Talk:Joe Nathan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Joe Nathan article.
Article policies
Good article Joe Nathan has been listed as one of the Everyday life good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
An entry from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on August 26, 2007.
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] Whereas Pierzinski has only...

What this has to do Joe Nathan is beyond me... I removed it.24.13.112.36 19:37, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA Candidate review

A cursory glance showed no signs of "quick failed" criteria. A few notes:

  • Please remove WP:DATE sensitive material (example: his current weight and height).
  • Could use some more content per WP:LEAD.
  • Give attention to grammatical voice in accordance with WP:MOS.

This article is a hold. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  10:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Alright. Height and weight are gone, though I didn't see much else date-sensitive material. If you mean the mention of his current contract is date-sensitive, I could try moving it to where he signed it, though it would leave a one-sentence 2007 season. I expanded the lead a bit, though I will try and do more. Voice I'm not very good at admittedly, but I'll fix that up best I can as well. Wizardman 02:18, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I think you've done a really good job with this. I would be glad to help with voice - but i'm not sure if that's okay. It's funny you mentioned the contract because that was exactly what i had in mind when i mentioned voice.
The article currently says:
He was signed to a two-year deal on March 4, 2004, where he would be paid the base salary of $440,000 in what was purposely an incentive-laden contract.
An alternative writing (and this is rather cursory - it's just a suggestion):
On [[March 4]], [[2004 in baseball|2004]], Nathan signed a two-year [[contract]] with the Minnesota Twins. The contract paid Nathan a minimum of $440,000 per year; however, it included a number of incentive clauses whereby Nathan's pay increased if he met certain performance criteria.

[edit] Re-assess

Please let me know when this is ready for a re-assesment! Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  01:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Date sensitive material is fixed, lead is expanded, I think I took care of the voice unless I missed something. I'll double check but I think it's ready for re-assessment. Wizardman 14:26, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Okay, I'll check it later tonight then just to give you some extra time, if you want me to look at it sooner, just lmk. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  15:12, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Alright, it's about as good as I'm going to get it. Unless i missed something everything's fixed. Wizardman 19:57, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Is it ready for my re-assessment? Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  02:22, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Yup. I've done all I could do. Wizardman 02:23, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Good deal, give me a few minutes, in the meantime, i would suggest cropping the image of Nathan. This is just an opinion (so don't feel obligated to do it as it has nothing to do with the GA) but with all that "green space", the image takes up a significant portion of the screen for many users, so if you crop it down to just him you can probably have it about 420x475 at default. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  02:34, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Alright. Since it was a cc image I wasn't sure if I was allowed, but I'll do that. Wizardman 02:38, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I have no idea if it's allowed or not in infoboxes but i'm 90% sure that croping it won't matter - look at John Abraham and then click on his image - you'll see it was cropped. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  02:39, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Image fixed. Wizardman 16:32, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notes

  • Height and weight for active sports figures should be included. There's no policy or guide suggesting or preventing "date sensitive material", at least not that I've read.Y Done, I understand both sides of this debate, but height and weight are usually re-recorded by the team yearly. A once-a year potential change probably isn't enough to be of concern.
  • Don't pipe year links (ie [[2000 in sports|2000]]) in full dates as it breaks user preference coding. For stand-alone years in the infobox, it's fine.Y Done
  • The article is on Joe Nathan, not his career, so there should be some personal information included. Y Done, about as much as I can do.
  • Where the article reads "Golden Key Honor Society" is it referring to Golden Key International Honour Society? If so, the spelling should be corrected and it should be wikified.Y Done
  • Where it reads "AAA Fresno", is that referring to the Fresno Cardinals? If so, spell it out and Wikify it.Y Done, referred to Fresno Grizzlies, which were linked elsewhere.
  • All dates need to be wikified for user preferences; including dates that do not have the year (ie. June 14). Per WP:DATEY Done
  • Ordinal numbers (ie. 4th) need to be spelled out (ie. fourth). Exception to this rule is centuries. Per Wp:date#Spelling_out_numbersY Done

I corrected some of these issues myself, but keep them in mind for future reference. LARA♥LOVE 03:35, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Actually, WP:DATE#Chronological_items speaks specifically to point 1. Height and weight should not be presented in the form of "he is xxx lbs".
  • I am not sure where you are getting with point two but the manual of style explicitly permits linking to years tha will enhance the content - for example the 1990 NFL season could appear as 1990.
  • What do you mean by 3?

Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  03:41, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Per MOS, you don't need to provide more than one wikilink to the same article. Still waiting for clarification, if not, i'll fix the minor issues myself and pass the article. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  05:21, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
  • It's about as done with what you wanted as I can get, let me know if there's anything else I need to tweak. Wizardman 22:48, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Alright, Juan, to address your points:

  1. The link you provided does not speak specifically to point one, in fact, it says absolutely nothing about height and weight measurements. It doesn't even cover anything remotely close to that. Player statistics should be included in their articles, that would include their height and weight. Player cards include this information. Just because it changes does not mean it should be omitted. Player cards are updated annually. Wikipedia is updated daily, so I think the article will manage to stay up to date.
  2. I am saying "do not pipe links in full dates". The point of wikifying full dates is not to add context. In your user preferences, you have the option to have dates displayed a certain way. For example, I have mine set to show September 2, 2007. However, you may have it set to 2 September 2007 or 2007-09-02. When dates are wikified, they automatically format to your set preference. However, if the year is piped, it breaks the code and the date does not format. For that reason, full dates should not have piped years.
    1. As far as the style guide goes, there is debate about whether or not years should be piped considering it takes the reader somewhere other than where they expected. Personally, I like piped years (stand-alone, of course), but some projects don't allow it. WP:MUSTARD, for example, discourages music-related articles from having piped links. It recommends placing "(see 2007 in music)" in the relevant sentence.
  3. What I meant by point three is that the article is titled "Joe Nathan" not "The career of Joe Nathan" or "Joe Nathan's career stats". It should include information about him, not just his career.
  4. As far as your last comment about wikification to articles, I'm not sure what that is in reference to. The guide recommends you not link to any given article more than once in shorter articles. In longer articles, no more than once per section. I'm not sure if I recommended any article be wikilinked more than once. LARA♥LOVE 04:48, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Wizardman, thanks for making the changes. Job well done. However (don't you hate those?), I thnk the personal information should be in a separate section titled "Personal life" or something like that. I'll ask a couple trusted reviewers their opinion on this, they may disagree with me. So, if you don't agree, don't feel pressure to make these changes. But the sections are all titled career, so I believe this change is necessary. I recommend looking over other GAs for sports people to see how it's done, but in my experience (and I've reviewed a few dozen sports articles), there's always a personal section... this is for any bio, really. I do like how you worked it in, though. Your prose is great. Flows extremely well. LARA♥LOVE 04:48, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Alright. I was going to do that but after viewing a lot of sports-related articles, I couldn't really find any middle ground on that matter. I'll move them to a new section if necessary, though I think either way is fine. Wizardman 15:06, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to agree with you there. I think if it didn't flow well, I'd be more inclined to recommend it be split into a new section, but you've managed to create some really great prose and it reads very well. The section headers all including career still bugs me, but overall it's a good read. Lara♥Love 04:28, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

(←) After talking with Juan, I've passed the article. Lara♥Love 05:07, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

"He controls all of his pitches well." This statement (while I agree with it) seems more opinion-based than encyclopedic. Is there something in terms of a consensus or sports journalism to make it more verifiable? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.53.176.235 (talk) 00:22, 11 May 2008 (UTC)