I am nominating this for featured list because I feel this is a complete and encyclopedic list. I am competing in the WP:CUP and may produce several more of these if this is favorably reviewed. I am attempting to obtain a commitment from a WP:MLB member to stub out player redlinks as a co-nominator on future lists, but am moving forward as a solo nominator on this current list. TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:24, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Each season, various United States intercollegiate sports recognize their top athletes by selecting a team of the best performers that year. & In each sport various organizations select such lists.- This list is about baseball, just focus on that.
Per WP:LEAD, the Lead should be a summary of the important parts of the article. So, in this case, the lead needs to provide a summary for the list and, now, a summary for the accomplishments section.—NMajdan•talk 20:54, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
The table needs some sort functionality. Well, the whole table needs to be re-thought out. How about this. Four sortable columns: position, name, school, and selectors. You can even add additional fields/superscripts to indicate players that were All-Stars or won a World Series, etc.
I will reorganize this tonight in this format, which is entirely different from the one suggested below. We can look at it and then consider it that is the way to go.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:43, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Not to mention that you are still very much active on this page after creating it yesterday, so it definitely lacks stability (it has already changed quite a bit from my review minutes ago). That would be a start.—NMajdan•talk 18:57, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
The term is used in the U.S. team sports - Doesn't sound right; maybe drop the.
In 1950, the American Baseball Coaches Association (ABCA) selected its first All-American baseball teams. - teams is plural, but the source makes it sound like only one All-American team was selected in 1950.
This list only includes players selected to the post-season All-American first-team for each selector. - This is your first mention of "first-team"; you may want to describe what first-team means and what other "teams" there are.
You reference All-Star Game several times. I'd like to see this specified as Major League Baseball All-Star Game. This is a list of college baseball All-Americans so I think some readers could be confused into thinking these are some college all-star teams.
That's not the convention at FLC; usually, general and specific references in featured lists are grouped under a single "References" level-2 headings, with bolded headers within that section for "General references" and "Specific references"/"Inline citations". — KV5 • Talk • 15:32, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
I'll re-evaluate when these items have been addressed.»NMajdan·talk 14:34, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Support pending an access date on ref #1.»NMajdan·talk 15:59, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
I am not sure an accessdate is appropriate. The link does not actually show the relevant text from the print edition. Thus, there is no date where I actually saw the relevant text online.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:32, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
If you can't see the text online, then there's no need to link to it. WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT. — KV5 • Talk • 18:24, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Suggest withdrawal. Possible quick-fail candidate.KV5 (Talk • Phils) 16:32, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
I've withdrawn my recommendation for quick-failing based on the improvements made, but I still think that this list is unnecessarily specific. A larger article on College Baseball All-America Teams could serve the purpose just as well. In fact, that could be made a featured list with a wide table along the lines of the Gold Glove or Silver Slugger Award lists. There really is no reason for this single team to be its own article at this point, however. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 19:01, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Are you suggesting one article with 64 tables like this would be better? Both basketball and football use the convention of one team per year. Keep in mind that season's accomplishments list is rather short compared to other years that have stars and older years where players are in the managerial and coaching phase of their careers.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:25, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm suggesting that one article would be better, not 64 tables. If you look at Rawlings Gold Glove Award, it doesn't have 60+ tables just because the award has been presented for 60+ years. I think that a format like that would work well for this list. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 19:38, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
On issue with that, your example has two winners per year. This list would have a dozen or more. How many years has the NCAA recognized All-Americans in college baseball?—NMajdan•talk 20:46, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
I have reformatted the list. I think the Gold Glove format would be wrong for this. Currently, I have access to the NCAA-sanctioned lists. However, in the future, other lists may be added. See 2009 College Football All-America Team to see how many major selectors there are relative to the NCAA-sanctioned lists.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:19, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
The current format is much better, but raises additional issues:
All occurrences of a position must now be linked due to sortability.
I can tell that the initial sorting is by the number of the position (1 for pitcher, 2 for catcher, etc.), but the casual reader likely will not know that. It should be explained.
Actually this is just coincidence. I think ABCA uses this order in listing its teams on the NCAA site, but BA uses another order. I just went with the order of the first list. I could just as easily have put pitchers last like on the BA lists.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:00, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Well, regardless of the order, unless it's initially sorted alphabetically by name (which would make the most sense), the sorting should be explained. I'm ok with the sorting by position number, though; it just requires an explanation (a footnote is easiest). KV5 (Talk • Phils) 18:16, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
What makes certain players redlinked and others blacklinked?
The vast majority of blacklinked names are for players who neither played in the Olympics nor played in Major League Baseball and thus fail WP:N (in particular WP:ATHLETE). I think there are one or two cases were a player is named with a bluelink in a position and then later as a blacklink at a second position.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:12, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Keep in mind that players that appear in multiple rows should be linked each time, as sortable table rows are a named exception to WP:OVERLINK. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 18:16, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
There are additional items, but this is a start. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 16:57, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
More comments (KV5)
Perhaps you should talk about unanimous selections in the lead.
In college athletics the only two sports where the group of All-American lists are considered collectively are basketball and football where there are designation as consensus and unanimous. Other sports do not make such designations. In a sense, these list are not that much more official than any others that might exist such as Sporting News, Associated Press, ESPN, College Baseball Writers, etc. They just happen to be the ones the NCAA lists on their website.
If these are the only sanctioned selectors, and the player is picked by all three, it is by definition unanimous. I didn't mean that you should define it as a term, just note which players were selected by all three organizations. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 01:17, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
The list clearly says this is for Division I college baseball with clarifying links. It names the specific publications. The publications do not seem to release information on how they assemble their respective lists.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:19, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
" All-American Selection" any reason selection is Selection?
The lead just seems a little weak on the subject matter, i.e. the All-America team. I'd expect to read more about the achievements of those selected, and I wonder if the Accomplishments really needs to be in a separate section?
If you wish I can merge the accomplishments and the WP:LEAD. I am not sure how things are done for lists.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:19, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Nothing overly complex, we try to comply with WP:LEAD and cover everything in a summary format. I'd prefer to not see foreshortened leads for the sake of small paragraphs of interest following. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:35, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
"(i.e., 1-pitcher, 2-catcher, etc.)." please check the punctuation here, not sure you need a comma after i.e. and not sure if you need two periods at the end...
i.e. is always followed by a comma (I believe). Also, I believe the two periods are correct, but could be convinced otherwise.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:24, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
"They are arranged in" initially, it's a sortable list.