Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/Juwan Howard/archive3

< Wikipedia:Peer review

Juwan Howard

Previous peer review
Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…

The last FAC suggested a PR, TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:44, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Comments some quick things

The Rambling Man (talk) 16:36, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Slogging through this one; I'm down to the beginning of his college career. Here are my comments so far. Most of them are of the "you might want to" variety instead of the "this really needs to be addressed" variety.

Lead:

  • "Howard and the Fab Five reached" Technically, it was Howard and the other four members of the Fab Five. Otherwise, it sounds like there were six of them. I know that's kind of nit-picky, but you could just drop "Howard and" and say "The Fab Five reached".
  • "as freshmen and sophomores" Another nit-picky thing – from this, it's not clear to the unfamiliar reader whether the Fab Five was a mix of freshmen and sophomores or you are referring to their collective freshman and sophomore years. (I remember them, so I know they came in as a unit.) You could address this in a couple of ways. On first mention, you could call them the "Fab Five recruiting class" or something of a similar ilk that indicates that they came in as a unit. Alternatively, you could say they reached the NCAA Championship game during Howard's freshman and sophomore seasons, which is not as specific, but would still be technically correct. I would also understand if you decided to leave it as is. This is a pretty minor thing, but I'm trying to approach the article from the perspective of someone who knows nothing about Howard or the Fab Five.
  • "Howard played six-and-a-half seasons for the Bullets/Wizard franchise and three full seasons for the Houston Rockets but no more than two seasons for any other team." First, Wizards is missing an "s", I think. Second, the non-NBA literate reader may not realize that the franchise changed its name. You could rephrase with a parenthetical (i.e. "for the Bullets franchise (renamed the Wizards in 1997)". Finally, this sentence makes it seem as though his tenure in Houston immediately followed his stint with the Bullets/Wizards. Including the years he played with the Rockets could help.
  • "During his rookie year as a professional," This kinda strikes me as awkward. What about "During his rookie year with the Bullets,"
  • "averaged 19.3 points per game, but has only averaged 17 points in three of his seasons since." Maybe "only averaged 17 points per game in three", just for accuracy.
  • "The 2005–06 NBA season was the most recent in which he was a starter." Seems unnecessarily wordy. How about, "He was most recently a starter during the 2005-06 NBA season."
  • Late addition: "Despite the sanctions and forfeited accomplishments from 1992 to 1998 by the Michigan Wolverines men's basketball due to the University of Michigan basketball scandal," Something about this doesn't read right. I can't put my finger on it, but there has to be a clearer way to express this. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 22:35, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Overview:

  • "She did not want to raise her child. Thus, Howard was brought up by his maternal grandmother, Jannie Mae Howard, who adopted him." Why not combine these? "She did not want to raise her child, so her mother, Jannie Mae Howard, adopted him."
  • "During recruiting visits by college coaches such as Lou Henson, Joey Meyer and Steve Fisher, Jannie Mae Howard did most of the questioning." Maybe mention what schools these coaches were from.
  • "His grandmother died a few hours after he announced that he would attend Michigan. After her fatal heart attack, Howard moved in with his high-school coach, Richard Cook." Could be combined. "Howard's grandmother died of a heart attack a few hours after he announced that he would attend Michigan, and he moved in with his high school coach, Richard Cook." Also not sure why there is a hyphen between "high" and "school".
  • "Howard has no siblings and is not close to his biological parents." This might fit better somewhere in the first paragraph, perhaps at the end or right after mention of his adoption.

Sophomore year:

Junior year:

  • "As Howard and Tom Kleinschmidt entered their junior years, some sources listed Kleinschmidt as the number one junior in the state. Others considered Howard the top prospect." This seems like a really awkward way to say that scouts were split as to who was the better junior between these two. How about something like "As Howard entered his junior year, some sources listed him as the best junior basketball player in Illinois, while others ranked Tom Kleinschmidt ahead of him."?
  • "Howard was said to be leaning toward playing for DePaul or, because of his admiration for Thomas, for the Illinois Fighting Illini." Who said he was leaning this way or that? Also, there has been no explicit connection made in this article between Thomas (presumably Deon) and the University of Illinois. This puts the burden on the reader to draw the connection.
  • "Others invited included Kleinschmidt, Donnie Boyce, William Gates, Billy Taylor, Rashard Griffith and Howard Nathan." Is this relevant?
  • "Although Howard was perceived as one of the top Chicago prospects at that time, the best Chicago-area prospect was Glenn Robinson of Gary, Indiana." I get the difference between Chicago and the Chicago area, but you might specify that Howard was perceived as one of the top prospects in the city of Chicago just to make the distinction clear.
  • "Howard's top six possible schools were Michigan, Nevada-Las Vegas, Kentucky, Marquette, Arizona and Dayton." This is a little confusing since it comes so close on the heels of another list with nearly the same number of schools. I realize that the intervening sentences probably represent at least a few months of time, during which his list changed, but it's still a little jarring. Since most of the schools are the same, could you just say something about him dropping Michigan State and Illinois and adding UNLV?
  • "some felt Webber and Robinson were his equals as prospects" Who?
  • "Howard was Illinois' number one recruit" But according to the most-recently-mentioned list, he had already dropped Illinois, right?

Senior year:

Hope to have more soon. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 17:34, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the college stuff.

Freshman year:

Sophomore year:

  • "there were reports that during the 1992 summer a controversy had arisen when three Wolverines were found to have been paid $300 to participate in a charity basketball tournament" There are way more words than necessary in this sentence. How about "media reports alleged that three Wolverine basketball players were paid $300 each to participate in a charity basketball tournament in mid-1992"? A month-year combination would be better, but I think the MOS says to avoid meteorological seasons, since they are opposite for our friends south of the equator.
  • "Furthermore" How about "The reports further alleged that"?
  • "The following season" Because we've already mentioned the beginning of Howard's sophomore school year, it is unclear whether this refers to the 1992-93 season (Howard's sophomore season) or the 1993-94 season (Howard's junior season). Might be best to just specify dates instead.
  • "As a sophomore member of the 1992–93 Wolverines," Haven't we already established that he was a sophomore?
  • "Meanwhile, the Chicago vocational team that he led to back-to-back city Final Fours fell to successive 4–20 and 4–21 records without him." Was he the only major player the team lost in those two years? I know Howard was good, but this could potentially be "correlation without causation". It seems out of place in the middle of a paragraph about Howard's sophomore season at Michigan anyway.
  • "Howard acquired a million-dollar disability insurance policy" I'm thinking "purchased" is the more appropriate verb. Is this even noteworthy, though? I'm sure a lot of players do it, and I'm not aware of Howard ever having to use it.
  • "As a freshman and sophomore, he was not only united with the Fab Five and future NBA player Riley, he was teammates with Rob Pelinka." So? Who's Rob Pelinka? Did being teammates with Howard affect either of them in a meaningful way later in life?
  • "Howard held Jamal Mashburn in check defensively, while contributing on offense" What does it mean that he held Mashburn in check? Did Mashburn not score? Did he not get a shot off? Was he 10 points below his average? 20? And what does it mean that Howard "contributed on offense"? That could mean he hit one free throw, or even that he made one assist.
    • I have added quotations to the footnotes. I don't know at what points in the game Howard was guarding Mashburn, but Mashburn posted 26 points and Howard's defense was lauded in the press. Mashburn was shut down most of the second half, which must be when Howard defended him. On offense, Webber and Rose combined for 45 of the team's 81. A key free throw late and a key field goal early are mentioned in the articles. Please advise.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:07, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • The specifics in the Adande article seem like a good way to go. Something like "Although Kentucky forward Jamal Mashburn scored 17 points against Michigan in the first half of the 1993 NCAA Tournament semifinals, Howard held him to 9 points in the second half, and he not make a field goal in the last 12:36 of regulation; Chicago Sun-Times sportswriter Jay Mariotti wrote that Howard did "a terrific defensive job" on Mashburn. Mariotti [or Adande] also mentioned an early field goal by Howard and a free throw he made late in the game as key plays in the victory." You can massage it however you like, but something along these lines, I think. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:03, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • I have no source stating that Howard guarded Mashburn in the 2nd half. We just know that Mashburn scored a lot early and Howard was credited with a great defensive effort. The change you suggest is truly unsourced.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:26, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • Didn't the quote from Mariotti specifically say that Howard guarded Mashburn? From the footnotes: "...Juwan Howard , the steady, bullish center from Chicago who did such a terrific defensive job on Jamal Mashburn..." Acdixon (talk · contribs) 17:08, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • Yes, but it is not clear that he was not also guarding him when he scored 17 in the first half.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:12, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
              • OK, this is straying a little too far away from my original concern, which is that saying Howard held Mashburn "in check defensively" while "contributing on offense" is much too non-specific and colloquial. If we can't fix it using my suggested rewrite above, you can propose something, but I think this one really needs to be fixed before the article goes to FAC. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 12:58, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "against the 33–4 1992–93 Tar Heels" Too many consecutive numbers. Pipe this link to read "North Carolina Tar Heels". Given that this is the 1992-93 season, it's highly unlikely they played the Tar Heel team from any other season in the tournament.
  • "During the championship game Howard picked up his second personal foul with 9 minutes 42 seconds remaining in the first half" The unfamiliar reader may not realize that a player only gets five fouls and that many coaches sit a player with two fouls on the bench until the second half to protect them from fouling out. Did Fisher do this with Howard? Did he continue to miss time in the second half with foul problems? Did he foul out?
  • "After the season, Webber and Howard were invited to try out for the United States national basketball team that would compete at the 1993 World University Games and Under-22 World Championships." Did Howard make either team? If so, how did he do?

Junior year:

  • "After Webber left for the NBA" May be better to specify that Webber left for the NBA after his sophomore year.
  • "against a victorious Arkansas team" This is a really weird way to indicate that Arkansas won the game. I had to re-read the sentence to figure out what was meant.
  • "The following day" Given that we don't say what day Howard announced, this qualifier doesn't mean much.
  • The discussion of the Michigan scandal is scattered in two different places, making it hard to follow. Since nothing really came of it until after Howard left college, I think it would be fine to give it its own section at the end of his college career, even though reports were apparently surfacing before his sophomore season. The details of the scandal and Howard's role in it are a little hazy. On first mention, it seems he only appeared at some summer camps, and we are told that might be an NCAA violation. When the scandal is next mentioned, there is a grand jury involved and we have stated as fact that Howard received money (for something, we don't know what) although it wasn't very much. We also know that his All-American designation was not forfeited (is this before the term "vacated" came en vogue?) but we don't know why. Knowing the NCAA, they never said why, but even that might bear mention.
    • The controversy during his sophomore year is not related to the scandal. Thus, I don't think the scandal is currently spread out. I am not sure it deserves its own section in his bio because he was not implicated.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:00, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • OK, that wasn't clear to me, so it might not be to the casual reader, either. Might be worth a sentence explicitly stating that the two were not connected. Also, it feels like there are some "loose ends" here. In the Sophomore year section, we don't know what became of the allegations that Howard appeared at a summer camp. We know that it was a possible violation of NCAA rules, but we don't know if he was cleared, found guilty, penalized or what. Then, in the Junior year section, we know that he didn't testify and that he wasn't believed to have received "large amounts of money". We don't know if he was accused and not found guilty, accused but not penalized because the amount he was found to have accepted was so small, or not charged at all. Also, as mentioned, we don't know why his accomplishments were not forfeited. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 11:49, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • It sounds like you are asking for details about not news. There is no story when a person is found not to have done anything worth being punished for. There was no further story about the sneakers. I could put in a line "In my research on his biography, I found no subsequent stories about the sneakers" or something else ridiculous, but the story ends with the detail we have here. Keep in mind how detailed this high school and college section is compared to almost any other basketball players biography that I did not write. Ordinarily stories about summer camps and such are not included in most bios. The fact that you have 80% of such a story is a lot.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:55, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • Oh, I think I wasn't as clear as I should have been. No, I'm not talking about the sneaker issue during his high school career. That's documented quite sufficiently. I'm talking about the summer basketball camps that he and some other Michigan teammates were alleged to have improperly attended in the summer between his freshman and sophomore years in college. It's mentioned in the Sophomore year (college) section that those might have been NCAA violations, but no further detail is given. Since we've apparently been talking past each other on that, let me also ask if that is connected to the booster scandal mentioned later. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:44, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More later. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 18:57, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Scouting report:

Early Washington era:

Plugging along... Acdixon (talk · contribs) 23:14, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Late Washington era:

More soon. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 21:12, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2001-2004:

More to come. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 21:30, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Houston era:

2007-present:

Personal life:

Almost done. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 01:57, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Other endeavors:

Popular culture:

  • Personal note: I'm really put off by the "popular culture" title because I see so much garbage crammed under these sections, generally speaking. You might consider calling it "Film and television appearances" which is more specific and avoids the stigma associated with pop culture sections.
  • "Howard had a small role in The West Wing" Non-U.S. readers may not know what this is. Suggest "Howard had a small role in the television drama The West Wing".
  • Do we know any details about these other appearances? It seems strange that the West Wing appearance gets its own paragraph, while all the rest are lists. At the very least, we should separate the "Beyond the Glory" and "The Fab Five" appearances by saying that he appeared as himself in these two. At present, we don't even communicate that "Beyond the Glory" is a documentary. The other appearances should at least give the details about what genre the show or movie is and what Howard's character's name was. Some basic details about the character would be nice, if available.
  • "Howard also appeared in the 1994 basketball film Hoop Dreams." Why isn't this mentioned first, since it comes first chronologically?

Statistics:

  • Why doesn't the legend appear above the college section? It looks like the same abbreviations are used.
  • In the 2007-present section, we're told "[The 2007-08 season] was the only season in Howard's career in which he did not start in a single game." Yet, in the table, I see zero starts for the 2008-09 season, the 2010-11 season, and the present season (so far). How do these two fit together?

Overall, this was an enjoyable read with several minor problems, but nothing major that I see. Let me reiterate the need for a MOS expert (particularly one familiar with the numerals vs. spelled-out numbers aspect) to go over it before you bring it to FAC again. I didn't spot check references or pay much attention to images, but the prose doesn't strike me as being far from FAC-ready. Good luck getting the bronze star. You obviously deserve it for the work done on this article. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:22, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.luquay.com/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Juwan_Howard/archive3&oldid=503600286"