Talk:1973–74 Buffalo Braves season

Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Good article1973–74 Buffalo Braves season has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Did You Know Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 16, 2010Good article nomineeNot listed
October 10, 2010Good article nomineeNot listed
October 17, 2010Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on April 28, 2010.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the Buffalo Braves first made the NBA playoffs during their 1973–74 season?
Current status: Good article

GA Review edit

This review is transcluded from Talk:1973–74 Buffalo Braves season/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Wizardman Operation Big Bear 19:31, 16 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

My concerns with the length and lack of detail, as I had with the other Buffalo articles, apply here, and as such I'm failing it. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 19:31, 16 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

GA Review edit

This review is transcluded from Talk:1973–74 Buffalo Braves season/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 14:01, 10 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: fixed six dabs.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 14:06, 10 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Linkrot: one dead link found and tagged.[2] Jezhotwells (talk) 14:12, 10 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Checking against GA criteria edit

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
    ... for the expansion Buffalo Braves franchise ... Please explain what an expansion franchise is for those unfamiliar with basketball terminology.
    ... the team made a series of player transactions that were part of the resume that earned Buffalo Braves General Manager Eddie Donovan the NBA Executive of the Year Award ... "resumé" (note the accent) is not the right word here.
    Donovan's season compounded his reputation as a wheeler and dealer. Compounded is not right either.
    Prior to the 1973–74 NBA season ...; Prior to the start of the season the Braves... Two sentences starting with the same phrase. Clumsy.
    The Braves drafted four players in the 1973 NBA Draft who played for the 1973–74 team: DiGregorio, Ken Charles, Mike Macaluso, and Jim Garvin Clumsy, rephrase for clarity.
    The team reached five games over .500 several time Surely "times"?
    Two weeks later on November 28, the Braves were victimized by Pete Maravich who entered the game in the second quarter and posted 42 points off the bench to lead the Atlanta Hawks over the Braves by 130–106. Victimized? This is really too full of jargon.
    It was the last time in NBA history that one player averaged both 30 points and 15 rebounds in an NBA season. Last time? Has the NBA folded?
    However, the Braves had won the most recent two matches after 22 straight defeats, including 5 earlier this season. Surely "that season"?
    Weasel words such as "blew", "erupted"
    Then when a McAdoo shot fell out of the rim, McMillian tipped the ball in as time expired for the victory. Clumsy, rephrase for clarity.
    Overall, poorly written, jargon laden. Put yourself in the place of someone who knows less about basketball than you obviously do. Good encyclopaedia articles need to be written clearly in good plain English. Take a look at [[WP::WikiProject Military history/Academy/Copy-editing essentials#Language tips]]. Although written for the MilHist project the concepts there apply to all articles. See also Wikipedia:Use plain English. Reorganise the sections such as Transactions, Regular season, etc. so that each has a clear narrative flow, rather than being an almost random assembly of facts.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
    One dead link as noted above.
    Several references appear to have double titles, see #4 & #47 for example.
    Those references that I could access appear mostly OK, but I note an over reliance on Basketball-Reference.com
    ref #16 & #17 don't actually say that the players didn't play in the 73-74 season. They just don't mention that season.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
    Hard to say in the present state of the article. Would be good to see what the press reported about the season. Did the club make money, lose money? What was reported about fan reaction?
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
    It should be explained that the Memorial stadium is the one nearest the camera.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  
    This needs a lot of work, especially on the pose, so I shall not be listing it at this time. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:07, 10 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

GA Review edit

This review is transcluded from Talk:1973–74 Buffalo Braves season/GA3. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Wizardman Operation Big Bear 16:00, 11 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Since this is just going to keep getting nominated, I'll do a review of it to try and get it to GA status, not bothering with a quick-fail. First thing I noticed is that the regular season section is still rather short. Much like the baseball and hockey articles that are GAs, the regular season should have a month-by-month breakdown. Expand that as such and I'll get to looking over everything else. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 16:00, 11 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Aside from American football, where week-by-week detail is reasonable due to the fact that the season has a much more limited number of games, it seems that there is only one other pre-internet era (c.1996-present) professional sport (admittedly I only looked for baseball, basketball and hockey) season GA (1985–86 Calgary Flames season). That was recently promoted and not held to the standard that you request. However, that aside, the request will take a bit of research. I am not sure how much notable stuff happened apart from what is mentioned, but I will try.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:19, 11 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
I have reorganized the content that was there a bit more. Is it ready for your perusal?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:06, 11 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
It's looking better, yes. What I would do is look through Google Archives, using various search terms for the buffalo team, if you're struggling to find more information to add in. There's not a huge amount of information since it is pre-internet, but it is out there. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 01:21, 12 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
How is it now?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:26, 12 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
This has inspired me to expand the subsequent two seasons that are also at GAC.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:07, 13 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
Definitely looking better, though even some more is probably possible. I'll review it tomorrow, so I'll be able to tell more clearly where the article's lacking, if it is at all. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 02:24, 15 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Anyway, here's the issues I found in the review:

  • "After three consecutive 60-loss seasons, the team made the NBA playoffs for the first time and became the youngest team to have done so in terms of average player age." were they the youngest that season, or are they an all-time team in this regard? I presume the former, but if it's the latter then that can be emphasized a bit more. Noted in the playoffs section, though a reword in the lead would be alright.
  • "The Elmore Smith trade, which was controversial at first," Any controversy I would add in with the offseason trade note. I know the Lakers brought him in as possibly taking over for Chamberlain, but I'm not finding much on Buffalo's end. If nothing else, note that they traded 'their top scorer and rebounder' in Smith.[3]
  • "The Braves played several home games at the historic Maple Leaf Gardens in Toronto" 'the historic' isn't needed.
  • "1974 NBA Rookie of the Year DiGregorio, earned" unnecessary comma
  • "21 rebounds, that earned the Braves a victory." score?
  • "The Braves lost for the 20th consecutive time to the Celtics that night[33]" needs punctuation
  • "21 wins which matched their total of" comma after wins
  • "On February 1, the Braves traded Kunnert and Wohl to the Rockets for Goukas and Marin." who? (need full names and links for the Rockets players, and Rockets should also be linked).
  • "The Braves made the playoffs by finishing in 3rd place in the Atlantic Division." This is in a weird spot in the article. I'd move it at the end of the paragraph, rewording now that it'll be there.
  • "Through 4 games, the series was even at 2 games. However the Celtics would pull away with 2 more wins to take the series in 6 games." spell out numbers.

Wizardman Operation Big Bear 23:16, 16 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Couple more things, then we're good to go.

  • "victory despite balanced scoring by the Celtics who were had three 20-point scorers:" -were
  • Were there any major trades/coaching changes that happened right at the end? I imagine not since they were a much-improved team, but it so then a section on that could be added. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 01:03, 17 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Alright, after quite a bit of work, I think this article is finally worthy of GA status, so I'm passing it. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 01:14, 17 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 1973–74 Buffalo Braves season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:39, 9 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 1973–74 Buffalo Braves season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:08, 15 June 2017 (UTC)Reply