The list was not promoted by Dabomb87 13:59, 10 February 2010 [1].
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating this for featured list because I think it meets the criteria. And I am competing in Wikicup. — Chris! c/ t 20:56, 4 January 2010 (UTC) reply
Comment still not sure what makes 40 points more significant than any other number of points. Seems like an arbitrary choice to me. Regardless, the list quality is high. So I'll remain neutral. The Rambling Man ( talk) 17:20, 30 January 2010 (UTC) reply
KV5: My comments had all been resolved when the nomination was re-started. I believe that the media examples that Chrishomingtang provided establish the notability of the forty-point guideline and, as before, I support the promotion of this list. KV5 ( Talk • Phils) 23:34, 30 January 2010 (UTC) reply
Weak oppose on indiscriminate grounds. The list is good but, per TRM and Chris, 40pts seems rather arbitrary. I readily admit I know little about basketball but in a quick google I found hits for Kobe lists of 60+ and 50+. The only significance of the 40 seems to be that he hit the 100 milestone of them late last year [2]. I realise the 60+ is unrealistic as a list but 50 also seems widely reported and I'm not sure of the significance of 40 over 50. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 17:57, 4 February 2010 (UTC) reply
To Chris, "The number of forty-plus point games players accumulate over their careers is often reported in media." this needs multiple refs, as you say "often" reported. But good work thusfar expanding the explanation of the significance. The Rambling Man ( talk) 09:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC) reply
The list was not promoted by Dabomb87 13:59, 10 February 2010 [1].
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating this for featured list because I think it meets the criteria. And I am competing in Wikicup. — Chris! c/ t 20:56, 4 January 2010 (UTC) reply
Comment still not sure what makes 40 points more significant than any other number of points. Seems like an arbitrary choice to me. Regardless, the list quality is high. So I'll remain neutral. The Rambling Man ( talk) 17:20, 30 January 2010 (UTC) reply
KV5: My comments had all been resolved when the nomination was re-started. I believe that the media examples that Chrishomingtang provided establish the notability of the forty-point guideline and, as before, I support the promotion of this list. KV5 ( Talk • Phils) 23:34, 30 January 2010 (UTC) reply
Weak oppose on indiscriminate grounds. The list is good but, per TRM and Chris, 40pts seems rather arbitrary. I readily admit I know little about basketball but in a quick google I found hits for Kobe lists of 60+ and 50+. The only significance of the 40 seems to be that he hit the 100 milestone of them late last year [2]. I realise the 60+ is unrealistic as a list but 50 also seems widely reported and I'm not sure of the significance of 40 over 50. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 17:57, 4 February 2010 (UTC) reply
To Chris, "The number of forty-plus point games players accumulate over their careers is often reported in media." this needs multiple refs, as you say "often" reported. But good work thusfar expanding the explanation of the significance. The Rambling Man ( talk) 09:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC) reply