Talk:Ramiro Peña

Untitled
The reason I've re-edited this page twice to refer to the "silent treatment" given to Ramiro Peña in the Yankees dugout... First of all, I saw the game where this occurred on the YES network, and not only did Michael Kay commented on what was going on in the dugout (what you see in the MLB link) but the footage was replayed several times during the game and included in the designation of Peña's home run as the "GEICO play of the game." Beyond all of this, though, I would argue the significance of the occurrence is that it reveals the 2009 Yankees to be a group of young men who enjoy themselves at the ballpark and are actually on friendly terms with each other as people. Ramiro Peña, at this point in his career anyway, is a second-string utility infielder. In many of the organizations in major league baseball, he would be pretty much ignored by his teammates because he doesn't make as much money or get as many endorsements as they do. Certainly on past incarnations of the Yankees he would have been treated that way. The reason I think their "trick" on their teammate was such a delight to watch is that it showed this year's Yankees are not like that. They were obviously as jazzed that Peña hit the home run as he was to have hit it. I absolutely think this deserves to mentioned on Wikipedia and will be extremely cross if it is deleted again. Zachary Klaas (talk) 21:26, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

As far as "notability" is concerned...note the following from WP: Notability: Inclusion of the Yankees' reaction to Peña's homerun in an article about Peña is different from writing a whole article about the Yankees' reaction to the homerun. I agree that this isn't notable enough to deserve its own article. But these points above justify what I've done here. There was significant coverage. The MLB clip made the reaction to the homerun the main topic of its source material: the clip is labeled "Ramiro Peña hits his first career home run to right in the top of the fifth inning and his teammates give the silent treatment"...the silent treatment is shown to be as much of the story as the homerun in that label. But even if we go the other route and still claim that nevertheless this information isn't notable, it is reliably sourced, and lack of notability alone isn't a proper reason to remove something from Wikipedia. Zachary Klaas (talk) 21:35, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * "'Significant coverage' means that sources address the subject directly in detail, and no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material."
 * "The notability guidelines determine whether a topic is notable enough to be a separate article in Wikipedia. They do not give guidance on the content of articles, except for lists of people.[7] Instead, various content policies govern article content, with the amount of coverage given to topics within articles decided by its appropriate weight. A lack of notability does not necessarily mean that reliably sourced information should be removed from Wikipedia."

Just added two more references that show that the "silent treatment" given to Peña was not only newsworthy according to more people than MLB, but in one case was in the lead sentence of the article, as if it were the story. Zachary Klaas (talk) 21:51, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I was just told that "one reference is enough" for Peña's "silent treatment" - okay, just don't turn around and tell me I didn't do enough references, because I've got a million more where that came from. Apparently Googling "Ramiro Pena silent treatment" gets aroung 1,430 hits. Zachary Klaas (talk) 22:08, 29 September 2009 (UTC)