Talk:Wes Durham

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Edit conflict on Wes Durham[edit]

I have only just noticed this, but after looking at the history, there's a slow (~1-5 days per rv) but ongoing edit conflict between LBronstein (talk · contribs) and who I am assuming is Dandurham (talk · contribs); the latter acting under IPs 71.32.90.238 (talk · contribs) and 71.35.184.9 (talk · contribs). This edit conflict is not healthy and it needs to stop right now. Now, usually, I'd just revert the vandalous (sp?) addition, but LBronstein (talk · contribs) appears to be acting in good faith, providing the article with good facts. Now, if you kids don't clean up your act and negotiate what parts are encyclopedic, this is going to get ugly, and you're both going to get banned. As the founder of the Georgia Tech WikiProject, I like to see people contributing to GT-related articles such as this one. If you both get banned, articles I'm interested in don't improve. While it's true that neither of you have edited articles not related to someone with the last name of Durham, I would hope that you two are more interested in Wikipedia and would be willing to contribute to the many related articles, or any articles for that matter. A happier, healthier encyclopedia, so to speak.

That being said, you two need to respectfully talk this out. Use the talk page to collaborate on improving the article, in a way you can both appreciate. Look at the articles of other American sports announcers to get ideas on how to improve this article, especially if you find one that is a Good Article or a Featured Article. I'm also going to post this on the talk pages of the users and IPs in question, but I want you two to respond on the talk page of the Wes Durham article. We'll see where it goes from there. Remember, be polite, assume good faith and no personal attacks. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 06:10, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am user Lev Bronstein, and I appreciate your comments. A few notes: I am new to Wikipedia posting, though I read it frequently. The Durham post was my first ever, and I did not understand why what I added kept disappearing. I wondered if it was something I was doing incorrectly, and my response was to keep re-posting it. In the spirit of what has been written, I have refrained from doing so again and will be glad to disuses these comments and try to arrive at an amiable compromise of some sort.
I tried to very hard to maintain a neutral tone in writing and to remember that – as I said - Durham has many admirers, including some in my own circle of Tech enthusiasts. And he also has many detractors, as I note, and I tried to include points from both groups. The quotation is verbatim from a game this year (Va. Tech). I will add that most of my friends who like Durham don’t dispute the accuracy of these observations. He tells lots of stories about game officials, often mentions their hometowns more than once and frequently announces – particularly in basketball – which announcer has whistled a foul, is fascinated by dunks, mentions team defenses infrequently, and interviews people by leading off with several sentences of his own observations. Some people absorb all that and find it charming, and others find it frustrating, but it all happens. Regardless of your opinion, that’s what I conveyed. Or tried to.
I appreciate your remark about other posts. As a longtime observer of Tech athletics, I think I have sometime to add to this project. There are several more posts in the works; today I expanded the posting on Al Ciraldo and added a number of remarks about the Dome. Both, I fear, feature the same characteristics as this post. Regarding the Dome, I aver that the spectator experience feels intimate in a setting that is spacious. I’m not sure if such adjectives will survive objections form others who may feel differently, but one of the things that I value the most about Wikipedia are such notes.
In writing about Durham, I knew the subject was a live person about whom I had heard many varying opinions, and I tried to steer a neutral course there. I hadn’t heard anyone express reservations about the spectating experience at the Dome, so I was more forthright.
I look forward to hearing any other comments on this.
Lev Bronstein 12-15-06 20:57, 15 December 2006 (UTC)~~
Thanks for taking the time to contribute to WP and reply to my post there! I'll reply with a more detailed message later, as I'm doing some other stuff right now. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 22:18, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I find Mr. Bronstein's comments interesting and very enlightening. It sounds very much as if he has spent a good portion of his time listening to my broadcasts, although he has a large degree of "writer's embelishment" on some of this. It also sounds like he has an some issues that no matter what I sound like, he is going to listen somewhere else. In short, I'm not his "cup of tea". Perhaps one day we can visit to talk about the broadcast profession and what he sees as "quality". Cause evidently it is not the work I submit.Wdurham0125 02:15, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I was somewhat startled to read a reply directly from Mr. Durham, and I appreciate his comments. His pride in his work and his strong interest in what others are saying about it is evident. In response to his offer of our sitting down to discuss this: if it is not awkward for him, I would be glad to visit with him (beyond these posts) at some convenient time to learn more about the challenges that he faces and the particulars of the broadcast industry. I am sure that a firsthand view would be informative.

Mr. Durham is certainly accurate in noting that I am very familiar with his broadcasting. When it comes to Tech sports, I - like most listeners - have no other radio sources, other than the UGa network for games against that school, which is not a choice I have ever made. I attend many Tech games (primarily football, basketball, volleyball, and baseball) every year, watch others on TV, and listen to almost all the others that are available on radio. I first went to Grant Field as a child in 1956, to the Coliseum the following season, and have watched Tech baseball games in all 3 versions of the stadium used for that sport. The children in my life knew all these locales from a very young age, and I listened to Al Ciraldo and Jack Hurst before hearing Mr. Durham. My observations about his broadcasting are a by-product of these and many more experiences.

What I would envision discussing with Mr. Durham is rather distinct from what I would say if I were summarizing varying opinions about his work, as I did in the post. I will add that his personal style of broadcasting – like that of everyone who expresses themselves openly in written or verbal form – will inevitably evolve and change over time in various ways, no doubt influenced to some degree by both praise and criticism from all sorts of sources. Whatever changes occur will no doubt please some folks and not others. Because he knows that, I imagine he will continue to make choices about what to say - as everyone so situated does - based on what he observes and what he finds relevant to the situation.

Whatever that is, I'll be listening to and watching Tech games, as I have for most of my life. And posting on Wikipedia, I hope.

Thanks,

User Lev Brosntein LBronstein 22:15, 17 December 2006 (UTC) December 17, 2006[reply]

Article Improvement[edit]

Now that you two are talking to each other, I feel a lot better. I've been looking for good examples of articles on sportscasters, and haven't found many. The best example I've seen so far has been Howard Cosell. Bob Costas and Jimmy Cefalo aren't bad examples, either. The best thing about those articles is that they separate out the biography from the other parts. Also, the biography is sorted and subsectioned by time. Wes, if you wouldn't mind, could you upload an image of yourself for use in the article? Thanks. I'll have another look at the article and see if I can't find some way to improve it. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 23:27, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I cleaned it up like I said I would. I tried to integrate what I could of LBronstein (talk · contribs)'s contributions, but most of them would need to be referenced to be in the article. LBronstein (talk · contribs), if you can find sources for some of the things I left in that section, I'd appreciate it. I'd also like to expand on the biography section, as it looks rather slim at the moment. I took some information from the recent Technique article to expand it a little. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 00:07, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For a decent example of a "Presentation Style" section comparable to what LBronstein (talk · contribs) was trying to accomplish, see Skip Caray. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 00:10, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate Mr. Bronstein's response. In terms of posting here, that was really not my intention, but I was told of the comments that had been made by another Tech fan, who was concerned about their intention. Therefore, when I saw what had been written, I felt it was proper to respond in the discussion area. In checking the history portion of the page, my uncle appears to be the person who contributed some of the biographical information here and on my Dad's page as well.

I truly respect the vehicle you have here and appreciate the willingness of folks to seperate fact and opinion in presenting subjects for information.

Thanks for your attention to this and continued best wishes to all.Wdurham0125 13:10, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Wes Durham. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:05, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wes_Durham&oldid=1206392066"