BR Bullpen:Featured Article Candidates

Nomination procedure Check the featured criteria and make sure the entry meets all of them before nominating. Place ===[[name of nominated entry]]=== at the top of the approprite list of featured entries. Below it, write your reason for nominating the entry. Supporting and objecting Please read nominated articles fully before deciding to support or oppose a nomination. To edit nominations in order to comment on them, you must click the "edit" link to the right of the article nomination on which you wish to comment (not the overall page's "edit this page" link). If you believe an article meets all of the criteria, write '''Support''' followed by your reasons. If you oppose a nomination, write '''Object''' followed by the reason for your objection. Each objection must provide a specific rationale that can be addressed. If nothing can be done in principle to "fix" the source of the objection, the objection may be ignored. To withdraw an objection, strike it out (with <s>...</s>) rather than removing it. Resolution Please read nominated articles fully before deciding to support or oppose a nomination. A nomination will become a featured entry if there is no objections to the entry or if all objections are "fixed". An entry must have three support votes other than its nominator.

Featured Article

David Wright

It's a good article, but it needs an introduction, and the first paragraph starts in the middle of things, skipping over Wright's amateur and minor league career. There would need to be a couple of sentences added there. There's also no mention of what he did in his only World Series in 2015. With those additions, i would support, but in its current state, the article still needs some work. Philippe (talk) 17:01, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Neutral for the time being. As a Mets fan, I thought I'd be biased toward a yes, however it just doesn't strike me as feature-worthy yet. Needs headers, needs to be longer, needs an introduction. Alex (talk) 18:19, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Neutral Not completed enough. Missed '09 WBC record and minors record. - Rugosa1134 (talk) 02:49, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

I'd be glad to finish the revisions but I doubt I'll have time in the next month with all the Jewish holidays. If someone wants to propose another Featured Article candidate, that'd be great. Given our usual rotation of (fairly) prominent MLB player/non-MLB or minor MLB player/event or team, we're due for a fairly prominent major leaguer. - Mischa (talk) 15:13, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Smoky Joe Wood

He is my suggestion for the next featured article so vote on this I guess. Cody n Nelli (talk) 03:43, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Oppose (for now): the article is short by our standards. SadGoth: if you're interested, why don't you take on fleshing it out as a project. You could start by mining the SABR Bio Project article for info, but there's a lot more available in other sources (for example, his performance in World Series play). See the work Mischa did recently bringing the Arky Vaughan article up to featured article standards. Philippe (talk) 15:14, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Neutral There were complaints that the Ayami Sato article was too short when I proposed that and this is shorter. OTOH, he is an interesting player. I'd support it if it was expanded more. We probably don't want to copy the SABR BioProject too much so that our articles are distinctive. Maybe there are some books he could use as reference? My other thought is that we tend to alternate featured articles of 1) Fairly notable MLB player-to-star (ex. Charlie Hough, Tommy Leach or Dock Ellis) 2) More obscure MLB player or non-MLB player (ex. Benny Distefano, Owen Ozanich or Koichi Tabuchi) 3) Event or team (ex. Chronicle-Telegraph Cup, 1983 Expos or 2007 Japan Series)

so it would probably go on the back burner (like the 2010 European Cup did for a while)

- Mischa (talk) 15:41, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Oppose We already had Arky Vaughan recently, I thought having another pre-1940 player was not proper. Also, this article itself didn't met our standards, and SadGoth should first improved the article then we can started to discuss whether it should be featured or not - Rugosa1134 (talk) 15:47, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Oppose He would actually be a very good candidate for a full-length article since there's legend to him but he's not super well-known, but as it stands now, it needs work. Needs to be longer. Clean up the structure a bit. Alex (talk) 18:22, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Ayami Sato

• Support We've never had a featured article for a female player and she's been one of the best. - Mischa (talk) 18:47, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
• Support It's time indeed for an article on a female player to be featured, and she has a great track record. Philippe (talk) 19:03, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose I'm not going to support someone just because they fit a demographic checklist. The article on its merits doesn't fit our standards. Too short (compare hers to all our most recent featured articles). Sourcing is weak, number of images are pretty weak. Alexsautographs (talk) 22:53, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Responding to different points raised -

• 1) I wasn't meaning that we need to check off numerous demographic boxes. No featured player from New Mexico? Let's put Ralph Kiner in! No player over 7' tall yet? Let's put Loek van Mil in! (Actually, both gentlemen had interesting careers and would be good candidates at some point - I haven't checked Kiner's page to see if it's complete enough) My point was more to use the featured article to expand people's knowledge of areas of the baseball world - ex. Owen Ozanich was featured not so we could have a French player so that people could learn about French baseball.
• 2) In terms of length, it would be one of our shorter features, though double the size of Spread of baseball project (OTOH, that did not go through our usual review process). It's not a lot shorter than Ming-Tsu Lu, which might be our shortest player page to date. I tried to see if we have a rule on page length for featured articles but can't find it. Anybody know?
• 3) Good point on sourcing. I can amend that.
• 4) Number of pictures - I thought 2 is about average for a feature. Some are more, some only have one. - Mischa (talk) 12:27, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

• Diversity is important, in that we don't want to solely have major league players from the same era as our features. It's worthwhile to reflect the diversity of articles that the bullpen holds - which includes a large number of biographies of female players. I don't mind a shorter article, or one that's not littered with end notes. The importance is that it treats its subject comprehensively and that one can learn about baseball from the article, and that's clearly the case in the proposed article. As for pictures, one is the minimum: just adding barely relevant pictures (e.g. adding a picture of Babe Ruth because the subject once did something usually linked to the Babe) is not going to improve an article. Philippe (talk) 12:34, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

2009 All-Star Game

What do people think? Long enough? It would be neat to have another game as the featured article. - --Mischa (talk) 14:17, 4 August 2016 (EDT)

I wrote most of that article, so obviously I think it's fine. However, it's not much different from other recent All-Star Game articles that also feature a game description. The main distinguishing feature is that President Obama was there, and as a result we have some pictures. --Philippe (talk) 09:25, 5 August 2016 (EDT)

I'll mark your vote as Support; do you have an All-Star Game candidate (or other game candidate) you'd prefer? I picked this one as a candidate mostly because it has more pictures and about as much text. - --Mischa (talk) 12:38, 5 August 2016 (EDT)

I figured the presence of pictures made it the better candidate. --Philippe (talk) 14:02, 5 August 2016 (EDT)

Honestly not a huge fan of this one. Most of the body is the roster lists. Alex (talk) 21:42, 5 August 2016 (EDT)

2003 Philadelphia Phillies

What are peoples' thoughts? Comprehensive article, but too opinion-laden? - --Mischa (talk) 12:33, 26 January 2016 (EST)

Support I like it; it gives a good sense of how the season went. It's clearly been written from a fan's point of view, but there is still lots of factual information that makes the article worthwhile. We don't have that many team season articles, and that one is clearly among the most comprehensive ones. --Philippe (talk) 15:19, 26 January 2016 (EST)

Support Wouldn't take much to even out the fan viewpoint - a word here or there. Maybe a few points could be added giving the team's standings/games back at certain points during the season. --Jeff (talk) 22:17, 26 January 2016 (EST)

• Neutral Probably needs another image or two. Will support when images are added. Alex (talk) 10:27, 29 January 2016 (EST)

What other images could we put up? Does anyone have a team photo of the club? - --Mischa (talk) 13:15, 1 February 2016 (EST)

• Neutral I think it could use a little more work, breaking it up with a few topic headers for readability, and adding one or two images (a team photo, as mentioned, a photo or two of its best players, showing the uniforms, or an action photo shot at their home park that season). The last sentence sounds like it was written as a season summary that year, with no knowledge of what the next 12 years held. -- Couillaud (talk) 10:01, 5 February 2016 (EST)