Talk:Joc Pederson

Images
Great to have the two new images. Well done. But can they be fixed (i.e., via fixing the exposure or contrast)? They seem unduly gray, especially for an infobox photo -- given that we have an older, but much better, one now moved to the body of the article. Tx. --Epeefleche (talk) 22:35, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I didn't take the photos, Tony did. I like the new one better cause you can see his face better, even though its a bit darker. If you want to download it and mess with the contrast, go right ahead.Spanneraol (talk) 00:54, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
 * My facepalm moment: not remembering until five months later that I'd been able to make some pictures of a handful of players before batting practice ended on 20 May 2015. Much better shot of his face, I think. — ATinySliver / ATalkPage  &#128406; 20:09, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Jewish heritage
Anyone who wishes to be proud of his or her heritage should indeed be; Wikipedia, meantime, can and should include details of heritage. That noted, there's the matter of WP:UNDUE, which required that the passage be trimmed and its additional details relegated to a footnote. (The whole point of the sentence is that Pederson is eligible to play for the Israeli team by virtue of his heritage; anything else in the main body is unencyclopedic, especially given his stated lack of a religious identity.) — ATinySliver / ATalkPage &#128406; 20:07, 29 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Joc has Israali citizenship so I changed American to American-Israeli but someone corrected it even though it is true. 73.7.174.87 (talk) 18:50, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I removed it because you didn't cite a reliable published source for that claim. BilCat (talk) 22:06, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Can someone fix?
I can't figure out how to fix this. Can someone else help? Thanks.

The bottom of the page now says in red:

Cite error: There are  tags or templates on this page, but the references will not show without a  template or  template (see the help page).

--2604:2000:E010:1100:29D7:CBBE:DC24:7E18 (talk) 19:00, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

TrueBlueLA
An editor has deleted a number of text entries on the claim that TrueBlueLA is not a reliable source. That claim is incorrect. And the deletions should be reverted. --2603:7000:2143:8500:C0AD:9D65:5166:A244 (talk) 18:12, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Claim is actually correct. SB Nation is not considered a reliable source for GA candidates. See Talk:Ryan Rowland-Smith/GA1. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 04:37, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Additionally, many of the deletions were made not merely because it was an unreliable source, but because the text cited went into unnecessary detail. If the info was worth keeping, the True Blue LA cites were merely replaced with reliable ones, and the information kept. The recent changes have been made with an eye towards getting it to GA status. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 04:39, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I actually disagree with the assessment from that particular GA review.. SB Nation is a fairly reliable source and I have used it in other GA articles in the past without objection... Seems like you are using one particular persons view and treating it like consensus, which it is not.. That said, as long as the information remains I don't have any real problem with changing sources. Spanneraol (talk) 20:29, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree with Spanneraol. I consider SB Nation to be reliable. It's not yet been discussed at RSN, as far as I can see. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:38, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I honestly don't personally have anything against SB Nation; I was just going off what another user had said. Thanks for the feedback, and I'll keep this in mind in the future! Any information that was removed was also taken out because it was going into unnecessary detail, though, not just because of the reliability issue. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 04:41, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:53, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Joc Pederson Braves.jpg

Nickname
An editor mistakenly believes that King is not a nickname. See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joc_Pederson&diff=1090201822&oldid=1090199924

However, we edit according to RSs. Not according to the beliefs of editors, however excellent they may be.

In this case, we have the best RS for major league baseball players, in mlb.com. The official site of major league baseball.

And it clearly states, in his mlb.com page, directly below his name: "Nickname: King."

This strikes me as irrefutable.

Of secondary importance, it is also listed as his nickname on his player page on MiLB.com. https://www.milb.com/app-firstpitch/player/joc-pederson-592626

And Baseball Reference. https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/p/pederjo01.shtml

--2603:7000:2143:8500:9069:3DDE:A56:E2DE (talk) 17:36, 28 May 2022 (UTC)