Talk:2008 NBA Finals

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 January 2019 and 10 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): JAnderson381.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:05, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Leading scorers[edit]

Why does Boston have two players listed as the top point scorers in games 1 & 2, and LAL has only one? Should'nt it just be the top guy for each team? Blackngold29 06:20, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Normally yes. But sometimes if there are more than one person playing great and score lots of points, I think we should mention them as well. Look at last year's finals page, you will see that we don't just list the top guy.—Chris! ct 06:26, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So where's the cutoff for "playing great"? Blackngold29 06:31, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've added Sasha for LAL's game 3. I'll guess the cutoff is if they've made an "impact" to the game without being the top scorer. On game 1, we remembered The Truth's injury and resurrection, on game 2 it was Powe, and on Game 3 it was Sasha who came outta nowhere. --Howard the Duck 07:20, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
IMO, editors should not be making decisions on who "played great". The leading scorers should have 1 for each team for each game or 2 for each team for each game. The fact it was done last year shouldn't have a bearing on this discussion as I'll say last year it was incorrect too. — X96lee15 (talk) 13:19, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On a related note, I'd be adding series stats once this is over. --Howard the Duck 13:57, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bias In The Game Reviews[edit]

I'd like to revert the recap of Game 4 on the article. Despite being a Celtics fan, this article shows a high level of bias towards them. I understand we all love our teams, but remember that the article should be factually informative, not sensationalized. Someone want to take this one on? I need a nap bad, and my spelling wont be up to par for much longer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TJohnson (talk • contribs) 06:33, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Game 2 Fouls and Free Throws[edit]

I've been reverted twice trying to modify the comment about the Game 2 free throws. I added a line about the controversy surrounding it (with references for both positions), and it was deleted. Then I deleted the line about the free throw discrepancy; it was added back.

The free throws are not mentioned for any other games. Either the controversy should be explained, or this information should be deleted. To leave it in as-is is weasel-y, implying that it was unusual or significant, without any context. The foul discrepancy was only 28-21, which leaves a much different impression. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamixoye (talk • contribs) 16:28, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the information you added with the references improves the content of the Game 2 section. Officiating in the NBA, especially in the playoffs, is a subject that has had a lot of coverage in the last year or so. Adding the "for" and "again" arguments is a fair, wp:npov way to go. — X96lee15 (talk) 16:35, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Edited back. See how long it lasts. Adamixoye (talk) 17:24, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Garnett[edit]

Kevin Garnett's post game comments were boastful and mainly incoherent, in stark contrasts to the eloquent words of Ray Allen and Paul Pierce. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.121.197.54 (talk) 04:13, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Point being? This is largely irrelevant. 99.240.229.247 (talk) 05:19, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention POV. --Edwin Larkin (talk) 16:35, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Points in Game 4[edit]

The Celtics demolished the Lakers, 131–92, the second largest margin of victory in a championship-clinching game, the all-time record being Game Five of the 1965 NBA Finals in which the Celtics beat the the Lakers 129–96.[15]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but 131 - 92 = 39 is bigger than 129 - 96 = 33. Is the second score wrong? In the same paragraph, it mentions that the Lakers cut the lead down to 39 points, but it doesn't mention what they cut it down from. Seems to be an important piece of information.

Finals MVP[edit]

Unusual that no one's added that bit of info yet. MMetro (talk) 13:33, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bot report : Found duplicate references ![edit]

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

  • "globe-618" :
    • {{cite news|url=http://boston.stats.com/nba/boxscore.asp?gamecode=2008061702&home=2&vis=13&meta=true|date=[[June 18]], [[2008]]|publisher=[[Boston Globe]]|accessdate=2008-06-18}}
    • {{cite news|title=NBA Basketball|url=http://boston.stats.com/nba/boxscore.asp?gamecode=2008061702&home=2&vis=13&meta=true|date=[[June 18]], [[2008]]|publisher=[[Boston Globe]]|accessdate=2008-06-18}}

DumZiBoT (talk) 22:50, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

merge from 2008 Finals Info from "Celtics-Lakers rivalry"to "2008 NBA Finals"[edit]

There is a lot of detail in Celtics–Lakers_rivalry#2008_NBA_Finals that should be looked to merged (if it is new info) into 2008 NBA Finals. The rivalry article already lists 2008 NBA Finals as a main article, so there should only be a summary of the series and not game by game detail, which belong in the specific article about the finals. Bagumba (talk) 23:36, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Too long lead[edit]

Anyone else think the lead section is uncomfortably long? Wrathofjames (talk) 01:26, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on 2008 NBA Finals. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:26, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2008_NBA_Finals&oldid=1196520600"