Talk:Mike Witt's perfect game/GA1

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.

---

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

Reviewer: Gonzo fan2007 (talk · contribs) 21:46, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Lead

• Of the 27 batters Witt faced, only a few threated to reach base. -> threatened
• as well as a long fly out in the eight inning that Witt initially assumed was going to be a home run. I am assuming Parrish also hit this ball. If so, to clarify, just start a new sentence and say Parrish also hit a long fly out...
• two-time All-Star, and a win-loss record of 117-116 change to two-time All-Star with a win-loss record of 117–116, note an en-dash needs to be added

Background

• the California Angels in 1978, and made the Angels opening day - no need for the comma
• Rookie of the Year voting, and put up respectable stats - no need for the comma
• 7-14 needs an en-dash
• hone his skills, and sought the help of professional hypnotists to increase his concentration when pitching. - no need for the comma
• 15-11 needs an en-dash

The game

• to be over, and that they did not take - no comma needed
• with a single, and advanced to second base - no comma needed
• Los Angeles Times, and was not closely - no comma needed
• rewrite his story in such as short time - reword (such a short time?)
• to be a home run, before Mike Brown - no comma needed
• two batters, and took the - no comma needed

Aftermath

• sun, and that they had a hard time seeing pitches. - no need for the comma
• praised Witt, and said: - no need for the comma
• 18-10 needs an en-dash
• perfect game, and tried to figure - no need for the comma
• 117-116 needs an en-dash

Statistics

• Ideally, we wouldn't rely on links to convey the meaning of acronyms. Can you add a legend or use {{Abbreviation}} to define the headings of the table nd the positions?

References

• I reworked the references into a cleaner format, hope you don't mind.
• I don't have access to the books, which are a good amount of the references, but AGF and not seeing anything controversial that may warrant additional investigation.
• Spot check:
  • Ref #1 looks good in all 3 uses. That said, you don't need to use the same reference after two sentences in a row that are both being cited to the same source.
  • Ref #2 looks good in both uses.
  • Ref #3 looks good. It does need "url-access=subscription" though.
  • Ref #7 looks good. It does need "url-access=subscription" though.
  • Ref #8 looks good in all four uses.
  • Don't have access to #15.

Images

• Both images look ok, although I admittedly don't know the intricacies of trading cards in the public domain.

Looks really good, only minor edits. Putting on hold. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:46, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

@Gonzo fan2007: Hi there! Thank you for taking up this review. My life's been a bit hectic over the last few days, but after tomorrow I should be able to address the issues brought up in the review. Famous Hobo (talk) 06:45, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

No worries :) « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 13:25, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

@Gonzo fan2007: Addressed most of the comments. There is one that I wanted to talk about

• Regarding the Statistics section, I've never seen a baseball article on Wikipedia use either a key or abbreviate the acronyms. Take for example 2009 World Series, 2008 American League Central tie-breaker game, and Philip Humber's perfect game. In fact, the Template:Linescore doesn't even allow for {{Abbreviation}} as far as I can tell. With that said, I did edit the box score tables in my sandbox with the abbreviation template to show you what it would look like. I'm not opposed to adding the template to the box score in the article, just figured I should let you know what I've seen in other baseball articles. Famous Hobo (talk) 09:21, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

• Famous Hobo, I'll leave it to your discretion. Won't hold up the pass. Nice work! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:24, 27 August 2023 (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.