Talk:2007 New York Mets collapse

Sorry if I step on any toes here-- but a portal for the Mets' 2007 swoon seems a bit much. also the game log of all the Mets games is overwhelming and probably unnecessary.--Bwthemoose 23:28, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that the game log is overwheming, especially since i created this article. Also, i don't know why every time i write an article, there is an editing conflict before the article is even finished, and even if there is not an editing conflict, the article is always greatly edited, to almost the oppisit of what i worte the article. This article has changed and taken away a large part of the information that i have provided. Why do some people on wikipedia have such a great urge to delete and change any new article? Thanks for listening.Juliancolton 01:30, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please take these words in the spirit in which they are offered :-)

Brevity is the soul of wit. It is the task of the copyeditor to tighten prose, delete superfluous content,and turn what is usually a shapeless lump of words into an article. No author likes it, but the sooner you accept it , the better writer you'll be.
NPOV. I gather your a Mets fan, and that's fine, but Wikipedia is not the place for fan pages. Remember, for every Mets fan in Queens or Mineola crying in their beer, there was a Phillies fan in South Jersey or Deleware celebrating. And the Phillies drive to the pennant is just as noteworthy as the Mets spectacular flame-out.
Finally, what makes this article worth-while is not really the Mets' failure, after all, people fail all the time-- but how it relates to other similar failures in the past, For instance, the 1964 Phillies who lost 10 straight games at the end of the season to blow the pennant, or the 1978 Red Sox who had a 14 game lead on the Yankees, only to lose in the infamous Bucky Dent game, or to take another sport, the notorious el foldo of Greg Norman in the Masters who blew a 6 shot lead in the last 9 holes. One could multiply these examples, but I hope you get the point.

P.S. Once the words leave your fingers and end up on the server-- it's no longer your article, but Wikipedia's. --Bwthemoose 13:37, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just for the record, i am not a Mets fan, but rather a die-hard yankees fan. I wrote the aritcle because it was a requested article, and because i like to see the mets lose. Anyway, i do understand that once an article is writen, it is nolonger mine but wikipedia's.

And when you say that it is not the mets' article but the similar failure's, are you saying that there should be an article for every time any other sports team has failed?Juliancolton 15:48, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, sorry--maybe an anti-fan page then ;-)

Actually that wouldnt be a bad article-- "memorable sporting fiascos", where all the flops, from the 64 Phils, the 69 Colts,Greg Norman, could be looked at together-- like a giant rubbernecking party.--Bwthemoose 17:10, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the article has problems with tone-but it may be fixable,with editing. Perhaps it would be better merged into the main NYM 2007 season article.--Bwthemoose/Talk 10:42, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that this article needs to be deleted. I will try to fix the tone and wording of the article, but i am still not sure why it needs to be deleted. Also, it was a reguested article, so somebody must think that an article of this sorts is not all that bad.Juliancolton 13:20, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]