Talk:Jack Chesbro/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 13:28, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

I'll begin this review shortly. MathewTownsend (talk) 13:28, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Review

This is a wonderful article that is packed with information. My only concerns have to do with a general reader (like me) making their way through the article and not understanding some of it. Also, it is confusing when a link seems to be an "Easter egg" link, in that it goes some place unexpected or not explained. All the different name changes of teams is confusing. I have asked question about his various pitches, as after all he is a pitcher and that's how he managed to win all those games in 1904 and get into the Hall of Fame.

• Lead

• Everything in the lead should be repeated in the article, including links.
• The lead could be expanded to include more about his record, the unusualness of it, since that is the only reason he is in the Hall of Fame.

• I expanded the lead.

• Early life

• the bolding of John Dwight Chesebrough in the "Early life" is not needed and unnecessarily draws the eye. It doesn't contribute anything to understanding Chesbro so I think the bolding should go.
• Don't need to repeat the same footnote in one sentence, especially for info that is not controversial
• Where is Haughtonville? Can you say something like "the nearby town of Haughtonville"?

• Professional career

• Minor leagues - need a link somewhere to the Minor leagues for those who don't know

• Major League - also needs a link somewhere
• Pittsburgh Pirates needs to be repeated here and linked. The reader shouldn't have to get there via the various Pittsburgh Pirates seasons. (General principle: the lead is a summary of the article. Therefore, everything in the lead should be repeated in the article's body along with any additional material.)

• Pittsburgh Pirates was linked towards the end of the minor league section. I moved it into the MLB section, that should be more clear.

• Explain somewhere that the New York Highlanders are now the Yankees, so the reader doesn't have to wonder if the link is wrong. (Its confusing that the team name seems to flip back and forth.)

• Now mentioned in the lead and body that the name changed, which happened after Chesbro retired.

• "At the end of the 1902 season, news broke that Chesbro agreed to sign with the New York Highlanders of the American League (AL) for the 1903 season,[11] when Jesse Tannehill told Pirates owner Barney Dreyfuss while under the influence of pain medication." - clumsy wording - that Dreyfuss revealed the news? (I had to read that sentence several times before I made the connection.)

• "Chesbro pitched the Highlanders' first game." - that was the team's first game ever? They were a completely new team?

• Yes. I clarified this in the text.

• "slow ball" - why in quotes and what is meant? Is it explained in changeup? What is it?

• Not really sure. Back then, pitchers were experimenting with different things. It's not clear that this is the same as a changeup or something different.
• Can't find any more detail.

• "a Yankees franchise record' - it hasn't been explained that he is a member of the Yankees. When did the name change occur?

• In 1913. I changed it from Yankees to New York, since the term Yankees probably shouldn't be used as he was never on the team when it was known as the Yankees.

• "causing the Highlanders'" - confuses the reader to use Yankees and Highlanders interchangeably without explanation.

• I've tried to address this. Have I?

• How has the "current dollar terms" for the trade been arrived at?

• Source added that lists all players and sum of the cash from that trade.

• "jump ball" - can this be explained?

• I'll try, but again this seems to be one of those pitching experiments that may not be described in much greater detail.
• Can't find anything else.

• "After the 1907 season, Chesbro announced that he was giving up the spitball, intending to return to the "old style of pitching" in 1908" - what is the old style of pitching?

• That means without the spitball. I hope I clarified this by stating that the spitball was experimental at the time.

• "claimed by the Boston Red Sox in September" - this is not linked - previously they are called the Boston Americans, although the link goes to Boston Red Sox. Confusing

• Link and team name clarification added. The Red Sox used to call themselves the Americans, much as the Yankees used to be known as the Highlanders.

• "but he was placed on the ineligible list after he refused to report to the minor leagues" - is this like a farm team of the Highlanders? Or the minor leagues in general?

• Yes, it was New York's farm team. I clarified this.

• Post-MLB career

• "Chesbro returned to his farm" - hasn't been explained that he has a farm.

• Explained that he bought it about a decade earlier.

• "including Milford, Massachusetts" - does this mean in Milford Massachusetts?

• Clarified

• "Chesbro met with New York owner" - this links to Yankees so "New York owner" is incomplete - if the reader doesn't look at the link, it could mean an owner that lives in New York

• Fixed.

• "The National Commission" - what is this

• The governing body of MLB. I took it out as it isn't needed.

• Legacy

• Really an excellent section and it would add to understanding the article of more of the information in it were incorporated into the lead.

• Thank you. You're right that much of this fits well in the lead. I beefed up the lead, and the legacy section too.

• This is an extremely well written, well organized article. It appears very well sourced, although because of the "subscription required" much is not accessible to me. My list aboves is essentially nitpicks from a person not deeply familiar with baseball.

MathewTownsend (talk) 17:40, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks for the review. I'll try to have this all addressed today, as I'm leaving town on vacation later this week and I'd rather have this wrapped up before I leave, rather than having to keep this on hold while I'm away. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:45, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
• I've addressed many of your comments. Later today I'll try to see what more I can find on the specifics of those pitches, though I suspect it won't be much. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:59, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
• I can't find any more information on those pitches. Back then, pitchers were just doing anything they could think of. The spitball was one of those experiments, and it was eventually banned by MLB. Chesbro's "slow ball" and "jump ball" appear to be among those experiments. Pitchers weren't taught standardized pitches like the fastball, curveball, changeup, etc. in this time. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:58, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

• Very good job! MathewTownsend (talk) 20:17, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

• Congratulations!

MathewTownsend (talk) 20:17, 21 December 2011 (UTC)