Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Philadelphia Phillies Opening Day starting pitchers

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
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 Matthewedwards 06:36, 21 February 2009 [1].

List of Philadelphia Phillies Opening Day starting pitchers edit

Nominator(s): KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
Toolbox

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it exemplifies all of the featured list criteria. I know that I may be stuffing beans up my nose here, but I feel it necessary to address some concerns ahead of time. I am aware that the level of citations in the lead may be low compared to some other leads. The reason for this is due to the length of the Phillies' franchise history. The list is unsplittable by city or other non-arbitrary criterion vis a vis the Giants or Orioles lists. Some of the facts in the lead would require the use of between five and, in one case, fifteen references to fully verify. Though all of these references are available and presented in the article with their individual years, I feel that citing fifteen refs on one fact to be overkill per WP:LEADCITE and visually unappealing/distracting per WP:FL?'s Cr.6. Comments are welcome and will, of course, be addressed by the nominator. Cheers. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 22:59, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • CommentSupport - I need to take a closer look, but at first glance tThis is EXTREMELY impressive. Having worked on many of the lists in this series myself, I'd be surprised if this wasn't the best of the lot. Rlendog (talk) 00:24, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Upon further review, changed to support. Rlendog (talk) 01:59, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks! I appreciate it; I've been working hard on it for two months. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 00:25, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Truco

Comments from Truco (talk · contribs)

Lead
  • The team's record in his five Opening Day starts is 4–1. - is -->"was"
  • But the statement is in the past tense, which is why it should be "was".--TRUCO 503 23:08, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually, the verb is what makes the tense past or present, so it would be grammatically correct either way. Since the record isn't going to change but still exists, it's like a world record or a season record; it doesn't change in history. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 23:13, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's either way really.--TRUCO 503 23:15, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Art Mahaffey has the best record in Opening Day starts for the franchise; though many players have won their only Opening Day start, Mahaffey started and won two Opening Day games, for a winning percentage of 1.000. - in this context, best record is POV unless you provide statistics right after it.
  • The statistics are part of the same sentence; I don't see that it can get much closer. The sentence is structured to be grammatically fluent, which is a part of writing good prose. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 03:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • IMO it would make it sense to add the years in which the franchise used each stadium.
  • It's a possibility, but it makes for a lot of parenthetical clutter. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 03:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Steve Carlton won his Opening Day start against the Montréal Expos in 1980,[4] while Brett Myers received a no-decision against the same franchise (now the Washington Nationals) in 2008, a game that the Phillies eventually lost. - I thought Tampa Bay was in the 2008 World Series?
  • Yes... this doesn't have to do with the World Series; rather, it addresses the seasons in which the team won the World Series. They didn't play Tampa Bay on Opening Day is 2008. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 03:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Grover Cleveland Alexander started Opening Day in 1915,[8] the Phillies' first World Series appearance,[1] while Robin Roberts started the first game of 1950,[9] and Terry Mulholland the first game of 1993. - Alexander's name is already mentioned before this, no need to mention his full name again.
Key
  • Each year is linked to an article about the Major League Baseball season;

numbers indicate game number during that Opening Day in the case of a doubleheader. - 1)if you mentioned the acronym of the Major League Baseball (MLB) in the lead, you can write MLB here to save space 2)"the" should be added before game number

  • I don't see a need to save space and I don't use acronyms without a really good reason, so that's unnecessary. Second point: Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 03:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Its personal preference really.--TRUCO 503 23:08, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Table
  • To be consistent, Grover Cleveland Alexander should be piped just to "Grover Alexander" [as well as in the lead]
  • Not so. All contemporary accounts refer to Alexander by his full name or by his nickname, Pete Alexander. In addition, his article is titled as such, so there's no need to use the redirect. Furthermore, the Phillies retired a "P" for him using his full name, so it's obvious that they considered it necessary as well. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 03:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Footnotes
  • Ties were technically possible in baseball until several rule changes beginning in 2007; however, ties were rare in practice due to the extra-innings rules. - wouldn't beginning be "began"?
  • Either is technically correct; it's a matter of semantics. Both work. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 03:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
References
  • To be consistent with the other links, link USA Today
  • Its redundant to list the "work" as Retrosheet.org and the "publisher" as Retrosheet, Inc. when the URL is name after the publisher, so its best just to name it Retrosheet, Inc.''TRUCO 503 01:45, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not correct on this point; they are two separate things. The non-profit company Retrosheet, Inc. is distinct from the website Retrosheet.org, like Baseball-Reference.com is distinct from Sports Reference LLC. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 03:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for clarifying that.--TRUCO 503 23:08, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:49, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)
* Dabs; please check the disambiguation links identified in the toolbox. Also, what makes Retrosheet a reliable source? Dabomb87 (talk) 23:16, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Dabs are fixed. I am searching for the link that shows Retrosheet's reliability; however, I have seen this same question over and over again at FLCs, FACs, and GA noms. Does reliability have to be re-established every time? I would think that many of us have done enough FLs or reviewed enough times to know that this is something we see on a regular basis and know. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 00:12, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • After reading that FAC, I decided that Retrosheet is in fact reliable. Also, this confirms it, so everything is good. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:29, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

  • "Recreation Park yielded a 1–2 record on Opening Day, while Veterans Stadium has the lowest winning percentage (.200), with two wins and eight losses." "while"-->and.
  • Yes, but "while" is only used for emphasis on contrasting clauses or if one action was taking placing during the other. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:05, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Subordinating conjunctions also join two clauses together, but in doing so, they make one clause dependent (or "subordinate") upon the other." [4] In this case, "while" is used as a subordinating conjunction, and clause 2 is dependent on clause 1 to explain that the record stated is for Opening Day, rather than all-time or some other statistic. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 23:56, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, but I noticed something else. The usage of verbs and subjects here is a bit confusing: "Recreation Park yielded" and "Veterans Stadium has". Dabomb87 (talk) 00:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the Phillies' first World Series appearance,[1] while Roberts started the first game of 1950,[9] and Terry Mulholland the first game of 1993." Same comment.
  • See above. Also, in this instance, it would create two dependent clauses both begun by the word "and". KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 17:28, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • To the two one above, I honestly have no idea where they it came from, and I don't know how to find them it. Should I just remove them it? It's never been a problem in any previous FLCs. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 17:28, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • All of the information on the Alexander image was already present; I just organized it into the correct format. I don't have any information on the source of the Gleason picture and don't know where to look. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 17:45, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, if the info can't be found, then the image cannot be used. You would have to remove the image from the other FLs also. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:05, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

  • Ref 2 needs a format=PDF added to the template.
  • All the Retrosheet references have double periods.
I had a similar issue with a recent GAN. It is just a quirk in the citation templates that they add a period, even if the information submitted to the template already ends in one. I think the simplest fix is to just drop the period at the end of the abbreviations, which will make the information submitted to the template look funny, but will produce a citation in the article with just a single period. Rlendog (talk) 01:56, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That is what I do too. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:57, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Italicize USA Today, it is a publication. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:27, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Publisher or work, you only need one or the other. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:05, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:49, 21 February 2009 (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_list_candidates/List_of_Philadelphia_Phillies_Opening_Day_starting_pitchers&oldid=1062257943"