Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
- Pursuant to the discussion on this list's talk page, even though I largely agree the list is fine as is, there are definitely a couple things that are perhaps too detailed to be noted here (and that belong in the main article):
- "Their intent was to break free from the standard business practices of the two leagues that they claimed stifled players' salaries; such as the reserve clause, and the Brush Classification System, as well as thier ability to sell players to another team without the consent of the player." I think this is too detailed for what should be a brief overview of the team's history.
- "The Quakers were controlled by a group of investors, which included brothers G. W. and J. E. Wagner." Also irrelevant here, and also seems to be out of place in the paragraph.
- "able to sign solid veterans players that included" Typo, and can I assume that "solid" is asserted based on information from the sources?
- "were a short-lived Major League Baseball franchise that existenced for two seasons" Grammatical error, and remove "short-lived" and let the stats do the talking.
- "due to great financial losses"-->because of great financial losses
More later. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:21, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll try to come back to this soon, but for now there's a dead link; check the toolbox. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Made the changes suggested, also, the last line of the lead doesn't sit well with me, and it was pointed out at earlier all-time roster discussion that it is not needed, being that it is apparent to the reader what the article/list is, plus the header. Let me know what you think on this as well.Neonblak talk - 07:30, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I like the changes to the lead. Consider making similar cuts in your previously promoted FLs.
- I will consider that, especially with the recently promoted Providence Grays all-time roster. It had length issues from the start.Neonblak talk - 18:05, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- "Although many players departed for new teams for the 1891 season, the Athletics signed replacements, including Gus Weyhing, Elton Chamberlain, and Pop Corkhill." "Although" signals some kind of unexpected turn of events, but it's not surprising that the team signed replacements after some of their existing players left, is it?
- I tried to point out that these weren't just merely replacements, but good solid veterans. How about "Following the 1890 season, many players returned to their previous teams, however, they were able to sign quality veteran players, including Gus Weying, Elton Chamberlain, and Pop Corkhill."?Neonblak talk - 18:05, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Sounds pretty good, except I would reword "however, they were able to" to "however, the Athletics were still able to" for clarity (if you have a more concise suggestion please implement it). Dabomb87 (talk) 22:13, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Used your suggestions. Sentence should be fixed now.Neonblak talk - 10:49, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- "the AA could no longer operate because of great financial losses, and were forced to fold" "were"-->was
- "Matthews' career consisted of one game, and he collected one hit in three at bats." "and"-->in which
- "Shindle had a batting average of .324, collected 21 doubles, 21 triples, 10 home runs, and 189 hits, while scoring 127 runs." Problems with parallel structure: "while scoring"-->and scored Dabomb87 (talk) 15:44, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed.Neonblak talk - 18:05, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
|