Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:37, 24 March 2009

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Biography: Sports and Games This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by the sports and games work group (assessed as High-importance).

	Kobe Bryant was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result May 27, 2008 Good article nominee Not listed July 16, 2008 Peer review Reviewed December 31, 2008 Good article nominee Not listed
Current status: Former good article nominee

Archives
March 2005 - December 2006 January 2007 - November 2007 December 2007 - April 2008 March 2008 - July 2008

Kobe Bryant accomplishments and records

I see someone split off Kobe Bryant accomplishments and records. This had been done once before and had been reverted. What was the logic of splitting this off again into an article that is again sort of unstructured.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:43, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I did the split since I felt the section was too big and should be in another article. If you don't agree, just revert it or talk about this more right here. -- K. Annoyomous24 00:09, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Chopping it is not so good because it looks like a chopped article. Can you turn the split article into something good. Maybe work towards a WP:FL.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:21, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I would do it as soon as I can but currently, I am busy with the other lists I'm trying get to WP:FL. The estimate time that I'll make Kobe Bryant accomplishments and records a featured list is around October. -- K. Annoyomous24 03:18, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Nominated for deletion

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Kobe Bryant accomplishments and records. Zodiiak (talk) 17:51, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Sexual harassment allegations

Am I the only one that believes that the allegations of sexual sexual are being giving undue weight throughout his article and especially in the opening paragrapghs, considering Bryant was not actually convicted of anything? We need to reach a consensus on this matter, and possibly trim it down. Lakerking04 (talk) 21:13, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree that it should be moved somewhere outside of the lead and intro. This is consistent with other articles about people in with similar controversies. Does anyone else have any input on this? If not, I will move it soon. --DerRichter (talk) 20:02, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Any objections to me removing it? --Ted87 (talk) 18:35, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that Zodiiak character will be against this. Honestly, I don't see why it should be in the lead of the article. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 21:56, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Check out the lead for Mike Tyson who was found guilty of sexual assualt. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 23:15, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Comparing this article to Mike Tyson's is kind of ehh...If you could find an article that has/has had controversy(ies) in the lead of the article, then I'll support the removal, since right now, I would like to have that section on the lead per WP:LEAD. -- ]_{call me Keith} 01:39, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, everything in the article must be summarized in the lead, so your edit to remove the paragraph on the sexual harassment case is incorrect. Btw, you revert three times, so beware of WP:3RR.—Chris! _ct 01:45, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Just because the lead of Mike Tyson incorrectly misses mentioning the sexual assault, doesn't mean this one should do the same.—Chris! _ct 01:49, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

See R. Kelly, notice the lead has nothing on his child pornography charges which were highly controversial?.. This Kobe Bryant article already has a sexual assault section within the article, and a totally seperate article on the whole case: http://en.wikipedia.org/Kobe_Bryant_sexual_assault_case . Having it also on the lead as well is pushing it a bit for a case that was dropped by the accuser. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 02:04, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

You are missing the point. It doesn't matter what other articles looks like. We have to comply with Misplaced Pages policy.—Chris! _ct 02:09, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, Yes it has to comply with wikipedia policy, but it also has to be consistent with other articles. And you have yet to give me another case similar to Bryants thats also pushed up into the lead of the article. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 02:20, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

No, it doesn't have to be consistent with other articles. There is no policy on that. Just because other articles is doing it incorrectly, doesn't mean we should do it incorrectly here.—Chris! _ct 02:31, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

It's more like you overdoing it than anything else. It doesn't NEED to be in the lead. Give me a valid reason as to why you want it there. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 02:47, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

By that logic, if I find that most Misplaced Pages articles lack references, then I should remove all references from Misplaced Pages for consistency. As for the valid reason, here's an excerpt from the lead of WP:LEAD: "The lead should ... summarize the most important points—including any notable controversies that may exist." Thus, if Bryant's sexual assault allegation is notable, then it should be included as per WP:LEAD. —LOL /_C 02:54, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

This article talks quite a bit about the assault -- it even has a forked article. A brief mention in the lead is warranted. Chensiyuan (talk) 03:09, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

If there is no more objection, I am restoring it to the lead.—Chris! _ct 03:21, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Objection! It also talks a ton about the Kobe-Shaq feud in the article and there's a "forked article" on it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/Shaq-Kobe_feud Yet I don't see anything about it in the lead.. Hmm.. I see the inconsistencies and the agendas are very clear. So 3 users for and 3 against, no consensus here just yet. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 03:29, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, the Shaq-Kobe feud is not as notable as the sexual harassment allegations, so it shouldn't be in the lead. And you are the only one who oppose, so it doesn't matter.—Chris! _ct 03:41, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Again, just because something similar is absent it doesn't mean his sexual assault case shouldn't be mentioned. WP:LEAD clearly supports its inclusion, and we can add a mention of the feud later if it really is notable. I really don't see this as an issue that requires consensus because we're educating you about policies instead of discussing the article as an exception to them. Even if this were to default as "no consensus", the mention would be kept because it was in the article prior to this discussion. And please do elaborate on how "the agendas are very clear". —LOL /_C 03:46, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Chris, civility here...and JoeJohnson2, we all make mistakes. Hope you read WP:LEAD or any other WP:MOS before arguing about anything within the article. -- ]_{call me Keith} 03:48, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

How am I being uncivil?—Chris! _ct 03:51, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

And you are the only one who oppose, so it doesn't matter. Yeahh...WP:Bite. -- ]_{call me Keith} 04:00, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

"we're educating you about policies" I already know the policies sweety. What you need to do is tone down on the POV pushing. The allegation to me isn't important or notable enough to be mentioned in the lead, and of course we do need to come to consensus on this issue because the importance of the case all comes down to opinion and I disagree with you. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 04:04, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Because you cited the Mike Tyson and R. Kelly articles in favour of your argument, it is clear to me that you are not familiar with the policies, "sweety". I'm really not pushing any POV; I'm simply enforcing a guideline—WP:LEAD—as I regularly do with WP:MOS. You've now switched from an WP:OTHERSTUFF-like argument to claiming that the sexual assault allegations were "not notable enough to be mentioned in the lead", so I'll let the others comment on how notable this case was. —LOL /_C 04:18, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Just like to comment on 2 things

1. According to Misplaced Pages:LEAD "Well-publicized recent events affecting an article subject, whether controversial or not, should be kept in historical perspective. What is most recent is not necessarily what is most notable". The main reason I object putting the info in the lead is because it was added at a time when it was well publicized and talked about. As time went on, it's significances has died down. Bryant's image is rebuilt and the media never talks about the allegations anymore.
2. The point that should be brought up is that Bryant was acquitted of the chargers. Which means not only was he not found of any wrong doing, it basically says there wasn't enough to even continue to accuse him.

Just my 2 cents --Ted87 (talk) 04:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

How about just shortening the section on the sexual harassment allegations in the lead? -- ]_{call me Keith} 04:22, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

How about we just leave it out of the lead entirely? JoeJohnson2 (talk) 04:37, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Infobox picture

Currently, I don't really like the picture of Kobe Bryant without his jersey on since it doesn't show what he is, a basketball player. So I want a vote to see which one should be the Infobox picture. Sorry if this isn't allowed or if you think this is a bad idea.

Here are the pictures I selected that could be the infobox picture:

• Image:Kobe Bryant Profile.jpg
• Image:Kobe Bryant Free Throw.jpg
• Image:Kobe 2007.jpg
• Image:20080810 d-1024-627v.jpg Image:20080810 d-1024-627v.jpg

• Currently, I choose Image:20080810 d-1024-627v.jpg.' as Howcheng said that you can't see Bryant's face in the free throw shot. I choose the current one because of the resolution and as per above. -- K. Annoyomous24 02:57, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
• Prefer Kobe Bryant Profile (I originally uploaded this, but thought it was a copyvio, when it really wasn't) or Kobe 2007 -- you can't see his face in the free throw shot. howcheng {chat} 02:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
• Prefer Kobe Bryant Profile, too, because of its quality. It doesn't matter whether he wears his jersey or not since he is a widely recognized basketball player. (Don't pretend to be a basketball fan if you don't know who is Kobe :) Just kidding!)—Chris! _ct 05:27, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

You know all Misplaced Pages readers aren't basketball fans. Some people may not even know who Kobe Bryant is (even though I think people should know him better). I am a huge Kobe Bryant fan as I have a number 24 on my username. So I'm going to stick with my choice until more people give their opinions on ths situation. -- K. Annoyomous24 03:57, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

• I think that we should assume that anyone that checks Kobe's page are not familiar with him. Misplaced Pages being an online resource should show every detail important and verifiable regardless of the knowledge of the person checking the page. So I choose kobe 2007. Just my two cents.Paulinprogress (talk) 19:14, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Height

http://www.celebheights.com/s/LeBron-James-3984.html http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg34/NBA7902/NBA%20Height%20Comparison/73357840.jpg

A bit less than 6-6, after seeing him beside the 6-4 Wade? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.177.26.40 (talk) 17:57, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

As of now, the NBA website confirms that he is 6'6", so until the NBA confirms that he is indeed 6'4", that is when we wil change it. -- K. Annoyomous24 00:09, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

How do you know that Wade isn't taller instead of Kobe being shorter? ;) --Ted87 (talk) 04:07, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

AC Milan - Barcelona

No reference I can find on the internet states that he is a Barcelona fan, rather a fan of Ronaldinho who previously played at Barcelona. Funnilly enough, Ronaldinho now plays at AC Milan, a club that Kobe has said he supports. Saying that kobe supports Barcelona may be factually incorrect. ManfromDelmonte (talk) 17:03, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Also former Barca coach Frank Rikjard was an AC Milan player when Kobe lived in Italy. Surely this is the more obvious connection to being a fan of that manager? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.233.211.171 (talk) 01:24, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Nationality

He is actually African American not American. Danabrenklin (talk) 23:37, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Nationality refers to the Nation in which he was born, therefore he is American. If we were talking about Ethnicity or Race then the appropriate term would be African American. -- $user log @ 01:08, 17 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by $user log (talk • contribs)

Vanessa Bryant - Merge/Redirect

Would anyone have a huge problem if the Vanessa Bryant article was redirected to Kobe's? There's a merge tag on the article (which lead me here) and since her article is already tagged for questionable notability, I think a redirect or merge is probably the best route. Thoughts? Pinkadelica 04:23, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

I think it would be fine. There's nothing of note on her page that would warrant her own article. Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:31, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

I just feel like in the few intro paragraphs...there is eerything in order from him being son of joe byrant to winning 3 consecutive championships, to being all time nba scorer or 05/06 and 06/07 and then winning mvp in 07/08 and then the gold medal redeem team, then the next paragraph says "in 2003 braynt was accussed of sexual assault" and then it talks about that part of his life. First of all, it is out of place and out of order, second of all that should be a whole section in itself, and should not be on the front fist paragraphs of an NBA legend and a man who made a mistake and has showed he made a mistake, put that at the bottom, so that new comers, new fans of admires of Kobe Bryant don't have to think that is who is is, and repersent him for what he is today, a loving husband, father and one of the greatest basketball players to ever play the game. thanks

Josiah peffer —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jopeff (talk • contribs) 20:48, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

$21,000,000

Is that a year? or over a few years? Y2J RKO (talk) 00:00, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

I assume you're asking about his salary. If so, then that is his salary for the 2008-09 season only. --Ted87 (talk) 07:17, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Past Larry Bird?

Didn't Kobe past Larry Bird's 21,000 points during the 2009 season? —Preceding unsigned comment added by GiGaMan78 (talk • contribs) 12:57, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Kobe didn't pass 20,000 points as the youngest player, he was one day short of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.171.159.242 (talk • contribs) 12:57, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Failed GA

I quick-failed this article as it currently smacks of recentism. The MVP year section (1 season) is currently at least twice as long as the early career and championship years sections (7 seasons). Balance like this needs to be fixed before i would even consider this a pass. Plus, any citation needed statements need to be sourced or rm'd. Wizardman 04:34, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Image

flickr. Chensiyuan (talk) 15:29, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Content

This article is becomming extremely lengthy. There seems to be a bit of trivial or needless information that can be removed. Much of the information seems unencyclopedic -- do we really need to know what video game covers he's been on? Do we really need to know about his commercials? Endorsements can be summarized within a personal life section, I don't think we need an entire subsection for it. Tons of needless recentism on this article that can be removed as well. I encourage users to try to look at the article from a historical perspective to understand what material is really relevant in order to make it a bit more concise. Zodiiak (talk) 05:57, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

• Note: this is the same user who wanted the removal of Kobe Bryant's accomplishments page. It seems to me that you have an agenda. JoeJohnson2 (talk) 11:13, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Agenda? I've been editing on Wikiedpia long before you were here my friend. I have no agenda, I've been improving articles on here long before you edited. If you looked carefully at my edits, you'll see at one point I was actually cleaning up and improving this article. The only agenda seems that you have a strong bias/favortism towards this specific article. Try to remain Neutral in your views before attempting to wash out an opinion with ridiculous suspicions. This is a community, contribute to it rather than forge accusations. Zodiiak (talk) 02:11, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Another thing is that Kobe Bryant got a 1450 on his SAT not a 1080; Shaq said so in his book Shaq Talks Back. Italic text (Dreamblackbelt (talk) 19:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC))

Yes, this article is long, but what would you remove? There doesn't seem to be a section that contains much that is irrelevant. The article doesn't drag on and all info is sourced, so I see no reason to shorten it. And since this article involves recent events it is hard to tell what is proportionally notable until he retires/is inactive. --Ted87 (talk) 21:34, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

• All unassessed articles
• B-Class biography articles
• B-Class biography (sports and games) articles
• High-importance biography (sports and games) articles
• Sports and games work group articles
• WikiProject Biography articles
• Former good article nominees
• Old requests for peer review