Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Derek Jeter/archive3

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 not promoted by Ucucha 14:52, 17 December 2011 [1].

---

Derek Jeter

Derek Jeter (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured article candidates/Derek Jeter/archive1
• Featured article candidates/Derek Jeter/archive2
• Featured article candidates/Derek Jeter/archive3
• Featured article candidates/Derek Jeter/archive4

Nominator(s): – Muboshgu (talk) 17:22, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Third time is the charm? I acknowledge that this article wasn't close to FA the first time I nominated it. The second time, I dealt with all of the issues except shoddy prose before it was failed. I felt time should have been extended because I was actively working on it. So, I took some time and I feel that now, this page is ready to be promoted to FA status. Whatever problems remain should be minor enough for me to handle in a short amount of time. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:22, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks not done. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:06, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

• Why so many citations in the lead? Most of this material should be cited in the article body instead
• Source for 2002 ESPY?
• "Jeter returned to bat .324, losing the batting title to Bill Mueller, who batted .326." - source?
• "Jeter won his second consecutive Gold Glove in 2005, as his low range factor rose to 4.76 and ranked second among AL shortstops." - source? Check for other statements lacking sources
• Be consistent in how web citations are notated
• Be consistent in when publishers are included
• Check wikilinking for consistency
• Book sources need page numbers
• Don't write titles in all-caps
• Publications should generally be italicized
• What makes this a high-quality reliable source? This? This?
• Don't duplicate cited sources in External links
• FN 80: publisher?
• Be consistent in whether ISBNs are hyphenated or not

In general, citation format should be made much more consistent. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:06, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

• • I think I have fixed citations to be consistent. I may have missed a few things here and there. Regarding FanGraphs and TheBaseballCube, we do consider these reliable statistics-based sites. LoHud Blogs are written by beat writers of The Journal News and published by the same newspaper. Regarding the inline citations, (1) is it a problem to have those things cited in the lead? I am sure that those things are mentioned in the body as well. I can remove the citations if you prefer. As for (2) citations that are also external links, I added citations to [2] in text where it was suggested in the second FAC try that statistics should have inline citations. Should I remove them and refer people to the external links section? – Muboshgu (talk) 03:25, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Comments – These are more content-based than what I usually offer, both because I know a lot about the subject and because FAC has been called out on the carpet for not having enough of this.

• There are a bunch of paragraphs that don't have citations at the end. This means that at least some content is likely uncited, and it makes me wonder how much of the rest is well-supported by the sources.
• I think the Jeter–Chad Curtis "confrontation" is given some undue weight by having an entire paragraph devoted to it. That's longer than the paragraph on his 1999 season in general, and the incident really wasn't that significant in the grand scheme of things.
• "Jeter's tentative deal fell through, and he agreed to a one-year deal for $10 million." If I'm not mistaken, I rememeber Jeter winning a salary arbitration case that year. I don't think it was merely an agreement between he and the team.
• The performance in the 2000 World Series is kind of glossed over. We only get his statistics and the fact that he won the World Series MVP award. To me, this is at least as worthy of extended commentary as the catches against Oakland and Boston. It could at least be said that he hit a home run on the first pitch of Game 4, and another in the clincher.
• The 2001 November statistics are given, but no general playoff statistics. I'd say that they should be added, because his statistics weren't great if the World Series home run isn't considered. I've seen an explanation that he was playing injured after making a tumbling catch in the last game against Oakland. Not sure if you can source all this, but it sounds at least somewhat useful to me.
• I don't see anything sourcing that Jeter tied or broke the old Yankee Stadium hits record. The source at the end of this paragraph just covers his speech at the last Yankee Stadium game. It's crucial that what's in the article can be verified by a source.
  • Jeter tying the Yankee Stadium hits record still needs a cite; the new ref only covers him breaking the record. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:18, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
    • Added a source of his tying the record. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:37, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
• From 2009–present: "based on the rationale that Jeter has a higher on-base percentage than Damon, but grounds into double plays more often." This is sorely in need of an update, given that Johnny Damon hasn't played for the Yankees in two years.
• Something else to fix: "behind the Minnesota's Joe Mauer...". One word too many in there.
• A couple of suggestions for the Player profile section. First, I would consider moving the Postseason performance sub-section to here; it seems like a better fit here than after the season summaries. Given how his postseason accomplishments are what people really talk about when profiling him, I think there's some logic to doing it that way. Second, reference 20 has some interesting items about Jeter's confidence, how he's an aggressive hitter, and how he could still get hits even while having trouble with his swing. Adding one or two things from here would really help strengthen this section, which doesn't have that much in the way of details.
  • Well, he can't literally swing at every pitch in the strike zone, or he would never have a called strike against him. No one in baseball history can have that said about them, no matter how great they are at hitting. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:18, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
    • Good point. Fixed. Although I could go inserting Derek Jeter facts in this article to really improve it... – Muboshgu (talk) 02:37, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
• Check refs 27 and 36 for some citation formatting bugs that should be resolved. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:37, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
  • While here, it looks like refs 26 and 27 are the same and can be combined. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:18, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
    • Whoops. Done. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:30, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
  • On it. According to Cot's Contracts (which I believe is reliable), Jeter and the Yankees avoided arbitration in 2000, but I'll look for news sources. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:46, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Okay. I have ref'd up things that needed refs, including the 2000 contract. I've made sure that every paragraph ends with a ref. I took out the Chad Curtis incident entirely, which I agree is not important in the long run. I think your idea of moving the "postseason" section to the "player profile" section is a great idea, so I did it. All the other fixes are made.
  • I do wonder your opinion of the sourcing of statistics with BR using inline citations, which the above reviewer commented on. I want to know if I should make that change or if it's okay as is. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:23, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
    • I'd definitely leave the cites, unless there's another reliable source you can easily replace the BR refs with. I can't say that it bothers me that much, but I do think Nikki's right that the guidelines discourage repeating sources as ELs. I'd lean toward taking the EL out, rather than the other way around. Oh, and you're right about him having no arbitration in 2000. The case I was thinking of was actually in 1999. My mistake. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:18, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
      • It's hard to remember who went to arbitration last year, let alone more than ten years ago. I removed BR from the ELs. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:30, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Oppose: I have read the lead and first section and have found several prose issues which make me think this article is not quite ready yet. The prose is choppy and repetitive and it is hard to follow for this reason. I have had a quick scan of the remainder of the article and see other similar issues. I would recommend a thorough copy-edit by an uninvolved copy-editor. I have listed some concerns below but these are examples only and the prose needs looking at very carefully. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:57, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

• Second paragraph of lead: out of 8 sentences, 5 begin "Jeter" or "He". The other three start with short phrases (The following year, In addition, Through 2011), followed by "he" or "Jeter".
• Third paragraph of lead: Three sentences all beginning Jeter. Then the first sentence of the fourth paragraph begins "Jeter". The other two sentences also begin with nouns which adds to the repetitive effect. And the last sentence of the first paragraph begins "he". Out of 13 consecutive sentences, 10 begin outright with "he" or "Jeter". This makes for very heavy going and is not FA level prose.
• I notice similar problems in the Early life section. There seems to be a simple, repetitive sentence structure of noun-verb-subject, with short additional phrases in one or two sentences. The overall effect is a series of short, choppy, disjointed sentences. I would suggest rewording a few sentences to give some variety; for example "Jeter became inspired to play baseball by watching Dave Winfield play with the Yankees" could easily be altered to "Watching Dave Winfield play with the Yankees inspired…"
• The paragraphs in this section are also on the short side: The third paragraph is three sentences, the fourth and fifth are two sentence, the sixth is one sentence.
• "earning an All-State honorable mention": jargon which should be explained for the non-expert.
• "Jeter was scouted extensively by Hal Newhouser…" I understand the intention, but the effect is a bit jargony. How can one person scout extensively? A better effect may be to spell it out: "Houston Astros scout Hal Newhouser watched Jeter play many times…"
• "and the speculation was that he would insist on a salary bonus of $1 million or more to forgo his college scholarship and sign.": Speculation from whom? To sign for whom: the previous sentence says the Astros did NOT sign him. Sign what? Why would someone of this age be worth so much? Why so much speculation?
• I'm not sure this section really hangs together to say how good he was. It mentions awards and the prospective giant contract, but nothing really says that X thought he was going to be brilliant. Dry stats do not really give this impression, particularly to the non-specialist.
• "the only place Derek Jeter's going is to Cooperstown" What is Coopertown? (Sorry for my ignorance, but there may be many readers who wonder this).
• The end of this section jumps all over the place. Scouted by the Astros, turned down by the Astros in favour of Nevin, baseball scholarship, giant contract speculation, Nevin signs for Astros, scout quits, Yankees (when did they come into the picture) sign him, will he attend college, no he's going to Cooperstown (? See above), turns professional, signs. There is no narrative behind this and that makes it hard to follow.
• Not an opposable issue, but I always have reservations about FACs for current sportsmen and women. What is to say that they will not have a huge number of events in their lives which need adding before they retire and how can be guarantee that additions will keep the standards high enough for a FA? --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:57, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
• I just realised I opposed this article last time as well, for some very similar reasons. I would have hoped that these issues would have been fixed before it was renominated here. To re-iterate, I would recommend a thorough copy-edit by someone who has not spent any time on this article to give it some fresh eyes. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:00, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
  • All good points, which I will try to address by the end of the week. Regarding that last issue, I can understand that things will change for Jeter between now and his retirement, but most things will not change. He's under contract with the Yankees until he's nearly 40, at which point he's likely to retire. Mariano Rivera, which is FA, is a good article for comparison to this one, or at least it will be once I improve this article's prose enough. Rivera, like Jeter, has been an active Yankee since the mid-1990s.At most, he could try to play for another season or two after this. His status as a future Hall of Famer has been pretty well established by the first sixteen seasons of his career, and anything else he does from here would be basically icing on the cake. That said, if I can't get this passed to FA status, I probably won't try again until after his retirement. The prose at this article is certainly better than it was as of its last nomination, and I hope I can get it up to FA status soon. I'll give it a thorough prose rewrite and see if I can recruit a helper. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:08, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

• Fair enough on his career probably winding down. I would never oppose on this issue alone but always like to check how much "change" is likely. It is more of a concern when very young sportsmen are put up at FAC. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:11, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

• I've improved the prose in the first sections, somewhat. Perhaps not enough to sway you yet, but I am enlisting help and will take a deeper look myself. While I agree that sentences shouldn't be repetitive, it's hard to make many of them anything but "noun-verb-clause", which I don't think should make one oppose the FA nomination.
• After considering the content of your comments, I notice that a lot of them stem from the fact that you don't understand baseball, which is my fault because that means the page isn't accessible enough (for instance, Cooperstown, New York is the hometown of the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum, and since that's cumbersome to say, we simply say "Cooperstown" as a synonym for "Hall of Fame", which I've now made clear through prose). I've tried to add a little bit more to explain amateur scouting (amateur players get paid substantial amounts of money just to make them turn pro). Newhouser's quitting in protest and Groch's Cooperstown comment should indicate just how highly they regarded Jeter. I hope that's sufficiently clear now. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:13, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

• I haven't looked again in detail yet and won't until the copy-editing is finished. A quick glance seemed marginally better, but I should point out that 1a of the FA criteria states that a FA is "well-written: its prose is engaging, even brilliant, and of a professional standard." In my view, sentences such as those you mention would not meet this criteria if there were too many following that structure. On your second comment, the Cooperstown thing seems much clearer now. I know it is tricky in these articles to keep it clear enough for the general reader but not diluting the baseball side of things too much. I have a fairly rudimentary understanding of the game but can follow the gist usually, and only comment about it when I am lost completely! --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:29, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

• Comment - I've started copyediting the article, and I've noticed some key things that are missing. First, no mention is made of Jeter being All-Star Game MVP in 2000, which I believe was the first time a player was MVP of the World Series and All-Star Game in the same season. In fact, no mention is made of him making the All-Star team until his 9th selection. Also, I think it would be good to get a quote from Jeter after being named captain. After all, it was his dream to play for the Yankees and here he is being named captain! Actually, a few quotes from Jeter sprinkled throughout the article wouldn't hurt. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 23:09, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Huh. Coulda sworn the AS MVP was in prose. I'll fix that and try to add quotes tomorrow. The issue there is that, as beat writers are on the record saying, Jeter doesn't give good copy. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:10, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
  • I added mention of his ASG and WS MVP awards. I will add detail on his All-Star game selections tonight, and try to find a quote or two. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:41, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

"He just says he wants me to be a leader, like I have been. The impression I got is just continue to do the things I've been doing."

-Derek Jeter

• • • I'm in the process of editing the prose to mention his All-Star appearances. However, I don't know that adding any quotes from Jeter will help. To the right is a quote from Jeter on being named captain. Pretty ho hum if you ask me. I'll look further to see if there's anything more interesting, but as Mark Feinsand of the Daily News beat said, "He's not the most interesting quote in the world; that's by design." – Muboshgu (talk) 16:43, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

I think it would be worth adding something about his very scrawny build when he was first signed to the Yankees organization. Sounds like there were quite a few doubts whether he could be a big-time player in such a skinny frame. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:42, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

I can do that. There's a NYT article I saw where Andy Pettitte made a comment along those lines. I'll add it after lunch. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:00, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.