User talk:Zodiiak

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Dwyane Wade

I propose removing all the "only player to average (x) and (x) and (x) stats per game in a so and so" from the Wade article. As a matter of fact I'll do it myself. As the GA reviewer said on the article's talk page too much stats ( and a lot of it is extreme Wikipedia:Fancruft) non basketball fans turn off and stop paying attention and it becomes boring. See the article's talk page and respond to me there to discuss this. Thanks. Quadzilla99 06:49, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually I created a subpage see the article now to have a look and comment on the article's talk page to discuss this. Quadzilla99 07:55, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia by the way! Quadzilla99 08:33, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Replied in discussion--thanks for the welcome =) Zodiiak 19:12, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bill Russell

I noticed that you are a member of Wikiproject:National Basketball Association. I'd like to ask a favor of you: Bill Russell's article is a Featured Article Candidate and I'm worried that it may not pass merely because there are not enough reviewers looking it over. Would you mind looking it over and seeing if you feel it meets the criteria. If you have never done so before all you have to do is look over the criteria and see if it meets them. You can pass, fail, or stay neutral. Don't worry if you don't like anything in the article you can state so and usually people will work to improve it. Here is the candidacy page. Thanks in advance. Quadzilla99 08:56, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

  • I'll take a look at it, and add it to my watch list =) Zodiiak 19:44, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dwyane Wade

I tinkered around with some of the changes you made to the Wade article, please don't get upset. Maybe we could work on the Off-the Court section together. A lot of these sections end up being random collections of information with 1-3 sentence paragraphs which are against Good Article criteria. What I find is that if you find ways use creative linking sentences you can eventually tie it all together into solid 6-8 sentence paragraphs. Like "Player x proved himself a popular endorser and was involved in numerous endorsement deals such as..." as it stands right now it doesn't flow together smoothly. It would be easy to break it up into sveral small paragraphs but that could hurt it if it's GA status gets reviewed and lead to it's removal from the GA list. Maybe a start would be making separate "personal life" and "media figure and business interests" section like we did in Michael Jordan's article. Quadzilla99 05:15, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

One thing for example: right now the stuff about his devout Christian beliefs is important but it's hard to transition into, and is too short for it's own paragraph. Quadzilla99 05:18, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
  • No, I actually completely agree. I was reading through the article and a few paragraphs just felt like random sentences strung up, and not fluid enough. That is why I was proof reading it just now, to try and work on the transitional sentences, linking, etc. The subsections for business/personal life might be a bit premature...i'm not sure how much can be done about the business aspect of Wade, as he is only in his third year...but I would definately try and contribute as much relevent info as possible. Zodiiak 05:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Good work, I was actually going to suggest one minor adjustment (removing "able to transfer") but you fixed it already. Looks pretty good right now, could maybe use a smoother transition into the mentioning of the nicknames. I can't think of one as of right now though. Quadzilla99 06:34, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Thanks...If it's in the same paragraph as the endorsements, you could mention how his nickname flash was used in ads, comparing him to the superhero flash, even though it was originally given to him by Shaq from the Flash Gordon theme song. That same paragraph could be used to mention his popular converse slogan of "Fall down seven times...stand up eight"

[edit] Career achievements of Dwyane Wade

Being as you work on the page there is a stat on the NBA Milestones section that is blank. It reads:

    • Four consecutive games, May 23rd - May 29th, 2006

Four consecutive games doing what? I think it was shoot 70% and take 15 shots or more shots per game in the playoffs or something. Could you fill that out please? Thanks in advance. Quadzilla99 08:59, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Ok, took care of it Zodiiak 19:40, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
It still doesn't makes sense as it says he had set an NBA record by shooting 69.5% and averaging over 30 ppg for an NBA playoff series (last year versus the Pistons). However it then states in the next line that he set an NBA record by doing so over 4 consecutive games (the series went 6 obviously so the numbers aren't for the entire series just 4 out of the 6 games) so the record isn't for a series it's for any 4 consecutive games in the playoffs. Or is it any 4 consecutive games in a playoff series? Or is it any 4 consecutive game in the Conference Finals? Does the series thing have any meaning? I know you didn't add it so don't take it like I'm blaming you but it needs to get fixed and if you weren't around I'd just remove it as it currently makes no sense. Thanks. Quadzilla99 11:26, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


Shots made/attempted, Month/Day, Total Points
9-11, 5-23, 25pts
11-20, 5-25, 32pts
13-17, 5-27, 35 pts
8-11, 5-29, 31 pts
4 Consecutive game Averages of: 30.75 points per game, 14.75 attempts per game, shooting 69.5% (41/59).

Game 5, he was 11/20, finishing with 23 points. Game 6, the flu game, he was 6-15, 14 points [10 assts].

I didn't add it, I think those are really really specific numbers, but some actually find those numbers interesting, so I'll adjust it to make sense
Zodiiak 20:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] C.B.

I know that he is listed as 6' 6" on nba.com but nba.com doesn't always tell the truth. There are many websites which say that Barkley is at 6' 5". Search it on google. So Please do not revert my edit. Thanks. MM 14:15, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, I took my time to search informations about Charles' height and I must say, there are different versions about his height. On the one hand, he is listened as 6' 5", on the other hand as 6' 6". His height is rather involved to verify. Are there any solutions? MM 14:21, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Michael Jordan is definitely one inch taller than Charles Barkley. Well, is there a way to contact nba.com? Because 6' 6" for Charles Barkley is not right. MM 14:32, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

You're assuming his height based on a picture, and uncreditable resources. With regard to the picture, who's to say Barkley is standing straight, not slouching, etc. Yes, many sites list him from 6'4 to 6'6. Barkley makes note of his controversial playing height in all his published books. The NBA has always listed players taller than they really are. Nate robinson is listed as 5'9, but is closer to 5'6-5'7. It does not matter, nba.com receives their information from the a players listed playing height, while in the NBA. Players, and announcers alike have always joked about a players supposed playing height or weight. The UserBox for all nba players on Wikipedia is designed to reflect their playing stats, and Barkley's playing stats, with regard to his height, has always been listed, in his 16 year career, 6'6'. A note on his height has been made in the subsection titled, early life and college career. If you want to make an added note in the introductory paragraph, then I believe that would be best. However, I do not think footnotes or skeptisms have priority over a players listed playing height/Billed Height, as noted by the NBA. For further discussion please discuss on Barkley's talk page. Zodiiak 20:17, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Barkley has admitted he's "6'4 and 3/4" in numerous interviews but as is Wikipedia and NBA policy we use their listed height. I actually added a source:[1] to the Ben Wallace article where he directly admits in an Associated Press story that he's 6'7 (he's listed at 6'9) but I never thought about changing the listed height in the article. Quadzilla99 09:28, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:AIV

Since D-Wade gets a lot of vandals, I thought I'd take a second to just make sure that you know that after a user has received several warnings you can report them to WP:AIV, at which point they'll start getting blocks. Obviously this works for any article. Keep up the good work by the way. Quadzilla99 14:37, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, and appreciation ;) Zodiiak 14:42, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Michael Jordan

hi, do you have any thoughts on the FAC going on for the MJ article? thanks. Chensiyuan 13:11, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Overall, I think the article is in great shape, well written and sourced. I think there's only a few important notes that should be added to it, that may currently be missing. Such as how the first Air Jordan's were in violation of NBA rules, how he always wore NC shorts under his uniform--leading to longer shorts which became a trend in the NBA, shaving his head bald --leading to another trend, and recapturing the title on Father's day--leading to him pouring out his emotions (I think that was the year, or the year before, when his father was murdered) Zodiiak 18:47, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good work

The Working Man's Barnstar
I, Quadzilla99, hereby award you with the Working Man's Barnstar award for all the time and effort you've spent bettering NBA articles, and also for all your vandal fighting on the D-Wade and New Jersey related articles. You're a fine editor and are quickly establishing yourself a good reputation. Keep it up! Quadzilla99 20:20, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Wow, thanks so much for the recognition. It is greatly, greatly appreciated ;) Zodiiak 21:41, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jordan FAC

The Michael Jordan FAC has been re-listed (which was probably a good idea). Thought you'd like to know, here's a quick link. Quadzilla99 14:47, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Regarding you third edit (I like the first two), there were a lot of complaints on the FAC about using "would be eliminated" instead of "were eliminated" and "would go on to" instead of "went", so I would change them back or shorten them. Basically they wanted the least amount of words as possible, as several people complained about wordiness. But the "would go on to" and "would ultimately" were complained about. Keep in mind that's how I had them originally, so I thought they were fine too. Quadzilla99 20:44, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Feel free to continue copyediting the article by all means, just keep that in mind. Quadzilla99 20:46, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Wow. What's funny is, the way we've been writing it, is how it has been written in every biography I've read. But thanks for the heads up, I'll change it and be a bit more careful with the wording. Zodiiak 20:51, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, apparently they also want the tense to always be went, lost etc instead of would lose or would go on to. I complained about it too as you can see, but gave in so as to get it passed. I guess they like the least amount of words to be used as possible. Also they want consistent tense to be used. Quadzilla99 21:02, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
It's a sensitive article and you know the FAC better than anyone else on here. So, I'll refrain from making any edits until I've read the entire FAC. I'll give it a few scans though to make sure everything is concise. Great work by the way, I know it's been incredibly tough trying to satisfy everyone. Zodiiak
Here's the link I meant to add:[2] Basically it was copyedited this way by a couple of editors who complained about what I told you. If you looked at it beforehand you would see I had it almost exactly the way you were putting it. Quadzilla99 21:11, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

If I could recap for you, basically all the concerns were addressed except for Peter Isatalo's, whose inane ramblings were useless and idiosyncratic, and Zagalejo's who thinks it still needs more copyediting (some of them aren't crossed out but trust me they are all addressed). I would let Zagalejo do the copyediting personally, as he already started it this morning. He has been a big critic of the copyediting and despite myself and a couple of other editors copyediting it he hasn't been happy just yet. So it's probably for the best that he just does it himself. Incidentally a lot of the copyediting was done by other people so I want to keep them happy. I say all this because when I reverted your edits, it might have come off like a classic case of WP:OWN and wanted to make clear that I wasn't fighting to keep my own wording in there. Just that the current wording was arrived at in a lot of cases in response to complaints and was copyedited by other editors who had complaints. Quadzilla99 21:37, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry, I understand ;) Zodiiak 23:54, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Incidentally you should enable an email address (it's in your preferences profile). I was going to email you a source or two for Barkley and D-Wade that I was thinking of using to improve their articles, since I was busy I figured I'd email them to you so you could use them. They are from pay only sites (ESPN Insider and NY Times archive) so I couldn't put their content here. Quadzilla99 00:28, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Ok, just confirmed my address. Feel free to send and thanks in advance for the articles ;) Zodiiak 00:40, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Ok, don't make it too long maybe 2-3 sentences should be alright. Quadzilla99 01:10, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../z/o/d/User_talk%7EZodiiak_f2f5.html"