Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mariano Rivera/archive2

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by SandyGeorgia 23:40, 11 July 2009 [1].

Mariano Rivera

edit
Nominator(s): Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 15:19, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

I am nominating this for featured article because... all of the concerns brought up during the first FAC have been addressed and an attempt to generalize the article topic has been made. I would like the article to reach Featured Article status by the time Rivera saves his 500th game - hopefully, if that happens, the article would be used as a timely Featured Article on the Main Page. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 15:19, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. This article has come a long way and is in really good shape. I made a few changes to improve the flow of certain paragrahps and feel there are a couple of other places where flow could still be improved, but it is good enough that I would not oppose on those grounds. There is just one minor change I would like to see before I actually support: the account of Rivera's blown save in Game 7 of the 2001 World Series should really include his throwing error to second base, which was a crucial moment in the final outcome. Indrian (talk) 17:30, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Generally well-written and comprehensive. Indrian (talk) 21:55, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - the last FAC for this article was just closed on 14 June 2009, generally it's a good idea to wait more than 5 days to renominate. --Ealdgyth - Talk 14:45, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • The guidelines say you should wait a few weeks to resolve the issues before renominating, but the FAC was closed right after I had just addressed several issues that had been brought up, and up to that point, I had promptly resolved everything that came up. I'm not sure what waiting a few weeks would really do for the article. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 15:55, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Did you check with the previous opposers to see if their issues were resolved? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:49, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the previous opposers who commented on the nomination page changed to "support" the article. The one's that did not reply to my attempts at addressing their issues have been contacted on their talk pages. Many of these items that I have been fixing never came up in the Good Article review or the peer review, so this is the first time I've had them pointed out to me - and it's good they are being pointed out now. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 18:17, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There were actually two opposers at the first FAC, including Laser brain; his had been there for almost two weeks. The second opposer wasn't nearly as persuasive to me, though he did have a few pertinent points. On balance I think the article has improved from when it first came to FAC, but I do wish the second nomination had come 2-3 weeks later, as the instructions recommend. Giants2008 (17-14) 00:15, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Both opposers were contacted before I contacted anyone who supported the article. I would have waited on this nomination, but I felt like the first was closed prematurely just as constructive feedback was being made, I (seemingly) fixed all concerns that were addressed, and I would like to have this article become a FA before Rivera reaches 500 saves. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 15:26, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I'm slightly embarrassed, I added this to my watchlist ages ago as Mo is my favorite player, intending to one day sit down and fix this article. Someone beat me to the punch though! :) Author fixed a massive list of notes in the previous FAC, really looks like he fixed everything, not sure why it didn't draw more support. Staxringold talkcontribs 13:31, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
TonyTheTiger's first thoughts
I was trying to have it mirror the other baseball player FA's. I'll connect it with the 2nd paragraph instead. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 02:46, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Pitching mostly in relief, he allowed an average of 0.17 earned runs per nine innings (see earned run average, or ERA)" seems odd in an article about baseball. All you need to say is "Pitching mostly in relief, he posted a 0.17 earned runs average (henceforth E.R.A.)," with the word linked. It is not unlike any other baseball statistic. Just link it and use it in proper and normal context.
  • I think "As a 25-year-old rookie with major arm surgery in his past," would better as ""As a 25-year-old rookie with prior (or previous) major arm surgery,"
  • Can you add current dollars to the "US$3,000 signing bonus on February 17, 1990". See the conversion function in use at Fountain of Time. It will help to conceptualize a generation of inflation in the US to international readers.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:40, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "number of home runs he allowed across the entire previous season" - across seems unidiomatic.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:30, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what you mean (e.g. unidiomatic?). Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 02:46, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I believe across is an ungrammatical preposition in its current use.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:12, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Should be fixed - I replaced it with "in". Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 17:10, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support-My issues are now resolved. The article is even better than the prior FAC, which I believe I supported.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:00, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support Looks like a great article. Wikipediarules2221 22:59, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comments Support. Looks pretty good overall, but a few points.
  • I would avoid introducing acronyms and abbreviations in the lead section unless they're used again in the lead. Some percentage of readers just look at the lead and nothing else, and thus don't need to know about MLB, AL, and ERA. (I'd rewrite the second 'MLB' as 'major leaguer'.) You can then introduce the acronyms and abbreviations the first time they're used in the body.
I would disagree - readers are going to see the lead first and foremost, so it stands that important terms and concepts should be introduced there. Furthermore, they may jump around the article without reading it from the start, meaning they could miss the initial mention of the unabbreviated term. I don't think it hurts to show the abbreviation in the lead. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 03:10, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The sentence "Raybourn was surprised that scouts had shown interest in Rivera a year later as a pitcher.[9]" doesn't seem to connect well - why the surprise?
Raybourn didn't think Rivera had a future in the MLB, nor did he expect Rivera to have changed positions. I've rephrased it as "shown interest in Rivera as a pitcher a year later". Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 03:10, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Any explanation for why Rivera gained speed on his fastball in his mid-20s? Seems kind of unusual.
There isn't an explanation - just one of the great mysteries about Rivera. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 03:10, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you can find a source that says that, it would be a good addition. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:27, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Will add when I find a reference. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 13:59, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Was 1998 really the beginning of his cutter? What was his 'out' pitch before then?
He developed it in 1997, but only really featured it as a pitcher in 1998. He didn't have a specific out pitch, per se, before then. He mostly relied on variations of a fastball. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 03:10, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Up where the cutter is introduced, I'd add something somewhere about how many batters get their bats broken trying to hit him - that's another one of his trademarks. I know it's mentioned in a section at the end, but it's worth being in twice, as it graphically illustrates how tough he is to hit.
Fixed. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 03:10, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think you meant 'penchant' not 'pension', but I'm not sure a penchant is something you earn. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:27, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Rephrased to say "earned a reputation for breaking hitter's bats". Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 13:59, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there a cite for 2001 and "Rivera's year ended with one of his most disappointing moments" - it seems to contradict the later ""I am glad we lost the World Series," Rivera told Wilson, "because it means that I still have a friend."[101]"
How would you rephrase this moment then to signify it was the low point in his career? He did feel better about the loss when he realized the consequences it had in the bigger picture, but in the perspective of his career, it was his worst moment. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 03:10, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would phrase it as observers believing it was the low point in his career, with a cite. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:27, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Rephrased to say "infamous" instead of "disappointing". Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 13:59, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speaking of trademarks, you could add that Rivera became so associated with "Enter Sandman" that when Billy Wagner came to the Mets with the same entrance song, there was quite a fan/press hullabaloo that Wagner should switch to something else.
That is a good point, but I'm not sure how to seamlessly weave it into the 2006 season summary - and it seems to me that the "controversy" was invented by the New York press because they had no familiarity with Billy Wagner or his entrance music. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 03:10, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, I talked with Yankees fans who were genuinely upset, because they felt Wagner was barging in on Rivera's special association, even if he had used the song before. You might also add that Rivera had/has no clue who Metallica are. Material like this is good for the article because it adds a human interest element into what otherwise inevitably becomes a dry recitation of reliever statistics. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:27, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mentioned in the 2006 season summary. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 13:59, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think "bloop single" needs to be quoted.
Fixed. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 03:10, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Before talking about his 3 innings in relief in the 2003 ALCS, you should mention that his normal usage pattern was just the ninth, with occasionally entrances in the eighth, usually with two outs.
I tried to cover this by explaining in the 1997 season summary that he was installed as closer to pitch the 9th innings. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 03:10, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You now say there "to traditionally pitch the ninth innings of games", but as you point out elsewhere, that practice is recent, not old. I'd use a different word. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:27, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Rephrased to say "typically" instead of "traditionally". Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 13:59, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the 2004 ACS coverage, I'd add that the Red Sox went on to win the WS and break the curse, etc - to show how important the Rivera blown saves were.
Fixed. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 03:10, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • How does the DHL Delivery Man of the Year Award or the This Year in Baseball's Closer of the Year Award relate to the Rolaids Award previously mentioned? It's kind of confusing. If the point is that there's no one agreed-upon top award for relievers, that should be stated briefly somewhere.
I'm not sure if this is something that is within the scope of the article, but I've prefaced each award with a brief explanation of how the winner is chosen. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 03:10, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I like the use of more sophisticates stats in the "Legacy" section; what about adding WHIP and oppo BA to the career stats section?
There is some debate at Wikipedia:Baseball whether or not a stats table is necessary at all, so I think any additions would be pushing it. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 03:10, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some more comments I thought of today:

  • Might be worth mentioning that he's seen in all the 'Yankees win the World Series' photos because he's always on the field for the last out (would be really good if there were a usable image of one of these for the article)
This doesn't really seem necessary - it's already mentioned that he closed out 3 consecutive World Series. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 03:19, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should mention his demeanor is placid, unlike many 'wildman' closers over the years who have unusual appearances, weird mannerisms, over-the-top celebrations after key outs, etc
Done. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 03:19, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • How popular is he with the fans? A good metric might be how his jersey sales compare to those of other star Yanks like Jeter or A-Rod.
I've never come across rankings of baseball jersey sales before. This only seems relevant to basketball or football, where the jersey always has a number printed on it. Otherwise, I think it's hard to classify Rivera's popularity. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 03:19, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Yankee jerseys do have a number on them - maybe you mean that not all of them have a name on them? I found content.com/article/1560495/mlb_baseball_jerseys_finding_the_best.html?cat=14 this blacklisted site that says that Jeter and A-Rod are in the top five nationally (piece together the url); if a better source were found, you could say that Rivera has never risen to their level of fan following. Wasted Time R (talk) 12:03, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What I'm trying to say is that baseball jersey sales aren't as widely published as basketball or football jerseys because you have to buy a football/basketball jersey with a number on it. You can buy a blank baseball jersey without a name/number on it, making it difficult to quantify in sales when you can just get a name/number added aftermarket. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 12:44, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • You mention he originally spoke no English, when/where did he learn and how well does he speak it now?
I know he learned it throughout minor/major league baseball, but I haven't come across specific mentions of how he learned it. He just did. He's now an advocate for Hispanic players learning English, and vice versa. I'll make mention of this in the personal life section. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 03:19, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • What commercial endorsements does he have, if any?
As far as I know, Nike is the only endorsement he is involved in, and it is rare to see him in any advertisements for them. I will try to find a reference to this. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 03:19, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
He did that ad for Nike where everyone wore masks representing how their personality/style was viewed, and he was wearing that weird surgical/optometrist thing to represent his accuracy and precision. Beyond that I agree, I can't think of another appearance. Staxringold talkcontribs 17:36, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And there was the TV ad where all the athletes wer saying things that Lance Armstrong can't do, but at the end, he appears and says no one can ride a bike like him. But yeah, that seems like it's it. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 17:39, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Any justification to a screenshot of that Nike-mask ad? It was just so odd... Though I suppose without a bigger discussion of advertising it's not really notable. BTW, with his new salary does Mo crack the Forbes top 100 highest paid athletes list? I think they break it down paycheck + endorsement money, also. Staxringold talkcontribs 18:06, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Forbes has a list of highest paid athletes, but they only seem to follow those who made at least $30 million/year, which Rivera does not. If the article is need of any images, it's one of him from the 90s and maybe one of him celebrating a World Series title. The Nike ad was weird, but weirdness isn't enough for us to claim fair use of the ads. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 18:31, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are there any good quotes from him about how it feels to win championships? Or how to come back from blown save?
I added a quote about his reaction to blowing a save and trying to turn the page - placed it in the "Legacy" section. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 03:19, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know Rivera's not the most colorful player around, but I'm looking for angles the article can explore beyond just his on-field accomplishments ... Wasted Time R (talk) 00:03, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • One uncited statement I just noticed. I still support vigorously, but do you have a cite for the bit under personal life about his glove being inscribed with the Bible verse? That's a very factual and direct statement to be left uncited. Staxringold talkcontribs 17:39, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Mariano_Rivera/archive2&oldid=1138466460"