Talk:Cack Henley

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following 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 Theleekycauldron (talk) 09:09, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
  • ... that Cack Henley threw the longest complete game shutout in professional baseball history? Source: Alcalá, Carlos (June 8, 2009). "1909 complete-game shutout is one for baseball's record books". The Sacramento Bee. p. B1, B6. Retrieved August 26, 2021 – via Newspapers.com. The record has not been broken - and perhaps cannot be. One hundred years ago today, a young Sacramentan threw the longest shutout by a single pitcher in professional baseball history: 24 innings.

Created by Muboshgu (talk). Self-nominated at 04:58, 28 August 2021 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: No - Hook's statement merits a more academic source or multiple sources aside from a local Sacramento newspaper. Source is reliable enough for hook.
  • Interesting: Yes
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Hook cites a local Sacramento newspaper while making a global claim in regards to sports records. A more reliable source would be needed as well as the hook amended to a scope more appropriate (say, U.S. professional baseball) for this hook to work, I think. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Talk 18:03, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • @A. C. Santacruz:, The Sacramento Bee is a reliable source, and Wikipedia bases its content on reliable sources. I saw nothing to suggest there was a longer complete game shutout in professional baseball in any other country. I've seen some that say there have been in Japanese high school baseball, but the hook limits it to professional baseball. Also, "U.S. professional baseball" wouldn't be accurate since there are plenty of teams from Canada that have played against American teams throughout baseball's history. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:26, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Muboshgu: I do believe The Bee is a reliable source in US topics, my issue with it is in regards to its authority on global sports. Perhaps ammending the hook to "North American professional baseball" or a similar term could work? I would have no problem with such a hook. I still feel the article could be improved with an academic source but for the scope of a DYK that would be unnecessary in this case. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Talk 19:32, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Muboshgu I don't understand what you mean by hedging, but in any case I'm hoping a more experienced reviewer can settle the concerns I raised. If they believe there is no issue with the hook then approving it makes sense, but once again it is my opinion that due to the nature of the source the hook should be appended to North American professional baseball. On another note, the reference is from 12 years ago and so may be outdated. Not that I think that's an issue that would affect the DYK but is just a suggestion to find a more modern source to back up the claim within the article. Cheers A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Talk 12:34, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I hope I am not appearing as hostile to the hook or article, by the way. I really like the hook and hope this can get resolved.A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Talk 14:49, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A. C. Santacruz, no not at all. I hope I'm not coming off as hostile either. By "hedging", I just meant adding a qualifier that the source doesn't use. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:54, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I recently got much appreciated help from Gerda Arendt and Victuallers regarding a DYK hook, so I am pinging them here in case they have time to resolve this issue. I fear editors are skipping commenting on this DYK as they see a long discussion and assume there's no need to add. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Talk 11:18, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You never find an indisputable source for claims about "most unusual thing happened ever". If it was published in a sizable newspaper written by a staff who included baseball followers (who know unusual stuff) then its going to be pretty reliable and it may/probably is, true. I would go with it as is but you could add "it was said" or "reportedly" without losing any readers (our readers are not stupid - they know that world's tallest/smallest thing means reportedly/ so far/ narrowly defined etc. As a Brit I would find it much more interesting if you removed the word shut-out and explained that bowler x prevented the New York Strut Walkers from making any score for 23 days (or whatever). HTH Victuallers (talk) 12:04, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) Thank you for pinging me, but I have little time right now, and am no sports expert. I try to avoid these "longest under some complicated condition" hooks, but have one of them open (Drewanz, youngest), helped by a "at the time". On my out, perhaps I can look at this particular case later. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:28, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks y'all! After reading Victuallers' comments it seems that the hook then has no problems. While as a European I agree that terms like "shut-out" are very foreign to me, I think it's best to leave them in the hook as it is a great opportunity for readers to learn more about baseball. Looking forward for other readers to get that education same way I did when reading the hook. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Talk 14:17, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To T:DYK/P6
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cack_Henley&oldid=1207620969"