Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ozzie Smith


 * 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 Raul654 04:11, 19 February 2009.

Ozzie Smith

 * Nominator(s): Monowi 
 * previous FAC (01:21, 3 August 2008)

After two peer reviews and work on NPOV and copyediting, I believe this article now meets the Featured article criteria. Monowi (talk) 01:30, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Image review File:Ozzie Smith suit.jpg and File:Ozzie Smith Doubleday.JPG are pretty much okay (although it would be nice to have the uncropped image of Ozzie Smith suit.jpg with EXIF). However,
 * To any future editors who may read this, I've made a personal choice not to post the uncropped Ozzie Smith suit picture. Sorry! Monowi (talk) 22:28, 19 January 2009 (UTC)


 * File:Ozzie Smith statue part.jpg requires a stronger rationale than just "shows his statue". This is based on the Significance criteria of WP:NFC.  If the image is just to "show his statue", then obviously removing it from the article would not be detrimental, since the text has said that a statue of Smith exists.  One way to beef the rationale would be to "show a statue of Smith in his trademark style/pose/action or most memorable moment" and expand from there.  This, however, has to be backed up by reliable sources and mentioned in the text (as critical analysis).  For the moment, this image can serve as an identifying picture for an article of its own (Statue of Ozzie Smith), but seems decorative in the article about Smith.
 * Use of the beefed-up rationale you have kindly suggested might be a bit challenging to pull off in the article. I have references that can confirm Smith's trademark to be his backflips, but of course that's not what this statue depicts. I wonder; would it be acceptable to alter the rationale by saying the statue is representative of his defensive skills via this action pose, and using a reference that cites him being a proficient defensive player? I am interested to hear any thoughts on this matter. Monowi (talk) 06:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I suspect what you need is to integrate more information from the "Cardinals Unveil Ozzie Smith Statue" newspiece, specifically what pose the statue is in and why the sculptor chose that pose, into the article. That will serve as critical commentary, and in the rationale for the statue, state what aspects of the pose it is supposed to capture that words could not fully express, and it might work.  Jappalang (talk) 09:11, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I have altered the text of the "Post-playing career" section of Smith's article, and the rationale on the image's page in an attempt to execute your excellent suggestion. Monowi (talk) 07:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I tidied up the image page and further strengthened the rationale. Jappalang (talk) 16:16, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Great work! Thanks! Monowi (talk) 00:19, 22 January 2009 (UTC)


 * File:Ozzie sidewalk.JPG seems to be incorrectly licensed. The statue's photo could not be a "free" image because there is no "freedom of panorama" in the US.  This tablet is a work of art.  It is engraved in stone (thus 3-D piece of art) and there is the top logo (birds, baseballs, and bats) and the copyrighted Mastercard logo to be concerned with.
 * Thanks for pointing this out. I had been wondering about it since it was mentioned in the article's previous peer review. I plan to re-post & re-license the picture under non-free use within the next day. Monowi (talk) 07:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I have updated the license for the picture to non-free use art. The current revision of the rationale is admittedly not strong, as I will probably need to take the ideas used to update the above picture and use them here. Since the picture can't be licensed under GNU, my instinct is to remove the picture from the article, as I feel the picture of the sidewalk paver/stone didn't add that much to the article in the first place. I'm interested to hear what other editors think. Should this picture stay in the article or be removed? Monowi (talk) 05:59, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The text of the tablet can be blockquoted in text, hence an image of it would be decorative. Jappalang (talk) 22:38, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Picture removed. I agree with your comments above. Not only is it simply decorative, it doesn't make much sense to include this particular picture in the article under the non-free use rationale. Monowi (talk) 05:01, 24 January 2009 (UTC)


 * File:CardsRetired1.PNG might be incorrectly licensed as well (though very likely free). Would a border around a simple number constitute enough artistic creativity to void PD-text?  If not, then PD-text should be the license for this image.
 * This illustration was part of the article prior to my first edits to the article in 2007, posted by User:Silent Wind of Doom. I agree that PD-text would be more appropriate in this case, but I feel wary of changing the license of another user's creation. I will attempt to contact User:Silent Wind of Doom about this issue. Monowi (talk) 22:28, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with any changes, however looking at this now (my second such work, after the Yankees ones) I see that all of them are woefully innacurate and just plain bad. I'm currently rehauling the images, which will be more than numbers with borders.  Should be done by tomorrow night at the latest.The Silent Wind of Doom (talk) 06:01, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The changes have now been made. I don't have the best knowledge of the vaious lisences, so if you feel that there should now be a change, just tell me, and such a change will be made.The Silent Wind of Doom (talk) 22:09, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, Silent Wind of Doom, but you cannot upload that version. It is a derivative work of the wall itself (due to the artwork of Smith in action in the background).  That would be a copyviolation.  I advise you to revert all such changes and call for an administrator to remove those versions from the history.  Jappalang (talk) 00:20, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Marked as copyvios (derivative works). Jappalang (talk) 12:32, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Neutered versions of the retired number imags have been uploaded. Sorry for the delay, but it's been busy. The Silent Wind of Doom (talk) 22:02, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Awaiting feedback and comments. Jappalang (talk) 11:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
 * At the present moment, only one image issue remains, the retired card number. I am tagging the images for copyright violations as derivative works.  Jappalang (talk) 12:32, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Can anyone weigh in on whether the new images can qualify for PD-text? Jappalang (talk) 02:52, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I have boldy tagged the retired number as PD-text, so the image issues are resolved. Jappalang (talk) 01:07, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Source review:
 * Ref #117 (all-century team final voting) is dead. Other refs check out error-wise. Wizardman  19:57, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The link for current reference #117 has been replaced, and now works correctly. Thanks for taking the time to review the sources. Cheers, Monowi (talk) 22:28, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Comments - As someone who has reviewed this in the past, I'm quite impressed with it. A few prose nit-picks in the first few sections, but it's a good read overall.
 * Link National League on its first use.
 * Done. Monowi (talk) 06:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * "and also won the National League Silver Slugger Award as the best hitter at shortstop in 1987." That will get rid of some wordiness.
 * Done. Monowi (talk) 06:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Early life: "moving in closer to reduce reaction time with each throw.[8]When..." Space needed.
 * Done. Monowi (talk) 06:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Give the full name of the NBA in this section, as opposed to just using initials.
 * Done. It does make the sentence a bit longer, but it is worth it for users who might not be familiar with NBA. Monowi (talk) 06:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * San Diego Padres: I doubt the American dollar needs to be linked.
 * Ok by me; wikilink removed. Monowi (talk) 06:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Remove the second Padres link to help cut down on the number of repetitive links.
 * Wow, I didn't even know that was there. Thanks for pointing that out! Done. Monowi (talk) 06:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Fourth paragraph of Padres section: One instance of "get" and one of "got". I'd change the first to "record" and the second to "entered" or similar. Those would be more formal language, which is always better.
 * A great suggestion; done. Monowi (talk) 06:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * If the Yuma Daily Sun is (was) a printed publication, it should be given in italics. Check for this in the references too.
 * Italics added. My cited reference can confirm the Yuma Daily Sun was a printed publication at the time it did the specific article about Smith. Thanks again for pointing it out; it really helps to have another set of eyes look over things!  Monowi (talk) 06:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delink the dates in a couple of the references.
 * Could you possibly help point out examples of this in the article? Right now the only date links I see are for links from specific years to articles detailing specific MLB seasons. For instance, I've wikilinked "1985" to 1985 St. Louis Cardinals season. I have removed wikilinks to seasons Smith did not play in, such as 1997 & 1999 in the "Post-playing career" section.
 * Actually, I meant the links for access dates in references 106 and 123, and the publication date in the latter. The year links for teams and seasons are an entirely seperate debate.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 00:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Date links removed. Wow, my mistake for misunderstanding your original comment! Monowi (talk) 06:05, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll be happy to come back and read more later when these are done.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 00:03, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time to look over the article so far. I really appreciate it! Monowi (talk) 06:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The bad part about having a limited number of active reviews is that I often find myself waiting for something to do. The good part is that nominators get fast return visits from me. Here's a second round.
 * Trade: Consider linking no-trade clause. I find that phrases like this, which could be considered jargon, are good candidates for explanatory links.
 * Done. I remember trying to previously wikilink a long time ago; guess the article hadn't been created yet when I last checked! Monowi (talk) 07:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 1982 season: Consider adding a best of seven disclaimer for the World Series. This might be confusing for non-baseball fans who have just read about the shorter playoff series. Also, check to see if "best of five" in the LCS should have hyphens. A similar usage later has them.
 * Hyphens & "best-of-seven" text added. I found an MLB.com article herethat used the hypens, so I went with that. Monowi (talk) 00:19, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * En dash for 3-1 score in Game 7 of the World Series.
 * I honestly can't tell the difference between the dashes, so I hope I put the right one in. Monowi (talk) 07:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * That's the right one.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 21:40, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Go crazy folks: Flip wrist broken to broken wrist.
 * Done. Monowi (talk) 07:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't think Busch Stadium needs a link there, with one in a prior section.
 * Done. Monowi (talk) 07:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "After the Cardinals took a 3-games-to-2 advantage". Consider changing the numbers to words. Numbers less than 10 are usually spelled out, but editors have differing opinions on this. Note that the "2 for 23" earlier is fine, since it's a compound element. No, this isn't confusing at all. :-)
 * Done. I originally had the numbers written out, but they were apparently changed by another editor somewhere along the way. Monowi (talk) 00:19, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Another en dash for "July 11-14", when Smith tore his rotator cuff.
 * Done. Monowi (talk) 00:19, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note that I'll be doing something new in this FAC. When I provide further comments, I'll be doing so on a talk page to avoid clogging up FAC any more than necessary. Of course, I'll provide a link here for the convenience of everyone involved.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 00:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Concluded my review on talk page.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 16:28, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Editors can feel free to view the talk page listed above to see how the remaining outstanding issues in Giants2008's review were addressed. Monowi (talk) 02:29, 25 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Support - I was around for the second of the article's two FACs, and the improvement in quality between then and now is quite noticeable. After a large amount of work, in the previous FACs and here, I think it's ready. The talk page review is done too, for anyone interested.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 21:59, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:02, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time to do that; your help is appreciated! Monowi (talk) 07:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Extremely good article with top-nouch sourcing. I have a few comments before I could support this article. I'm not going to comment on grammar and so fourth, as that's my weakness.


 * 1) I personally think the Amos Otis growing up in his neighborhood is irrelevant, unless Otis helped influence Smith's baseball career.
 * I re-read the new combined paragraph without the Amos Otis sentence, and I agree it's far from vital to include that sentence. I probably threw it in there to get a three sentence paragraph back when I first started editing the article. Monowi (talk) 06:09, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) What got him into baseball, the early life doesn't mention that?
 * I've added in a sentence that addresses this topic. The sentence reads, "Smith played a variety of sports in his youth, but considered baseball to be his "favorite."" Adding in this sentence gave me a chance to split the first part of the "Early life" section into two paragraphs as well. Monowi (talk) 06:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) In high school and college, did he made receive any awards playing baseball, All-American or All-District for example? (skip if he didn't)
 * I used current reference #14 (cal-poly) to note that in fact he was named an All-American during his college career. This was a great suggestion, it really adds an significant piece of info to the article. Thanks! Monowi (talk) 06:09, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) A sentence on why the Padres and Tigers decided to draft Smith, did he had some sort of special skill (obvious to us baseball fans but not to the average non-baseball fan reader) to get him drafted this high.
 * I don't have a direct reference about the thought process of either the Tigers or Padres in drafting Smith. Mention of Smith's All-American status in college, not to mention the school records he set, seem to be the best evidence that can currently be offered as to why the Tigers and Padres drafted him. If anyone can find a reference or two that can address this issue, it would be very welcome. Cheers, Monowi (talk) 21:22, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) When did Smith and his wife gets married?
 * Short of finding their marriage certificate, I don't have a concrete reference for the year they married, so I decided not to include a specific date in the article. My research for the article leads me to believe it was around 1981, but as I said, with no reference to back it up, I'm kinda stuck on this one. Monowi (talk) 06:09, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I found a source that it's in October/November 1980 http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/access/684993992.html?dids=684993992:684993992&FMT=CITE&FMTS=CITE:AI&date=Nov+25%2C+1980&author=&pub=Los+Angeles+Times&desc=Padres%2C+as+Good+as+Gold+at+Short%2C+Go+After+Catcher&pqatl=google but I don't have access to those archives, maybe if someone can? Secret account 15:41, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Stats would be nice for his second place in ROY, just like how you provide stats for his Silver Slugger Award season.
 * I added his 1978 batting average and fielding percentage into the text, with the accompanying citation. Sorry I've been slow addressing these new comments, I'll get to everything as soon as I can. Cheers, Monowi (talk) 07:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) What happened to the 1985 and most of the 1986 regular season?
 * I added a sentence about Ozzie's performance during 1985 by citing his stats for that season. As for 1986, I think between mention of his son doing the Opening Day backflip, and the description of his diving play, 1986 is adeqeatly covered. Monowi (talk) 06:49, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) "From 1993 onwards, injuries started to creep up on Smith." What injuries did he get in 1993? Also by the sentence it seems to the reader that he was also injured in 1994, but he played what seems to me a complete season only missing about 10 games.
 * Thanks for pointing this out. After reviewing this issue, it was clearly a weak point of the article. After further research, I removed the "From 1993 onwards..." sentence in the lead, and instead mentioned that he missed nearly three months of 1995 after his shoulder surgery. I also replaced a reference from ESPN that listed his stats with a specific one from Retrosheet that listed what games Smith made an offensive appearance in during the 1995 season. Definitely check out both the last paragraph of the lead section and the second paragraph of the "Torre era" section to view the changes. Cheers, Monowi (talk) 21:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Why the divorce from his wife?
 * That's a great question, one that I wish I could answer. Any comments I could make about that would simply be conjecture, because I don't have a reference for this specific issue. Even some of the more recent references cited in the article tend to overlook or dance around the issue. Monowi (talk) 06:09, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Did he had success from his business ventures or did it failed?
 * I added some new info into the paragraph about his business ventures, including a sentence that mentions both his sports bar and youth sports academy are still operating as of 2009, backed up with references. Monowi (talk) 06:56, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Secret account 21:57, 27 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Support issues been mainly concerned Secret account 23:13, 2 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment: Overall this is a great article, however I have one caveat. "While Smith was attending junior high school, his parents decided to divorce.[5] A Los Angeles Dodgers fan during his childhood, Smith would ride the bus for nearly an hour to get to Dodger Stadium, attending about 25 games a year.[5] Upon becoming a student at Locke High School, Smith played on the basketball and baseball teams." The sentence on the Dodgers feel out of place thrown in between middle and high school. If it was intertwined a little better with the childhood section of the article I would support this as an FA. Wizardman  17:19, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I have re-phrased the sentence mentioning Smith's attendance at Dodger games in the following way: "Continuing to pursue his interest in baseball, Smith would ride the bus for nearly an hour to reach Dodger Stadium, cheering for the Los Angeles Dodgers at about 25 games a year." I think this phrasing works well because the previous paragraph now mentions Smith's interest in sports, and that baseball was his favorite sport during his youth. Monowi (talk) 06:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks good. I'll give the article a final look through tomorrow, and support if I find no concerns. (I keep putting this article on the backburner though i really want to read it) Wizardman  06:37, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose, 1a. This looks OK, but I quickly got mired in prose issues indicative of article-wide problems. Below are samples; please get someone to go through the whole article and look for other instances. I see that you had two peer reviews, but they don't look very substantive.
 * Is the backflip thing really important enough to mention in the lead?
 * Yes, I believe it is vital to mention Smith's backflip trademark in the lead section. I would assert that Smith's backflip brought him more fame than some other aspects of his baseball career. To demonstrate the importance of the backfilp, I can cite his Baseball Hall of Fame plaque, which mentions the backflip. Cheers, Monowi (talk) 06:12, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * "When turmoil with Padres' ownership developed ..." Do you mean conflict?
 * No, I don't. According to |Merriam Webster's definition, turmoil is, "a state or condition of extreme confusion, agitation, or commotion." Indeed, it was the extreme agitation the Padres felt from Ed Gottlieb's antics (like taking out a help-wanted ad) that makes the use of the word turmoil appropriate in this instance. In fact, the article later mentions that Padres General Manager Jack McKeon expressed how agitating Gottlieb was, telling Whitey Herzog it was part of the reason the Padres were now willing to trade Smith. Cheers, Monowi (talk) 22:10, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, I misread this. I thought you meant turmoil between ownership and Smith. But you mean turmoil among several people, correct? Can you reword to "When turmoil among the Padres' organization developed ..." or similar? -- Laser brain  (talk)  22:17, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, by using "turmoil" the sentence is conveying conflict among several people, but you make a good point that the sentence isn't phrased to explicitly express that. With that in mind, I'm hesitant to have to explain that the turmoil was between Padres ownership & the combination of Smith & his agent, especially when the goal is to make the lead concise. In that sense, use of the word "conflict" would be more appropriate because it would still accurately describe the relations between Smith and the organization at that time, and leave the more detailed antics of Gottlieb to the body of the article. So, I replaced "turmoil" with the word "conflict" in both the lead and later in the article. Thanks for the tip, and the healthy discussion. Cheers, Monowi (talk) 07:55, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * "Born in Mobile, Alabama, Smith was the second of six children (five boys and one girl) born to his parents Clovis and Marvella Smith." This needs revision so there are not two "borns"
 * Done. New sentence reads, "Smith was born in Mobile, Alabama, the second of Clovis and Marvella Smith's six children (five boys and one girl)." Cheers, Monowi (talk) 06:54, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * "... while his mother became an aide at an Armenian nursing home." This suggests the nursing home was either in Armenia or somehow of Armenian ownership, which I'm sure wasn't the case.
 * To simplify things, I removed the word "Armenian" from that sentence, which is fine because the inclusion of that word wasn't exactly relevant to the article anyway. Monowi (talk) 08:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * "Developing quick reflexes through leisure activity, Smith would bounce a ball off the concrete steps in front of his house, moving in closer to reduce reaction time with each throw." This is oddly worded, suggesting he developed the reflexes and then did the bouncing. Also, in the lead you say "athletic activity" and here you say "leisure activity". Those aren't really the same thing.
 * I changed the sentence you refer to in the "Early life" section to read, "Smith developed quick reflexes through various athletic and leisure activity, such as bouncing a ball off the concrete steps in front of his house, moving in closer to reduce reaction time with each throw." Do you believe this is an appropriate way to phrase this sentence, and I was also wondering your opinion on keeping the phrase "athletic activity" unaltered in the lead section in light of this sentence revision. Any comments from editors are welcome too. Cheers, Monowi (talk) 06:32, 9 February 2009 (UTC)


 * There are too many sentences with the same structure: "Developing quick reflexes via childhood athletic activities, Smith played ...", "Drafted as an amateur player by the San Diego Padres, Smith made ...", "Developing quick reflexes through leisure activity, Smith would ..."
 * "Smith went on to be named an All-American athlete" For any such phrase, "Smith was named" is much simpler and cleaner.
 * That's a great suggestion. I took the extra step of re-phrasing the sentence so that it now reads, "Later named an All-American athlete, Smith established school records in career at-bats (754) and career stolen bases (110) before graduating in 1977." Is this wording ok, or would you suggest another approach to phrasing this particular sentence? Monowi (talk) 06:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


 * "Smith credited Padre manager ..." You say "Padres" everywhere else - why not here?
 * It appears I missed that typo in my previous read-through, but it's now fixed. Thanks for pointing that out, I'll try to continue to try & address the other outstanding points with the spare time I can manage to find. Cheers, Monowi (talk) 06:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * -- Laser brain  (talk)  03:23, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Support. After finally getting around to reading this article, I am satisfied with how it is. It reads very well, the quote boxes are used well, and right spots are accentuated, and there's not too much statistical information thrown in, which I would actually consider a positive, since it shows that there has not been any unnecessary padding in the article. I'd liek to see more of that, yes, but it's not really necessary, as this article was very enjoyable to read. Wizardman  05:38, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.