Talk:Tim Lincecum/GA2

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Kncny11 (talk · contribs) 23:48, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'll be reviewing this GAN. Expect comments no later than the end of the week. Kncny11 ^(shoot) 23:48, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Lede

comma after "from 2007 to 2015"
WL to first instance of Cy Young Award
list specific years of the "five-year span"
start of second para is awkward
pipe Washington Huskies to Washington Huskies baseball
don't need to specify "Washington" Husky after first instance
the framing of his build looks awkward
WL no-hitter
don't need to mention WS wins here if the years are mentioned in the first para

Early life

move information about his parents here, specifically the part about his father and the draft
should State Player of the Year be capitalized? Genuine question, link is dead
specify Kingco 3A and WL to Kingco Athletic Conference
mention here that he was drafted but chose to attend UW
pipe UW reference to Washington Huskies baseball
"as a Washington Husky" is redundant
"He won" → "He was the recipient of"
any stats from his summer with the Mariners?

San Francisco Giants

move draft info and minor league career under the Giants subhead, as that all happened within the larger organization
Changed instead to "Draft and Minor League Career" section, which allows the San Francisco Giants section to focus on his time in the major leagues. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 04:47, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"He signed for a $2.025 million signing bonus on June 30, which at the time..." → "His $2.025 million signing bonus was, at the time, ..."
day of his professional debut
Tough to find dates for minor league games. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 04:49, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Going into the 2007 season"
move Ian Stewart quote to pitching style section
I think it's better here, as it speaks to what type of pitcher Lincecum was in 2007. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 04:49, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"In five starts (31 innings)" → "In 31 innings across five starts with the Grizzlies,"
"one run, 12 hits, and 11 walks while striking out 46 batters"
- MOS says that numbers above ten are given numerically
  - I changed it, but that's actually not true. From WP:MOSNUM: "Integers greater than nine expressible in one or two words may be expressed either in numerals or in words (16 or sixteen, 84 or eighty-four, 200 or two hundred). When written as words, numbers from 21 to 99 are hyphenated (including when part of a larger number): fifty-six or fifty-six thousand but five hundred or five thousand." Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 04:52, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Lincecum struck out the highest percentage of batters ..." → "Lincecum struck out 30.9% of batters, the highest of any minor league pitcher in the previous ten years."

Rookie year

"With an injury to the Giants' fifth starter, Russ Ortiz" → "After starter Russ Ortiz suffered a [specify injury]"
"Lincecum was called up from Fresno" → "the Giants called Lincecum up"
"In his first career inning, Lincecum struck out three batters," → "Lincecum struck out three batters in his first inning"
WL Colorado Rockies
They are already linked earlier in the article. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 04:41, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
first sentence of second paragraph is awkward/redundant
name the day of his first win
"He faced the Houston Astros in each of his next two starts" → "His next two starts were against the Houston Astros
- specify dates
"After recording a no decision in the first game, Lincecum returned
don't need his July-only stats
We should leave those in. It is impressive to win every decision in a month. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 04:44, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"he struck out twelve" → "he recorded 12 strikeouts"
WL Chicago Cubs
They are linked earlier in the article. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 04:45, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"while throwing only 88 pitches"
"shut down for the season" → "benched"

Consecutive Cy Young Awards

first paragraph somewhat unclear
was May 15 his first start for the season?
"Lincecum appeared on the cover"
"because he was hospitalized the day of" → "after being hospitalized the day of"
Better the way it is-he might have still been hospitalized during the game.
"He recorded his 252nd strikeout of the season, breaking Jason Schmidt's [insert year] single-season strikeout record"
wording on the 265 strikeout sentence could be clarified
"He finished 23rd in that year's NL MVP voting"
What day was his first 2009 loss, and against what team?
Lots of redundancy in the middle paragraph
- Struck out a member of the Nats at Nationals Park
- struck out Guzman for his 500th career strikeout
second-to-last paragraph: second to who?
"since coming up to the big leagues" → "in his major league career"
- why did he miss the start?

First World Series championship

combine first two sentences
"In June, he stopped walking so many hitters" → "By mid-June, he recovered his stride,"
It's more specific the way it is. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 04:23, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
WL MLB All-Star break
WL pitchers' duel
"pitched eight innings of one-run ball" → "gave up one run in eight innings"
"At the end of the season, Lincecum won his third ..."
"In his next postseason start, Lincecum outdueled fellow Cy Young winner Roy Halladay"
The "Game 6" line reads a tad dramatic
WL to first base and third base
"scamper back safely" feels more sports-journaly than encyclopedic
Scamper is a perfectly appropriate member of the English language that captures what happened. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 04:27, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
WL double play

Setting records

WL to New York Mets
"becoming the Giants franchise holder ..." → "surpassing Hall of Fame 'first five' inaugural member Christy Mathewson as the Giants franchise record holder for ..."
I decided it made more sense to keep it the way it had been phrased, but I broke it into two sentences so it wasn't as long. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 04:19, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- "While Mathewson accumulated his 28 ten-plus-strikeout games in 551 starts over 17 seasons with the Giants, Lincecum recorded 29 such games in 129 starts over five seasons."
"threw a three-hit shutout against the Oakland Athletics"
"striking out Jerry Hairston Jr. → "against Jerry Hairston Jr." (if you're recording your 1,000th strikeout, it's assumed that you struck out the batter in question)
"despite having the fourth-lowest ERA in the NL, including a second-half ERA of 2.31, Lincecum finished the 2011 season with a 13-14 record."
WL run support
"leading to Lincecum becoming" → "making Lincecum"

Second World Series championship and career downturn

switch first two sentences
who did he play on the 23rd and 28th?
"and did not win again until he threw seven shutout innings against the Los Angeles Dodgers on June 22.
Reads better the way it is now-other makes for kind of a long clause. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 22:50, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Santiago Casilla blew the save, but ..." → "closer Santiago Casilla gave up two runs in the 9th inning, but the Giants won 3-2."
"Lincecum pitched better" → "Lincecum improved"
the whole second paragraph reads fairly awkwardly as-is and can probably be restructured
"won 8–3, forcing a deciding Game 5"
That's not really correct grammatically. It's better as it is now. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 04:17, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Third World Series championship ...

"program that would improve his coordination"
mention the insanely high spring training ERA!
WL Bumgarner
"became the pitcher of record" → "was credited with the win", possibly?
No, he was not credited with the win until after the game, whereas he immediately became the pitcher of record when the Giants took the lead. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 22:45, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Lincecum was the only member of the Giants' 25-man playoff roster not to play in the NLDS and NLCS."
"started the season ... by May 3" reads oddly
WL cortisone

Los Angeles Angels

"pitched six innings of one-run ball" → "gave up one run in six innings"
mention the opposing team and day of his other win
what day did he accept an option to return to Salt Lake?
"even though major league rosters expanded" → "when major league rosters expanded"
I think even though is better - it highlights the fact that the Angels could have called up Lincecum without bothering to make room for him, and they chose not to. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 22:43, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
WL the expansion to Major League Baseball rosters#Expanded roster
specify if his 2-6 record is overall for the season, or only in the majors
"after the season" → "at the end of the season"
After is better because players don't become free agents until early November, about a month after the regular season has ended. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 22:42, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Texas Rangers organization

day of his signing needs a ref
- the Star-Telegram ref is not an official announcement, but rather a rumor
"Jon Daniels, the Rangers' general manager said ..." → "Rangers general manager Jon Daniels said ..."
"due to a blister ..." → "after suffering a blister on his right middle finger during spring training"
when is "eventually?"
Unknown; dates of specific minor league games are difficult to track. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 21:08, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"in an interview at the ceremony"

Pitching style

start with "From the age of four" sentence
"Sportswriters Bob Nightengale and ..." → "Lincecum's pitching technique has drawn comparisons to Oswalt"
Wikipedia seems to prefer more specificity with these sort of statements; see Template:Who. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 20:58, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"breaking curveball which broke away from" is redundant
clarification needed on his primary two pitches, as there are three listed (two kinds of fastballs and a curveball)
WL Batted ball#Ground ball
add km/h conversions to all the mph figures.
"His other pitches, which were typically in the TKTK range, also slowed slightly as his career progressed."
I think overall a lot of the quotes from batters he's faced could go in their own section here
With this one, I'd prefer to keep them where they are, in order to show what time period they were made in. The Lincecum of 2008 was not the Lincecum of 2014. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 21:05, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Career highlights

specify that National Freshman of the Year award came from the Collegiate Baseball Newspaper
WL to Players Choice Awards

Personal life

the sentence beginning "Lincecum has lived in Sausalito, California ..." is somewhat confusing
include year of the Sacramento Bee thing
"since Joe Montana" doesn't have to be in quotes
WL Fox Sports
I feel like "because of his athletic abilities" is not the full story behind his nickname
replace "driving 74 mph in a 60 mph zone" with "speeding"
"discovered the pitcher with 3.3 grams of ..." → "found 3.3 grams of marijuana in the pitcher's possession"
It's better the way it is now, because then "still illegal under state law at the time" comes directly after what it modifies. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 20:53, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"A 2010 This is SportsCenter commercial featured ..." → "Lincecum appeared in a 2010 This is SportsCenter commercial, ..."

References

Copyvio score looks decent at 39.4%
reference 2 is dead
reference 4 only lists his MLB stats, not NCAA
It actually lists the NCAA stats too, but you have to click an icon for them to come up. I added a note of how to do so in the citation, since people frequently miss this. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 19:13, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't love reference 8. It borders on WP:OR, as it's primarily about Villalona's signing bonus, with assumptions that can be extrapolated to Lincecum
reference 9 does not indicate that Lincecum was "frequently" named the organization's top prospect
Took out the sentence altogether, since one of his prospect ratings is cited a couple of sentences later. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 19:10, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
reference 10 (NYT) does not mention anything about the Volcanoes or Lincecum's minor league debut
reference 18 does not match up with the information to which it is attached. Its placement suggests that it's about Lincecum's two games against the Astros, but it links to his MLB debut against the Phillies
reference 141 (Zillow) is dead
since I don't have the book onhand, I'm going to take your word that all those citations are correct
there are areas that seem to border on overlinking, such as the sentence about his mother being the child of Filipino parents, where the San Francisco Chronicle article adds nothing to the Manila Times citation.

Stability

Checked Revision history says that, save for one IP vandal on February 19, there's no edit warring or other instability.

Images

Checked All images are free use and appropriately placed within the article.

Overall comments and verdict

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
There are some confusing sentences and paragraphs, largely detailed above.

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
Apart from some general MoS issues (like when to use numbers or written words), the biggest issue is tone, which occasionally dips into resembling a sports news piece rather than an encyclopedia.
Is it verifiable with no original research?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
Reference formatting looks good.

B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
There are a few permanent dead links, as well as references that do not actually cite what they're linked to. Some overlinking as well.

C. It contains no original research:
A borderline case.

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Tone issues mentioned above are not obviously biased, but could stand to be improved.
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
On hold until all issues are fixed. Kncny11 ^(shoot) 02:44, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
All my comments have been addressed, so I think it's time to pass this baby! Kncny11 ^(shoot) 05:13, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]