Wikipedia:Peer review/Atlantic Coast Conference Men's Basketball Coach of the Year/archive1

Atlantic Coast Conference Men's Basketball Coach of the Year

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for both User:Remember and for myself for peer review because we believe it is close to meeting all of the criteria to become a featured list, but would like suggestions or improvements before submitting a formal FLC request. It already has a sister page (Atlantic Coast Conference Men's Basketball Player of the Year) that we made reach FL status a while back and would like this one to do so as well.

Thanks, Jrcla2 (talk) 23:41, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Comments by Shirik

• Looks like a decent candidate for a featured list to me, but it could still use a little bit of work. I made a thorough copyedit on it, the prose was a little wordy or misleading in some places. I think it's OK now. The biggest concern I have is that source #1 seems to be given very heavy attention while the other sources aren't used at all in the lead. Preferably the lead section would have varying sources. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 22:22, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
  • I agree that, if any references are to be used in the lead, then there should be more than one. I have a question however: Given that all the lead is doing is putting into words what the list itself is representing (which is referenced by many sources), is there even a necessity to have any references in this particular article's lead? E.g. needing to reference the fact that Dean Smith has won the most awards seems a little overkill to me, especially considering anyone can plainly see that in the well-referenced list below. Thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrcla2 (talk • contribs) 15:14, 19 March 2010
    • Actually, all articles can get away with not having references in the lead iff the lead only summarizes content that is present later in the article that is appropriately referenced there. It's certainly arguable that this is the case here, so I wouldn't object to no references. The content in the lead can easily be verified by the fully-referenced list. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 19:19, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
      • How about I remove all references in the lead, since it is only one used repeatedly (making the lead look cluttered/weird)? Would that be alright and then get your approval for FL? Jrcla2 (talk) 19:26, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Comments by H1nkles

• Make sure you have non-free use rationale for using the ACC logo in this list.

 Done

• Why do you have color w/ symbol for some of the qualifiers like HOF coaches? Wouldn't the coloring of the box or the symbol by itself be enough? It just seems like overkill to have the symbol and the color.
  • The reason is that other similarly-themed Featured Lists use this demarcation as well, and Remember and myself did not want to disrupt the consistency when this becomes a FL too. I am referring to Atlantic Coast Conference Men's Basketball Player of the Year and Big East Conference Men's Basketball Player of the Year.
• I'm not sure the specifics about the recruiting violation are important. The fact that they had to skip the postseason due to a recruiting violation is important but the exact violation seems a bit unnecessary. In my opinion of course.
  • I agree that they may not be essential to the overall purpose of the article, but in my opinion it is worthwhile to leave in there because it fully explains to the curious reader exactly why N.C. State would/could finish a season 27–0 but not claim a national championship.

Otherwise the list looks good. H1nkles _{citius altius fortius} 18:37, 19 March 2010 (UTC)