Talk:Mel Ott

	Baseball portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Baseball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of baseball on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BaseballWikipedia:WikiProject BaseballTemplate:WikiProject BaseballBaseball articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Hall of Fame task force.

Biography: Sports and Games

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	Sports portal This article is supported by the sports and games work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

United States: Louisiana

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	Louisiana portal This article is supported by WikiProject Louisiana.

Intentionally walked?[edit]

Don't think so. According to this article, Ott was walked with the bases loaded, but it was not intentional:

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCI/is_5_59/ai_64150752 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jpmlaw (talk • contribs) 02:27, 14 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Marking as trivia[edit]

I beg to differ. There is not one one item on this list of Mel Ott's baseball records and accomplishments that is trivia. Each of these accomplishments are distinct and are better represented in such a list than they are in text. When seen in such a list, the full weight of Mel Ott's baseball accomplishments jump out. While I do agree that additional text should be added mentioning some of these accomplishments, I do not agree that such text replaces an itemized list of accomplishments. A list is simply the most concise and impactful representation of the information. What do others think? Brholden 04:17, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I might have placed the "wrong" tag, but I can't find a better one at this point. The section definitely has some valuable information, but this is not the type of information that should be listed. The information is presented in a format that is similar to other examples of trivia I have seen in the past. Keep in mind that just because information is tagged as "trivia", it is not necessary "trivial". That's why I hesitated to simply remove this section (as I do other "trivia" sections), because the article could benefit from properly incorporated information. WP:NOT offers further reading on the topic. //Tecmobowl 04:22, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOT says: Statistics. Long and sprawling lists of statistics may be confusing to readers and reduce the readibility and neatness of our articles. In addition, articles should contain sufficient explanatory text to put statistics within the article in their proper context for a general reader. Articles which are primarily comprised of statistical data may be better suited for inclusion in Wikisource as freely available reference material for the construction of related encyclopedic articles on that topic. Infoboxes or tables should also be considered to enhance the readability of lengthy data lists. ---- I would say that this is not a "long and sprawling list of statistics", but is instead an organized, sub-divided list of 18 relevant facts, presented in an appropriate manner. Brholden 04:37, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it is organized and sub-divided, but again, it is a list. The information needs to be presented in context, remember, a person on wikipedia who knows nothing of the topic should be able to understand it. Get it into the body of the article. If Ott had enough accomplishments to warrant a list like format, it would (or could) be created. (i don't think he does btw). This is just like Michael Jordan. There is a section (here) that presents the information in list format. That is also bad. However, my point is that he also has a dedicated article for this type of content (here). //Tecmobowl 04:42, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The list at the bottom of the main Michael Jordan article is excellent. It crisply summarizes his basketball acheivements, recapping the text. It belongs there. As to Mel Ott, he is in the Baseball Hall of Fame, the Giants retired his number - what more would a baseball player need to do to deserve a list? Of course, what the article does need is more text speaking about his career, but it also needs this list, just like Michael Jordan's article needs its list. Brholden 06:28, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tecmo Banned Indefinitely. FYI--Tecmo has been banned indefinitely for repeated violations of Wiki policy.--Epeefleche 01:30, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]