- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was not promoted by Karanacs 15:49, 22 September 2010 [1].
Juwan Howard (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Nominator(s): Finetooth (talk · contribs), TonyTheTiger (talk · contribs)
I am nominating this for featured article because this is a great article with a lot of detail. I have finally gotten a good copyedit from Finetooth after having added a lot of encyclopedic content. TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:10, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We ran into one problem as far as citing encyclopedic content when we realized that he is married, but there are no good sources regarding this. We are using questionable sources, but the fact isnot likely to be challenged and I was not sure what to do.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:15, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is also one dab issue with template defaulting to Charlotte Hornets rather than New Orleans Hornets. I am not sure how to handle this template use.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:32, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I will add WP:ALT to the final image when the template is reformatted.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:38, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I just removed the template. No dead external links. Ucucha 00:39, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- That edit now leaves us with the problem that when the 1995 Charlotte Hornets season article is created we won't be linked to it, which was the purpose of the template.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:55, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- The "other endeavors" section should be called "film career". Also, there is no ref at the end of the section. ~EDDY (talk/contribs/editor review)~ 00:36, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- This references his marriage, as for a reliable source. ~EDDY (talk/contribs/editor review)~ 00:48, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I am unable to view that source. Does it mention his wife, kid and marriage date? what about marriage location? meeting at Alonzo's party?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:53, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- If you google "juwan howard wardally" on news archive search, the second result (the link above) yields the following result: "Juwan Howard 29 a sixfoot nineinch forward for the Denver Nuggets just bought a ... getaway for Howard and his 27yearold bride the former Jenine Wardally of ..." This says that Howard married Wardally, their marriage was in 2002 (the year of the article), and that she was 27 when they wedded, all important information to cover. If you found the entire article at, say, a library, you might find stuff on his wedding, the reception, the honeymoon, etc.
- Similarly, "juwan howard jace" on Google News Archive has two interesting results. The snippet from this says "Denver Nuggets forward Juwan Howard apologized to his teammates Friday ... ``I caught it from my little son, said Howard, referring to 13-month-old Jace, ..." This article was written in November 2002, so Jace was born in October 2001, before the marriage. Interesting.
- The fourth result, http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=MH&s_site=miami&p_multi=MH&p_theme=realcities&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=11A50587EDB0C700&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM mentions "Juwan Howard now with the Minnesota Timberwolves has listed his fivebedroom ... The Howards who have two sons Jace 5 and Jett 3 still own a condo at Three ..." So he had another kid that wasn't even mentioned in the wiki article? I'm starting to doubt the comprehensiveness and sourcing of the article, despite its length. Are there any other glaring omissions? ~EDDY (talk/contribs/editor review)~ 00:51, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- In truth missing children might be an issue for a holder of public office, but for an NBA player it is probably par for the course. For this type of subject, the children become consequential if they show promise of being professional athletes. You are sort of basing your objection on an afterthougth. The encyclopedic content for this article is his career path. His family info is only of mild interest.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:41, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Wait, why would a public officeholder he held to a differant standard than a basketball player? While obviously his only clame to fame is his basketball career, a featured article should, at the very least, mention each of his kids. These are important events in Howard's life. He is not a basketball machine; he is a living breathing person. ~EDDY (talk/contribs/editor review)~ 22:13, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- NBA basketball players have a high propensity to have a lot of Baby mama that are hard to keep track of and sort of pop up out of the woodwork.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:09, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- While we do not need to keep track of every one of Howard's relationships, I'd say ones with children involved and marriages are pretty important. ~EDDY (talk/contribs/editor review)~ 01:24, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- While I can make a pretty solid promise to include all marital relations, parental is not really something I would want to put my reputation on. He is a balla and you never know. Of course, I will attempt to address any kids the are known in the public eye, but that is all I can promise.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:43, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- No refs for his career stats? ~EDDY (talk/contribs/editor review)~ 00:48, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- So his parents were not married then? It should be made explicit
- In the early years, there is no indication of what his role as a player is apart from two words in the lead. If he has always been a fwd then it needs to be explained.
- His playing style and technqiue has no section, strengths and weaknesses. Why? There is only one sentence from his uni days, but things could have changed. YellowMonkey (new photo poll) 05:24, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you point out a couple of articles that have exemplary playing style sections?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:03, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- P.S. did you notice the following text in the article "Howard provided the Mavericks with a back-to-the-basket player who moved into the starting power-forward position, enabling Dirk Nowitzki to play small forward and Bradley to play center.".--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:49, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I have added a second sentence to that that reads "' At the time, he was still regarded as a versatile offensive player who could "take advantage of smaller defenders in the paint and then stretch his bigger defenders outside" in addition to being a solid rebounder."--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:03, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Playing style sections are the norm, as far as cricket articles go, eg Wilfred Rhodes, Wally Hammond, Douglas Jardine, Sam Loxton, and every other general biog I can remember and most GAs too, excluding female cricketers who are shunned by mainstream writers and only have scorecards. YellowMonkey (new photo poll) 02:07, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Although I have never written a basketball FA, I have written an American football FA (Tyrone Wheatley), a bunch of basketball GAs (Manny Harris, DeShawn Sims, Evan Turner, Demetri McCamey, E'Twaun Moore, Albert White (basketball), off the top of my head) and a couple dozen American football GAs and never seen one or been asked about one. Mostly these are composed of athletic chronologies. I tend to probably have more detailed preprofessional text than most in my articles, but never had any request for anything resembling a playing style. Since most people are star players the style is implied generally by statistical accomplishments.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:32, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Have you seen one in a basketball FA?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:34, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Nope, but a lot of North American sports articles are garbage and wipped up as quickly as possible, without looking at the finer details. Aaroncrick TALK 07:57, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Are you suggesting this article with 200+refs was just whipped up?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 08:04, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Nope, but on this occasion, there must be stuff in those 200+ refs that will stay stuff about his playing style - at least more than what you have currently. IMHO, this article may not be comprehensive. Aaroncrick TALK 08:15, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- As I recall skimming all the content that I have about him the Dallas article jumped out in the back of my mind. There is another mention probably about him being an above average defender. I am not sure if I can find which one it was. I'll see what I can do. Typically, a basketball FA would only note a players defensive skills who has actually been selected to the NBA All-Defensive team. Thus, when I read the mentioned fact, I discarded it as too low a level of significance unless he was really one of the best. I have not come across any material that says something like "He prefers to got to his left in one-on-one isolation" or "He is a good help defender" or "He likes to work the pick and roll". It might be out there somewhere, but as far as the type of meaty content to fill in a playing style section, I have not seen much other than the Dallas article and stuff about his college playing style. Admittedly, of the articles in the archives at the bottom, I might have only scanned 10% of them, but given the amount that I have read, I would have like to have come across more extensive descriptions before creating a separate playing style section. I will give it another look though.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:12, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have just created the
Juwan_Howard#Scouting_report section.--
TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:16, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
[reply]
- Very good, thankyou. Aaroncrick TALK 02:26, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sources comments: Nitpicks:-
- Ref 48: "???" looks unfinished. Best leave it out
- Ref 191 italicizes "NBA.com" whereas 196 doesn't (nor 213)
Otherwise sources look good. Brianboulton (talk) 09:46, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments: I've just looked at the lead and first few paragraphs so far.
"he became the first player to graduate on time with his class after leaving college early to play in the NBA."
Could you explain the context or significance of this?
Why did this not usually happen?
- Most players who enter the NBA early are suddenly making millions of dollars a year and don't feel the need to continue doing their coursework along with their classmates since many people view college as a path to a job. Once you have the multimillion dollar job, why keep doing the classes.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:06, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
How was he able to?
- The source is sparse. I know from personal knowledge as a fan of Michigan that news stories reported that he used a laptop while traveling. I don't have access to Michigan newspapers. I will try to google news some details.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:06, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Could some of these explanations be added to the article? I think it would help.
- I added some more. The paragraph seems quite meaty to me now, but let me know if you want to see even more added.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:47, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Paragraph is fine. It may need copy-editing in places. Could a sentence be added to the lead to the effect of "he became the first player to graduate on time with his class after leaving college early to play in the NBA ... , as most players did not feel the need to attend classes." Or something. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Although he continued to be a productive starter, he never again performed at an All-Star level, and near the end of his contract he was traded at the NBA trade deadline twice to make salary cap room." Very long sentence. Also, the begining of the sentence reads as if the previous sentences have talked about how good he was. But if I've read it right, it has only mentioned three seasons and has not really said how good he was or how successful. And what is a "productive" starter?
- Thank you. I split the sentence in half to make two shorter sentences. I think the $100 million contract is sufficient evidence of his success. A productive starter is one who scores points or otherwise contributes to the team. Not sure what else you are looking for here.Finetooth (talk) 02:45, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry if I'm not clear. I think it would be better to say how he was productive, i.e. how did he contribute. Maybe the lead isn't the place for it, but as I said below, I don't think the lead gives a clear picture of how good he is/was. --Sarastro1 (talk) 07:40, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Sarastrol, I don't mean to be rude. The current WP:LEAD has the following text "After one season as an All-Rookie player and a second as an All-NBA performer. . .During his first 5 seasons in the NBA, he averaged 19.3 points per game. . ." Any basketball fan knows very well how good he was. Those two phrases may not mean much to you, but anyone who follows basketball understands very clearly how good he was. Anything more would be an overstatement or overemphasis. The lead properly balances his peak and his present state pretty well, IMO.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 08:26, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- So, can I just establish that this is not written with the general reader in mind but only for basketball fans? If so, I do not feel that I can support it (which I would like to, to be honest, as it seems comprehensive). IMO, FAs should be written with the general reader in mind, and it seems that most of them are. And "any basketball fan" may understand this, but is that enough for FA? Obviously, the entire rules and structure of the sport don't need explaning in depth, but there are points where further brief explanations would make it more accessible for everyone. --Sarastro1 (talk) 11:17, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Tony, it might help to add a comparison stat or two if you have them handy. I'm thinking maybe after "19.3 points a game" something like "X points is the NBA average" would help. Or after "All-Rookie player", maybe something like "Only X rookies out of Y (Z percent) make the All-Star team each season." This would put Howard's accomplishments into a quantitative perspective that any reader would understand without knowing anything about the NBA. Comparisons like this should go into the relevant places in the main text and then could be included in the lead. Finetooth (talk) 21:32, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"In 2010, he is entering his 17th season in the NBA, including 5 for playoff teams": This suggest he played five separate seasons for a different type of team called a playoff team. I assume it means that in five seasons, his teams reached the playoffs?
- You are right, and your construction is more clear. I adopted it. Finetooth (talk) 02:53, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Howard had a successful career at Chicago Vocational Career Academy where he became a 1991 Parade and McDonald's All American and a member of the National Honor Society". Successful how? What did he do there? And while the last items are linked, they make the sentence very bumpy. Could a few words be added to say what they are to make the sentence flow a bit?
- Yes. I revised to "Howard attended Chicago Vocational Career Academy, where he was named a 1991 All-American basketball player by Parade magazine and won McDonald's All American honors in a national tournament for boys and girls. He was also chosen for the National Honor Society, which recognizes achievements in scholarship, leadership, service, and character." Finetooth (talk) 18:13, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"By his sophomore year, he was already expected to be a 1991 blue chip recruit." Seems a bit pointless. If it is necessary to talk about being a "blue chip recruit" (which seems to be an unnecessary term to introduce here), he either was or he wasn't. Why say what he was expected to be? May be better to say that he showed potential, or was expected to be successful, or high hopes were expressed?
- It is not the case that either he was or he wasn't. What this is saying is that over two years in advance of his senior season recruiting, expectations were high that he would be one of the top recruits at that point two years into the future. The term, which is linked, is a common term in American sports. If you are foreign, it may be lost on you, but suffice it to say it is not random jargon because it has a substantial linked article.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:16, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I revised to include a clarifying phrase: "By his sophomore year, he was already expected to be a 1991 blue chip recruit, highly prized by college basketball coaches." Does this make the claim more clear? Finetooth (talk) 18:24, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, thanks. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"He was regarded as one of the best sophomores in the Chicago metropolitan area." Says who? Who thought so?
- The following sentence, which you mention below says "He was the only sophomore named by the league coaches to the 20-man, 1988–89 All-Chicago Public School League squad as a second-team member." I think if we address your concerns on that sentence, this will be resolved.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:43, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
*"He was the only sophomore named by the league coaches to the 20-man, 1988–89 All-Chicago Public School League squad as a second-team member." Long and a bit clumsy. What is this squad?
"The summer after his sophomore year, the 6-foot-8-inch (2.03 m) center, Howard, ...": Why is his height forced into this sentence? And "Howard" is unnecessary.
- When discussing high school basketball players, they are typically still growing and contemporary height measurements are valuable to the reader. Howard removed though.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:51, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- OK. --Sarastro1 (talk) 07:40, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"...attended the Nike Academic Betterment and Career Development (ABCD) camp, which was held annually in Princeton, New Jersey, during the late 1980s,[9] where he was matched against the 7-foot-4-inch (2.24 m) Shawn Bradley." This makes for a very long sentence. Could be tightened up, e.g. "... during the late 1980s [what years?] attended the annual Nike Academic Betterment and Career Development (ABCD) camp in Princeton, New Jersey. While there, he was matched against the 7-foot-4-inch (2.24 m) Shawn Bradley."
- I split the sentence in two but retained the existing explanation for the dates as well as Howard's height, which is important because he was considerably shorter than Bradley. Finetooth (talk) 04:38, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Could this be made explicit? It is not immediately obvious that this is why the info is there. --Sarastro1 (talk) 07:40, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I added "despite having his shots blocked several times by the much taller Bradley" to the subsequent sentence (which also contains the first of the problematic uses of "big men". I hope this makes more clear that Howard excelled even against players with a height advantage. Finetooth (talk) 17:46, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks, that clears it up nicely and "big men" sits a little better now it is defined. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"There he established himself as one of the best junior big men in the country despite having his shots blocked several times by Bradley." This reads like having shots blocked by Bradley meant he could not be one of the best players in the country . And "best junior big men" sounds jargony and clumsy.
- Not sure what would be better. He was a junior in high school, and he was big. Size is very important in basketball. Finetooth (talk) 04:43, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- My main problem with this is the part about "despite having his shots blocked..." I'm not sure "big man" belongs in an encyclopedia, and if it is a common term, maybe it could be linked in some way. Personally I think "tall players" or even "big players" sounds less informal. However, I'm not too bothered if it is that common. --Sarastro1 (talk) 07:40, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Listen to an NBA or college basketball broadcast. "Big man" is a common term. See below.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:50, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks, Sarastro1. I changed the sentence to read: "At this camp, Howard established himself as one of the best junior-year big men (tall basketball players) in the country despite having his shots blocked several times by the much taller Bradley." I'm hoping that this makes "junior" more clear, makes the importance of the height difference more explicit, and (knock on wood) makes "big man" more meaningful. It is an odd specialized term that might literally be taken to mean a fat guy or hulking brute uninvolved in sports. :-) Finetooth (talk) 17:32, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm happy enough with this now. If I was been nit-picky, I might still say that he could not be one of the best if his shots were blocked (i.e. as if that by itself would stop him). And as I said, "big man" sits a bit better now. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- "Involved in controversy for receiving a second pair of sneakers, he was sent home early on the last day of the six-day camp." What??? This needs expanding and explaining.
- I did not want to give WP:UNDUE weight to an insignificant hiccup in his career. It is pretty clear that he got sent home for an infraction of getting a second pair of shoes at the camp. It is not much more major of a story than that. What are you looking for here.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:54, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Could we resolve this one by deleting all mention of the sneakers on grounds that it's even less than a hiccup, and the article is already quite long? Finetooth (talk) 17:50, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Fine by me. Although it sounded quite interesting! :) And Tony, with the greatest respect, I'm not sure the words "controversy for receiving a second pair of sneakers" is "pretty clear". I doubt most people realise it is illegal to own two pairs of shoes of any type. :) But seriously, if it is staying in it should be made clear why it is controversial. All it needs is "a second pair of shoes was not permitted" (which sounds odd to me, but I'm not a basketballer. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll leave this one for Tony to decide. I'm the expert on comma splices; he's the expert on basketball. I don't actually know who gave Howard the sneakers or why it would upset anyone." Finetooth (talk) 21:12, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I think sneakergate has more detail than necessary, but the whole story is in the article now.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:18, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"He also participated in the Bill Cronauer (B/C) camp in Rensselaer, Indiana, which was attended by more than 100 college coaches and where he became ranked as one of the top 10 underclassmen in the country." Long sentence. What is an underclassman? Ranked by who? What is the significance of this?"Howard attended other camps that summer and had a goal of surpassing Deon Thomas as the best big man in the state." What camps? Who is Deon Thomas (I know it's linked, but a few words would suffice to say why this is important)? Big man again.
- Big man is common basketball lingo. It is common for tall players to play on the front line together and neither officially being the center. Howard eventually moved from center to power forward, both of which are big man positions. Are you averse to the article retaining this common term. It is actually unnatural to me to replace big man with something like front line player.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:08, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- See above. If big man is a common term, I'll let it go but would prefer it not to be there as it sounds informal. --Sarastro1 (talk) 07:40, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Will my addition of "big men (tall basketball players)" on the first use suffice? Finetooth (talk) 17:53, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Covers it nicely, I struck the comment. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"In 1994, Howard was drafted a full round ahead of Thomas." Important because...? Again, we need to know who Thomas was.
- On the contrary, I am a sports fan and quite familiar with many sports articles. However, I have only a passing knowledge of basketball and found it hard to follow the beginning of this article (although the rest looks clearer at a quick glance). Most FAs (and GAs for that matter) that I have seen do not use too much jargon so that the general reader can follow them. As a fan, what is not confusing to you may not be understood by others. It only needs the addition of a few words and phrases here and there. --Sarastro1 (talk) 07:40, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The lead does not really establish how or why he was good, but mentions lots about his decline. More on the peak would be good. There is a lot of linking which is distracting, and the article seems to use a lot of jargon which makes it hard to follow for a non-expert who is not prepared to follow every link. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:54, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- In terms of how good he was, I am wavering about adding that he averaged 7.9 rebounds a season for his first five years or about 7.5 for his first 10 seasons. I just don't see it as a WP:LEAD-worthy fact. I grew up reading the sports page and the jargon seems natural to me. Aside from the term "big man", I am not sure what you mean. I am always willing to listen to suggestions on delinking because I am a heavy linker. I don't know that expanding this article by teaching basketball terms to the reader would be the proper thing to do, but if you have specific problems, I can attempt to address them.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:09, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments –
- High school: "the Michigan recruiting class was considered to be the top in the nation." My first thought when reading this was that something should come after "top". However, if you go with "best in the nation" instead, I don't think any additional words would be an improvement.
- College career: Should final four be capitalized (NCAA version)? I think it should, given that the U.S. sports media consistently does so.
- Capitalize major league baseball. I'm sure of this one.
- "When the 31–4 Wolverines were matched up against 33–4 the 1992–93 Tar Heels in the championship game". Flip 33–4 and "the".
- De-capitalize National in "United States National basketball team".
- Washington era: Comma needed in the middle of "10-year $30 million".
- "Cheaney, a swingman from Indiana University, veteran point guards Chapman, MacLeon, Cheaney, Mitchell Butler and Scott Skiles were expected to provide solid perimeter play." Cheaney is repeated, and an "and" should be placed before the point guard list.
- Since they are not all point guards and I incorrectly summarized the secondary source, I chopped the sentence down.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:36, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- "This was not enough for the Bullets to make the playoffs despite its ninth consecutive losing season." Don't think "its" should be used following a plural team nickname. There are several things you can do, from making it "their" to changing the team name to Washington.
- Typo in "In addition to signing free agents Murry and Williams". The first player should be Murray.
- Don't think the Wizards need to be linked before almost all seasons, unless the links went to the team's individual seasons. That doesn't seem to be the case, though.
- They are nominally linked via a template that will go to the season articles that are expected. This is superior to redlinking the season articles, IMO.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:42, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- 2001–04: What game was Howard ejected from? Also, did the league suspend him from any future games? Giants2008 (27 and counting) 02:43, 19 September 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.