Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/John Beilein/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by SandyGeorgia 22:20, 27 January 2010.

John Beilein

 * Nominator(s): TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:20, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because I am hoping to convert WP:GT 2008–09 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team into a WP:FT at some point. This article has been through a recent WP:PR and it is becoming high quality. I would appreciate feedback. TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:20, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Oppose
 * Again, are we going to have to go through the overlinking thing? Head coach is not worth implying to our readers that diverting to that article is at all useful. It starts: "A head coach, senior coach or manager is a professional at training and developing sports men and women. They typically hold a more public profile and are paid more than other coaches. In some sports such as soccer and baseball, the head coach is usually called a manager, whilst in other sports such as Australian rules football they are generally termed a senior coach." Gee, that is so useful. So to start with can you go through the whole article and apply modern linking practices, please? Tony   (talk)  07:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I am glad to see you have chosen to allocate some time to getting involved in this article. All articles are improved by your involvement.  Unfortunately, I have a low success rate at FAC when you are involved in my articles.  Generally, this is because we don't see eye to eye on a lot of basic issues in terms of linking usage.  I am certainly willing to take your advice into account.  However, you know I generally believe a lot of things should be linked that you do not. In this case, we have an article that you have chosen to say take a lot of links that I included in the article because I believ they should be included.  However, you chose not to really give much guidance on what things to remove.  I would be much better able to improve this article if you were to be more extensive in this suggestion.  I will, however, attempt to consider removing some links tomorrow.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 09:07, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose Choppy prose that needs copy editing. Also over-referencing is another stylistic issue. Philosophically I agree that some statements in many articles need to be cited to more than one source; however, I think this practice should be restrained by WP:COMMONSENSE, esp. in the sense that only more problematic or controversial statements usually need this sort of treatment. &bull; Ling.Nut 14:41, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * In terms of references, Beilein has frequently worked in two newspaper cities.  Often, when I have the time, I track down the story from both when I write.  In this case, there are many instances of this type of referencing.  I don't see the harm in this technique.  I don't think you are saying I am referencing too many statements, but rather too many statements have multiple refs.  Is that correct?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:48, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with the above comments. If articles could have illnesses then this one would pass as having a serious case of overlinking and overreferencing. One might think the more references the better right, but from what I see it is a MoS issue.   Burningview    ✉  21:43, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment. Alt text is present (thanks), except that the lead image (in the infobox) lacks it. Please add some: the template supports that now. Eubulides (talk) 06:31, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

With respect to overlinking, I have just overhauled the article, which may have been costly in the short run. I have incorporated cbb link so that each team season is sought in a link, but general articles are accepted. This will probably make the article less palatable to you link worrywart in the short run, because until there is more extensive article creation for basketball seasons, we will have redundancies to general articles. In terms of continueing to improve the article I need to understand a couple of things. The following are commonly linked items in the article: Aside from these linkes there are not many links in the article. So which of these are you against?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:43, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) notable athletes
 * 2) notable coaches
 * 3) NCAA tournament seasons
 * 4) NIT tournament seasons
 * 5) Conference tournament seasons
 * 6) Opposing teams (now using cbb link to attempt to link to team season many of which do not exist yet)
 * 7) Basketball conferences


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.