Talk:Kobe Bryant/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Kobe Bryant accomplishments and records

I see someone split off Kobe Bryant accomplishments and records. This had been done once before and had been reverted. What was the logic of splitting this off again into an article that is again sort of unstructured.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:43, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I did the split since I felt the section was too big and should be in another article. If you don't agree, just revert it or talk about this more right here. -- K. Annoyomous24 00:09, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Chopping it is not so good because it looks like a chopped article. Can you turn the split article into something good. Maybe work towards a WP:FL.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:21, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I would do it as soon as I can but currently, I am busy with the other lists I'm trying get to WP:FL. The estimate time that I'll make Kobe Bryant accomplishments and records a featured list is around October. -- K. Annoyomous24 03:18, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Nominated for deletion

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kobe Bryant accomplishments and records. Zodiiak (talk) 17:51, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Sexual harassment allegations

Am I the only one that believes that the allegations of sexual sexual are being giving undue weight throughout his article and especially in the opening paragrapghs, considering Bryant was not actually convicted of anything? We need to reach a consensus on this matter, and possibly trim it down. Lakerking04 (talk) 21:13, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree that it should be moved somewhere outside of the lead and intro. This is consistent with other articles about people in with similar controversies. Does anyone else have any input on this? If not, I will move it soon. --DerRichter (talk) 20:02, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Any objections to me removing it? --Ted87 (talk) 18:35, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that Zodiiak character will be against this. Honestly, I don't see why it should be in the lead of the article. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 21:56, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Check out the lead for Mike Tyson who was found guilty of sexual assualt. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 23:15, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Comparing this article to Mike Tyson's is kind of ehh...If you could find an article that has/has had controversy(ies) in the lead of the article, then I'll support the removal, since right now, I would like to have that section on the lead per WP:LEAD. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]_{call me Keith} 01:39, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, everything in the article must be summarized in the lead, so your edit to remove the paragraph on the sexual harassment case is incorrect. Btw, you revert three times, so beware of WP:3RR.—Chris! _ct 01:45, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Just because the lead of Mike Tyson incorrectly misses mentioning the sexual assault, doesn't mean this one should do the same.—Chris! _ct 01:49, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

See R. Kelly, notice the lead has nothing on his child pornography charges which were highly controversial?.. This Kobe Bryant article already has a sexual assault section within the article, and a totally seperate article on the whole case: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kobe_Bryant_sexual_assault_case . Having it also on the lead as well is pushing it a bit for a case that was dropped by the accuser. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 02:04, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

You are missing the point. It doesn't matter what other articles looks like. We have to comply with Wikipedia policy.—Chris! _ct 02:09, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, Yes it has to comply with wikipedia policy, but it also has to be consistent with other articles. And you have yet to give me another case similar to Bryants thats also pushed up into the lead of the article. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 02:20, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

No, it doesn't have to be consistent with other articles. There is no policy on that. Just because other articles is doing it incorrectly, doesn't mean we should do it incorrectly here.—Chris! _ct 02:31, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

It's more like you overdoing it than anything else. It doesn't NEED to be in the lead. Give me a valid reason as to why you want it there. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 02:47, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

By that logic, if I find that most Wikipedia articles lack references, then I should remove all references from Wikipedia for consistency. As for the valid reason, here's an excerpt from the lead of WP:LEAD: "The lead should ... summarize the most important points—including any notable controversies that may exist." Thus, if Bryant's sexual assault allegation is notable, then it should be included as per WP:LEAD. —LOL ^T/_C 02:54, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

This article talks quite a bit about the assault -- it even has a forked article. A brief mention in the lead is warranted. Chensiyuan (talk) 03:09, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

If there is no more objection, I am restoring it to the lead.—Chris! _ct 03:21, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Objection! It also talks a ton about the Kobe-Shaq feud in the article and there's a "forked article" on it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaq-Kobe_feud Yet I don't see anything about it in the lead.. Hmm.. I see the inconsistencies and the agendas are very clear. So 3 users for and 3 against, no consensus here just yet. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 03:29, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, the Shaq-Kobe feud is not as notable as the sexual harassment allegations, so it shouldn't be in the lead. And you are the only one who oppose, so it doesn't matter.—Chris! _ct 03:41, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Again, just because something similar is absent it doesn't mean his sexual assault case shouldn't be mentioned. WP:LEAD clearly supports its inclusion, and we can add a mention of the feud later if it really is notable. I really don't see this as an issue that requires consensus because we're educating you about policies instead of discussing the article as an exception to them. Even if this were to default as "no consensus", the mention would be kept because it was in the article prior to this discussion. And please do elaborate on how "the agendas are very clear". —LOL ^T/_C 03:46, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Chris, civility here...and JoeJohnson2, we all make mistakes. Hope you read WP:LEAD or any other WP:MOS before arguing about anything within the article. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]_{call me Keith} 03:48, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

How am I being uncivil?—Chris! _ct 03:51, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

And you are the only one who oppose, so it doesn't matter. Yeahh...WP:Bite. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]_{call me Keith} 04:00, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

"we're educating you about policies" I already know the policies sweety. What you need to do is tone down on the POV pushing. The allegation to me isn't important or notable enough to be mentioned in the lead, and of course we do need to come to consensus on this issue because the importance of the case all comes down to opinion and I disagree with you. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 04:04, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Because you cited the Mike Tyson and R. Kelly articles in favour of your argument, it is clear to me that you are not familiar with the policies, "sweety". I'm really not pushing any POV; I'm simply enforcing a guideline—WP:LEAD—as I regularly do with WP:MOS. You've now switched from an WP:OTHERSTUFF-like argument to claiming that the sexual assault allegations were "not notable enough to be mentioned in the lead", so I'll let the others comment on how notable this case was. —LOL ^T/_C 04:18, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Just like to comment on 2 things

1. According to Wikipedia:LEAD "Well-publicized recent events affecting an article subject, whether controversial or not, should be kept in historical perspective. What is most recent is not necessarily what is most notable". The main reason I object putting the info in the lead is because it was added at a time when it was well publicized and talked about. As time went on, it's significances has died down. Bryant's image is rebuilt and the media never talks about the allegations anymore.
2. The point that should be brought up is that Bryant was acquitted of the chargers. Which means not only was he not found of any wrong doing, it basically says there wasn't enough to even continue to accuse him.

Just my 2 cents --Ted87 (talk) 04:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

How about just shortening the section on the sexual harassment allegations in the lead? -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]_{call me Keith} 04:22, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

How about we just leave it out of the lead entirely? JoeJohnson2 (talk) 04:37, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

If you can convince us that the allegation is not a notable controversy, then sure. It seems that I don't have to explain WP:LEAD anymore. Ted is off to a good start. —LOL ^T/_C 04:54, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

And I don't think anybody will argue against that the allegation is not notable. So consensus = restore the paragraph to lead. Case close.—Chris! _ct 05:16, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

It isn't notable enough to be in the lead. No consensus here yet. I suggest you wait a few days and get other users opinion on this before you jump to anything. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 05:30, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

You are the only one who oppose. We already had consensus above unless you can argue against that the allegation is not notable. I suggest you to drop this and move on.—Chris! _ct 05:39, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Why are you in a rush? There is no consensus yet. You still haven't given me a solid reason as to why YOU and your "friend" want it there. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 05:44, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) Who is this "friend"? Anyways, most of the WP:NBA members are currently sleeping so, lets just hope that there will be more users commenting on this thread before reverting or keeping it on the lead. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]_{call me Keith} 06:01, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I honestly do not see how it can be argued that this does not belong in the lead. The Kobe Bryant sexual assault case was one of the most notable off-court, off-field, or off-ice events to ever occur in professional sport. I would really like to see JJ argue some substace behind why this is not notable enough to be in the lead, when it is perhaps one of the single most notable events of Kobe's life. I 100% support inclusion in the lead. – Nurmsook! ^talk... 06:20, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Do you even follow basketball? I doubt it. This is a small blip in Kobe's career. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 15:53, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

JJ2, it doesn't matter if he even follow basketball, the sexual harassment allegations were all over the sports industry for around a month during that time. I'm sure most Bryant fans (like me) will obvious remember that allegation. Also, stop removing the content when this issue hasn't been resolved yet. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]_{call me Keith} 20:21, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

The sexual assault allegations, while they were notable at the time, are rarely even mentioned today. The fact remains that this was a small incident in his life in which he was not legally convicted of anything. And seeing as this is a biography, we have to look at events from a greater perspective and not get caught up in the passions of the times.Lakerking04 (talk) 04:09, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Notability or whether or not Kobe was convicted aren't the issue here. According to WP:LEAD, all aspect of the subject must be covered by the lead. Please do not unilaterally remove without consensus.—Chris! _ct 04:26, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think WP:LEAD states that the content in the lead doesn't need to be notable, but I do know WP:N#TEMP states that "[n]otability is not temporary". Lakerking04 said above that "they were notable at the time", so according to that quote and Wikipedia guidelines, they are still notable today. —LOL ^T/_C 06:01, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Right, thanks for the clarification. Also this part of WP:LEAD is the most relevant in my opinion: "The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview of the article. It should establish context, explain why the subject is interesting or notable, and summarize the most important points—including any notable controversies. (emphasis mine)"—Chris! _ct 21:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

I have to admit I too don't see the value of keeping the sexual assualt nonsense in the opening paragraph. Chris, you seem to be the only one who is insisting. Can we have a vote on this? Does anyone else agree with Chris? Kk5000 (talk) 00:21, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Its inclusion is based on its notability, not how much "value" we see in keeping it or the outcome of a poll. —LOL ^T/_C 02:48, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

First of all, no one is saying it should not be included. Just that it does not belong in the lead. Just like Bill Ayers and Reverend Wright wouldn't belong in the lead for Barack Obama's entry. The only reason a poll was suggested was because 2-3 misguided people seem to be disputing/reverting the overwhelming consensus that this does not belong in the lead. While the consensus is not always true, it certainly is in this case. Some woman accusing him of rape and then backing off by refusing to testify can't possibly belong in the lead. Kk5000 (talk) 22:11, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Given the context of your earlier comment, I was talking about its inclusion in the lead. This shouldn't get into politics or a WP:OTHERSTUFF-esque argument, and I don't see an "overwhelming consensus" in favour of its removal. Notability is not determined by what occurred, but rather by the coverage, sources, etc.; see WP:GNG. —LOL ^T/_C 03:30, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I believe what was argued above by Lakerking is WP:RECENT. Time will tell whether or not it is a notable event in his stacked life. As to whether or not it should be included in the body, I believe it should. As for the lead, I'm not so sure. As it stands, this does not seem to be as sufficient in weight as his basketball career and other mentions. At the very least, the sentence is much too long to justify that much weight in the grand scheme summary of his life. Jonhan (talk) 02:02, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Infobox picture

Currently, I don't really like the picture of Kobe Bryant without his jersey on since it doesn't show what he is, a basketball player. So I want a vote to see which one should be the Infobox picture. Sorry if this isn't allowed or if you think this is a bad idea.

Here are the pictures I selected that could be the infobox picture:

• 
  Image:Kobe Bryant Profile.jpg
• 
  Image:Kobe Bryant Free Throw.jpg
• 
  Image:Kobe 2007.jpg
• 
  File:Kobe Bryant Beijing Olympics 20080810 d-1024-627v.jpg

• Currently, I choose Image:20080810 d-1024-627v.jpg.' as Howcheng said that you can't see Bryant's face in the free throw shot. I choose the current one because of the resolution and as per above. -- K. Annoyomous24 02:57, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
• Prefer Kobe Bryant Profile (I originally uploaded this, but thought it was a copyvio, when it really wasn't) or Kobe 2007 -- you can't see his face in the free throw shot. howcheng {chat} 02:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
• Prefer Kobe Bryant Profile, too, because of its quality. It doesn't matter whether he wears his jersey or not since he is a widely recognized basketball player. (Don't pretend to be a basketball fan if you don't know who is Kobe :) Just kidding!)—Chris! _ct 05:27, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

You know all Wikipedia readers aren't basketball fans. Some people may not even know who Kobe Bryant is (even though I think people should know him better). I am a huge Kobe Bryant fan as I have a number 24 on my username. So I'm going to stick with my choice until more people give their opinions on ths situation. -- K. Annoyomous24 03:57, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

• I think that we should assume that anyone that checks Kobe's page are not familiar with him. Wikipedia being an online resource should show every detail important and verifiable regardless of the knowledge of the person checking the page. So I choose kobe 2007. Just my two cents.Paulinprogress (talk) 19:14, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Height

http://www.celebheights.com/s/LeBron-James-3984.html http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg34/NBA7902/NBA%20Height%20Comparison/73357840.jpg

A bit less than 6-6, after seeing him beside the 6-4 Wade? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.177.26.40 (talk) 17:57, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

As of now, the NBA website confirms that he is 6'6", so until the NBA confirms that he is indeed 6'4", that is when we wil change it. -- K. Annoyomous24_[c] 00:09, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

How do you know that Wade isn't taller instead of Kobe being shorter? ;) --Ted87 (talk) 04:07, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

AC Milan - Barcelona

No reference I can find on the internet states that he is a Barcelona fan, rather a fan of Ronaldinho who previously played at Barcelona. Funnilly enough, Ronaldinho now plays at AC Milan, a club that Kobe has said he supports. Saying that kobe supports Barcelona may be factually incorrect. ManfromDelmonte (talk) 17:03, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Also former Barca coach Frank Rikjard was an AC Milan player when Kobe lived in Italy. Surely this is the more obvious connection to being a fan of that manager? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.233.211.171 (talk) 01:24, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Nationality

He is actually African American not American. Danabrenklin (talk) 23:37, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Nationality refers to the Nation in which he was born, therefore he is American. If we were talking about Ethnicity or Race then the appropriate term would be African American. -- $user log ^(Talk) @ 01:08, 17 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by $user log (talk • contribs)

Vanessa Bryant - Merge/Redirect

Would anyone have a huge problem if the Vanessa Bryant article was redirected to Kobe's? There's a merge tag on the article (which lead me here) and since her article is already tagged for questionable notability, I think a redirect or merge is probably the best route. Thoughts? Pinkadelica ^{Say it...} 04:23, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

I think it would be fine. There's nothing of note on her page that would warrant her own article. Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:31, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

I just feel like in the few intro paragraphs...there is eerything in order from him being son of joe byrant to winning 3 consecutive championships, to being all time nba scorer or 05/06 and 06/07 and then winning mvp in 07/08 and then the gold medal redeem team, then the next paragraph says "in 2003 braynt was accussed of sexual assault" and then it talks about that part of his life. First of all, it is out of place and out of order, second of all that should be a whole section in itself, and should not be on the front fist paragraphs of an NBA legend and a man who made a mistake and has showed he made a mistake, put that at the bottom, so that new comers, new fans of admires of Kobe Bryant don't have to think that is who is is, and repersent him for what he is today, a loving husband, father and one of the greatest basketball players to ever play the game. thanks

Josiah peffer —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jopeff (talk • contribs) 20:48, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

$21,000,000

Is that a year? or over a few years? Y2J RKO (talk) 00:00, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

I assume you're asking about his salary. If so, then that is his salary for the 2008-09 season only. --Ted87 (talk) 07:17, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Past Larry Bird?

Didn't Kobe past Larry Bird's 21,000 points during the 2009 season? —Preceding unsigned comment added by GiGaMan78 (talk • contribs) 12:57, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Kobe didn't pass 20,000 points as the youngest player, he was one day short of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.171.159.242 (talk • contribs) 12:57, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

kobe bryant past larry bird in the 07/08 season But in the 08/09 season he made 25.000.000--—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.79.163.159 (talk • contribs)

Failed GA

I quick-failed this article as it currently smacks of recentism. The MVP year section (1 season) is currently at least twice as long as the early career and championship years sections (7 seasons). Balance like this needs to be fixed before i would even consider this a pass. Plus, any citation needed statements need to be sourced or rm'd. Wizardman 04:34, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Image

flickr. Chensiyuan (talk) 15:29, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Content

This article is becomming extremely lengthy. There seems to be a bit of trivial or needless information that can be removed. Much of the information seems unencyclopedic -- do we really need to know what video game covers he's been on? Do we really need to know about his commercials? Endorsements can be summarized within a personal life section, I don't think we need an entire subsection for it. Tons of needless recentism on this article that can be removed as well. I encourage users to try to look at the article from a historical perspective to understand what material is really relevant in order to make it a bit more concise. Zodiiak (talk) 05:57, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

• Note: this is the same user who wanted the removal of Kobe Bryant's accomplishments page. [1] It seems to me that you have an agenda. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 11:13, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Agenda? I've been editing on Wikiedpia long before you were here my friend. I have no agenda, I've been improving articles on here long before you edited. If you looked carefully at my edits, you'll see at one point I was actually cleaning up and improving this article. The only agenda seems that you have a strong bias/favortism towards this specific article. Try to remain Neutral in your views before attempting to wash out an opinion with ridiculous suspicions. This is a community, contribute to it rather than forge accusations. Zodiiak (talk) 02:11, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Another thing is that Kobe Bryant got a 1450 on his SAT not a 1080; Shaq said so in his book Shaq Talks Back. Italic text (Dreamblackbelt (talk) 19:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC))

Yes, this article is long, but what would you remove? There doesn't seem to be a section that contains much that is irrelevant. The article doesn't drag on and all info is sourced, so I see no reason to shorten it. And since this article involves recent events it is hard to tell what is proportionally notable until he retires/is inactive. --Ted87 (talk) 21:34, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Image controversy

File:KobeSpurs.jpg

On my talk page me and JoeJohnson2 (talk · contribs) (henceforth JJ2) have been arguing until we are blue in the face about the images to the right. At the top is an image that has been in the article for about a year. It was taken during the 2007-08 season. It shows Bryant being defended by Baron Davis. Below that is an image of Bryant attempting to get around Bruce Bowen. The former image was removed at first for offensive caption and then later for incorrect date credit (it was originally credited as a Playoff time photo). Even though the top image looks like it is near half court, I like it because it has that swag that says to me It's Goin' Down because Bryant has his tongue wagging and looks like he wants a clear out to take break some ankles. I also like it because it is an action shot of Bryant being guarded by a former NBA All-Star and All-NBA Team player. After getting the caption fixed, I added it back and JJ2 first removed it for the date confusion. Now, we are clear on the date and he put forth the Bowen picture below. He says the Bowen picture is more relevant because Bowen is an All-Defensive team player who has been assigned to be the Bryant stopper during five NBA playoff series. I feel there is room for both pics and see no reason not to keep the picture of Davis as well. I also feel we should have an action shot of Bryant against an All-Star. JJ2 says Michael Redd is an All-Star. In fact, Redd and Davis were All-NBA during the same season. There is an image that looks like Bryant is attempting to defend Redd on an impending inbounds pass play. This is not really an action shot in my mind. Does anyone else have any thoughts?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:41, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Both images should be used, I think.—Chris! _ct 18:11, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

If we were to put the images on the article, where would it be inserted? I think the Bowen one could be on the player profile. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]_{call me Keith} 18:19, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Since the Bowen article is from the same date (5.21.08) as the other yellow uniform picture in that seasons section maybe it should go to the player profile. I would like to move the pictures from playoffs down to the third paragraph on the left in that season section and readd Baron Davis in the top right of that season.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:35, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

The Baron Davis image will not be used in any Kobe Bryant related articles. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 19:02, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't think you understand WP very well. No one person says what will be in the articles (unless they call you Jimbo!!!!)--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:32, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

• Reasons as to why it shouldn't be included in the Kobe Bryant article:

1) The Kobe Bryant main and List of career achievements articles already have a higher number of Bryant in an away jersey.

2) Bruce Bowen has played Bryant in 5 playoff series (most of them WCF I think), and was the primary defender against Bryant for numerous years, they've played each other often and have a bit of history against each other.

3) Baron Davis is not even remotely as relevant as Caron Butler (recent All-Star, former teammate with Bryant in the 2004-05 NBA Season with the Lakers and was apart of the Shaq trade) and Michael Redd (former All-Star, former teammate with Bryant on the Team USA Reedem team for 2 summers) all of them have made it to the All-NBA team, but Caron Butler and Redd clearly have been more relevant to Kobe's career.

4) The Baron Davis image serves no purpose of the article, it really looks out of place and this is suppose to be a bio, not a image gallery.

Also I would like to point out that his image has had some shady comments on the image description page by the uploader link, this just solidifies why I'm against this image even more. So this image will not be used and should not be used in any Kobe Bryant related articles. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 19:51, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

All these so called reasons are basically your opinions. You don't own Wikipedia, so it doesn't matter what you think.—Chris! _ct 20:09, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

So you don't have a valid reason as to why you want it up there so you resort to these games.. Sorry but these images will not be included in the Kobe Bryant article. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 20:12, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Again you don't own Wikipedia, so you don't have the final say on whether or not these images will be included in the article.—Chris! _ct 20:23, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

You don't either, maybe I should contact an admin. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 20:26, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Go ahead. Admins still have to abide by consensus if there is one.—Chris! _ct 20:56, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Since TonyTheTiger wants me to comment on this, like I said, I think the Bowen one could be on the player profile. As for the Davis one, it has bad resolution, and I see nothing that we can do with the photo. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]_{call me Keith} 04:33, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually I think both can be in player profile. And I don't get what you mean by the Davis image has a bad resolution. It is 978 × 1,097 pixels.—Chris! _ct 20:46, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Quality* -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]_{call me Keith} 01:01, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

When the image is reduced to a thumbnail, the source's low quality won't be noticeable. —LOL ^T/_C 01:07, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Agree with LOL—Chris! _ct 01:17, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm just going to add Image:KobeSpurs.jpg into the player profile section until JJ2 comes back from whatever. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]_{call me Keith} 01:41, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Another image

I think that File:BryantBeijing.jpg is a nice image overall, but it kind of bothers me that there are two images in a section that can barely fit two images. What I'm saying is that it seems redundant having the picture there, but I can't find any other place in the article where we can insert it. So, any options? -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]_{call me Keith} 21:44, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Maybe removing File:BryantBeijing.jpg is a good idea. It is actually very hard to see Kobe in that image.—Chris! _ct 22:01, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I'll just remove it until someone for some reason will oppose or revert it. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]_{call me Keith} 02:31, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

I would crop the image and readd it. It is actually a very good shot to help people understand his level of fame.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:43, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

When you readd it use the same multiple image template as in teh section above except use vertical for the instead of horizontal.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:49, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't get what you mean. Could you give me an example of what you what to do, please. Thanks. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]_{call me Keith} 04:21, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Are you saying you don't know how to crop it or don't understand using the {{multiple image}} template?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:22, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

No. I don't get what you mean because you because how are we supposed to make that >> image vertical. Also, I always check my watchlist, so there's practically no need to note me on my talk page. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]_{call me Keith} 03:27, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

No the image would be landscape. See the college section of Manny Harris to see what I mean be using the template vertically. Note one image can be portrait and another landscape.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:05, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I dropped a note on your talk page for an opinion in the section above. I do not understand your opinion and it is 2–1 otherwise.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:06, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Nike Contract

Kobe Bryant recently accepted an offer from NIKe for the new release of the NIKe ZOOM. He was offered $120 million for a 6 year contract. Kobe will be paid more if him and the Lakers win championships because if he wins, the sneakers are worth a lot more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kobe12345 (talk • contribs) 03:01, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Source? Enigma^msg 21:45, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Kobe Doin' Work

I've created the page, Kobe Doin' Work. I was going to add to KB's page, but I don't know where to mention it/include it. CollisionCourse (talk) 08:15, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Rob Pelinka FAC

Kobe's agent has been at FAC for a while with little commentary. See Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Rob Pelinka/archive1.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:53, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

NBA Courtside series temlate

Can we discuss the merits of having {{NBA Courtside series}} on the page. It does not seem like a template worth having to me.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:15, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Doesn't seem particularly useful. howcheng {chat} 03:33, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Byrant didn't agree to contract "the following day" after Shaq was traded.

The "Post Championship Years" section, as it is now, reads

"Phil Jackson's contract as coach was not renewed, and Rudy Tomjanovich took over.[60] Shaquille O'Neal was traded to the Miami Heat for Lamar Odom, Caron Butler, and Brian Grant.[61] The following day, Bryant declined an offer to sign with the Los Angeles Clippers and re-signed with the Lakers on a seven-year contract.[62]"

According to references 61 and 62, there was a couple of weeks where the Lakers had traded Shaq, and Byrant had yet to sign a contract extension.

Article 61: "It's Official: Shaq traded to Heat for three players, draft pick". USAToday. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/nba/2004-07-14-shaq-trade_x.htm. Retrieved on 2008-06-23.

Article 62:"Kobe remains with Lakers". Associated Press. http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1840336. Retrieved on 2008-07-16.

This should be changed to "Weeks later," or something like that, or omitted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.148.53.195 (talk) 19:02, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

The second ref does say: The decision came a day after the Lakers traded fellow superstar Shaquille O'Neal to the Miami Heat. Now, it will be Bryant -- along with incoming coach Rudy Tomjanovich and Heat imports Lamar Odom, Caron Butler and Brian Grant -- who will lead them into the future. It looks like the decision was made the day after, although the actual contract signing was a short time later. Stil perhaps the wording could be clarified.--Cube lurker (talk) 19:11, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Neutrality

This article, in the first 2 paragraphs, is extremely bias against Kobe. From claiming hes not a "REAL" NBA star to saying the Celtics won the championship in 2008 because they have a collection of 4 stars instead of "one egotist" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.34.204.142 (talk) 02:05, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

The words "real" and "egotist" don't even appear in the article. —LOL ^T/_C 02:51, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

It was just vandalism that has been reverted. --Ted87 (talk) 04:09, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Stats section

I reverted the previous edit. Per WP:NOT#STATS, Kobe's statistics should absolutely be removed from this page. I removed a similar grid from the Ted Williams article years ago, and no one complained; all agreed. Why is Kobe different? Wikipedia is NOT a repository for every statistic ever. Honestly, how often are the stats going to be updated? Daily? Weekly? Yearly?

There are several hundred websites WHOSE JOB IT IS to keep track of stats, notably: NBA.com. This article should point to the existing stat sites; there is simply no justification for including the grid of stats on this article. Timneu22 (talk) 20:38, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

So are you suggesting that all sports players articles have their career statistics removed? Laugh out loud, I don't think that's going to happen... -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 21:02, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Right, we DO NOT keep track of stats. The stat is only here for reader's info and are updated after the season is done. The WP:NOT#STATS argument is null as the removal of stats is clearly detrimental to reader's knowledge. I have reverted the previous edit once again as you have no consensus to do so. Just because nobody complained at the Ted Williams article, doesn't mean you have consensus.—Chris! _ct 21:29, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

NOTSTATS doesn't prohibit all statistics; just excessive lists of statistics with insufficient context. Otherwise, you might as well delete the area and population figures from our country articles.

I will agree that maintaining the stats has been problematic. While they are certainly maintainable, most players' statistics are irregularly updated, causing out-of-date info to linger in articles for weeks, or months. That's a real problem we will have to address, but from a policy standpoint, there's nothing wrong with the statistics. Zagalejo^^^ 23:33, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Because of the updating issue, that's why I am in favor of adding an as of sentence somewhere next to the table. That way, readers know if what they are reading is up to date.—Chris! _ct 23:39, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

That would help a little, but most editors aren't going to remember to do that, and nobody is watching most of these articles as it is... Zagalejo^^^ 00:11, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree, but that's what we have to live with. Removing this info is worse than having out-of-date info IMO.—Chris! _ct 01:51, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

And it all comes down to this... a link to nba.com will always provide the reader with accurate stats. I have NO IDEA why this isn't the only approach. It is the only one that is correct. Timneu22 (talk) 01:29, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

The argument for the removal of statistics is simply not persuasive, iumpractical, and does not accord with the realities of the situation. What defines a sportsperson's biography? Essentially, his statistics and championships. While we're at that, why not just make WP a simple list of three to four external links, each talking about these aspects of the sportsperson in question. The utility of statistics is undeniable. That they are not updated on a consistent basis is a separate argument, and it has already been said that "correct as of" would go some way in dealing with veracity. Chensiyuan (talk) 01:34, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Well just a note, the ice hockey project has a standard of not updating current season stats and has an "as of last season" type comment on stat tables. We just regularely revert stat additions mid season. And on articles that seem to have people constantly trying to add the stats we add an HTML comment in saying not to update till the end of season. Works quite well and we rarely have issues with it. Its been how we do things since atleast early 2006 and hasn't encountered any issues. Probably would work here too. -Djsasso (talk) 04:37, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Aside from having an automatically updating grid from a reliable sports source, I think this is probably the best idea. There should be consistency across all sports. Timneu22 (talk) 13:54, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I've thought about something like this. That might work. There's no way we could protect the stats section, is there? Zagalejo^^^ 17:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I strongly doubt that a selected portion of an article can be protected, but comments should work. —LOL ^T/_C 04:23, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Do you think the Wikipedia people can change the wiki software, so that portion of the article can be protected? That to me seems to be a great idea.—Chris! _ct 20:43, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I've no idea, but I wouldn't count on them. You don't like the NHL way of dealing with this? —LOL ^T/_C 20:55, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I just thought that the idea of protecting parts of the article was interesting. I have no problem with the NHL way.—Chris! _ct 22:45, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Player Profile Neutrality

I added a neutrality disputed template to the player profile section because the entire section is just to show how great some people think he is. Henry talk 19:30, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

And for what it's worth, the last sentence of that section is completely out of place: After having been represented by Arn Tellem, Bryant is now represented by Rob Pelinka.[138]. Timneu22 (talk) 20:21, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Are are your specific concerns? --Ted87 (talk) 00:00, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Well despite my attempt at making the section more neutral, the tag was still put back. If no one can give any reasons or suggestions then the the neutrality tag should be removed. --Ted87 (talk) 17:38, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Add in a reference about Kobe's jersey number choice?

Sorry, I'm not great with how to go about this, but I noticed something missing from the article.

There are a few sources and it was aired on TNT before that Kobe chose the number "8" not because it was 143 added together as the article states, but rather as a tribute to one of his favorite players growing up in Italy, Knicks coach Mike D'antoni.

D'antoni was actually a teammate of Kobe's father, Jellybean Bryant in Italy. It actually references this slightly in the Mike D'Antoni wiki article:

69.239.106.228 (talk) 07:24, 25 July 2009 (UTC)Aleksi

Images

It seems to me that at least one non-basketball image would be useful, if we have one. Why not include this one? Also, why is the Olympic team photo in the article if Bryant is not visible (unless I don't recognize him).--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:35, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

• Hi.. Kobe is right in front of Dwight Howard in the olympic team photo. Looks fairly recognizable to me and it fits in well with the article.

And isn't this: a "non-basketball" image? I'm pretty certain it is. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 22:43, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

• • My earlobe recognition is not that good. Can we get caption saying who is who? I still think the one in the suit is better and main image quality. It should at least be in the article, IMO. Why was it removed?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:14, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

• • • "Can we get caption saying who is who?" Sure, if it helps.. but it wouldn't look as good imho. "Why was it removed?" because it just didn't look as good as the current Keith Allison photo. Is there a way to insert the image within the article without changing the infobox one? JoeJohnson2 (talk) 20:51, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

religon

Kobe bryant's religon is catholic. kobe attends mass every sunday and on the road kobe attends the local catholic church. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.240.56.162 (talk) 20:53, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

External Images

External image
Sports Illustrated cover titled "It's Over"

Wasn't too sure if it warranted an upload under fair use, so would this be the right way to go? Would anyone be against me inserting this within the article? It would fit in well in the "Coming up short (2002–04)" section. -- ĴoeĴohnson|2 19:04, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

• How about this image? http://kobe.aceshoops.com/wp-content/gallery/kobe/DSC_0070.JPGkbjersey.jpg or even one of the 81pt game http://www.nba.com/media/lakers/kobe_index_060123.jpg ... -- ĴoeĴohnson|2 19:23, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't think the SI cover or the 81 points picture would be covered under fair use. The high school jersey probably would, though. --Ted87 (talk) 05:21, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

No the HS jersey photo would not qualify. All we need is someone at Lower Merion HS to take a photo, so it's very easily replaceable. howcheng {chat} 04:38, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

2k10

kobe has been named the new man in the cover of the new nba 2k game series —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.219.65.66 (talk) 13:40, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

• It's already in the article. See: Endorsements -- ĴoeĴohnson|2 13:45, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

High School

While in high school, then 76ers coach John Lucas invited Bryant to workout - it should be "work out". 208.101.210.225 (talk) 07:39, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Done, thank you. —LOL ^T/_C 23:13, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

second para, 4th line

the second para, 4th line has a line "Since his second year in the league, Bryant has "started" in every..." it should have been Since his second year in the league, Bryant has "starred"( not started lol... ) in every NBA All-Star Game that has been hosted, including winning the All-Star MVP award in 2002, 2007, and 2009.

(Ashu pat007 (talk) 06:01, 16 November 2009 (UTC))

As far as I can tell, he has started in every All-Star Game he's played in: scroll down to the All-Star stats). Even in 1998, when he was coming off the bench for the Lakers. The fans voted him in.Zagalejo^^^ 06:51, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Yep, and nba.com confirms this; his career stats page indicates that he started in all 11 of his All-Star games, and he's absent from the 1997 box score ( lol... ). —LOL ^T/_C 08:07, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Good Article potential

Wow, this page is so comprehensive but there are so many things in its way to becoming a Good Article. Stuff like referencing, dashes, grammar and general style. Manderiko (talk) 13:51, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Agree.—Chris!_c/t 06:07, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

First player since Jerry West?

It is stated in the last sentence of the section for the 2008-09 season that "Bryant was awarded his first NBA Finals MVP trophy upon winning his fourth championship, becoming the first player since Jerry West in the 1969 NBA Finals to average at least 32.4 points and 7.4 assists for a series and the first since Michael Jordan to average 30 points, 5 rebounds and 5 assists for a title-winning team."

I think this makes it seem like no other player in any playoff series has ever averaged at least 32.4 points and 7.4 assists since 1969. However, Michael Jordan averaged 35.7 points and 8.3 assists against New York Knicks in 1989 playoffs if I'm not mistaken. The reference article from ESPN also mentions that this is a finals series record(not playoff series overall) post 1969. Cihan Bahran (talk) 18:42, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Fixed. --Ted87 (talk) 02:21, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Endorsements

There is a spelling error under endorsements: "In 2009, Bryant signed a deal with Nubeo to market the "Black Mamba collection", a line of sports/luxary watches that range from $25,000 to $285,000." It should be luxury.

Algiers23 (talk) 15:28, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks. --Ted87 (talk) 17:23, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

The 3-Peat section below contains two errors.

Bryant started the 1999–2000 season sidelined for six weeks due to an injury to his hand in a preseason game against the Washington Wizards.[47] With Bryant back and playing the first full season as a starter, he saw an increase in all statistical categories in the 1999–2000 season. This included leading the team in assists per game and steals per game. The duo of O'Neal and Bryant backed with a strong bench lead to the Lakers winning 67 games

1)Kobe was sidelined for six weeks. He didn't play his first full season until '00-'01 due to the lockout in '98-'99 and injury in '99-'00.

2)lead needs to be led. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.24.166.228 (talk) 06:09, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks. --Ted87 (talk) 06:53, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

President

The photo with the President has in its description the first and last name of President but leaves out the prefix of "President". This needs to be changed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.193.93.159 (talk) 03:07, 2 February 2010

This is not necessary. 211.30.25.34 (talk) 08:23, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

The relevant policy can be found at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies)#Honorific prefixes. —LOL ^T/_C 20:07, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit request

{{editsemiprotected}}

kobe bryant recently said he told coach k he would have attended UNC

"Bryant has stated that had he decided to go to college after high school, he would have attended Duke University" should be changed to "Bryant has stated that had he decided to go to college after high school, he would have attended the University of North Carolina"

note http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/1003/cbb.celebrity.picks.ncaa/content.12.html 69.77.132.177 (talk) 19:49, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately this does not substantially improve this article. This is a what a could have or should have done. If this quote had taken place one year after a big entry into the league, that would a different story. --Morenooso (talk) 20:01, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

The source you provided says Duke, not the UNC. It says "North Carolina", because that's where Duke is.  fetchcomms☛ 20:34, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I think "North Carolina" refers to the university, not the state. Otherwise, it wouldn't make sense to say "However", as there would be no contrast against "go[ing] with Coach K". —LOL ^T/_C 00:42, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Edit request

{{editsemiprotected}}

Image request : [URL=http://img208.imageshack.us/i/kobebryantb.jpg/][IMG]http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/1669/kobebryantb.jpg[/IMG][/URL]

121.98.212.10 (talk) 05:41, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

We can only use images if they are suitably licenced - ie, they are free for any use (including commercial use) - except for some very special exceptions.

If it is your own picture - you own the copyright - then you could give such permission by uploading it to Commons.

If it is not your own picture, we would need specific, explicit permission from the copyright holder. This is explained in Wikipedia:Finding images tutorial#Ask for permission.

In any case, an 'edit semiprotected' isn't what you want; the pic has to be uploaded to Wikipedia first.

 Chzz  ►  06:08, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7