Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Gold Glove Award winners at third base/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 Matthewedwards 22:39, 27 June 2009 [1].
List of Gold Glove Award winners at third base[edit]
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating this for featured list because I can. Just kidding. Of course I wouldn't bring anything here that I didn't think met the criteria, nor would I nominate it if I didn't intend to address the comments raised. Cheers. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 01:14, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Just a couple comments though,
- The first reference isn't working. There are no Disambiguous links, the table formatting looks good, I checked it through AWB and there are no general fixes needed, all the references have good formatting and the lead seems like a good summery of the article. Not much on sports data but other than that it looks like a good list. --Kumioko (talk) 02:17, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The reference does work. If you checked it through the external link checker in the toolbox, it shows up blue because the SI archives block bots and scripts. If you click through directly from the article, you can see the reference. Can you clarify what you mean by "not much on sports data"? KV5 (Talk • Phils) 11:29, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Truco
|
---|
Comments
|
Support Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
"Hall of Famers to win a Gold Glove"-->Hall of Famers to have won a Gold Glove
"The least errors committed in a winning season is five" A bit too ambiguous; make it more obvious that you are referring to third-base Gold Glove winners.
"only pair of brothers to win Gold Glove Awards"-->only pair of brothers to have Gold Glove AwardsDabomb87 (talk) 21:19, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:19, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Very good, just as the others in the series are. Giants2008 (17-14) 21:42, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.