Talk:Brooklyn Nets

New Jersey Nets Article

While the team remains in the same market, I do believe there should be a separate article for the New Jersey Nets. The team played in New Jersey for 35 years and carved out a significant legacy there. Also playing in a new state helps. MarcusPearl95 (talk) 23:09, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

There's already the History of the Brooklyn Nets article that elaborates on the history. It's not so long as to need to have the New Jersey period split out. Doing such also creates the false impression that it's a separate team. It's not. oknazevad (talk) 00:47, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

There are Plenty of Instances where teams who have played in other areas for shorter tenures have separate articles, you may think it gives off a false impression, but for everyone else, it does not.MarcusPearl95 (talk) 00:59, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Are you also proposing a separate article for the New York Nets? oknazevad (talk) 01:07, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

No. Umbrella concept of New York/Brooklyn Nets MarcusPearl95 (talk) 01:36, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

And the New Jersey Nets are in that exact same umbrella. Hell, the New York Nets have less in common because of he decades of time separating their stints on Long Island and Brooklyn. It's all one team, and all one metro area, and doesn't need separate articles. oknazevad (talk) 03:42, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

The fact that they branded themselves as a New Jersey Nets is the big difference here. If they did what the Giants did and kept their New York branding, then I’d be more inclined to agree with you, but they chose to market themselves as a New Jersey team, which is a separate state, and therefore, entitled to its own article. They are the same team, and as with other articles, it will make that perfectly clear, that I can assure you. MarcusPearl95 (talk) 22:54, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

And now they're the Brooklyn Nets, which is not the same as New York, either. Again, it's still the same metro area. They didn't even change local broadcasters. Heck, for the first few years after they opened Bar lays Center, they were still using the exact same training facility. In New Jersey. The basketball pages have been consistent with not having separate articles for teams that move within a market, even if they've changed their names. oknazevad (talk) 23:15, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

No.72 retired

There's a banner that retired no.72 in honor of Notorious B.I.G., does that count? Nbagigafreak (talk) 11:56, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Location

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I had made a good intentions edit the other day on the article as well as the NBA article. The location of the team should be identical to the Knicks as "New York, New York." Yes the team is named after the city's borough of Brooklyn, but it is not the official city/municipality. The team is in NYC so it should be listed as such just like the Mets and Yankees are in their respective articles and MLB article. Would like a constructive discussion on this matter so we can come to a common consensus. Banan14kab (talk) 21:15, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

This has been discussed many times through the years. The longstanding consensus is to use "Brooklyn". Why do you keep asking the same question from time to time? – sbaio 14:55, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

@Sbaio Please point us to previous discussions, so that we can understand how the consensus was reached. Assadzadeh (talk) 16:27, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This deletion ...

Is uncalled for. The editor does not understand wp:pov. And that IP edits are fine - not to be denigrated because the editor is an IP editor. I urge the revert of the editor's deletion of RS-supported proper text. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brooklyn_Nets&curid=72852&diff=1277754084&oldid=1277696739 2603:7000:2101:AA00:6103:B31A:D0F4:8A0E (talk) 23:03, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• (summoned by the NBA project alert) I don't know why the Miami News article that allegedly reported on this hasn't been directly cited. The only source provided in the bundle that discusses the Jewish aspect is tercrowley.com which looks like a blog, and a cursory search doesn't find meaningful evidence of WP:USEBYOTHERS. Even within the blog, it's a brief passing mention among many others, so it comes across as cherry-picked. I tentatively would support only the inclusion of the trade info; it seems widely-covered and topically significant since it involves the first overall draft pick. @Sbaio: to be clear, would you have any objections to the basic trade info being added? Or are you only opposed to the Jewish detail? Left guide (talk) 04:00, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  Just because it involves the first overall draft pick doesn't make it significant. As Sbaio stated on his talk page, which I agree with ...that addition is too trivial to be on main team page (and most likely team's season page). It might be suitable for individual player pages, but that is also questionable. (Note the same info is already included on both Art Heyman and Barry Leibowitz pages.) So, I would say that even the basic trade info doesn't need to be added. Assadzadeh (talk) 05:10, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  @Left guide: I am opposed to both, because Brooklyn Nets#History is a short summary of team's history. A more complete team's history was split into History of the Brooklyn Nets in the past. The basic trade detail might be included in the aforementioned page, but that trade is so insignificant that I am not sure at this point that it belongs even there. And yes, the Jewish detail should not be added, because the source is unreliable and that part is too trivial. – sbaio 06:34, 1 March 2025 (UTC)