Talk:Steve Nash

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article Steve Nash has been listed as one of the Everyday life good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
March 24, 2008 Good article nominee Listed

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Steve Nash article.

Article policies
Archives: 1, 2
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:


Contents

[edit] incorrect full name

as http://www.nba.com/playerfile/steve_nash/bio.html listed, full name is "Steven John Nash", not "Stephen John Nash" can someone add in the re-direct link of "steven john nash" to this page, I would have done it except i don't know how Z3u2 18:10, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

His full name is indeed Stephen Nash, per his acceptance on his Order of Canada[1] is spelt that way.(For the record, Steven is American spelling whereas Stephen is British spelling) For him to accept the highest honour in his home country and have his name spelt wrong wouldn't make any sense now does it?--Cahk (talk) 05:50, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
"Stephen" is how his name is spelled in the Official NBA Encyclopedia. (But for the record, "Stephen" is a very common spelling in America.) Zagalejo^^^ 06:01, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Stephen is common in America within those who have British ancestry or from states that used to be Thirteen Colonies. Otherwise, most people spell Steven not Stephen for pronounciation sake.--Cahk (talk) 06:05, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
We're getting off-topic, but do you have a cite for that? I've known lots of Polish-Americans, Italian-Americans, Greek-Americans, Mexican-Americans, etc etc named "Stephen". Zagalejo^^^ 06:16, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
I meant to say that Americans (as oppose to x-Americans) do not use the spelling of Steven. I didn't meant to exclude other nationalities in using Stephen (it's Greek, afterall). For a (not reliable) source lol[2] On a more serious/academic route, I guess you can trace it back via history or linguistic route. --Cahk (talk) 07:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] GA push

In an (way belated) attempt to push this article towards GA-quality, I've touched up the article in the following areas:

  1. Lead (not fully satisfactory yet for GA; contingent on touching up of other areas)
  2. High school and family
  3. College

The sections on his NBA career/player profile/off the court/int'l career leave much to be desired at the moment and I would work on it in due time. A round of copy-editing is probably needed as well. P.S. in line with my comment above about citing sources I've also made the formatting uniform. Chensiyuan 12:36, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Update -- lots of chopping and changing, working slowly through the Suns section at the moment... but much more to come. Chensiyuan (talk) 23:31, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Update -- done with Suns (save for 2007-08 season which would be done in due time), more or less done with player profile... get ready to get chopped for "off the court"! Chensiyuan (talk) 12:29, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Books

Anyone who has access to the books listed in the article, feel free to incorporate. Chensiyuan 16:10, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reference style

Please see the relevant WP guidelines/policies on how to reference. Templates are not necessary; rather, the key is being consistent within the article. Chensiyuan (talk) 23:30, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WHAT?

This article reads like a bona fide promotion of the new white hope in the NBA. Nash doesn't even deserve the length of the article. He's comparable only to John Stockton on court duties. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.193.101.49 (talk) 04:57, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Are you making an argument here or ranting. Chensiyuan (talk) 06:23, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
It's not a promotion of anything - just an article about Steve Nash, whose skill and play have been acknowledged by many respected people both in the USA and internationally. There's a reason why it's a GA - it's also well written. --Shruti14 t c s 18:16, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Excessively long intro

The introduction is way too long and the information there is misplaced and mostly redundant with the body of the article. The intro shouldn't be more than a couple of paragraphs long, and should only be an overview. Right now, it lists every accomplishment, personal life details, and career moves. I'd be happy to cut it down to a reasonable size, but I want to make sure there's no strong objection and that no one thinks I'm destroying the article. --Mosmof (talk) 15:45, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Having written, and contributed to, quite a fair number of featured articles, I'd have to disagree that it's "excessively long". By a long shot in fact. I would agree however that it can be trimmed. Let's have a little discussion on what detracts from WP:LEAD before proceeding. Chensiyuan (talk) 15:48, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Fair enough. My issue, I guess, isn't so much the length but the structure and level of detail. The intro should deal only with the really, really important facts about the article subject, i.e. what makes the subject more notable than others like it. Right now, it's a chronological bio.
Here's stuff that I think should be in the intro:
  • Birth date and location
  • He is a point guard for the Phoenix Suns of the NBA.
  • He is a two-time NBA MVP and x-time All-Star.
  • ___ (insert expert here) calls him one of the greatest point guards of his era/ever.
  • He played for Santa Clara and made 3 NCAA Tourney apps.
Everything else is more appropriate for the article body, I think. --Mosmof (talk) 16:04, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay since I've been editing this article for a long time I'd work around your suggestion first but it'd probably take a couple of days. I should also add that my take on what's most pertinent about WP:LEAD is the reader shouldn't be surprised by the fact that something is in the body wasn't summarised in the lead. Many times, when an article is up for GA or FA nomination, the common gripe is a short lead rather than a long one; here, by virtue of length alone, it's not terribly cumbersome. The importance lies of course in the content, and I just think that anything that is given extensive treatment in the body warrants some indication in the lead. Chensiyuan (talk) 16:32, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I meant to respond sooner, but thanks for taking my suggestions. You've spent more time on this article and GA nominations, so I trust your judgment. Like I said, looking back, my issue had less to do with length and more to do with the level of detail. --Mosmof (talk) 17:49, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Your comments are appreciated and compelled me to re-look the quality of the lead. I've since trimmed it down quite a bit, although I'd be the first to admit that (a) a chrono presentation of his bio; and (b) some degree of detail, are still present. That said, I hope that both points can be justified, on the basis that only his most important achievements are mentioned. What do you think of it now? Chensiyuan (talk) 23:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Interestingly, Tim Duncan, an FA I co-authored with a couple of other editors, employs the sort of title/award-driven lead you're talking about. Guess who wrote that lead... lol. The parallels between the players' style of basketball and their respective leads stand out as well! Chensiyuan (talk) 03:03, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA Review

Honestly, after reading the whole thing and looking through everything, I actually see nothing wrong with this article, and I'm going to outright pass it. The lead's a little long, but not too long to bother putting this on hold. Well done, I really enjoyed reading this! Wizardman 01:51, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for taking time to review this. Chensiyuan (talk) 01:54, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for reviewing this - I agree that it should be a GA. I hope, with some changes, that this article will eventually become a FA --Shruti14 t c s 18:14, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Early Life

"His arch enemy is Jared"? Jared who? Why? Is this legitimate? SpellcheckW7 (talk) 22:36, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism. And removed. Chensiyuan (talk) 23:24, 8 April 2008 (UTC)