Talk:Chris Davis (baseball)

Deletions of pertinent information/inline citations

An editor has deleted much of the following paragraph repeatedly, including twice today. As I indicated before on this page at [4], which discussion the editor deleted without response, the inline references are appropriate, support the text, and comport with Wikipedia guidelines. Wknight has fine-tuned the language, and I agree with his helpful edits. The material has been the focus of many newspaper articles this season, which evidences its notability. And the inline citations directly support the material, and comport with Wiki guidelines. While the editor in his last edit summary wrote “there doesnt need to be 500 references for such little info,” I will note that: 1) there is only “such little info” in deference to user’s desire that there not be more info reflected, 2) the number of references seems appropriate to support the content to both me and Wknight, per his comment, and is in accord with Wiki guidelines, and includes articles from the Wall Street Journal and USA Today, and 3) the number of references is somewhat fewer than 500.

The full paragraph is as follows, and the diff reflecting specifically what the editor has repeatedly deleted is [5]

After striking out in 30% of his at bats in 2008, Davis led all players in strikeouts during spring training, with 26 in 79 at bats, though he batted .304. In the regular season, he began on a record strikeout pace with 100 in only 219 at bats and, at one point, had made contact with the ball a league-worst 58.2% of the time. On July 5, he was optioned to the minors, as Josh Hamilton came off the disabled list.

--Ethelh (talk) 19:21, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm fine with reducing the number of quotes re being sent to the minors, if that is all they will support.

And here are two quotes that I thought appropriate, and would put back in:

"It's not the strikeouts that's bothering me, it's just that I'm not having productive at bats," Davis said.

On July 12, Davis said he felt he was is ready to return to Texas. --Ethelh (talk) 19:32, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

References

Chris Davis: The Early Years

I would like someone to find info about Davis' early years as far back as high school atleast. The man is 6'4 235lbs of pure mucle and is extremely athletic (flexible and agile) as evidencenced by the amazing plays he routinely makes in the field. Surely someone with such a freakish combination of size and agility played other sports growing up. I am curious about his athletic history. A man with such size and athleticism and hand eye coordination is quite rare and I am surprised that he seems to have not been very highly heralded in his early days. I am basing that assumption on the lack of info available about him prior to 2006 and his relatively low draft spot. I would think such an athletic specimen would have been a 3 sport high school all american nd Division A college top recruit. If anyone could provide some info on his early athletic history it would greatly approve his Wiki page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.165.27 (talk) 07:54, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Position

At the end of 2012 he played a fair bit of outfield, didn't he. Should his listed "position" change? With the departure of Reynolds, it seems likely that he'll be at first again, but we shouldn't assume that should we? 67.234.253.4 (talk) 20:36, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Bull Durham

While Crush Davis does sound like "Crash Davis" it may also simply have come about because it sounds like Chris Davis. The Article cited does not mention the movie? Anyone know a source that verifies the movie was the inspiration? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.173.225.33 (talk) 16:24, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Requested Move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no move. The consensus appears to be that there is insufficient long-term information to conclude that this is the primary topic. -- tariqabjotu 15:00, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

---

• Chris Davis (baseball) → Chris Davis
• Chris Davis → Chris Davis (disambiguation)

– I know part of the attention Chris Davis the baseball player is getting is because of what he's doing this season. However, after checking the page view statistics, I believe he is clearly the primary topic. In the last 90 days, this one has 118,620 views while Chris Davis (politician) has 338 views, Chris Davis (fighter) has 684 views, Chris Davis (musician) has 640 views, Chris Davis (wide receiver, born 1983) has 288 views, and Chris Davis (wide receiver, born 1984) has 861 views. If Davis should reach 60 home runs, I would like to point out that Roger Maris (who has been retired for years) had 54,572 views over the last 90 days, still a gigantic increase over the views of the other Davis's put together. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 17:33, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose – more primarytopic mania/recentism. The name is very ambiguous, and the disambig page serves well; leave it. Dicklyon (talk) 01:28, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose - this isn't a primary topic. – Michael (talk) 21:19, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
• Strong Support - if his view count is two orders of magnitude greater than the combined total of all its alternatives then clearly the current disambig page is simply getting in our users' way. The primary topic seems pretty clearcut here.--Xiaphias (talk) 03:32, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose Who? If you can admit "what he's doing this season" is driving recent page views, don't turn right around and give us recent page views. Go back and look at a point when he wasn't in the news a lot. If he still dominates pageviews, I could change my mind. --BDD (talk) 18:21, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Baltimore Orioles (2011-present)

The final line in this section is incorrect. Adam Jones has only had one 100 RBI season, that being the 2013 season. He and Davis could not, therefore, have had back-to-back 30 HR and 100 RBI seasons. In fact, 2013 is also Davis' only 100 RBI season.

69.7.229.78 (talk) 18:01, 27 September 2013 (UTC)osfandavy@rcn.com

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Chris Davis (baseball)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: CutOffTies (talk · contribs) 11:53, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Initial Comments

Hello, I will be reviewing this article.

• 0 dab links , good.
• The links look good except this one is not loading [6]

• It loads on my computer; however, I have added an MLB.com one in case others are experiencing the same trouble.

The lead needs to be trimmed to follow the guidelines of establishing context and summarizing the subject's notability . Statistics should be kept to a minimum unless they are put in content. Listing his 2013 53 home runs and saying it led the majors and set an Orioles record is good. The other stats with the Rangers and 2012 is excessive information for the lead.

Overall, I think there are too many stats. Please either put the stats in context or summarize performance as opposed to just listing statistics.

Related, I feel that the coverage is not broad enough. You mention something about his slump in 2014 - I know there have been several articles about this in both local and national sources. The analysis and Davis' response to this should be given more coverage.

Again, his 2013 year was quite a breakout year but there is simply just listing of what he accomplished. There needs to be more about the press coverage of his feats. What did his teammates and manager say? What about when he replied to a question on Twitter asking if he took steroids? That got a lot of coverage.

I think the article is a pretty good summary but you need to add some more content to make it seem more than what you can get by looking at baseball-reference.com. It is too dry currently.

I'll give you some time for that. I will eventually do a review section by section and then after your response I will perform the assessment --CutOffTies (talk) 08:51, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Great improvements. I will review the sections in the next day or two. --CutOffTies (talk) 23:35, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Sections

I'm going to comment by section to help you clean up the article before the assessment. If any of my comments require clarification, please let me know. Please confirm when you are done with my suggestions (regardless of whether or not you implement them).

Lead

• Why does it say "He bats left-handed but throws right-handed." Aren't there several players like that? Consider changing "but" to "and"

• I prefer concise leads that summarize why the subject is notable so users can quickly get a high level summary of the subject. I'd like to hear your thoughts on why things such as height/weight, his hometown, and the junior college info and year by year details are included. Compare this to good article Ryan Hanigan. I'm not saying you necessarily need to change anything but am interested in your view. Nice job minimizing the stats.

• Well, as for the height and weight, hometown, and junior college, most sources include this information. All of the statistical sites do. In addition, you will often find that information in encyclopedias if applicable to the subject (for instance, we don't list Galileo's junior college because he didn't have one). I like to do a much briefer version of year-by-year stats because different years are different, sometimes quite dramatically, especially in Davis's case. I feel this is still a summary.

• In relation to the guidelines for the lead, your explanation does not provide reasons as to why you are including so many details. Complying with the lead guidelines is 1b of the good article criteria.

• Perhaps I am including more details than you think necessary, but I am still summarizing. Mentioning each season of Davis's is not detailed. I always mention every season a player has had (unless, perhaps, their career is 14 or more years), and no one has complained about it yet. As for the height and weight, the lead is the most logical place for it, and it should be in there if we're going to have the article about him being overweight. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 02:50, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

• "tendency to strike out left the Rangers disappointed in him" : Isn't this a bit dramatic? "disappointed" sounds like something a team would feel if he had off the field problems or something

• He was the starting 1B for 92 games in 2009. I wouldn't say that is most of 2009.

• "led all of baseball" - isn't more appropriate to say led the league?

• "career year" sounds a bit jargony. an adjective like excellent seems more straightforward.

• The last paragraph is good.

High school and college

• Consider combining these sentences, "Davis graduated from Longview High School in 2004. At Longview, he played shortstop on the school's varsity baseball team and pitched as well". Right now there's a bunch of brief sentences

• The sequence seems a bit out of place. It says he goes to Navarro, then something about being drafted by the Angels, then I assume his performance his first year at Navarro. His performance should go before being drafted by LAA

• Going back to my initial comments, this is a dry listing of he did that, he did that and he then he did that. Is there anything interesting you can find about his time in HS/college?

Minor league career

• Why are you including other stat leaders he tied with or ahead of him? I wouldn't expect that for most of his leading stats in the majors, much less low level minors unless it was a future HOF player or some extraordinary stat.

• I always wonder, when I see that someone finished second or tied with someone else, who the other player was. Besides, this helps to put achievements in perspective. The fact that Davis's home run total in the Northwest League trailed someone like Adam Witter keeps the reader from thinking this is a special achievement that assures stardom. When tying players such as Cano, that implies a mark that is more special.

• That is not a convincing reason to include those details. I don't think it puts it in perspective and it is too much detail that is straying from the subject. In this case, since it is the Minors and includes players who didn't even make the majors (ex. Manelik Pimentel), it seems like more of a reason to trim it out. Note that not including "unnecessary detail" is part of 3b of the good article criteria

• Is there anything about why he switched from SS to other positions?

• I believe defensively; though not in the minor league section, this article now reflects his defensive excellence at first base.

• Just by listing fielding percentage? Have you researched articles around that time to find secondary sources besides stats?

• The 35 game hit streak needs a reference.

• Where in the reference does it assert that he had a 35 game hit streak? Have you searched for this in an actual article rather than linking to stats? It is always preferable to not link to stats as a reference.

• If you click bio and scroll to the appropriate season, you will find it. It is a bio, not just stats. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 02:50, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

• Again, lots of stats with little context

• I didn't want to do too much analysis of his minor league career; however, I hope Davis's quote about his '08 time with Round Rock helps this out.Sul

• The quote is good though I don't understand why you don't want to "do too much analysis" but list lots of stats.

• "He was named to the All-Star Futures Game but was unable to play in it due to what happened on June 26" - Please spell things out and don't make the readers have to read the next paragraph to figure it out.

• "Callup" is better but just spell it out completely instead of using jargon.

• I read something recently that he was overweight in the minors until he changed his diet. It should not be difficult to find if you do some research. Things like that make an article a lot more interesting and fulfill #3 of the good article criteria, broad in coverage.

2008

• First Ranger in first two starts - good.

• Crush having to do with Bull Durham is not in the ref.

• There is nothing about his fielding.

• "He struck out 88 times, or in 30% of his at bats" No need for "or".. consider changing to "which was" or something like that.

2009

• What were expectations going into the season?

• Ron Washington quote is good.

• "optioned to the minors" is sort of jargony. How about sent back down?

• Why was he sent back down? Besides the strikeouts there's nothing but accomplishments listed so you need to put this in context. What was his response? What did the Rangers say??

• I can't find Davis's response. However, the strikeouts were the reason he was sent down. I also added a quote by Washington.

• Quote is good.

• You say with the Redhawks but readers may be confused who the Redhawks are unless they go back to the 2008 section

• The same with Blalock. After a brief mention in 2008, Blalock reappears with no explanation.

• When I first started contributing to articles on Wikipedia, most editors told me not to link or explain a player twice, which is why I did not with the RedHawks or with Blalock. I don't think the RedHawks are necessary anyway, but I could explain Blalock if you really want.

• I didn't say anything about linking. Just a couple words to put in context (or not mentioning name/team at all) would suffice.

• The quick strikeout pace is good

• Again, lots of stats but no real evaluation of how his season went beyond that.

2010

• " A roster spot and spot" please reword

• Stats stats stats. No context.

I'm going to stop for now. I should have the rest finished soon, but feel free to respond to what I've already listed. --CutOffTies (talk) 07:17, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your responses. I added some final comments for the section through 2010 which may be easier to follow with diff. CutOffTies (talk) 00:08, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

2011

• The Daniels quote is good

• ”That brought”- unnecessary

• For the trade, can you find anything about why the Orioles were interested in him and their reaction to getting him?

• Nice job with the Phil Bradley K stat

2012

• The coverage of his pitching is pretty good. Did Davis have anything to say about this?

• You say nothing about his move to RF late in the season and in the postseason after Markakis got hurt. The first sentence about his playing multiple positions is good but surely there is an article that has this rather than having the mlb stat reference.

• I'm baffled that you have a total of one article from the Baltimore Sun. Please do some more research.

2013

• Pretty good summary. Again some articles from the Sun and other places (The New York Times did a feature on him early in the season) can add more colour

2014

• Alright, though there should be more about analysis of his slump (as I said before, several national articles about this) and especially now, a little bit about how his team is still performing well.

Personal

• Very good summary and appropriate length.

Overall

• Take some time and I’ll come back with an assessment in a week or so. If you need more time, let me know. Again, I suggest focusing on going beyond stats. If you spend significant time reading through a variety of sources you should find some good content to add.

Checklist

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Prose is well-written and concise and meets guidelines of the manual of style. In the review process, the nominator's explanations for their choice of content to include in the lead does not reflect familiarity with guidelines to the lead, but there are no blatant violations.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Information is properly sourced

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The article does a good job of summarizing basic baseball accomplishments of the subject. I question the nominator's choice of sources as most simply back up statistics or are bland references from mlb.com. There are several in-depth profiles of subject from newspapers and magazines that the author of an encyclopedia article should have read and incorporated in the article as part of serious research and effort expected in a good article. However, there is enough done to satisfy "broad" coverage.

   There are some minor details included that I feel are unnecessary and lose focus. Nominator's explanation is not convincing, but they are minor enough to overlook.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Solid tone throughout, no pov. Well referenced.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Article is very stable - almost no vandalism and no edit wars that I can see.

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Images are good

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: Pass

Congratulations. -- -- --CutOffTies (talk) 04:13, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Source dump

• Feature article on his future with the Orioles. Go Phightins! 03:24, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Baseball assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Chris Davis (baseball)/Comments (baseball), and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Chris Davis also played 1B when playing in 2002 with the Dallas Patriots that year they won the mickey mantle world series they also won the 2003 season.

Last edited at 02:07, 12 August 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 14:18, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Chris Davis (baseball). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://archive.is/20140824024519/http://archive.thespectrum.com/usatoday/article/8101305 to http://archive.thespectrum.com/usatoday/article/8101305
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140819083408/http://texas.rangers.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090326&content_id=4067540&vkey=news_tex&fext=.jsp&c_id=tex to http://texas.rangers.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090326&content_id=4067540&vkey=news_tex&fext=.jsp&c_id=tex
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140819083305/http://rangersblog.dallasnews.com/2010/05/home-run-pool-will-julio-borbo.html/ to http://rangersblog.dallasnews.com/2010/05/home-run-pool-will-julio-borbo.html/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140812211357/http://www.csnbaltimore.com/blog/orioles-talk/chris-davis-dropped-seventh-first-time-2012 to http://www.csnbaltimore.com/blog/orioles-talk/chris-davis-dropped-seventh-first-time-2012
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130519141250/http://bellafloraofdallas.com/bella-bride-jill-meyer-chris-davis/ to http://bellafloraofdallas.com/bella-bride-jill-meyer-chris-davis/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:18, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

"Robbed of three home runs" in July, 2015

This should have further explanation. Aside from being unsourced, how could one conclude on July 23 that three robbed HR's was "more than any other Major Leaguer the entire year" (see this diff)? That seems like a crystal ball prediction at the time, since the season wasn't even over then. There's no further explanation given: was he "robbed" because of fan interference, spectacular defensive plays, or bad umpiring calls? The reader is left to wonder, as the rest of the paragraph has nothing more to say about it. This first sentence of the paragraph seems out of place.  JGHowes  ^talk 01:17, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 April 2019

In 2019, he set the MLB record for the most consecutive at bats by a position player without a hit, going 0-for-54. This streak began in 2018 and expanded through the beginning of the 2019 season. On April 13, 2019, his hitless streak ended as he went 3 for 5 with two doubles and 4 RBIs. MJFK61 (talk) 18:14, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. The information on his hitless streak is already in the article. See Chris Davis (baseball)#2019 NiciVampireHeart 18:19, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Later years of career

This article was assessed as a good article back in 2014. To me, it appears that the portions of the article dealing with the period after 2014 are not at the same level of quality as the rest of the article. In its current form, I don't believe the article matches the "good article" criteria at this point. I have done some work on the period after 2014 and would welcome other editors to join me in getting it back up to speed. MonMothma (talk) 01:48, 11 April 2024 (UTC)