Template:Did you know nominations/List of Major League Baseball all-time leaders in home runs by pitchers

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Mentoz86 (talk) 14:16, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

List of Major League Baseball all-time leaders in home runs by pitchers edit

Created/expanded by Neonblak (talk). Self nom at 00:23, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Very nice work! However, the list neither has 1500 characters of prose, nor has its prose been expanded 5x. - The Bushranger One ping only 22:03, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
Well, I didn't even consider that I didn't get 5x due to huge overall expansion. I won't be able to look at again until tomorrow however. I was going to re-visit this later for a FL run when I could figure out what else to write :) Neonblak talk - 22:26, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
  • I've expanded the article, and it should now meet the DYK length requirements. - PM800 (talk) 04:28, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Sensu stricto, this would need to have 2315 characters of prose to qualify as a 5x expansion. However as the previous prose amounted to 'this is list X of Y', and the tables themselves are wildly improved, I'm going to WP:IAR this. Now, a note, while it's true that the lede is referenced to the tables (except for the first paragraph), I'd suggest that you add references to the table-referenced bits of the lede, just to satisfy the rules lawyers. AGF on offline (rulebook) sources. There is, however, a quibble: Reference [3], livestrong.org, is this a reliable source? - The Bushranger One ping only 04:47, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Wow, I didn't realize that it wasn't 5x. Sorry about that. I've just added more references for everything. - PM800 (talk) 06:05, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks much to you PM800 for expanding the lede, it would have been at least a two or three days before I would have been able to get back to this. As for the quibble on the first paragraph, the rule book only goes just so far on what it considers a "home run", and I found that this site had a good explanation of the little-known interference situation, however, it looks like PM800 added citations that would explain those as well, so that site can probably be removed.Neonblak talk - 06:32, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Nicely done! This is good to go. - The Bushranger One ping only 07:04, 6 June 2012 (UTC)