Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Silver Slugger Award

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Scorpion0422 01:20, 25 March 2009 [1].

Silver Slugger Award

Nominator(s): KV5 (Talk • Phils)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe that it meets all of the FL criteria. This is also the inaugural list in my attempt at a featured topic, for which this will be the lead article. (For those who have expressed interest in the FT itself, see my sandbox for more details - scroll all of the way to the bottom.) Cheers. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 23:33, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Truco

Review by Truco (talk · contribs)

General comment

Fix the dabs (as found with the checker tool in the toolbox)

Oh God, I hate dabs, I thought I had them all. Done. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 12:10, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

The Silver Slugger was first awarded in 1980 and is given by Hillerich & Bradsby, the manufacturer of Louisville Slugger bats. -- Comma before and (2 different subjects)

You don't use a comma before a coordinating conjunction ("and"). KV5 (Talk • Phils) 11:47, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well actually you do, but I just noticed that these are not 2 different subjects, so no comma is needed.--Best, ₮RU CӨ 15:52, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This means that it is possible for three left fielders, or any other combination of outfielders, to win the award in the same year, rather than one left fielder, one center fielder, and one right fielder. -- The comma before to win the award in is not necessary and the one before rather since they are on the same topic/subject

The phrase "or any other combination of outfielders" is an appositive phrase and is appropriately set off by commas; the phrase "rather than one left fielder, one center fielder, and one right fielder." is a dependent clause and must be preceded by a comma. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 11:47, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, eh. I keep reading these sentences in different ways.--Best, ₮RU CӨ 15:52, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rodriguez' awards are split between two positions; he won seven Silver Sluggers as a shortstop for the Texas Rangers, and three with the Yankees as a third baseman. -- the semi colon should be a colon

Not correct. These are two independent clauses (complete sentences), so using a colon here would be incorrect. A semicolon is used "between closely related independent clauses not conjoined with a co-ordinating conjunction." KV5 (Talk • Phils) 11:47, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Three players are tied for the most wins among designated hitters; Edgar Martínez,[14] Paul Molitor,[15] and David Ortiz[16] all have four wins at the position, though Martínez also won one award at third base. -- semi-colon->colon

Same as above. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 11:47, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well this is a "syntactical-descriptive" type, in which you give a description and then list the series, which requires a colon. From my understanding of colon.--Best, ₮RU CӨ 15:52, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oy, guess you're right on that count. Done. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 16:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

References

General: MLB.com is no different than the MLB, and its their official website so the work and publisher is the same

Actually, it's not, because the website is MLB.com, but the publisher is disambiguated as Major League Baseball. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 11:47, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly. MLB.com is written by who? The Major League Baseball association. MLB.com is their official website, which is not owned or publisher by any other company. If the website were a subpage of the MLB, then the work field would be from whatever the name of the page is and the publisher would be the MLB. From my FA's, I was told and understood that World Wrestling Entertainment (the company) was the publisher of WWE.com because it is their official website. However, their corporate website differs from their official website, so the work field for a source like that would state "WWE Corporate" and the publisher still being WWE. Same thing with the MLB.--Best, ₮RU CӨ 15:52, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What if a reader doesn't know that MLB.com is Major League Baseball's website? It could be the website for anything listed at MLB (disambiguation). That's why it's written this way. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 16:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's what the publisher field does, MLB.com is the URL, while the publisher dabs it automatically. That's why it should be as such.--Best, ₮RU CӨ 16:06, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And that's what I already have written. The publisher field isn't automatic; it's filled in with Major League Baseball when the website is MLB.com. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 16:23, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but I'm trying to tell you that work and publisher of MLB is not different, the internet is much different from WP with dabs. The work and publisher is the same for all company official websites (unless otherwise stated), like the NHL.--Best, ₮RU CӨ 16:54, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And I'm trying to explain to you that the disambiguation is necessary, for the reason outlined above. There are several FLs that use this format and I haven't seen anything around here that would indicate that this has changed or that this format is incorrect. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 16:58, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, let me ask you. What are you disambiguating by adding "MLB.Com"? When the publisher explicitly state the same thing?--Best, ₮RU CӨ 17:34, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that's where we've been having the disconnect. I was considering the publisher to disambiguate the work, not the other way round. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 19:30, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now that I've made the mental connection, this is Done. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 19:35, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sorry for the confusion.--Best, ₮RU CӨ 20:15, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In-text citations

Any reason why its not called "Specific" (just wondering)

WP:CITE says that "all quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged should be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation." That's why I call them in-text (meaning the same as inline) citations, rather than specific references, which is a term that Wikipedia doesn't use. They use "general reference", but not the other. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 11:47, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Refs about teams should have it as the publisher being the MLB and the work coming from the team--Best, ₮RU CӨ 02:37, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't quite understand what you expect from this last comment. If you want me to change the publisher on team-specific refs to Major League Baseball, I can do that, but I'm not sure. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 11:47, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In accordance to my comment above, you should have the team name or the name of the subpage as the "work" and the MLB as the "publisher".--Best, ₮RU CӨ 15:52, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. Done. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 16:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I also noticed that you state the acronym for the American League (AL) and National League (NL), but you don't use them later in the lead, you spell out the name, either mention it by the acronyms or remove the acronyms since they aren't in use.--Best, ₮RU CӨ 15:52, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 16:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Previous issues have been resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards. Great work.--Best, ₮RU CӨ 20:15, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:40, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

Out of curiosity, what is the featured topic going to be?

The Silver Slugger Award itself is going to be the featured topic; I'm going to be merging the lists of NL winners at each position and AL winners at each position (with the blessing of WP:BASEBALL) into lists of Silver Slugger Award winners at each position. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 20:55, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"who do receive an award" Is "do" necessary here?

I don't know that it's essential; I was trying to explicitly clarify that AL pitchers don't receive one without explicitly writing that. Done. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 21:16, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Embattled home run record-holder Barry Bonds" Do we really need "Embattled"? At the very least, put it in quotes.

I would rather take it (and him) out all together, because I am very anti-Bonds, but I won't let that influence my work. The reason it's there (and referenced, of course) is because there is always the possibility that baseball could strip the awards at some point. I'm indifferent, really. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 20:55, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well see, (and I don't blame you for your feelings toward him) Bonds was called "Embattled" by just one source. Using a source to classify him as generally "Embattled" is a bit much I think. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:18, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, there were several sources (see [2], [3], [4], [5] for more details); that just happened to be the one I chose because Google News doesn't usually disappear over time. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 21:31, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"He also won the award in five consecutive seasons two different times in his career"-->He won the award in five consecutive seasons twice times in his career

I assume you meant "twice" rather than "twice times". Done. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 20:55, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did; good catch. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:18, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Wade Boggs leads ~~all~~ third basemen"

Done. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 20:55, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"while Barry Larkin leads shortstops with nine." "while"-->and Dabomb87 (talk) 20:37, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I still don't agree with this, but I won't fight it. Removed and replaced with semicolon. Done. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 20:55, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:37, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support looks good. But I am curious what featured topic you had in mind.—Chris! _ct 23:09, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See the DB87 capped comments. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 23:43, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After reading it, I am still not sure what the topic is. But, oh well. Good luck.—Chris! _ct 01:45, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, see above link. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 12:34, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from -- SRE.K.A.L.24_[c]

"Major League leader at his position (** indicates tie)" Since I'm not that much of a baseball fan, I don't get this, and neither will some other readers. Just clarify the statement.

Clarified. Done. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 12:06, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The title for the general reference should be "Awards and Honors - Silver Slugger winners", since I believe it is more clear as a title. "MLB Awards: History" won't really make sense.

The "title" of a reference is supposed to be the title of the website. This is the HTML title, minus the boilerplate text from all MLB sites. I could add the subtitle if that would help. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 12:06, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That will definitely help. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]_{call me Keith} 22:22, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

-- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]_{call me Keith} 22:40, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 15:51, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I realize this will be a huge pain, but would it be possible to make both tables of even width (including the columns)? -- Scorpion ⁰⁴²² 15:21, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Likely possible, but also likely to impede quite a few readers. This table is already cramped on a 1024x768 in Firefox and MSIE, and fixing column widths is likely to make it more so. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 15:50, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.