Talk:Babe Ruth Bows Out

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 17:42, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Babe Ruth Bows Out (1948)

• ... that Babe Ruth died two months after this Pulitzer prize winning photograph (pictured) of him attending a ceremony to retire his number? Source: June 13, 1948 photo and Death August 16, 1948 and 1949 Pulitzer
  • ALT1: ... that Babe Ruth Bows Out (pictured) marked the first time a sports related image won the Pulitzer Prize for Photography? Source: first time
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/555 Edgecombe Avenue
  • Comment: The image is cropped - I am not sure if we need to call that out in the caption.
    • Since the subject is the prize-winning photograph, I would strongly recommend using the full photo. If the cropped version is used, it should definitely be mentioned in the (pictured) and/or the caption. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 18:06, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Created by Bruxton (talk). Self-nominated at 17:28, 31 December 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Babe Ruth Bows Out; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• @Mandarax: Thank you for the comment. I have put the original photo in the article nomination in place of the cropped. Bruxton (talk) 15:37, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

• The age and length look good. The sourcing is acceptable. Both hooks check out and are interesting. No copyvio is apparent from a spot check. I would rather not run the hook in slot 1, since I would like to see a stronger evidence that it is PD than a context-free tag. --Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 18:12, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Babe Ruth Bows Out/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: PCN02WPS (talk · contribs) 18:21, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Looks interesting! I'll take a look at this. If you have any interest in returning the favor I have a list of my unreviewed nominations here. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 18:21, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Lead

• The Bronx might be well-known enough that you don't need "...borough of New York City" - this would also help to shorten the first sentence. You might also consider a full stop after "Ruth" and a new sentence starting with "It was taken by..."
• First two sentences of lead's second paragraph begin with "Ruth was..." - sounds a touch repetitive. You could combine these sentences (also avoids it sounding a little choppy) by saying something like "...turned to the camera; he was sick with throat cancer at the time and..."
• To give the last sentence some context, I would make it clear that he was not playing for them at the time, but was rather dressed out for the occasion of the jersey retirement.

I have  Fixed the lead Bruxton (talk) 04:07, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Background

• "was in Yankee Stadium for his final appearance" → makes it sound like he is making his last appearance as a player for the Yankees, rather than just making his last appearance in the stadium as a whole
• First paragraph is a little choppy, especially the second through fourth sentences
• "played the song "Auld Lang Syne."" → move full stop outside of quotes per MOS:LQ
• Link New York Herald Tribune on first mention in body
• "from other news agencies were present but Fein moved away" → the use of the word "but" implies a contrast in some form, though Fein moving away from other photographers doesn't contrast with many other photographers being present
• recommend adding a comma after "jersey number"
• Link Retired number somewhere, since this concept may be foreign to non-sports-oriented readers
• "on June 14, 1948 in the New York Herald Tribune" → comma after "1948" per MOS:DATECOMMA

I have  Fixed the section Bruxton (talk) 04:07, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Description

• "the Babe Ruth number retirement ceremony on June 13, 1948" feels a little too formal, considering all elements of that phrase (save for the attendance) have already been explained in previous sections. I think something like "Yankee Stadium hosted a total of 49,641 fans for the retirement ceremony."
• Note that if you keep the phrase "retirement ceremony" in the first sentence, it should probably be changed in the second sentence to avoid repetition
• "and stood alone on the field just in front of home plate" → the photograph itself seems to disprove this; many (if not all) Yankees players appear to be standing on the first base line and (this is a touch more pedantic) Ruth appears to be standing on the third base line, rather than directly in front of home plate. I think "near home plate" is how I would word it but I also really don't have a problem with getting rid of "just" and having it read "stood [...] in front of home plate" or something similar.
• "His legs looked thin as he stood..." → this sounds like Wikipedia's voice expressing an opinion; I would quote and attribute this "thin" comment directly as I'm not sure there's a good way to say it otherwise while using that word
• The last sentence of the first paragraph is worded a little strangely; the first part is fine but after "and while is surrounded" it sounds odd. Maybe simplify and emphasize that he caught viewer's eyes easily, if you can get sourcing to back that up? Or maybe that the image was busy but the focus kept attention on Ruth? Something like that would be good as long as it can be worked in without getting repetitive. It was clumby so I sued a direct quote
• The last sentence sounds a little out of place; might it fit better in "Background" when mentioning the last time he had played for the Yankees?

I have  Fixed Bruxton (talk) 04:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Reception

• Link Pulitzer Prize for Photography on first mention in body
• Remove unneeded comma after "Photography"
• Recommend adding a word, like "The photograph is displayed in..." or something similar
• Are there dates available for when it was at the Smithsonian? Ditto for when it was first displayed at Cooperstown

I have  Fixed. Regarding dates, I am sure it is on permanent display at the Hall of fame but I will need to find out about the Smithsonian. Bruxton (talk) 04:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Overall

• I feel like there is a decent amount of overlap between the first paragraph of "Background" and the first paragraph of "Description"; could some of the content - maybe stuff that is not directly related to the content of the photo - be moved from "Description" to "Background"?

I have moved a few sentences. Let me know if you see more that need to be moved. Bruxton (talk) 04:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

That's all I have on the first reading - an easy read and an interesting topic. I'll take another read-through once these have been addressed - no rush. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 03:14, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Comments on second read-through

• Y Lead - this may seem quite obvious but I would specify that it was his number three Yankees uniform (or word it somehow that makes it obvious that it was his number when he played for them), not just a random jersey he grabbed out of the clubhouse that day
• Y Background - link Babe Ruth on first mention
• Y Background - I still think the first sentence is a little awkwardly worded - my suggestion would be "On June 13, 1948, baseball player Babe Ruth attended a jersey retirement ceremony held for him by the New York Yankees at Yankee Stadium" - obviously you don't need to use this exact format if you see improvements to be made, but I think something similar to this would be good so we can avoid the sort of "he just so happened to be there" kind of attitude present right now
• Y Background - recommend replacing all uses of "Ruth" after the first in each paragraph with "he" to avoid repetitiveness; good on first mention in each para but unless you switch who you're talking about it doesn't need to be repeated.
• Y "The house that Ruth built." → move full stop outside quotations; also recommend making "the" lowercase as this doesn't need to be a sentence
• Y I think a little background information (just a sentence or two at most) explaining Ruth's significance to the Yankees and to baseball history would be helpful for those who are unfamiliar with him
• Y "When Ruth came out of the dugout, a band was present" → kind of sounds like they became present only when he walked out of the dugout (picky, because everyone knows that's not practical) but I feel that "...came out of the dugout, a band played Auld Lang Syne" or something like that. Saying that the band was present is sort of redundant when you go on to say that they played a song when he walked out
• Y Recommend reordering the bit about Fein needing to cover the event to be earlier, since in the "narrative" being presented in the second paragraph Ruth walks out of the dugout and then the reader is immediately taken back to that morning for the photographers bit
• Y Same point as above re:"he stood alone on the field" - photograph shows other players standing on the field
• Y Expand link to cover all of Cooperstown, New York
  • Y The dates for Cooperstown/Smithsonian would be nice to have but if you're not able to find them, don't sweat it - I won't hold up the review just for that.

That's what I've got for my second time around. Nice work. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 06:35, 6 February 2024 (UTC) Will look for this down the road Bruxton (talk) 17:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Comments part three

• Y The lead looks great, no comments
• Y The expanded background is awesome but it gives a ton of emphasis on his time with the Red Sox and only one sentence about him actually playing for the Yankees. An unfamiliar reader might be confused as to why his number wasn't being retired by the Red Sox - I think there needs to be some solid background information on him and what led to the jersey retirement. The first paragraph of his article says that he is regarded as one of America's greatest sports heroes and is considered by many to be the greatest baseball of all time; of course, if you insert stuff like this it will have to be properly attributed but I think an emphasis on just how big of a deal he was for the Yankees and for baseball as a whole needs to be present to get the full context

@PCN02WPS: I feel like I may be getting to far in the weeds, but I added a paragraph proceeding the Red Sox paragraph to show the the Yankees received economic benefit, enthusiasm and greatness. Let me know what you think Bruxton (talk) 23:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

• Y Start of the second paragraph needs a bit of reworking now that Ruth has been introduced in the first paragraph ("baseball player" no longer needed, link can be moved, etc.)
• Y lowercase "the" in "the house that Ruth built"
• Y "back of his number 3 jersey" → "three" is spelled out in the lead
• Y "was first published on June 14, 1948, in the New" → I would recommend replacing the exact date with "the day after the ceremony" just so the reader can get a sense of pacing without having to remember dates
• Y As far as I can tell the "NBHF" acronym is not present on the organization's article; I think a better way to abbreviate would be simply "Hall of Fame", since this also avoids the "and Museum" portion of the name getting split off by the acronym
  • ? "the Columbia Record" → "The Columbia Record" ((tq|adding "The" creates a redirect.
• Nix "newspaper"; that is apparent from the link
• Y I think a change from "is mounted" to "was mounted" would be best since the statement is dated and is only accurate as of 1985
• Y Caps on Ruth's name

That's what I have from the latest pass-through. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 22:54, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Comments numero cuatro

•  Done Added bit about the Yankees looks good, I would slim down the paragraph about the Red Sox as there is still quite a bit of emphasis on him which I think is undue here (this can get the emphasis more focused on NYY without adding more text)
•  Done Third paragraph still has his first name and link even after he's referred to in the first paragraph just by his last name; move full name and link to first mention in first body paragraph
•  Done It looks like the Record is referred to in its own article the same way you refer to it, so no action needed there.

That's all I have for prose. Spotchecks below:

•  Done FN 1: N ...played for the New York Yankees from 1919 to 1934... - source says he was traded to the Yankees in December 1919 but didn't play for them until 1920 (since the 1919 season would have been finished by then; Babe's article also reflects this)
  • Y and was regarded as one of the greatest baseball players.
• FN 3: Y that Yankee Stadium was often referred to as "the house that Ruth built"
  • Y After his death Ruth's body lay in state at Yankee Stadium.
• FN 5: Y By 1930 the Yankees were paying him an annual salary of US$80,000.
• FN 8: Y Ruth's last appearance in a major league baseball game was in 1935 for the Boston Braves.
• FN 12: Y Fein said, "I saw Ruth standing there with his uniform number three, the number that would be retired, and knew that was the shot."
• FN 16: Y The image won the 1949 Pulitzer Prize for Photography.
• FN 17: Y In 1985 the Columbia Record newspaper reported that the image was mounted beside Ruth's uniform in the Baseball Hall of Fame.

Just a couple prose things and one reference to address here. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 17:02, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

@PCN02WPS: Thank you. Thanks for catching the 1919 iussue. The information gives good context. I have started another Babe article. Bruxton (talk) 02:37, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

I think that'll do it. I made a few minor copyedits that I didn't want to hold this up just because of (some commas and a script to fix date formats). Awesome job sticking with this - I'm sorry my comments dragged it out so long - but this really is an impressive article (as is the funeral article). Very nice work, happy to pass. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 13:09, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.