Talk:Jamie Moyer

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Copyvio: Needs rewrite[edit]

I've come across this same problem in several Phillies articles now. Almost the entire article needs a rewrite because there are huge sections of it that are word-for-word copies of one of its sources. It's violating the copyright of the original author as it stands right now. KV5 (talk) 21:21, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have trimmed most of the paragraph on The Moyer Foundation, as it was a word-for-word C&P job from the organization's Web site. caknuck ° is not used to being the voice of reason 04:37, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am new to this and am acting at the request of Jamie Moyer. He would like to have all information about the Moyer Foundation and his marriage removed from his wiki biography, as well as references to his ex-wife and ex-father-in-law. Jamie and Karen Moyer were divorced in 2017. If anyone wants to contact me directly, I have a copy of the divorce decree that Jamie sent me and would be happy to provide it. Again,I am acting at Jamie's request. He's a friend of mine and my husband's.DaisyCougan (talk) 02:19, 8 March 2019 (UTC)DaisyCougan[reply]

Rewrite[edit]

I've trimmed a lot of fluff out of the opening paragraph that was linked to mirrors or non-notable. It's been removed several times before. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 14:34, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bobblehead[edit]

whats with the bobblehead picture? seriously" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.230.243.1 (talk) 20:15, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

250th win[edit]

According to mlb.com he is the 44th pitcher, not the 46th, to get 250 wins. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.46.82.40 (talk) 02:12, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then fix it. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 11:46, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Satchel Paige was the oldest pitcher to win a game in the majors. He pitched in the majors until he was 59. You can read about it here in Wikipedia. Coming from the Negro Leagues he was rookie of the year at age 42. He was an all-star at ages 46 and 47. His negro league won lost record isn't included. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.147.134.122 (talk) 14:53, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Scouting report[edit]

I think the Scouting report is more of a summary of Moyer's success. I think it should go into the lead because the type of pitcher Moyer is is the importance of the article, "Moyer is best known for his methodical approach to the game and his devastating changeup. He has notes and video recordings on almost every batter that he faces, which he studies before games." This seems like a good way to lead this article, it talks about his approach game to game. --Halvorsen brian (talk) 10:31, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But if it's not part of the actual article, then it doesn't belong in the lead. The lead is supposed to serve as a summary of the article, so it should really be a brief overview of his career and accomplishments, not his scouting report. If the report itself is expanded into a wider section, I wouldn't see any problem with having something like that sentence in the lead, because it would be part of a summary. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 11:49, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The article is about his pitching, his pitching style is outlined in the scouting report. --Halvorsen brian (talk) 20:13, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I also think that belongs in the lead more than "he has been linked to Phil Niekro." --Halvorsen brian (talk) 20:18, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Phil Niekro[edit]

I removed the comparison to Phil Niekro from the lede. I don't see why it would belong there. Phil Niekro was a knuckler, whilst Moyer is not. The only major comparison I see to Niekro is the longevity of their respective careers. Using that logic, we could liken him to Joe Niekro, Hoyt Wilhelm, Nolan Ryan, Roger Clemens, Jesse Orosco, Satchel Paige, and a plethora of others. It doesn't belong in the lede.Mk5384 (talk) 00:22, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The information was referenced. He has been compared to Niekro numerous times. I've restored the information. — KV5 • Talk • 22:49, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, I agree that the Phil Niekro comparison sits awkwardly in the first paragraph. Sure, there are some similarities (age and finesse), but is that an outstanding feature of Moyer's career comparable to his status as the MLB's leading pitcher in total strikeouts and wins? Don't Moyer's accomplishments speak for themselves above and beyond such qualifications as relatively minor similarities historical ballplayers? Maybe we could move the Niekro comparison to a less prominent place. No biggie, just wanted to weigh in with my thoughts on the subject. Best, Colinclarksmith (talk) 04:36, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There's a big difference between being the MLB leader in wins/strikeouts and the active MLB leader in wins/strikeouts. As soon as Moyer retires, he loses that designation. The comparisons are still valid. Since the lead is supposed to be a summary of the article, rather than being removed from the lead, the comparisons should be expanded upon later in the article text. — KV5 • Talk • 11:31, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I believe the difference is about 250 and 3,500 respectively. Thank you for clarifying my point! I'm not sure how that's relevant to the Niekro comparison issue though. I'm not questioning the comparisons' validity, merely their placement. Maybe their lack of mention elsewhere in the article that you point to can be used to reinforce my point. Just something to chew on. Best, Colinclarksmith (talk) 15:34, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I'll take a look at it. — KV5 • Talk • 16:55, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Four Decades[edit]

How can he have played in four decades if his last year was 2010? 2010 was not the start of a decade since there was no year 0. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.7.204.175 (talk) 22:21, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your point, but most people are going to say that the 60s began in 1960, the 80s began in 1980, etc ... hence 2000 and 2010 also began decades, as will 2020, 2030, etc. Kosmo99 (talk) 16:03, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Played in X number of decades" is really a sort of nonsensical concept anyway, but now that he has played in 2012, the question raised by the two previous commentators has become moot. Everyone will agree that 2012 is in the decade of the teens. Paul (talk) 23:39, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Photo caption in Philadelphia Phillies section[edit]

There is no surer sign of amateurism than the self-evident photo caption, and they don't come any more self-evident than "Moyer signing autographs" under a photo of Moyer signing autographs. Are you afraid people will think he's, uhh, selling peanuts? A caption is the most-read thing on a page and should say something — so if you don't like what I wrote, write something else — but don't perpetuate a self-evident caption, which is actually an insult to the reader! — HarringtonSmith (talk) 18:08, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So removing non-neutral wording is now an insult to readers? Let's tone down the rhetoric a bit. As to the "self-evidence" of the caption, it's better to have something than nothing at all. I really don't appreciate being referred to as an "amateur", so perhaps it might be better to measure those words next time instead of editing in frustration or anger. — KV5 • Talk • 18:57, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you were amateurish, only that a self-evident caption like the one in question is — a characterization I stand behind. I didn't say that removing non-neutral wording is an insult to readers, I said that a self-evident caption was an insult — a characterization I stand behind (along with David Ogilvie, by the way). In your edit summary reverting my work, you said "I don't see how that caption adds anything to this image"; I'm not trying to fight with you, I'm trying to broaden your horizons a little bit if you don't see how it's better. The caption you restored is utterly meaningless because it is self-evident. That caption is the perfect spot for a three-line encapsulation of the non-statistical side of Jamie Moyer, that's all. 'Tis a pity we can't get such an encapsulation into that spot. Look, we're both Phillies fans, both jazz fans, both liberals. We shouldn't be banging heads like this. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 19:15, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mean to be banging heads with you. A quote about philanthropy, though, should probably be in that section, rather than the Phillies section, and if it is going to be attributed as contributing to his popularity, then we need to find a source that says that. — KV5 • Talk • 11:43, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We don't need to tie his philanthropy to his popularity at all. "After his trade to Philadelphia, Moyer continued his philanthropic work through the Moyer Foundation" — or some such. There's no cite in the text, btw, though there is one about his Catholicism. There's no rule that says that autographs need even be mentioned in that caption; it's plain enough what he's doing. I only picked his philanthropy to mention there because I thought it was something people may not know about him, and since (as I mentioned bombastically yesterday), picture captions are the most-read item on a page, putting it in the caption would inform the most people about it.
BTW, the photo higher up in the article is similarly self-evident: "Moyer pitching for the Mariners" or something like that it reads. Wouldn't "207 of his wins (whatever the number is) came in the American League before he returned to his hometown" or "Moyer has done two tours for GM Pat Gillick, first at Seattle and then later for the Phillies." It's such a good chance to say something about the guy, I just hate to see it get wasted. I don't know enough about him to know what a good summary or informative statement would be (that and the fact that the summary statement I thought was good yesterday got reverted in three minutes flat).
There really are no hard-and-fast rules when it comes to captions; we just gotta figure out what's important to say about the guy, and say it. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 12:18, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Very true. As long as it's supported and referenced (either in the caption or in the text), I've got no problem including it. You're definitely right about the self-evidence thing; MOS:CAP says that a good caption "clearly identifies the subject of the picture, without detailing the obvious; is succinct; establishes the picture's relevance to the article; provides context for the picture;" and "draws the reader into the article." — KV5 • Talk • 14:56, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I floated two trial captions, KV5; see what you think. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 23:34, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there's anything wrong with them, per se; I don't think captions need titles, so that bold should be removed. This isn't like a newspaper, so I think they should be just be straight text. Also, unless there's a cite for "Mariner Moyer" as a nickname, it shouldn't be used. — KV5 • Talk • 15:17, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Currently a free agent"[edit]

Is this acccurate? It's not like he can sign with an MLB team at this point. I realize that he may very well attempt to play major league ball again next season and may also continue playing baseball in other leagues during MLB's offseason, so I'm certainly not suggesting that we call him "retired". But "free agent" makes it sound like he's currently seeking a spot on a major league roster. Joefromrandb (talk) 10:37, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Jamie Moyer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:27, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jamie Moyer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:13, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Divorced from Karen?[edit]

According to this,[1] Jamie and Karen were divorced in 2017, but we don't have a source for it. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 15:24, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jamie_Moyer&oldid=1206953601"