Talk:Kevin Garnett
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is supported by the Sports and games work group. | ||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles related to Chicago. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Boston Celtics, which aims to improve all articles related to the Boston Celtics. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| High | This article is on a subject of High-importance within Boston Celtics articles. | |
Contents |
[edit] POV in article
A lot of this article uses the words "widely" and "is considered" and other masks for point of view. Just because you are saying that something is generally agreed upon doesn't mean it is. You still have to cite sources if you're stating something debatable. Someone please clean up this sloppy article.
- please sign your edit with four tildes so i dont have to strike it out. thanks--Gephart 05:52, 23 April 2006 (U
[edit] Consecutive Double-Doubles
I think KG broke or at least tied the record for most consecutive double doubles with around 28 or 29. Can anyone help me out, i am having troubling find sources. Danka shane. --Gephart 05:52, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
- He didn't set a new record, as Moses Malone had 44 in a row in 1983. However, his streak (I believe it's at 31 games) is the longest since then.Greb 18:34, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Player profile
My contribution was reverted: "Garnett relies on his quickness to get near the basket and great midrange jumpers to score points. He is a superb rebounder and a good passer, unusual for someone at his size and position." Is it really needlessly flowery? Just pointing out how he plays. I'm not even a KG fan. Aree 15:59, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Here is a link to the specific updates you made, and I reverted. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kevin_Garnett&diff=84645045&oldid=84606614 The "large toolbox" metaphor, aside from being a little odd, didn't seem to be a helpful edit. Is his "toolbox" larger than other players? Is this an arbitrary measurement? Would a reader who knows nothing about Kevin Garnett understand it? As far as "flowery" language, I was mainly referring the glowing adjectives used in characterizing his abilities. Terms like "suberb", and "great" are arbitrary, and depend on your POV, that's why they should only be used in the context of a notable, cited source, such as a quote from Bill Russell. If you want to convey that he is superb, or great at something, use measureable, verifiable statistics to support that assertion. ---Jackel 18:39, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Alright. I'll get some stats/quotes to back it up. You would agree that KG's specialty is his broad range of skills (yes, definitely larger toolbox than most PFs) and that he is a superb rebounder. I'll find somewhere to add to it. Aree 02:05, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Aree, I appreciate your efforts to improve this entry, but I rv'ed this, "Garnett relies on his quickness to get near the basket and midrange jumpers to score points." I don't see it as helpful information. What players DON'T use their quickness to improve their position? Are mid-range jumpers the ONLY way Garnett can score? I agree that Garnett is an agile, quick player for his size, and that he has solid shooting skills, but its only notable if its verifiable and cited. Same goes for his broad range of skills; it may be true, but Wikipedia requires verifiability, not truth. ---Jackel 14:28, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Well, that is Garnett's game. Which PFs rely on quickness as their weapon? Garnett, Amare Stoudemire, Shawn Marion, Chris Bosh. Which PFs don't? Elton Brand (strength), Tim Duncan (tactics), Dirk Nowitzki (shooting up to 3pt), Boris Diaw (passing). Of course they have some quickness as well but that's not what they rely on. What I'm trying to do is point out his above average attributes over generic PFs, so people get an idea of his game, not just numbers.
- Every player has a primary scoring move and then counters for each defense. Garnett's first option is midrange jumpers near the top of the key, similar to Nowitzki. But there are other primary moves, like Stoudemire (catch and dunk), Duncan (angled bank shots), Marion (constant off-ball movements), Brand (posting up). If I really have to get verification, I'll try to refind the statistic that said 70% of Garnett's points come from the free throw area, but sorry, can't afford the time.
- I think Wikipedia's verifiable rule should be taken with a grain of salt. It's great if everything can be verified like scientific papers (I am a scientist, so I know about citations). But 100% scientific is Wikipedia not. A lot of Wikipedia's knowledge is formulation of a collective mind, which origins are hard to point out. Garnett's midrange jumpers ability is an integration of SLAM's feature article on KG, Bill Walton's commentating, Sam Cassell's interview... you get the idea.
- Besides, I think too strict an adherence to the rule can hinder an article's progress and the community loses as a whole. For instance, when I browse through soccer (which I'm no expert at), the information on Frank Lampard I benefit most is the "known for his powerful long-range shots from midfield" (useful, hard to verify) rather than the number of goals he scored as junior (easily verifiable, not useful). At the expense of a little "doubt" (here, you don't even doubt KG's all-around skills), the community gains much. Another example: Must all the stories in Old wives' tale have citations? If it so, might as well delete the entire article (except about knuckle-cracking arthritis) and lose the potential knowledge we all could have reaped. --Aree 15:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- I've made an attempt to incorporate the changes you wanted in a more comprising manner. Your choice of phrasing was too rigid, as if you were describing him in a video game; "hit the A button to make Garnett use his quickness to get near the basket, or press B to make him shoot a midrange jump shot to score points". As you indicated, it would be hard to find a citation that supports the case that Garnett is quicker than others, or that he has shooting range beyond that of most 7 footers. My solution was to avoid the strained logic of your phrasing, yet incorporate what you were trying to say. The Wiki is only a valid source of information and knowledge if it is not only accurate, but verifiable, thus any challenges as to its accuracy can be answered. I agree that plenty of articles make assertions to things that are not easy, or even impossible to verify, it just because they haven't yet been edited to follow the wiki guidlines. It doesn't give justification to ignore what the Wiki project is about. That's why it will always remain a work in progress. ---Jackel 17:20, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Ha ha ha, never thought of it like that. That would be strained logic indeed. How bout, "Garnett's MAIN weapons are quickness and midrange jumper" (implying there are more weapons). Anyway, it's fun to see my so-called contributions garner your attention. Please let me point out that verifiability, though very important, does not precede everything else. Wikipedia:Five_pillars.
- (2) "..means citing verifiable, authoritative sources whenever possible" (not only if possible - so we may go out on a limb with common sense)
- (5) "Wikipedia does not have firm rules. If the rules prevent you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore them.[1]
- Thanks for compromising. It is always better to edit than to revert. --Aree 18:06, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- I've made an attempt to incorporate the changes you wanted in a more comprising manner. Your choice of phrasing was too rigid, as if you were describing him in a video game; "hit the A button to make Garnett use his quickness to get near the basket, or press B to make him shoot a midrange jump shot to score points". As you indicated, it would be hard to find a citation that supports the case that Garnett is quicker than others, or that he has shooting range beyond that of most 7 footers. My solution was to avoid the strained logic of your phrasing, yet incorporate what you were trying to say. The Wiki is only a valid source of information and knowledge if it is not only accurate, but verifiable, thus any challenges as to its accuracy can be answered. I agree that plenty of articles make assertions to things that are not easy, or even impossible to verify, it just because they haven't yet been edited to follow the wiki guidlines. It doesn't give justification to ignore what the Wiki project is about. That's why it will always remain a work in progress. ---Jackel 17:20, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Aree, I appreciate your efforts to improve this entry, but I rv'ed this, "Garnett relies on his quickness to get near the basket and midrange jumpers to score points." I don't see it as helpful information. What players DON'T use their quickness to improve their position? Are mid-range jumpers the ONLY way Garnett can score? I agree that Garnett is an agile, quick player for his size, and that he has solid shooting skills, but its only notable if its verifiable and cited. Same goes for his broad range of skills; it may be true, but Wikipedia requires verifiability, not truth. ---Jackel 14:28, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Alright. I'll get some stats/quotes to back it up. You would agree that KG's specialty is his broad range of skills (yes, definitely larger toolbox than most PFs) and that he is a superb rebounder. I'll find somewhere to add to it. Aree 02:05, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
should there be sth in this article that talks about his 126m contract or his own line of shoes? Chensiyuan 03:39, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Cleanup
This article needs massive, massive cleanup. Instead of listing every thing wrong with it I'll just point to Bill Russell, Kirk Hinrich, and Hakeem Olajuwon which are Good Articles about NBA players. Look at those articles and compare it to this one, that will serve as a starting point to anyone who wants to fix this article. Quadzilla99 05:06, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
- Expand it also include a history of his career as in Michael Jordan and Hakeem Olajuwon. Quadzilla99 17:49, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
He is really 7'1, though listed as 6'11, what is wrong with you people. Check your references and get it right!
[edit] Cleanup Cont'd
I agree with the statement above because I was thinking about not letting people edit yet. We should make it go under construction once again.
[edit] Garnett Going To The Suns
I've just been told by a very very reliable and creditable source that Garnett is going to the Suns very soon. So be on the look out for that, and remember, you heard it here first.
- they are saying that garnett will go to the suns Marion will go to the hawks and minnesota will get the hawks #3 and #11 picks but a deal has not yet been made
- Your very very reliable and creditable source was not so reliable nor credible. Guess we heard it here last. Zachary 21:15, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Leothedry 06:48, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Garnett NBA Draft
I think its should be added that Garnett was forced to enter the NBA draft by his inability to score a 17 on the ACT. There was definative reason Garnett was drafted out of high school and his on court talent is not the only reason. see articles http://espn.go.com/ncb/s/2002/0228/1342892.html http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_n3_v88/ai_17018371 http://archive.salon.com/people/feature/2000/02/12/garnett/print.html Johnny lunchpail 02:45, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Garnett to the Celtics
[edit] He's been traded to the Celtics
Garnett is awsome...i love you ♥ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.60.124.23 (talk) 20:24, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm not jumping into the edit war that's going on, but wanted to note that it's in the news & definite, so please stop reverting to Timberwolves. Thanks
- I'd call the situation me reverting a vandal, and not an edit war. Pats Sox Princess 02:33, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Garnett's weight
Where did the 265 pound listing come from? Obviously that can't be right but I searched the internet and couldn't even find that listing. He is listed at 220, 240 and 253. 220 probably being the most accurate and 253 probably being the most common listing.
[edit] "Manse"
Any reason to mention how much his house cost? Is there any relevance to the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kinshane (talk • contribs) 01:54, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
- It is just information from the source. So why not? | 8-Hype (talk) 15:42, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
- The test for inclusion is actually rather different, although not necessarily so for the conclusion. Chensiyuan (talk) 02:03, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
