Talk:Biogenesis scandal

A news item involving Biogenesis scandal was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 8 August 2013.

Wikipedia

Baseball High‑importance

	Baseball portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Baseball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of baseball on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BaseballWikipedia:WikiProject BaseballTemplate:WikiProject BaseballBaseball articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Drug Policy (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Drug Policy, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Drug PolicyWikipedia:WikiProject Drug PolicyTemplate:WikiProject Drug PolicyDrug Policy articles

Proposed merge with Biogenesis of America

Biogenesis as a clinic has no notability outside of this scandal. Information on the clinic itself could easily be contained in the scandal article. It's better to have one article on this than two fractured articles. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:49, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Per notability concerns expressed by Muboshgu. -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 22:57, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Per Muboshgu. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:54, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. -- Y not? 20:33, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Player table

I'm concerned that the article will rapidly date once editorial interest wanes, and the current-status of the listed players obsolesces.--Froglich (talk) 04:31, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Let's clarify that the positions and teams are as of the date of the suspension, so it doesn't need updating. -- Y not? 12:19, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. "Currently" is a term that gets dated very quickly. I made a change to the wording, and if anyone can think of a better way to phrase it, by all means. – Muboshgu (talk) 13:56, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

questions about A-Rod's suspension

I find this:

"On August 5, 2013, Alex Rodriguez was suspended through the 2014 season, a total of 211 games, ..."

As I have asked in the Talk section of A-Rod's Wikipedia entry: When does that "211 games" start? A-Rod has indicated he will appeal, and he did play last night for the Yankees. And what is this I hear of this coming Thursday (2 days after the message you are reading)? Would A-Rod's appeal shorten the "211 games"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.20 (talk) 18:50, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The 211 games would start from the date when his appeal fails. So if they ruled on this in the off-season this year (which is probable) and the appeal failed, he'd miss all of the games of the 2014 season, and the first 49 of the 2015 season. If he would have waived his appeal and started the suspension immediately, he probably would have been given a reduced number, and he would have burned off 70-some from the total in 2013. Jkonrath (talk) 18:01, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A-Rod being allowed to play

The article needs background on why he's being permitted to play pending appeal while no other players is taking?/eligible?/whatever? for the same scenario, especially as enormous sums of income are involved.--Froglich (talk) 18:52, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Other issue the article might address: how are the disabled and minor-league players affected by the suspensions? (obviously they wouldn't be affected if the suspensions involve MLB games only, and only the next fifty or so games (which you could miss anyway if disabled while collecting salary).--Froglich (talk) 18:59, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Players nationality

I not a baseball fun but the nationality of each player deserve a space in the table, aparition or not in national baseball team to next or past WBC or olympic team, weakining it teams or not matter--Feroang (talk) 23:54, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Add it then -- Y not? 01:59, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. How is their nationality relevant in this context? – Muboshgu (talk) 02:38, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"The 13 simultaneous suspensions are the most since 1921 when eight players were banned for life for throwing the 1919 World Series"

This strikes me as meaningless? 13 is more than 8, so it is in fact the most simultaneous suspensions EVER, not since 1921. I would just remove this, but it's sourced (from the Guardian), which makes the same claim, so I'm wondering if I'm just missing something here. (Two more players were banned in connection with the Black Sox scandal, Joe Gedeon and Dickie Kerr, but that still only brings us to 10.) -Elmer Clark (talk) 07:18, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Delete it, then. WP:BEBOLD. Erobinson55 (talk) 23:59, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like User:Rupertslander went ahead and reworded it. -Elmer Clark (talk) 20:54, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnicity of Players

How is it that all of the suspended players seem to be of Hispanic background? Has anyone else discussed this? GrimmC (talk) 18:42, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No. -- Y not? 15:02, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty sure Ryan Braun isn't Hispanic. Jkonrath (talk) 22:20, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Accusations and investigation

The introduction to the article says, "Anthony Bosch...Dr. Pedro Bosch...Ashley Bosch". Thus listing three people named Bosch involved with Biogenesis.

In the section Accusations and investigation, the third paragraph has "In April, Bosch received a complaint from the Florida Department of Health for practicing medicine without a license." I found this sentence completely ambiguous. From other investigations I know the investigators put pressure on everyone hoping to crack one and get them talking. So I did not know if the third paragraph meant Anthony or Ashley.

Am I supposed to assume this Bosch is Anthony simply because he was named in the previous paragraph? Your comment says "yes". But that requires the reader to know the standard Wikipedia style and to believe that it is correctly being followed here.

Is that really the standard Wikipedia style? If it is, I am sorry to hear that. I cannot believe I am the only reader to whom this would cause confusion. It sounds presumptuous of Wikipedia. Why not just allow the specific naming of the person in cases such as this where there is plenty of room for ambiguity and confusion.

Respectfully yours Nick Beeson (talk) 22:46, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The second paragraph uses the full name Anthony Bosch, "In March, the MLB sued the clinic's owner, Anthony Bosch, and his business partners, Carlos Acevedo, Ricardo Martinez, Marcelo Albir, and Paulo da Silveira in an attempt to obtain information. " I think its a general convention, not just Wikipedia, that subsequent mentions of surnames refer to the last mentioned person. There are some extreme cases where constant use of full names may be warranted, but I don't think this is one of them. I recently worked on Dave Arseneault, and remember these sources that use "Areseneault" only even though the articles talk about him and his son, both named Dave Arseneault and on the coaching staff of the same team.[1][2].—Bagumba (talk) 23:42, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]