Jump to content

Talk:Bengie Molina

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

Defense

[edit]

I don't get it, Bengie is horrible defensively. He throws runners stealing second base at an 18% success rate, yet this article says about how he is great defensively. I don't get it.

I don't think catchers that are "horrible defensively" win 2 gold gloves. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.6.185.21 (talk) 05:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Measuring defensive worth by Gold Gloves is like saying someone is a good hitter by citing RBI totals. --98.116.175.52 (talk) 01:11, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

World Series

[edit]

Would it be appropriate to add him as a 2010 World Series champion in the infobox since he received a World Series ring? --Coingeek (talk) 20:58, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2010 WS

[edit]

He won a ring in 2010. He was on the Giants roster during the season. Counts as a title for him. Braque6 (talk) 07:30, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Angels section name

[edit]

Technically, the Angels changed their name from "Anaheim Angels" to "Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim" in 2005, Molina's last season with them. However, "Anaheim Angels/Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim (1998-2005)" is a very long name for the section. Would it make more sense to merely call it "Anaheim Angels (1998-2005)"? Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 02:27, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Big Money origin?

[edit]

If anyone can find a source explaining the origins of the nickname "Big Money," that would be great. I assume part of the reason is that Molina's initials are BM, but SABR says only that he was nicknamed that, no explanation on why. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 03:17, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Bengie Molina/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: GhostRiver (talk · contribs) 16:58, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Hello! I'll be taking a look at this article for the January 2022 GAN backlog drive. If you haven't already signed up, please feel free to join in! Although QPQ is not required, if you're feeling generous, I also have a list of GA nominations of my own right here.

Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Infobox and lede

[edit]
  • Add "MLB" in parentheses after "Major League Baseball"
  • "got his first" → "received his first"

Early life

[edit]
  • Delink "Ladislao Martínez" per MOS:PARTIALNAMELINK
  • Should "baseball hall of fame" in "Puerto Rico baseball hall of fame" be capitalized?
  • Per WP:INTEGRITY, I'd prefer if the citations at the end of the first paragraph were spread out and linked to specific sentences

College

[edit]
  • Instead of using separate conversion factors, you can do {{convert|85|to|87|mph}}

Professional career

[edit]

Anaheim Angels

[edit]
  • "Mayaguez" → "Indios de Mayagüez"
  • I don't love the phrasing of taught him so much about catching, but I don't have any better ideas of how to rephrase it
  • "was calling him" → "called him"
  • "Despite getting" → "Despite receiving"
  • "37%" → "37 percent" per MOS:PERCENT
    • The exact wording of MOS:PERCENT is "are commonly used", which implies to me that this isn't a requirement. I'd be happy to change it anyway if it was only used once or twice, but given that the % symbol appears several times in the article and the use is consistent, I think it's fine to keep it that way. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 19:44, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "45%" → "45 percent" per MOS:PERCENT
  • Add the diacritics for Iván Rodríguez
  • "becoming the only MLB catcher ever"
  • "44%" → "44 percent" per MOS:PERCENT
  • Add spaces around ellipses in "battles his weight" per MOS:ELLIPSES
  • "26%" → "26 percent" per MOS:PERCENT
  • Add diacritics for Bartolo Colón
  • We have a WL for personal catcher? Game changer!
    • Perfect for cricket fan reviewers that have no idea what this means! (Although, whenever I'm annoyed at someone's total ignorance of the sport, I remind myself that at least they're reminding me what isn't as commonly known as I think it is.) Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 19:47, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Add diacritics for "Víctor Martínez"
  • "31%" → "31 percent" per MOS:PERCENT

Free agency

[edit]
  • Hyphen to en dash in the section header
  • No comma needed after "$18 million"
  • Link "prospects" to Prospect (sports)

Toronto Blue Jays

[edit]

San Francisco Giants

[edit]
  • Link concussion
  • "becoming the first Giant with two home runs"
  • "off of Jorge Julio"
  • "2.9%" → "2.9 percent" per MOS:PERCENT
  • by a San Francisco Giant does this distinction mean that someone had more RBI when the team was in NY?
  • "30%" → "30 percent"
  • "1000th hit" → "1,000th hit"
  • Link sacrifice fly in the first paragraph and delink in the second of the 2008 section
  • "35%" → "35 percent" per MOS:PERCENT
  • "23%" → "23 percent" and "2.5%" → "2.5 percent" per MOS:PERCENT
  • ""one of the greatest defensive catchers in Giants history."" → ""one of the greatest defensive catchers in Giants history"." per MOS:LQ
  • No comma needed after "Molina re-signed"

Texas Rangers

[edit]
  • "23%" → "23 percent"
  • DYK is admittedly not my favorite part of Wikipedia, but the part about the guaranteed World Series ring would make a great hook

Legacy

[edit]
  • Some kind of topic sentence in the first paragraph about his relationship with his pitchers would be nice

Coaching and broadcasting career

[edit]
  • Write out and link St. Louis Cardinals in the first sentence
    • How did they not get mentioned until after his career? Good thing this wasn't the Yadier article ... 19:53, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Personal life

[edit]

References

[edit]
  • Good

General comments

[edit]
  • Images are properly licensed and relevant
  • No stability concerns in the revision history
  • Earwig score is artificially inflated by direct quotes and proper nouns, actual prose looks good

Everything looks good on my end, passing now! — GhostRiver 00:13, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]