Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Portland Trail Blazers draft history/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 12:26, 4 February 2024 (UTC) [1].[reply]
Portland Trail Blazers draft history (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
- Nominator(s): -- ZooBlazertalk 23:59, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm back with my second FLC while I wait for my first one to be resolved. I decided to work on another NBA list and have worked on this one off and on over the last few months. This one is about the draft selections of the Portland Trail Blazers beginning with their first pick back in 1970 and the accomplishments of many of them while playing for the team. -- ZooBlazertalk 23:59, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- MyCatIsAChonk
Will review soon- upon first look, the lead is very long. The lead should most certainly be divided with headers and reorganized appropriately. Perhaps "History" or "Statistics" or something else. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:44, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I've divided up the lead with headers.
I'm also in the process of adding the missing players from the table, which may take a day or two. At first I thought it would just be extra clutter to add every single pick when most missing players aren't notable, but I looked at draft history articles for other teams and many include even the non notable players.- This is now finished. -- ZooBlazertalk 01:45, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]- @MyCatIsAChonk Would you still be willing to do a review if you have a chance? ZooBlazer 06:29, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @ZooBlazer, completely forgot, thanks for reminding me. After looking through and making some minor changes, I only have one comment: the coloration on the table headers is making the up and down arrows not visible. Is there any way to have them visible? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 14:38, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @MyCatIsAChonk Hmm, I'm not sure. Looking at other all-time roster articles, it looks like the template ({{NBA all-time roster}}) always makes the arrows black regardless of the team colors used. I don't know if there is something that can be updated in the template or if the table in the article can be individually changed to make the arrows white or red. ZooBlazer 15:46, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, if it's a standard part of the template, I don't think it's too disagreeable. Support. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 15:53, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @MyCatIsAChonk Hmm, I'm not sure. Looking at other all-time roster articles, it looks like the template ({{NBA all-time roster}}) always makes the arrows black regardless of the team colors used. I don't know if there is something that can be updated in the template or if the table in the article can be individually changed to make the arrows white or red. ZooBlazer 15:46, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @ZooBlazer, completely forgot, thanks for reminding me. After looking through and making some minor changes, I only have one comment: the coloration on the table headers is making the up and down arrows not visible. Is there any way to have them visible? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 14:38, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @MyCatIsAChonk Would you still be willing to do a review if you have a chance? ZooBlazer 06:29, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Drive-by comment
- The lead needs to be much more than three sentences long -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:11, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I've expanded the lead now. -- ZooBlazertalk 16:43, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- More comments
- "The franchise won its [...] and were" - subject changes from singular to plural mid-sentence
- "led by their 1974 first overall pick, Bill Walton, as well as multiple other of their former draft picks from that team who went on to have their numbers retired by Portland" => "led by their 1974 first overall pick, Bill Walton, along with other former draft picks who went on to have their numbers retired by Portland" is far more succinct and easy to read
- "Many of the players selected players" - repeated word
- "The team also has four Rookie of the Year winners, three of whom were drafted by Portland" => "Three players drafted by Portland won the Rookie of the Year award" (if the fourth guy to win that award wasn't drafted by Portland then he isn't relevant to this article)
- "Geoff Petrie, the franchise's first ever draft pick was named" => "Geoff Petrie, the franchise's first ever draft pick, was named"
- "Petrie averaged 21.8 points, 2.8 rebounds, and 4.6 assist" - are there appropriate wikilinks for these terms, as I for one have no idea what a "rebound" is (the others I can probably guess)
- "In 1972, they chose center LaRue Martin from Loyola Chicago, the team then chose" - start a new sentence after Chicago to break up an extremely long run-on sentence
- "and 3.7 blocks during the series" - would benefit from a link here too
- "as he had season ending microfracture surgery" => "as he had season-ending microfracture surgery"
- "two points field goals made" - I *think* this should be "two-point field goals made"
- Could do with a link on "steals" wherever that is mentioned first
- Also link field goals (I thought that was an American football thing......?)
- And free throws too
- "Drexler won in 1992 in Barcelona as a member of the Dream Team, and Lillard won at the 2020 Summer Olympics in Tokyo" - seems a bit random to pipe out the words "Summer Olympics" on the first usage but not the second. If you are only going to show it once then it really should be on the first usage
- "winning one of the bronze" => "winning one of the bronzes"
- "Dave Twardzik (#13), Lionel Hollins (#14), Larry Steele (#15), Drexler (#22), Bob Gross (#30), Terry Porter (#30), Walton (#32), Lloyd Neal (#36), and Petrie (#45)." - this is not a complete sentence
- In the key you have symbols along with colour to denote Hall of Famer and NBA All-Star (which is correct - colour alone is not enough for accessibility reasons) but then you don't actually use the symbols in the table
- You need a symbol for First Overall NBA Draft Pick
- I'd be tempted to add something into the History section to cover the fact that the draft has (apparently) shrunk dramatically in size since 1970, with the result that a team has gone from being able to draft a whopping 19 players a year down to just 2. It just looks a little odd in the table without context -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:26, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @ChrisTheDude Thank you for the feedback. I think I've addressed everything that you mentioned. -- ZooBlazertalk 16:45, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:17, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment – The pattern for the combined cells (such as Walton's and Wicks') makes it very hard to read the player name. I suggest choosing just one background color (either the more significant honor or a new arbitrary color just for those combos). SounderBruce 01:45, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @SounderBruce Which option would you suggest? It was originally the color of the most significant honor, but I changed it because there was a similar situation brought up during one of my recent FLCs by EN-Jungwon. I do agree that it's hard to read. ZooBlazer 01:52, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Making the stripes wider might also be an option. As it stands, the main issue is that the close spacing is causing an optical illusion. SounderBruce 02:05, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @SounderBruce I changed just the first instance of the double colors as a test. I made the prominent honor color a bigger line. Would that work? Or should i try something else? I'm inexperienced when it comes to this kind of thing, so it's a lot of trial and error. ZooBlazer 03:26, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- It is easier to read with thicker stripes, but they should be consistent widths. Having fewer stripes is totally fine; using non-diagonal ones could also help with readability. SounderBruce 04:57, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @SounderBruce I made the lines 180 degrees. That look okay? ZooBlazer 06:10, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @SounderBruce: Just wanted to ping you again to see if further changes need to be done still or not with the pattern. -- ZooBlazer 07:17, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It still doesn't look right, though I don't have an answer for what would work in its place. Aside from the color, I also suggest swapping out the tilde for a different symbol, as it is hard to see. Also consider fixing the hidden sort button in the header. SounderBruce 09:42, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @SounderBruce: Swapped out the symbol by borrowing from your Seahawks seasons FL. Small way of combining my favorite NFL team with my NBA team I guess. As for the sort button, it isn't hidden purposely. The problem is the arrow is black like the background so it blends in. -- ZooBlazer 19:00, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- ZooBlazer pinged me to give an opinion here; unfortunately I have problems but not solutions.
- @SounderBruce: Swapped out the symbol by borrowing from your Seahawks seasons FL. Small way of combining my favorite NFL team with my NBA team I guess. As for the sort button, it isn't hidden purposely. The problem is the arrow is black like the background so it blends in. -- ZooBlazer 19:00, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It still doesn't look right, though I don't have an answer for what would work in its place. Aside from the color, I also suggest swapping out the tilde for a different symbol, as it is hard to see. Also consider fixing the hidden sort button in the header. SounderBruce 09:42, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @SounderBruce: Just wanted to ping you again to see if further changes need to be done still or not with the pattern. -- ZooBlazer 07:17, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @SounderBruce I made the lines 180 degrees. That look okay? ZooBlazer 06:10, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- It is easier to read with thicker stripes, but they should be consistent widths. Having fewer stripes is totally fine; using non-diagonal ones could also help with readability. SounderBruce 04:57, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @SounderBruce I changed just the first instance of the double colors as a test. I made the prominent honor color a bigger line. Would that work? Or should i try something else? I'm inexperienced when it comes to this kind of thing, so it's a lot of trial and error. ZooBlazer 03:26, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Making the stripes wider might also be an option. As it stands, the main issue is that the close spacing is causing an optical illusion. SounderBruce 02:05, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @SounderBruce Which option would you suggest? It was originally the color of the most significant honor, but I changed it because there was a similar situation brought up during one of my recent FLCs by EN-Jungwon. I do agree that it's hard to read. ZooBlazer 01:52, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- The black header making the sort arrows invisible isn't ok. I know it's their colors, but those need to be visible so that the reader knows they exist.
- The stripes are...odd. I think they're okay accessibility-wise? But I'm pretty sure to a lot of readers it's just noise, especially some of the color combinations. I know EN-Jungwon asked to have the colors match the symbols instead of just a single color last summer, but I don't think they were right. I don't know of any better way to display multiple colors in a row then what you have, but I don't think it works well right now. --PresN 03:58, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Much, much better. Combining the awards makes a lot of sense. I can't commit to doing a full prose review, but on the table portion I can support this nomination. SounderBruce
- Love it, thanks! --PresN 18:23, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Source review passed; promoting. --PresN 03:52, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.