Template:Did you know nominations/List of Major League Baseball pitchers who have struck out three batters on nine pitches
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 22:44, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
List of Major League Baseball pitchers who have struck out three batters on nine pitches[edit]
- ... that Nolan Ryan is the only player to pitch an immaculate inning in both the American League and National League?
- ALT1:...
that Sandy Koufax (pictured) is one of three Major League Baseball players to pitch an immaculate inning more than once? - ALT2:... that 46 Major League Baseball players have pitched an immaculate inning, most recently Wade Miley?
- ALT3:... that 46 Major League Baseball pitchers have struck out three batters on nine pitches, most recently Wade Miley?
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Ottumwa Packers
- ALT1:...
5x expanded by Bloom6132 (talk). Self nominated at 21:22, 27 April 2013 (UTC).
- A suggestion would be to rename the article to "List of Major League Baseball immaculate innings" or something like that because the current title is kind of ungainly. 2600:1000:B11D:8756:0:F:E395:7601 (talk) 14:46, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
- I didn't create this title, but the current unwritten (and thus, unofficial) consensus is that the current title is the proper name for the event. Even though the term "Immaculate inning" is commonly used, it's colloquial and not universally recognized, evident as several MLB news articles ([1][2]) do not use the term. This is in contrast to a perfect game or no-hitter; these are universally recognized and used as the official term for the respective events. —Bloom6132 (talk) 20:05, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
Almost 3 weeks now and still no review. Could someone please take a look at this for the first time. —Bloom6132 (talk) 17:46, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
For main hook, ALT2, ALT3. The article is long enough and expanded appropriately. The article is well referenced, with no evidence of copyvio or close para-phrasing. Three of the four hooks are fine, and good to go, but ALT1 is not appropriately referenced inline. I have struck ALT1 out for the moment simply to avoid confusion; if you prefer this hook, a little work in the article will allow it to be used. Harrias talk 12:33, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
