Talk:J. J. Barea

Did he actually graduate from Northeastern? The article does not say, and if he did, it also does not say what was his major at the university. Frankly, that's an important issue for those fans who think finishing college is just as important as basketball... Flybd5 (talk) 03:31, 8 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

He claims to be 5'10.5" - 5'11" in a recent interview by ESPN. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.55.87.158 (talk) 20:37, 20 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Link? But we always go after what nba.com says at their profile. Kante4 (talk) 20:45, 20 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

He is actually 179 cm http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Jose-Juan-Barea-171/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.59.126.202 (talk) 21:28, 25 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

--Here is the link where he claims his real height-- http://www.mavs.com/videos/exit-interviews-jj-barea/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.59.124.44 (talk) 18:34, 28 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Ok I am nominating this to WP:GAC again, it appears the main concerns in the last review has been taken care of, Chensiyuan helped me with the text cleanup and the unsourced image is gone. To the reviewer please note that this article is lacking an image because no public domain image has appeared so far, I have tried to find one and failed and a petition on the NBA WikiProject hasn't produced any results. - Caribbean~H.Q. 02:38, 22 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Problems with the article

• Some very short sentences, which need to be smoothed out. Some read like dot points and are dot points without the dot so to speak.
• Prose: There are many places where a comma is appropriate but is not given at all.
• Some paragraphs do not appear to be fully cources and could do with some tying up

Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:59, 2 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

I will work with these points tommorow morning when I can edit with a fresh head, thanks for the review. - Caribbean~H.Q. 04:09, 2 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ok I have added a few commas here and there, however I need a few examples of the sentences that you are talking about, can you list the paragraph's that you think aren't fully sourced? I think that any controversial or doubtable statement has been covered by one of the references presented, a list of the sentences and paragraphs in need of work can be very useful. - Caribbean~H.Q. 22:45, 4 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Um, just picking a paragraph at random and checking the sources, the international section. The first ref is broken and the second doesn't say what the accomopanying sentence does say. I have done a copyedit for you. Can you also source the infobox please? Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:49, 5 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the copyedit, that has always been my Achilles' heel as a editor. About the references, I added a funtional link for the first one and replaced the second one with the Miami Tropics' official site reference. - Caribbean~H.Q. 06:19, 5 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

The fields in the infobox have been referenced using his NBA profile. - Caribbean~H.Q. 06:33, 5 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ok, I passed this article. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:47, 10 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the review again. - Caribbean~H.Q. 04:57, 10 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Shouldn't it be 2001 to present? It says he turned pro in 2001. CollisionCourse (talk) 01:25, 26 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Certainly. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:24, 18 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ok, I reorganized the article cause I felt the previous order of having the career listed as BSN, NBA, and NBA Development League was problematic in terms of chronology (he went to the Development League in the middle of his first NBA season, so it made no sense to have it on another section AFTER the NBA bit). To kinda solve that, I integrated that part into the NBA section while dividing the info per seasons. That said, I'm not that fond of sub-headings and sub-sub-sub-headings so I don't know how well the article looks now. I also expanded the sections for each season, especially the current one where Barea has had a sorta breakthrough during the playoffs with all the notoriety of the Bynum incident and whatnot. Any recommendations and comments are welcome. Thief12 (talk) 20:56, 11 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for fixing the article. This article was outdated and is actually in danger of losing the GA status. So I am glad that someone has the initiative to do something about that. One comment though. I don't think it is a good idea to use Yahoo articles as refs since most of their articles quickly become dead links, which is bad. So I prefer sites like ESPN, which keep their article viewable for a long time.—Chris!_c/t 21:16, 11 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Really? I frequently link to Yahoo Sports because I've found recaps of games from years ago. Do you think those links would become dead links too? Either way, I can find similar pages on ESPN and change the links. Thanks for the comments! Thief12 (talk) 01:44, 12 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Oh, I am speaking from my previous experience using the site. Maybe I should be been clearer above that that is my observation. Anyway, it is entirely possible that they improve their website archive. If so, that is good.—Chris!_c/t 01:53, 12 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I think there ought to be an asterisk for his height listing. Wikipedia shouldn't repeat questionable information as fact, even if that is the official number. His own mother says that it's not true http://www.wfaa.com/sports/JJ-Bareas-family--123203878.html It's ok to go with the official listing, but people want to know the truth and they should be able to get it from their first investigation, which is usually Wikipedia. 72.83.70.240 (talk) 03:55, 14 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Unfortunately, the infobox isn't set up to handle an asterisk, or even a footnote. That will generate a big red "expression error" message. The infobox isn't technically wrong, since 6'0" is his "listed" height. I wouldn't be opposed to adding something about his height to the body of the text, but I'd like to see what other people think. Zagalejo^^^ 04:03, 14 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Note that in the text if you want. But the height in the infobox should not be changed since 6'0" is his listed height on NBA.com.—Chris!_c/t 04:18, 14 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

I added some info about Barea's height on the "Personal life" section, with sources. It can be moved to another section, if deemed appropriate though. Thief12 (talk) 22:57, 4 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

In the end it says that Barea was the first puertorican to ever win an NBA ring, he might have been the first to play on a finals but Butch Lee in 1980 was awarded a ring as part of the team even if he was unable to play.173.215.163.222 (talk) 04:46, 14 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Should be fixed now (unless you're looking at an older version of the article). Zagalejo^^^ 04:59, 14 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

There is some controversy among writers of whether he is a Puerto Rican citizen or a US Citizen. It should be noted that a person born in Puerto Rico is as much a citizen of the United States as anyone born anywhere else in the US. It is a technicality, but I think an important distinction, given the fact that a person from Puerto Rico needs no passport to enter the rest of the US, and has the same benefits as other Americans. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KingJames73 (talk • contribs) 02:29, 13 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Clearly, the answer to "Nationality" is American. Someone has tried to make the distinction that his "sporting nationality" is Puerto Rican, which is also true. However, the infobox does not provide a space for such "Sporting Nationality". Thus, the correct answer is "American".Pr4ever (talk) 03:07, 13 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

I think he is both Puerto Rican citizen and U.S. citizen. I'm not really familiar with Puerto Rico-U.S. nationality/citizenship status, but why couldn't the article be neutral and list both Puerto Rican and American in the infobox. It looks weird that the lead says that he's a "Puerto Rican basketball player" but his nationality in the infobox is American. Sure he has U.S. citizenship but I think he never referred to as an American basketball player. In international basketball, technically his legal nationality needs to be Puerto Rico in order for him to play for the Puerto Rican national team. I'm not sure how FIBA determine legal nationality for U.S. territories, but that's how it's written in their regulation — MT (talk) 15:39, 14 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Really, it all depends on what we want to do with the infobox. As citizenship is normally understood, Barea would be considered American, so there is a case to be made for putting "American" in the infobox. However, I have a feeling we might end up needing an RFC to settle this issue. (Once semi-protection is lifted, I know some IP will quickly change the nationality back to Puerto Rican.) Zagalejo^^^ 22:57, 14 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

There is a non-elegant solution to solve this, see Emir Preldžič where the infobox listed 3 nationalities and using parenthesis to explain which one is his professional (sporting) nationality and which one his ethnicity. Personally I don't like it since it clutter the infobox but this may be the solution needed. — MT (talk) 02:07, 15 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

You know, I don't mind the "non-elegant" solution. Infoboxes are not required to be "elegant" but informative. We can either place the legal nationality and sports nationality and explain it, or design an infobox that will include "Nationality" and "Sports Nationality" when they are different. Pr4ever (talk) 03:13, 15 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Infobox is supposed to be informative, but it is not capable to handle complex issue like nationality. The best way is to explain using a footnote.—Chris!_c/t 04:12, 15 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Another option is to remove the nationality bit altogether, and simply leave the birthplace. Zagalejo^^^ 05:26, 15 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

• Another option which I believe would satisfy all parties involved would be to place in the Nationality section something like this: American/Puerto Rican. I believe that this would be a good choice since the American citizenship that was given to the Puerto Ricans born in the island is not a permanent one without an amendment to the US Constitution and can be revoked if the island became an independent nation or whenever the United States feels like it by an act of Congress. Many Puerto Ricans consider it as a second class citizenship, since they do not enjoy the full rights which stateside citizens enjoy such as the right to vote for the president. In Puerto Rico you will find many Puerto Ricans who will say "I am an American citizen and proud of it" and you will also find many Puerto Ricans who will say "I am not a "Americano", I am Puerto Rican, period". But, one thing is true almost everyone identifies themselves simiply as "Puerto Rican" regardless of their political believes. So what do you all say? Let's stay on the non-political safe side and settle the issue with a "American/Puerto Rican". Tony the Marine (talk) 17:24, 25 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

I don't mind having American / Puerto Rico in the infobox. However, if the infobox need to be more accurate, we should follow the example in Emir Preldžič, by listing American (Legal nationality) / Puerto Rico (Sporting nationality), since he represents Puerto Rico national basketball team. Either way is fine for me as long as Puerto Rico is mentioned. — MT (talk) 18:08, 25 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

My preference would be to leave the nationality field completely blank, and let people figure things out from the body of the article. But I could live with either Tony's or Martin's suggestions. Zagalejo^^^ 21:16, 25 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

I don't think it should be left blank, but as Zagalejo, I could live with Tony's "American/Puerto Rican" suggestion or Martin's legal/sports dual nationality inbox mention suggestion. Pr4ever (talk) 02:49, 26 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Comment

• Since it is agreed that either version will be fine, I will proceed to post the version that I suggested with the hope that it is the least complicated and that all the parties involved are satisfied. Thank you all. Tony the Marine (talk) 03:15, 26 June 2011 (UTC)Reply