Edge Rewrite
pun Source code View original
Jump to content

Talk:Justin Pippen

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

Did you know nomination

[edit]
Latest comment: 5 months ago92 comments7 people in discussion
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. You can locate your hook here. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Crisco 1492 (talk) 17:47, 3 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

( Comment or view )
( Article history links:
)
Justin Pippen
Justin Pippen
Moved to mainspace by TonyTheTiger (talk). Number of QPQs required: 2. Nominator has 384 past nominations.

TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:57, 22 December 2025 (UTC).Reply

Turns out I needed all of it and more. Both are long and new enough and the QPQs are done. Earwig's clean and the hook checks out. No reason why this might deserve a maintenance template, though I trimmed a couple of BLP violations myself (and I really hate the tables not aligning right). Let's roll.--Launchballer 05:29, 23 December 2025 (UTC)Reply

No Cal team has done that since Pete Newell’s last team back in 1959-60." So I don't think headline is the issue."-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:24, 3 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

ALT2 feels like a specialist hook and mainly appeals to basketball fans, while ALT1a again does not address the concerns raised above. Maybe the safest option here is proposing separate hooks for Ames and Pippen. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:15, 20 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
There is virtually nothing in either article that is not about basketball (except for the fact that Justin Pippen has famous relatives which is not a hookworthy fact). Any subject from these articles will appeal mostly to basketball fans.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:17, 21 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
That's a problem then because hooks are supposed to be intended for broad audiences, not specialist ones. So if all hook options will only appeal to basketball fans and not anyone else, that means the article is not a good fit for DYK. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:02, 21 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
Whatever issue I had with Tony's original hook, I think it's a bit silly to suggest we can't use a basketball fact for a basketball person. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:24, 21 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
I didn't mean that, I mean that a hook should not only be appealing to basketball fans. That doesn't mean we can't use a basketball-related hook, just that you don't need knowledge of basketball to find it interesting. Having said that, ALT1a's fact could work with further tweaking, but not in its current state. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:49, 21 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

I'll take one stab at something and if we don't get somewhere, timeout's tomorrow anyway:

I have no opinion about ALT2a, but aren't ALT3a-ALT6a all basically just regular basketball coverage? They sound less like DYK hooks and more like what you'd see on ESPN. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:48, 21 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
As I have stated and User:Premeditated Chaos has tried to back me up, these are basketball players with articles full of basketball facts. The most intriguing facts in their articles are likely to be basketbally. regarding 3a-6a, it is EXTREMELY rare to see someone score 7 points in 6 seconds to win a basketball game by one point, but against Notre Dame no less. That is about as close to a 10k pageview hook as you could ask for. Pippen has the additional feature of being proximal to celebrity, but otherwise his article is very basketbally. You can tune into ESPN every night to see someone make a gamewinning shot, but not 7 points in 6 seconds. That is regardless of whether it was by a bad ref call. IMO, If there was any foul it should have been called on the floor with no continuation for the shot, but it is in the books. I assume Notre Dame was out of challenges. It would have been reversed if challenged to a two shot fouland wiped out the bucket (or none at all and probably count the bucket depending on when the whistle sounded).--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:38, 21 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
The issue is: is that really a good fit for DYK? That would be like having a hook that went "LeBron James scores 10 in the last eight seconds to lead the Lakers to a one-point victory over the Clippers." Interesting for LeBron and Lakers fans, a good discussion point for NBA analysts, but might no be something that a non-basketball fan would find interesting. As a basketball fan myself, the interestingness of that angle is going to be lost among those not into sports.
Again, the issue is not that it is a basketball-related fact, it is if it is a basketball-related fact that would interest non-fans. There is a difference between that kind of hook, and for example, something like "... that the NBA's Phoenix Suns once played a preseason game in a tennis stadium?" Still a basketball-related fact, but has broader appeal. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:41, 22 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
If I am missing a great hook let me know, but we don't have a lot of broad appeal subject matter in either article.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:05, 22 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
The only remaining option I see is Leeky's proposal, the rest are non-starters. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:55, 22 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
Regrettably I see only ALT3b (Pippen's solo hook) as being broadly interesting enough, while the other options (i.e. Ames's solo hooks) are nonstarters. We cannot simply wait for March as the nomination is already past WP:DYKTIMEOUT as of yesterday. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:09, 23 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
Given that concerns remain unresolved and this is already above two months, it's probably best to let this one go. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:57, 23 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
User:Narutolovehinata5 I thought you previously said 2a and 3b were OK. This is personal for me because I have done dozens if not hundreds of basketball players but for the first time I am able to possibly get a basketball player from the high school closest to my residence (less than 5 blocks away) on the main page. I live at the Hampton House and Ames went to Kenwood Academy.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:46, 23 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
Are you rejection 7-11?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:48, 23 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
To answer the later question, yes. They seem to be too basketball-fan centric. The only hook I would personally approve at this point is 3b: 2a still feels rather flimsy, and it is still reliant on waiting for March. The real issue here is DYKTIMEOUT: I can approve 3b if it makes you feel better, but given the circumstances, you may have to let Ames go. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 06:50, 23 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
What does 2a have to do with March?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:47, 23 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
What is wrong with 10?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:47, 23 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
You were saying that we have to wait for March 9 to know both players' impact on the team, and while not directly stated in the hook, it's still indirectly linked to that idea. Besides, if an entire team is going to be replaced, someone has to be the replacement, and it's not clear at first glance what makes these specific players important.
Think of it this way. You are writing these hooks from the perspective of a sports fan or a basketball fan. You need to write or propose hooks targeted to a non-sports fan. This does not mean that a non-basketball hook is needed; instead, it needs to be a hook that will answer the question: "if I know little-to-nothing about basketball, or if I am not a sports fan, will this catch my interest?" Theleekycauldron wrote an essay a while back about a thought experiment of saying a DYK fact to a person and judging their reaction. It's a usual rule of thumb regarding hook interest, and should be something to be kept in mind. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:03, 23 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
How is the discretion of WP:DYKTIMEOUT applied in general if things nominated before this were nominated are being held for April 1. Could I make this a date request for the first week of the NCAA tournament and get more leeway on the TIMEOUT?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:43, 23 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
A date request for the Wednesday of the first week of the tournament when a team like Cal could be playing a First Four or NIT game would be reasonable from my perspective.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:45, 23 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
April 1 is an explicit exemption to nominations being timed out. Letting this nomination be extended when others are not would likely be seen as unfair by other editors. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 15:58, 23 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
When you say unfair to others, has there ever been a nomination that requested source evidence that we knew would be available 2 weeks beyond the deadline. I am not just asking for 2 weeks extra because I've been inattentive to the process and need more time. I have attempted to be proactive and responsive and know that exact future publication date of an anticipated source, which is a bit different.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:39, 23 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Narutolovehinata5 and TonyTheTiger: How do you feel about ALT3c: ... that a future teammate (pictured) of Dai Dai Ames played on a team of sons of National Basketball Association players while in high school?--Launchballer 15:45, 23 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

I'd oppose that wording on WP:DYKMAJOR grounds. The hook is still ultimately about Pippen and not Ames, and the hook reads as if Ames was only added to the hook for the sake of it becoming a double hook. Regrettably, it would probably be for the best to move away from a double hook at this time, although given the lack of agreement on a hook and how this is already past time out, I wouldn't be opposed to just pulling the plug on this one. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 16:00, 23 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
DYKMAJOR, that's the one that says "The boldlinked article should generally be the main or at least a major factor in the hook", right? I'd say the boldlinked articles are the main factors in the hook. I don't think Ames being shoehorned in is a problem.--Launchballer 16:07, 23 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
Yes. I am specifically referring to ALT3c in this case: the hook is mainly about Pippen, with Ames only being incidental. The way I interpret DYKMAJOR is something like this: would the hook still make sense if one of the bolded links was removed from the hook? If a mention is essential, it can work as a double or even a multi-hook, but in this case, Ames's mention is not essential and does not actually add much. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 16:27, 23 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
I've always interpreted it as 'is this likely to make readers look at something that isn't new or recently improved'. For example, looking at the bottom of this month's WP:DYKSTATS, KLSR-TV and ABC 33/40 both got way less views than their hooks' Christopher Judge and The Puppy Episode, which aren't eligible. In this case, both Ames and Pippen are eligible, so it isn't a problem that views are being diverted.--Launchballer 16:45, 23 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
Sorry, where is ALT3b in the article? ALT17 says "Ames made two three point shots in the final 11 seconds, including a four-point play with 5 seconds left" and (to this basketball ignoramus) three points is different to four points.--Launchballer 15:23, 24 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
Use the pagesearch for ALT3b. You actually followed along quite well. That is really more than you need to know but if you click on the four-point play link, I imagine you would understand.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:50, 24 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
That's a major concern Tony. All of your new hooks are still targeted towards basketball fans. You need to propose or focus on a hook for a broad audience. That is not what is happening here.
As an aside, Tony, I suggest that you stop signing all of your hook proposals and instead just make one big edit with all your proposals, and just sign one at the end. Your current practice is making this nomination difficult to read and follow. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 16:00, 24 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
It checks. Let's roll.--Launchballer 19:09, 24 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Launchballer and Theleekycauldron: Honestly, that is a very boring hook in comparison to 3b and 17, which I would only want to go with if we can't get something else passed. Can we pursue 3b and 17.

@Launchballer: Since 3b was acceptable I would prefer to go with 3b/2b if the reviewer does not want to endorse ALT 17, which would get more views than 2b, IMO. N.B. 2b just removes Pippen from 2a which seems to have no objectors.

ALT2a approved only; ALT3b and ALT17 require knowledge that isn't in the required articles, and it would be idiotic to shear off Pippen given that the hook works as a double. (And I don't use pagesearch, thank you very much, I read the article.)--Launchballer 23:20, 24 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
Not sure what 3b requires, but I thank you for taking some time in this mission. You devote a lot of energy to DYK. Keep it up. We are still leaving the best topic (17) on the cutting room floor, but this one is in the books.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:28, 25 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
(edit conflict) I already said I'm okay with ALT3b, but not so much ALT2b or any variant of that, especially if it was a double hook.
I have come up with a ton of hooks for this nomination. That is actually one of the recurring issues with your nominations. You often propose several hooks that are just very minor rewords of each other, instead of proposing one main hook, then letting the subsequent discussion decide on a final wording. For example, ALT12-ALT17 are really just the same hook. Proposing too many hooks at the same time, especially with the aforementioned signature issue, made it more difficult for this nomination and probably contributed to why it turned out the way it did.
For me, ALT17's angle is a non-starter because, again, it reads more like an ESPN blurb than a DYK hook, making it really feel like it appeals more to a sports fan than a general fan. It does not matter if your previous hooks were well-reviewed or if you had similar hooks approved in the past. That would be invoking WP:OSE. It's not that I have a bias against your nominations (I don't), it's that I am checking these hooks from the perspective of a non-basketball fan.
Although, I don't focus on DYK, the two most viewed articles I have had are basketbally. OSE aside, I have at least a dozen highly viewed basketball hooks. As a result, I feel that I have the evidence that the reader is a lot less lazy in regards to basketball than you seem to realize.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:28, 25 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
OSE doesn't apply to hooks. That specifically says "comparing with articles that have been through some kind of quality review [...] makes a much more credible case" and I would argue that viewcount is a quality review. That said, searching the DYKSTATS archives shows lots of hooks that have done poorly, which is a good reason why that doesn't work on this occasion.--Launchballer 01:13, 26 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
Finally, regarding the special occasion request, given that special occasion requests have to be made within two months of the nomination, and this nomination is already over two months, that probably isn't a good idea. I won't object if an uninvolved editor allows it, though. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:26, 24 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
I was not planning on making a date request, but this got pulled from the queue and we are getting close to the time of year when college basketball is of great interest in the US, which is a huge percentage of the ENWP readership. March Madness date requests have sometimes worked out well in the past. Since we are not that far away from March 18, I'll see if we can get that date. No biggie if we don't becuase the chosen hook is a bit of a dud.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:28, 25 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
  • @Narutolovehinata5, Launchballer, and Theleekycauldron: Dear WP colleagues, I went to bed last night thinking that one of two things was true: 1. There is some game or mission to reduce the pageviews of my hooks 2. You guys and gals are all D A$ and S AF. I woke up this morning enlightened. I view the suggestions like accessibility or green concerns for an architect who is trying to make the most profit. He would insist that he could make the most profit by ignoring accessibility or green concerns like he has in the past but they are in the way anyways. I can see that DYK is now concerned that all hooks are easily consumed by all readers. I do think 17 the other hooks would have gotten more pageviews, but I kind of understand.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:15, 25 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]
Latest comment: 5 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:51, 15 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

[edit]
Latest comment: 5 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Fixed it already. Just link the school's name instead. 9mm.trilla (talk) 11:32, 6 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Justin_Pippen&oldid=1342001623"