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

The list was promoted by Giants2008 17:12, 2 October 2012 [1].

300 win club[edit]

Featured list candidates/300 win club/archive1

Toolbox
Analysis Citation bot External links

Nominator(s): – Muboshgu (talk) 22:44, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It;s important for WP:BASEBALL for this to become a FL. Joining the 300 win club is seen as one of the highest achievement in baseball, along with joining the 3,000 strikeout club, 300 save club, 500 home run club, or 3,000 hit club. Incidentally, those are all FLs. This will complete the set. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:44, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Bloom6132 (talk) 17:03, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments – "who won 300" – replace with "who have won," in order to make it the exact same wording as the other FL baseball stat club lists. "No pitcher reached 20 wins in a non strike-shortened year for the first time in 2006, which was repeated in 2009." – it would sound better with "...for the first time in 2006; this was repeated in 2009. "The next member of the club to become eligible for the Hall is Roger Clemens, who is expected to become eligible during the 2013 balloting; however, his election is seen as uncertain because of his alleged links to use of performance-enhancing drugs." – this kinda resembles a run-on sentence. I would suggest breaking it up between the words "balloting" and "however." Footnote: "Though it was illegal to doctor the baseball" – replace with "is." It's still illegal. —Bloom6132 (talk) 11:10, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply] Addressed. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:10, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Bloom6132 (talk) 17:03, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments –

"who won 300" – replace with "who have won," in order to make it the exact same wording as the other FL baseball stat club lists.
"No pitcher reached 20 wins in a non strike-shortened year for the first time in 2006, which was repeated in 2009." – it would sound better with "...for the first time in 2006; this was repeated in 2009.
"The next member of the club to become eligible for the Hall is Roger Clemens, who is expected to become eligible during the 2013 balloting; however, his election is seen as uncertain because of his alleged links to use of performance-enhancing drugs." – this kinda resembles a run-on sentence. I would suggest breaking it up between the words "balloting" and "however."
Footnote: "Though it was illegal to doctor the baseball" – replace with "is." It's still illegal.

—Bloom6132 (talk) 11:10, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Addressed. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:10, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support – meets all 6 criteria. Great work! —Bloom6132 (talk) 17:03, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:52, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments "from a shorter distance from h" from...from a little repetitive, perhaps rephrase. Reworded. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:36, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply] "foreign substances " could you explain this? Source doesn't specify, though back in the day, a pitcher could apply anything from spit to tobacco juice to a ball. Sometimes, the ball would be completely black because of all of the stuff on it, but it would still be used. Today, even the slightest bit of dirt on a ball gets it taken out of use. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:30, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply] "production.[2] the increasing " should be a comma I guess, but then this sentence would be HUGE. Consider split. Changed to "production.[2] Also, the increasing". – Muboshgu (talk) 18:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply] Image captions need periods. Fixed. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply] Ref 16 links the NY Times but ref 2 doesn't. Fixed. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply] Similar comment with ref 19 and ref 18 for Baseball-Reference.com. Fixed. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply] The Rambling Man (talk) 10:16, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:52, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

"from a shorter distance from h" from...from a little repetitive, perhaps rephrase.
- Reworded. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:36, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"foreign substances " could you explain this?
- Source doesn't specify, though back in the day, a pitcher could apply anything from spit to tobacco juice to a ball. Sometimes, the ball would be completely black because of all of the stuff on it, but it would still be used. Today, even the slightest bit of dirt on a ball gets it taken out of use. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:30, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"production.[2] the increasing " should be a comma I guess, but then this sentence would be HUGE. Consider split.
- Changed to "production.[2] Also, the increasing". – Muboshgu (talk) 18:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Image captions need periods.
- Fixed. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ref 16 links the NY Times but ref 2 doesn't.
- Fixed. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Similar comment with ref 19 and ref 18 for Baseball-Reference.com.
- Fixed. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 10:16, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

" In total, 24 pitchers " In total is redundant, but avoid starting the sentence with a number...
- Thought about how to handle that one for a while, was leaning towards "There are 24 members..." but went with spelling out 24. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:01, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"finishing his career" would prefer "ending his career"
- How about "and retired"? Can change to "ending his career" if you're dead set on it. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"suppressed offensive production" I don't understand this phrase or how a stadium design could achieve whatever it is...
- Some stadiums are hitter's parks while others are pitcher's parks. This could be due to a number of reasons, such as how far the fences are from home plate. Also, stadiums at higher altitude have more offensive production because the ball will travel further in the thinner air. The stadiums that were new in the 1960s (Dodger Stadium, Shea Stadium, the Astrodome) were definitively pitcher's parks. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:30, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - That is genuinely interesting. I think a little note for the non-baseball experts wouldn't go amiss here. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:39, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Something in addition to the link to pitcher's park, you mean? I can think about how to do that. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:01, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it "300 winS club" the grammatically correct version? To non-baseball readers the title needs to be explained and cited. Nergaal (talk) 01:17, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- That's a good point, but as you can see from the sources[2] and from the similar lists I posted above (3,000 strikeout club, 300 save club, 500 home run club, 3,000 hit club), the term which should perhaps be plural is most commonly used in the singular form. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:15, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments –

"World War II military service, such as Bob Feller". "Feller" → "Feller's"?
- Fixed. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:15, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Grammatically, "that" needs to be added before "were pitcher's parks" for the sentence as a whole to work.
- Fixed. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:30, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Would be nice to have the all-time leader in wins mentioned in-text. That's an important fact I'd expect to see in the prose, not just in a photo caption.
- Added. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:30, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Kid Nichols caption needs some sort of citation, since nothing in the prose or list verifies his age. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:21, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Ref added. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:30, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 13:09, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments "leading to the use of a four-man starting rotation." example of noun+ing which should be avoided. change leading to which led Fixed – Muboshgu (talk) 17:20, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply] "~~still~~ fewer chances to pick up wins" Fixed – Muboshgu (talk) 17:20, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply] should avoid using a semi-colon for bolding as its a WP:ACCESS issue. Screen readers can't pick up the semi-colon, so would change to using the conventional three apostrophes instead Fixed – Muboshgu (talk) 17:20, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply] ref 5 Sports Illustrated is a printed publication, therefore it should be in italics Fixed – Muboshgu (talk) 17:20, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply] NapHit (talk) 14:11, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 13:09, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

"leading to the use of a four-man starting rotation." example of noun+ing which should be avoided. change leading to which led
- Fixed – Muboshgu (talk) 17:20, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"~~still~~ fewer chances to pick up wins"
- Fixed – Muboshgu (talk) 17:20, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
should avoid using a semi-colon for bolding as its a WP:ACCESS issue. Screen readers can't pick up the semi-colon, so would change to using the conventional three apostrophes instead
- Fixed – Muboshgu (talk) 17:20, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
ref 5 Sports Illustrated is a printed publication, therefore it should be in italics
- Fixed – Muboshgu (talk) 17:20, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NapHit (talk) 14:11, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)
"Early in the history of professional baseball, many of the rules of present day baseball were not in place; the distance pitchers threw to home plate was shorter than today, and pitchers were able to use foreign substances to alter the direction of the ball." - Relevance not clear to people without a background in baseball. - Relevance not clear to people without a background in baseball. Changed to "Early in the history of professional baseball, many of the rules favored the pitcher over the batter; the distance pitchers threw to home plate was shorter than today, and pitchers were able to use foreign substances to alter the direction of the ball." Otherwise looks fairly well written. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:37, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply] Thanks, and thanks for the &nbsp's – Muboshgu (talk) 15:03, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply] File:Kid Nichols Baseball.jpg - Do we know for sure this was published* before 1903? Source link is dead for me. Do you mean 1923? I looked on loc.gov for the original image and found it here.[3] It says it was "created/published" in 1905, which is before the 1923 cutoff. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:34, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply] Dur, yeah. Source should be updated. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:38, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply] I fixed the link on the image.[4] – Muboshgu (talk) 23:45, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply] Otherwise images are fine. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:17, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)

*"Early in the history of professional baseball, many of the rules of present day baseball were not in place; the distance pitchers threw to home plate was shorter than today, and pitchers were able to use foreign substances to alter the direction of the ball." - Relevance not clear to people without a background in baseball. - Relevance not clear to people without a background in baseball.

Changed to "Early in the history of professional baseball, many of the rules favored the pitcher over the batter; the distance pitchers threw to home plate was shorter than today, and pitchers were able to use foreign substances to alter the direction of the ball."

Otherwise looks fairly well written. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:37, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and thanks for the &nbsp's – Muboshgu (talk) 15:03, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kid Nichols Baseball.jpg - Do we know for sure this was published before 1903? Source link is dead for me.
- Do you mean 1923? I looked on loc.gov for the original image and found it here.[3] It says it was "created/published" in 1905, which is before the 1923 cutoff. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:34, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Dur, yeah. Source should be updated. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:38, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - I fixed the link on the image.[4] – Muboshgu (talk) 23:45, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Otherwise images are fine. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:17, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support on prose and images. Solid. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:48, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support TBr and ley 03:25, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Congrats man! Been quietly watching you improve this list from the shadows, looks great! Staxringold _talk^contribs 14:41, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Glad it's up to par. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:01, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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