Talk:Ten Cent Beer Night

Nickel or dime?

This article is a HUGE mess.

The problems start with the title. It was Nickel Beer Night, as one of the article's own external links points out (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2004-11-20-sports-incidents_x.htm) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.162.187.125 (talk) 19:16, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually, fun fact... lots of people like to call it Nickel Beer Night, probably because it rolls off the tongue better, but it was, in fact, ten cents per beer. The USA Today article is just plain wrong. Dave (talk) 17:22, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

And, the first paragraph of the article was copied into an ESPN article, sourced to "ESPN Research." (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/playoffs2007/columns/story?columnist=crasnick_jerry&id=3051291&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab1pos1). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.177.181.40 (talk) 00:04, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

The article makes two references to the price of beer, and both of them are at 5¢. Was this event really known as "Ten-cent Beer Night", or is it mistitled? --wintermute (talk) 18:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

The references have since been corrected, it was in fact 10 cents per cup. "Nickel Beer Night" sounds better than "Ten-cent" or "Dime", which is probably why the misconception has propagated. Dave (talk) 17:24, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Confusing

I also found the first paragraph confusing, seeming to switch back and forth between the incidents in Texas and those in Cleveland in the same chronology. "In Texas," did the intoxicated crowd throw food at the Texas players emerging from the dugout and did WJW switch off their coverage? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.10.130.207 (talk) 16:24, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

The reference at the end to Michael Clark Duncan is probably in error. The article on "Disco Demolition Night" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disco_Demolition_Night) also claims that the actor was present at the riot and lost a belt buckle. Highly unlikely he was at both riots. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.219.118.27 (talk) 00:46, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Comment from IP

This article should be nominated for best of Wikipedia. Hilarious--particularly the quote "there is no doubt that beer played a part in the riot" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.179.104.201 (talk) 16:20, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Comment from IP 2

Why aren't there any pictures??! Someone had to have brought a camera that day!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.45.182.241 (talk) 01:32, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Comment from IP 3

The link to the second footnote is pointing to a page that does not exist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8805:D480:13D:3929:C1C5:340E:75AB (talk) 12:40, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Unencyclopedic language

The version preferred by Ganesha811 has ben reverted again for the one with the correct encyclopedic tone. For example content like "Although it is not clear why" is pure original research, editorializing, and inappropriate for an encyclopedia. - Who is John Galt? ✉ 18:26, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

"Correct" encyclopedic tone is a matter of opinion (or rather, of consensus) - I see nothing unencyclopedic about the language you removed. "Although it is not clear why" is not in the slightest original research - it was cited, correctly, to Paul Jackson's ESPN article, in good summary style. If you have specific other pieces of language you object to, I'm happy to discuss them. —Ganesha811 (talk) 20:20, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

To be honest, I think many of your changes are improvements. But I am concerned about the removal of the quotes pulled from Jackson's piece, which I feel add a lot to the article, as well as the bit about Billy Martin and his players charging onto the field. I think it would be a fair compromise to restore those while also keeping your other changes. —Ganesha811 (talk) 23:07, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Encyclopedic tone isn't a matter of opinion... Most of WP:TONE addresses this directly. The fragment "Although it is not clear why", whether taken from an ESPN article or not, conveys no useful information to improve readers' understanding of this event. Regarding the quotes: I think excessive direct quotation weakens an article and we should paraphrase rather than rely on lots of direct quotes. TONE addresses this as well, noting that an article should usually match the style used in Good and Featured class articles of the same category. Are there examples of Baseball-event good articles that make use of a large number of direct quotations? If so, then I could probably be persuaded to keep them. - Who is John Galt? ✉ 02:04, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Take a look at Orel Hershiser's scoreless innings streak, 2004 World Series, or 1926 World Series, all baseball-related FAs. They all have a number of direct quotations and detailed, even slightly amusing passages like the following: "In the bottom of the third, Ruth singled and Meusel bunted him over, but Ruth split his pants sliding into second, prompting radio announcer Graham McNamee to exclaim, "Babe is the color of a red brick house!" Doc Woods, the team's trainer, ran out and sewed up Ruth's pants, much to the amusement of the crowd. "

Almost every part of this article is paraphrased already, as is proper. Including 3 short quotes, none of which even comprises a full sentence, is hardly excessive in an article of over 1500 words. —Ganesha811 (talk) 10:58, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Volume of Beer per Serving?

The header lists the volume of each serving as "eight ounce cups" while the section "The game" explicitly states that fans were served "12 fluid ounce (355 ml) cups." Which is accurate? Separate issue, that metric conversion feels unnecessary.