Jump to content

Talk:2007–08 Boston Celtics season

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Good article nomination

[edit]

I've added this article to the good articles nominee list. Please feel free to review the article. ● 8~Hype @ 11:40, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't the season have to end in order to promote the article to Good article criteria? Zenlax T C S 20:02, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. Only the infobox will be changed until the end of the season, and maybe some little things will be added. But the article is as good as finished. ● 8~Hype @ 20:30, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good Article Quick-Fail Criteria says that an article which covers an unfolding event with a definite future ending point could fail Good Article criteria. The359 (talk) 22:44, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's what I was afraid of. Maybe holding off in the nomination would be a good idea. Zenlax T C S 19:41, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, it certainly would not hurt to wait a few weeks until the season ends (at least for the Celtics), just in case anything major occurs during the playoffs. The359 (talk) 04:05, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will not fail the article. As the season comes to an end, I would be happy to review the article myself. But, it would be best to remove the nomination at once. Zenlax T C S 18:32, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK, then just remove it. ● 8~Hype @ 19:21, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You'll have to do it, as you are the nominator. Zenlax T C S 20:43, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

what is the song when the celtics win at home?

[edit]

mmkay? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.216.37.134 (talk) 19:44, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All-Star coaching

[edit]

The original wording of the article would suggest--to someone who doesn't understand how the process works--that Rivers was chosen to coach the East team solely on the basis of the Knicks game. Since that is, needless to say, not how the process works, it makes sense to actually explain how that choice was made. Samer (talk) 16:43, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The source has it the same way. ● 8~Hype @ 06:28, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If I may ask, would you please look at your source again? The information I have added is in the paragraph immediately following the one you cite. I am simply trying to complete the chain of logic for people who don't know exactly how the selection is made.
Also, please note that "It will stay that way." could certainly be seen as a violation of WP:OWN. Samer (talk) 19:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just provide a source (if it isn't in the original one) for the February 3 rule and your version is good. Pats1 T/C 19:47, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The source is the same article, the very next paragraph. Samer (talk) 16:18, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Your text is very poorly written, with the use of brackets and disregard towards dashes. ● 8~Hype @ 17:02, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Stismail, IIRC, is a professional proofreader (I'm sure he has a better way of putting it than that). Pats1 T/C 17:04, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Then you're good. Just because a certain level of grammar or a certain sentence structure was used in the source doesn't mean it has to be replicated in this article. Use correct grammar and use whatever sentence structure best fits the article; citing a source is to verify the actual information contained, not word-for-word how the article presented that information. Pats1 T/C 17:04, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And just because a certain level of grammar or a certain sentence structure was used in the source, it doesn't mean it doesn't have to be replicated in this article. ● 8~Hype @ 17:45, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I do not understand the point you're trying to make; in this case, the article simply can't be cited exactly, since it's written in the future tense ("Rivers will coach," etc.). Samer (talk) 19:15, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Italicization

[edit]

Moreover, awards such as "Defensive Player of the Year" are not, and should not be, italicized. Samer (talk) 16:44, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is an official title and therefore should be. ● 8~Hype @ 20:03, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Making changes

[edit]

Let me just repeat this statement from the editing page:

If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed for profit by others, do not submit it.

At the very least, you should actually look through edits before you undo them: some of your reverts actually involve factual issues (e.g., when did the Celtics set the steal record you cite?), while others are simply wrong, and indefensible (e.g., Texas Triangle is not an italicized title, period).

I also point out that there are dozens of violations of WP:NUMBERS, as well, in that "6th", "1st", etc., should be spelled out in the body of an article unless there is a logical reason for not doing so. I'm not changing them all now, but you can't really make much of an argument for undoing edits when the original version contradicts WP:MOS. Samer (talk) 00:45, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some things of you are poorly written, like "the fifth Celtics team to do so", or putting sentences in brackets. Each record in the records section includes "in NBA/franchise history". Also, 6th and 1st shouldn't be spelled out, but I did it intentionally because this section is all about numbers and it is easier for a reader to see. Also, having more than one sources is not a bad thing. ● 8~Hype @ 10:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I didn't revert constructive changes you made. ● 8~Hype @ 10:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, "the fifth Celtics team to do so" is correct (because it provides parallel structure--"The Celtics are the Nth team to do X, the Nth Celtics team to do it, and the first team since Y to d it").
As for multiple sources, it's useful if the multiple sources are providing different pieces of information. Here, I'll admit that the Globe one is different enough to justify keeping, but the Celtics.com release is just a second (slightly abbreviated) copy of the NBA.com release, and that's just a waste of bandwidth. Samer (talk) 11:29, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Come on, this version is pretty fine right now, why do we need a war over some small changes? ● 8~Hype @ 12:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Because that's in our nature. :) Seriously, though:
  1. How about this for a compromise on the numbers: leave ranks (e.g., "6th in minutes") as ordinal numbers, but change "1st quarter", etc. That way the important numbers stand out more.
  2. As far as the links go, I really think that exact duplicate links--e.g., the Celtics one I mentioned above--are just a waste of bytes. Samer (talk) 14:10, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK, sounds fair to me. But could you please point out what changes you are exactly going to make? Can you make a list, or just change it and then revert it so that I can have a look at the changes? ● 8~Hype @ 15:33, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One other thing--I don't see why it's necessary to state "in the NBA Finals against the Lakers", etc., a dozen or so times, with wikilinks every single time. I agree with linking the individual games at least once, but this is overkill, especially since they're in consecutive paragraphs. Samer (talk) 21:31, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

I'm going to remove the duplicate links, but I'm honestly curious as to why that article exists in the first place; there is nothing special about the definition of a point in basketball (as opposed to, say, hockey or tennis). Samer (talk) 20:24, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article status

[edit]

Review

[edit]
Please feel free to review the article and comment on it. ● 8~Hype @ 14:32, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination

[edit]

Why i remove the game log

[edit]

Because it's best to keep it private. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.194.235.61 (talk) 06:29, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 22:50, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 22:50, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]


video game spam

[edit]

Anon here, removed spam from the article to a video game. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.80.3.5 (talk) 16:52, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:2007–08_Boston_Celtics_season&oldid=1196509159"