Talk:T206 Honus Wagner

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured article T206 Honus Wagner is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 27, 2008.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
November 12, 2007 Good article nominee Listed
December 13, 2007 Featured article candidate Promoted
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on November 15, 2007.
Current status: Featured article
WikiProject Baseball (Rated FA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review[edit]

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:

I can't believe someone worked so hard on this article; last time I read it, it was very stubby. Great job! Anyhow, a few comments:

  1. "During the presidency of trust-buster Theodore Roosevelt, the ATC was subjected to legal action from the government, in hopes of shutting down the monopoly in the industry." requires a citation. I'm assuming that you'd use the same reference as in the following paragraph, but it doesn't hurt to cite it directly.
    Yes check.svg Done Nishkid64 (talk) 05:52, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
  2. All one-two sentence paragraphs must be either expanded or merged with the surrounding paragraphs, as they cannot stand alone.
    Yes check.svg Done Nishkid64 (talk) 05:52, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
  3. "They stopped production of the card, however, after Wagner denied authorization." It's pretty much common sense, so I won't hold it against a GA pass, but if a citation is easily available for this, it might help on your quest to FA.
    Added source that says: "One of the prevailing theories was that Wagner, one of the premier players in the history of baseball, insisted that he be paid by the tobacco company for the use of his image causing the production of his card to be halted. Nishkid64 (talk) 05:52, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
  4. In the third paragraph of "1991 Copeland memorabilia auction," the first part of the Gretzky quote is chopped/used in a way that doesn't work a sentence "[a]t the time all these memorabilia things were increase in value" and needs to be fixed per the way quotations are edited.
    See [1]. Is that any better? I was just using the quote to reaffirm my previous sentence. I was going to remove it now, but I just wanted to see what you thought of it now. If it doesn't work, I'll remove the quote. Nishkid64 (talk) 05:52, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
  5. "Some memorabilia collectors have dismissed Ray's claims, saying that the card hardly proves any doctoring was ever done on the card." (1991 Copeland memorabilia auction). I'm a bit confused with this sentence. Did you mean to say that the photograph hardly proves?
    Yes, I meant the photograph. Thanks for catching that. Nishkid64 (talk) 05:52, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
  6. "Meanwhile, Treat Entertainment and Wal-Mart heavily benefited from the publicity they created for the card, selling more than 30 million baseball card packs in a matter of months." (Card back on the market) requires a citation.
    Yes check.svg Done Nishkid64 (talk) 05:52, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

To allow for these changes to be made, I am putting the article on hold for a period of up to seven days, after which it may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work thus far. Cheers, CP 02:01, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Amazing work! It gives me great pleasure to pass this as a Good Article. Good luck on your quest for FA status, congratulations and thank you for your hard work! Cheers, CP 16:57, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! Nishkid64 (talk) 19:04, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

WoW! What a story. This is one of the few Wikipedia articles I felt drawn to read through in its entirety. It makes me want to know more about all aspects. Outstanding job! -- Jreferee t/c 19:04, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


can someone protect this while it's the featured article? it's changing quite a lot while i try to read it and click through links and come back... Kinser (talk) 03:10, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually it's changing very little compared to most featured articles on the main page. Regardless, please see WP:MPFAP for why your request will likely not happen. Siradia (talk) 04:10, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Water test?[edit]

Can someone knowledgeable on the subject please add a section more thoroughly explaining what the water test is, and why the card breaking apart indicates that it is fake? Also, is the test a destructive one (that is, the sample that is put in, regardless of its authenticity, would be destroyed?) Thanks! EagleFalconn (talk) 15:11, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Seconded; I came to the talk page to ask this very question, surprised it's not elaborated on in the text. --Golbez (talk) 16:37, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
I was wondering the same thing. --JGerretse (talk) 16:40, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Me three. Perhaps a wiki-link would be nice? Besides that, an amazingly written article. Props to all the editors! --haha169 (talk) 17:14, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Alright, I'll have to find the book that I used to reference this article. It might take a while, since I obtained the book through my university, and I won't be back in college until early September. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 18:01, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
It's now early October, and this question is still unanswered. :( --Golbez (talk) 15:37, 7 October 2008 (UTC)


I understand the general principle of WP: Notability and how it doesn't apply to such a clear, well-documented and well-written article such as this one; all I can say, though, speaking as both a non-American and as someone not remotely interested in obscure baseball cards, is that as Featured Articles go, and in terms of the general notability of the subject matter, this is the most utterly trivial Featured Article I have ever read, and goes down in my book as a small monument to heroic but wasted endeavour. Lexo (talk) 22:53, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Sure, you are entitled to your opinion, but is it really necessary to discourage the editors who worked hard on this article by saying this is "the most utterly trivial Featured Article I have ever read"? I can assure you there are more trivial FAs in Wikipedia, and as FAs go, I find this one a very interesting and informative article. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 22:58, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
This is the most valuable sports card in the world. Surely that has to count for something. :) Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 23:54, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm not a sports fan by any stretch of the imagination. Nonetheless, this is a very interesting article. It's probably the most well-known single baseball card in the world, out of 100s of 1000s, and even folks like me know about it. Ignore the haters!!! PurpleChez (talk) 16:23, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Good Good[edit]

I never thought reading about a single card could be so enjoyable, well done! — Realist2 (Speak) 23:49, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 23:54, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

PSA grading scale[edit]

Uhm, the article contains a section describing other cards, and mentioning the PSA 1-10 grading scale. Could someone indicate whether a '2' on this scale means the card is in very good or very bad condition? Also, if an article exists on wikipedia regarding the scale, maybe someone could link to it? I dont know anything at all about the subject, and a search on 'PSA' obviously left me quite confused. Thanks in advance, and congrats on a fine article. --OscarBor (talk) 10:16, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

PSA 2 is considered "Good". It's third-lowest rating in the scale. See [2]. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 13:19, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

hi, everyone, i was reading the article on Honus wagner and was wondering if anyone knew which cigareete co names gave out the baseball cards in their packs, I have 3 1910 never opened MURAD hard packs, does anyone have any information, thanks, rags... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ragstoys (talkcontribs) 18:31, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Chicago sun times[edit]

The April 9 2013 Chicago Sun Times article referenced under the Jumbo section is discussing the altered Gretzky card, not the Jumbo card — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1eellc (talkcontribs) 19:55, 12 April 2013 (UTC)


...discussed card in 1981: A2Kafir (and...?) 20:37, 17 June 2013 (UTC)