Template talk:NBA Awards

National Basketball Association Template‑class

	This template is within the scope of WikiProject National Basketball Association, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the NBA on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Basketball AssociationWikipedia:WikiProject National Basketball AssociationTemplate:WikiProject National Basketball AssociationNBA articles
Template	This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Alternate template[edit]

Why not use this version?

Well, I like the current version better because people can click on the links at the top of the page.—Chris! _ct 03:55, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But the current version doesn't let pictures of the trophy to be displayed on the introduction. -- K. Annoyomous 24 01:27, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is a minor issue, I think. Images don't always need to be at the top.—Chris! _ct 04:00, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NAVBOXES should be at the bottom of the page, not in the lead. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:51, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chris, I think you should reply on this problem and follow the WP:MOS for WP:NAVBOXES. -- K. Annoyomous 24 02:33, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But WP:NAVBOX never says that navboxes can't be in the lead. So how is this a problem?—Chris! _ct 03:27, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you can show me a template that looks like the one currently used, I'll maybe re-consider but currently, I never saw any and Matthewedwards said that it "should" be at the bottom of the page, that's why it doesn't say that naxboxes can't be in the lead. -- K. Annoyomous 24 07:42, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is an example: Template:SSM used in the lead of Same-sex marriage in California. —Chris! _ct 05:22, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's different. there are sections on that template. this one doesn't. Now, I don't really care. I'll ask Matthewedwards to respond. -- K. Annoyomous 24 06:23, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(←Outdent) This template appears in the lead section of NBA All-Star Game Most Valuable Player Award. It links to NBA Coach of the Year Award, NBA Rookie of the Year Award and Larry O'Brien Championship Trophy. Those awards are all independent to the All-Star Game Most Valuable Player, even though they are related to each other in the grand scheme of things. Further, the Coach of the Year article does not provide any information that is important to All-Star Game Most Valuable Player article, which doesn't provide any information that is important to the Rookie of the Year Award. That is why my personal preference is to see navboxes at the bottom of articles. Navbox content is not often all that relevant to the content of the articles they appears on. Navboxes usually contain links to related articles and do not provide further understanding of the subjects of the pages they appear on. Lede sections are supposed to be a brief overview or introduction to the rest of the page content. When navboxes appear in the lead, they give the impression that they are contributing to the understanding of the article content, when in fact they do not. They just provide distracting links to other semi-related pages. This is why I don't understand your comment, Chris, "I like the current version better because people can click on the links at the top of the page." Don't you want people to read your article? What if one of the links in the navboxes appears to be more interesting than the page they're currently on?

Anyway, in either format, the template brings together a collection of links of similar articles. It look awkward if the links were all crowbarred into normal prose, and if they weren't in a template they'd all be listed in the "See also" section rather than the Lede section. With that, I've done quite a bit of digging around to find something that can confirm one way or the other.

WP:Lead says Navigation templates may be in the Lede. That page links to WP:BETTER, which says they should go at the very end, as a navigational footer. BETTER links to WP:LAYOUT, which says the lead section may have navboxes, but also that "Various navigational aids go at the end of the article, following the last appendix section."

All those guidelines link to WP:NAVBOX, which says "There are two basic layouts [for Navboxes]]: (1.) On the right side of page - for example {{History of China}}. (2.) Footer boxes - for example {{Health in the People's Republic of China}} designed to appear at the bottom of each article." It goes on to say, "For footer boxes, {{Navbox}} is the standard. Existing hard-coded collapsible tables or NavFrames should be converted to {{Navbox}} if possible. This standardizes the look and to eases future maintenance." This template obviously isn't a collapsible table, and while it isn't coded like a Navframe, it does appear to be a one, albeit without the collapsible bits. If we look at the code for this template, it begins with "{| class="navbox"", if that's the case, it should be a standard navbox. Finally I looked at WP:ACCESS to see how our handicapped readers deal with right-hand column tables. That page also allows this kind of navbox, which it calls a "sidebar", to be present in the lede. WP:MOS incidentally doesn't mention navigational boxes.

So while I don't like it, it seems this template style is allowed. And while it is, I won't oppose any articles or lists at FAC/FLC when they do use it, but I will continue to request that they change it for the reason I gave in my first paragraph.

Finally, I'm pretty sure though that this talk page isn't watched by many people, so I'm going to take it to WT:MOS, where hopefully more people will weigh in. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 09:10, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chuck Daly Lifetime Achievement Award[edit]

Should this article be merged into the template? I believe it should because it's a prestigious NBA award, and it has been given out for many years now. Robert4565 (talk) 14:49, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]