Jump to content

Talk:Mets–Phillies rivalry/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Needs a LOT More Work

See Yankees-Mets Rivalry and Yankees-Red Sox Rivalry for an idea on how this should be written. I only see stuff mostly pertaining to the past few years. It should start from when the Mets started in MLB back in the early 60s. Arnabdas (talk) 16:45, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, there hasn't been much prior to the last few years regarding the rivalry. Despite the proximity, usually one team was really good and the other team was really bad. And it was never even close to the Giants/Eagles or Rangers/Flyers rivalries. However, in recent years it has without a doubt become one of the fiercest rivalries in Major League Baseball. I live in Brooklyn and I root for the Phillies in the National League and in past years I could go to Shea without hearing a word. Now I hear stuff all the time when I attend a game there..and the same goes for Citizens Bank Park, where Mets fans usually invaded without any fight being put up. - 04:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.161.206.86 (talk)
Yeah, there wasn't really a serious "rivalry" to speak of until '06 or '07. And besides, just because it needs work is no reason to put it down. Why not help instead? KV5 (talk) 23:10, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree-- this so-called rivalry is a very recent phenomenon but it's played up here as if it dates from Abner Doubleday. I grew up with the Phils and remember vividly when the Mets started. At Shea Stadium in Bunning's perfect game, for example, the NY fans were all cheering him on unabashedly. As far as real emotion, the Reds, Braves, Pirates and Cardinals have all had more historical drama. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.164.97.100 (talk) 21:47, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Did you happen to read how old of a discussion you were bumping? This article has changed a lot since this time. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 00:17, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

The image Image:NLE-NYM-Logo.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:01, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Issues tag

I should have followed up on the tags I placed at the top earlier, but better late than never. Basically, I've placed the tags because the concerns raised above still aren't really addressed. There's quite a bit of not-NPOV, like "The rivalry is often quite intense", "Jimmy Rollins made a statement that may have set the rivalry in a dead heat", and "rivalry portended to be even hotter", and the timeline of the rivalry seems to be mostly WP:SYNTH. There's really no substantial support for the rivalry's notability - just a recounting of events that happened over the past few seasons. The "Causes" section is entirely original research, and "said to be among the best rivalries in the National League, along with the Cardinals–Cubs rivalry and the Dodgers–Giants rivalry." is a rather blatant weasel phrase.

It seems, unless there's a massive rewrite, the article is better off being merged with a more general article about NY-Philly rivalry in all sports. --Mosmof (talk) 23:15, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

There's a lot of information in here that has references, but they are currently elsewhere. I can probably take responsibility for some, if not a lot, of that, because I put info with references into the season articles but not this article. I will try to scavenge those references from other sources and bring them here so that we aren't having this problem. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 12:48, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
I have presented a significant number of references to back up many of the claims made in this article, as well as removing some of what appeared to be original research. Would the tagger please re-review and then consider removing or address additional concerns? KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 20:32, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

sourcing

I've noticed the tags on the article, and can't really argue too much with them. If I can, I'll do some writing to help out. In the meantime, here's a recently published article by USA Today here: [1] that goes into some detail on the rivalry, including notable quotes. Umbralcorax (talk) 17:18, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Introduction of OR

I'm removing a section of original research from the "causes" section. It cites no reliable sources. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 19:59, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Update to Photo captions

I updated the Photo captions. Whomever wrote them was very biased. They were reworded neutrally so no bias is evident. --Akc2543 (talk) 06:52, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Much Improved

I've reviewed and made minor contributions to this article from time to time; this is the first time I've seen it in a few months and I'm very impressed now with the level of detail, especially regarding the rivalry in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Good work. 68.82.197.245 (talk) 14:59, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mets–Phillies rivalry/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Alex finds herself awake at night (Talk · What keeps her up) 10:06, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Review coming post haste whenever I feel like it. (Hey, not being snarky, it just might be a day, it might be two days, it might be three days. But it probably won't be any more than that ;) Alex finds herself awake at night (Talk · What keeps her up) 10:06, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Quick-fail assessment
  1. The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability. - Obviously not a problem.
  2. The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. - Nothing sticks out.
  3. There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including {{cleanup}}, {{wikify}}, {{NPOV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{fact}}, {{clarifyme}}, or similar tags. -
  4. The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars. - Article has hardly been edited by anyone but the nominator over the last month
  5. The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint. - N/A, further updates will obviously be needed as this topic has no endpoint at all, save for one of the teams going out of business.

Proceeding with full review. Alex finds herself awake at night (Talk · What keeps her up) 01:36, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Quick impressions

There are 20 citations in the two-paragraph lead. WP:LEADCITE states Because the lead will usually repeat information also in the body, editors should balance the desire to avoid redundant citations in the lead with the desire to aid readers in locating sources for challengeable material. Leads are usually written at a greater level of generality than the body, and information in the lead section of non-controversial subjects is less likely to be challenged and less likely to require a source Certainly 20 citations in a lead seems an awful lot. Only three are repeated in the body of the article, but are citations in this bounty perhaps redundant to other citations?

Any chance there's a free-use picture of McGraw doing something other than pulling up his shirt and showing off his beer gut?

The first three images being right-aligned seems off, as all face away from the text. Suggest moving two of them to the left Alex finds herself awake at night (Talk · What keeps her up) 01:51, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

KV5's replies
I will take a look at the lead to see which citations are redundant and post additional notification here when that has been completed.
I have not been able to find another free-use image of Tug McGraw, aside from his plaque from the Philadelphia Baseball Wall of Fame. If you feel that would be more appropriate, I'm OK with switching it out.
The reason for the right-aligned images is because I don't want the images to break the section headers. I could probably move the Bunning and Schmidt images to the left side without much issue, so I'll fix that now. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 02:04, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

It's unlikely that I'd fail the article for any of these matters. If there's no better pic of McGraw, then so be it (a picture of a plaque might run into problems with a FAC). It's just kind of an unintentionally hilarious picture. The article just seems visually unbalanced with almost all the images on the right. In the past, my screen has proven to be different from most people reading Wikipedia (such that alignments that seem weird for me are fine for others, and vice versa), so it's entirely possible there's nothing wrong there.

I'll start with the criteria-based rundown now, but my next edit to this talkpage is probably not going to come for a few hours. Alex finds herself awake at night (Talk · What keeps her up) 02:19, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm actually a little too tired right now to fine-tooth the prose; that'll have to come later

Image review

Images all have ALT text - great! I'm no maven when it comes to ALT text, but I do have a handful of suggestions to perfecting it:

  1. I would specify handedness when applicable. The ALT text for the images of McGraw, Wagner, Hamels, and Pedro don't specify whether they're right or left-handed, making it seem an incomplete description of the image. Arguably the Rollins image could also specify this (left-hander's batting helmet).
  2. The ALT text for second of the two images of Pedro Martinez that are one on top of the other should probably mention that it shows the same man was the image above it. WP:ALT specifies that ALT text for a further image of someone already described can simply refer to that person directly.
  3. Approximate age should given. I like to use "mid twenties," "late forties," etc, though that might not actually be best as it may not be information verifiable to someone looking only at the image.

Captions are excellent. No suggestions. Licensing also looks good: File:Tug.jpg would probably need a date attached to it at FAC. No problems here for me, but if you're looking down the line, I'd suggest taking care of that.

KV5's replies
All of the image concerns have been (should be) alleviated. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 14:39, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Source review
  1. The Checklinks tool reveals two dead links: sources 81 and 89.
  2. It's technically not required (nor are citation templates in the first place), but I'd advise using ISO 8601 style if you're looking eventually to take this to FAC. In any case, the date forms need to be consistent; several references use day-month-year, while most use month-day-year. I'd recommend the latter (if you're not going to convert them all to ISO 8601, as it should be the style used in the article prose.
  3. The books that are cited all seem to have substandard capitalization in their titles - does this actually reflect their titles?
  4. Since references 109 and 110 are the same book, might it be better to put that citation in the "Bibliography" section and refer to specific page numbers with the inline citations, as is done with Kashatus and reference 108?
  5. To what extent is the Max Blue book used as a reference?
  6. (new) Possible problem at a future FAC with reference 89, as it requires registration for the full article. Alex finds herself awake at night (Talk · What keeps her up) 08:18, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Overall, looks pretty good. Alex finds herself awake at night (Talk · What keeps her up) 06:27, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

KV5's replies
The two deadlinks are gone: one has been replaced, and the other has been removed since it was one of two references sourcing the same statement.
The Blue was an accidental copyover from another article, and the Threston book has been converted to part of the bibilography. As to title capitalization, I try always to copy the titles directly from Google Books to maintain formatting, so as far as I'm aware, the technically incorrect capitalization is as it appears in the books.
Everything else here should be resolved, I believe. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 12:50, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Prose review
  1. The lead does not fully address the contents of the article. It adequately describes the rivalry or lack thereof up through the beginning of the 21st century, but does not address it from that point. Certainly I think it's notable to mention the Mets' 2007 collapse in the lead.
  2. The term "Phold of '64" is not present in the citation that follows it. Quotes must be directly cited, so either this needs a citation or wording that doesn't use this particular (peculiar) term.
  3. Why didn't McGraw pitch for the Mets in 1968?
  4. Several times the names of stadiums are used in place of stating Philadelphia or New York. This is only clear if you know that Veterans Stadium was and Citizens Bank Park is in Philadelphia, and Shea Stadium in New York. For at least the first instance of each of the stadium names, this should be made explicitly clear. In particular, a sentence like On September 27, 1989, the Phillies faced the Mets in their home finale at Shea Stadium is problematic.
  5. Unsourced quote in the "1989–1990" section.
  6. Why is John Franco's quote in the "1991-1994" subsection appended with [sic]? Am I just missing the apparent error?
  7. I know I already said the captions were great, and for the very large part they are, but why do Samuel and Wagner's pictures specifically include (pictured)? I'm not sure why it's necessary there but not in all the other, similar pictures.
  8. "2005–2006: The rivalry intensifies" subsection could probably use more than one citation.
  9. Some overlinking with team names being linked repeated times in the article.
  10. Diacritics for Rodríguez are missing.
  11. Before the arrival of the Mets in Philadelphia Some context for this? Does this refer to a specific season? The Mets' first-ever season?
  12. Why is Red Sox-Yankees rivalry a specific internal link given here? Is it simply because it's not given in prose, like Cardinals–Cubs rivalry and Dodgers–Giants rivalry are? Just sticks out as odd.

Fairly small number of points for an article of this size. Good job. Alex finds herself awake at night (Talk · What keeps her up) 08:11, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

KV5's replies
Addressing some of the questions asked above:
Phold of '64 isn't meant to be a quote; it's simply a descriptive term that's used. That being said, I added a reference.
I do not know why McGraw didn't pitch for the Mets in 1968; the source doesn't give any details. I don't know that it's particularly relevant to the rivalry.
Found some further info: apparently McGraw was demoted to the minors due to an argument with Mets manager Wes Westrum after Westrum tried to get him to stop throwing the screwball. Like I said, though, don't know that it's a relevant point. If you think it's important, I can add some info and the source.
The minutiae of why isn't important, but it might be good to say briefly that he was in the minors (and not hurt or with some other team). 03:48, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
John Franco's quote – the [sic] is because the book uses [butt] in the quote. I didn't want it to appear as though it had been censored for Wikipedia; it was censored at the source.
The picture captions include (pictured) because the player in the image is not the only player mentioned in the caption. I was trying to be as unambiguous as possible.
That makes sense. Alex finds herself awake at night (Talk · What keeps her up) 03:48, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
The link to Yankees/Sox – yes, that is the reason. If it's more appropriate, I can just change that to a link to List of Major League Baseball rivalries.
Okay. I'm sure it's just fine MOS-wise. It just seems a little odd to me to have a section header for one wikilink. Alex finds herself awake at night (Talk · What keeps her up) 03:48, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Other issues should be resolved, or mostly resolved, to this point. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 14:20, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Went ahead and made the remaining changes myself. Well done, good article. Alex finds herself awake at night (Talk · What keeps her up) 04:22, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Dykstra/Samuel trade

The Samuel/Dykstra & McDowell trade occured on June 18, 1989, NOT July 18.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/samueju01.shtml?redir —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.22.180.130 (talk) 17:03, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

The reference date was formatted incorrectly, my bad. That doesn't negate the use of civil language, however. <Redacted>. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 17:07, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Moments of Peace

There were moments of peace in the rivalry. These included the Mets hosting the 1964 Major League Baseball All-Star Game and a Phillie being named MVP of the game and the death of Richie Ashburn in 1997, as it happened while the Phillies were in New York to take on the Mets. There was a moment of silence before the first game following his death. Should those be added with references? I would think so, as rivalries have had moments of peace. -- SNIyer12, (talk), 01:53, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

If there are reliable references for those things, it wouldn't hurt. I don't know about the All-Star game info, as that's really tangential, but the Ashburn thing is poignant and definitely relevant if there are sources. — KV5 • Talk • 02:40, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
It would be best if each item was discussed here before inserting it rather than having to go back and delete, copyedit, etc. Like I mentioned, the All-Star game info is really a stretch, so I removed it, along with the cycles, which weren't moments of peace at all. Everything should be incorporated into the article's chronology, not given its own section unless it warrants several paragraphs. — KV5 • Talk • 16:55, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
I would like to propose this about the death of Richie Ashburn in 1997: "During a series between the Phillies and Mets at Shea Stadium in 1997, there was a rare moment of peace in the rivalry as both teams remember former Phillies broadcaster and original Met Richie Ashburn, who died during the series." Sources: Ashburn Provided Hits, and Humor, September 10, 1997, by Buster Olney, The New York Times, page B12. Quote: "Shea Stadium's flag flew at half-staff, and there was a moment of silence before the game." Also BROGNA'S HOME RUN AND GREEN'S PITCHING GEM DEFEAT METS, September 10, 1997, by Jim Salisbury, The Philadelphia Inquirer, page D1. Quote: "A somber day that began with wake-up calls informing players of the sudden death of the beloved Ashburn, the Phillies icon who was in his 35th season as one of the club's broadcasters. Reminders of Ashburn were almost constant throughout the game. The Phillies wore black armbands embroidered with the No. 1. The flag flew at half-staff." -- SNIyer12, (talk), 17:03, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
It sounds fine if it's incorporated into the "1995-2000" section within the parts about the 1997 season. — KV5 • Talk • 17:07, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Turnpike Series

There's only one reason why I created this article and undid the redirect of Turnpike Series to this article. Confusion. [2] Some people might think Turnpike Series as the rivalry between the Phillies and Pirates, as the Pennsylvania Turnpike connects both Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. I have also seen Turnpike Series as a battle between the New Jersey Devils and Philadelphia Flyers, as the New Jersey Turnpike connects both New York City area and Philadlephia. Some may also refer to it as the Flyers–Penguins rivalry, given the Pennsylvania Turnpike, like with Phillies-Pirates. SNIyer12, (talk), 17:18 25 August 2010 (UTC)

You would need to provide reliable sources in a talk page discussion, preferably at Talk:Turnpike Series. Turnpike Series redirects here because it's the former name of this article; those others have never been named as such on Wikipedia. — KV5 • Talk • 17:19, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Here's a link on the Turnpike Series refering to the rivalry between the Phillies and Pirates. [3] SNIyer12, (talk), 19:18 25 August 2010 (UTC)
A messageboard or forum on Google hardly counts as reliable. — KV5 • Talk • 19:23, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Regional Proximity

In the regional proximity section, I think it should read like this:

"The rivalry can also be attributed to the proximity between the cities of New York City and Philadelphia, which are approximately two hours apart by car. The Mets' fanbase comes from the New York metropolitan area, which includes southern Connecticut, and northern and central New Jersey as well as parts of upstate New York. Conversely, the Phillies' fanbase generally draws from the Delaware Valley (the Philadelphia metropolitan area), which includes Southeastern Pennsylvania, central New Jersey south of Princeton, southern New Jersey, northern Delaware and extreme parts of northeast Maryland. In addition to numerous regular-season meetings between the Phillies and the two New York clubs (the Dodgers and Giants) before the arrival of the Mets, the rivalry between Philadelphia and New York was spurred by post-season meetings between the two cities in 1905 (Giants and the Philadelphia Athletics), 1911 (Athletics–Giants), 1913 (Athletics–Giants), and 1950 (Phillies–Yankees). The New York area – Philadelphia rivalry is evident in other sports (for example, the rivalries between the New York Giants and the Philadelphia Eagles in the National Football League, and the National Hockey League, the New York Rangers and the Philadelphia Flyers and New Jersey Devils and Philadelphia Flyers)."

I think it should be worded that way, because of the rivalry between the Devils and the Flyers, as the Devils are a New York area team. -- SNIyer12, (talk), 17:34, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

The Devils are specifically named as a New Jersey team, regardless of where their arena is located, so I don't think that it's necessarily appropriate to include them since this is about New York and Philly. Regardless, the grammar in your proposed rewording is wrong; a better option, if and only if it should be inserted (which I still don't believe that it should), would be "and between the New York Rangers and the Philadelphia Flyers, as well as the Flyers and the New Jersey Devils, in the National Hockey League). — KV5 • Talk • 17:44, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

I've asked that no one add information that the New York - Philadelphia rivalry is evident in the one between the New York Knicks and the Philadelphia 76ers of the National Basketball Association at this time. I've added that info, but that's in another article about rivalries between New York and Philadelphia teams: the one between the Rangers and the Flyers. -- SNIyer12, (talk) 00:23, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

If there are references, there is no reason not to add this information. But a reliable source is necessary. — KV5 • Talk • 00:28, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
I have references for the New York - Philadelphia rivalry being evident between the Knicks and the 76ers, but I don't want to add the information here at this time. Anyone who wants information on that should refer to the article on the rivalry between the Rangers and the Flyers. -- SNIyer12, (talk), 13:47, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
Like I just said, if you have references, you should add it. There's no reason to give preferential treatment to a hockey article over a baseball article. It's not neutral. — KV5 • Talk • 14:04, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
As I said, I don't plan to put info about the New York - Philadelphia rivalry being evident between the Knicks and the 76ers in the NBA at this time. If I was, how would this sound: "The rivalry can also be attributed to the proximity between the cities of New York City and Philadelphia, which are approximately two hours apart by car. The Mets' fanbase comes from the New York metropolitan area, which includes southern Connecticut, and northern and central New Jersey as well as parts of upstate New York. Conversely, the Phillies' fanbase generally draws from the Delaware Valley (the Philadelphia metropolitan area), which includes Southeastern Pennsylvania, central New Jersey south of Princeton, southern New Jersey, northern Delaware and extreme parts of northeast Maryland. In addition to numerous regular-season meetings between the Phillies and the two New York clubs (the Dodgers and Giants) before the arrival of the Mets, the rivalry between Philadelphia and New York was spurred by post-season meetings between the two cities in 1905 (Giants and the Philadelphia Athletics), 1911 (Athletics–Giants), 1913 (Athletics–Giants), and 1950 (Phillies–Yankees). The New York area – Philadelphia rivalry is evident in other sports (New York Giants and the Philadelphia Eagles in the National Football League, the New York Knicks and the Philadelphia 76ers of the National Basketball Association, and the New York Rangers and the Philadelphia Flyers of the National Hockey League). [4]" As I said, I'm not going to put the info or change it at this time. -- SNIyer12, (talk), 14:06 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Considering that reference says that they do not have a rivalry, it shouldn't be inserted at all. — KV5 • Talk • 14:28, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
All right. This ends the discussion. The final outcome: Let's not put the information about the New York - Philadelphia rivalry being seen between the Knicks and the 76ers, as it isn't that strong. I prefer to keep it the way it is at this time, that the rivalry is seen between the Giants and the Eagles and between the Rangers and the Flyers. When I put that info in the article about the rivalry between the Rangers and the Flyers, it was removed, as it isn't strong. In fact, it is also removed from that article. -- SNIyer12, (talk), 13:33, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

I've requested that no one add information about the New York - Philadelphia being evident between the Islanders and the Flyers. Although the Islanders are a New York team, they play outside New York City limits, in Long Island. -- SNIyer12, (talk), 15:04, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Players

What are your thoughts about having a section listing all the players who played for both the Mets and the Phillies. Most other articles about these sports rivalries, like Yankees–Mets rivalry and Yankees – Red Sox rivalry have such lists. -- SNIyer12 (talk), 21:28 25 August 2010, (UTC)

Such lists are generally trivial and should be avoided. Just because other stuff exists elsewhere doesn't mean it needs to be here. Such a list existed in this article and was trimmed during the process of preparing it for Good Article status because of WP:INDISCRIMINATE. — KV5 • Talk • 00:18, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mets–Phillies_rivalry/Archive_1&oldid=1137005731"