Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/History of the Nashville Sounds/archive2


 * 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 Laser brain via FACBot (talk) 15:01, 16 December 2018.

History of the Nashville Sounds

 * Nominator(s): NatureBoyMD (talk) 19:57, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

This article is about the Nashville Sounds Minor League Baseball team that has played in Nashville, Tennessee, since 1978. It is currently listed as a Good Article, and I believe it meets the criteria to become a Featured Article. I have put a lot of work into this article and am prepared to quickly address any issues. NatureBoyMD (talk) 19:57, 10 October 2018 (UTC)


 * A quick look shows that the prose is good. I was expecting to trash it. Tony (talk)  05:07, 15 October 2018 (UTC) PS I'd insert a comma after "logo" in the upppermost caption. Tony  (talk)  05:08, 15 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Done. NatureBoyMD (talk) 12:54, 15 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Support – I reviewed this article and copy-edited it during the first FAC, and I'm glad to see that the prose has received some praise. Having checked the additions to the article since the first FAC, everything added appears to be at the same level as the content present when I last saw the article; I only made one minor change in the new material. Overall, I think that all aspects of this article are now up to FA standards. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 23:12, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Cas Liber
Taking a look now....


 *  The Sounds led all of Minor League Baseball in attendance in their inaugural season and continued to lead the Southern League in attendance in each of their seven years as members of the league. - repetitive. Can we phrase part of this a different way? "draw the largest crowds"? or something similar?


 *  ...began to be outshined by newer state-of-the-art ballparks being built in the late 1980s - I suspect "state-of-the-art" is redundant here..?

These are very minor issues - looking good Support on comprehensiveness and prose Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:48, 29 October 2018 (UTC)


 * I changed the first bit to "The Sounds led all of Minor League Baseball in attendance in their inaugural season and continued to draw the Southern League's largest crowds in each of their seven years as members of the league." ... "state-of-the-art" has been removed from the second. NatureBoyMD (talk) 22:23, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

SN54129
Support great article; comprehensive, in-depth and thoroughly referenced. The only thing that jumps out at me is that, in your images, you use pixels to determine their size, whereas, for the purpose of universality, uprights are prefered. If you haven't come across them, that's —and on that note, since your lede image effectively replaces an infobox (nothing wrong with that of course), I'd suggest enlarging it. Maybe by ~50%, as I did here (but then self-reverted). —— SerialNumber  54129  18:35, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not very familiar with the use of uprights, but after a look at the related MOS, I assigned upright values to all images (1.3 to the lede per your suggestion, 0.8 to portrait images, and 1.2 to most landscape images). I welcome any editor to adjust the values as they deem fit. NatureBoyMD (talk) 21:09, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Source review
Starting source review:
 * Ref 141 is a dead link
 * I replaced this with an existing reference. NatureBoyMD (talk) 19:01, 9 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Some references to milb.com give Nashville Sounds as the website and Minor League Baseball as the publisher, while others that seem similar give Minor League Baseball as the website. Is there a reason for this variation?
 * Where the page is located on the team's page, it's listed as website=Nashville Sounds & publisher=Minor League Baseball. Where it is not within the team's portion of the larger MiLB.com, its just MiLB as the website. I also went back and made this usage consistent through the article. NatureBoyMD (talk) 19:01, 9 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Can you explain why SportsLogos.net would be considered a high-quality reliable source?
 * I replaced this reference with others. (FWIW, through my knowledge of the team, I know the information presented there to be factual.) NatureBoyMD (talk) 19:01, 9 November 2018 (UTC)


 * The Baseball-Reference.com references usually have the publisher as Sports Reference, but in some cases the publisher is missing. This should be consistent (you shouldn't need the 'LLC' for references).
 * Fixed. NatureBoyMD (talk) 19:01, 9 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Refs 162-164 are to The Clink Room, which is the blog of a pair of designers who work on team branding. Even if this can be treated as a reliable source (which I doubt), the posts linked are to pictures of draft logos. If the textual narrative about what the design team was asked to do is based on these images, then that would seem to be original research.
 * I replaced this with a team-published source supporting the possible renaming. NatureBoyMD (talk) 19:01, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

More to come, but those were the first concerns I noticed. --RL0919 (talk) 17:31, 9 November 2018 (UTC) Added two more to the list. --RL0919 (talk) 18:36, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the replies above; these changes look good. Spot checks for verification and paraphrasing have checked out OK. I only have a few additional notes: Pending the format cleanup items, this looks good for sourcing. --RL0919 (talk) 07:00, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
 * There are several references to Sounds souvenir programs. This type of material is relatively difficult to obtain for verification, but given that other sourcing has checked out so far, I assume these are all good.
 * One of the references to these programs, ref 124, is formatted with the title in quotes. The others are in italics. These should be consistent.
 * A few of the titles for sources are in sentence case instead of title case. For example (but not limited to), refs 41, 160, 171. Suggest you do a sweep to use title case consistently.


 * The above formatting inconsistencies have been remedied. NatureBoyMD (talk) 14:56, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The changes look good. I think this article now meets the FA standards for sourcing. --RL0919 (talk) 19:55, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Comments from Ceranthor
Planning to read through the prose and post comments in the next day or so.  ceran  thor 00:26, 29 November 2018 (UTC)


 * "On the field, the team won six consecutive second-half titles from 1979 to 1984 and went on to win the Southern League championship twice" - Why "went on to win" instead of just "won"?
 * "first, in 1979" - I think the first is implied, and then I'd cut the comma as well with removing that word
 * ", and again in 1982" - I'd cut the comma there
 * "the team went on to win" - same note as above... you can tell I'm not a big fan of the phrase "went on to" :)
 * " in 1897, but relocated " -not sure the comma's needed here
 * "Getting a team and building a ballpark" - seems like a long title... any thoughts for a more concise way to say the same thing?
 * I'm stumped as to landing on anything more concise. Everything I think of is basically the same length. (I sort of like it how it is.) NatureBoyMD (talk) 02:10, 4 December 2018 (UTC)


 * "when he observed the large crowds and sellouts the Chattanooga Lookouts experienced" - phrasing here's a little awkward... what about "the large crowds... for the Chattanooga Lookouts", getting rid of "experienced"? or replacing experienced with "saw"
 * changed to "when he observed the large crowds the Chattanooga Lookouts saw..." NatureBoyMD (talk) 02:10, 4 December 2018 (UTC)


 * "would cost between $300,000 and $500,000;[17][18] but bids for the project ranged from $980,000 to $1.2 million.[17]" - why a semicolon rather than a comma?
 * "The Sounds led all of Minor League Baseball in attendance by drawing 380,000 fans in their first season.[14] " - for home games only, or away as well?
 * Inserted their home ballpark name here to indicate home. NatureBoyMD (talk) 02:10, 4 December 2018 (UTC)


 * "by a circle of the same colors bearing the team name in a modern font.[105]" - "a modern font" seems arbitrary; any idea which font it is? does the source say?
 * Dropped "a modern font". No name given. The phrasing was intended to differentiate from the country music style font used previously. NatureBoyMD (talk) 02:10, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Support on the prose.  ceran  thor 01:36, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
 * All other changes made per your suggestions. NatureBoyMD (talk) 02:10, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Coord notes
This has been open quite a long time but at this stage appears to be progressing towards consensus for promotion; before we get there: Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:57, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * We need an image review.
 * I'd like to see a spotcheck of sources for accuracy and avoidance of plagiarism or close paraphrasing (this is not the nominator's first FAC but it's been awhile since their last spotcheck).
 * I'd encourage to post comments at their earliest convenience.


 * It appears that RL0919 has performed a spotcheck of sources per his comments above. NatureBoyMD (talk) 14:29, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Okay tks, I no doubt searched for "spotcheck" without a space in the middle... Cheers Ian Rose (talk) 19:41, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, I did. I didn't elaborate about it in my comments because I didn't find anything to recommend fixing, which probably made it easier to miss the mention. --RL0919 (talk) 02:02, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry for my delay. I am intending to post prose comments tonight.  ceran  thor 17:16, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Many tks. Cheers Ian Rose (talk) 19:41, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I'll be quite disappointed if this fails due to the lack of an image review. Is that a possibility? NatureBoyMD (talk) 15:59, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
 * No, lack of image review just delays things -- I wonder if or  could have a look? Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:36, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Image review

 * File:OriginalNashvilleSoundsLogo.png: I am not sure if this image use complies with WP:NFCC as it looks like it's already used in the parent article.
 * I've removed it from Nashville Sounds. NatureBoyMD (talk) 14:25, 14 December 2018 (UTC)


 * File:Nashville Sounds 1978 game 2 ticket.jpg: To me this file looks like it might be copyrighted; even such brief texts can have "selection and arrangement" copyright.
 * I don't know. There are many more examples of similar tickets (and much more elaborate) at commons:Category:Sport tickets under similar free licenses. (Yes, other stuff exists.) They're tagged variously under Public Domain, CC, commons:Template:PD-US-1989, and commons:Template:PD-Ineligible. I can remove the image if absolutely necessary, but I just don't believe that it is copyrighted. Are there other opinions? NatureBoyMD (talk) 14:25, 14 December 2018 (UTC)


 * File:GreerStadiumScoreboard2.jpg: Should probably be tagged as commons:Template:De minimis on Commons.
 * Done. NatureBoyMD (talk) 14:25, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

In general it looks like the images are all pertinent and captions are supported by article text, although some of them don't appear to. ALT text is fine. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:26, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
 * ::

-- Laser brain  (talk)  15:01, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.