Talk:20–20–20 club

message: Thanks to the folks who have been working on the 30-30 club .... I borrowed some of their intro.TeganX7 23:55, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Discuss the appropriateness of adding a note about the 3 men who've added 20 stolen bases to the 20-20-20 club article, versus creating a second article titled 20-20-20-20 club to deal with the information.
:The newly invented 20-20-20-20 club article references an SI article on the web by link at the end.  This is merely a journalist using the term 20-20-20-20 as a title.  ESPN did not use this term, neither did TSN.  Why?  Got me.  No one refers to the 20-20-20-20 club, while the 20-20-20 club is an instantly recognizable term.  That said, there is consensus throughout the sports world and throughout sporting journalism that also stealing 20 bases while joining the 20-20-20 club is a noteworthy, even rarer achievement.  The originator of the article insists stolen bases are irrelevent, clearly the consensus in the sports world is that they are not.  Clearly 20 stolen bases is associated with the 20-20-20 club.  The originator of this article has three times deleted my small, pertinent addition and has now obscured the matter further by creating a small stump of an article labeled 20-20-20-20 club.  A label that is neither instantly recognizable, or generally utilized.  All so they can get their way.  Deleting is innapropriate.  No editing occurred.  The creation of the second article was a means to get their way and end the issue as he/she wanted.  I will quote what this person wrote on their user page:
::"I also just started an experimental format in baseball record keeping. I feel the current system creates too many pages for related information that could just as easily be kept on a single (albeit larger) page."  
:Apparently, this only applies if someone hasn't had the gall to tell this person they are wrong.  Apparently stumpy little articles with invented names for the occasion are then a preferred means of presenting related information.  Finally I would refer everyone to the basketball example where the quadruple double, and the as yet unobtained quintuple double cohesively, cogently exist as one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.123.66.156 (talk) 04:24, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you Coppertwig for your response, and I agree that the article content and discussion is what is supposed to be happening here.  Unfortunately, only one of the disputing editors is actually contributing a viewpoint, the other editor is merely slinging mud towards that editor and his/her viewpoint.  My retort was more of an exhortation to the unsigned 69.123.66.156 to please do exactly what you are requesting, which is stay on topic, if he/she would like his/her viewpoint to be taken seriously.  The irony I was attempting to portray is that 69.123.66.156 may hold the prevailing viewpoint but he/she was actually destroying (IMHO) any chance of it prevailing with consensus because of the (IMHO) attacks.  More flies with honey...  Keeper76 14:19, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge After reading several articles under the baseball records category, I agree that the article 20-20-20-20 club should be merged with 20-20-20 club.  The other instance (precedence) similar to this one is the 3000 hit club, which includes a subcategory called 4000 hit club, instead of an article of its own.  Keeper76 00:06, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just Delete it.  No unique content. User:Pedant 02:08, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for Comment 

message: Okay, I went at this with a chainsaw, removed the "conversational tone", cut a lot of the "close calls" (16 triples isn't even close to 20), and cut out the "trends" section...Wikipeida is not a place for original research.  I have no objection to re-adding any of the content as long as it's sourced properly.  A polite reminder, too: Remember the trifecta.  I'm not seeing it practiced a lot here.  --UsaSatsui 00:37, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Brutal, but necessary edits.  Thanks UsaSatsui -- Keeper76 16:47, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major edit 9/13/07 

message: I struck out "is a term" in the lead "20–20–20 club is a term applied to the group of batters..." per Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_dictionary#Fixing_bad_articles.2Fstubs.  Simpler to use is on its own.—Bagumba (talk) 08:15, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  is a term .... 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 20–20–20 club. 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  tag to http://www.omaha.com/article/20110417/MONEY/704179949
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120130181714/http://rangersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/07/bengie-molina-on-cycle-being-s.html to http://rangersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/07/bengie-molina-on-cycle-being-s.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:34, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified