Talk:Saul Rogovin

Edits by Masonpatriot
Please stop edit warring. As indicated, by simply combining all paragraphs in every section into cumbersome large paragraphs, you reduce readability. It also makes the article less like an encylopaedia. If you wish to discuss further, please do so on this talk page, rather than by reverting and edit warring. Thanks. --Epeefleche 14:15, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Both versions are incorrect. Having one-two line sentences makes pieces of information disconnected from each other. Having a big, long paragraph reduces readability and is less aesthetically appealing. Now, I will revise the page to combine both of your ideas on the article's layout. Please do not revert my changes for now. Discuss here, and we'll see if we can reach a compromise. Nishkid64 (talk)  14:31, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, he's complaining abotu inline citations, yet you guys are already halfway there. Just format those inline links into citations, like this. Doesn't really need a rewrite at first glance, I'll have a look over. As for the paragraph issue, since I'm a "lumper" myself, I'm probabyl not the right one to discuss this. Nishkid seems right on this.-- Wizardman 14:33, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * This is a diff of my changes . Tell me what you guys think. I will also format the in-line citations later. Nishkid64 (talk)  14:36, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm completely content with Nishkid64's take on the article. It was just an article that was too scattered, unorganized, and not cited, despite having good content.  I am more than happy to have more sets of eyes work on the page, so long as no one asserts ownership. I like were the article is heading now. I'm still of the opinion that the misc/trivia section should be removed. - Masonpatriot 14:41, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks Nishkid! Will look at it.  In the meantime, for those "lumpers" interested in the subject, with regard to the issue of the relationship between readability and paragraph size, see, for example:, , , , , , .--Epeefleche 14:45, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * On second thought, I believe I'll just let you guys work your magic.--Epeefleche 15:15, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * In-line citations have now been added, and the section titled "Miscellaneous" is now titled "Personal". I still feel this should be somehow incorporated into the main body of the article. Nishkid64 (talk)  16:34, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here and here. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 23:08, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Conflicting dates of birth
According to mlb.com Rogovi's date of birth is listed as October 10, 1923 (and reflected in the article). However, baseball-reference.com notes it as March 24, 1922.

Bob305 (talk) 02:22, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Checking back today and and both sources now list March 24, 1922. I will accordingly make the changes in the article. Bob305 (talk) 03:45, 5 August 2017 (UTC)