# Talk:Roger Bresnahan

Although many sources credit Bresnahan with the introduction of shin guards, several sources point to information showing that other catchers were using them earlier. For example, Bill James in The Politics of Glory, (1994 - later republished as Whatever Happened to the Hall of Fame), pp. 41–42, says the Negro league catcher Chappie Johnson was wearing them in 1902 and Nig Clarke wore them in the major leagues in 1905. See Baseball Legends Revealed #2. The article really ought to acknowledge that the claim is disputed. BRMo (talk) 02:28, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

I suppose you're right. That page cites James and the Fleitz book I cited in this article. I haven't read the James book, so I don't know about his research on this (other than his sterling reputation, so I wouldn't question him). A closer look at the text in the Fleitz book shows that others tried using protection before, but Bresnahan's use led it to take off. I'm not sure how to rewrite that (it'll impact my DYK nomination, thanks for mucking it up with facts :P). – Muboshgu (talk) 02:59, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
The page now reflects that Bresnahan helped popularize shin guards, while acknowledging that he wasn't the first to wear them. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:14, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Text is misleading, as it suggests that Bresnahan popularized the use of almost all gear, as opposed to merely the shin guards.  I do not have the James book, so I do not know his use of words, but Peter Morris' Catcher (2009, Ivan R. Dee Publishing) demonstrates that the face mask, the chest protector, and the glove had all been introduced and come into regular play over the course of the the mid-1880's to the 1890's, which is to say that the introduction of the shin guards was one of the last major forms of protective gear introduced to the catcher (which is not to say that they were unimportant, or that there have not been developments in protective gear since then.)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.85.138.189 (talk) 04:17, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Roger Bresnahan/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 11:17, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Opening review:
There is one dead link identified by the tool.
Removed – Muboshgu (talk) 15:54, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
(will continue review in a bit)  MathewTownsend (talk) 11:17, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

minor problems
"who starred primarily as a catcher and a player-manager" - does a player-manger "star"?
"Faster than the average catcher, Bresnahan had two inside the park home runs on May 30, 1902." - meaning a faster runner, I gather.
Yes – Muboshgu (talk) 15:54, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
"Bill Klem called the game," - this means calling off the game?
Yes – Muboshgu (talk) 15:54, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
"The Giants sought to get younger and faster in 1909" - sought to get a younger, faster team? (less idiomatic).
Fixed – Muboshgu (talk) 15:54, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
"married Gertrude" - does Gertrude have a last name?
Having trouble finding it. Even her obituary doesn't say.[1] – Muboshgu (talk) 03:11, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
organizational problems
The lede doesn't cover the article, not only does it not indicate the range of positions he played, and his rather complicated "other life", but doesn't mention his rather salient idiosyncratic personality, his awards, poems about him (rather unusual, isn't it?), significant disagreements etc.
The article rather falls apart in the end. Surely "personal life" can be integrated into another section that deals with his non player/manager activities. And the "Profile" section is awkward. I don't know how this is usually handled in articles, but it seems like this information should be integrated into his playing career.
MathewTownsend (talk) 01:51, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
GA review-see WP:WIAGA for  criteria (and here for what they are not)

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose: clear and concise, correct spelling and grammar:

B. Complies with  MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation: 

Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Provides references to all sources: 

B. Provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary: 

C. No original research: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Main aspects are addressed: 

B. Remains focused: 

Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc: 

Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales: 

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 
Pass! (I added the artist's name to painting.)

Article passes GA review. Congratulations!  MathewTownsend (talk) 20:59, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! It's certainly stronger now than when you started the review. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:09, 20 June 2012 (UTC)