Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Baltimore Orioles Opening Day starting pitchers


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Scorpion0422 00:45, 18 February 2009.

List of Baltimore Orioles Opening Day starting pitchers
I believe this list meets the Featured List criteria, similar to List of Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim Opening Day starting pitchers, List of Los Angeles Dodgers Opening Day starting pitchers, List of Atlanta Braves Opening Day starting pitchers, and other similar featured lists. Rlendog (talk) 22:42, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Comments from  - excellent list
 * Flanagan's two Opening Day starts came eight years apart, in 1978 and 1986. - instead of came, how about "occurred"
 * McNally's record of three wins and no losses in Opening Day starts gived him a 100% winning percentage, the best in Orioles history. - 1)gived should be "gave", unless its an English variant 2)no need for the percentage symbol 3)best is WP:POV, "highest" should work better
 * The Orioles played in the World Series championship in 1966, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1979 and 1983, winning in 1966, 1970 and 1983. - Either remove championship or add "game" after championship
 * I don't know, but I just find it weird that you link the other publishers but not the MLB, that's just IMO though.-- TRU  CO   01:23, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comments. I addressed them all, except that I think the percentage sign is needed with the 100% (even though it is stated to be a winning "percentage").  I don't know how I brain farted that "gived". Rlendog (talk) 01:39, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Its not really a common for these types of list to have the #% winning percentage, its too repetitive.-- TRU  CO   01:55, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It seems odd to me (I think that, if anything, they should all use the percentage sign, since one character is hardly overly reptetative and this is a percentage so without a % it seems like it should be just "1" or maybe "1.000", but then those aren't percentages) but I changed it. Rlendog (talk) 02:08, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, "winning percentage" is not given as a percentage, but as an average. I know the name is misleading, but it's the proper way to write it. It should actually be a "1.000 winning percentage." KV5  •  Squawk box  •  Fight on!  17:57, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with Killervogel, it should be reworded accordingly.-- TRU  CO   01:07, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. Rlendog (talk) 01:47, 8 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Support - problems fixed to meet WP:WIAFL.-- TRU CO   503  04:44, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:01, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:01, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * What makes BaseballLibrary.com and Retrosheet reliable sources? Dabomb87 (talk) 02:46, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * BaseballLibrary was considered a reliable source for List of New York Yankees Opening Day starting pitchers and List of Boston Red Sox Opening Day starting pitchers, both of which are featured lists. BaseballLibrary is in fact the sole source for much of the information in the Red Sox list.
 * Retrosheet is actually the source for much of the box score information included in Baseball Reference, which is itself considered a reliable source. See for example the attribution at the bottom of this page .  It is also heavily used in Sabermetric books researching baseball history.  See, for example, the acknnowledgement on page 7 of Rob Neyer and Eddie Epstein's Baseball Dynasties book  (you may need to search for "Retrosheet" and link to the "Front Matter" item; there is also a 2nd reference to Retrosheet within the book).Rlendog (talk) 03:31, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification on Retro sheet. For BaseballLibrary, we need to know exactly what kind of fact-checking the website does; that it is used on other FLs mean nothing. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:35, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The information I was sourcing from BaseballLibrary was included in the Retrosheet and Baseball-Reference sources anyway, so I removed those citations. I am pretty sure the BaseballLibrary information is good, since it matches up to the other sources, but I do not know how to prove it, and it is unnecessary for this article anyway. Rlendog (talk) 04:18, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I reinstated the BaseballLibrary source; it was proved reliable at an FAC a while back. Sorry for the trouble. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:01, 11 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.