Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/1966 NBA Expansion Draft/archive1
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was promoted by The Rambling Man 08:02, 2 June 2010 [1].
1966 NBA Expansion Draft (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
- Nominator(s): —Chris!c/t 01:37, 11 May 2010 (UTC) & User:Martin tamb[reply]
I am nominating this on behalf of User:Martin tamb because I think it is ready. It will hopefully be a part of a future Chicago Bulls GT.—Chris!c/t 01:37, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Wow, still no comment. My list is that boring that no one wants to read it. :)—Chris!c/t 18:25, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from KV5 |
---|
First! (I guess) KV5 (Talk • Phils) 18:35, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No problems in the table. Well done. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 18:35, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Once these are completed, I can support without hesitation. — KV5 • Talk • 13:57, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
- Support — KV5 • Talk • 01:17, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from Zagalejo
- I know that the Chicago Bulls Encylopedia has some additional info about this draft. I own a copy, so when I get a chance, I'll add some stuff. One thing I remember is that Dick Klein (the Bulls' GM) planned to use Kerr and Bianchi as coaches before the draft even took place. (So, basically, they were drafted to be coaches; they were still under playing contracts, so they couldn't be signed outright.) I also remember that Klein worked out some deal with Red Auerbach in which Klein promised not to select a certain Celtics player (I forget which one) if Auerbach shared his evaluations of other players throughout the league. Zagalejo^^^ 19:02, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Cool, thanks for helping.—Chris!c/t 19:07, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- OK, I added a little bit. Zagalejo^^^ 22:14, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Do we really need to mention here that Sloan was inducted into the HOF as a coach? He was primarily inducted because of his work with the Jazz. Also, I don't think we should mention Thompson at all, since none of his accomplishments have anything to do with the Bulls. Zagalejo^^^ 19:37, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Those excessive detail can be cut down. But some should remain because readers probably would like to know what happen to the players after being drafted.—Chris!c/t 19:54, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, if we're going to say that Sloan is in the HOF, then I think it would be better to restore something about the Jazz, for the sake of clarity. Zagalejo^^^ 20:07, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Those excessive detail can be cut down. But some should remain because readers probably would like to know what happen to the players after being drafted.—Chris!c/t 19:54, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 19:38, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments
The Rambling Man (talk) 17:04, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
|
Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 18:10, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments – I only have a few issues, but they are significant. Not everything in the table is cited at the moment, and there are a couple of inaccuracies/omissions.
Couple more comments after the changes:
|
- Support – After the fixes, the list meets the criteria. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 20:05, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Good list, but there's one thing I'd like to see. For Sloan, I'd like to see a highlight/key either for being in the Hall of Fame as a coach, or for having his jersey retired by the Bulls (or both). Do that and I'll support it. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 20:19, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't really agree with the colorings because this isn't a normal draft articles. The colorings could have ambiguous meanings, for example: whether the players has been selected to the All-Star Game before he was drafted by the Bulls or after his whole playing career ended. Non-expansion draft articles wouldn't have this problem because the draftees were never been in the league before being drafted, while in an expansion draft, the draftees are usually already in the league. Also a coloring for Hall of Famer coaches is never being used in any draft articles because it's irrelevant for a list of players drafted. Hall of Famer coaches are usually mentioned in a short paragraph on the lead. Furthermore, the information about the Hall of Famers and the All-Stars was already included in the lead. It even mentions which player was already an All-Star when he was drafted and which player became an All-Star after their Bulls drafted them. I would like another opinion from the others on this issues. — Martin tamb (talk) 20:46, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- That sounds reasonable to me. I didn't think about this when I added the color.—Chris!c/t 23:44, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not crazy about the colors. They're misleading; I think Boozer is the only one who actually earned his "color-worthy accomplishment" as a Bull. Zagalejo^^^ 05:29, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Color removed.—Chris!c/t 18:48, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't really agree with the colorings because this isn't a normal draft articles. The colorings could have ambiguous meanings, for example: whether the players has been selected to the All-Star Game before he was drafted by the Bulls or after his whole playing career ended. Non-expansion draft articles wouldn't have this problem because the draftees were never been in the league before being drafted, while in an expansion draft, the draftees are usually already in the league. Also a coloring for Hall of Famer coaches is never being used in any draft articles because it's irrelevant for a list of players drafted. Hall of Famer coaches are usually mentioned in a short paragraph on the lead. Furthermore, the information about the Hall of Famers and the All-Stars was already included in the lead. It even mentions which player was already an All-Star when he was drafted and which player became an All-Star after their Bulls drafted them. I would like another opinion from the others on this issues. — Martin tamb (talk) 20:46, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Truco
|
---|
Comments
|
- Support -- All issues resolved; meets WP:WIAFL. Good work!--Truco 503 23:14, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Hidden category: