Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Chicago Bulls seasons/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates‎ | Chicago Bulls seasons
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 not promoted by User:Scorpion0422 01:14, 29 September 2008 [1].

Chicago Bulls seasons

edit

I am nominating this article because I think it fulfills the FL criteria. It is modeled after Los Angeles Lakers seasons, a featured list.—Chris! ct 00:23, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from -- K. Annoyomous24
  • Comments
    • "founded" should be "found".
done —Chris! ct 06:47, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • "late 1970s and early 1980s", be more accurate. I would accept "1970s and 1980s".
    • "During the eight year span in the 1990s", be more accurate. I would accept "During the 1990s".
Changed —Chris! ct 06:47, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Didn't link Michael Jordan? How is that possible? (sorry for my POV).
done —Chris! ct 06:47, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • In "having won a record 72 games", the words "record 72 games" links to the article List of NBA teams by single season win percentage, so couldn't you change "having won a record 72 games" to "having the highest single season winning percentage"?
I think the numbers of game is more notable.—Chris! ct 06:47, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • both of the word, "phrase" should be "phase".
done —Chris! ct 06:47, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Should get some more copyediting help.
I think the prose is good. Any suggestions.—Chris! ct 06:47, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • The article said that the Chicago Bulls have the record of most wins with 72 twice, once in the mid-first paragraph, and once in the second paragraph.
Not really. The first mention is just saying 72 wins. The second one shows the actual stats. —Chris! ct 06:47, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
But it is still saying that they have the best winning record with 72 games. Just erase the one on the first paragraph, or move the second paragraph into the first paragraph sentence about the 1995-96 Chicago Bulls season. -- K. Annoyomous24[c] 08:10, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Shouldn't use # as a symbol as it may confuse readers that the symbol may mean number. There are more symbols to choose from in the article, New York Giants seasons.
I don't think it is confusing at all. Let me hear what others think before changing it.—Chris! ct 06:47, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"The "#" sign is usually a symbol for a "number", so I'd appreciate if you could substitute it. It's a little weird to see "1st #". Hmm, after thinking a little, maybe it's better not to indicate division titles in the "finish" column, just in the "division" column will do." -- K. Annoyomous24[c] 08:10, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • If you look at the column "Awards" in the row "1990–91", you'll see that the awards by Michael Jordan exceeds one line. If you look at the article we nominated, Los Angeles Lakers seasons, you'll see that all of the awards are below the awardee. So I think you should follow that way. (By the way, I reverted your edit on Los Angeles Lakers seasons {look at the edit summary})
not done, see the edit summary. If you still disagree, then we should talk about it. —Chris! ct 06:47, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I just don't like looking at lists that look untidy as I "think" I have a minor obsession about tidiness. -- K. Annoyomous24[c] 08:10, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done all —Chris! ct 00:51, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll just Support with one more comment. The second paragraph is all about the 1995-96 Chicago Bulls season. ust try to find more interesting fact/information and the list would be perfect! -- K. Annoyomous24[c] 02:53, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not supporting as I did not noticed the disarrayed prose. -- K. Annoyomous24[c] 19:03, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- K. Annoyomous24[c] 01:13, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not supporting until ALL consensus are resolved. -- K. Annoyomous24[c] 17:43, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - sources look good, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:41, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - lead is in disarray...

  • Opening three sentences set a bad precedent - very choppy and not engaging.
  • Can you link expansion team?
  • You've used ref 1 seven times in the lead - a bit overkill.
  • ", the team's fortunes changed when they selected Michael Jordan in the 1984 NBA Draft" but then "1992 to 1998, the Bulls won six championships with the" - so the team's fortunes changed 8 years later...
  • "with the help of superstar Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen, Dennis Rodman and coach Phil Jackson" - superstar is peacock/POV and I'm sure the rest of the team helped too.. not just these three and the coach..
  • "eight year span from 1992 to 1998" that's seven years at best.
  • "the franchise's all-time leader in regular season games and playoff games won" - leading coach?
  • "When Jordan retired for the second time " did you mention him retiring for the first time?
  • "the team fired Skiles " not really - I expect an individual was responsible for this.
I didn't fix it yet. Article on ESPN simply says the team fired the coach. If you still want me to change it, I will do it.—Chris! ct 19:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "disastrous start" POV.
  • "the team headed for a new direction " what does this mean?!

The Rambling Man (talk) 09:31, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I copyedited the lead and fix everything.—Chris! ct 19:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not ready for FL status - The table and references look good (this is based on only a superficial review), but as The Rambling Man stated, the lead is (still) in disarray.

  • It seems to me that the lead for an article like this one should provide a concise overview of the team's history. For example, the first paragraph of New York Yankees seasons gives the team's total number of seasons and summary information on League championships and World Series results, while the first paragraph of Virginia Tech Hokies football seasons tells when the team started and says it has played in more than 1,100 officially-sanctioned games, including 21 bowl games. In contrast, the current lead for Chicago Bulls seasons has no broad historical overview statements, but rapidly descends into details about individual season records, coaches, and draft picks.
  • The very first phrase is a problem. The fact that the team was founded (not "found" -- this was supposed to have been fixed; did something happen?) in 1966 as an expansion team is hardly the single most salient point to start the article with.
  • Is it necessary to highlight the name of the stadium as the second sentence of the lead section?
  • The first reference to "the playoffs" would benefit from some context (a reader from Mars would ask "which playoffs?") and a link to NBA Playoffs.
  • Copy editing is needed to address subject-predicate disagreements (such as "the Bulls hit its low point" and "the Bulls holds record"), the incomplete sentence "Both of which were achieved in the 1995–96 season", and some idiomatic phrasing that misfires (such as "the rest of supporting casts").
  • Speaking of "supporting casts," I think the lead section makes too much use of mixed metaphor (including "supporting cast") and sports jargon (such as "rebuilding phase").

--Orlady (talk) 21:03, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I copyedited it again following New York Yankees seasons closely. Hopefully, I have addressed your concerns.—Chris! ct 23:42, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Those edits resulted in a nice improvement in the focus of the lead paragraph, but I see some serious copyediting needs (including those noted by TonyTheTiger, below). --Orlady (talk) 13:48, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would reconstruct the first sentence to use one less preposition by converting something to the possessive. I.e., either use Eastern Conference's Central Division or National Basketball Association's Eastern Conference.
  • The second sentence is vague. I think you mean to say which ranks third in number behind because you could say they won them behind Jordan and Pippen.
  • The third sentence should be reconstructed to say they initially played at Chicago Stadium, but since 1994 have played at the United Center.
    • Actually, they played their first season at the International Amphitheater. See [2].
  • The second para starts with an odd construction. I would throw the word Having in front of it.
  • The All-Time record section should have a footnote saying statistics include games through Month DD, YYYY. During the season this may get confusing.
  • I just reformated the footnotes.
  • Oppose, sorry. I agree that the prose could use some more work. I think too many sentences begin with participle phrases, which gets a little grating. Some more specific comments:
  • the team compiled a 33–48 record in 1966 under the franchise's first Coach of the Year Johnny Kerr
Technically, the team compiled that record between fall 1966 and spring 1967.
  • With the leadership of Jordan and head coach Phil Jackson, the franchise's all-time leading coach in regular season games and playoff games won,[2] the team appeared in the playoffs in the next 14 seasons
Is Jackson the leader in regular season games coached or regular season games won? Or both? Also, the sentence suggests that Jackson was coach for all of those 14 seasons, but he didn't join the team until 1989. See List of Chicago Bulls head coaches. (And while I'm on the subject, Michael Jordan was only around for 13 of those 14 seasons.)
  • The Bulls missed the finals in 1994 and 1995 when Jordan briefly retired to play baseball.
Jordan returned to basketball in time for the 1995 playoffs, so this needs some rewording. (It's true that he was probably a little rusty, but he was playing basketball in spring 1995, not baseball.) Zagalejo^^^ 22:39, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is Ok. I guess I rush it a little when I nominated. I will fix all the suggestions. Thanks all.—Chris! ct 01:24, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Chicago_Bulls_seasons/archive1&oldid=1164846502"