Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Philadelphia Athletics 18, Cleveland Indians 17 (1932)/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 11 October 2023 [1].

Philadelphia Athletics 18, Cleveland Indians 17 (1932) edit

Nominator(s): Wehwalt (talk) 17:54, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about... one of the most peculiar but exciting games in Major League Baseball history. You'd expect a pitcher who gave up 14 runs and 29 hits to lose the game, or at least not be the winning pitcher wouldn't you? But on the afternoon of July 10, 1932, Eddie Rommel did win that game, coming in as a relief pitcher and pitching 17 innings, and thereby lies a tale ...Wehwalt (talk) 17:54, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review edit

  • Suggest adding alt text
Done.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:55, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Eddie_Rommel,_Philadelphia_AL_(baseball)_LCCN2014716263.tif: when and where was this first published?
I've removed the copyright not renewed tag. The Bain tag does not rely on when it was published.
  • File:Connie-mack-cover.jpg: source link is dead, tagged as lacking author info.
I've replaced the source link. I looked through the April 11, 1927 issue and it doesn't say who the photographer is, nor does the Time site or an internet search, so I've changed it to "not known". The copyright is expired in any case. Thank you for the image review.--Wehwalt (talk)

Support from Chris edit

Drive-by comment
  • I'll do a full review later, but one opening thought. The first sentence says "On Sunday, July 10, 1932, the Philadelphia Athletics defeated the Cleveland Indians 18–17 in eighteen innings." Nowhere in that first sentence does it say what sport they were playing. Yes, Major League Baseball is mentioned right at the end of the second sentence, but I think it really needs to be stated that this was a baseball game in the very first sentence. I wouldn't write an article on this football match and have an opening sentence that simply said "On 12 November 2022, Liverpool beat Southampton 3–1" because it doesn't give sufficient introductory context to the reader.......... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:53, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I've moved "Major League Baseball" into the opening sentence, albeit at the end. Wehwalt (talk) 10:08, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
More comments
  • "The Cleveland Indians, despite not having won a World Series since 1920,[3] were under new ownership" - I can't see any obvious reason why their not having won the World Series for 12 years would make it unlikely for them to be under new ownership, so "despite" doesn't seem appropriate here
  • "Another reason for giving rest of the pitching staff" => "Another reason for giving the rest of the pitching staff"
  • "When play resumed, Glenn Myatt walked to put runners on first and second,[16] Bill Cissell attempted a sacrifice bunt, but popped the ball into the air towards Rommel." => "When play resumed, Glenn Myatt walked to put runners on first and second;[16] Bill Cissell then attempted a sacrifice bunt, but popped the ball into the air towards Rommel."
  • That's all I got on a first pass. There's more commas than I would personally use, but I think based on past reviews that's probably a UK/US difference..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:14, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, ChrisTheDude I've done those things. I split the sentence rather than add "then" in your final comment. Wehwalt (talk) 16:42, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nice one - support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:07, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from Therapyisgood edit

  • The Cleveland Indians had not won a World Series since 1920. you never actually link World Series anywhere to the term itself, just the years. At a minimum a link should be established to give readers an understanding of what this is.
Linked by splitting the 1930 World Series link.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:37, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Cleveland Indians had not won a World Series since 1920.[3] By the late 1920s, they were under new ownership, who were determined to spend freely to acquire talent, and after a seventh-place finish in 1928, finished in the top half of the league standings the next seven years. we never actually said which league (ie AL or NL) the Indians were in.
Clarified.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:37, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lead: Sunday baseball was still illegal in Philadelphia, article: Sunday baseball was illegal in Pennsylvania. was it illegal in the whole state or only in the city?
The whole state. The voters of Allegheny County legalized it in 1933, the same time Philadelphia County did. The idea of phrasing it this way is to focus on Philadelphia.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:53, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • There was no scoring in the second inning, which ended with the Indians leading, 3–2, but in the top of the third, Brown gave up a solo home run to slugger Jimmie Foxx, his 31st of the season, to tie the score. too many commas, perhaps break into two sentences.
OK.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:53, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rommel walked with two outs in the top of the fourth inning, you need to wikilink walks here and not later in the paragraph.
Done.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:53, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • disagreeing with the choice of Hudlin. can you clarify this means as a pitcher, as that's what I'm implying but it's not said outright.
  • What makes BallNine a reliable reference?
This site makes it clear they have ample subject-matter experts and an editorial structure, sufficient in my view to qualify per WP:RS.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:33, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • they would never again be so close that season, right? Or all-time?
Clarified.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:53, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All I have. Therapyisgood (talk) 21:09, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All done. Thank you for the review.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:53, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from Usernameunique edit

Lead

  • The first and last paragraphs each list a variety of records; it's unclear why they're split up the way they are.
I think you've got to lead an article with your strength, and you tell the reader right off the bat why this game was exceptional in the lead paragraph, especially in the era of Google previews. You tell them immediately that this game set records. But there's no need to shoot off all your ammunition in the first paragraph, especially as you have to give baseball information. Thus, the end of the lead can hold some of the records, and of course there are more mentioned later.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:39, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Background

  • lost considerably — A bit vague, and I think the grammar is off (verb/adverb, not verb/noun)
Expanded.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:39, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • At the time of the July 10, 1932 game, it was within three weeks of opening. — Better off in the second paragraph?
Not really. We're just trying to give a thumbnail sketch of background on the two teams in the first paragraph.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:39, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cleveland manager Roger Peckinpaugh was nearly as bad off for pitching as was Mack. — Meaning their bullpen was spent? Can you give more details, in the way that you gave details for the A's?
I've added the info that they left a half-dozen (so says source) players behind them in Washington. The July 10 Plain Dealer says that Peckinpaugh was talked into starting Sarge Connally in the second game on Saturday against his better judgment and he did pretty badly but the article doesn't connect all the dots. I think the info on the players left behind and the knowledge Cleveland had played five games in three days is enough. It's the A's shortage of pitchers that's a major theme of this article anyway, no source says (or discusses) that Cleveland was out of pitchers.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First through sixth innings

  • Mack relieved Krausse and sent Rommel to the mound for the second inning — Seems like a pretty odd decision. Is there any word on his thinking?
I think a lot of baseball historians would like to know his reasoning. He takes only two pitchers to Cleveland and then promptly locks Rommel in the game? Regrettably, there's nothing beyond speculation. The "He Won?" source has someone who speculates Krausse might have been injured but I find that dubious because he pitched in the second game the next day. Mack's biographer doesn't say, he didn't put a reason in his Sunday column on the 17th and he doesn't seem to have given any interviews about it, hardly surprising given their likely rush to get out of Cleveland, but there's nothing in any newspaper.com newspaper or the Cleveland papers I have access to from another database.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:55, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Seventh through ninth innings

  • Foxx hit a two-run home run — Note that it was his second of the game?
Fair enough.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:38, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mack called time — What does this mean? A mound visit, or some arcane rule?
You have to call time to replace a player. That's been the rule since King Kelly tried to declare himself in the game as a ball flew towards him in foul territory.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:48, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • He had planned what to do in that situation for years — How do we know this/what's the statement attributed to? Was it his error, or the second baseman's? What about the infield fly rule?
The infield fly rule does not apply to attempted bunts. That Rommel had planned what to do appears with minor variations in multiple sources. It was his throwing error, and that appears in the Retrosheet box score.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:48, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Did Rommel state in interviews that he had planned it? If so, maybe worth adding. When an article talks about what someone thought/intended/planned, a logical question becomes "how do we know that?" --Usernameunique (talk) 03:41, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • the fans cheered Peckinpaugh for several minutes — What does the source say?
"But when the Indians came back, as if to vindicate Peck, and scored six times themselves, the fans tendered Roger several minutes of applause, as second-guessers sometimes will."--Wehwalt (talk) 14:32, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extra innings

Nine innings, in a 25-4 win over the Browns.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:32, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • he hit his third home run of the game — How many on the season? Any word on the number of pitches/the count, or is that lost to history?
Counts and pitches are lost to history unless mentioned by the press. I'll mention it was his 33rd.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:32, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • took an unexpected bounce over Vosmik's head — What does this mean? What does the source say?
" Eric McNair then hit a ball into left field that took a crazy bounce over Vosmik’s head. This allowed Foxx to score the go-ahead run. McNair was thrown out trying to stretch the hit into a triple."
  • The game had lasted four hours and five minutes. Had neither team scored, the game would have continued until nightfall put an end to it. — What time was it when it ended? How close to nightfall?
The article says this was a three pm game and says the game lasted 4:05. The reader can compute the time the game ended. None of the sources gives the time of sunset in Cleveland on July 10, 1932. I could find it, but there's an extent to which that would be unwarranted OR since the condition of the lighting (and, to some extent, the breaks in the innings) would dictate when the game was called.
  • he probably threw more than that — Why?
Per source. If he threw three per batter, he threw 261 pitches "and likely threw more".

Records set

  • No other player has had more than seven hits in a game — Who else has hit seven? Worth a footnote?
  • A total of five players, per here. Since all of these take a back seat to Burnette, I don't see the point of a footnote.
  • he won all of them — Footnote with some details, e.g., the scores and number of innings of those games?
The source doesn't mention it and I don't think the mention is with the digging. It's just a "wow" statistic, worth the inclusion but not worth listing all of them.
  • the MLB record of 181⁄3 innings — Specify what the category of record is—presumably total number of innings pitched in a game.
Clarified.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:38, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • won't be seen once in a blue moon — Is this a correct quotation? I get what it means, but as written, it's close to a double negative (unless he's trying to say its rarer than once in a blue moon).
It's what it says.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:51, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • probably the only one that Burnett will ever make — The only what? Record?
Yes, that's what it means. Technically there are two records, one for hits and one for singles but it's worth quoting.

Aftermath

  • the games on Tuesday and Wednesday — I would mention somewhere that these were also against the A's?
It is mentioned in the "Background" section, but I restored the language and clarified it was against the Athletics..
  • On September 2, 1932, Krausse started — Was that his next appearance?
No, as I mentioned he pitched the next day. He only pitched one inning on July 10, it's not terribly necessary to track his appearances. This is more in line of this is what happened to the major figures in this drama.
  • he said neither pitcher was ever the same — Neither pitcher in which game? This one, or the 26-inning one? Also, Brooklyn Dodgers 1, Boston Braves 1 (26 innings) says that "There were stories told that the lengthy pitching appearance ruined the arms of Oeschger and Cadore; this was not the case as both pitched several more years in the major league and Oeschger won twenty games in 1921."
As the article on the 26 inning game says , there was a myth that Cadore and Oeschger shut their arms out, and this is an example of that. It's good as a lead-in to the fact that Rommel in fact never pitched effectively again
It might be worth noting that the claim as applied to the 26-inning game is a myth. As you say, there's a worthy point to be made in noting Robinson's comment, but it currently reads as unrebutted fact. --Usernameunique (talk) 03:49, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • his arm was finished — For good? Or as in "boy, that was a long day; I'm spent"?
I think the text makes it pretty clear it was for good. That's what he said in retrospect, anyway.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:10, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Overall

Many thanks. I think I've answered or respond to all.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:10, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Added two comments above, but am adding my support. Very nice article. --Usernameunique (talk) 03:50, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source rev edit

All the newspapers used were significant regional/citywide papers of record in their day. Of the texts used, all are published by respectable houses by acknowledged experts (Jordan is a lawyer, but also a respected author, Allen a sports historian, Macht has been reviewed in PR journals, and Odenkirk is professor emeritus at Arizona State pen). All is well, no obvious commissions and no red flags. Serial 12:29, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for that.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:44, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Philadelphia_Athletics_18,_Cleveland_Indians_17_(1932)/archive1&oldid=1179718552"