Wikipedia:Peer review/Doc Adams/archive2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Doc Adams[edit]

Previous peer review
Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'm considering a nomination at FAC, which would be my first. Before going there, I want to know whether this article on an early baseball personality can be brought to the point where it has a realistic chance of passing, and what I can do to improve it. In particular, I'm looking for comments on prose issues, jargon-related concerns, and whether the article has sufficient context to be understandable. Note that sources on the topic are relatively limited and I've already squeezed out what I feel is worth mentioning about Adams; however, I should be able to add some more background on baseball in a few areas if it's deemed necessary. I'll act on all comments to the extent that I can, and I look forward to seeing what you have to say.

Thanks, Giants2008 (Talk) 15:18, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Sarastro

Overall, this is looking good. It certainly has an excellent chance of passing. I had no real jargon concerns, and I think the "baseball-speak" is explained extremely well. Context looks good, there were just a couple of parts where a little more detail may help. A few prose points, but possibly picky and none of them a big deal. Let me know when it goes to FAC. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:30, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lead
  • "he has been credited as a significant figure in the sport's early history": Who has credited him? Fans? Critics? Historians?
  • "Adams began to play baseball in 1839" suggests he had never played the sport before 1839; the main body seems to say that this is just one possible theory as others say he went to Yale to play.
    • Removed that bit from the lead due to the multiple theories, which take an excessive amount of space to describe for a lead section. It's enough to know when he started playing for club teams. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:50, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "As a player, he received credit for pioneering the shortstop position": From?
    • Historians again. I went with "researchers" in the text for variety. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:50, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Adams made baseballs and helped in the production of bats; he also umpired games sometimes.": Not sure about made; possibly "manufactured" would work better here? And "helped in the production of bats" is a little vague, even for the lead. How much did he help? Finally, it may be better to say "he also occasionally umpired games" or "he also occasionally acted as umpire".
    • Made the two suggested copy-edits and added a mention of his role, which appears to be one of oversight according to the sources. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:50, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "voted into other positions": A little vague?
  • "advocate for rule changes": I may be wrong, but is it not "advocate of"? But that one may be a minefield!
  • "he led the new organization's rules and regulations committee": My personal preference would be for "led the rules and regulations committee of the new organization".
  • "Adams set the field's bases 90 feet (27 m) from each other": Maybe better as "Adams ruled [too strong for his role?] that the bases on the field should be 90 feet (27 m) apart".
  • "Adams began working in the medical field in the late 1830s, and practiced in New York City during his time as a member of the Knickerbockers. In 1865, he left the field": field…field
  • "credited him as" sounds a little clumsy.
    • Turned it into "historians have given him credit for...". Giants2008 (Talk) 22:50, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • It seems a little odd that the lead's last paragraph covers his medical and personal life then goes back to his baseball. Maybe better to move the last sentences beginning "Adams' contributions…" to the previous paragraph?
  • Maybe worth saying who John Thorn is (i.e. historian John Thorn or John Thorn, a baseball historian…")
    • Done. Again went with "Researcher", as I had used the word "historian" in the last sentence. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:50, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Early life
  • "U.S.": Not sure, but I think I would prefer this to be spelt out here, but not a big deal.
  • "After being schooled at Kimball Union Academy in New Hampshire (from 1826 to 1828) and Amherst, Massachusetts' Mt. Pleasant Classical Institution": Do we need parentheses? If it is important enough to include, I would remove them, particularly as such information is not given for the second school. Also, why the abbreviation of Mt.?
    • Did both; I don't have a great reason for abbreviating it before. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:50, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Daniel Lucius Adams attended three colleges": Why not just "Adams"? I don't think there is any danger of confusion with his father at this stage.
  • "in a letter penned in 1832 or 1833 that he had begun playing": Better as "began playing"?
  • "asking him where he had left the items in the family's house.": Confusing here. To what does this refer? If it is where she refers to the "bats and balls", I don't think it is necessary. If it is not that, I am lost!
    • That is what it referred to. I removed it as you seemed to suggest. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:50, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Researcher Gary O'Maxfield has stated": I think "Researcher Gary O'Maxfield states…" is better construction here.
  • "saying the opportunity to play baseball was one of the reasons": I think "baseball" is unnecessary here.
    • You're right; that was actually a glaring redundancy I usually catch in others! Giants2008 (Talk) 22:50, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "he went into the medical profession, joining his father": I initially thought this meant joined his father in the profession, but apparently it was in the same place. Maybe this could be cleared up?
    • Changed it to "joined his father's medical practice", which should be clearer. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:50, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The club attempted to organize its first game…": As they were evidently successful, would "The club organiszed its first game" be better?
  • "The Knickerbockers had a 2–2 win–loss record in 1857 in competitive games": in…in never looks great; what about "in competitive games during 1857"?
  • I appreciate that details for his games are probably very scarce, but it there any indication of how his performance compared to other players? My understanding of modern baseball is rudimentary, but as it was evidently a very different game then, it may be useful to have some yardstick with which to measure him, if possible.
    • I'm not finding much of anything in my sources about elite players of the 1840s–early 1950s. It doesn't seem to have been studied. One of the books says that baseball back then was more about recreation/exercise than competition, and so the most talented players "did not really matter". It doesn't seem like they're known in any case, and the researchers don't seem to know what to do with the surviving run totals to determine them. Is it worth adding a sentence or so to the article saying that determining the most-skilled players wasn't emphasized back then? Giants2008 (Talk) 01:40, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Might be worth saying something along these lines if you can source it from that book; might just give some perspective for the modern, stats-obsessed reader! Sarastro1 (talk) 19:54, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Added a little about this, which hopefully gives sufficient context. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:48, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Playing style
  • Forgive my ignorance, and this is probably not directly relevant, but has the role of shortstop has changed since Adams invented it? In other words, does he still relay throws or is there a different emphasis now? The article implies that they "plug a gap" in the field, but I'm afraid my baseball breaks down at this point!
    • The emphasis, and positioning, are both significantly different now. I put more on this in the Legacy section, since I felt the information fit best there.
  • "he played at every position except pitcher": played at or played in?
    • Actually, I think "played at" is correct here. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:48, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Equipment maker and umpire
  • "Adams found that the ball became more "lively"": What does this mean in baseball terms. In cricket it would probably mean that it swung or moved around more (probably owing to a similar effect), but I think even if the meaning is the same, some clarification would help the general reader.
    • That basically means that the ball goes farther. I clarified this in the article. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:48, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He personally made baseballs": As above, I think manufactured would be better here.
  • "Author Peter Morris credits Adams' ball-making efforts with helping to prevent the Knickerbockers from going under in their first few years.": Not sure about "with helping" here, and the sentence is a little lumpy. Maybe better to say "According to author Peter Morris, Adam's ball-manufacturing efforts helped to keep the Knickerbockers in operation during their first few years". And it is not clear from what went before that his sales of baseballs went to the club.
    • As a matter of fact, sales didn't have anything to do with the quote. They had a limited number of baseballs in those days, and without balls they couldn't have played at all. This should now be a little clearer. I also re-wrote the sentence in accordance with the prose suggestions. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:48, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Who did he assist in making bats?
    • The sources don't give any real details as to who the bat-makers were. I wish they did, but without that knowledge I can't really do anything here. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:48, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "One notable game he umpired": Maybe better as "One notable example" as everything else is mentioned in the previous sentence.
  • "Adams became the first umpire to use a new rule allowing for a strike to be called against a batter who did not swing at a pitch in the strike zone": Possibly worth mentioning what the previous rule was.
Knickerbockers and NABBP executive
  • "The Eagle Base Ball Club, desiring a unified set of rules, sent a message to the Knickerbockers requested that a committee be formed.": Something not quite right here: either "requesting" or missing "which".
  • "Adams himself was considered a "respected" figure": By who?
    • By the other teams in existence, according to the source used. This has been clarified. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:48, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • This section may be a touch listy: "In XXXX, Adams was YYYY".
    • Tried to vary the prose more. It was hard because much of the content is list-like, but I think it's less listy now. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:48, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "tasked with getting local clubs to send delegates": "getting" lacks a little elegance! Maybe "encouraging"?
Number of players and game length
  • I know it is linked, but probably worth saying who Spink was. Also worth saying why there was the discrepancy in the accounts, if known.
    • Mentioned that Spink was a journalist. Unfortunately, nobody addresses the disparity in the accounts, at least not in the sources I have. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:48, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Distance between bases and campaign against bound rule
  • "The rule change was proposed to the NAABP annually by Adams but did not pass": From what year, and how many times?
    • Seems like it was every year from 1858 (the NAABP's first year) through 1861, and the next few years after Adams retired. One of my source books had good details on this, which I've incorporated. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:48, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Personal life
  • "They had four more children from…": I don't think we need the number; just "the others were born between…"
    • Made a change in this fashion, and rearranged some of the wording in response to the change. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:48, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would be inclined to merge this with "Later life" but even if not, I think it would make sense to place it before that section, rather than after his death.
    • I did merge the content into Later life, and I think it works well there. It expands that section a bit and takes care of the stubbiest section that the article had before. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:48, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Legacy
  • Similar to above, I might be inclined to move this to the end of his baseball "career" rather than at the end of the article, but really not an issue if you don't agree as it is a matter of personal preference.
    • I personally like having the Legacy section at the end because it provides an ending of sorts to the article. I'd rather leave the content there, if it's not too big a deal. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:48, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
General
  • Another image or two would be good, if possible. File:Doc Adams.jpg is on commons, but the publication information is a little ropey and I'm not sure it would survive an image review unless more can be found out about it.
    • I can't prove that image was published pre-1923, and have removed it from the article before for that reason. I'll see about getting some kind of image to go with the playing career section. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:48, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Okay, I found an old drawing published before 1923, which I added into Playing career. Wish there was more I could do, but given the era I should probably feel lucky to have any illustrations at all, so I can't complain too much. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:48, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • There seems to be a problem with the external link in ref 7.
    • Oh, great. The Harvard people seem to have decided to remove most of their archived articles. The Internet Archive appears to have a version of the article, but there are technical issues at the moment (not sure if they're related to what happened on the Harvard site). I'll give it a day or two, and if there's no change I'll have to start replacing cites. Most of what that source covers is available elsewhere, so the situation isn't dire. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:48, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Doesn't look like the Internet Archive version is working properly, so I'll have to go through and re-source these items. In case I don't return here, note that this will be done before an FAC. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:48, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do not watch peer reviews, but please ping me if there are any issues or comments. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:30, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thank you so much for taking this on. I was hoping to see you stop by, given your work with cricket bios. I'll add comments above as I get through the comments. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:50, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Doc_Adams/archive2&oldid=1076197378"