dabomb87 (talk) 19:25, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
So let me reiterated my position: I like the idea of adding position. And I still like nationality in the list, but since this is creating a huge opposition, I might have to reconsider. I also think JustSomeRandomGuy32 should have discussed first, but this no longer matter anyway.—Chris! ct 19:12, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't think we could add it to the All-NBA teams, since the articles are lacking space to add more into the list. Besides, if we add it to ie. NBA MVP, then we could be consistent with other major league awards. Also, Dabomb87: after telling JSRG32 to have brought this up before, you then just quickly go and move NBA awards to List of NBA awards ;b. I support the move, though I hope no one will oppose. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 19:14, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
I moved to "List of" because that was a fairly uncontroversial move supported by WP:LISTNAME, a consensus-supported style guideline. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:25, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

So what is it going to be: flags or no flags? I think we need to make a decision. Can everyone confirm their !vote? From what I can see, so far, oppose seems to be the consensus:

Support inclusion of nationality info
User:Chrishomingtang, User:Crzycheetah
Oppose inclusion of nationality info
User:JustSomeRandomGuy32, User:Dabomb87, User:Zagalejo
No opinion
User:SRE.K.A.L.24, User:LOL

Chris! ct 18:40, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Also will it satisfy anyone if we exclude flags, but keep the nationality column?—Chris! ct 18:43, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm against flags and nationalities. Nationalities without flags—irrelevant info; flags without nationalities—MOS breach. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:11, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

No offense to anyone at all, but I haven't read most of the rest of this discussion, and I'm just going to throw my $.02 in here. I'm not putting in a vote above because I have an opinion, but it is neither for nor against inclusion. Are the nationalities really necessary? Of course not. It's one thing to note with one sentence in a lead that "the only int'l players to win [award] are [winner], [winner], and [winner]," but it's another to have flags and full country names for every player. However, am I particularly offended that the nationalities are there? Not at all. With that said, I was pointed toward this discussion because I removed info that was reverted, and I personally feel that reversion is incredibly stupid. I removed this footnote from the NBA MVP page: "Because Tim Duncan is a United States citizen by birth, as are all natives of the U.S. Virgin Islands,[9] he was able to play for the U.S. internationally.[10]" This was changed back within half an hour, and while I don't doubt the user was acting in completely good faith- to be honest, I didn't even look at the username- I find it patently ridiculous that people feel we must have this info. This isn't even saying "Tim Duncan is from the Virgin Islands"- it's saying, in AN ARTICLE ABOUT PLAYERS NAMED NBA MVP, that he played internationally for the United States. WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES THAT MAKE? HOW IS THAT EVEN REMOTELY RELEVANT? If people want to debate whether we should have countries at all, that's one issue- I can understand points on either side of the debate; this, on the other hand, isn't an issue at all. I don't care if Tim Duncan plays interplanetary hoops for Mars- winning the MVP has nothing to do with what country he plays for in non-NBA competitions. -- Mike (Kicking222) 22:30, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Please tone down a bit and assume good faith. "Stupid" is not a good word to use in a civil discussion.—Chris! ct 22:42, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
You mean like when I said "I don't doubt the user was acting in completely good faith"? Sorry, Chris. I'll try to assume good faith next time... or last time, when I already did. (And yes, this was quite bitchy of me, but I don't like being chided for not doing something when I explicitly did it.) -- Mike (Kicking222) 22:58, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
You also added my name to the above voting, when I also explicitly said "I'm not putting in a vote above because I have an opinion, but it is neither for nor against inclusion." I'm sorry, but did you even read what I wrote, Chris? -- Mike (Kicking222) 23:00, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
The way you commented above doesn't seem to be in good faith especially when you type in all caps. But whatever, that is not important any more. Just try not to type in all caps when commenting.—Chris! ct 23:35, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Just to clear things up, I support on having nationality notes, but dont care about the nationality column. Also, I'm going to go install the position columns by Saturday (since there's a Lakers and Canucks game every single day till...mid-May. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 02:36, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

For the positions, I think we should avoid the PG-SG-SF-PF-C position and use the C-F-G position instead since it is easier to source. Also you need a reference column.—Chris! ct 05:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I agree with the C-F-G, but we don't need a reference column for it, since Basketball-Reference is already listed as a general reference, and I'm sure that can work. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 05:44, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't mind you fixing my comment, but don't do it on other people. They may not like that.—Chris! ct 06:21, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
LOL, true, but when you said G-F-G, I was like WTF?! -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 06:42, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Agree on C-F-G, PG-SG-SF-PF are too specific and can change often. No opinion on the nationality, because excess information wouldn't hurt the article but simpler table would be easier to read. Martin tamb (talk) 05:56, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Foul (basketball)

This article is currently a redirect to personal foul. I had an idea of having put all the fouls (personal, flagrant, technical, and team fouls) into one article, though it will definitely be hard for me, as you may all know, I don't create article, I create stubs or featured lists. So, anyone interested in helping me? -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 07:41, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I will see what I can do to help :).—Chris! ct 19:07, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Announcements

I just noticed that there is something called Wikipedia:Announcements, which lists the milestones of a particular projects. Wikiproject can signed up for here. If there is no objection, I will sign us up.—Chris! ct 19:49, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Charles Barkley

Charles Barkley is at FAC. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:04, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Please help in any ways. There are many things left to do (e.g. format refs or fix MOS breach). Pushing this to FA is going to be a huge accomplishment.—Chris! ct 04:14, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Draft Trades

Just a simple question, what trades should be included in the Draft articles? I suppose it should just be draft day trades (which occurred on the day of the draft), and pre-draft trades that resulted in exchange of draft picks between the teams, such as in 2005-2008 NBA Draft articles. However, in 2004 NBA Draft article, it mentions Anderson Varejão draft rights being traded a month after the draft. I don't think this trade had anything to do with the Draft itself. Do the article really need to mention the draft rights traded after the draft day? Because it would be really confusing if the 1999 NBA Draft article mentions that Frédéric Weis draft rights was traded in 2008 (reference) or 2002 NBA Draft article mentions that Luis Scola draft rights was traded in 2007 (reference). Martin tamb (talk) 07:57, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I think we should follow the model used in 2005-2008 NBA Draft articles. It doesn't make sense to talk about trades that happen, say 5 years later.—Chris! ct 18:23, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
I think we need to mention the trades (where draft rights are mentioned) that happen from the draft day to the day the following season starts. That whole process is still one "offseason" where teams try to become better. --Crzycheetah 20:21, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Good point, thanks for clearing that up. However, what if a drafted player signed with a team that drafted him and then he was traded during the offseason (example: Patrick Ewing, Jr. signed with the Kings on July, traded to Rockets and then Knicks on August). Do the articles need to mention Ewing's trade details? - Martin tamb (talk) 02:58, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
No, I don't think so. Since he signed with the Kings, he became a regular player that had nothing to do with the draft anymore. That trade should only be mentioned in those teams' "transactions" section. We only need to focus on draft picks and draft rights to the players. A drafted player is not yet a member of that team until he signs a contract, so he should be still considered a part of the draft.--Crzycheetah 04:25, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Okay, so only draft picks and draft rights traded in pre-season, not including signed draft picks and draft rights traded years later. Thanks for the responses. - Martin tamb (talk) 13:39, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Anaheim Arsenal

Sorry, if I posted on the wrong WikiProject, but since D-League is part of NBA, I think this discussion belong here. The Anaheim Arsenal are going to be relocated to Springfield, Massachusetts for the 2009-10 Season, but there are a separate Springfield NBA Development League team article. Looking back at some past examples such as when the Asheville Altitude moved to Tulsa and became Tulsa 66ers or when the Columbus Riverdragons moved to Austin and became Austin Toros. Those relocated franchise only have a single article for both of them. I think Anaheim Arsenal and Springfield NBA Development League team articles should be merged. Any input on this matter? - Martin tamb (talk) 10:06, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

The article should definitely be merged once the 2009–10 D-League season start, just because to have consistency with the others. Seattle SuperSonics is a exception because it had a great long history, and should be used for provide historical information of the Sonics. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 04:15, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Okay, will do that later, probably after the Springfield team has a name. - Martin tamb (talk) 12:03, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

List of Houston Rockets seasons

Resolved: Disputes resolved, Infonerd2216 (talk · contribs) indef blocked. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:37, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I've filed a report here regarding User:Infonerd2216's insistence in inserting the word "tough" in a statement about the playoffs series with the Lakers. I reverted him several times because of pov concern and more importantly, adding this descriptive word doesn't increase readers' knowledge about the subject. But he refused to stop, even resorting to personal attacks.[4] Any thought on this?—Chris! ct 01:21, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

It's definitely POV, but to me it's very minor, don't waste too much time for this. But if he continued, I suggest report him for 3RR, these edits [5], [6], [7], [8], should be enough to report him. Also, he seems to have personal attacks against anyone, see [9]. I don't know if there's any place to report personal attacks, but if there is one, I'll report him. - Martin tamb (talk) 02:13, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Minor or not, I would try to make sure that it's not added again because of how clearly it violates WP:NPOV (without a quoted source). We can't allow a disruptive user to have it their way simply because of their persistence, as that will encourage them to use the same tactic in a future conflict. That said, I'll try to help out if their behaviour continues. —LOL T/C 03:48, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
He is involved in an edit war at List of Toronto Raptors seasons; please join the discussion. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:22, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Just report him for 3RR. He's pushing his idea and did not care about the reasons behind the revert. - Martin tamb (talk) 01:50, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Forget my comment, I forgot that 3RR rule is 24 hour time frame. - Martin tamb (talk) 01:57, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
You don't have to violate 3RR to be blocked for edit warring. However, (s)he seems to have stopped for now, so there is no need to pursue. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:17, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
He hasn't stopped yet. —LOL T/C 02:19, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Leave him one more stern reminder, then I think we may have to ask for administrator intervention. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:25, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Do you think {{uw-npov4}} would be the right thing to message him with? —LOL T/C 02:36, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) That's fine, but I would add additional info too WRT his specific edits (mention that he is not following consensus, etc.) Dabomb87 (talk) 02:38, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

User:Infonerd2216 was indef blocked after I reported him for threatening me on my talk page on WP:ANI.—Chris! ct 00:33, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Potential good articles

I discovered that a bunch of NBA referee articles are in pretty nice shape and could potentially add to our GA collections. They include Tim Donaghy, Dick Bavetta, Steve Javie, Bennett Salvatore, Joe Crawford, Darell Garretson, Richie Powers, Jake O'Donnell, Bernie Fryer, Ken Mauer and Mike Mathis. Unfortunately, the primary writer of these articles User:RyguyMN have not edited since January 2009. I planned to nominate them if there is no objection. (I will merely "nominate" them and made sure they pass. I will not take credit for any of them). Any thoughts?—Chris! ct 22:23, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Some of them are in very nice shape indeed; others need work. For example, Jake O'Donnell needs info about his early life and life outside the NBA. Also, why are dates linked? Dabomb87 (talk) 01:23, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Isn't that injunction still in place? —LOL T/C 01:32, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Only for mass delinking; if you limit the delinkings to very few articles and only delink dates as part of larger improvements of the article, it is acceptable. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:15, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
I will get to work then.—Chris! ct 03:17, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Tim Donaghy is at GAN. And Dick Bavetta is almost there. It would be great if someone can help.—Chris! ct 18:30, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Should we create a specific infobox for referees? I've been thinking about that. It would be great if LOL can help because you are knowledgable about templates and stuffs like that.—Chris! ct 23:10, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
I'll help out however I can, but I just want to let you know that I'm not as familiar with layout as I am with parser functions. —LOL T/C 23:23, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
We can just make one based on Template:Infobox Person with the same exact layout.—Chris! ct 23:43, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
After looking at the source code of {{Infobox Person}}, I'd say that it should be pretty easy for a layman to follow, especially with the numbered data/label parameters; but if you want, describe what you want and I'll work on it. —LOL T/C 00:49, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Besides having most basic info, it would be good to have a place for awards, achievement, # of games officiated, hall of fame etc.—Chris! ct 00:55, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
What's the "most basic info"? Should this be created at {{Infobox Basketball Official}}? —LOL T/C 01:08, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
name, place of birth, birth date, etc ... And, yes. Sorry for not being clear—Chris! ct 01:33, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
So we don't want Cause of death, Height, Weight, Spouse(s), Children, Education, or Occupation? —LOL T/C 02:02, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) Cause of death, Height, Weight, Spouse(s), Children, Education, alma mater, nationality, image are needed. Occupation, not really b/c this infobox is specifically about referees.—Chris! ct 02:34, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Can anyone identify any referees here? These are all free images that we can used for their articles.—Chris! ct 00:36, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Bill Spooner; Ron Garretson (I think); Tony Brothers; Jack Nies; Ken Mauer, Tom Washington, and Steve Javie; Steve Javie. You might figure out some of the rest by looking here. Zagalejo^^^ 05:02, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I have three more add to the GA list: 2007-08 NBA season, 2006-07 NBA season, and Kobe Bryant. I have two potential FAC's Jerry West and LA Lakers, though these are not referees. Will an admim move User:Yellow Evan/Sandbox to the 1971-72 NBA season? Leave Message ,Yellow Evan home , User:Yellow Evan/Sandbox

Chauncey Billups

Minor point of contention re: the opening to his biography, and the appropriateness of including nickname. It's pretty well-sourced, though I'm not sure that it has widespread recognition. Has been discussed on article talk page. Thoughts from roundball experts welcome. JNW (talk) 17:24, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I didn't want to get into an edit war, but I realize some editors really want to have nicknames mentioned in the opening paragraphs. The problem that I see with nicknames in general is that:
  • Not all nicknames are created equal. Some, like "Nene" are quasi-official names. Some, like "Shaq" are essentially sobriquets. Some, like, S.T.A.T are obscure and generally only know around nerdy internet folks who edit Wikipedia articles. Then some like "KG" or "CP3" are basically abbreviations or internet shorthands, and I'm not sure if we can even call them nicknames. My point here is, just because a nickname is mentioned by a reliable source, doesn't mean it should receive the same weight as "Nene" or "Shaq".
  • Not all nicknames are permanent, and there is no metric for verifying a nickname's notability. I don't think anyone calls Garnett "The Big Ticket" these days, and he's probably not "The Franchise" any more. How do we know when a nickname no longer carries currency? Awards, teams played for, leading a stat category - that kind of stuff is always verifiable. That's not the case with nicknames.
WRT the "Mr. Big Shot" nickname specifically, yes, it's sourced, but the nickname is only mentioned in passing or in a profile. That tells me that the nickname is widely accepted, but isn't *that* important. And the arguments made in Talk:Chauncey Billups, that the nickname is notable because it confirms his clutchiness seems awfully POV-y. I don't see the problem with merely mentioning it in the Pistons subsection or the personal life section. --Mosmof (talk) 23:09, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Template:NBA Finals summary

I think we should make changes to this template. First, there is no place to put the scores, which are pretty important information for the series. Second, the champion/runner-up parameters are problematic because we cannot be certain which team will be champion until the series ends. I think we should model this template like {{Infobox Stanley Cup Final}}. Any thoughts?—Chris! ct 23:13, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like good suggestions to me right now. If the proposed format is approved, then I should be able to use assisted editing to modify all of the current transclusions. —LOL T/C 00:08, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
I think we should go ahead with fixing the parameters as soon as possible because it isn't a controversial change. I think the parameters should be called eastern champion/western champion, instead of champion/runner-up.—Chris! ct 21:22, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Would listing all seven scores would fit in 300px? NHL game scores rarely hit double digits so they can list all games. Or we have a vertical alignment.
I'd also say to list the team with the home court advantage to be listed last. If we're going by vertical orientation, the West/East can be done nicely. –Howard the Duck 04:07, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
We can try vertical alignment and see if that works. Using an asterisk to show home court advantage might work better IMO, too.—Chris! ct 05:46, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
I was reserving asterisks for "if needed" games and/or OTs... –Howard the Duck 06:49, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Right, then how should we show home court advantage?—Chris! ct 18:24, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
If we're sticking on a horizontal orientation, I'd prefer the team with the advantage at the bottom; if it's vertical, how about italicizing it? We do that for the brackets, so... –Howard the Duck 19:25, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Italic would work—Chris! ct 19:58, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Anyone has a mock-up? –Howard the Duck 10:08, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Could you create one?—Chris! ct 21:24, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Game 1 vs. Game one

Which one should we used in our articles? I know this is nit-picking but if we standardize this, I believe we can make our articles look more professional. Any thought?—Chris! ct 01:06, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

O...hard one. In Wikipedia, it should be game one, but it's pretty obvious that no one writes game one. IMO, I would say Game 1, just since no one writes game one. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 01:17, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
You seems to be right. Almost all of our GA/FA use game 1, instead of game one.—Chris! ct 01:33, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

James Naismith place of birth discrepancy on bio page

Hey,

On the Naismith article, there's an historical inaccuracy I'm trying to correct but I'm getting into an edit war with an admin for no real reason. The article states he was born in "Ramsay Township, Almonte, Ontario, Canada", in 1861. Here's the issue with this:

  1. He was born in Ramsay, not Almonte. Almonte was separate back then, it merged in 1998 (according to their wiki pages). It would be historical revisionism to apply this merger 137 years prior.
  2. Ontario did not exist in 1861. It was formed in 1867. Period. He couldn't be born in a place that didn't exist. If you want to get accurate he was born in "Upper Canada", but definitely not Ontario.
  3. Canada, as it is wiki linked to, was also formed in 1867. I tried changing it to read more accurately, Province of Canada.

So, I digress, it should read in the infobox (and bio) (I believe) [[Ramsay Township|Ramsay]], [[Province of Canada]] (or [[Province of Canada|Canada]])

Opinions? --Lvivske (talk) 04:37, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, you seem to be right since it is indisputable that both Ontario and Canada were not yet established at the time of Naismith's birth. But then how come Ramsay Township, Ontario is redirected to Mississippi Mills, Ontario?—Chris! ct 06:14, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
According to the second link, "The current town of Mississippi Mills was incorporated on January 1, 1998 by amalgamating the town of Almonte with the townships of Ramsay and Pakenham." Zagalejo^^^ 06:40, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Was Naismith born in Ramsay? The Naismith Museum's website says he was born in Almonte: [10] There's a biography of Naismith that might settle this issue, in case someone wants to track it down.
Reading that link...says "born near Almonte" which leads me to believe the Ramsay source is right. His father "moved to live and work with his Uncle Peter who had arrived in Ramsay Township in 1832."--Lvivske (talk) 07:02, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Ah, I was looking at the top, where it says he was born "in Almonte". Hmm. I'll try to pick up a copy of the biography when I get the chance, since I assume that source will go into the most detail about his birthplace. Zagalejo^^^ 18:26, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
That said, I'm on board with the rest of your suggestions. Zagalejo^^^ 06:40, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Does that mean I can make the edits? Or do we need more consensus from the WP? The guy opposing is an admin, so I'll likely be shot down if I go this alone.--Lvivske (talk) 03:52, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Go for it. Zagalejo^^^ 04:07, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Comment If consensus supports Lvivske's changes, that is great - I've no stake in the matter other than helping to maintain the stability of a frequently vandalized article. It is important, however, to clarify that the matter has been incorrectly (and unfairly) described as an "edit war with an admin". The initial change was made without explanation by Lvivske on the 28th; it was reverted because it was unexplained, on an article with a relatively high rate of vandalism, and because Lvivske appeared to be the first person in the history of the article to make such a change. (I could not find any indication of it having been a subject for discussion, let alone controversy.) Lvivske only left a note on the article's talk page after the back-and-forth, and there was no mention that the discussion had moved here (which would have been helpful). As for the "admin" part, at no time did that become a factor in the issue. Furthermore, any admin who tried to "shoot down" an editor by using the admin bit to his or her advantage in a content dispute would find themselves being shot down (in a far more serious manner) shortly thereafter. --Ckatzchatspy 20:53, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Copyright violations at Shaquille O'Neal?

See Talk:Shaquille_O'Neal#Copyright_violation. Thanks! Zagalejo^^^ 19:02, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

___-doubles

Should we merge double-double, triple-double, quadruple-double, five-by-five into one article? I have this idea because all of them are very short. The merged article can be long enoough to maybe go for GA. Merging is easy to do, but the problem is what the name of the new article should be. Is there a generic term that covered all of these doubles? I can't think of one.—Chris! ct 00:10, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

The cumulative article size of the four articles is 48 KB, which seems fine to me. {{Basketball statistics}} calls them "doubles", so my initial suggestion for the article name would be Double (basketball). —LOL T/C 03:21, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Well, I created {{Basketball statistics}}, so that is what I thought they should be called.—Chris! ct 04:01, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I also feared that the name might constitute original research since I haven't see this name mentioned in anywhere at all.—Chris! ct 04:10, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
This could be a good time to ignore the rule because we seek to improve Wikipedia by merging several small and similar articles, and the only thing in our way is an article name. —LOL T/C 05:04, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I think you are right. I will get to work then.—Chris! ct 05:45, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

WNBA task force?

Since I wasted the whole day thinking of idea for the WNBA articles, I came up with the idea of having a WNBA task force, for all the WNBA articles. Anyone with me here? -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 23:20, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

That would make all WNBA articles falls under this project. I don't see why not. I can help bring some lists up to standard.—Chris! ct 00:14, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
So a WikiProject would be better?
P.S. I want to make the page, so yeah... -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 00:22, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Task force is fine.—Chris! ct 03:18, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Whoever is interested in improving WNBA articles, please join WP:WNBA! -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 04:48, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Cool. I'm not particularly interested in the WNBA but I'll keep the TF watched in case there's anything I can do to help. —LOL T/C 05:08, 14 June 2009 (UTC) P.S. Post-scripts normally come after the sig ;)
I think it would be great to pay some more attention to WNBA articles. There's at least one former All-WNBA First Teamer who still doesn't have an article: Eva Nemcova. [11] If anyone's looking for a DYK cookie, you should start an article on her. Zagalejo^^^ 20:19, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
I created it, through I am not interested to submit it to DYK. So anyone here, please feel free to do so.—Chris! ct 23:54, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Removal of player career statistics table

FYI, a discussion has been started at the Kobe Bryant talk page about this. See Talk:Kobe Bryant#Stats sectionChris! ct 21:31, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Brandon Jennings

So should be used on the "college" parameter on the roster template? His high school? "Italy"? –Howard the Duck 12:45, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

It should be the Italian club he is currently playing for Italy, since it's the current team he's playing for country he's playing in. He is currently considered an international eligible draft pick, but I think he's going to be reverted to an American player after the draft. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 21:59, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Actually he is not an international player based on CBA rules (see Eligibility for the NBA Draft), because he did complete high school in the United States and played outside the U.S. for less than three years. He is classified as automatically eligible non-international player because he is one year out of his high school graduation and has signed a contract and played with a professional basketball team outside the NBA. - Martin tamb (talk) 10:14, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
But he will be drafted out of Italy, just to clarify. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 22:10, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, for Jennings it should be Italy on the roster template and the draft article. While we were on this matter, what about Mike Taylor who went to college, dropped out, played in the D-League for 1 season and drafted from D-League. The L.A. Clippers roster still listed his college team, but the draft article listed him as drafted out of D-League. What should be used in the roster template? I suppose it should be D-League. - Martin tamb (talk) 01:40, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
I would agree with you on this one, since it's supposed to be the last team the player played for, since they are "drafted out of" that team. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 02:03, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Well, I just realize that the roster page on NBA.com/Clippers listed his college on the From column instead of D-League, same thing listed on the ESPN roster page and Yahoo roster page. - Martin tamb (talk) 02:27, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

NBA head coaches articles

Since 3b was recently added to the featured list criteria and WP:LISTS adding their stand-alone list rule, I was thinking of merging the head coaches article which have less than 7 entries (including head coaches who had two terms, and colspans) into the main articles. Here is what the Miami Heat article would look like if the head coaches article was merged into it. Even though the articles would grow sooner or later, right now is the present, and we should do what's best for the present more than the future (makes no sense whatsoever, but hope you guys get what I mean). Any comments? -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 23:06, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

While that will pretty much destroyed the head coach featured topic at least for now, merging seems to fit with the Wikipedia standard. I support this purposal.—Chris! ct 00:16, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Errr I'm not sure. I think that 3b has less to do with lengths of the articles but more what they're about and I think that these are fairly natural to keep separate, as IMO they fit the description of an intuitive stand-alone list. They are all growing (albeit slowly). And then there's the whole question about sets of articles (i.e. all the manager articles), which relates directly to a potential FT. I guess the closest comparison for a past discussion about this is this one - note the list was demoted but not for 3b concerns. Of course, WP:FT? allows lists with less than 10 items to be included as audited. On the other hand, if the lists are merged in then the only way I can see to still build the topic would be to include the articles that the lists are merged in to, just for the one merged in section - rst20xx (talk) 00:49, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
How about the defunct NBA teams? Do we have to make practically useless head coaches articles for those too? -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 00:54, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
We could combine the head coaches lists for defunct teams into one article. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:18, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Agree —Chris! ct 23:19, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Umm...ok. The title would be...List of NBA defunct teams head coaches? -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 02:11, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

NBA draft infobox?

What do you guys think about infoboxes for the draft pages? We can have the basic info in there: logo, date, place, network, #1 overall player and team, ... Basically something like our colleagues at WP:NFL did, {{Infobox NFL Draft}}.--Crzycheetah 02:54, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Sure, go ahead.—Chris! ct 02:58, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I created and implemented the {{Infobox NBA Draft}} in 2003 NBA Draft and 2004 NBA Draft lists. Any comments?--Crzycheetah 05:30, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Is there a site that provides all of the info for every draft? I'd like to add infoboxes to the rest of the draft articles. Also, keep WP:MOSTIME in mind; "PM" should be lowercase. —LOL T/C 05:54, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
I use http://www.nba.com/draft200X/ for 2001-2009 draft info. As for the older drafts, I am guessing google will help.--Crzycheetah 06:00, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

NBA depth chart

Just want to let editors know that User:Pats1 has removed the depth charts from team articles.—Chris! ct 04:34, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Well you can refer him to this page's archives since it's a topic that has been discussed by a few of us before. I'm still not a fan of depth charts, but I think quite a number here supported the inclusion... Chensiyuan (talk) 04:58, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
The original discussion is at WT:Basketball. As you can see, in April 2008, there were a couple of supports for removal(mine included) and depth charts were gone. Two months later, a couple of supports for inclusion joined, but nothing happened. In August 2008, there were many supports for inclusion and the depth charts came back. It's offseason, I guess when the season starts, the consensus will build up for the inclusion.--Crzycheetah 05:11, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
I used to support the inclusion, since I was only 14 back then (a year is a lot for adolescences) and barely knew why I was editing, but now I get the sense that the depth chart are barely useful. Since like what Crzycheetah said, if the season is over, they'll probably be original research, like what Pats1 wrote on the edit summary. So at the end of all the updating for depth charts, the template will probably be deleted. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 05:18, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
How about this. At then end of the season we remove them. When the next season start we put them back in. Sounds fair CT and SK? Leave Message, Yellow Evan home
Fairness is not an issue at all. The fact that depth charts violate our WP:original research policy should be enough of an argument to start a deletion campaign for all depth charts templates.—Chris! ct 20:07, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm against depth charts entirely. Even during the season, you can't maintain them without using a lot of original research. Yes, some websites and magazines publish depth charts, but those aren't kept up to date, and they often contradict each other, anyway. Our efforts are better spent elsewhere. Zagalejo^^^ 19:59, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
I guess we have overwhelming support for depth chart removal. If there is no oppose, I will go ahead and marked all templates for tfd.—Chris! ct 20:04, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
It seems like User:Pats1 has deleted all depth charts templates. He can do that because he is a synop. There is no need to continue this discussion.—Chris! ct 20:14, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
It's not really original research...the starters, reserves, and inactives are all sourced by NBA.com per game. That means we have to update all the depth charts every game if they keep on changing. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 01:06, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Last year I said that ESPN, CBS or Yahoo! can be used to nullify the original research issue, but nobody took the initiative to follow any source. —LOL T/C 02:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Each of those sites has its own scheme, though. Which one would we pick? And how often are they actually updated, anyway? Zagalejo^^^ 04:45, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't know how often they are updated throughout the season, but during the off-season I wouldn't count on any activity. Even if they're infrequently updated during the season, then we can use "As of" on the hypothetical templates. —LOL T/C 05:14, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

(→) I believe those depth charts are technically wrong, They use all five positions and sometimes place the reserves in the wrong spot. For the Lakers, for instance, all depth charts last year showed that Odom was Gasol's substitute, but most of the time, he entered the game for Bynum. Yeah, we can say that Odom played Gasol's position and Gasol was in Bynum's spot, but that's an assumption that only basketball experts can make. This isn't Hoopedia. Wikipedia is not for experts only, but for everybody. We have the rosters for the readers to know what players the team has. As for the strategical rosters, they should be left for Hoopedia. Whether they're referenced or not, they're still unnecessary and violate WP:IINFO. --Crzycheetah 05:14, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Salaries

Hi, I just want to ask that on every player's info page should I put their salary. --Saffi2k7 (talk) 00:56, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I would say go for it. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 03:33, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, go ahead. But make sure to source it.—Chris! ct 01:51, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Not only provide a reference, but please avoid deleting references and not replacing them, as you've done for quite a number of players already. Chensiyuan (talk) 14:54, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Roster navboxes

I notice that roster navboxes don't include the assistant coaches. What does everyone think of adding them, and since there will be a handful of coaches, having them appear on a second line, roughly like this:

--Muboshgu (talk) 01:35, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

It's acceptable. Assistants need respect, as well.--Crzycheetah 03:57, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
If this gets the green light, then we should add another parameter like assistants so that "Assistant coaches" isn't hard-coded into every team's navbox. I have a simple script ready to output all of the assistant coaches from the nba.com/ team /roster pages. —LOL T/C 04:08, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Sounds to be a great idea—Chris! ct 20:07, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
This might help in populating the navboxes, but I haven't checked all of them for redirects, ambiguous names, last names that contain a space, or duplicate last names. —LOL T/C 20:19, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
That's a great start! If someone can change the coding of the templates, I can help check the links and add them. And create some pages for the ones who are currently redlinked. --Muboshgu (talk) 12:14, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
I updated {{Atlanta Hawks current roster}}. Hope everything's fine. —LOL T/C 13:51, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Tim Donaghy

Can anyone pitch in on the GAN? There's some major stuff to work on, and I don't know if I'll be able to put the time needed to improve it. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:04, 28 July 2009 (UTC)