Wikipedia:Peer review/Derek Jeter/archive2

Derek Jeter

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Since this article's first peer review in 2009, I got this article listed as a GA, but failed to get it listed at FA three times. The first time, I withdrew because there was more work than I had thought. The second and third got stymied mostly by prose quality. I think I got the prose very close at the end of the last FAN, but I ran out of steam and it closed, since it had been open a while. I need help getting this as close to FA as possible now, so that the fourth review won't be so problematic. Thanks, – Muboshgu (talk) 01:05, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Comments – I've purposefully avoided trying to review this too deeply at FAC since I'm a die-hard Yankees fan, but for purposes of finding weak areas before another FAC I should be somewhat useful.

• High school: "Jeter's baseball talents drew the attention of University of Michigan". Feels like "the" should be in there before "University".
• Draft: Would be a good idea to mention what spot Jeter was drafted in (sixth, I believe). Although I like the Hal Newhouser story very much, his draft placement would make it clear that the Astros weren't the only team that passed on the opportunity to draft Jeter.
• Minor leagues: "Manager Gary Denbo benched Jeter in the season's final game to ensure his average would not drop below the infamous .200 mark, known in baseball as the Mendoza Line." I remember some jargon concerns from the previous FAC, and fear that "infamous" could be another one. It's not clear to a non-baseball fan why this is infamous, and I'm really not convinced the word is even needed. The sentence seems just fine, and understandable, without it.
• Is there a link for South Atlantic League?
• We have "Class-A" and "Class A" in this section. Make up your mind on whether or not the hyphen should be in there and stick with it.
• Not sure if Topps needs italics or not.
• "The Yankees reportedly offered Jeter the opportunity to work out with the replacement players in Spring Training prior to the 1995 season, but he declined to cross the picket line during MLB's work stoppage." I'd remove "the" before "replacement players" and decapitalize spring training.
• "Steinbrenner approved a trade that would have sent pitcher Mariano Rivera to the Seattle Mariners for shortstop Felix Fermin, but general managers Gene Michael and Brian Cashman convinced Steinbrenner to give Jeter an opportunity." Bob Watson was the general manager in 1996, not Michael or Cashman. Michael had a scouting position at the time, while I don't remember for certain what role Cashman had. I think he was the assistant GM, but wouldn't swear to it. The article is incorrect, either way.
• The "and hit his first major-league home run that day" part isn't backed by the Baseball-Reference page. Should be relatively easy to find a source to put here, if the previous one doesn't already cover it.
• Excess "a" in "Jeter hit a fly ball to right field that was a ruled a home run by the umpires."
• "and the Yankees defeated the Atlanta Braves in the 1996 World Series to win their first World Series championship since 1978." Couple things to note here. First, the second World Series could be considered a prose redundancy, and the sentence seems to flow nicely even without it. Second, the FAC reviewers aren't fond of bare year links like the 1978 one appears to be.
• "and 84 RBIs, and for a team that won 114 games during the regular season and is widely considered to be one of the greatest of all time." First, remove the "and" before "for a team". Second, I'm not convinced that one source from the team is enough verification that the 1998 Yankees were among the greatest baseball teams in history. There are many who say that, so it shouldn't be too hard to find one or two supporting sources.

Overall I think this has come a long way from when it was first at FAC, but I do still see some rough edges to sort out. In addition, I still sense some choppiness in the career summary, though I'm having a hard time putting my finger on it. Don't think it's that far away, however. Please ping me if you want me to review further. For an article as close to my heart as this, I'm definitely willing to put some more time into looking at it. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:49, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Brief comments

• Ensure that all references are consistent. Ref 116 and 117 use a different format to the rest.
• Ref 143 is dead.

– Lemonade51 (talk) 12:54, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments! If anyone else wants to chime in before this gets archived, I'd greatly appreciate it. I can use all the help I can get here. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:40, 14 January 2012 (UTC)