Talk:Matt Bush (baseball)
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Birthplace
editHis birthplace is relevant information and should be included in the article. The IP addresses recently removing Bush's birthplace cite WP:OPENPARAGRAPH, which says at the end, "Generally the guidelines for lead sections specify what should be in the first section. For example, exact birth and death dates are certainly important to the person being described, but if they are also mentioned in the body and in infobox, the vital year range can be sufficient to provide context in some cases. Birth and death places should be mentioned in the body if known, and in the lead if they are relevant to the person's notability." The last sentence is where I'm drawing attention.
I realize that Bush is not notable for being born in San Diego, but the solution is not removing the information from the main text of the article. Ideally, it would be moving the birthplace to a "personal life" kind of section, but there isn't one at this time. The opening paragraph is the only part of the article other than the "baseball career" section, so it's the only place to have Bush's birthplace. It's not sufficient to have information only in the infobox. -Phoenixrod (talk) 05:49, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
To add: I've asked at the Village Pump about how to interpret the policies in question. -Phoenixrod (talk) 06:10, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Is it safe now to call him a former player?
editBush was just sentenced to three years in prison for DUI--meaning he won't be out of prison until he's 29 years old, way too old for a major league prospect. Given this, and his own statements that Tampa Bay was his last chance, I wonder if it's too soon to call him a former player, and thus the third number-one pick to never play in the majors. THoughts? HangingCurveSwing for the fence 23:54, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- There is a similar discussion in WikiProject: Baseball--YOLO Swag (talk) 00:34, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- Discussion was at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Baseball/Archive_34#Is_it_safe_to_call_Matt_Bush_a_former_player_yet.3F. Seems like there was no consensus on calling him a former player yet.—Bagumba (talk) 18:56, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
As of 2023, has played up and down combination of MLB, AAA and AA since 2016. Jmg38 (talk) 04:08, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
Highest level
editThe addition that he "never played a meaningful game above the Class AA level" seems a tad negative. It would be more neutral to say "Bush has only played as high as the Class AA level". Has he played a meaningless game above AA?—Bagumba (talk) 01:33, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- I rewrote it for NPOV. He's reached Class AA, that's all we need to say there, although the fact that he may join Chilcott and Taylor as #1 overall picks to never reach MLB does bear mentioning in the body (the lead after he officially retires). – Muboshgu (talk) 01:42, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- Agreed.—Bagumba (talk) 02:17, 19 December 2012 (UTC)