Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Major League Baseball players to hit for the cycle/archive1

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

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 15:15, 9 October 2011 [1].

List of Major League Baseball players to hit for the cycle edit

Featured list candidates/List of Major League Baseball players to hit for the cycle/archive1

Nominator(s): — KV5 • Talk • 15:03, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A break from the Phillies. My current open nomination has three supports and no unresolved comments. Comments to be expediently addressed. Cheers. — KV5 • Talk • 15:03, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Couldn't find anything troublesome in the list. Another nice job. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:22, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Looks good to me as well. Jimknut (talk) 16:46, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:12, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

The lead says only two MLB teams have failed to hit for the cycle, but the table at the end of the article indicates seven haven't. I guess you mean "current" teams in the lead?
Where are the family pairs referenced?
Where are the Hall of Famers referenced (you mention the HoF in some captions)?
"(as the "Boston Beaneaters")." sounds like Long was batting under a pseudonym...
"who played for the Boston Red Sox that season." probably neater to say "playing for the Boston Red Sox." as that avoids an awkward "that season" moment.

The Rambling Man (talk) 10:56, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

- All done. — KV5 • Talk • 11:06, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support I think I'm perpetually amazed by the stats lists that baseball generates. Good work. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:12, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Amazing TRM is a win for me. Cheers. — KV5 • Talk • 21:31, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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