Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Connecticut Huskies in the WNBA Draft/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 Giants2008 22:05, 11 April 2012.

List of Connecticut Huskies in the WNBA Draft

 * Nominator(s): –Grondemar 02:02, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

I based this new list on the current FL List of Oklahoma Sooners in the NBA and WNBA Drafts. I also pulled from the NFL draft FLs as well as my previous FL Huskies of Honor. I believe this list fully meets WP:FLCR and invite your review. Note that unlike this Oklahoma list this is a list of only women's basketball players; I believe 23 draftees is plenty for a stand-alone list. I plan to build List of Connecticut Huskies in the NBA Draft subsequently. –Grondemar 02:02, 11 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Image review: File:WNBA Sue Bird cropped.jpg should use instead of  . Otherwise, all used images appear to be free and are properly tagged as such.  Good  raise  23:42, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Fixed as requested. –Grondemar 05:45, 18 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose – Criterion 3b. Sorry, but I don't see any reason why this shouldn't be included as part of a combined NBA and WNBA Draft list, like Oklahoma's. I just checked how many men's draft picks Connecticut had, and the number is actually one fewer than the Sooners. We're talking about a net difference of 11 players from Oklahoma's list to what a combined Connecticut list would contain. I don't think that's enough to support two lists. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 01:11, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose, per Giants.  Good raise  12:01, 16 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I strongly disagree with the rationale behind the two above opposes. I will provide a full response later today.  I request patiences from the FLC delegates until I can post my full response. –Grondemar 17:30, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

In regards to the above oppose rationale provided by Giants2008 and concurred with by Goodraise, I object on the following grounds:


 * It proposes merging two different subject areas into a single list: men's basketball and women's basketball. While basketball is indeed a single sport with a common set of rules, there are significant differences in both the rulesets and the style of play between men's and women's basketball at both the collegiate and professional levels.  Among the differences at the collegiate level include length of the shot clock (35 seconds in men's, 30 seconds in women's), location of the three-point line, and certain violations such as ten-seconds-in-the-backcourt.  Similar rule differences exist between the NBA and WNBA.  The style of play between men's and women's basketball is even more of a apparent difference: men's basketball is characterized by "above-the-rim" play with slam dunks while the women's game plays more "below-the-rim" as in general women do not dunk.


 * It is not consistent with how reliable sources treat the subjects. Reliable sources treat men's and women's basketball as two independent sports. ESPN, as an example reliable source, has separate pages for men's and women's basketball at both the college and professional level:   . You will be hard-pressed to find any reliable source that simultaneously discusses both the NBA and WNBA Drafts.  The two drafts occur months apart.  While the WNBA is still managed by the NBA, most of the WNBA teams are now independent of NBA teams.  The NBA and WNBA are separate entities drafting from different sets of players.  It does not make sense to insist on the merger of men's and women's basketball content in featured lists when no reliable source organizes itself that way.


 * It is not consistent with how other Wikipedia articles are structured. In general, the format for university athletic department articles is to have an overview article at UNIVERSITYNAME NICKNAME such as Connecticut Huskies or Oklahoma Sooners.  These articles then if needed per WP:SUMMARY have subarticles on each sport, such as Connecticut Huskies men's basketball and Connecticut Huskies women's basketball.  You'll notice that Connecticut Huskies basketball is a disambiguation page, not an article about both programs.  If there is any university that has a common article for both their men's and women's basketball programs I would be interested in learning about it.  This draft list exists as a stand-alone list rather than an embedded list because merging it into Connecticut Huskies women's basketball would be WP:UNDUE.  The standard for whether a stand-alone list should exist should be whether it would overwhelm its parent article, not whether it could be merged into another list with another defined scope.


 * It is not consistent with other featured lists. The vast majority of basketball featured lists  only discuss men's basketball.  No current featured list only discusses women's basketball; of the lists that discuss both men's and women's basketball, there are as follows: List of members of the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame and List of coaches in the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame, where it makes sense to cover both men's and women's basketball in these lists, since the Hall of Fame inducts from both sports; Huskies of Honor, a university-wide recognition program that includes inductees from men's and women's basketball as well as other athletic personnel (John Toner); and List of Oklahoma Sooners in the NBA and WNBA Drafts as well as List of Oklahoma Sooners head basketball coaches.  The Oklahoma Sooner articles are the only basketball FLs that cover both men's and women's basketball, and in reviewing the history it appears the only reason these were merged is that the nominator felt that the women's lists would be too short to pass on their own.  I submit that 25 entries is not "too short" for an FL.  Additionally, if it is required to cover both men's and women's basketball in every featured list, we should look at delisting lists such as List of North Carolina Tar Heels men's basketball head coaches, List of Texas Tech Red Raiders head basketball coaches, Big East Conference Men's Basketball Player of the Year, 2008 NBA Draft, List of National Basketball Association awards, and so forth.

I am very interested in your response. Thanks, –Grondemar 01:35, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose struck. Connecticut Huskies basketball being a disambiguation page is the argument that convinced me. In my opinion, the nominated list does not presently violate criterion 3b.  Good raise  01:05, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Mine is too. I'm still a little shaky on the list based on the minimal increase in size from an already featured list, but the argument that the two teams each have subarticles is a strong one. I'll probably end up refraining from supporting after a more thorough review due to my concern, but I won't oppose over it. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 02:21, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your reconsideration. –Grondemar 05:42, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Comments – Giants2008 ( Talk ) 00:14, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 * In the second paragraph, the hyphen in "win-loss record" should be an en dash.
 * Fixed. –Grondemar 23:16, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Alt text for the images would be a nice luxury.
 * After all of the debate on alt text over the years I notice that WP:ALT isn't labelled a policy, a guideline, or even an essay. It would be nice if there was some kind of consensus to include alt text and of what that alt text should consist.  For now, I added "refer to caption" to the alt parameters of each of the images. –Grondemar 23:16, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 * In the Notes column, I don't believe the "Champion" in "WNBA Champion" warrants the capitalization.
 * Changed as requested. –Grondemar 23:16, 19 February 2012 (UTC)


 * One thing: Could you add wikilinks to the names in the captions of the images?
 * Other than that, Support -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 01:37, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Done, and thanks for the review! –Grondemar 02:58, 12 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Support - with comment. "three players—Taurasi, Charles, and Moore" - there are two Moores in the list, so you'll need her first name here. Good job on archiving all of the references- means I get to skip my spiel here, though note if you care that if you add |deadurl=no to the reference, then the current page will be listed first, not the archived version- super-optional, though. I have no problems with the WNBA list being separate from the NBA list. -- Pres N  19:54, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I have addressed all of your comments. I did not know about the deadurl parameter and will make use of it going forward.  Thanks for the review! –Grondemar 00:01, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Comment some double full stops in the refs e.g. 37, 39, 45, 47, 49... need to be fixed, and I think since you have "Center / Forward" and "Forward / Center" (I guess meaning the first is the usual position but can play the second?) you should have a note to explain why you have this. I don't think Notes need to be sortable either. But other than that, I'll support. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:47, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I fixed the first and last points above. Regarding the ordering of positions, these were generally based on what the sources said rather than any kind of editorial judgement, so I'm not sure what I can say here. Thanks for the review. –Grondemar 02:13, 4 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Support The Rambling Man (talk) 11:42, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.