Talk:Randy Johnson

It should definitely be noted June 3, 1985: Drafted by the Montreal Expos in the 2nd round of the 1985 amateur draft. Player signed June 9, 1985.

Draft information is quite important to the players career. It should also be noted that he entered the draft out of high school, specifically June 7, 1982: Drafted by the Atlanta Braves in the 4th round of the 1982 amateur draft, but did not sign.

He did not sign and went on to attend USC http://www.baseball-reference.com/j/johnsra05.shtml#TRANS —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.160.175.163 (talk) 16:24, 26 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

He also went on to play for the expos for two seasons. This should be included rather than skipping straight to the mariners —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.160.175.163 (talk) 16:27, 26 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

The Arizona Diamondbacks : Player Information page for Randy Johnson lists his date of birth as September 9, 1963. His page here currently gives the date as September 10. A quick Google search also reveals many other websites that give the date of the 10th Any idea where the September 9th date came from? The Diamondbacks' website seems to be wrong... -- TomPreuss 20:01, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I have included some unusual incidents involving Randy Johnson in the 1993 and 1997 All-Star games, but some other Wikipedia member insists on deleting it. I think it should be left alone. Dodgerdave 02:11, 5 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

It is borderline "fluff" as far as being encyclopedic goes. It does not specifically reveal anything notable about the player himself, it is more a description of Kruk or Walker's reactions to those incidents, whether or not they were practical jokes on Johnson's part. The information would stand up more effectively if there were some sources of material that elaborated on any specific notability of those incidents, or a documented history of practical jokes or personal feuds/inside jokes between the aforementioned players. At least, that's my take on all this; I might be way off. KirinX 02:35, 5 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

They were certainly "unusual incidents" just like the bird incident of 2001 and the cameraman incident of the 2004-05 offseason. I did provide some sources from retrosheet.org. It included boxscores which clearly states on the play-by-play accounts and it gives discriptions of the incidents (written in boldface letters). My opinion is that if the Kruk and Walker incidents don't stay up there, then the cameraman and bird incidents should not be up there as well, since they are not "encyclopedic" material according to your opinion. Dodgerdave 05:33, 10 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Sorry for the term, but Randy Johnson was really "screwed" out of a Cy Young award this year. He beat Roger Clemens in 75% of the categories that matter. He may have lost 14, but most of those losses he had 2 or less runs of run support. And now Johnson wants out of Arizona, and I bet it's because people say he would've won the Cy Young Award if he would've went to New York. So.. Arizona's getting "screwed" out of the best pitcher in baseball because the people who pick the Award winners picked the old guy who "screwed" over his former team while "retiring?" What a bunch of screwing.

my email address is joeyvip@hotmail.com contact me with any concerns, questions, arguments, or thank yous.

== Stats table? ==

Is that confusing table really necessary? There is no way you can understand it... the link to his baseball reference page is sufficient, no? Zellin 03:59, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)

It also gave him the longest span of any pitcher between no-hitters–14 years, although the span between Nolan Ryan's first and last no hitters was 17 years.

Well, if Nolan Ryan's was 17 years, then Randy's wasn't the longest... can someone look into this and make this sentence consistent. Themindset 07:59, 1 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

• What it means is that the 14 years was the longest amount of time between CONSECUTIVE no-hitters.

The first section states that Johnson has a 95-100 mph fastball. In the later section, Pitches, his fastball speed is reported to be between 94 and 99 mph. Has he ever actually hit 100mph on the radar gun? --SeanMon 00:18, 22 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

Yes, he has, on numerous occasions. Sadly, I cannot recall any specific examples, but I have been watching him for years as an avid pitching nut, and in his prime (96-01) he was almost always between 97-100. Ubergenius 14:28, 18 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

If I recall, he hit over 100 in the perfect game, and in the 20 strikeout game (at least on the radar gun the diamondbacks broadcast was using). Unfortunately, when you watch old broadcasts on mlb.com, they don't keep the graphics, so it's hard to find again. Dancindazed (talk) 00:22, 26 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

So he is Bi-sexual? Just browsing the article and wondered if it was slander?

i like this

my bad--Bucs10 21:23, 5 January 2007 (UTC)Bucs10Reply

The proffessional information on the main page now needs a change.. since RJ is now traded back to Diamondbacks from the Yankees. So the person who can edit the article can do it. since I am a new member i am not able to do so!

Until the trade is actually official (finalized, not just a tentative agreement, as is the case now), the article must remain as it is. -- KirinX 01:11, 6 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

I believe the tie-in with Nolan Ryan contains an error. Ryan's last game was in Seattle, but in September 1993, not 1992 as this tie-in would seem to indicate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.57.66.111 (talk) 18:59, 29 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

yeah so he plays for dbacks now, can someone change it, i am not eligible to change this71.62.10.130 02:24, 8 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

No, the trade is still not official. Official means the commissioner's office has given the OK. Have no doubt, it will be updated as soon as that is so. -- KirinX 02:30, 8 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Need to change the fact that Randy Johnson is currently the only Seattle Mariner to win the Cy Young Award.— Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

Done. — KV5 • Talk • 19:37, 18 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

who cares that it is not official, there is about a 0% chance the trade wont go through. Even if it doesnt you can always just change it later.--Bucs10 03:11, 9 January 2007 (UTC)Bucs10Reply

Wikipedia policy cares. And there's always a chance that a trade won't go through. Thinking otherwise is pure folly. And if the trade does go through, you can always change the page later. -- KirinX 03:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

The deal is finalized because he passed his physical, and if you dont believe me read this [1]--Bucs10 05:10, 9 January 2007 (UTC)Bucs10Reply

Considering this [2] article (posted 3 hours after yours, and from the same source) says the trade is still pending approval from Bud Selig (the Commissioner), my feeling is that the page should remain the same. From all indications the deal will become official first thing tomorrow morning. Somebody will edit the page then. Please just be patient until then. -- KirinX 05:25, 9 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Agreed there is no panic. Not a primary source for news. -- No Guru 05:29, 9 January 2007 (UTC)]]Reply

As I'm the person asked for the FProt, I'll ask for the UProt when it's a done deal. You have my word. -Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 10:00, 9 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

No worries, I've done so. -- KirinX 21:05, 9 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

For Pete's Sakes Johnson is not a Yankee anymore change it!! Iam banned for trying to change it so change it!! [3] Garth 187 20:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

{{editprotected}}Yes the deal was finalized earlier today so Johnson is now officially No. 51 on the Arizona Diamondbacks.

I've already requested unprotection; there's no real need for the {{editprotected}} -- KirinX 21:07, 9 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Article is now no-longer full-protected, but simply semi-protected. See [4] for an explination by the (de)protecting admin. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant ^{[ T · C ]} 01:50, 10 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

I have added a bunch of {{fact}} templates to the article in the places I feel are most needing a reference. I may do some of the work, but I'm not an RJ or Diamonbacks fan so let's just say I don't have a giant desire to. If people can source these and place them, it would be fantastic. -- KirinX 17:09, 8 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

I'm not completely sure on how this is decided, but how many people would type in Randy Johnson and mean the american football player? It's not even his real name, just a nickname, so I'd suggest moving this page back to being just "Randy Johnson" and having a link to the disambiguation page at the top. There are a lot of links out there going directly to "Randy Johnson", so I'm taking some time to go through them and link them all to the correct page. If we do decide that the top "Randy Johnson" page should go directly to the pitcher I'll just turn this (pitcher) page into a redirect page.

Any thoughts? Linelor 21:04, 14 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

I think his dead bird should be put under accomplishments, he's one of two pitches to do this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.24.177 (talk) 22:29, 14 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Funny...but, "birds killed" is not an official baseball stat last I checked. -- Mount Molehill (talk) 02:23, 24 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Who's the other pitcher? (reply on my talk page as i won't check back here). - -[The Spooky One] | ^{[t c r]} 03:41, 23 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

It does deserve a mention. I mean how rare is a celebrity bird murderer? I think it should go in the section of the team for which he played during that time. Plus a citation that is not a video would help out tremendously.72.221.114.113 (talk) 20:06, 2 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Not sure much more solid something other than a video can be.Jeremyeyork (talk) 03:27, 10 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Article said their initial decision was reversed, but I see no evidence of this anywhere. mlb.com and baseball almanac make no mention of it and still report that MLB doesn't officially recognize this as a tie for the single 9-inning game record. http://www.baseball-almanac.com/recbooks/rb_strik.shtml http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/baseballs_best/mlb_bb_gamepage.jsp?story_page=bb_98reg_050698_houchc As much as I wish it was recognized, I still don't think it is, so I put request for citation back on there. -- Mount Molehill (talk) 02:19, 24 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

He's signed and is on the roster. If you want proof here ya go. http://arizona.diamondbacks.mlb.com/team/player.jsp?player_id=116615

Anyone have a picture of him pitching for the Giants? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richjenkins (talk • contribs) 08:24, 1 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

This review is transcluded from Talk:Randy Johnson/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 18:32, 26 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

After reading through this, I am failing it as a good article because it fails most of the good article criteria as is. It fails for the following reasons:

• First, citations. Ideally, there should be one per paragraph as a guide. Right now the article has 20 citations. For a man of Johnson's notability and stature (bad pun intended), I would look for a number closer to 80. On top of that, some of the sources are odd. For example, #6 is a bare link to amazon. Are you citing the book itself or the amazon site. I presume the former, and as such you need to use the appropriate template to get that right. Also, what makes Jockbio.com a reliable source?
• Many of the cites you do have are bare urls. Those need to be fixed.
• The 'in popular culture' section ideally should be removed, though if you can source the information and present it properly, it can stay.
• There is nothing on his minor league career. He spent multiple seasons in the Montreal farm system, which need to at least be mentioned (minimum a paragraph)
• Some of the language is POV (ex: "Since entering the majors, Johnson has been among the most feared pitchers in the game because of his effective fastball", "But his untapped talent was volcanic") If a source says that and you cite is as such (with words like volcanic quoted) then that would be acceptable, but as is that language can't be used. Let his accomplishments and pitches speak for themselves in the article.
• Some sections have pretty good structure, but others (namely the Diamondbacks) could use some paragraph-combining and the like. 5-7 sentence paragraphs are your friend.
• How long did he play at college? If it was multiple seasons then that definitely needs expansion as well.
• The sections themselves can be moved around, I think. If he was nicknamed the big unit in montreal, then it could be added as a subsection to the Montreal section (since you'll be adding minor league info, Montreal and Seattle can be split)

Hopefully this isn't being too harsh. It's a great start at least, and I do want to see his article reach FA status sometime down the line. But a lot of work remains to do on the article first before GA or FA can be discussed. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 18:32, 26 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

The provided reference for Randy Johnson being "an avid metal fan" does not even reference the player; there is also no evidence that it qualifies as reliable and that evidence would need to be provided, the burden of proof being on the inserter of the information. Regardless, this is trivial and really has no encyclopedic basis for inclusion in this article. — KV5 • Talk • 00:49, 25 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

You know, this article isn't far from GA status. If anyone wants to help me get it there, I'll be using Wizardman's review from last year as a jumping off point. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:55, 30 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Nice to hear that opinion. We have some time what about trying to get it as a GA (if not already, I do not know how to check) just before interest pickup before his first Hall of Fame Ballot appearance. On that note, on one side he looks like a near automatic to be elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame on the first try. On opposite side, steriod era- is he totally clean and no issues or debate on that? Wfoj2 (talk) 22:27, 10 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

I don't agree with keeping the two lines separate in the infobox. Yankees10 says they are "2 different awards", but I disagree. I believe it is one award given to two individuals per year, one for each league. I think it's preferable to say he's a 5x Cy Young Award winner than a 4x NL Cy Young award winner and 1x AL Cy Young award winner. Thoughts? – Muboshgu (talk) 19:57, 30 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Maybe bring this to WP:Baseball since its not only with Johnson (Roger Clemens won in both leagues, Roy Halladay, Frank Robinsons MVP's) for those that don't have his page on their watchlist?--Yankees10 20:20, 30 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Good point. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:34, 30 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

No mention of Johnson's photography career? Or listing of his official website, which features his photography? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.2.233.212 (talk) 00:32, 15 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Randy Johnson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080803090139/http://videos.espn.com/baseball/arizona-diamondbacks/randy-johnson.htm to http://videos.espn.com/baseball/arizona-diamondbacks/randy-johnson.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:58, 10 December 2017 (UTC)Reply