Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Major League Baseball pitchers who have struck out four batters in one inning/archive1


 * 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 User:Giants2008 10:01, 30 July 2013 (UTC).

List of Major League Baseball pitchers who have struck out four batters in one inning

 * Nominator(s): Bloom6132 (talk) 15:18, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel it has been improved significantly and now meets all 6 FL criteria. Bloom6132 (talk) 15:18, 20 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Support on prose and images. Solid article, good job. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:04, 21 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Support - great list, great prose, my only qualm would be that the picture of A.J. Burnett has a shadow over his face, and consequently it is kind of hard to see, but looking at Commons, it is clearly the best option. Great job!  Go  Phightins  !  21:44, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review. Yeah, I too would've preferred getting another pic of Burnett, preferably in a Yankees or Marlins uniform (the two teams he was on when he accomplished the feat). —Bloom6132 (talk) 07:03, 29 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment The Dagger (†) is probably a bad choice to mark hall of fame members. It's traditionally used to indicate deceased, due to its resemblance to a cross. Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:25, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I know it's not that ideal – it was once discussed here. What it boils down to is consistency – daggers have been utilized in almost all baseball FLs.  The reason for it is that the asterisk (which is only utilized in older, non-updated FLs) carries an especially negative connotation in the baseball world.  It was first popularized during the M&M Boys quest to break Ruth's single-season HR record, and now it's been used for the stats of players suspected of taking performance-enhancing drugs. —Bloom6132 (talk) 00:27, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * It may also be worth noting that in cricket, wicketkeepers are denoted with a † (see this scorecard for example). It's certainly used in Europe to denote the deceased (I think German Wikipedia use it routinely instead of "died" in biographies), but it's fine here. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man] (talk) 16:42, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Couldn't, say, the Pilcrow be used? or maybe an asterism (⁂)? It'd be much less ambiguous. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:35, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but a dagger is still the most preferable. An asterism might not be accessible to some screen readers. —Bloom6132 (talk) 10:42, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * That's a good point. I've made an accessible asterism template, Template:Asterism, to match Template:Dagger et al. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:29, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * On a related subject, should the ring (°) have an accessible template, or is that handled by screen readers? Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:31, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think either the degree (º) or section (§) symbols are cover by screen readers (basically any symbol that's not in image form). But that's an unfortunate limitation of not having enough symbols in graphics rather than text.  That's why I'm still not keen on eliminating the dagger.  It is (in my opinion at least) more aesthetically compatible, especially given that the active players symbol (double-dagger) compliment the HOF'ers symbol.  Even TRM said the dagger is "fine here" and my thought is to leave well enough alone.  But if you insist on an asterism, I'll discuss this with the baseball community first before making any changes.  We've been using daggers for HOF players in all lists (even ones without the mustard colour), so this change will have to be discussed and approved of first. —Bloom6132 (talk) 15:22, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * One other issue. The last sentence of the paragraph of the lead is uncited. Shouldn't it be? Or is all that information in the article? Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:35, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * All covered in the general ref at the bottom. Readers can skim through each of the Baseball Almanac bios if they wanted to in order to confirm the statement.  This has been done for all my previous 9 baseball FLs (all less than a year old) and has been accepted every time. —Bloom6132 (talk) 10:42, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Alright. if we sort out the ° accessibility, I'll support. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:50, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * And no, it doesn't look like º or § will be sorted out (unless someone can find a way to turn them into graphics). However, this issue has been overlooked in the past, since reviewers understood the limited number of symbols in graphics, and that I did correct the ones that I could (i.e. † and ‡). —Bloom6132 (talk) 15:28, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I can do that, if you want. It's not too hard. What should they be called? Ring and Section sign?
 * Also, would it be worth changing the alt on the symbols, e.g., which gives ? Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:10, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Degree symbol and section sign. And thanks for your help! —Bloom6132 (talk) 16:21, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * As for my opinion on the asterism, read the long paragraph (a.k.a. "rant") above. —Bloom6132 (talk) 16:23, 22 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Support - all looks good. Orval Overall, that's a quality name :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:37, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.