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)
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: /info/en/?search=Glossary_of_baseball ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.113.28.133 ( talk) 01:35, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
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)
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)
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: /info/en/?search=Glossary_of_baseball ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.113.28.133 ( talk) 01:35, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
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)