Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Cincinnati Reds managers/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 not promoted by Matthewedwards 21:15, 10 February 2009 [1].

List of Cincinnati Reds managers[edit]

Nominator(s): jj137 (talk)
Toolbox

All right, I think this one is ready. Let's see how it fares. All comments are welcome. (And yes, I am in the Wikicup, if that matters at all.)   jj137 (talk) 17:13, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Truco

Weak Oppose/Comments from Truco (talk · contribs) - prose and format problems

  • The Cincinnati Reds are a professional baseball team based in Cincinnati, Ohio. - per consistency with other lists and because they are an American baseball franchise the word "American" should be added before "professional"
  • There have been fifty-nine different managers in their franchise history; four during the era of the Cincinnati Redlegs (1953–1958), and the rest under the Cincinnati Reds (1882–1952, 1959–present). - 1)the semi colon should be a colon 2)Remove the comma 3)Be consistent with the statistics, you can be explaining some of the coaches with actual numbers and then say the rest, give the actual number
  • Since 2003, the Red Sox have played their home games at Great American Ball Park.' - Red Sox? Also, what about before 2003?
  • Sparky Anderson managed the most games with 1,449 and wins with 863 with the Reds. - this would be better represented as it is in the List of Washington Nationals managers FL
  • Anderson is the only Reds manager to have two World Series wins, coming in 1975 and 1976. -->Anderson is the only Reds manager to have won the World Series twice, in 1975 and 1976.
  • Pat Moran, Lou Piniella, and McKechnie had one World Series victory each; Moran was the manager during the infamous 1919 World Series. - why was it infamous?
  • McKechnie won his championship in 1940, while Piniella won his in 1990. - I'm pretty sure they "led the team to the championship", since they can't literally win the championship
  • Jack McKeon is the only Reds manager to win the Manager of the Year Award, winning in 1999. ---> Jack McKeon is the only manager to have won the Manager of the Year Award with the Reds, which he won in 1999.
  • Is it necessary to force the TOC? It leaves a white space in between the prose and the TOC table
  • Ref # 5 should be made into a general reference and the in-line citations in the table to this source should be removed if the gen. ref. is added.
  • Why isn't the # column sortable?
    • Fixed. I didn't see a point in that originally I guess.   jj137 (talk) 01:02, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • All the entries should be center aligned, minus the achievements
  • This is actually not a requirement; I do it in my tables for aesthetic reasons but it doesn't have to be. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 17:38, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The achievements should be in a "World Series (1975, 1976)" format
  • The lead should be expanded a bit more, who is the owner, who found them, etc.--TRUCO 21:50, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from KV5
Comments from KV5
  • Managerial records all needs references. None are provided, and neither is a general reference, though specific ones are preferred.
    • I added references for these.   jj137 (talk) 21:57, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • No playoff ties in the table, so not needed in the key.
  • I don't believe that you need the footnote in the "#" column if there are no repeated managers.
  • Differentiate between players inducted to the Hall of Fame as managers and as players (see List of Baltimore Orioles managers for an example).
  • "baseball team"→"baseball franchise"
  • If you aren't going to use the abbreviations NL and MLB, it's unnecessary to explicitly define them in the lead.
  • "in their franchise history"
  • To expand lead: add discussion that complements the most successful managers shown already, such as managers with highest and lowest winning percentage, etc. See List of Philadelphia Phillies managers for ideas.
  • I agree with the above, in that linking to the Black Sox scandal isn't enough to define it, especially since it's an Easter Egg link, which isn't the best to start with.
  • Please note in the key that linked years link to the corresponding MLB or baseball season.
May come back later for more, but I think this should do it for me. Hope this helps. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 17:37, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Last thing that I can see is that Baseball Almanac is not considered a reliable source by the Baseball WikiProject. You could replace those links from Baseball Reference or add references from BA/Retrosheet to each manager's table row. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 13:01, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Where does the Baseball WikiProject state that Baseball Almanac is not considered a reliable source? Rlendog (talk) 03:14, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm just going by what I was told in my first two FLCs by other reviewers; I had to remove all of the references to Baseball Almanac because it wasn't reliable. I would say that perhaps this page establishes reliability, but I'm far from an expert on the subject. What's your opinion, Rlendog? KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 12:55, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • I actually asked because I had a similar experience. I just thought from your comment that there might be something on WP:BASEBALL noting that, rather than it being the opinion of one or two particular reviewers. The reason I was given was along the lines of "they claim to have x number of pages and y number of facts, but how do we know we can rely on their factchecking process." And I am not sure how that can be addressed, or why Baseball-Reference or BaseballLibrary don't generate similar concerns. I can't say I use Baseball Almanac as much as BR, but I haven't found any problems with the information there (I did actually find an error in BR that I think Basball Almanac has correct, where they listed a Kansas City Athletics home game - not even against the Red Sox - being played at Fenway, not that I am suggesting BR is unreliable as a result). My view is that at the very least the information on BA should be viewed on its own merits, rather than a blanket statement that it is considered unreliable. For example, I would think a box score appearing on Baseball Almanac would be as reliable as that box score appearing on any other source. Or if a Baseball Almanac article contains some information that can traced back to a different accepted reliable source but also some additional information, there is a good chance that the additional information is reliable as well. That said, I believe that the information referenced from Baseball Almanac in this article is also available on B-R, so it may be best to just switch the ref to deflect any concern. I may just add the B-R ref myself if I get a chance tonight. Rlendog (talk) 00:47, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
          • Just a note: Baseball-Reference was proved reliable at this FAC. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:55, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
            • What am I missing? I don't see Baseball-Reference discussed at all at that FAC, and the FAC was failed. In any case, I have no problem considering BR a reliable source. I'm just not sure what it would take for Baseball Alamanac to be considered a reliable source, and even if it is not considered a reliable source for everything, it would seem that it would be a reliable source for certain things, such as box scores. With respect to this FLC, I changed the ref to BR. In this case, it is clearly superior to BA, since it includes games managed. BA only has the won-lost record, and so the games managed was apparently determined by adding the two. But this is a problem, since it ignores tie games, and there were also some typos or arithmetic mistakes. I think I fixed all those. Rlendog (talk) 04:09, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

  • "The Reds are members"-->They are members
  • "There have been fifty-nine different managers in the team's franchise history," Comma should be a colon.
  • "regular season games"-->regular-season games
  • "regular season game wins"-->regular-season game wins
  • "Pat Moran, Lou Piniella, and McKechnie had one World Series victory each" "had"-->have.
  • Image captions that are not complete sentences should not have periods.
  • File:BidMcPhee3.jpg needs an author. How do we know that the image was published before 1923? Dabomb87 (talk) 00:36, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

  • What makes http://www.baseball-almanac.com/mgrtmcr.shtml a reliable source? We need to know their methods of fact-checking.
  • The Baseball-Reference citations are inconsistent. This is how they should be formatted: "Baseball Hall of Fame Inductees". Baseball-Reference. Sports Reference LLC. Retrieved 2009-01-27. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:36, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I fixed the issues with games managed and the references (see above), but I think the list should reflect League Championships (e.g., 1970 and 1972) in addition to World Series Championships. Rlendog (talk) 04:11, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24[c]

  • I don't know if this still stands, but wikilinking articles like this: 1940, violates WP:MOS. Don't know for sure now, but hope that more users will comment on this situation. You could wikilink it like this: 1940 season. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 08:48, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "...in regular season games managed (1,449)..." The table lists 1,450.
  • "...with 1,380 and 744, respectively...." The table lists 1,386.
  • Please fix the disambiguation links.

-- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 08:48, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    • The discrepencies in the number of games managed came about when I corrected the number of games in the table. I fixed those numbers in the lead now too. Rlendog (talk) 15:27, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This FLC seems to have stagnated; the nominator has not edited since January 27. Dabomb87 (talk) 05:01, 8 February 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_Cincinnati_Reds_managers/archive1&oldid=1143879346"