Contents

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Gold Glove Award winners at catcher/archive1

List of Gold Glove Award winners at catcher[edit]

Nominator(s): KV5 (Talk • Phils) 01:30, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Featured list candidates/List of Gold Glove Award winners at catcher/archive1

I am nominating this for featured list because I'm trying to finish this topic... and because I've been lazy trying to get the end of this series done. Let's do it! KV5 (Talk • Phils) 01:30, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• OpposedComment

• I only need to look at the article history, created today, the same day it was nominated for FLc - there is no way to determine if this list has any kind of stability or any problems based on the fact that it was created today. MPJ-DK (talk) 07:47, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Every other list in this series, all of which have since been promoted, has been nominated on the same day they were created. I work long and hard on these lists in my sandbox before I create them. This isn't the first time I've done this, nor will it be my last. Please review the list based on the criteria rather than assuming that it will be unstable. There is no rule regarding how long an article should/must exist before a nomination. That is why we have workspaces. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 12:00, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• The stability criteria is there to ensure no edit warring or such is ongoing; as these lists are more-or-less uncontroversial, major changes are unlikely, so it's acceptable to nominate them on the same day of creation. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:12, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Not only that, but considering that this list is just the next in a series of Gold Glove lists, which have sailed through FLC, I don't think there should be many issues. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:05, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Alright fair enough then. MPJ-DK (talk) 16:41, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Images need alternative text. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:06, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry, it's going to take me a while to get used to doing that too. Done. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 16:11, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks, I tweaked it a bit in accordance with the guideline. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:32, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• So... is it unacceptable to use names? Because... someone else is going to have to go back and check all of my featured lists. I do not have time to do it again. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 16:53, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Don't worry, I can take care of it for you. The reasons that using names is not useful for alt text are a) No need to repeat info found in the caption, and b) readers would not be able to determine from the image alone (without the caption) who the player in the image is. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:54, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Oh OK, I understand. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 19:24, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Support -- Previous issues resolved/clarified; list now meets WP:WIAFL.--Truco ₅₀₃ 20:14, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:41, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Other than the dead links, Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:03, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Two links suddenly went dead. Might want to check it out. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:33, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like something happened to Rawlings' website. I don't know what happened but nothing on their website is using the same addresses anymore. I can't tell if this is something they are doing or if they got hacked. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 19:14, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I trust this will be fixed eventually. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:41, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will do my best to locate the updated links as soon as I can. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 00:01, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments –

• Any link rot on the Rawlings site will affect the other lists in this topic. Although they aren't relevant for this FLC, it's worth noting so they remain up to date.

• I'm aware. Trying to work it out as I go. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 01:26, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Number consistency lacking here: "There have been four 4-time winners at catcher".
  • Per WP:MOSNUM, adjacent, non-comparable quantities should be formatted differently. Indeed, "4 4-time winners" would be harder to read. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:18, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• "until Johnson and Matheny accomplished the feat twice in the National League within six years". Reads like they both did it twice, which is not the intent.

• It doesn't read that way to me; that would be "until Johnson and Matheny each' accomplished the feat twice". I'll see what I can do. It was OK for DYK. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 01:26, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Table: Should there be commas for putout totals over 1,000? If so, it may affect other lists in the topic.

Giants2008 (17–14) 01:15, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• • I do believe Giants is correct here, per WP:MOSNUM. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:19, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Not necessary as far as I know, never been a problem in any other lists. "When a number has exactly four digits on any side of the decimal separator, those digits may optionally be expressed as a group of four instead of three (e.g. both 9876 and 9,876 are acceptable, although commas or spaces are not used in four-digit years, page numbers, and addresses)" (from MOSNUM). KV5 (Talk • Phils) 01:26, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Seems you're right. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:32, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Great work on working up this set of articles. I assume you're planning on doing pitchers next/last? Staxringold _talk^contribs 02:20, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Yep, pitchers are currently sitting in my sandbox waiting to be matched with their stats. That list shouldn't take too long because there are a lot of repeat winners, but I have been away on a sales trip for work so I haven't had a lot of time to catch up. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 15:09, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{FLC}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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