Eisspeedway

Talk:Tony Gwynn

Cancer

Final Base Hit

Resolved

His final base hit of his career was a double. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.34.211 (talk) 21:56, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it's been fixed.—Bagumba (talk) 23:40, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox highlights order

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Baseball#Infobox_highlights_order to help reach a consensus on the first highlight to list in Gwynn's infobox. Thanks.—Bagumba (talk) 01:51, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Archived at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Baseball/Archive_41#Infobox_highlights_order.—Bagumba (talk) 04:21, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Early life and family info in the lead

@Bagumba: we seem to have disagreement over the inclusion of a brief sentence of early life and family info in the lead. As evidenced by similar passages in FA baseball player article leads I have not edited like Ozzie Smith, Jackie Robinson, Sandy Koufax, and Babe Ruth, this type of info seems par for the course to open the second paragraph as an important part of a biography. Furthermore, it's also the only major section not represented in the lead. Left guide (talk) 12:01, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:BIRTHPLACE is clear about leaving it out of the lead, except when it's core to their notability. That being the case, his family's origin isn't relevant either. As for other FAs, a guideline trumps WP:OTHERSTUFF exceptions. —Bagumba (talk) 12:52, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy section

@Bagumba: For a specific point of disagreement that could become protracted and not quickly resolved, I'd prefer to discuss it at the article talk page. Maybe we can start by finding common ground; do you agree with me that the legacy section is too long? Left guide (talk) 10:59, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I didn't want to make it too impersonal, but it's also better here when it might not be resolved immediately, and someone besides us might be the ones who end up resolving it. But agreed, the section is too long, whether it means trimming or moving content. —Bagumba (talk) 11:20, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bagumba: Thanks for responding. Do you still stand behind this claim? And if so, can you please provide sources to support it? That seems to be a key part of our disagreement. Coincidentally, not long before you raised objections to my article re-structuring, I had added this quote from an LA Times sportswriter indicating that Gwynn's character and humanity is more important than his on-field accomplishments, which counters that claim. Left guide (talk) 11:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
His character is part of his notability, definitely. But the WP:WEIGHT of sources praise his baseball achievements. It's not so much that anyone said he wasnt a nice guy (aside from a few select players that said he was not a team player). —Bagumba (talk) 12:45, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand; it seems that relatively speaking, you tend to prioritize what sources cover and I tend to prioritize what sources say. In most cases, it's probably identical or inconsequential, but here there appears to be a meaningful difference, and maybe that's a disagreement we'll just have to live with going forward. So more concretely, any ideas for working on the legacy section? I note that WP:Articles for deletion/Legacy of Roberto Clemente contains arguments that may be useful in deciding whether to split to Legacy of Tony Gwynn. The thought of List of career achievements of Tony Gwynn has crossed my mind also; at least for that we'd have prose and context to build from. Left guide (talk) 13:49, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting AfD. I guess there's different standards talking about a HOFer's legacy versus -a middling player's high school career e.g. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jabari Parker's high school career. —Bagumba (talk) 17:38, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed about the differing standards. I think Jabari Parker's case is more of an outlier since his high school career can easily be fleshed out on his main biography (he was essentially a "bust" so there's relatively little to say about his pro career, and he doesn't seem to be notable for much else). The high school career of LeBron James for example might be a valid split since there has been lasting secondary coverage of it and his main article is so long. LeBron James and activism or Activism of LeBron James is almost certainly a reasonable split since there have been scholarly journals offering dedicated coverage to that topic (I did some research on that a while back but didn't care to put pen to paper with any drafting or article-writing). I feel like for Gwynn, there might be something split-worthy, but I can't quite put a finger on it (his 1994 season is one topic I thought of that might make for a reasonable split, but that doesn't address the legacy section length). There's also other stuff I've incidentally run into about Gwynn while researching that I feel deserves to be mentioned in this article, but due to some combination of the article structure and writer's block on certain topics, I don't know how to integrate it (for example, the uniqueness of the athlete-fan relationship in his case and how in some ways he transformed it, and also how he essentially "built" Petco Park). Left guide (talk) 03:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah. I parked a lot of "Legacy" information years ago, but I'm open to opinions of where and whether it belongs. I never much considered splitting, but Clemente's case perhaps opens up that option, but I'm wary that it's just the easy way out instead of making tough copyediting decisions; I'm still undecided. Clemente is nationally remembered as a humanitarian moreso than Gwynn, but not that everyone needs to be on Clemente's level, who has a related award named after himBagumba (talk) 05:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also consider WP:PROPORTION:

An article should not give undue weight to minor aspects of its subject but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight proportional to its treatment in the body of reliable, published material on the subject.

Not that his character is a fringe idea, but he's still more notable for his on-field accomplishments. —Bagumba (talk) 19:01, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
LAT's Plaschke is a columnist, who has more leeway to write personal opinion.[1] Incidentally, the same article is on LAT's website here (easier access). —Bagumba (talk) 18:55, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]