Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of United States Military Academy alumni (athletic figures)/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 Scorpion0422 23:34, 13 June 2009.

List of United States Military Academy alumni (athletic figures)

 * Nominator(s):  — Rlevse • Talk  • 17:36, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Another list in the series of West Point alumni.  — Rlevse • Talk  • 17:36, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Its a short list but it looks good to me.--Kumioko (talk) 01:50, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Support from KV5  ( Talk  •  Phils ) 11:55, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Comments and questions
 * I agree with Killervogel, either use General reference or General because there's only one general reference. I tend to use the latter, but it's simply a stylistic thing between the two.
 * Is this done with "External links" when they only have one link too? But Dabomb has now made them all "General" in this topic series. This sort of reminds me of the issues that the date delinking arb case was about, thankfully that case is about to close ;-)  — Rlevse • Talk  • 22:25, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The difference in the sizes of the two images in the lead is visually disconcerting. I would suggest either increasing the size of the logo slightly or decreasing the graduation picture slightly so they are more equal in size. That, or you could drop one of them, but I think they're both great images.
 * I think they're fine. But I've made the smaller one a bit bigger, the same size as the smaller one in the USMA Astros list.  — Rlevse • Talk  • 22:25, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Why on this list is the default sorting by year of graduation rather than name? It makes sense to do it chronologically on the superintendant list (where you are listing the holders of a single office chronologically) or even on the list of medal of honor winners (where again the list is sorted into chronological sections based on the wars where the medals were earned). However, there seems little reason for that sorting here, so it would seem to make more sense to sort in the default method for lists of people generally, that is alphabetically by last name in the first column of the table.
 * Consistency in the USMA alum topic. I'm making them as similar as possible.  — Rlevse • Talk  • 22:25, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * ...and I guess it's moot because of the sortability. Geraldk (talk) 22:38, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * There's a hanging semi-colon in James Hartinger's entry.
 * Fixed. <span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 22:25, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * In the notability for some entries you lead with information about athletics (Ronald Zinn), and in some you lead with information about their military careers (Doc Blanchard). It's debatable on the grounds of notability, but personally I would begin with their athletics information because that's the topic of the list. I know for some of them they are more notable for their military careers, but readers of this specific list are likely to be most interested in the athletics.
 * It can also be argued that since it's a military school the mil info should be first. I've added mil info where it's known on those who had it missing.<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 22:25, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I was just looking for internal consistency. Fine now. Geraldk (talk) 22:38, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * "The Academy was founded in March 1802 and graduated its first Cadet in October 1802." - in the second paragraph of the lead but repeats information in the first paragraph.
 * Cut the dupe in second para. <span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 22:25, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Please include more information in the lead about the athletics program at the Academy. You mention the academic curriculum, but very little about the athletics program. Is athletics an emphasis at the Academy? etc.
 * Added a para. <span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 22:25, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Geraldk (talk) 13:20, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Support Geraldk (talk) 22:38, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I'd recommend including John Roosma. He's a member of the Basketball Hall of Fame,  and Army's basketball MVP award is named after him.  Zagalejo^^^ 02:13, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Why was Roosma at The Point 5 years? I added him.<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 02:21, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Not sure, exactly. I'll see if I can find more information. Zagalejo^^^ 02:36, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:35, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:23, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Comment – There are several categories for Army Black Knights athletes and coaches in use here; football players have one, for example. Has an effort been made to check these categories for possible additions to this list?  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 23:18, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, what I did here was list people noted for outstanding athletic achievement (ex: Patton, placing high in the Olympics) or noted primarily for their athletic achievements (Anita Allen, a noted world class athlete). I've just added the dynamic list tag, which is very applicable to a list such as this. Many of the people in those lists are not noted for athletics, they just happened to play on a team at West Point (ex: Eisenhower and Schwarzkopf). If I missed someone who was in the Olymipics or otherwise athletically notable, we can surely add them. Merely having played on a team does not warrant inclusion in a list such as this in my opinion. <span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 01:09, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * PS, I want to add Eddie Doyle (American football) but I can't find his year of graduation. And I think Ed Beard (American football) was Class of 1964 but I'm not sure.<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 01:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Good. Now that I know it's not for just regular athletes, I can move on to offering my usual review.
 * At the start of the second paragraph, there is one sport that isn't covered by the leagues mentioned: football, Army's most historically famous sport. Could this possibly be given a tweak?
 * "Three alumni are recipients of the Heisman Trophy". Should probably be said that this is a college football award to benefit non-college football fans. I'm guessing it could be "of college football's Heisman Trophy", but adjust that as needed.
 * The Heisman bit is repeated in the third paragraph. Don't they qualify as athletes?
 * Mike Krzyzewski note: "men's basketball gold medal-winning team head coach 2008 Summer Olympics; three time NCAA national champion NCAA national champions." Two glitches here; I'm sure you don't need me to tell you what the first one is. Second one is that there should be a comma or "at" before 2008.
 * Not sure about a couple of these sources. Hickok Sports (ref 16) has been questioned more than a few times at FLC, and we can probably do better than Coach K's official site (ref 37).  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 23:19, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * All fixed. <span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 23:58, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The sources above are still being used, in unison with new references. If the new refs cover everything, I'd be inclined to remove the old ones.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 23:17, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Since the old ones concur with the new ones, what's the problem? <span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 23:41, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * We should be careful about using questionable sources, especially if better ones that cover the same territory exist. If the old sources don't back up anything more than the new ones, why are they even needed?  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 02:25, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Dabomb said "Sources look good" so it seems he disagrees with you. Maybe they're not so questionable. I'll let you two work it out. <span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 10:10, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I said "sources" look good because I thought the old ones had been replaced. There's no reason really to keep the [old] sources. It also looks better when the sources we use are all high-quality. Remove 'em, I say. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:23, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * OK. Rm'd them. <span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 20:15, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Support – Nice list overall.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 22:18, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.