User talk:Dmoore5556

Citations, Newspapers.com
Dmoore5556, nice work on the Tangerine Bowl articles. I have a couple comments about about your citations. First, wire service (AP, UPI, etc.) should be noted in the agency field, not the author field in Template:Cite news. Second, articles at Newspapers.com can be clipped so that they are viewable to everyone, even those without a subscription. Consider doing that as it increases the accessibility of the source material. See the citations as Cecil Coleman for an example regarding both issues. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 03:47, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Good pointers, thanks! --Dmoore5556 (talk) 03:52, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

List of Major League Baseball players to hit for the cycle
Hi, Dmoore. I've done a lot of work on list articles as a contributor and as a reviewer, and believe that a list's lead should be able to stand on its own merits, apart from the lead that the parent article happens to have. It's not a bad thing for the list to have a multiple-paragraph lead; in fact, the featured list criteria, which aids many editors in improving list standards, call for a lead to have good content on its own ("engaging" content, in that page's words). Regarding the main cycle article, one could argue that more content on the history of the accomplishment might be helpful, but that can be done without reducing the lead in the list. As for how the pages relate, I'd say the point of a list article in this situation is to avoid having a huge list overwhelm the main article (perhaps 2, if the Japan list was also there). There are cases where lists serve merely as content forks, but in this case splitting the lists into their own articles makes sense to me. They provide comprehensive information for interested readers, while those looking for more general concepts can read the main cycle page. If you're still concerned about how they interact, you could ask at WT:BASEBALL, as several editors active there have worked on these stat lists. Cheers. Giants2008 ( Talk ) 01:37, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks much for the response and insight, quite helpful. Dmoore5556 (talk)

Non-free image use
In general, Wikipedia's non-free content use policy does allow the use of logos (company, event, organizations, etc.) when they are used for the primary means of identification in the main infobox of stand-alone articles about the company, event, organization, etc. However, non-free use is typically restricted to the article about the parent entity per items 14 and 17 of WP:NFC. So, an non-free image of a football tournament logo is most likely OK when used for primary identification purposes in the main article about the tournament itself, but generally not OK when used in articles about individual occurances of the tournament unless the logo is specific to that particular event. If a season specifc logo for a particular occurance of an event does not exist, then using the primary logo is not automatic by default and typically only allowed for the first occurence where the logo is being used.

Another thing about non-free use is that each use of non-free content on any page of a Wikipedia article requires a seperate, specific non-free use rationale be provided which clearly explains how the particular use meets all ten non-free content use criteria. So, if you add a non-free image to an article, then it is also you're responsibility to provide the required rationale. Non-free files lacking the required rationale can be removed per WP:NFCCE so you need to make sure you at least add a rationale. A non-free use rationale does not automatically mean complaince with relevant policy per WP:JUSTONE, but it will at least give any one reviewing the file's use something to assess. You should try to be as specific as possible in the rationale (particulary with respect to WP:NFCC) and avoid simply using the boilerplate language of templates. If the file is not being used for primary identification purposes at the top of the article, then the rationale should not claim that it is. Not all non-free use is the same per WP:OTHERIMAGE, so you've got to try and be as specific as possible.

If you have any questions about any of this you can ask them here, or at WT:NFC if you want. Non-free content use can be tricky and mistakes are expected; if, however, you're going to be uploading or adding lots of non-free images to articles, you might want to start peaking at pages like WP:FFD, WP:MCQ or WT:NFC to see what types of issues are typically encountered and how they tend to be resolved. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:48, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi - thanks for your comments; I will review and work to align with defined/established policies. Dmoore5556 (talk)

File:Evel Knievel monument in Twin Falls.jpg
Can you provide any more information about this monument such as when it was created, who created it, etc.? This might be importent because photographs of 3D works of art located in the US, even those publically displayed, need to take into account the copyright status of the work itself per c:COM:FOP. You as the photographer can create a derivative work by taking the photo and you can release it under a free license of your choosing, but you are not the copyright holder/creator of the work being photographed. This particular upload might need two copyright licenses: one for the photo and one for the monument. It's possible that the monument is old enough to fall within the public domain, but that should not always be assumed per m:Wikilegal/Copyright of Images of Memorials in the US. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:15, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello - I personally took the photograph, and (I thought) released it under free license when I uploaded it. The monument itself was dedicated in September 1985 (more detail within the cited source in the article that the image appears in). Dmoore5556 (talk)
 * You can release the photo you took under a free license if you wish since it's your derivtive work, but the monument's copyright status also needs to be taken into account. Since you say it was installed in 1985, it is not eligible for PD-US-no notice or PD-US-not renewed and I believe that anything installed after 1977 is going to require OTRS verification that the scupltor/creator has agreed to release it under a free license. I tired searching for info here but found nothing. There's stuff about the monument online, but they appear to be mostly personal photos, reviews, etc, and not anything resembling an official website. Someone had to create it and that person likely holds the copyright on it, unless there was some kind of copyright transfer agreement or they released it into the public domain. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:49, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. The momument was created by a local monument company for the local Chamber of Commerce; if being a public work of art, created for a public agency, still has restrictions... I'll simply remove the photo from the article, and it will subsequently get deleted, due to being orphaned. Dmoore5556 (talk) 00:21, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * It might be better to ask for other opinions at WP:MCQ first. For example, works commissioned by the US government sometimes fall under PD-USGov, and a few states follow a similar practice like PD-NJGov, PD-FLGov and PD-CAGov. I'm not sure if Idaho or that local government does something similar. Even if it's not PD, maybe all that would be needed is OTRS verification saying that it's released under a free license per c:COM:OTRS. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:51, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Massachusetts elections
As you add elections to the Massachusetts elections template(s), please also add them to List of elections in Massachusetts. Thanks!—GoldRingChip 14:00, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Will do, thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 23:25, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Phantom ballplayers
Really nice work on the Phantom ballplayers page. Thanks. — Bbny-wiki-editor (talk) 19:34, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks much, it's been fun. I didn't know about the page until Muboshgu mentioned it on his talk page; quite an interesting topic. Dmoore5556 (talk) 20:34, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also: ~ Amory  (u • t • c) 17:17, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.

Sources needed for Days of the Year pages
I see you recently accepted a pending change to July 3. I looked for a reliable source for this date of birth in the linked biography that I could add to the DOY page and it was unsupported by any reliable source there either.

You're probably not aware of this change, but Days of the Year pages are no longer exempt from WP:V and direct sources are required for additions. For details see the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide. I've gone ahead and un-accepted this edit and backed it out.

As a pending changes patroller, please do not accept additions to day of year pages where no direct source has been provided on that day of year page. The burden to provide sources for additions to these pages is on the editor who adds or restores material to these pages. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 03:57, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Got it, thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 03:58, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Revert question
Why did you revert this edit? You said "unsourced," but the article has a whole section on "North America" that is not otherwise addressed in the article's introduction. 208.95.51.53 (talk) 17:45, 25 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi - the edit in question added "America", which is a very general term (does it mean the United States? North America? South America? all of those?), and without being sufficiently clear I reverted it. Based on what appears in the subsection you note, it's Newfoundland that they settled... which already is one of the locations listed in the lead (introduction). Thus, adding "America" (or some variant thereof) now would be redundant and overly broad. All that said, good faith edits are appreciated, and it's part of the Wikipedia process that some will be reverted, for various reasons. I hope that info helps. Dmoore5556 (talk) 18:43, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry. You're right.  I'd not seen the mention of Newfoundland.  208.95.51.53 (talk) 19:36, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Question about advertise on Gronkowski
I'm going to try again to see if someone will respond. I had clicked the Advertise button on Gronskowski at least 3 or minutes before you accepted the edit. Anytime I ask someone about this issue they ignore me. I sincerely want to help with these pending edits. But it's been near a week since I got the permission. And I am sure anyone could understand not wanting to spend up to 5 minutes on an article and they finding out someone else had already resolved it. It's usually because I am trying to understand an issue or am searching for a source, etc. Are editors seeing the advertise but no one takes it seriously? Or not seeing it, i.e, does it not work? Or is there some other reason? I am not trying to get at you for it, I just want to understand. Or maybe I should just do the decisions quickly, make a decision, then I can take my time and edit the article afterwords...find a source then I can add the content back in at that point? Some insight would be much appreciated, thanks. For example, I guess you know football since you accepted on Gronkowki quickly and already knew he had missed that season. Thanks in advance... dawnleelynn(talk) 20:06, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi - I think I've only ever seen "(under review)" appear once or twice in the list of articles to be reviewed. Personally, I've never used it, although I do think it's a useful feature. For the Gronk article, it didn't show up as "(under review)" when I looked at the list of articles, and when I reviewed the pending edit in question, I knew it was valid, so I accepted it. There may have been a delay from when I opened the article and when I accepted the edit, as I was working on some other stuff at the same time. Anyhow, it may be a case that if a few reviewers start to utilize the Advertise button, it will catch on more. Dmoore5556 (talk) 20:36, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks much for taking the time to respond. It never occurred to me that someone might have the article open awhile and be multi-tasking. I guess if one clicks the advertise button after someone already has the article open, a message does not pop up then. I have to admit I have only seen the advertise light up on the pending changes page once. I looked at that editor's page, and she had just been given the permission recently too. I think the issue happens when someone either doesn't see it, is in a hurry to fix a large backlog, or sees it but doesn't understand it means let them resolve it. The 2 or 3 other editors I messaged on their talk page probably did not respond because they saw it and did not know how to respond...I might not either if it were me. They may have felt I was calling them out, although that isn't what I intended. I'm not going to message anyone else about it. I think it's a good feature when it works correctly. Maybe it should lock the page for 5 minutes, LOL, j/k, that would not work at all. Again, thank much. Happy editing! dawnleelynn(talk) 21:01, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Autopatrolled granted
Hi Dmoore5556, I just wanted to let you know that I have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&page=User%3ADmoore5556 added] the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! ~Swarm~  {talk}  02:55, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Dmoore5556 (talk) 03:02, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

RE 2013 Red Sox
Okay, I assumed reverting it would fix the issue but I guess not. I believe the issue is fixed by removing the duplicate  entries. Noticed this has been an issue going on with other similar articles as well.--Spartacus0898 (talk) 19:34, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Looks like you beat me to the fix, colors looks correct now, per your change at 15:31, 18 March 2019‎. Thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 19:43, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Cathy Inglese
Stephen 03:30, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

The fixed formatting.
Just wanted to say thanks for fixing that formatting thing (TBD) on the 2019 Red Sox page. I had watched the game (and they mentioned on air that Eovaldi won’t start on Wednesday, but I wasn’t sure how to format the TBD so I did || with TBD in slot 2. James-the-Charizard (talk) 05:35, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * You are welcome. Thank you for your edit. Dmoore5556 (talk) 05:41, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Another barnstar!
Thank you! Dmoore5556 (talk) 06:34, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

ITN recognition for October 2019 Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress crash
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 07:14, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Bahamas Bowl
I just saw that I accidentally removed your stats that you added, I’m on a road trip so I’m updating on mobile as best I can, just wanted to let you know. Sorry about that. PCN02WPS ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 22:21, 20 December 2019 (UTC) hi, no problem at all, I pasted it back, thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 22:24, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Updating odds
Hey - just wanted to ask really quickly if, when you're updating bowl game odds, you could update them in the game summary as well as in the infobox? Thanks. PCN02WPS ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 01:38, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there are actually a couple of difference sources for bowl odds.  I've been using VegasInsider for the infobox odds, as that's the historical precedent.  For the game summary line (which looks new this year) I've been using ESPN's summary info, as that's where the win-percentage figure comes from.  ESPN and VegasInsider don't always exactly agree, but I don't think I've noticed them being off by more than a point. Not sure what's best; I'm not really a fan of the line and win-percentage being included in the summary box; the infobox odds seem sufficient to me. Dmoore5556 (talk) 01:49, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I was the one that started putting the line and odds in the game summary (I did it for Arkansas games this year and just left it in when I made the bowl game pages); I'm totally fine with, and after looking at it, would almost rather have, just have the ESPN link in that spot and leave the line in the infobox like you said. Also, there is really no historical precedent for VegasInsider; I just used that for the first few conference championship and bowl games this season but I think using ESPN for the line would be a little easier since there's not seven different sportsbooks' lines used on ESPN's site. I'm down for changing it to that right now, if that sounds good to you. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 02:01, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Sure, sticking with odds in one place (the infobox) and using ESPN as the source seems fine. It's also handy that ESPN keeps the pre-game odds in their summary pages, which are a lot easier to find for completed games than on VegasInsider. I can help updated pages, just let me know how you may want to split up the games (perhaps completed vs. scheduled). Thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 02:18, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I'll do completed if you want to do scheduled. One last question: just to be consistent, do we want to use a ".5" or "½" for odds that are to the half-point? Personally, I'd prefer ".5", but I'm fine with either. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 02:23, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Sounds good, I'll do all the yet-to-be-played games over the next hour or so. Let's use ".5". Dmoore5556 (talk) 02:25, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Awesome! I'll get conference championships and already-played bowl games. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 02:28, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

MLB standings templates
I have started a discussion at to remind everyone of the historical usage of the MLB standings templates. Seeds and clinching information has not in the past been hardcoded within the template; it is only shown in the MLB season article, and so that article uses the "seeds" and "highlight" parameters for the templates. Any feedback you may have for the discussion on the WikiProject Baseball talk page is welcome. isaacl (talk) 06:06, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2019 World Series
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2019 World Series you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 21:01, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2019 World Series
The article 2019 World Series you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:2019 World Series for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 12:01, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2019 World Series
The article 2019 World Series you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2019 World Series for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 14:41, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Cut and paste moves
Please don't move articles by cut and paste as you did at Chip Marshall (baseball). Use the move tab to do this. This preserves attribution which is a requirement of the CC license and the site's terms of use. These are a pain to fix and they get harder the longer they have been left like that. If you have done any more like this, please let me know or mark them with History merge to request an administrator to fix them. SpinningSpark 02:05, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oops, sorry about that; OK, I understand. I've re-applied updates to the Chip Marshall (baseball) article. Thank you for doing the move. Dmoore5556 (talk) 02:14, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

New Orleans Pelicans
Please be sure that you add Category:New Orleans Pelicans (baseball) players for players on the minor league baseball team. Category:New Orleans Pelicans players is for players of the NBA team of that name. Rikster2 (talk) 03:22, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Got it. What player edit did you find that had the wrong one? Thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 03:33, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * George Stumpf, Jim Shilling, Mike Ulincy. I tend to watch the NBA player category because this happens every few months. Rikster2 (talk) 11:15, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

For outstanding contributions to 2020 Boston Red Sox season, The Red Sox Barnstar

 * Thank you, RedSoxFan274 – hoping for a better 2021! Dmoore5556 (talk) 18:45, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Louisville opt-out
Hi there! Just wanted to drop a quick question about what specifically we are considering an opt-out. I'm more than happy to defer to your judgement here, but there is a line in the source I linked for Louisville (just the first one I found on Google) that says "They’re the sixth ACC team to opt out of bowl consideration...," which may have been the line that caused the original user to add them. Would that qualify as enough to denote it as an opt-out, or do we need to have sourcing that specifically says that the team is opting out or removing themselves from consideration? Thanks! PCN02WPS ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 03:10, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, for an opt out I feel it needs to be clear that the team removed themselves from consideration. For Louisville, the news reports (here and others) are saying their AD was told by the ACC that they're not being considered for a bowl; so I don't view that as a decision they made by themselves. I did look at that article that said "sixth ACC team to opt out" (here) and that just looks like bad wording by whomever wrote it. :-) If we end up with a few programs where things are cloudy I'm happy revisit the wording of that section... things should be pretty clear in the next four days or so. Thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 03:37, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , sounds good, just wanted to be extra clear! Thanks again. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 03:40, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , I ended up adjusting the wording, and re-added Louisville. Another editor added SMU, and rather than trying to arbitrate the bounds of "opt out", I felt it would be more constructive for us to list any of the teams that have been removed from bowl consideration. Dmoore5556 (talk) 18:57, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Myrtle Beach Bowl
To answer your question, there are multiple places the information is available. It is listed on the FirstTeam Radio Twitter page. It is listed on College Press Box. Travis Jones and Landry Burdine both mention it on their personal Twitter accounts, and I actually got the information from the President of FirstTeam Radio. It is also mentioned in the 506sports forums, and it is listed on my blog. However none of these sources meet the requirements for notability guidelines on Wiki, and you won't find any source that meets the notability guidelines for it. College Press Box would meet notability requirements, but you need a password to access that information, so the one site that would meet notability requirements isn't available to most people.Bigddan11 (talk) 03:23, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , thanks for responding. I have no notability concern for your source of the information, as long as it's from a reliable source. Based on what you note above, citing the Twitter accounts of the announcers is better that leaving the table without any citation at all, so worth adding in my view. If you could add references in that table to whatever the relevant tweets are, that would be helpful. Thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 03:57, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I have added the FirstTeam Radio Tweet, seeing as they are the company that produced the game. Bigddan11 (talk) 21:59, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , that's great, thanks! Dmoore5556 (talk) 23:27, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

2021 NCAA Division I FBS football season article
Why Did you Delete this and there is No 2021 NCAA Division I FBS football season article yet. 68.102.42.216 (talk) 03:55, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Table "Game results" has the results of each game that has been played. Table "Future games" has the dates and locations of the future games. Moving the game scheduled for January 10, 2022, from "Future games" to "Game results" is WP:TOOSOON. I hope that info helps. Thank you. Dmoore5556 (talk) 04:00, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * And to clarify, I believe you are referring to edits made at College Football Playoff National Championship. Dmoore5556 (talk) 04:02, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

List of Major League Baseball game sevens
Back in October, you moved all the MLB game sevens from the Game seven page to it's own article, initally named List of MLB game sevens. I initially reverted the articles, before ultimately moving the article to it's current title. I've since tried to adopt a more standardized approach (like the NHL and NBA articles you mentioned then) but efforts subsequently stalled.

I've restarted this effort as of today in my sandbox, and I came to tell you that when I'm finished, I'll likely have the current article deleted and replaced with my version (I'm telling you first, as you started the article, but the Baseball WikiProject will be informed later today). –Piranha249 17:09, 16 January 2021 (UTC)


 * , thanks for the note. I took a brief look at your sandbox and the format looks good. When finished, I believe you can just copy the new content into the existing page. If you want some assistance at some point, I'd be happy to help out with References (I prefer to use Retrosheet for box scores). Dmoore5556 (talk) 21:54, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

The Basketball Tournament
Hey DMoore - when you Google The Basketball Tournament, the Wikipedia snapshot shows Jonathan Mugar as the Founder and Nick Elam as the "Creator." This is not accurate. Nick Elam is the creator of the Elam Ending, but not the tournament. Can we fix whatever is causing this to appear? Thanks a bunch! — Preceding unsigned comment added by JBrownTBT1 (talk • contribs) 16:51, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , hi — that information is coming from Google and is not controlled by Wikipedia. If you do the Google search again, there's a "Feedback" button at the bottom-right of the panel. Click that, and it will open up a "Choose what you’re giving feedback on" dialog. You can then select the Nick Elam field and let them know it's incorrect. Dmoore5556 (talk) 20:17, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Minor League Baseball work
Just wanted to drop you a note to thank you for the work in expanding the historical classifications and presenting it in a more chronological manner. To that end, I also was thinking we can integrate the defunct classifications section into the historical narrative and eliminate the choppiness of too many subsections. What do you think? oknazevad (talk) 08:25, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , thanks for the note. Good point, it should be possible to place those defunct classifications into the history, to make things flow better. Feel free to revise, or I can try to get to it later this week. Dmoore5556 (talk) 16:58, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, I was able to update the article today. Dmoore5556 (talk) 21:26, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Looks very good. A barnstar for you!


 * Thanks much, . I may add some manner of classification table, to succinctly show how the hierarchy of Classes has changed over time. Dmoore5556 (talk) 22:30, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I think that might be a good addition. I wouldn't necessarily name all the leagues, as that varied almost yearly, but a short chart with the dates atop each column and what levels existed below it would work. oknazevad (talk) 22:35, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , yes, capturing all the leagues is better suited for stand-alone articles about each Class. I've added a "Classification hierarchy" section to the article with a table to show Class additions and subtractions over the years. Dmoore5556 (talk) 03:38, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Chart looks good, but I think it should be moved under the historical section as a subsection following the others as a summary of the prose material. Also, while Baseball Reference uses "A-" for the Class A Short Season leagues, they're unique in that and the official abbreviation of "A (Short)", which is what the MiLB website uses, is more widely used and more intuitive. I'd almost recommend using "A-Adv" instead of "A+" as well, but that ones more widely used. oknazevad (talk) 04:03, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , good suggestions—I moved the table and revised the abbreviations. Thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 05:20, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Class A-Advanced name
So in looking through the 2021 edition of The Official Professional Baseball Rules Book, one thing struck me majorly. It seems that the official name of the two levels are in fact High-A and Low-A, and that "Class A-Advanced" is no longer a current name. Makes me wonder if we should move the article on the classification, with the lead swapping the order of names, and that we should update the classification history chart to match. oknazevad (talk) 22:35, 6 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi, I agree, they changed the names of both Class A levels. There's no longer a "Classification of Minor Leagues" section (in the 2019 edition, it was Rule 51), so there's not a specific place where they directly state, "here are the levels", the new names just appear in various placed in the document. Rule 27 in the current edition is listed as "Classification of Minor Leagues" in the index, but Rule 27 actually contains just a single sentence about facilities. I bring this up because the document is inconsistent in its usage of "Class High-A" / "Class Low-A" vs. simply "High-A" / "Low-A". I believe the formal names are meant to be "Class High-A" / "Class Low-A" (see for example, document page 100 / PDF page 111). That said, we don't currently use the formal names of Class AAA and Class AA as article names on Wikipedia, we use the common names of Triple-A and Double-A. In any case, I'm supportive of moving the articles, and it sure seems the common names are simply "High-A" and Low-A". Let me know if you feel this is a just-do-it (Class A-Advanced renames to High-A, and Class A (baseball) renames to Low-A) vs. a discussion should be opened. If/when we proceed, it will require an administrator to move, as there are existing redirects "in the way" of a simple rename. Thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 01:32, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm leaning towards changing "Class A-Advanced" to "High-A", but leaving "Class A (baseball)" alone, as there's a lot more history with that name (which, ironically, was once the highest classification and is not the lowest outside the complex leagues), and I'd expect readers to search for it as is. The part of the rules I was looking at when it really jumped out at me, by the way, was in attachment 26 beginning on page 218 listing all of the teams' operating territories. There they plainly use "Triple-A", "Double-A", "High-A", and "Low-A" in those formats. oknazevad (talk) 11:16, 7 May 2021 (UTC) PS, also the MiLB.com website uses those as well. oknazevad (talk) 11:24, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , all good, I see that Class A-Advanced has now been moved to High-A. Certainly agree that Class A has a much longer history; we can revisit that one at some point, as I'd still lean towards making a change there, but it's not urgent. Thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 05:02, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Article move request
Regarding [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Baseball&diff=1021135760&oldid=1021123475 this edit]: I suggest opening the move request on the talk page of the article in question, to help simplify traceability in future, and since it's the usual venue for a move discussion. Thanks for investigating the issue! isaacl (talk) 03:30, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Makes sense, I'll move it there now. Thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 03:31, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Context for Lee Smith FAR
At some point last year, it was generally determined that a good chunk of older FAs didn't meet the current criteria, so the WP:URFA/2020 page was started to perform a sweeps on all FAs with the most recent FAC/FAR being from 2015 or earlier. The idea is to check on meeting the criteria (some older ones were judged against lower criteria at FAC, and other have simply not been properly maintained). If three editors mark on the big table there that the article pretty much meets the current FA criteria, then it gets moved off the main table into a smaller satisfactory table. The hope is that ones that need work get attention and avoid FAR, but a bunch have inactive nominators or are just so far gone that FAR winds up being necessary. It looks like since October 1, 2020 that 93 FAs have been delisted and a further 16 kept at FAR, with a number saved without FAR.

From a quick glance, three of the baseball ones in there are the Lee Smith one at FAR, Dr Pepper Ballpark, which was ruled satisfactory, and Sandy Koufax, which needs a third person to mark it off as satisfactory. Hog Farm Talk 02:57, 3 June 2021 (UTC) , thanks for the context. I can try to cleanup additional issues within the Lee Smith article as time permits. Is there a time limit on these, or might showing some progress stave off a de-listing, or ? Thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 06:06, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
 * There's no real time limit, so long as work is actively occurring. Stuff has run in FAR for months (we've got one each from January and February still open at WP:FAR since progress is occurring).  It'll take quite a bit of work to get the sourcing up to par (I'm afraid the majority of sources will need to be checked, since it's looking like there's a lot of places where the sources don't fully support the text), but it should be doable, and there's no real time limit for FAR if work is continuing. Hog Farm Talk 16:18, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * , thanks very much, that was interesting article to work on. Dmoore5556 (talk) 02:12, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Bobby Rose
This is a polite heads up.

I removed the Further reading section of the Rose article. Why did I do this? The article you linked to is a blogspot blog. Blogspot blogs are not considered a reliable source per WP:RSP. Even its use as just a link is prohibited under section 11 of WP:ELNO which reads- "Blogs, personal web pages and most fansites (negative ones included), except those written by a recognized authority. (This exception for blogs, etc., controlled by recognized authorities is meant to be very limited; as a minimum standard, recognized authorities who are individuals always meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for people.)" Just yesterday I took a link out of Mr. Baseball because it was also to a blog.

You have done great work on the Rose article. Cheers!...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 20:05, 22 June 2021 (UTC)


 * – ok, I understand, thanks for the note giving context. Dmoore5556 (talk) 00:18, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Cheating in baseball
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 1 July 2021 (UTC) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 01:04, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Brentwood, New Hampshire‎
Regarding your edit, if 125 after the renaming is not to be known as Calef Road, then additional edits are warranted. Spike-from-NH (talk) 03:44, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, I wouldn't expect they're mutually exclusive. Official namings to honor an individual can co-exist with common local names. Dmoore5556 (talk) 03:58, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

 * , thanks much for your note, and for the brownie! Hopefully things will go better for the Red Sox through the end of the season than has been the case the past couple of weeks. Thanks for checking in when time permits. Cheers! Dmoore5556 (talk) 00:28, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Image size on Tyler Matzek article
You restored the "image_size = 100px" tag on the Tyler Matzek article. I think it's better without it. With all the vandalism being reverted recently, I hoped to prompt you to review that edit. Thanks. Willondon (talk) 03:57, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, yes, I did. That image has such a severe height-to-width ratio, it doesn't present well. I just tweaked it from 100px to 125px, hopefully a reasonable compromise. Dmoore5556 (talk) 04:07, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

DYK for 2021 Major League Baseball lockout
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

2021 Myrtle Beach Bowl
Hi there - just wanted to drop a quick note about the 2021 Myrtle Beach Bowl article. I have a (admittedly lofty) goal of elevating at least some (but hopefully a majority or all) of the 2021-22 bowl game articles to GA, and as part of that I am using an expanded stats section. I think that using the full names of the teams involved in the team stats table looks better with the expanded tables, so I have changed the table back to reflect that, but I wanted to drop you a note instead of reverting you outright. As always, I'm happy to chat about it if you have a difference of opinion. PCN02WPS ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 08:18, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, not a problem—I appreciate the note and explanation. I hope the article does get GA status. Dmoore5556 (talk) 08:23, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

DYK for 2022 College Football Playoff National Championship
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for help with Frontier League Season and Creating Empire State Greys
Hey Dmoore5556,

I wanted to tell you to thank you for helping me out with the 2022 Frontier League season page and creating the Empire State Greys page! It has been tough being the only one editing the page for so long, and with your background, it is good to know that if I do end up making a mistake then you can help me. Looking forward to the season, I will be editing it after every game with stats, and records. Again thanks man!
 * , you are welcome. Thank you for contributing to baseball articles on Wikipedia. Dmoore5556 (talk) 06:16, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Name dropped at WP:ANEW
Hi, just so you know I mentioned you in a report I filed at the edit warring noticeboard. It's not about you, but user:JP7i1-u who keeps reflexively reverting the WPA World Eight-ball Championship article removing the infobox you added in the process. Just dropping you the line because you're required to be notified if you're mentioned at an admin noticeboard. oknazevad (talk) 09:49, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Crypto crash
Hey, I'm new here and was just curious why my update about FTX sponsoring the MLB was removed. Did it break any rules? thanks! Jamisonsupame (talk) 20:48, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi I removed it because it's not directly relevant to the topic of that article. Various of the crypto companies have done sponsorship deals; unless such a deal is particularly notable (such as multiple of the companies buying expensive Super Bowl ads) it doesn't really add to the article and a reader's understanding of the crypto crash. Focus and weight considerations are useful guidelines for article content. Dmoore5556 (talk) 21:04, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Alright, that's fair. thanks for the response. Jamisonsupame (talk) 23:13, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Here’s a Wild Maine Blueberry pie for drowning your sorrows in.

 * Thanks very much! That game was certainly... historic. Hopefully there are better days ahead! Dmoore5556 (talk) 18:48, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Incorrect information on Ryan Taylor page
The Ryan Taylor page is combining information on two different players named Ryan Taylor.

Ryan Taylor born February 1,1995 attended Ohio, Evansville and Northwestern. He played for Ohio 1804 in the TBT tournament and won the 33 pt contest.

The page on Wikipedia has pictures of both players named Ryan Taylor and information related to both players on the same page.

Is it possible to correct this information and created two separate Wikipedia pages for the individual players with the correct information and pictures attached ? 2600:1700:FE20:D290:A851:59AB:E7CC:C4DD (talk) 13:13, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Ryan Taylor TBT information
This page is combining information on two different basketball players names Ryan Taylor. There is a Ryan Taylor that attended Marshall and also a Ryan Taylor that attended Evansville.

This profile has pictures of both players.

The Ryan Taylor that attended Ohio and Evansville won the TBT 33 pt contest. Not the Ryan Taylor that attended Marshall.

Is it possible to create two separate pages for these players with the correct information and pictures attached ? 2600:1700:FE20:D290:A851:59AB:E7CC:C4DD (talk) 13:20, 31 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks much for that info. I've updated the article about Ryan Taylor (basketball) (the forward for Marshall / Herd That) to remove the erroneous 33-Point Contest info. I also updated the The Basketball Tournament 2022 section to remove the incorrect link to the wrong player. In both articles, I added an explanatory footnote explaining that there are two TBT players named "Ryan Taylor".


 * I only see a single photo on the Ryan Taylor (basketball) page, which looks to be of the correct player.


 * All that said, it's certainly possible to create a new article about guard Ryan Taylor who attended Ohio, Evansville, and Northwestern. The question is whether he meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines, which for basketball players can be found at WP:NHOOPS. I'm not familiar with either Ryan Taylor, so I'm not sure. Dmoore5556 (talk) 17:38, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Zack Kelly
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
, thanks! Dmoore5556 (talk) 01:02, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Dmoore5556!


Happy New Year! Dmoore5556, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

— Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 16:58, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 16:58, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

DYK for 2022 Camellia Bowl
-- RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Floterial district
I've undone an edit you made in 2020, and removed the entire External links section. Your map of NH representative districts is no longer at that address, I can't find it at the State Office of Planning, and in any case it would not have reflected the 2022 redistricting. If you can find a map of the new districts, feel free to re-add this section. Spike-from-NH (talk) 01:23, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
 * , thanks for letting me know. I was able to locate an updated (2022) list of districts, which I've added to the article. Dmoore5556 (talk) 02:51, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Invitation
Hello ! Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!
 * The New Pages Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help.
 * We think that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting.
 * Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines.
 * Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions.
 * If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here.

Sent by using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 10:30, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Re: Newington
I did it in good faith reverting, though I disagree given even closed stations have fallen under that naming convention and we are trying to mostly make it universal. Mitch 32 (won't you be my neighbor?) 18:20, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Why
Do you believe it is imperative that in a range of dates, as in 2000-the next year, that four digit dates must be used in the final year -- so much that you revert change 2000-01? 2603:7000:2101:AA00:ACC5:90EF:2806:5A6A (talk) 21:28, 27 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Yes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers#Ranges Dmoore5556 (talk) 22:08, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Montgomery Bowl for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Montgomery Bowl is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Montgomery Bowl until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Esolo5002 (talk) 23:12, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

TMNT Historical Marker
Thank you for editing the NH marker number for the TMNT marker. I apologize for being wrongly informed it was #290. Thanks! BakedintheHole (talk) 00:20, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * All good, it was an easy fix. Thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 00:21, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Famous Toastery Bowl
Thank You for the support.. Roberto221 (talk) 01:44, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

BBC Basic
Thank you for your editing. I have already suggested on the Talk that a major rewrite would be useful. Do you have any particular interest in the BBC Microcomputer / BBC Basic. If so we could compare ideas. I Think that identifying the version needs little more than a passing mention. BlueWren0123 (talk) 09:41, 29 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks for reaching out. I don't have technical insight or particular interest in those items, I just happened to be reading the BBC Basic article and wanted to flag some items that caught my eye. Hopefully there are some good sources about the topic that could be incorporated. Dmoore5556 (talk) 16:06, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes there are good sources, however...
 * The company, in addition to producing mostly quality hardware and software, produced documentation to a high standard, both in information content and in presentation, that few others even attempted to reach.
 * Many of the secondary sources were written by inexperienced users (often at school being taught by inexperienced teachers). They frequently 'discovered' something that had already been comprehensively documented by the company and then described their simplistic method of discovery.
 * This is a situation where mostly the reliable source is that produced by the company and the inadequate version is that produced by secondary sources.
 * There is a saying in the computer world: "When all else fails, read the manual".
 * wikipedia does not cope well with this truth. BlueWren0123 (talk) 05:35, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

College Football Playoff standalone article
Hi friend! If you have some time in the near future I would really appreciate if you'd be willing to take another look at 2023–24 College Football Playoff with respect to the merge discussion. I have done a complete rewrite of the article within the past week or so and expanded its scope beyond just the games played; in short, I think there's a much better argument to be made for the article being kept now that it is in better shape, and I plan on (slowly but surely) getting the rest of the CFP articles to that standard as well. Even if your !vote is unchanged, your opinion on the rewritten article would be much appreciated. Thank you! PCN02WPS ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 13:47, 19 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Hello PCN02WPS, I took another look at the article and added comment to the discussion. Dmoore5556 (talk) 04:18, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

2024 KBO League season
Hi Dmoore, I was wondering if you could help me improve my article on the 2024 KBO League season. Smartypants327 (talk) 02:43, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Go Red Sox
Hey Dmoore, I thought now was as good a time as any to let you know that I’m going to make a concerted effort this season to contribute on the Red Sox season page more. On my early days in Wikipedia editing sports pages and game logs was pretty much all I did (I worked on the season pages on an almost daily basis from c. 2011–2015, and especially in 2012, ‘13, and ‘14.

I’ve become much more of a general gnome and copy editor since then, but a few months ago I started putting some of my focus back to sports and specifically season pages and game logs. Obviously you will still be the undisputed top contributor, I'm not coming to take that title away from you, but I want to pitch in more when and where I can. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I respect highly what you have done for the season pages in the intervening years and if I do anything incorrectly or step on any toes in any way please do not hesitate to let me know. Chronicling a 162-game season is a considerable commitment and if I'm able to take some of the pressure off now and then I am more than happy to do that, but the last thing I want to do is to make more work for you and the other editors of the page than I'm saving.

So don’t be surprised if I pop in more often this year. I was not aware that Evo's CGSO from October 2022 was only five innings. Makes me wonder when the last 9-inning Red Sox CGSO was.

Anyway, I’ll quit rambling now. Hope the weather is treating you well (or as well as it can) up there in NH. I’m still in Los Angeles but will be in New England from June through October. I haven't been to Fenway in person since 2017 because reasons (and COVID), but I hope to remedy that and get out to a game this summer!

Thanks again for all you do, – Red Sox Fan274 (talk ~contribs) 05:36, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

P.S. I should’ve attached this to my original message but I'm going to go look for some WikiLove to give you. You deserve it!  Red Sox Fan274 (talk ~contribs) 05:36, 18 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi User:RedSoxFan274, thanks much for your note. By all means please be an active part of the 2024 season page; it's a long season and there's plenty of ground to be covered. I didn't recall Eovaldi's outing was rain-shortened until I looked at the box score. I believe the most recent nine-inning complete-game shutout for the Red Sox was on June 5, 2019, by Chris Sale (box score). I do hope you are able to visit Fenway later in the season! Thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 02:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

 * Thanks very much! Dmoore5556 (talk) 02:30, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Spring Training Log
First off, I appreciate all the work you do updating 2024 Boston Red Sox season after every game; I know many people read them and recognize all the hard work.

I'm inexperienced at editing Wikipedia so I thought I'd ask you. I noticed the Spring Training Log template uses long "em dashes" between the score, record and in cells with no data, whereas the regular season Game Logs always use short, "en dashes."

I noticed this inconsistency so I thought I would ask if this is easily fixed; I know editing templates can be finicky so I've been hesitant to try myself. Thanks! MattFry7 (talk) 16:49, 24 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks for the note. Yes, the Spring Training Log seems to have been filled out using emdashes (—) rather than endashes (–). I just did a mass search and replace on them, so the table should now be consistent with the regular season log. The search and replace function in the editing box is the best way to do stuff like that; it would take an inordinate amount of time to change them individually. Just need to be careful when using search and replace not to change unintended content, especially URLs in citations. Best to do a "show changes" before finalizing the edit, so you can take a look at what actually got changed, and make any adjustments that may be needed. Dmoore5556 (talk)