Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of New York Jets head coaches

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by User:The Rambling Man 20:26, 9 June 2008 [1].

List of New York Jets head coaches

This list is based off of List of Chicago Bears head coaches and List of New York Giants head coaches, which are both featured lists. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 03:24, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from User:Gonzo fan2007

Resolved comments from Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs)

{{{2}}}

Support All my concerns have been addressed, great list! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 01:52, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Just like the similar featured lists, I don't see why not. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie ^{( talk / contribs)} 01:56, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think there is scope for more information to be given as prose, not necessarily just as a lead section. For example, Bill Parcells' tenure overlaps with other coaches. Why is this? More background could be included to give the reader a greater understanding of the topic. An example of what I mean by this is given by List of Manchester United F.C. managers. Oldelpaso (talk) 10:06, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This was brought up in a previous FLC. Milk's Favorite Cookie created a separate article "History of xx coaches". I can do the same if you wish. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 17:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support, looks really good. GreenJoe 23:45, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support I can't see anything wrong. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 16:14, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Me either, although all the other head coach FLs also use a Colour along with the asterisk to highlight the Hall of Fame people. Matthewedwards (talk · contribs · count · email) 07:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, WP:COLOR doesn't state that you need to show something in both color and an asterisk as an indicator. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 16:49, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - True, but other FLs within the same scope have set a consensus-by-silence precedence for using colour. If you know what I mean. Matthewedwards (talk · contribs · count · email) 05:23, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Color-sighted people notice colors quicker than asterisks, so adding colors would benefit them a lot.--Crzy cheetah 08:16, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - I have added the colors, but what scientific evidence do you have to back up said claim? Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 16:12, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        Link, granted it's not a WP:RS, but you're not going to cite it anyway. ;) --Crzy cheetah 19:49, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        
        Support now the color's been added. Can't see a thing wrong with anything else. Nice work. Matthewedwards (talk · contribs · count · email) 01:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support, but ...
- "Twice in Jets history has there been an "interim" head coach." Word order a little forced.
  - Any suggestions? I was thinking "There has been an "interim" head coach twice in Jets history". That seemed a little off to me, though. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 02:27, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "The team began as the New York Titans in the American Football League in 1960, but was renamed the New York Jets three years later." Why "but"? "And" is needed here.
  - Fixed. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 02:27, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- One "also" needs weeding out.
  - Removed first one. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 02:27, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- W–L but spaced en dash equivalent ...
  - So it should be W – L? Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 02:27, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Suggestion: Why not move the pic up to the "Key" section so the horrid squashy text in the "Awards" column can be given space to breath?
  - Done. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 02:27, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "2006–Present": why cap P? And why not "since 2006" (so much nicer)?
  - Well, I'm trying to keep the date range (XXXX–XXXX) format consistent. Is there any reason not to capitalize the "P"? Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 02:27, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You sure leading zeros are customary for the averages? TONY (talk) 13:15, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - I was meaning to remove these in one of head coach lists I was previously reviewing. I'll go ahead and remove the 0. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 02:27, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Gary King (talk) 01:39, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is extra space before the "References" section
- Space removed.
Remove the number from the bold and perhaps remove bold altogether – it is not required.

Gary King (talk) 20:53, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Is there some reason for doing this? Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 21:07, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Those are some pathetic comments. ;) More importantly, there's no reason to remove the number from the bold. The 16 head coaches are the subject of the article. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 20:59, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, I don't really see why the bold needs to even be there at this point. It's just "head coach" really. Gary King (talk) 21:14, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, it can be done. But since there is no reason for the "16" to be unbolded, why change it? Just because it can be done? Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 21:18, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Even with the 16, it still doesn't capture the "essence" of the article – it would be better if the team name was included in the bold, but if that is not possible, especially without including any links, then the bold might as well just be removed. Gary King (talk) 21:21, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I'm going to have to respectfully disagree. The list is a list of NY Jets head coaches, and as there are 16 head coaches, it seems correct to leave it as it is. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 21:24, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find another head coach article that bolds it this way, but I could be wrong. Gary King (talk) 21:26, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I prefer not to start the article with "This is a list of New York Jets head coaches". Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 21:29, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And to comment or oppose based on what other lists do would violate WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 21:34, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Again, the article is not about any "16 head coaches", which is what the bold implies. You should be able to look at what is in bold and then immediately get what the article is about. Gary King (talk) 00:03, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, what do you suppose I do? Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 00:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I originally suggested to remove the bold. Bold text in the lead is not a requirement, especially for lists, which can sometimes have content that causes a convoluted bold title. Gary King (talk) 00:30, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gary, it's fine as it is. There is no reason to remove the bolding. Why fix something that isn't broken? So what if it's not a requirement? Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 00:33, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

← Because of my comment above "You should be able to look at what is in bold and then immediately get what the article is about." I don't understand why you are so defensive with this list, especially when it wasn't you who nominated it? The eyes are automatically drawn to bold text, and when you first see "16 head coaches", you don't have a firm understanding of what the article is about. However, in the last 5 articles that have had bold text in the lead, they are:

Boston Red Sox seasons – "Boston Red Sox"
Geri Halliwell discography – "discography of Geri Halliwell"
List of Maryland and Washington, D.C. hurricanes (1980–present) – "List of Maryland and Washington, D.C. hurricanes from 1980–present "
2004 Summer Olympics medal count – "2004 Summer Olympics medal count"
2006 Winter Olympics medal count "2006 Winter Olympics medal count "

4 of the 9 most recently promoted lists didn't have bold text in the lead. For Boston Red Sox seasons, I would have suggested that the bold be removed, but at the very least, it still helps identify that the article is about the Boston Red Sox. It is very uncommon to only bold common nouns in the lead of any article when it isn't the title of the article. Gary King (talk) 00:50, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not defensive of the list. I am simply active in FLCs, and I commented on what I believe is not an accurite statement. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 01:14, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am willing to continue discussions, but a statement like "Why fix something that isn't broken?" began to seem defensive. The whole point of FLC is to, ideally, make lists that have nothing else wrong with them. If I bring up a perfectly reasonable (note: it could be wrong; reasonable just means that it's worth a discussion) issue, then I see no reason why it does not deserve a discussion. Apparently, Nishkid made the change, so if this is the final action on this issue, then I am willing to cap my comments. Gary King (talk) 01:19, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I'm sorry I began to sound defensive there. At least in my area, "Why fix something that isn't broken?" is a known sarcastic question. Feel free to cap your comments, as I have no further comments. Cheers, Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 01:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Why fix something that isn't broken?" is also known as a common argument. Gary King (talk) 01:39, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gary King (talk) 01:39, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.