Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/30–30 club/archive1

30–30 club

30–30 club (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured list candidates/30–30 club/archive1

Nominator(s): Bloom6132 (talk) 14:04, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel it has been improved significantly over the past year and now meets all 6 FL criteria. —Bloom6132 (talk) 14:04, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Albacore (talk) 17:27, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

;Comments: Deadlinks Thanks for asking Google about this (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball#Baseball Digest). Should I keep the URLs (just in case they resurface) or should they be deleted, leaving only the journal cited in print form? —Bloom6132 (talk) 05:01, 4 August 2012 (UTC) I would leave them for now, but if the links don't go back up in the next few months I would remove the url. Albacore (talk) 21:53, 4 August 2012 (UTC) All photos need alternate text Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 05:01, 4 August 2012 (UTC) Kinsler needs alt text. Albacore (talk) 21:42, 4 August 2012 (UTC) Done. I just forgot to add "alt=" in front of "Ian Kinsler wearing a blue Texas Rangers cap and jersey." —Bloom6132 (talk) 07:59, 5 August 2012 (UTC) Template:Dagger and Template:Double dagger allow for footnotes for alternate text, follow the example in the templates. Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 04:22, 4 August 2012 (UTC) Alt text should have something more descriptive than "footnote". For example for the dagger for Hall of Fame the alt text would say "Elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame". Albacore (talk) 21:53, 4 August 2012 (UTC) Done. Changed alt text for HOF dagger to "Elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame" and active player double-dagger to "Active player." —Bloom6132 (talk) 08:16, 5 August 2012 (UTC) The year links in the table should have a note in the "Year" header column, like Tony Award for Best Featured Actor in a Play does. Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 04:22, 4 August 2012 (UTC) The years linked in the text should be removed per Template:Baseball year. Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 04:01, 4 August 2012 (UTC) Reference 5 needs the publisher. Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 04:01, 4 August 2012 (UTC) Albacore (talk) 21:13, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

• Support Meets criteria. Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 08:16, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

All my comments have to deal with the lead, save for the last comment. 1) The lead has numbers, such as 25, then "twelve." Be consistent. 2) A little too much detail for the HOF eligibility, IMO. Also, it's stated 13 of the current club members are "disqualified" for the Hall for the current time being; is disqualified the same as "ineligible" because I think the latter is what should be used. 3) The first sentence of the doesn't seem to be particularly controversial, yet it has 3 references. 4) I just got done reading a full sentence's worth of HOF eligibility requirements (last paragraph), yet I have to have it explained to me when Sosa and Bonds will be eligible? I think the reader would be able to figure it out on their own. 5) Perhaps too much weight given to the club and a player's HOF chances? I think "two of whom made it on the first ballot" is giving way too much credit to this feat and a players HOF enshrinement. There are a number of factors, some even off the field, that go into a player's induction; again, too much weight given to this one club IMO. 6) The lead lists the number of players who accomplished the feat in 2011, yet the caption of the Kinsler picture states he is the "latest." I would make the caption even more specific, stating "the latest of the five players to reach the club during the 2011 season." Zepppep (talk) 08:48, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

• (1) The "unwritten rule" for numbers is this (at least IMHO): if it needs a hyphen when written out in words, then it should be written numerically instead. Otherwise, use words. In this case, twelve can be written out without a hyphen, whereas twenty-five cannot. Hence, the variation, which also featured in the recently passed FL 50 home run club, with the "26 players" and "nine" variation.
• (2) HOF eligibility is always included in every career stat club list, whether single-season or career (but mainly for the latter). Also, utilizing "ineligible" instead of "disqualifying" would not be appropriate, as this has a completely different meaning in the context of baseball (think of MLB's list of "permanently ineligible"). "Disqualifying" here means that the players aren't qualified yet, but soon will be. Ineligible makes it sound like the players have been banned from baseball (at least temporarily), which clearly isn't the case.
• (3) The three refs here are used to highlight the notability of the term's usage (as per FL 50 home run club, which only a year before was nominated for deletion). However, as a compromise, I've deleted one of the references (book source that isn't too related to baseball).  Done
• (6)  Done
• That's all I have time for now. I'll address the other points later. —Bloom6132 (talk) 11:21, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

• (4) Mentioning Bonds and Sosa is in line with the 500 home run club FL and the recently promoted 50 home run club, where they mention soon-to-be eligible HOF candidates.
• (5) Format of mentioning first ballot HOF'ers is in-line with all other stat club FLs. I understand that this is a single-season stat club rather than a career one. However, even the 20–20–20 club (which is just an FLC) uses this format. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:58, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

• Comment: The Kinsler image caption seems inaccurate. Technically, he was not the most recent to join the club, since he did so in 2009. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 17:52, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

• You're right. Didn't notice that. Would you suggest me delete the Kinsler pic, or replace it with Ellsbury and label him the "most recent non-repeat player"? —Bloom6132 (talk) 19:14, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

• Replacing with Ellsbury's fine, though if you want to keep Kinsler (which I'd narrowly prefer just because it's a better pitcure, but it's entirely up to you), then change it to say latest to repeat the feat. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 21:45, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

• Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 05:00, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

• Support. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 21:52, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the numbers in the second paragraph of the lead section, note the following from Wikipedia's Manual of Style regarding numerals: "As a general rule, in the body of an article, single-digit whole numbers from zero to nine are spelled out in words; numbers greater than nine, if they are expressed in one or two words, may be rendered in numerals or in words... However there are frequent exceptions to these rules. ... Comparable quantities should be all spelled out or all figures: we may write either 5 cats and 32 dogs or five cats and thirty-two dogs, not five cats and 32 dogs." Since the first two sentences in the second paragraph are comparing numbers of players, it would be appropriate to use numerals for the numbers. isaacl (talk) 22:33, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

 Done —Bloom6132 (talk) 04:18, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

• Support Zepppep (talk) 08:52, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 23:29, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Comments "He remained only player..." missing a word between remained and only Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:43, 9 August 2012 (UTC) "Of the 18 players club members..." bit confused here never heard of players club members before, not sure if this is a mistake or my being English not understanding the term, either way, think it needs clarifying what is meant Done. I originally couldn't decide between "players" and "club members" so I accidentally included both without deleting the other. My mistake. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:46, 9 August 2012 (UTC) NapHit (talk) 18:34, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

• Support NapHit (talk) 23:29, 9 August 2012 (UTC)