Talk:Celtics–Lakers rivalry/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Y E ^Tropical ^Cyclone 18:36, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here are my comments:

"but it was small consolation in a decade where the Lakers would go without a championship, every one of their Finals' losses in that decade coming at the hands of the Celtics." source
"The 1982-1983 season would also be the rookie year of Laker James Worthy, another hall of famer in the storied rivalry.[37]" capitlze Hall of Famer?

Is Hall of Famer a proper noun? I'm not so sure about that myself.

"The Celtics would win in seven games, increasing their record of Finals' series victories against the Lakers to 8-0." source?
"

Regular Season: Johnson's Lakers won 10 of 17 games.

Johnson: 20.5 ppg, 7.1 rpg, 12.2 apg Bird: 23.0 ppg, 11.6 rpg, 6.5 apg

" source? Adn this should be in a table format.

"The Lakers-Celtics rivalry temporarily died down in the 1990s" source
"However, the Lakers would begin the rebuilding process in 1996 by trading for a player by the name of Kobe Bryant, who had been drafted from high school that year by the Charlotte Hornets" no need for by the name

This has already been corrected.

"Thereafter, Shaq went to the Miami Heat. The Lakers would miss the playoffs the following year and fail to advance to the Finals for the next three years." source?
"The Celtics likewise made little playoff progress after their near Finals run of 2002, when they made the playoffs at all" IMO a word is missing here

This has already been corrected.

"With the addition of Allen and Garnett alongside Pierce to become the new "Big Three," the Celtics would return to the top of the NBA in the 2007-2008 season by posting the best record in the league and make it to the Finals. The Lakers also returned to the Finals with the help of the mid-season acquisition of Pau Gasol" Do you mean Big Four

Big Four? If you're referring to + Rondo, IIRC those references didn't start showing up until he became a factor in 2009-2010.

"The next season, the Lakers and Celtics would play a regular season game on Christmas Day.[74]" who won?

The Lakers. I suppose I could throw that in there.

"However, both teams would have to fend off late series surges from their opponents, but would win their respective series 4-2 and set up a rematch in the 2010 NBA Finals." source?
"The Celtics would sign Shaq for the 2010-2011 season to replace the injured Kendrick Perkins, adding to the rivalry by bringing the Shaq-Kobe feud to the Celtics-Lakers." who's Shaq?

I assume you're being facetious and just mean that his full name should be spelled out. If so, already corrected.

Who won the meetings in 2009-10, 2008-09, and 2010-11.

Regular season meeting are not mentioned. I considered it, but to do so for the last three years would mean that we'd have to do it for all the other years too, wouldn't it? That would make the article awfully cluttered, especially as in the early years those meetings were more than twice a year. If you look, you'll see a table of regular season meetings at the end of the article. To my knowledge, other rivalry articles do not mention every single regular season meeting between the teams. The Celtics-Lakers rivalry is based primarily upon their Finals meetings anyway.

"This was the first NBA Finals series between the Lakers and Celtics after the Lakers moved to Los Angeles." source?
"Boston would win game one. However, the Lakers would edge out for close victories in Game 2 and Game 3. " mention West's layup

Will add it if I find a source.

Copyedit the 1963 NBA Finals section
Wikilink Lou Mohs if he has an article

This shoudn't be a problem.

Didn't Jerry West explode during the 1965 playoffs? Put that in the article.

Not sure what you mean by "explode," but I haven't seen a source for such and, given that seems to be a problem in much of the rest of your review, will obviously not add it without a source.

In the summary section, what happened to the Lakers during the years they made the finals, but lost

I'm confused by what you mean here. What specifically do you want referenced when you say "what happened"? How did the rosters change during the off season? Would require more specificity before doing anything about this.

In the summary section during the 1960's mention what actually happened during the series.

I actually started to do this, but felt it started to affect readability and make that subsection too long.

"With Bill Russell and Sam Jones in their final season, Boston's dynasty was but a memory. The Celtics were the league's oldest team and struggled to make the NBA playoffs as the fourth and final seed in the Eastern Conference. They upset the 76ers in the first round and postponed New York's finals appearance for another year. Awaiting the Celtics were the powerful Los Angeles Lakers who had a nucleus of Jerry West, Elgin Baylor and newly acquired Wilt Chamberlain."source?
Wikilink Mel counts
"By virtue of a 62–20 record, the Celtics had homecourt advantage over the Lakers who finished the regular season with a 54–28 mark. The first two games were played at the Celtics home court, the Boston Garden, while the next two were held at the Lakers home court, The Forum in Inglewood, California. The Celtics then hosted games 5 and 7 while the Lakers would host game 6." source?
"The game was known as the "Heat Game", as it was played under 97-degree heat, and without any air conditioning at the infamous Boston Garden" which unit?

Fahrenheit. If you really feel that should be added, I'll do so.

As such, I am falling this GAN. Y E ^Tropical ^Cyclone 18:36, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your feedback. I'll work on your comments, but unfortunately am busy in real life and may take awhile to work on these corrections. I must admit being unfamiliar with this process, but am also surprised at the level of detail in your commentary. My understanding from the review of Wikipedia:Good article criteria and Wikipedia:Compare Criteria Good v. Featured was that a GAN didn't need to meet such extensive criteria. Also, being unfamiliar with the process, when you fail the article is that the final say, or do other people have the opportunity to review?

As I said, I will try to address your concerns but real life must take precedence, of course. I worked really hard on the article (you should look at the past version) and decided to try for GAN since my impression was that it met the criteria. If not, no biggie. I will either work on it when I can in attempt to meet the criteria, or otherwise withdraw the nomination if I don't have the time to address your concerns. I think the article is much improved regardless. Thanks! TempDog123 (talk) 19:17, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Take you time addressing these. the GAN is simple, but the main reason I failed it is because, it lacked the sources it needed. When you fail an article, it is the final say until you re-nominate it again. Yes, I did look at past versions of the article and yes it improved quite a bit. If you have an question, feel free the contact me via talk page. Y E ^Tropical ^Cyclone 19:46, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I do have some immediate responses to your comments and have inlined them above. Thanks! TempDog123 (talk) 19:45, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to my comments inlined above, I note that you are a Lakers fan (as am I). However, many of your suggestions for adding content deal exculsively with the Lakers and not the Celtics. Even if we "hate the Celtics" (I do not) we of course must be unbiased in the article. If I were to add such information regarding the Lakers, for instance, I would feel obligated to add equivalent information for the Celtics as well. That is a tall order in terms of conducting research for additional information. Thus far, I have tried to strike a careful balance regarding the two teams, but do not want to add further information that might be superluous and bloat the article. TempDog123 (talk) 22:24, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]