Talk:Albert Pujols/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

2011

On February 1, 2011, Thomas Nelson Publishers released Albert's first full-length biography, Pujols: More Than The Game, by authors Scott Lamb and Tim Ellsworth. The book traces his early life and rise to stardom, his take on the steroid era in baseball, his philanthropic efforts and above all, the role his Christian faith has played – and continues to play – in his life.

Joe Posnanski, senior writer at Sports Illustrated, wrote the foreword for the book, which has also earned pre-release recommendations from former Cardinals second baseman Tommy Herr, World Magazine Editor-in-Chief Marvin Olasky, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and Union University President David S. Dockery, among others.--Thebyrdman412 (talk) 19:38, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[1]

just a typo

about halfway through, just North of footnote 61

Pujols has taken several trips to the Dominican, by taking supplies as well as a team of doctors and dentists to the poor who need medical care.

I would have put "Republic" between "Dominican" and the comma but I guess you can't do that any more. Source - http://www.uu.edu/news/release.cfm?ID=1787

Wkiernan (talk) 16:19, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Stats table, redux

Now that the season is over, it's time to match the stats table to those at other articles: one row, career stats only. Single-season stats aren't needed in the table and can be explicated in prose. Those stats which Pujols led in 2009 should be listed in the 2009 section (which really needs some actual prose expansion and formatting help), and the others should be subsumed into the career stats line. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 15:38, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'm not the one for stats, but possibly later this week I'll try to take a look at the '09 season section and clear it up a bit (it'll need to be revisited after the post-season, possibly end of year, depending on awards received and all). (I don't want to seem like I'm owning the page, I just like to think that I helped similarly cull down the 2008 season [before it was apparently merged with 2007] section to a more reasonable level.) umrguy42 02:59, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

2009 - bases loaded stats

As we clean the article up, I think it would be a good note to include his bases-loaded stats for the season (I don't know what the final numbers were, or I'd put them in). If I recall correctly, he tied the NL record for grand slams (worth mentioning), and had such a high SLG that I also feel is worth mentioning. Something on the order of "For the season, Pujols tied the NL record for grand slams with 5, and finished with an X for Y record with the bases loaded." (If the SLG can be worked in, great.) umrguy42 06:01, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Found what I was looking for, if it needs to get put in: "He was especially dangerous with the bases loaded, going 10 for 17 with five grand slams, three doubles and 35 RBIs." [1] umrguy42 21:06, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

batting average

i checked on the official site his batting average was .327 and pablo sandoval and hanley ramirez were 2nd and first in this 2009 season another stat that people dont care about he was walked the 3rd most.not only they that but they left out the 3rd in rbi's (135) he was 2nd in doubles (45) slugging percantg was actually .658 and was 25th in the league with steals (16) and got caught stealing 4 times got hit 9 times by pitches the only down side he was T-5th in grounding into double plays (23) update these stats.and never mentioned his 9 straight years with 30+ hrs and .300 avg and leading home runs (47) he was 114th in strikeouts (64) obp (.443). his full name is jose alberto pujols alcantara —Preceding unsigned comment added by That guy cc (talk • contribs) 02:50, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Pronunciacion

I think his surname is of Catalan origin, so its pronunciation should be [puˈʑols]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.62.6.185 (talk) 19:41, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

That's simply not the way he pronounces it. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 20:18, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Which is amusing. He pronounces it wrongly. It’s a Spanish mispronunciation of a Catalan name. He makes it sound like ‘poo holes’, when the original Catalan pronunciation would be innocuous in English. Comedy gold. — Chameleon 12:41, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Mind in the gutter, have we? It's his name and he can pronounce it as he see fits. I'd imagine, since Spanish and not Catalan is spoken in the DR, that the name was hispanicized in the past, not an altogether unusual occurance.Wschart (talk) 20:17, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Under personal life...

I would add that Albert and Diedre Pujols had another son, Ezra, born on February 5th, 2010. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.107.86.243 (talk) 21:07, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

It can gladly be put into the article if you have a reliable source for the info. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 21:12, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't have time to put this in today (hello, work) but here's a link: "Pujols Five Becomes Pujols Six" for those who do wish to put it in. umrguy42 19:49, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Never mind, doing it anyway :p umrguy42 19:51, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 173.27.24.242, 4 May 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} Pujols is known as 'Albeirto' in his native country, The Dominican Republic.

173.27.24.242 (talk) 04:24, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Can you please post a reliable source to back up this statement? BejinhanTalk 06:17, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. -- /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 16:03, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Infobox statistics

Can a rationale be provided as to why doubles, OPS, and hits should be included in the infobox? They don't provide any utility to the reader, as Pujols is not a franchise/MLB record holder in those categories, and OPS is notoriously unstable because he's still active anyway. — KV5 • Talk • 16:03, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 128.252.16.235, 19 July 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} In section 'Professional career - Major League Career - 2010 - 4th paragraph written as: "On June 30, he had his 37th career multihomer game at Busch Stadium tying Stan Musial's franchise record by a Cardinals' player.[49]"

it should be written as

"On June 29th, he had his 37th career multihomer game at Busch Stadium tying Stan Musial's franchise record by a Cardinals' player.[49]"

While the citation [49] is dated the 30th of June, the game was played the previous evening - June 29th. I also attended the game and it was the 29th of June. ESPN's recap also clearly indicates the 29th as the date of the game. http://scores.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=300629124


BirdsonBatFan (talk) 14:54, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

checkY Done — KV5 • Talk • 15:26, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Albert and Glenn Beck: WP:UNDUE weight?

So, I'm wondering, while the couple sentences in his "Personal Life" section are well-referenced, and may be enough to withstand a concern of undue weight, what about the picture? Do we need both? I mean, the Glenn Beck rally was one bit of his life one summer... umrguy42 18:19, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

It illustrates an element of his personal life. No other images that illustrate his personal life are available. I don't see a problem with it. (And trust me, I'm not biased, I HATE Glenn Beck and would love to purge him from everything everywhere, but I know that's not how we operate.) — KV5 • Talk • 18:21, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
But does it really "illustrate" his personal life, though, is what I'm getting at. A one-time rally he attended. It's not something he makes a habit of (which is part of the problem I have with the sentences as well, referenced though they are). Just because there's a picture of him, doesn't mean we have to use it. umrguy42 02:07, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
It illustrates an element of the written article, which is why I don't particularly see a problem with it. I'm not a regular contributor to this article, however, just someone who's got it on his watchlist for various and sundry reasons. — KV5 • Talk • 02:28, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Restoring honor

Having attended my first game at St. Louis's Sportsman's Park I grew up watching Stan the Man, Lou Brock, all the way through the Bonds/Clemens display of disgusting cheating. Albert is what it is all about. This man should be held as the standard for decency and excellence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.162.1.162 (talk) 22:13, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Removal of 2010 stats line

Per the discussions in the archives, there is no reason to have statistics beyond the current season (regardless of my belief that even that is extraneous). Thus, I have removed it. Anyone who would prefer otherwise is welcome to comment in this section. Thanks. — KV5 • Talk • 02:06, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

I consider it a sneaky way to try to expand the stats section back to the way it used to be: B-Ref on Wikipedia. Seriously, I don't understand the fascination of certain editors to try to import huge stat tables from sites that perfectly updates to here, where we explicitly aren't supposed to do that. Current season and career stats only is the compromise. – Muboshgu (talk) 05:01, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
In the case that it's not a violation of WP:NOT#STATS and a violation of WP:NPOV because Albert is having a decidedly average season for a ballplayer so far (or a poor year for a "machine", whichever way you look at it), 2010 stats should still stay out of this article. If someone who comes here wants to find that info, they'll click the links on the page. – Muboshgu (talk) 05:04, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
I don't see any real problem in having the previous entire year (2010, one line) for any player shown for comparison purposes with his current year, and it certainly isn't any violation of any WP rule about "long and extraneous" listings. At the end of the current year, the 3rd-year-back can then be deleted. KV5 and you are the only two people on this entire WP who constantly complain about this idea that 2 years showing is somehow "too much," while other players are conveniently ignored. What is your problem in showing his current and previous year? Todd Helton and Alex Rodriguez also have "long and sprawling" (vertical) lists of Awards & Honors, but you don't bother cutting them down, compared to one measly line of data for the previous full year summarizing AP's (2010) record, as polls have shown he is presently the best player in the game, and should be given leeway in showing his current and past year. You guys should be more tolerant and understanding instead of so rigid and unbending when there is no rule anywhere preventing showing 2 years of any player and only you two care about it. So, find one for me, ok? BTW, your line about "sneaky way to try to expand the stats section back to the way it used to be" shows your mentality completely. Nobody is trying to do that. Lighten up! Katydidit (talk) 06:04, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Katydidit, I would appreciate it if you stopped casting blame and making false assertions. It's really not helping matters. First, your claim that "other players are conveniently ignored" is false. If you see other players with statistical tables, you are well within your rights to remove or reduce them while pointing to the discussion on statistical tables in this talk archive, or even while pointing to WP:NOTSTATS. I do the same any time that I encounter them. However, you are talking about two different things here, and have used a straw man argument to do so: Pujols' lists of accomplishments have not been reduced or removed, and you have misrepresented my position by saying that I am arguing for their removal (I'm not). Neither Helton nor Rodriguez have statistical tables in their article. A discussion of awards, or even their listing, is perfectly acceptable; it's the raw statistical data itself that is prohibited by NOTSTATS. Your accusation that Muboshgu and I are the only people who "constantly complain about this idea that 2 years showing is... 'too much'" is also false. On this point: 1) the archived discussion clearly shows that several other editors agree with that viewpoint – we are just the only two to participate in discussion at this point and are thus the subjects of your ire; and 2) we have not "constantly complained" – rather, both of us have quietly tolerated the constant statistical updating, as long as it fell within the parameters of the previously determined consensus. Once it didn't (an extra, unneeded stats row that is a policyvio and redundant to Baseball-Reference, the Baseball Cube, Fangraphs, ESPN, the official MLB website, Yahoo! Sports, FOX Sports... I need not continue with this list), then and only then were steps taken to remove it.
As I have mentioned to you time and again, your insistence on seeing a cut-and-dried rule in policy that says "Albert Pujols' statistical table can't have more than the current year's statistics and his career totals" will never happen. One article is not going to be the focus of any policy. But your accusations of rigidity and intolerance on our part is uncivil, especially when you have been given an extreme amount of leeway on this article in doing things that are contrary to NOTSTATS. Repeated discussions have led to the same result, both in this article's talk archive and on the WikiProject Baseball talk page (search the archives and you will see several discussions). Continuing these same edit patterns could be considered tendentious, and if you continue to make unfounded accusations and to be uncivil, an request for comment can be opened for a discussion of these issues specifically and of your conduct in general, based on the fact that this has become a long-term pattern. — KV5 • Talk • 10:54, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
As an editor who was formerly involved in the debate, I agree with more or less everything KV5 just said. -Phoenixrod (talk) 16:44, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Unclear sentence

In the second sentence of (I believe) paragraph 2, it talks about his dramatic walk-off HR in the NLCS against Houston. The sentence should probably start with "In game 5, Pujols hit a dramatic walk-off HR in Houston to bring the series back to St. Louis" But at least indicate that it was in game 5 since the preceding sentence is talking about the series going six games. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.164.66.109 (talk) 20:44, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Age(?) - in days - to reach 400 homers?

Resolved
 – Incorrect days removed.—Bagumba (talk) 10:12, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

From the article in the section Major league career, 2010 season, it reads: Pujols is the third-youngest player in Major League history to reach the milestone, at 30 years, seven months and 10 days (30,222 days). Only Ken Griffey Jr. (30,140 days) and Alex Rodriguez (29,316 days) hit 400 at an earlier age.

What do the number of days represent? The players' ages? Or some other statistic? If the numbers are supposed to represent the players' ages in days, the figures are incorrect (perhaps erroneously based upon 1000 days in a year?) Pujol's age of 30 years, seven months and 10 days equates to 11,172 days. I can correct, but perhaps I am missing something??? Everiverever (talk) 09:30, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

"The NY Times wrote"...

I think that it was an author writing in the NYT to whom this comment should be attributed. Not the NYT -- which said nothing on the subject -- that would have to be stated in an editorial of the NYT, to be attributed to the paper.--Epeefleche (talk) 04:20, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Its pretty standard in the media to just use the name of the publication in attributions, unless the reporter is notable. I looked at Presidency of Barack Obama, and there are attributions such as "USA Today reported ...", "MSNBC reported ...", and "The New York Times reported ...". You could mention Tyler Kepner, the NYT reporter in this case, I just dont think it adds anything for the reader.—Bagumba (talk) 07:21, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Succession boxes and navboxes for the same honors

An edit restored succession boxes which I believe is redundant to existing navboxes in the article. For example, for NL ROY, one can tell from the navbox that Pujols won ROY in 2001 and was preceded in 2000 by Furcal and succeeded in 2002 by Jennings (note that Pujols would be in boldface if viewing the navbox in the article)

Preceded by National League Rookie of the Year
2001 		Succeeded by

We shouldnt need both the succession box and naxbox, and Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)/Archive_90#Using_navboxes_where_succession_boxes_would_suffice indicated a weak consensus to move towards navboxes.—Bagumba (talk) 07:35, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Pronunciation of name

The pronunciation given for Albert Pujols' name is incorrect. It says it is pronounced "Poo-holes". This looks like the English word "holes," which gives the impression that the last letter of the word is pronounces with a "z" sound like the "s" in "holes." But it is not, it is pronounced "s" not "z". Thus, the pronunciation should be changed to read "'poo-hols". Also, the P in the pronunciation should not be capitalized, since it is a pronunciation guide, not a proper name itself. The article is locked so I cannot fix this, otherwise I would. But I am hoping that someone who has access to it can fix it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.193.85.45 (talk) 23:14, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Fixed by deletion; somebody was just trying to be funny and failing. — KV5 • Talk • 11:03, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Pujols is a catalan name, and thus should follow the catalan pronunciation, not the spanish one. Hence, the "j" should be pronunced "ʝ" (like the Y in Yes). Sometimes, the catalan "j" can also be pronunced like the french/portuguese "j" but never like the castillan J (X). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.75.235.47 (talk) 14:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

See above; this is not how he pronounces it. Just because the name is Catalan doesn't mean that Pujols himself is Catalan and pronounces it that way. Nobody in my family follows the Swiss-German pronunciation for our last name but that doesn't make it wrong. — KV5 • Talk • 14:58, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Free Agent?

According to mlb, the Cardinals, ESPN and others, his free agency doesn't officially begin until 12:01 AM Eastern on 11/3/2010, which is still a couple hours away as I write this, meaning this article technically isn't accurate until 12:01 Eastern. Right now, it's about 9:20 PM Eastern, roughly 3 hours away from him being an official free agent.--75.0.35.121 (talk) 01:17, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Like you said, he wasn't officially a free agent until 12:01, which has now passed. Here's a link that shows he's now officially a free agent (as of 12:01 AM Eastern):http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20111102&content_id=25880048&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb

--75.0.34.113 (talk) 06:51, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

can someone verify that Pujols has been officially introduced to the media in Dallas, TX as an Angel? Otherwise, we have to change it back until that happens. --Boston Burkenation (talk) 18:00, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Is there some sort of protocol that we have to wait for the player to be introduced? NYyankees51 (talk) 18:26, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

In short, yes. Because of the inherent uncertainty in these contracts, until a player is introduced it is treated as not official. A physical is never a formality because things can happen. Take Marcus Cannon (NFL, New England Patriots) for instance. During the NFL Combine, he was diagnosed with Cancer. If during his physical it's discovered that Albert has some serious medical issue the deal can be cancelled. SEE ALSO: Wikipedia:CRYSTAL. So again, yes, until the player is introduced he has to be listed as either a member of his previous team (in the case of trades) or as a Free Agent (in the case of Free Agent signings). The exception to this is arbitration cases; when a player announces he'll accept arbitration, however that is not pertinent to this case. Hope that clears that up. Oops, forgot to sign in. --Boston Burkenation (talk) 19:05, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
All we are really looking for is an official announcement from team that he signed, and not reports from "sources". It just so happens for PR it usually coincides with a personal intro.—Bagumba (talk) 19:08, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
yes, that is said better than the way I phrased it. thank you! --Boston Burkenation (talk) 19:13, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Los Angeles Angles I believe that the atricle needs to be changed to him being a member of the Los Angeles Angles since it was announced on MLB.com that he had signed for 10 years and $254 million. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.40.22.141 (talk) 00:29, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Just because MLB announced it doesn't make the deal official. Wait for the press release or conference, then worry about it. Until that happens, he is still a free agent. — KV5 • Talk • 01:08, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
For goodness sake, the Angels are already selling Pujols merchandise! It's a done deal, there is nothing speculative about it. --CASportsFan (talk) 20:42, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Neither MLB.com nor ESPN.com have noted it in their FA trackers. The article already says there is a tentative agreement in place, so not like readers will know nothing of the deal. Both sides are spending too much time arguing over colors in an infobox.—Bagumba (talk) 20:56, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

This line needs to be edited - "His wife would later explain on a radio talk show that they were disappointed in the Cardinals only offering a 5 year deal for Pujols" to include the word "initially" between "Cardinals" and "only". In fact, while the Cards first offer to Pujols was for only five years, their final offer was a 10 year deal that would have paid him $220 Million. The current wording suggests that the initial five-year offer was the Cardinals only offer to Pujols, which was most certainly NOT the case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.73.47.9 (talk) 19:46, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Albert Pujols Age Dispute

this article needs to reference that Albert Pujols Birthday is disputed

see this article

See this article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.166.55.11 (talk) 21:31, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Due and undue weight

Regarding this text:

He hit a game-winning single on September 17 against Rubén Quevedo in a 2–1 victory over the Milwaukee Brewers.[24] The next day, he homered and had five RBI in a 9–4 victory over the Brewers.[25] Three days later, he had five RBI again and hit his first career grand slam (a game-winner against Omar Olivares) as the Cardinals beat the Pittsburgh Pirates 9–5.[26]

This article runs the risk of becoming a game recap farm if we don't keep strict criteria on what we include. Maybe his first career grand slam is worth noting, but I'm not sure. I don't feel that a 5 RBI game is that rare (how many did Josh Hamilton get last night?), and a source would be needed to back up that it is anyhow. I feel this page needs to stick with awards, feats (backed up by sources), records, and the like.

There are other examples:

On May 30, he had his 36th career multihomer game at Wrigley Field hitting 3 home runs. Later in June he had his 37th career multihomer game at Busch Stadium tying Stan Musial's franchise record by a Cardinals' player.[68]

If his 37th career multihomer game tied Musial's franchise record, why are we mentioning his 36th? Three home runs in a game is nice, but again, Hamilton hit four last night. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:51, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

The first example should be put into context of the sentence that follows it (in bold):
He hit a game-winning single on September 17 against Rubén Quevedo in a 2–1 victory over the Milwaukee Brewers.[24] The next day, he homered and had five RBI in a 9–4 victory over the Brewers.[25] Three days later, he had five RBI again and hit his first career grand slam (a game-winner against Omar Olivares) as the Cardinals beat the Pittsburgh Pirates 9–5.[26] For his accomplishments, Pujols was named the NL co-Player of the Week from September 17 to 23.[11]
Perhaps it can be condensed, but some details are worth mentioning if this was his first Player of the Week and it was in his coming-out rookie season. In general, I agree that specific games (e.g. #36 multihomer) are not worth mentioning unless they are notable in relation to a players overall career. With Pujols' accomplishments, the criteria is even more stringent.—Bagumba (talk) 17:24, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Right, he has so many accomplishments that we can't list everything. I'll grant you that the NL co-POTW makes the first example above worth mentioning, though it would be better if it were condensed. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:31, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Should his 439-foot home run in 2001 be mentioned or not? (I have not put that in the article yet.) Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 18:16, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
What are the arguments for mentioning it?—Bagumba (talk) 18:26, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
His MLB.com bio mentions it, and it's a pretty long distance for a home run. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 18:42, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
While MLB.com can be considered reliable, everything on the site is not necessarily notable to mention in a bio. Perhaps if multiple sources years later mention an event it will be a stronger argument that it really is notable. He's probably hit lots of "long" distance homeruns, so it would be somewhat indiscriminate to list them all.—Bagumba (talk) 18:54, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
I don't think 439 ft is any sort of record, so I don't see why it should be mentioned. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:47, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I deleted this: On August 10, he hit a grand slam against Shawn Estes in a 5–4 victory over the New York Mets.[2] He's hit many grand slams, I'm sure. Why does that one matter? – Muboshgu (talk) 18:47, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

It is true that Pujols is one of the best hitters of all-time, but don't overestimate him. The record for most grand slams of all-time is 23 (and Pujols does not own it), so they are not that frequent. We can't list every achievement Pujols has ever won, but I think a grand slam is definitely one of his biggest. Although Hamilton hit 4 home runs the other day, a 4 RBI game is not that common.Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 22:48, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
Four RBI games are not so uncommon that we need to list every one. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:55, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 12 July 2012

Some of the info is a little outdated and could be more accurate if corrected

Sexysaxman (talk) 16:41, 12 July 2012 (UTC) thank you very much

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Reliable sources may also need to be provided. Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 16:45, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

AL Player of the Week

Pujols won the AL Player of the Week for July 30-August 5, 2012, which should be included under both award sections. [2] Rarohla (talk) 22:17, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Note about GA review

While it's possible the article may pass GA review, I would clean up the following in hopes of getting passed:

  • "Early life and career" section needs expanded. Each of his seasons have more text and prose than this section. Look to add details to better inform the reader.
  • Numbers < 10 should be written out per WP:MoS. I just changed all the "RBI" to "RBIs" where appropriate per WP:MoS#Abbreviations.
  • Add details to references, including publisher, location (when applicable/necessary), page, etc. Also, I believe only the first letter of a website would be capitalized (sorry, can't find a relevant link).
  • 2012 section: "Pujols struggled" - give the stats to the reader and let them determine how he fared. "Soon after" - when, exactly? Did Pujols have anything to do with Hatcher's being fired? The Marlins "reportedly"? They either offered him a contract or didn't. If a reliable source can't establish this, then it probably needs to be removed and simply "the Marlins expressed interest." Is it necessary to give such details as the stat line for the July 31 and Aug 1 games? Would it not be enough to summarize his stats for the week, considering his winning the AL PoW is mentioned later?
  • Lead - "tying series records" - which ones? Capitalize "series" as well. "Pujols was born in DR, but..." - no comma needed, and what is the purpose of "but"? Also, replace "America" with "United States." "After failing to score 100 runs...he won his second MVP." - what's the correlation? If there is none, don't mention it. If the amount of runs he has scored is desired to be in the lead, the current wording suggests it's not important and thus should not be included – or at the very least, in a different way.
  • "International career" – this section is too short to remain on its own. Add more details or merge it with other parts of the article.
  • "Christianity" – "Pujols and his wife are devout and active..." This appears a bit POV. If he's publicly stated he's a Christian, as well as members of his family, isn't that enough? Also, if it known where the family attends church, let the reader draw their own conclusion. "Devout" and "active" are difficult to measure. "Pujols and his family" – they likely "attended" the church in Missouri, but seeing as he is now in California...
  • "Pujols was plagued by plantar..." – he either had it or did not have it. If it's a lingering injury, state so. Zepppep (talk) 10:39, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your help. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 11:40, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
No problem. I see some of the above have been tended to (amazing you were able to understand the above, considering all the typos!). I have a feeling a reviewer might also raise issue with the numerous other players mentioned when Pujols finished second, or third, etc. in some statistical category. Is it really necessary for all these other players to be named? I have a feeling it might seem to distracting to the reader and thus a reviewer might have issue with it. Zepppep (talk) 14:39, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Proposed removal of redundant publisher information

A number of citations in this article unnecessarily include the publisher for periodicals and websites that have their own Wikipedia article. This information has no value to anyone wanting to check or track down references. For example, publisher=Washington Post Company for references to The Washington Post, or publisher=MLB Advanced Media for references to Baseball-Reference.com, only make the article longer - significantly longer when repeated many times - without adding anything useful. Therefore I plan to upgrade the article's citations to remove all such redundant publisher info, bringing them into line with the recommended use of the cite template (see Template:Citation#Publisher). Please raise any questions here or on my talk page. Colonies Chris (talk) 21:37, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Albert Pujols/GA3. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Batard0 (talk · contribs) 17:26, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

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

I'll take this one on. It's quite long, so it may take me longer than usual to get through. I'll begin by looking at the pictures, stability and neutrality and will continue with a review of the prose, which will likely take a while and might be laborious. I'll then go on to the other areas and address any broader issues. The box above is a barometer of progress. I think we should be able to get through this one without much trouble (but with a little patience). --Batard0 (talk) 17:26, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Lead

  • A nitpick, but I'd suggest changing "Previously, he has played for the St. Louis Cardinals." to "He previously played for the St. Louis Cardinals." This simply flows with the rest of it a bit better and is just slightly more concise.
  • There's a slight bit of confusion in the second para. First, we should say "National League Most Valuable Player (MVP) Award" (this adds "MVP" in parentheses). Second, is his "first MVP Award" an NL MVP?
  • runs batted in is wikilinked for the second time in the third para. Can hence be removed.
  • When we say "home runs and runs batted in," perhaps we could say "home runs and runs batted in, or RBI" or else "home runs and runs batted in (RBI)" since we use RBI in the following sentence. Readers will probably get that it's RBI in any event; this is merely a suggestion.
  • I'd prefer a slight rephrase of the last two sentences for clarity to the following: "He won his second World Series in 2011 as the Cardinals defeated the Texas Rangers in seven games. Pujols tied Series single-game records for home runs, hits, and RBI in Game 3. He became a free agent after the season and signed a 10-year deal with the Angels." Or something like this. My issue here is that the subclause "tying Series single-game records for home runs, hits, and RBI in Game 3" in the second-to-last sentence is somewhat out of joint with the temporal position of the rest of the sentence, which describes the Cardinals winning the overall series, not game 3.

Early life and career

More to come... --Batard0 (talk) 18:09, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

  • Having "an only child" in parentheses is a little jarring. I think the prose would be clearer if we put this in its own sentence after the first one, i.e. "He was an only child." Or we could say "Born on January 16, 1980, Pujols was an only child. He was raised ... etc. etc."
  • "he was also an alcoholic, and Albert often had to drag him back home from games" -- I don't get what his father being an alcoholic had to do with Pujols having to drag him home from games. Was he drinking at the games he pitched in?
  • "Growing up, Pujols would practice baseball using limes for balls and a milk carton for a glove." -- I think "practiced" is better than "would practice" here, since it conveys the same thing and is more concise.
  • "where Albert witnessed a shooting at a grocery store. Two months later, they moved to Independence, Missouri, to join some relatives" -- we're not drawing a close enough link between these two events. Did the family move because they feared violence in New York? Was his witnessing a shooting coincidental to the family's move?
  • "was named All-State" -- it'd be good if we could say who named him "all-state". Was it sportswriters? The statewide high school athletics association?
MLB.com just said he was named All-State twice; I'm afraid I can't find another source saying who gave him this honor. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 20:08, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • "he was walked 55 times (partly because opposing coaches believed he was older than 18)" doesn't fully make sense to me. Why would you walk someone intentionally because of your belief about his age? Would they still have walked him if he were a poor hitter but they believed he was older than 18?

More to come... --Batard0 (talk) 13:03, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

  • For the following: "In his only college season, Pujols hit a grand slam and turned an unassisted triple play in his first game" I think it reads a little more clearly (and chronologically) like this: "Pujols hit a grand slam and turned an unassisted triple play in the first game of his only college season."
  • I suggest changing "one semester" to "a semester" in an attempt to avoid confusion that may arise from a reading of "one semester early in December 1998" as meaning [one semester] [early in December] instead of the intended [one semester early] [in December]. Another possible phrasing is "After graduating one semester early from high school in December 1998". This may actually be better.

Minor League career

  • "Thus, he was not drafted" -- here we can remove "Thus", since it's clear from the foregoing that his drafting had to do with uncertainties about his age, position and build.
  • "is still tied for ninth" -- here I'd suggest a "was tied for ninth as of {{currentyear}}" construction.
  • "Once the Cardinals increased" --> "When the Cardinals increased" is better because it more precisely locates the timing of the cause and effect.
  • It might be good to say what the collegiate league was -- an amateur league, summer league, whatever.

St. Louis Cardinals -- 2001

  • There should be a comma after "Tony La Russa" in the first sentence, introducing the quote.
  • "including a home run (his first)" --> "including his first home run" for conciseness.
  • "he his eighth home run" --> "he hit his eighth home run" (missing "hit")
  • This first paragraph is too long. I suggest a new paragraph at the midseason point, so we would have "At midseason, Pujols became...etc."
  • I suggest removing the following two sentences: "He hit a game-winning single on September 17 against Rubén Quevedo in a 2–1 victory over the Milwaukee Brewers.[16] The next day, he homered and had five RBIs in a 9–4 victory over the Brewers.[17]" This is fine stuff, and well-sourced, but I think we're verging on an overabundance of detail here for an encyclopedic article. I'd also suggest removal of "For his accomplishments, Pujols was named the NL co-Player of the Week along with José Mesa from September 16 to 22.[3][19]" A player of the week award is not significant in the context of Pujols' career, which is what the article is about, and hence should not be included. As the GA criteria say, we should be staying "focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail".
I removed the Player of the Week Award mentions from Pujols's career summary (they are, after all, included in the table at the end of the article). Do you think the Player of the Month awards should remain or not (I never pay much attention to who wins them myself, but some reviewers prefer mention of those)? Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 19:48, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • "However, Pujols had two hits" --> "Pujols, however, had two hits" etc...this reads a bit more clearly, I think.

2002

  • The same sorts of issues with stats persist here. We don't need player of the week honors; they're not really that significant, especially in light of the fact that he's won many other more prestigious awards. I'm also a little concerned that the summaries under the year headings are merely listings of statistics and performances in games and awards. Some of these should be included, I think, like stats about him breaking club records or doing something in his career for the first time or winning a significant award. The thing about the stats here is that they crowd out any discussion of Pujols' career as a narrative; we never have sentences like (off the top of my head) "Pujols was the leading hitter on a Cardinals roster that included so-and-so and so-and-so (and maybe some pitchers, also mention who was managing the team). The Cardinals had been in decline between 1994 and 2000, but Pujols' arrival made the team a perennial playoff contender throughout the early 2000s." I'm just making this stuff up, but you'll get the drift, I think. What we need more of is a sense of context -- we need to describe what effect Pujols had on the Cardinals, how he played a role in the team's success and who the people were around him who contributed to the team's success. I'm concerned that we're both focusing too much on statistics and not being broad enough in our coverage of Pujols. He didn't exist in the vacuum of his own performance, and we shouldn't be describing him in that way. What made Pujols so good, anyway? What was it about his swing, his eyes, his mind or his build made him good? These kinds of questions should be answered here.
  • I'll add that I think the year-by-year summaries may not be the best way to present Pujols' career, because the format lends itself to listings of stats, which I strongly suggest getting away from. Could we group the years into thematic sections, like "Early career with the Cardinals (2001–2005)" then "Later Cardinals career and World Series wins (2006–2011)" and "Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim (2012 – present)". These names are just a suggestion --you know better than I do how to organize it. --Batard0 (talk) 17:57, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • I'm going to pause here for the moment until these issues are discussed and addressed. I think we may be looking at a major reworking of the main sections covering his career. I think this can be done within the timeframe of this review; it won't be easy or quick, however. --Batard0 (talk) 05:25, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • A lot of work, but I am determined to keep this article from having to undergo a fourth GA review. It may just take some time. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 19:48, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • That's fine with me -- I can be as patient as need be, as long as we're improving the article. --Batard0 (talk) 03:53, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Changes addressed. I mentioned that Pujols led the Cardinals in home runs in 2001 (since he was a rookie and Mark McGwire was on the team that year), but I would refrain from mentioning that in other years because Pujols was easily the best player on the Cardinals. It would be, in my opinion, a little like saying, "Willie Mays was the leading hitter on a Giants' roster that included so-and-so." I would hesitate to mention other players too much (as this article is supposed to be about Pujols, not the St. Louis Cardinals), but Tony La Russa, Chris Carpenter, Scott Rolen, Jim Edmonds, Adam Wainwright, and Matt Holliday are now all mentioned in the article. Apparently, Pujols's swing was the main thing that made him good. As the Cardinals had just reached the NLCS in 2000, I do not think we can add that he brought them out of a decline. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 12:12, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
This is moving in the right direction, and the section titles are good. The fundamental issue about his major league career section remains, however. The 2001 season is fine. The 2002 season and beyond are still too bogged down by statistics and trivia, I think. I think we need more of a sense of Pujols's career as a narrative rather than a collection of statistical milestones, if you know what I mean. In other words, we want to hear the story of Albert Pujols's career, not just the numbers. Thinking about it like you're trying to tell Pujols's story might help; are there some good sources (newspaper articles, perhaps) that are structured in narrative form that might be usable as sources for this? --Batard0 (talk) 19:09, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
I tried to make it more like a narrative; let me know if I need to do more. I had trouble finding newspaper articles in narrative form. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 12:10, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
Good stuff. I'm going to go through and do some copyedits, making any additional suggestions here as I go along. I'll do this in stages, and please revert and discuss anything you disagree with. Sorry about the delay on this. --Batard0 (talk) 17:32, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
Going through the first few paragraphs of the early career section, I think some of the old issues are still there. It's better-organized, for sure, but I'm sure we could find something about what he meant to the team. I don't want to sound like a broken record here, but the issue is that it's basically a list of statistics and things that happened without much context around it. It's well put-together, but it's more like a well-constructed list than an encyclopedia article, if you know what I mean. I'm going to go back and do some more copyediting. I'm removing a few sentences that I think contain trivial statistics. Please take note of this and discuss if there's disagreement. --Batard0 (talk) 19:15, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
I added how Pujols made the Cardinals one of the best offensive teams in the league in 2002 and 2003; also, I mentioned why the pitching staff may have kept the Cardinals from reaching the playoffs in 2003. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 12:27, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
This is good stuff. This book, most of which is available at Google Books, looks like an excellent general source. --Batard0 (talk) 16:12, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
I added some stuff from the book. Unfortunately, the preview ends with Pujols still in the minor leagues. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 12:11, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
That's strange -- I'm able to click on any chapter in the table of contents, and it takes me to at least the first few pages of that chapter. --Batard0 (talk) 14:05, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm now going through and making some more edits, including deleting some trivial statistics and such. The career section still is essentially a list of statistics put in paragraph form. This should be changed into a narrative and a lot of these statistics should simply be discarded as trivia, in my view. The obviously significant stuff, like his major accomplishments and season statistics, should be kept, but it's difficult reading slogging through stat after stat. Let's say you wanted to write a bio of Babe Ruth. You'd simply write the narrative of Babe Ruth's career, right? Writing it like "On April 28, 1924, Ruth had four hits and two home runs against John Smith as the Yankees beat the Indians 8–3. On July 22, Ruth hit the game-winning home run off Joe Smith as the Yankees beat the Red Sox 4–3. On September 3, he had another game-winning home run and hit four out of four." Does this tell us anything about Babe Ruth? Not really. It's a listing of stats that we could find if we went to a reference book. It's good to have stats, but only if they're in the right context. I'd strongly recommend looking at the article on Ozzie Smith, which is FA-class, as a guide on how to write a strong narrative account of a player's career. I think we'll be able to get this to GA status after solving some of these focus issues, but in the longer run I think the article needs a major overhaul. --Batard0 (talk) 08:22, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

I've finished copyediting the article, and while it reads ok, it still needs a lot more work. As a first step, I'd recommend the removal of all nonessential information. The article is far too large. It's about 7,500 words. To put that into perspective, the article on World War II is about 10,000 words. At this stage, I don't think we're going to be able to undertake the kind of fundamental reworking the article needs to improve, so here's what I suggest. First, cut it down to about 5,000 words, maximum. At that point, I'll take a final look and pass it as a GA. If you would like to make the article better, I'd suggest soliciting the help of other editors who have experience with baseball articles and the FA process. Perhaps put it through a peer review after that, and it might get somewhere. Back to where we are now: if you would rather not cut the article's size, I'll be understanding, but at the same time I won't list it as a GA, because I don't think it passes the focus criterion in its current state. I don't want to sound harsh here, but I sincerely think the article needs a lot of work. --Batard0 (talk) 10:24, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

I've slimmed the article down. If it needs more cuts, let me know. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 13:50, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

All right. I'm going to pass this now, because I think it meets the GA criteria. So good job. Having said that, I think the article could still use a lot of improvement and is far from ready for consideration as an FA, for example. The concerns I have are already expressed above, but the thrust of them is that the article is too stat-heavy and not narrative enough. There are plenty of reliable sources out there that describe Pujols's career in a narrative fashion, and I would recommend using those as a basis for a rewrite. The stats don't have to be eliminated entirely, but should be substantially scaled back in favor of the narrative. If you want to take this further, I would suggest making the aforementioned changes and then taking it to a peer review before nominating it as an FA. --Batard0 (talk) 06:50, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 12 February 2013

This article is semi-protected to promote compliance with the policy on biographies of living people. 69.122.190.4 (talk) 15:15, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

And the request is......?.--JayJasper (talk) 17:45, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Rivertorch (talk) 20:32, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

2012-2013 section

About Jack Clark accusation, "in August" should be changed to "in August 2013" otherwise reader would assume August 2012.

Eoswalt (talk) 13:02, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Detail of introduction

Hi Muboshgu, I notice you consider that my edits to the introduction here make it too short. I was wondering what detail you feel is missing? I can revert and then add anything you feel is missing.

I feel that the current introduction contains a lot of extraneous detail. For example: Pujols batting and throwing right-handed is easy to find in the infobox, his height is easy to find elsewhere, his weight can fluctuate.

The stats about his batting average/homers/RBI over 10 seasons and doubles over 12 years is what I would consider trivia, which could be in the article but not in the introduction. If you include exactly how many doubles he has then it will need to be updated a lot during the season.

Details about when he first hit 40 homers or first failed to score 100 runs don't really deserve to be in the introduction, in my opinion. Also details about how many games the Cardinals won or lost the World Series in seem a bit irrelevant for the introduction section.

What do you think? RWyn (talk) 22:14, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

[...] contributing to two World Series championships in 2004 and 2011.

See title, the Cardinals won in 2006, not 2004. Could someone please edit it? (I can't edit it). Rabida (talk) 06:09, 29 December 2014 (UTC)Rabida

Pronunciation

For background, please see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 June 16#Albert Pooholes. According to the discussion, "POO-holes" is a well-known English approximation of the pronunciation of Pujols' surname, enough that there are reliable sources (e.g. [3], [4], [5]). I'm not familiar with the player myself, but there doesn't seem to be any disagreement on this point.

Our article here gives [ˈalβert puˈxols] as IPA for the pronunciation, but that appears to be wrong. According to Help:IPA for Spanish, the ˈ indicates stress on the syllable following the mark, making the pronunciation "pu-HOLS". I have edited the page to fix the IPA code, however I am not an expert in this area and it's possible I'm not reading the help page properly, or that the page is incorrect. Leaving a note here in case anyone comes along who knows better and disagrees.

Ivanvector (talk) 15:20, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Information 2001 section

The article mentions the Cardinals winning the "wild card round" in 2001, this is a little bit of nonsense since there was no "wild card round" in 2001, there was however a wild card spot. The wild card was determined only by the regular season record. They did win the wild card playoff spot and lost in the NLDS.

I don't have the wherewithal to figure out how to "edit" this article. Footnote #10 link is dead. Will someone please put this working link in place of it? http://www.si.com/vault/2009/03/16/105787315/the-power-to-believe — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.255.102.44 (talk) 04:31, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Done. Next time, put your new section at the end of the talk page, and please remember to sign it with the four tildes ~~~~. Regards, Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 05:15, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 July 2015

I suggest that Albert Pujols' player of the month award for the month of June 2015 be put in for the awards section at the bottom of the page. Also for the 2015 season section, I suggest adding a sentence or two about his selection to the all-star game and starting in place of Miguel Cabrera, especially because it's his first all-star appearance since 2010. TheMachine5 (talk) 06:36, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a specific change in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
More importantly, you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 13:03, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Game 1 of the World Series in 2006

The home run that Pujols hit against Verlander in Game 1 of the 2006 World Series put them up 4-1, and they would eventually win 7-2. It's listed as the Cardinals having won 4-2. Please fix. [3] 66.109.61.131 (talk) 15:23, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

One of the references is misquoted

Albert did not deny ever taking PEDs. Albert denied Jack Clark's story and that he did anything illegal. This leaves open the possibility that Albert used PEDs legally in the Dominican Republic or that he used PEDS in a manner different from what Jack Clark described. This bothered me at the time because Albert is a Christian but he gave only a half denial. He was not clear if Pujols is claiming that he never used PEDs or if Clark's allegation is not 100%true.

This is the source that was cited. http://m.mlb.com/news/article/56426970

Can someone change the phrase "statement adamantly denying that he had ever taken PEDs" to "statement denying Clark's allegations"?

Zkomins (talk) 00:10, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Albert Pujols. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:33, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Fielding Bible

His 5 fielding Bible awards should be put up top so he is accurately represented as a good defensive 1st baseman Aaa606 (talk) 02:24, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 April 2017

Change HR to 592 67.86.57.10 (talk) 10:06, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Done per mlb.com. Thanks for engaging with the article. In future, please provide a reliable source for proposed changes—or just wait; these stats are usually updated fairly promptly. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a news site, and accuracy is valued over speed. RivertorchFIREWATER 12:09, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 June 2017

Change 599 home runs to 600 home runs. 184.97.227.224 (talk) 03:51, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Already done when I got here. —KuyaBriBriTalk 02:26, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Add a 600 home run club link — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.66.29.97 (talk) 00:57, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Not done: There is no article on 600 home run club, and 600 home run club redirects to 500 home run club. —KuyaBriBriTalk 02:26, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

500 homerun club should be updated to 600 homeruns club

Update needed 2017 Jorge0524 (talk) 22:24, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Albert Pujols. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:10, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 23 external links on Albert Pujols. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:03, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 September 2017

St. Louis Early Career (2001-2003). Fourth paragraph. The Cardinals finished the 2001 season with a 93-61 record, should be 93-69.Source:Baseball Reference 2001 NL season.2601:581:8500:949C:7042:6610:579C:47C4 (talk) 01:00, 27 September 2017 (UTC) 2601:581:8500:949C:7042:6610:579C:47C4 (talk) 01:00, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Done. Thanks! (Note: the existing reference is correct.) RivertorchFIREWATER 03:05, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

There was no wild card round in 2001

"The Cardinals finished the 2001 season with a 93–69 record and advanced to the playoffs as a wild card team.[31] The team won the NL wild card round and advanced to the NL Division Series (NLDS).[32]"

Fix that please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:3A0:4940:7D94:7163:450D:DC66 (talk) 23:07, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Albert Pujols update

His stats through the 2017 season should be updated in the inbox. In inbox, should be thru 2017 season. He has 2,968 hits and 1,918 RBI. In third paragraph, his career batting average thru end of 2017 season is .305, his walk rate is 11.2%, and his ISO is .256. Also Accomplishments section at bottom of article needs to be updated thru 2017 season. sources: baseball reference. Fix please. Thank you.2601:581:8500:949C:304C:CD3D:3958:6A95 (talk) 02:33, 7 December 2017 (UTC)2601:581:8500:949C:304C:CD3D:3958:6A95 (talk) 12:16, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Albert Pujols. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:17, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 December 2017

Go to talk page:Albert Pujols update 12/14/2017 and make changes I requested. Article needs updating. Thank you. 2601:581:8500:949C:304C:CD3D:3958:6A95 (talk) 16:29, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:51, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 December 2017

Update.In stats inbox,change thru 9/20/2017 to thru 2017 season. Change hits from 2,959 to 2,968. Change 1,914 RBI to 1,918 RBI. in third paragraph,next to stat inbox,,change .312 batting average to .305,the walk rate from 12.1% to 11.2% and his Isolated Power from .217 to .256.In Accomplishments paragraph,needs update. Will do next. Lets update what I specified for now. Source:Baseball Reference, Fangraphs. 2601:581:8500:949C:304C:CD3D:3958:6A95 (talk) 21:22, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Done But as an aside, it is easier for editors responding to edit requests if the requester does not change their request five times along the way. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 14:28, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 December 2017 Accomplishments first paragraph only update thru 2017

First sentence,change 2012 to 2017,change slugging percentage(fifth,delete)to total bases(tenth),change on base plus slugging(fifth,delete) to home runs (seventh)and change OPS+(sixth,delete) to RBI (tenth). Those 2012 stats are completely outdated and his rankings have changed.

Second sentence,change 2012 to 2017,delete (he led all active players),change to(ranked among active players) change to eighth in batting average(change .325 to .305), change first to second in slugging percentage (change .608 to .561) and change from first to fourth in OPS(change 1.022 to .947). Updated from 2012.

Third sentence,change top 10 players to( ranked #1 among active players)Change all following stats to first(doubles,home runs,RBI,and runs scored.)Update from 2012.

Fourth sentence change 2012 to 2017.

This was complicated. Thank you for your time.Sources:Baseball Reference all-time leaderboards. 2601:581:8500:949C:304C:CD3D:3958:6A95 (talk) 22:21, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

 Done. Thank you for catching this; I agree that if we're going to have text like this, we should be updating it a little more often than once every five years. This took me a few edits and here they are all grouped together. It's really important that you comb through this bit by bit. This was a whole lot of tiny changes and it would have been very easy for me to have done something wrong. CityOfSilver 15:12, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
@CityOfSilver:, thank you for getting this. I was about to answer the IP's request when I saw through your edit summaries that you were working on it. I have asked the admin who most recently placed the semi-protection if this can be removed so that the IP can update the stats themselves. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:24, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
@Eggishorn: Thank you for waiting. There are a lot of anonymous users willing to update stats like this, and I wonder if your approach might be a little better long-term, particularly during a given sport's offseason. (Or, and I hate to say it, in cases like this where an athlete's star has dimmed so much that the article probably isn't as popular a target for vandals.) Instead of going through these requests bit by bit, we can decline the request, get the article unlocked, and ask the anonymous editor to go ahead. CityOfSilver 15:48, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Just one more thing and done:Second sentence to include rankings:batting average,put in(eighth),slugging percentage(second) and OPS(fourth).Thanks.2601:581:8500:949C:304C:CD3D:3958:6A95 (talk) 16:54, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

We are investigating the possibility of removing the semi-protection. If you can wait a bit, we may be able to get the admins to remove it and then you can make these changes yourself. There is always the option of registering for an account and then you will, after a short period, be able to edit these articles without having to make requests. Thanks for you patience. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 19:08, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
The article is now unprotected. You should be able to make these edits yourself. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 23:04, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Passing people on all-time lists

It will be interesting to note where Pujols finishes up in the various all-time hitting categories but do we really need to add to the article every time he passes someone on those lists? --Jameboy (talk) 23:32, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

  1. ^ http://www.uu.edu
  2. ^ {[cite web |last=Hoffman |first=Jared |url=http://stlouis.cardinals.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20020810&content_id=101068&vkey=news_stl&fext=.jsp&c_id=stl |title=Cards thwart Mets' comeback |publisher=Major League Baseball |work=Cardinals.MLB.com |date=2002-08-10 |accessdate=2012-05-12}}
  3. ^ http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/DET/DET200610210.shtml
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Albert_Pujols/Archive_2&oldid=1126338994"