Talk:1998 National League Wild Card tie-breaker game

Chicago Low‑importance

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Baseball: Cubs Mid‑importance

	Baseball portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Baseball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of baseball on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BaseballWikipedia:WikiProject BaseballTemplate:WikiProject BaseballBaseball articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Chicago Cubs (assessed as High-importance).

1998 National League Wild Card tie-breaker game has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 11, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed
January 24, 2013	Good topic candidate	Promoted
April 22, 2019	Good topic removal candidate	Demoted
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 1, 2010. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Barry Bonds was retired with the bases loaded twice during the 1998 National League Wild Card tie-breaker game?
Current status: Good article

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:1998 National League Wild Card tie-breaker game/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 02:56, 11 June 2010 (UTC) Overall this is a good article, though I found a few issues:[reply]

"Giants' outfielder Barry Bonds drew criticism for his postseason performance, an area Bonds' had performed below his regular season standards back to his time with the Pittsburgh Pirates." It feels a little wordy right now. Maybe something like '..Bonds drew criticism for his postseason performance, which had been a recurring criticism dating back to his time with..'
"However, the Mets did not win another game that year and finished their season one game back of the Cubs and Giants who ended tied at 89–73." If it was just two games as it seems, I would state that they lost their last two rather than not winning another.
"Holding the highest non-division winning record a tie-breaker was necessary to determine the Wild Card winner." huh?
In the game summary section, be consistent with inning names (either 5th/7th/9th or fifth/seventh/ninth, not both)
The game summary section is unsourced. Granted, adding in the B-R (or whoever's) game log at the end of each para should do the trick just fine.
"but is tied for the 9th highest single-season save total in MLB history" While nice, I'm not really seeing a reason to have that part of the sentence.

All changed except the last one. It's included because that's rather hugely notable. Say, for example, Sammy Sosa had hit 1 home run in this game. He wouldn't have overtaken McGwire for the (then) most home runs in a season in MLB history, but raising up the 2nd highgest total ever is a big deal. This is the same situation, a top-10 all-time season in a (now) major MLB stat is a pretty big deal. Staxringold _talk^contribs 03:24, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's a pretty nice article; the Bonds stuff in particular was interesting. I'll put it on hold and pass when things are fixed. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 02:56, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's one of those big what-ifs. GoS focuses more on BALCO and Bonds once on drugs, but what if he'd socked one out there in the ninth and the Giants make the playoffs via a tie-breaker by 1 run on a home run. Staxringold _talk^contribs 03:24, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Everything looks good now, so the article passes. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 03:49, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]