Wikipedia:Peer review/2009 World Series/archive1

2009 World Series
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I have been working on bringing it to featured quality and, with a month of winter break upcoming, I'd like to finish the job. The article has been modeled off of 2004 World Series and, to a lesser extent, 1926 World Series. I know the Aftermath section is in need of work, that's one big area for improvement. Beyond that, there was serious debate at the FAC for 2004 World Series (so much it was restarted) over the use of the fair use logo. What type of image would you use there?

Thanks, Staxringold talkcontribs 17:32, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Guess what?... You're gonna get a review from me. It will take some time, and I'll go piece by piece, but as always, we work well together. Lol. Doing... KV5  ( Talk  •  Phils ) 16:43, 17 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments from KV5
 * Series results that are written out are parenthetical and should be separated from the rest of the sentence by commas. Examples from the lead include: "The two franchises had previously met in the 1950 World Series in which the Yankees swept the Phillies, four games to none" and "The Yankees defeated the Phillies in 2009, four games to two, to win the franchise's 27th World Series championship".
 * Done.


 * I think it's unnecessary detail to have the Phillies' three previous opponents in the lead. The fact itself is notable, but the other teams aren't. I would move this to a footnote. Same with the Yankees.
 * Done. Should I source this to the B-Ref pages for those WS in that note?
 * B-Ref is always good. KV5  ( Talk  •  Phils ) 16:11, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Staxringold talkcontribs 16:32, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Reference 4 does not verify the fact it's sourcing.
 * Yeah, deleted. That was a left-over source about the "Turnpike Series" thing that you rightfully removed. As with above, should I source this with B-Ref pages?
 * As per above. KV5  ( Talk  •  Phils ) 16:11, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Staxringold talkcontribs 16:32, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


 * "and the series winning Game 6" - series-winning
 * Done.


 * "as a result of their 4–3 win" - since this refers to the American League, it should be singular, ''of its 4-3 win"
 * Done.


 * "only the third one ever "
 * Done.


 * "During the regular season, the Phillies led the National League East for most of the season" - I would say most of the year to avoid redundancy
 * Done.


 * The Phillies did not have the best regular-season record in the National League. They were the #2 seed, but faced the Rockies due to the rule disallowing first-round intradivisional matchups.
 * Yeah... I have no idea where that sentence snuck in. This is the annoying thing about these large, constantly updated articles when you come in midstream. There are bits like this and the POV Game 1 summary that are just silly. Fixed.


 * "The Phillies won that series ... They won that series by a dominoqq series score" - redundant, reword
 * Done.


 * "Carl Pavano[17]," - move ref
 * Done.


 * "Notable free agent acquisitions ... Another major acquisition" - redundant, re-word
 * Done.


 * "CC Sabathia had a strong season winning 19 games," - comma after season
 * Done.


 * "the Yankees all-time leader" - Yankees'
 * Done.


 * You use ALDS and ALCS without explicit definition. Same above with NLCS.
 * Done. Left abbreviations even if they aren't reused for the infobox.


 * Umpire should link to Umpire (baseball).
 * Done.


 * "The World Series crew had included at least one umpire who had never worked the World Series in 24 of the past 25 series, but following several mistakes by umpires in earlier rounds of the playoffs this crew did not" - there are some comma issues here, but adding commas in all the places they belong would turn this into a big run-on sentence, so I suggest the following: The World Series crew had included at least one umpire who had never worked the World Series in 24 of the past 25 series; however, following several mistakes by umpires in earlier rounds of the playoffs, this crew did not.
 * Done.


 * "Citizen's Bank Park" - no apostrophe
 * Done.


 * "1 p.m." - I think this needs to have a non-breaking space; it's broken on my monitor
 * You have some times as above ("1 p.m.") and others like so ("7:00 p.m."). Consistent format.
 * Done.


 * "Prior to the game First Lady Michelle Obama" - comma after game
 * Done. Also for the Jay Z and Mary J Blige events.


 * "home-run" - no hyphen, and link
 * Done.


 * "and only three hits"
 * Done.


 * "seven Yankees' batters" - remove apostrophe, this isn't possessive
 * Done, but that's not possessive? I guess being a member of a team isn't really being a possession, but they do own their contracts.


 * "two homeruns" - home runs
 * Done.


 * "The stellar pitching" - POV unless it's referenced
 * Done.


 * "was quickly replaced"
 * Done.


 * "was relieved by David Robertson who walked Jayson Werth" - comma after Robertson
 * Done.


 * "The star of the game was Phillies starter Cliff Lee who, after giving up an unearned run in the ninth, finished with a complete game only allowing just the one run on six hits and striking out ten batters, not walking any of the hitters he faced, and making some notable fielding plays." - several issues:
 * "star of the game" is POV unless sourced
 * "giving up", which is used a lot, is a bit jargony
 * " only allowing just the one run"
 * "notable fielding plays" needs a ref.
 * Fixed. I can't find any real sourcing on the fielding. He made that one impressive grab where he nonchalantly lobbed the ball to first, but that's the only thing I can even find a mention of.


 * In the "Game 2" section, I've encountered the first of a lot of severe overlinking. I noticed this before during the series but nothing was done about it since that time. I'm not going to go through player by player and find them all; I'll leave that task to you. Suffice it to say, however, that players shouldn't be linked more than once in the "Series" section, and that, after their first mention, using last names is probably enough, since I don't think there are any players between the teams who have the same surname.
 * Shouldn't they be linked once per game, not just once in the Series section overall? That's how I'd been trying to format it on purpose. That way the individual games are readable. Doesn't seem like overlinking to me.
 * I don't think so. WP:LINK says "In general, link only the first occurrence of an item. This is a rule of thumb that has many exceptions, including... where a later occurrence of an item is a long way from the first." I don't believe that these are far enough apart, considering the length of the game summaries, to be considered "a long way from the first".
 * I'm doing this per 2004 World Series. Jason Varitek, for example, is linked in multiple games. Heck Renteria is linked twice in Game 1. Staxringold talkcontribs 16:21, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm no FAC reviewer; I'm just saying what I think. Feel free to implement my suggestions or not at your leisure. KV5  ( Talk  •  Phils ) 16:28, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Hope you won't oppose at FAC over this in a few days! :) Staxringold talkcontribs 16:33, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I stick to FLC... FAC scares me. I went through one attempted candidacy, and now I just stick to GAs. What does that tell you? KV5  ( Talk  •  Phils ) 16:38, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


 * "and a part of the two teams' long standing rivalry" - I don't think "rivalry" needs to be linked again.
 * Done.


 * "With Melky Cabrera at second base and Posada at first, Johnny Damon hit"
 * Done.


 * "first base umpire" - first-base is a compound adjective here, so it should be hyphenated
 * Done.


 * "Ultimately Rivera threw 39 pitches" - comma after "Ultimately"
 * Done.

My review is complete through Game 2; I'll return for further issues later. KV5 ( Talk  •  Phils ) 13:22, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Is aftermath the best title for the heading? Aftermath makes me think of a tragic event, which may be true in the eyes of the Phillies fans. Suggest a better title, perhaps follow up? I am not sure, not a big deal either way. Dincher (talk) 00:43, 21 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Remarks from Nosleep


 * Most images have alt text - the logo in the infobox lacks it, as does File:New York Yankees 2009 World Series Champions.jpg. I would suggest adding handedness (where obvious by the picture) and approximate ages of the individuals to the alt text.
 * Added the alt text to those 2 images. The handedness I can try to add (certainly for pitchers throwing), but I dunno about approx age. Basically for everyone you'd say roughly 30 years old and be within 5 years, and getting any more precise would be a lie in trying to read those pics.


 * Reference 80 (though it shows up as reference 75 on the checklinks tool) is dead.
 * Fixed. Staxringold talkcontribs 04:36, 28 December 2009 (UTC)


 * the Philadelphia Phillies, champions of the National League (NL) and the defending world champions Suggest defending World Series champions as it's often a point of contention, major or minor, that the World Series really is the "world championship" of baseball, given that much of the world plays it and only two countries are eligible for representation in the World Series.
 * Fair nuff. I would think the same kind of rules about color/colour for example would control here (from the viewpoint of the World Series and those involved it's a World Championship, even if the Japanese/Latin American leagues would disagree).


 * Is it necessary to enumerate the teams' previous World Series opponents? Especially in the lead, which seems a bit bloated as is.
 * That got trimmed down above. I think it's worth noting the hefty connection to each others respective divisions in recent past, and their immediately previous opponents just makes good sense IMO.


 * They finished the season with a record of 93–69 (.574), six games above the second-place Florida Marlins. Presumably this is covered by an existing source, but my general rule of thumb is every statistic needs a conspicuous citation.
 * Covered by the source right before, but I'll duplicate it.


 * The Phillies won that series 3–1 and went on to play the Los Angeles Dodgers in the NLCS This acronym is not used or spelled out previously.
 * Fixed above.


 * They won that series by a series score of 4–1 Score? Potentially confusing, as individual games obviously have scores, but does the series? I wouldn't say so.
 * Further reworded.


 * Is the whole of the third paragraph under heading 1.1 covered by citation 12?
 * I hate that stupid sentence SO MUCH. It is such absolutely crufty, meaningless garbage. Deleting again.
 * Also, added some sourcing for the rest of the other paragraph.


 * position players Alex Rodriguez and Mark Teixeira both had 30 or more home runs and 100 or more runs batted in (RBI). This sounds awkwardly inexact when dealing with only two people. Suggest more than 30 home runs (or over 30) and more than 100 runs batted in.
 * The problem is ARod had exactly 30 home runs and 100 RBI. And that's notable because those are 2 pretty common cut-offs for a good season (20-25-30 HR, 100 runs, 100 RBI, etc are common benchmarks).
 * Then how about the exact totals for both? position players Alex Rodriguez and Mark Teixeira had strong seasons offensively, Rodriguez with 30 home runs and 100 runs batted in (RBI) and Teixiera with 72 and 250. (since I don't know Teixiera's numbers offhand)
 * 39 and 122 (quite good, though RBIs annoy me), and done.


 * The Yankees defeated the Minnesota Twins in three games in the 2009 ALDS and the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim in six games in the 2009 ALCS Acronyms not used above
 * Fixed above.


 * The third paragraph in heading 1.2 lacks any citations.
 * Added some


 * The Phillies won the previous season's World Series against the Tampa Bay Rays, the franchise's second championship. The Yankees lost their last World Series appearance to the Florida Marlins in 2003 and had not won since 2000 against the New York Mets. The teams had previously met in the 1950 World Series, which the Yankees swept in four games. Uncited
 * I'll cite the 1950 WS. But the rest has been moved to a footnote. I can cite this, as I said to KV5, with the individual series' if you think it's necessary.
 * Nevermind, fixed.


 * Joe West, Dana DeMuth, Gerry Davis, Brian Gorman, Jeff Nelson, and Mike Everitt served as umpires for the series. Umpire links to a glorified disambiguation page.
 * Fixed above.


 * Two different orthographies for "home run" in section 2.1 (two-out solo home-run by Chase Utley and he first left-handed hitter to hit two homeruns) which I'm pretty sure are both wrong.
 * Both fixed above.


 * The stellar pitching by Lee and Yankees starter CC Sabathia POV?
 * Fixed above.


 * The star of the game was Phillies starter Cliff Lee Lee has already been referred to earlier in the paragraph, plus "star" seems a bit POV.
 * Fixed above.


 * Why Pedro Martínez but Alex Rodriguez (the diacritic)?
 * No reason, however that's the correct location of the ARod article. No diacritic.


 * With Melky Cabrera at second base and Posada at first Johnny Damon hit a low line drive Cabrera is referred to in the previous sentence, no need to give his full name again.
 * Fixed above.


 * The Phillies scored first with Jayson Werth's lead-off solo homer followed by a bases-loaded walk and a sacrifice fly to make it 3–0 in the bottom of the second inning. Suggest solo home run, which was followed by for additional clarity.
 * Fixed.


 * He walked Johnny Damon who then stole second base. Needs a comma
 * Fixed.


 * Alex Rodriguez was hit by a pitch and Damon scored on a single by Jorge Posada. Rodriguez is already referred to in this section. Also suggest a transitional word, like was then hit by a pitch, which then needs a comma following it here.
 * Fixed.

Will finish later. Nosleep ( Talk  ·  Contribs ) 22:36, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I actually don't think I'm going to be able to get back to this. Nosleep  ( Talk  ·  Contribs ) 06:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem, thanks for all your work! I'll work on the Aftermath section and then start the FAC soon. I'll let you know! Staxringold talkcontribs 15:07, 6 January 2010 (UTC)