| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Four-seam fastball article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
This article is essentially a single-source article composed mostly of a single, lengthy quote from a copyrighted source. I'm not sure this is appropriate. 71.57.26.140 (talk) 02:51, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
- Maybe adding that the reason to it being called the rising fastball is not that it is rising, but instead that the spinn of the ball makes it drop less than an ordinary ball. In fact it is said that the trajectory of the four-seam fastball is dropping so much less than expected that some pitchers swear it is not dropping but instead rising. A persons expectation can play tricks on your eyes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.114.12.152 (talk) 20:52, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
way too much jargon edit
The article tries too hard to introduce tangentially relevant baseball slang, as if trying to impress upon the reader that the article was written by somebody who is part of a special baseball club. Examples include get "around on" a pitch, swinging "empty", the "good-eye" batter, if a batter can "square up", fastball loses "heat", among others (quotation marks are in the original article). There is no need to introduce a slang term or colloquialism that is only used once and is defined right after it is used. The article would be easier to follow if this jargon was removed (or perhaps exported to a document on slang baseball terms (or to this existing page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_baseball ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.113.28.133 (talk) 01:35, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Awkward edit
The wording in much of the article is incredibly awkward (“It is called what it is”????) and written in the conversational style of an over-enthusiast. Further, it has the awkward tone of feigned expertise rather than plain language to define the pitch and its effects for the reader. Wideeyedraven (talk) 14:47, 2 May 2023 (UTC)