Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bill Russell
- 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 review. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was promoted 06:03, 17 February 2007.
Self-nomination. The article on the legendary basketballer and the NBA's most successful player of all time is already a GA, and after going through peer review, reading the FAC and getting valuable help of guys like Quadzilla99, Myasuda, Chensiyuan and others, I want to go for the FA. The WikiProject NBA (WP:NBA) has atm zero FAs, and I would like to make a start. Thanks for reading. —Onomatopoeia 08:43, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose For now. There's almost no information about his early life. I once recall watching a documentary about Russell where it discussed the racism he experienced in Louisiana and later San Francisco and how those experiences made him the person he was. I think this article needs to expand its personal life section greatly and needs a few paragraphs about his childhood so that it can delve into just how fascinating and complex the man was. As it stands now, its just mostly an article about his basketball achievements. Warhol13 14:25, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- to be sure, there is quite a bit on the non-NBA aspects in the article. yes, not a whole lot on the racism incident but well, if we can agree that is very important, then something has to be done about it. however, i do not think the documentary per se makes it very significant. we need to know why it warrants independent treatment within the article. thanks. Chensiyuan 14:40, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I was bringing to light that the article mentions nothing about the first 16 years about the mans life other than where he was born and that he moved to San Franciso. All childhoods are important to understaning who a person is and for Russell this seems to be especially so. Anyway, the documentary I'm referencing is "Sportcentury: Bill Russell" and I saw is on ESPN a few years ago. You might be able to catch is on ESPN Classic sometime. Warhol13 16:53, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I believed I've remedied that. I'll leave a note on Warhol's talk page. Quadzilla99 19:00, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I was bringing to light that the article mentions nothing about the first 16 years about the mans life other than where he was born and that he moved to San Franciso. All childhoods are important to understaning who a person is and for Russell this seems to be especially so. Anyway, the documentary I'm referencing is "Sportcentury: Bill Russell" and I saw is on ESPN a few years ago. You might be able to catch is on ESPN Classic sometime. Warhol13 16:53, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think I've addressed the concerns of Warhol and it's a well written, well researched article. Quadzilla99 19:03, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support as above. Chensiyuan 15:25, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Bill Russell had thirteen blocks in a game because goal tending was legal in college during that time (watch footage of those ncaa chamionship games). Rusell was important is this rule change as well as, along with Wilt Chamberlain, the rule change to extend the paint from 6 to 12 feet. I added this to the article but perhaps it could use work. Also, the "early years" section is coming along. I would like to see some discussion on what impact the racism had on him, perhaps a quote from him. I also know that he experienced racism in San Francisco, a place where his family felt it would get better. Warhol13 20:48, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I just added a good chunk of info on Russell as a victim of racial abuse, and added his quote that the racist abuse made him harder and how he worked that others saw him as a man first and a basketballer second. —Onomatopoeia 12:21, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- there's this part about "the ultimate low blow" - is that what is meant to be said? Chensiyuan 15:25, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I think that getting your skin color registered officially is simply outrageous. But I have changed that. —Onomatopoeia 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)Oops, I misread the article and removed that sentence. —Onomatopoeia 15:35, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Please add WP:PDATA - make the spelling of English words consistent with either American or British spelling, depending upon the subject of the article. Examples include: honor (A) (British: honour), neighbor (A) (British: neighbour), neighbour (B) (American: neighbor), defense (A) (British: defence), offense (A) (British: offence), recognize (A) (British: recognise), recognise (B) (American: recognize), aging (A) (British: ageing), routing (A) (British: routeing). M3tal H3ad 10:13, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay I added a WP:PDATA template and read through the article, I didn't really see any of the British spellings in there. They should all be out now. Quadzilla99 05:46, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support M3tal H3ad 06:35, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose/moral support Support The research is solid, but the article could use more copy-editing. I think the intro (especially the second paragraph) could use some work, as it contains redundancies and non-parallel constructions. I'd love to see this on the main page, though, so I'll try to help out however I can. Zagalejo 17:35, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay I think those concerns have been addressed, could you be more specific as much as the prose has been rewritten in the last couple of days. Quadzilla99 07:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't really have time to go into specifics. There are a few minor things to address (unnecessary or incorrect punctuation marks; passive voice; sentences that end with prepositions, etc.), but it looks like the copy-editing is progressing nicely. The article should be fine by the time it has reached the front page, so I'll vote support for now. Zagalejo 16:01, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If anyone has any comments as to the prose please be specific so people can address your concerns. Just saying the prose is not good is not really an actionable objection. A lot of work has been done in recent days and the prose looks pretty solid. Thanks. Quadzilla99 08:03, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support My qualms have been address and I support now. Warhol13 18:10, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Manderiko 18:47, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The article is comprehensive and well documented -- the difference between the article from early December of last year to where it stands now are like night and day. My only issue with the article at this time are some redundancies between second paragraphs of the "Awards and feats" and "Legacy" sections, but this is a minor point.Myasuda 05:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Initially, I had the same reserves as Zagalejo, with regard to passive voice, and other minor grammatical complaints. Overall, however, I belive the article is well written, documented, and sourced. Zodiiak 03:29, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.