Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball/Archive 1

message: No idea if this will ever matter, but just letting you guys know that I'm an admin in case something needs to be done that normal users have more trouble doing (including merging pages). --Woohookitty 08:57, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Did Ben Franklin get in on some of that 18th century ball?.... (unsigned, I couldn't resist)
I don't know if anyone reads this, but I'd like to help with this project. Pkirlin 04:01, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Hello all

message: I'd be willing to participate. I've contributed a lot to the main article Baseball, as well as everything related to Umpire (baseball) and :Category:Baseball rules. --Locarno 14:02, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hello world 

message: The Image :Image:Baseball.jpg is on the speedy delete list, as it has no copyright information. However it is used on :Template:Baseball-stub (and possibly elsewhere). Can someone make a nice freely licensed replacement for it and change the stub to use the new image. Justinc 00:25, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed it from baseball stub in the hope that someone may notice and do something about it. Justinc 21:50, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I honestly have no knowledge about images so do what you gotta do and I guess we will deal with it.--CrazyTalk 22:18, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The easiest thing to do is to take another similar picture and replace it with that. There may be one you can use already, but if you have a glove a ball and a camera it shouldnt take long. I can put a new picture back in the stub if you like. Justinc 00:07, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image issue 

message: If anyone is looking for something to do, the Cleveland Indians and Houston Astros articles desperately need expanding.--CrazyTalk 23:28, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expand articles 

message: Hello, I noticed that User:BLOGuil created a new template lising current teams that is on the Major League Baseball page. I think the colors are awful and the cells are out of whack and who needs links to the NLL and WNBA etc., but otherwise a vast improvement over what previoulsy existed. Does anyone else have any opinions on it?--CrazyTalk 22:45, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I completely agree with you. With the cells set up the way they are it makes it look like there are the same number of teams in each division. Check out the NFL's team template which I think is very well done. - Pal 13:45, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

text: It looks somewhat better, but it could use improvement. Win777 13:50, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Check out this one I just threw together (shamelessly borrowed from the NFL one) : template. Better? Worse? Should the divisions run horizontal instead? - Pal 14:45, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template on MLB page 

message: Do y'all have a set of standards for the "$year in baseball" articles? --Alynna 23:13, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The user who is doing those, MusiCitizen, is doing those on his own and is not part of the project. You might want to check with him. He does seem to appreciate input to improve his pages.--CrazyTalk 02:24, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  years in baseball 

message: Hello,<BR>
Does anyone have any opinions on when we should delete external links that are fan sites? Some teams are overloaded with what seem to be useless external links to blogs or other sites that have the same news as any other site on the internet. If it is a ticket sales site or some other advertizement, I have been deleting those on sight, but how should we determine what is and what is not an appropriate "fan site" without opening the flood gates to every fan site? Any thoughts?--CrazyTalk 01:07, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links / Fan sites 

message: Should we have a uniform way of listing these?
Atlanta_Braves#Minor_league_affiliations 
New_York_Yankees#Minor_league_affiliations
-- Win777 19:43, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This detail was not strongly addressed but there is a rough template that might be used for them. If you want to tinker with the template, that's fine. Do you think they really justify a template or is just listing them good enough? I can go either way. I am putting them back on the pages using the format on Atlana as above, but that is just a quick fix. Unfortunately, when the new user put on the first infobox, he removed the minor league affiliations entirely, so when I put up the existing infobox, I could not cut & paste like I had planned.--CrazyTalk 20:21, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

text: I don't mind taking this on, but I want to make sure that it's not for naught and that there is agreement. I'm pretty new here and especially don't want to work outside a project's goals where one exists.--Elliskev 15:50, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Do we have any particular listings with images and reasons to show them in the parent team? Retropunk 05:29, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor league affiliations 

message: If anyone wants to read something outrageous, check out The Curse of Donnie Baseball. I think I will nominate this article for deletion unless anyone thinks this is relavant and not just a load of crap.--CrazyTalk 15:00, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems to me like it would be somewhat interesting as a section of Mattingly's page but doesn't warrant its own. wknight94 17:52, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's "real enough" - as far as these baseball curses go. It may be slightly misnamed however, a google search for "curse of don mattingly" yields many results including a New York Daily News reference. No Guru 22:01, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Curse of Donnie Baseball 

message: I really don't think we should have the "categories" links in the infobox template. These are lists of links that should go in the see also section. -- BMIComp (talk, HOWS MY DRIVING) 19:59, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I just made the above change in the template and in the team articles. -- BMIComp (talk, HOWS MY DRIVING) 22:06, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template: Categories 

message: I was thinking that having a template for season/career statistics would be a nice addition to the bottom of player pages. Thoughts? Also, is there any reason that logos on pages for teams like the Cubs and Dodgers have that "shine" on them? It would make more sense to me if the more basic (and official) logos were used instead. --gavindow 07:03, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Statistics template for player pages?/Shiny Logos 

message: Hi all. I just wanted to get your opinions on the Minor League/Franchise template I've been adding to the MLB teams in California, Oakland, Dodgers, etc... and the Red Sox. I figure if the old infobox featured this information exclusively it still deserves an infobox of some kind, even if it's reduced in stature to just above the MLB box as I've been placing them. So far I've done 6 of the teams and their minor league affiliates. I liked how the old box was uniform across both the MLB team and the minor league affliates. This recaptures that. While leaving room on minor league teams for an infomation infobox like on the Stockton Ports page. Let me know what you think.Gateman1997 21:17, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Franchise/Minor League Template 

message: The issue has arisen on the Triple Crown page as to whether we ought to use the actual stats, or the official stats provided by Elias - is there a consensus already reached on that issue here?? WilyD 20:08, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stats 

message: I just noticed User:Alakazam adding www.sportsecyclopedia.com links to each baseball team article. He/she isn't a new user nor has past behavior of spamming, (also the site has a decent Alexa rating - 141,000). But, I don't like the mass adding of links, as it has the appearance of spam. What's your thought on adding this link the the articles? Worth including? or not?
I also think many of the other links in the team articles look no more informative and useful than sportsencyclopedia, and might be worth trimming. See External links guidelines and WikiProject Spam for more information on the guidelines and ongoing efforts. Thanks. --Aude (talk | contribs) 20:17, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I say revert this. Google gives zero "link: -site:" results. Yahoo gives zero "link:" and "domainlink:" results. According to Alexa the top referrer is Wikipedia itself. AFAICT it gains more being here than Wikipedia. --Perfecto  20:36, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Second. I don't think this site is special enough to justify such extensive linking (and man, that is one ugly site). - EurekaLott 03:30, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: In looking at the Boston Red Sox roster (which I have since edited), I noticed that the coaching staff was included in the Active 40-man roster, which they shouldn't since they are not players. While this may seem nit picky to some, I think it is important that the information is displayed accurately. Also, there has been some discussion on Talk:Boston Red Sox#manny and Talk:Boston Red Sox roster about what the flags represent. Some, including myself initially, believed the flags represented nationality and others have said they represent country of birth. I believe the latter is probably the case, but I am still not sure. I think the rosters could use a descriptor at the top or a note at the bottom that explains the flags. In addition, it would make sense to have the throwing/batting hands of the players, especially for the pitchers. I will be adding them to the Red Sox roster, unless there is a standard that is being used that I don't know about. Assawyer 03:31, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Team Rosters 

message: Hi, I'm a member of the Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team, which is looking to identify quality articles in Wikipedia for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing using these criteria, and we are looking for A-class, B-class, and Good articles, with no POV or copyright problems. Can you recommend any suitable articles? Please post your suggestions here. Thanks a lot! Gflores Talk 17:40, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Articles for the Wikipedia 1.0 project 

message: Someone has put a redundant paragraph on all of the candidates for the Baseball Hall Of Fame who have not recieved enough votes to make the ballot for the last few years. Check out the Gregg Jefferies page for an example. I think all of them should be removed, as for most of the players, it is fairly unlikely that any player like Gregg Jefferies would even have a prayer of making it to the hall of fame. Fthepostingquota 01:31, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Tracking the Hall of Fame chances for players like Jefferies who have zero chance of gaining entry is not required. No Guru 19:57, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh, that was me, before I registered a proper account. I do now think that the paragraphs are kinda wordy, but I think the information is notable and not redundant, since to even get on the ballot, a player has to get through a screening committee. Maybe the info could be shortened to something like, "was named on the xyear HoF ballot, but did not get enough votes to stay on it" without getting into the mechanics of the induction process. Suggestions? dfg 21:01, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  HOF Losers/Veteran's Comittee 

message: I think it would be useful to have subcategories for current players of a given team. For example, :Category:Current Minnesota Twins players would be a subcategory of :Category:Minnesota Twins players. This would provide allow readers and editors to easily focus on the current roster of any MLB team. I'm going to go ahead and start implementing this soon unless I hear some objections here. Please let me know if you think this is a bad idea, and if so, why. Thanks! android79 02:13, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea. Have at it ! No Guru 02:19, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I hope anyone who chooses to add a category like this takes responsibility for keeping it up-to-date in season. --djrobgordon 21:56, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ditto. If you can pull it off, that's great, but it feels like a trap to me. ×Meegs 00:38, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I think this is a good idea. It adds some real-time edits to do, but of course the page Minnesota_Twins#Current_roster and the other MLB ones need to be updated as well, so as long as someone is doing that, this wouldn't be much added labor.--Deville (Talk) 18:02, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm all for this. Caknuck 09:16, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category proposal for current MLB players 

message: The question of using images of football cards in player articles under fair use has recently come-up at WP:NFL. In a brief search, I couldn't find any non-copyright-expired images in baseball player articles. I think that's the way it should be, but I couldn't find any discussion about cards here (or at the players project), so I'm wondering if there's been any talk on the issue. In either case, if anyone has any expertise or opinions, please share them at Wikipedia talk:Fair use#Fair use of baseball cards images. Thanks. ×Meegs 10:58, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just came across a couple instance of this yesterday and had the same question. See Tim Belcher and Brad Ausmus. --djrobgordon 21:55, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baseball card images in player articles 

message: I have nominated the article MLB on NBC for peer review at Wikipedia:Peer review/MLB on NBC/archive1. If anybody has some suggestiions for improving the article, it would be great if you could put them there. Thanks, ςפקιДИτς ☺ ☻ 18:03, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review 

message: There are many pages with titles like Baltimore Orioles/Players of note, which seem to violate the convention (or rule?) of not having subpages in the main namespace. Shouldn't these be renamed to something like List of TeamName players ? Ardric47 00:06, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lists of Players 

message: I know it isn't for another 7 months to be precise, but we need to have a good dusting and cleanup of the ALDS, NLDS, ALCS, NLCS, and WS articles. In addition, I would like to see a template box called "Major League Baseball Post-season" on each of these articles, organizing them neatly. For now, I'll try to put something together. --Jay(Reply) 21:17, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've put something together. --Jay(Reply) 22:03, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Nice Cleanup of the post season articles. 

message: I have created an article about the investigation at 2006 Baseball steroids investigation. I think there will probably be a lot to add, and it's better to have a central article than be adding it to articles on Bonds, Selig, Mitchell etc. --W.marsh 03:18, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  2006 Baseball steroids investigation 

message: How about some improvement in the area of Baseball outside the U.S.? Japanese League, Mexican League, etc. I nominated the Mexican League for Article Improvement, but it received 0 supporting votes.
One would think there would be more interest coming off the World Baseball Classic.
Yadin twelve 02:41, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm willing to improve the Japanese baseball section.  I think it could use some cleaning up. Rockfender 16:56, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  International Baseball 

message: There is a Baseball Wikia site here that we could use some help on.  I've started a results sheet there that records scores and highlights for daily MLB games.  It's got very few active people there, and it would be nice if we could copy the baseball stuff from Wikipedia and expand on it there.  Maybe we could get some bots together to do the copying.  Copy every link in the baseball categories, including all the pictures. --Kitch 15:48, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baseball wiki 

message: I made a new infobox which is kind of a hybrid of the one you have been using and the one that seems to be most prominent. I took the style from yours (team colors, ect) and the info in their box. its over at Template:MLB Player and I already put it up for Jason Varitek.Zzz345zzz 12:09, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Info Boxes

message: Hello... I'm relatively new to Wiki, but have been following the minor leagues for some time, and have a lot of "official" publications like programs, media guides, stats, player bios, stadium info, etc., especially for the Eastern League (AA) and the International League (AAA) over the last 10 to 12 years.  I've recently started updating the EL team pages with some historical data like each season's record and finish, playoff appearances, managers, etc.  Just wondering if there is (or should be?) a list of some basic things like that, that could be added for each team in some standard format.  I'd certainly volunteer to add whatever I have handy, and/or research whatever I don't.  --DAKern74 04:30, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be great. If you want to add any stadium info I'd gladly use any you add and modify it into the stadium infoboxes. Also welcome to the project!Gateman1997 04:42, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I saw the infoboxes you have for both the Stockton Ports and their ballpark as mentioned in §15 above.  My hobby is visiting ballparks (only 6 MLB ones left, and I was actually in Stockton (...Modesto, San Jose, Sacramento) about a month ago), so I can probably start a series like that for some of the teams/fields here in the northeast.  I take it the pictures are just people's own personal shots that they've uploaded?  I've got at least a dozen parks hanging around in albums just waiting to be scanned. :)  DAKern74, 05:10, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sweet. Those pics would be a great addition if you're willing. I too have begun my quest to visit all MLB Parks. I've got the entire west coast Shea and Fenway under my belt... but I've got about 20 to go. I've also begun my quest to visit all A's minor league parks. So far I've got Vancouver, Sac, and Stockton done. Gateman1997 05:32, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Minor League Data

message: I have a friend who just wrote this.  I think it's ok but could use work.  Prob is, I have no clue about baseball.  Could you help this article and direct him to this project?  He wont listen to me... thanks American Patriot 1776 22:19, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Amateur baseball in the United States 

message: Just wondering if we should put asterisks by any "tainted" records. I am also kind of new to this wiki stuff. -- Texasag28 4:52, 29 May 2006 (CT)
If MLB doesn't do it, then, I would go with no. -- Win777 03:50, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Asterisks 

message: Just a heads-up: the "players of note" pages for every MLB team are up for deletion here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Louis Cardinals/Players of note. You may want to weigh in with your opinion. - EurekaLott 14:20, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Players of note

message: I have found this page while working through Dead End Pages. It clearly needs some work, but I have no idea if this sort of article is useful. Posting here in the hope someone who knows about these things will pick it up. Thanks, ::Supergolden:: 09:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[1999 Red Sox]] 

message: Baseball, this project's main article, has fallen apart. It needs a complete rewrite from a copyedit standpoint, and while it has large reference section, in-line citations are absent. It would fail FAC as it exists right now, and has recently failed
a version 0.5 nomination. I believe it would take a concerted effort to get this back to FA status, but it is possible. --D-Rock (commune with D-Rock) 00:56, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baseball main article 

message: Hi, can someone start Pull hitter - baseball ignoramus here who looked up the term and there was no article (or even redirect) for it. Stevage 08:36, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OIC, it's the same thing as hooking in cricket. Ta. Stevage 15:26, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pull hitter 

message: Lets make a page for 2006 Major League Baseball Playoffs. See 2006 FIFA World Cup.   Bornagain4 01:41, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Section 

message: I have reduced the infoboxes to a more reasonable version. There should not be stand-alone templates (like Template:MLB infobox Brewers for example) that hold only infoboxes. Infoboxes are supposed to be placed directly in the article in accordance with Wikipedia guidelines. That is why the Braves infobox was recently deleted, and it's likely that more will be deleted in the future, causing us to lose all of their info. Rather than copy all the info from the template pages into the start of each team page (which would add close to 100 lines to the beginning of every team article), I significantly pared down this info so it would not dominate the team pages. A lot of the info from the old infoboxes was already in the articles and thus redundant, but if there are things that need to be included, please move it from the templates into the main article, as I will also do when I get the chance. Thanks. - Pal 01:19, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the new infobox is a little too sparse.  I agree that the old ones contained too much information, but the new ones don't seem adequate enough.  Maybe we could add championships back into the infobox? Rockfender 03:30, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about we add back alot of the info. The new infoboxes are naked compared to the old one. Also they're all basically empty. Gateman1997 05:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I've gone ahead and moved the old infoboxes into the article name space which solves the deletion issue the Braves faced. I know it's alot of text at the beginning of the article, but that's what the individual section edit buttons are for. Also it's much easier to pick and choose anything we may want to delete from the vastly more informative infobox rather then add from the sparse one. Gateman1997 15:40, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I removed the retired numbers section since those were already in the article of all but three teams (I added them there) and that's not really important info for the infobox. - Pal 17:21, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reduced Infobox 

message: Just to let you know, I noticed this category, Major League Baseball Regular Season 2006, and Major League Baseball Regular Season 1903 while monitoring RC. It looks like they were created by someone who was, at the time, not really participating in this WikiProject. So I'll let you guys handle whether you want to keep them, merge them, etc. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:07, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I noticed you just joined this WikiProject.   Although, I am not active, the current practice was to do the format similar to what is currently on 2005 in baseball#Major League Baseball final standings. That is why I posted this message in the first place. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:38, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If at all, it should be "2004 MLB season" rather than "MLB regular season 2004". Compare 2004 World Series, 2006 World Cup, 2006 redefinition of planet, 2008 Presidential campaign --what, where is it? --P64 23:05, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Category:Major League Baseball regular seasons]] 

message: Do we have an article improvement? If not, we should try and get 1. Here is a sample article improvement drive. Kingjeff 00:37, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Baseball article improvement drive

message: Hello, all.  I'm fairly sure none of you know me.  I am currently a member of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Missouri and as a part of that group have gotten together basic information on seven of the defunct minor leagues that have had teams in Missouri, and am in the process of getting information on the others, both existing and defunct.  My question is where do you all draw the line regarding "significance" in this regard.  My personal inclination is to add one page per league, listing the standings and other essential data of the teams and seasons of each league on a year-by-year basis.  I do note however that at least one of the these leagues, the Missouri State League, did not complete its inaugural season.  There may well be others like that as well.  Do you think that such leagues, on which data is available but whose term of existence was, shall we say, short would qualify as "significant" enough for inclusion or not?  Thanks for your consideration of this admittedly obscure question.  Badbilltucker 13:52, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think they're significant enough to pass my standards. ςפקιДИτς ☺ ☻ 21:49, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: One page per league seems reasonable to me. But if a league name is reused, rather than disambiguate by default, I would combine by default (one page for all renditions of Missouri State League) and split them only when content warrants. Consider "American Association" for example. --P64 23:20, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Listings of defunct minor leagues? 

message: This may be the wrong place to bring this up, but there are lot of people editing team pages who simply do not know what "franchise" means. For instance, look at the Norfolk Tides page, where the editor said the franchise began in the South Atlantic League. This is incorrect. The Jacksonville Suns franchise was relocated to Norfolk. The SAL franchise moved to the Carolina League and I don't know where the went from there.
This is a growing problem where people think just because a team has been in a certain city for a long time or that the team name is the same, it means the franchise has existed the entire time. A franchise is ****not**** tied to a city or a team name. Just because there was a team called the Bisons in Buffalo in the 1800's does not mean the International League Buffalo Bisons are over 100 years old. This has an effect on everything from the establishment date of teams (someone said the Phillies began in 1880 just because the team from who the Phillies got their NL spot began in 1880, even though the clubs have nothing to do with each other).
Please, people, think about what you're doing so that you provide accurate information. --Leshii 20:28, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Franchise" Definition 

message: I think it would be worth adding the team history, and ballpark history (home fields), categories to the MLB team templates. They have those two categories in the NFL football team templates, for example the St. Louis Rams, and I believe that is quite relevant for baseball as well, not to forget it's great for quick reference. Also, other stuff, such as team stations and broadcasters. I'd be willing to help add the information. I also prefer the contrast of the NFL infoboxes (no offense to the creator of them, just trying to help out). 
Baseballfan Talk, 10:36, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  It seems silly to have a section called "Ballpark" which only contains the current ballpark, and then for some reason also has the time in the ballpark listed as (1996-present) as if there could be any other ending time for a section that only lists the present ballpark.  Cjosefy 13:47, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional information in MLB team templates 

message: Hi, I have belonged to Wikipedia for about a month now, and I want to get started working on something, and I thought baseball would be good because I have a fairly extensive knowledge of the subject. Can someone direct me to something I can work on? Bornagain4 16:49, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi there, Bornagain4.  My view on the regular season is that while this information is certainly valuable, an encyclopedia is not the best place for information that needs to be regularly updated, such as current standings and such.  I mean, every day, this material would have to be changed, which is quite an effort.  There's also much debate about how much statistical/almanac-type data belongs in wikipedia, anyway.  PKirlin 18:24, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Umm...I'm new here 

message: Rolando 00:18, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-MLB uniforms 

message: I think that Akron Aeros could use a cleanup. More specifically, the roster. What defines a "top prospect" and are the "Current Aeros who have appeared in at least one game with another team in 2006" and "Appeared in at least one game with 2006 Aeros but no longer with team" lists necessary? They're trivial. What happens to these lists in 2007? Other thoughts? -- Win777 02:50, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Akron Aeros

message: If anyone has information on this it would be much appreciated to be added since the baseball community in Australia is pretty small. --JRA WestyQld2 05:29, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: like said above, we have created alot of pages relating to this topic, anyone with even the smallest piece of information, or even if your an Aussie and like Baseball, let me know!. Pages relating to the former Australian Baseball League and former International Baseball League of Australia, current and past Claxton Shield series, and also articles related to the Australian Baseball Federation(and creating the individual state federations) at the moment we are putting all our efforts into the background of the sport in Australia, in the future we hope to get started on the many Aussies playing or have played in the Majors, cheers --Dan027 10:02, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Baseball in Australia

message: Does anyone know the location of Oakdale Park? --South Philly 00:25, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: From the picture on this site, it appears it has been turned into a playground, and according to Topozone.com, there is a neighborhood called Oakdale out to the southwest of Center City, very near Swarthmore College.  Their map has at least two playgrounds marked in that vicinity.  Can't say for sure whether one of them used to be a baseball "stadium", but perhaps this is a starting point. Dakern74 01:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Oakdale Park

message: Hi, I noticed that you were wanting to use the bot, but your listing of the project at Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Index got automatically deleted.  I have added the top level categorys (by quality, by importance) to the bot's category listing at :Category:Wikipedia 1.0 assessments, so tomorrow night the bot should automatically ADD your articles to it's list.  Please let me know if you have any more problems, and thanks for using the bot! Walkerma 06:06, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Using the bot 

message: I'd like to request an article, or a section in the MLB article, about the phrase "...without the express written consent of Major League Baseball." --M@rēino 19:52, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You'll find that phrase or a variant in almost all sports broadcasts.  I suggest looking up Copyright. Cjosefy 20:09, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I know, but AFAIK, MLB is the only organization for whom it's become a commonly-parodied catchphrase (Simpsons, Dave Letterman,random blogs, etc.) --M@rēino 20:28, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  express written consent 

message: A recent AFD discussion on October 2 in baseball was recently closed as transwiki to Wikia:Baseball. As the result of that discussion, it sounds like a couple of editors are planning to transwiki the entirety of :Category:Dates in baseball. See User talk:Herostratus#Transwiki of dates in baseball for the discussion. If you want to see a different outcome, now's the time to speak up. - EurekaLott 04:12, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Dates in baseball

message: It seems CrazyTalk made a template for each team, which isn't the purpose of the template. The Template:MLB infobox template should be used for all teams and the old templates, which violate the fair use policy, should be deleted.  I'm going to start replacing teams with the correct template and start nominating the extraneous templates for deletion. Retropunk 00:49, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't notice that User:Gateman1997 already made the changes to the articles.  I'll go ahead and nominate all templates for deletion since they serve no purpose and violate policy. Retropunk 00:58, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Team Templates 

message: I noticed that someone assessed Jim Thorpe as top-level importance for Wikiproject Baseball.  This is quite simply ridiculous.  I realize that Jim Thorpe is one of the greatest athletes that ever lived and a legend in several sports, but Baseball is not one of them.  His baseball career is merely a footnote and of no importance to the game itself (though certainly important to him since it got his medals taken away).  There are several projects that can and should give him top-level importance, but the baseball project should stick to what is important to baseball.  I feel he should be reassessed. Indrian 02:09, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm also confused why Thorpe and other players are under this project's umbrella when there is a separate project for baseball players here.  Is there supposed to be a distinction between the two projects?  —Wknight94 (talk) 05:31, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Jim Thorpe rated top importance?

message: Just discovered this page recently. Pretty basic, but looks like there's something interesting still to be said there about organized league play and such. I'm a stranger to this project, myself, but it looks robust enough that someone's probably interested. Stellmach 20:17, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wiffleball]]

message: This article was marked for cleanup back in June, but it doesn't appear anyone got around to doing it.  As a former official scorer, and now "the guy with the clipboard" at my local minor-league teams, I've reworked it from scratch with a better outline and a lot more "official info".  The old one has a rather bad example that doesn't even add up right, but that could be related to all the comments where the author admits he spilled beer on himself.  :\
The proposed brand-new page is under my own subpage for right now, at User:Dakern74/Baseball_scorekeeping.  Anyone from the project who'd like to give it a going-over, feel free.  I realize there are a lot of generalizations ("some people do...", "most scorekeepers will...") because everyone keeps score in a slightly different way.  Feel free to leave comments on that talk page, and maybe after a few reviews/recommendations, we can get around to replacing the original.  Thanks for your help! Dakern74 03:47, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Baseball scorekeeping]] 

message: Just a heads us since I saw this article on the Cubs-Cardinals series has been tagged for Wikiproject Baseball. I've contributed extensively to this article and I would appreciate any feedback (positive or constructive) on what can be done to approve the article. Thanks! Agne 00:38, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like you did a good job on the article.  At the risk of being a killjoy, one glaring omission is any references to this "series" even existing.  I've been watching baseball for over 20 years and I've never heard the term, "I-55 Series".  None of the references seem to make a big deal about the series and only the George Will commentary makes any substantial mention of the two being nearby.  Maybe there's more in the references that don't have websites.  Otherwise, it seems well put together.  One interesting thing I found recently is that Lee Smith was the all-time saves leader for both franchises until recently - that might be worthy of a mention somewhere.  —Wknight94 (talk) 02:02, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[I-55 Series]] nominated for Good Article Status 

message: Do we have a career stats table for players? Kingjeff 02:16, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Career stats table

message: See my comment on this article's talk page. Dakern74 11:56, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Golden sombrero]]

message: It is just me or does the "Calendar" section of "2006 in baseball" seem a little too MLB-centric? For example, it says "Active rosters expand..." but neglects that this applies only to Major League Baseball. There is an article for the 2005 MLB season, but the equivalent 2006 article, which redirects to "2006 in baseball", is where the information would probably be more appropriate.
On a secondary note, should the seasonal articles for Major League Baseball not be titled more like the NFL articles are (2006 NFL season, for example)?  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tocapa (talk • contribs) . 
Good idea and as far as the redirect for the 2006 season, some ass insisted on doing that. Kingjeff 03:24, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I'm not a big fan of delving too far into the minor league baseball world.  At the very least, I think the major league coverage should be expanded further before the minor league coverage.  Why should there be articles on A-level minor league players and mentions of minor league news when 12-year major leaguer, Craig Swan, is still a redlink even though he was the 1978 N.L. ERA champion?  —Wknight94 (talk) 03:30, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not saying that we need to put focus on minor league baseball, but I'm saying that the Calendar is simply a list of important MLB dates, the sole exception being the LLWS. We should also mention important dates for international baseball, methinks. In addition, almost all of the "Events" are Major League Baseball events. Since a skimming of the talk pages indicated that size was an issue, we could trim by moving a lot of that information to an appropriate article for the specific season. My implication was actually that the article is too Amerio-centric, even though baseball, as I recall, is one of the more popular international sports. --Tocapa 03:40, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

text: What exactly would be included outside the MLB for 2006?  What is the signifcance to rosters expanding in the minor leagues in a season?  Does that even happen?  Oh, I just did some math as I was typing this - you broke out the Major League Baseball season 2005 article.  Doing that for the size limit is not standard practice.  Just take a look at List of Seinfeld episodes which is 85 KB and has dozens of little images making dial-up users slow to a crawl.  And God help you if you suggest breaking that up (I tried on the talk page of that article and met heated opposition).  There's really no good reason left to have that Major League Baseball season 2005 article.  —Wknight94 (talk) 03:46, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You misunderstand again. The point I attempt to make is that the article should be more internationally relevant and that the calendar of important MLB events is not relevant in that capacity, and is more appropriate for a season article. I'm saying contract, not expand. --Tocapa 21:45, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I'm intrigued - and apparently prone to misunderstanding things.  What international baseball events do you figure should be added to the calendar?  —Wknight94 (talk) 23:12, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major League Baseball seasons and years 

message: Why does this project have a SOFTBALL as its icon?  Wahkeenah 08:03, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sometimes it's better to be small and hard than to be big and soft. d:) Wahkeenah 17:16, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I have left a comment at the photographer's user page on Commons.  Of course, anyone is free to replace the picture in the meantime. — Scm83x hook 'em 17:01, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect the original uploader was playing a joke, to see how long before someone would notice. The answer: about 15 months. I have replaced it in the template with a generic Little League-type ball. Sometime later I'll see if I can find a major league ball instead. Wahkeenah 17:16, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've got a handful of foul balls from the majors.  I could try to snap one and upload it if we don't find one already out there.  Lemme know. -- dakern74 (talk) 19:27, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Softball 

message: The article Dr Pepper Ballpark is up for featured article candidacy at the moment and is having a sluggish repsonse by the overall community; only two users have come by to vote (however, both supporting the article's passage).  If members of the WP Baseball community could come by and take a look at the article and comment on the candidacy here (hopefully supporting it! :-) ), it would be greatly appreciated. — Scm83x hook 'em 16:18, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Dr Pepper Ballpark]] 

message: I'm curious where the ballpark rankings on MLB ballpark articles come from, and why they're included? As it is, they're not correctly sourced, and I don't know of any acknowledged authority on ranking ballparks. | Mr. Darcy talk 18:50, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just took the time to glance through all 30 parks, and I only see "rankings" listed for the two in Pennsylvania {PNC Park and Citizens Bank Park).  And the "Ballpark Digest" aren't really rankings, they're scores (5 out of 5).  I'd suggest we just eliminate it from these two pages. -- dakern74 (talk) 19:23, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Funny, those were the two pages I looked at, so I assumed it was on all of them. I agree that those sections should be deleted. Thanks. | Mr. Darcy talk 19:43, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You'll probably get an argument by the guy who posted them, but they should go. They have no context (maybe unless you read the article connected with them) and in any case they are just one magazine's opinion. Wahkeenah 19:54, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ballpark rankings?

message: Should we make an combined local Article Improvement Drive for this project and the Baseball players one like the one the soccer wikiproject did, Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Article improvement drive. This way we can make our baseball articles higher quality and quicker to WP:GA or WP:FA status. What you guys think. Jaranda wat's sup 00:10, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sign me up.  —Wknight94 (talk) 00:25, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Sure we should. As a participant of soccer AID It's been good for soccer articles. Kingjeff 00:41, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Who is going to start it though, I'm not good in working with templates and those types of pages. Jaranda wat's sup 18:16, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, there are questions that needs to be answered before we can really get this off the ground like if this is going to be a weekly , biweekly or monthly and how many votes it needs in a specific time period before it is taken down and archived. Kingjeff 19:24, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Agree, agree, agree.  One week and - oh, did I mention sign me up?  :) —Wknight94 (talk) 19:32, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't think there is a standard stats table.  There was once an infobox push for baseball but it failed pretty contentiously and was globally deleted.  In bio articles I watch, I constantly see people reversing the order of stats, putting RBI higher than HR or vice versa, etc.  —Wknight94 (talk) 20:02, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

text: For each season's stats for a particular player?  I think people frown on simply listing out yearly stats for a particular player calling it indiscriminate information.  Wikisource might be a better place for that.  —Wknight94 (talk) 21:07, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Local AID 

message: Hi. I think this comment I got from Talk Page on my Pal says it all. 
"...It might be worthwhile for WikiProject Baseball to come up with a rating system that applies only to baseball articles (to get a broader range of evaluations)... - Pal"
We should use another rating system, which will give another rating, one that is decided upon the same way any rating below GA is: Reviewer decides it. But on this system, there is no voting involved, so it gives an immidate rating. Think of it as the Zagat Survey of baseball articles. I have 2 ideas for the system, let me know what you think, along with which idea you like, if you support this new system.
IDEA 1: Just use a modified 1-10 system, 1 is worst, 10 is best, with amazing articles given HQA, which will stand for High Quality  Article. Or, if you think we should have more of a baseball theme, instead of HQA we could have HR, home run.
IDEA 2: We create a second page for each article, in which we ask that people leave a rating, using the 1-10 HQA/HR system, and a coment, if they want. Then, every week, they are all averaged together (HQA/HR goes in as 11) and that is how the rating is decided.
Let me know what you think!
 22:05, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  We should add a new system... 

message: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baseball in the UK
Article was originally an advertisment spam but a rewrite has been started to put it on the right track. A request has been made for those with more knowledge about the subject to give it a look. I figure what better place to ask? :) Agne 22:46, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baseball related article on AfD 

message: I've recently created this infobox for use in the articles about Japanese professional baseball teams.  Almost all the information is already on all the pages in non-infobox form, but I thought this would be a bit more organized. The box is currently featured on the Orix Buffaloes page for testing. If everyone likes it, we can go ahead and apply it to each teams page. El Cid 05:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks okay for now. Call me a color freak, but it seems really plain. If you add some colors, I'd absolutely love this template. --Nishkid64 00:34, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems like there's an opportunity to merge this template into Template:Infobox baseball team. There are pages for teams from the Mexican League too (e.g., Sultanes Monterrey) which could benefit from infoboxification. It would not be hard to make some of the infobox labels into parameters (think, seriesname=Japan Series championships)
In any case, rather than just listing the colors, maybe the Japanese template could use Template:Baseball uniform--the soccer uniform template on which it's based has been very successful. Rolando (talk) 06:07, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I think merging might be a good idea, but I don't want to leave out any information.  The Template:Infobox baseball team seems a bit more sparse.  I'm new at the infobox game, so if someone could merge the two while keeping all the information, and allow boxes to contain league-specific data (like Japan Series wins), I'd be all for it. And I like the uniform template approach to team colors, but I'd personally need some help with how to edit those if I was going to contribute. : ) El Cid 07:46, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree completely. I can work on expanding Template: Infobox baseball team, and then we can worry about merging. How does that sound? Rolando (talk) 16:09, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds great. Let's go ahead and get to it. El Cid 23:45, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  See Talk:Orix Buffaloes. Rolando (talk) 14:50, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Template:Japanese baseball team]] 

message: Hello all, I noticed a vandal going through some pages I watch (University of Michigan) who did some blatant vandalism.  Tommerrigan then moved on to some baseball pages, and I suspect most his edits there are untrue and purposefully misleading.  I'm not too knowledgable about baseball, so I figured I should just let you guys know.  -TheMile 01:11, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's hard to tell which edits are vandalism and which are not but almost none of them are sourced.  Of the only two that were cited, one cited a source that didn't match the text being cited and one was a blatant copyvio.  They've all been reverted for various reasons by various editors (including me). —Wknight94 (talk) 03:38, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandal Alert 

message: Hi. If you still have work to do tagging talk pages and assessing articles, my AWB plugin might be of interest to you.
The plugin has two main modes of operation:
*Tagging talk pages, great for high-speed tagging
*Assessments mode, for reviewing articles (pictured)
As of the current version, WikiProjects with simple "generic" templates are supported by the plugin without the need for any special programatic support by me. I've had a look at your project's template and you seem to qualify.
For more information see:
*About the plugin
*About support for "generic" WikiProject templates
*User guide
*About AWB (AutoWikiBrowser)
Hope that helps. If you have any questions or find any bugs please let me know on the plugin's talk page. --Kingboyk 11:58, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tagging talk pages and assessing articles