Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/600 home run club


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   keep. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   03:28, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

600 home run club and 700 home run club

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Both of these pages are reproductions of 500 home run club (and you can see that they are copied from a prior version of that page). More to the point, while the terminology of the "500 home run club" is well known, nobody ever talks about a 600 or 700 home run club. Muboshgu (talk) 04:06, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions.  —Muboshgu (talk) 04:09, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * A quick google search for the phrase "600 home run club" yields 221,000 results. So I wouldn't say "nobody ever talks about" it.  In fact, "500 home run club" only yields 24,600 results, but this is because the majority of references (391,000) are listed as "500 HR club", whereas for some reason, the same ratio does not exist for 600 (only 94,300 for the abbreviated version). I don't know if this is relevant for Wikipedia's deletion policy, but I think it shows something. Myavantssoslow (talk) 02:15, 30 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete This is a very interesting one. Some Googling certainly reveals both phrases ("600 home run club," "700 home run club") being used, but I concur with the nominator's assessment of the respective notability of the "500 home run club," which is a very notable phrase of long standing, and the two newer "club" phrases. That said... I reserve the right to change my mind on this. The 600 and 700 phrases are used. I just don't know that they're notable as a per se club. Will be curious to see other persons' thoughts. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡ  bomb  04:22, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Some people have used these terms, but not with the regularity that would establish notability. --Muboshgu (talk) 15:11, 24 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Not notable. Yes the term gets used occasionally, but a club term gets created for virtually any statistical group. 500 HR Club is the only one which draws truly notable coverage. Staxringold talkcontribs 13:16, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - It's difficult to conceive that for a sport where having played just one major league game gets a guy into Wikipedia, which I believe is the case, that something like this would draw a challenge. If these were retitled "List of Major League Baseball players hitting 600 home runs" and "List of Major League Baseball players hitting 700 home runs," would there be grounds for a challenge? I doubt it. So, rename and move along. Carrite (talk) 14:07, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Anyone who plays a single game gets entered in the Baseball Encyclopedia. In the case of renaming these articles, there would still be quite a bit of redundancy with pages like List of top 500 Major League Baseball home run hitters‎ and of course 500 home run club, without any particular notability to the terms "600 home run club" or "700 home run club" that would merit inclusion. --Muboshgu (talk) 15:11, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Appearance at the Major League level virtually guarantees you will satisfy WP:GNG and passes WP:ATH. 600 and 700 home run lines, while mentioned are merely subsets of the 500 HR club that fail any real test for stand alone lists. Staxringold talkcontribs 15:49, 24 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete, sufficiently covered by 500 club article.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:09, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete both Now that I understand the history behind this a little better, I can see that I misunderstood the premise of the nomination.  Although the term 500 home run club is well known, both of these are artificial variations made by a person who, perhaps, thought that there should be a "600 home run club" and a "700 home run club".  Another great idea would be to have a 755 home run club for Aaron and Bonds. Cheers for A-Rod, who might hit his 600th homer this afternoon (9th inning, Royals at Yankees), but there's no "club", simply a milestone to be mentioned in his article. Mandsford 19:49, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep/Rename I created these pages because although the simple terminology may not be notable, I believe the data on here is useful and not presented in this fashion anywhere else on the web. It used to be on the "500 home run club" page and then was deleted.  I was actually considering naming them "list of MLB players who have hit at least 600 home runs" but chose not to.  I would support the name change, which I think is better than deletion altogether.  Again, although the terms aren't notable, all you have to do is watch any baseball broadcast surrounding any of these milestones or talk to people in the sport about them, and you can see that fans and insiders alike are very interested in the milestones and the data surrounding them. (And there is a reason these HR balls are worth well over $100,000 if caught...) Myavantssoslow (talk) 06:07, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I can think of all sorts of ways that this could be accomplished within 500 home run club, including a prominent stripe between Ruth and Mays, and another one (soon) between A-Rod and Frank Robinson. While one could make a list of four active members of the 500 club (Rodriguez, Thome, Ramirez, Sheffield), the information is conveyed more effectively by the use of a color code. Mandsford 17:48, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * For those interested, A-Rod might hit his 600th homer today in a game going on now in its 3rd inning.  Mandsford 17:54, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think it could be accomplished within the 500 HR club page. And if you look at what it looked like before July 11, it was on there.  However, someone thought that all of the date/age/pitcher information for 500/600/700 didn't need to be on there because of all the columns that were mostly empty, so I thought I would put it on a different page.  I really think this info should be somewhere on Wikipedia. Myavantssoslow (talk) 02:00, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I can see your point on that, and it makes a difference to me. Mandsford 18:20, 31 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Merge/Redirect to 500 home run club.  D C E dwards  1966  20:30, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Per prior keeps.  The "nobody ever talks about" statement is, as pointed out, clearly incorrect.--Epeefleche (talk) 03:57, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep MLB itself uses the term 600 Home Run Club : . There are thousands of hits for these terms. The nominator obviously does not know what he is talking about. Kinston eagle (talk) 01:55, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep I misread the original nomination as saying that these were redundant to 500 home run club. In looking closer, I see that the statement is that these are "reproductions...copied from a prior version of that page" and the word "prior" cancels out the concept of this being redundant to an existing article.  The 500 home run club page does refer to six (and, soon, seven) people who hit more than 500 home runs, and the date upon which they reached the 500 milestone.  I'm not objecting to Staxringold's revisions of the format of the table (he said that he would add in the opposing pitcher info if it was sourced, and I'm hoping that the age info will be displayed again, even in the clumsy looking years and days form-- Ruth, Aaron, Mays, Griffey and Sosa were all 34 when they made it to 500).  Still, the 500 table stops at 500, and the circumstances of those same five people (or of Bonds) reaching 600 aren't on there, ditto for Bonds, Aaron and Ruth hitting 700.  I agree with Myavant that this should be on a table somewhere-- baseball fans thrive on this stuff.  Mandsford 18:20, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per Epeefleche and Mandsford above.   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 20:46, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.