User talk:Jackal4

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --M e rovingian (T, C, @) 16:34, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Rafael Batista
Helllo. You can check at. Cheers MusiCitizen (talk) 16:51, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Links
Look, I am not going to revert you again, but why do you remove the links, yes I know that it says not to at Wikipedia:Manual of Style, but you remove every single one on the article until there is only one. No, I do not follow your edits I have over 1,000 baseball articles on my watchlist and check it every day, I hardly ever revert your edits anyway so I dont know why you assume I do follow you. I know you follow mine because you make an edit to an article that I edited right after I do, and it gets annoying, so please stop.--Yankees10 02:17, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

How does it annoy you? People are constantly editing articles after you. How do you know we don't have some of the same articles on each of our watchlists? Jackal4 (talk) 03:08, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah we could, but I still believe that you follow my edits, because it happens all the time--Yankees10 05:37, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Roger Clemens
A friendly warning: you are coming precariously close to a violation of WP:3RR over at the Clemens page, and possibly others in which you're involved in disputes with that IceFrappe fellow. You might want to ease up before it turns into a full-blown edit war. -Dewelar (talk) 17:10, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I figured I was close. I'm not reverting him anymore, just going to try to get an admin to do something about it. Jackal4 (talk) 17:17, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * That's probably a good idea. He doesn't seem to be doing anything constructive at this point. -Dewelar (talk) 17:25, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

infobox situation
Can you give your input about the retired infobox troubles here:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball--Yankees10 04:57, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


 * It would be appreciated if you at least responded and tried to help the situation--Yankees10 17:06, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


 * What do you want me to say? That I support you and think these players' infoboxes should be retired. Jackal4 (talk) 21:51, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


 * You can say whatever you want, it just would be nice for you to say what you think considering you were one of the ones involved in the dispute from the beginning. What I meant by you responding is if you could have left a message saying you do or dont want to and not just ignoring it just because I left the message--Yankees10 00:45, 17 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I didn't ignore the discussion because you left the message, I ignored the discussion because I didn't think I could add anything to it. Half of the discussion there now was already there the first time I saw it and you've already argued my point. All I would do is bring the number of users who think the infoboxes should be retired to two. Jackal4 (talk) 14:05, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I didnt mean responding to the discussion I meant responding to my post, I thought you didnt respond because of the problems we had, but it doesnt really matter anyway, this issue is most likely going to die anyway and I am going to change the infoboxes back after a few months considering some of the guys would be out of baseball for nearly two years, and to say they are going to get signed and are not retired is ridiculous, by the way I support you with the Ryan Braun issue I dont know what the user is doing--Yankees10 23:50, 17 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh my bad. I just left him a message on his talk page. I don't know how he can argue that birthplace shouldn't be in Braun's infobox. Jackal4 (talk) 23:58, 17 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Did you also notice that he unnecessarily removed the link to Ryan Braun (pitcher) at the top, I wonder what his explanation for that is--Yankees10 00:05, 18 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh, I didn't even notice it was missing. Jackal4 (talk) 00:06, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Infoboxes
I didnt know there was a discussion about it, I just removed it because I have seen edits of them being removed. Personally I think they should be there. By the way they are thinking about merging the active and retired infobox. I personally HATE this idea, what do you think?--Yankees10 23:46, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Im thinking about starting a vote on what we should do that goes along with the discussion, would you vote?--Yankees10 23:56, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Alright thanks, I'll tell you when I open it, It will probably be on saturday.--Yankees10 00:09, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Im not going to open the vote because people are saying Support or Against, can you say you are against it or not at the discussion.--Yankees10 23:42, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Placement of the Lifetime template
The reason I've been moving this template to the bottom of articles is this line from the documentation:

'' Since Categories are preferred to be listed in most-common order, the Lifetime template should generally be placed after the last Category tag ''

-Dewelar (talk) 21:52, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

MLB retired
Please stop using the MLB retired infobox when creating new player pages. The template has been deleted and the page just redirects to the MLB player infobox now. Thanks! -Dewelar (talk) 11:02, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Brian Esposito
Do you have a source on his status? The minor league roster page (which may be out of date, for all I know) still lists him with the Drillers. Mackensen (talk) 23:03, 13 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Jackal4 (talk) 05:42, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Cool, thanks. Mackensen (talk) 14:58, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Esix Snead
--Dravecky (talk) 09:32, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Tim Redding
Hey Jackal, thanks for the help at the article. I noticed this little change you made in the lede. Let me explain why I think the previous version was better. Most people reading the article know that he's a baseball player and know what Major League Baseball is. However, when creating an article we must have in mind the person who knows nothing about baseball or the Major League's. So I feel it's important that the lede not open up with "Major League Baseball" player but the more simplified "baseball player". Do you agree? -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 18:50, 10 January 2009 (UTC)


 * No, I don't. If he was just a professional baseball player he wouldn't be notable enough to have an article. He has an article because he plays Major League Baseball, a major league. Jackal4 (talk) 22:43, 10 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Hey Jackal, thanks for responding. What you're saying regarding his notability is 100% true. However, there's no reason to have the claim to notability thrown at the reader in the first sentence of the article. It's more important that the information be given to the reader in a more lucid and simplified manner. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 22:48, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Jimmy Scott interview
I am a new Wikipedia editor trying to link some baseball player articles to their interviews on another web site. I was wondering why you deleted the references/links?Brfallon (talk) 01:21, 13 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Baseball players give countless numbers of interviews during their lives. One interview isn't notable enough to be included in articles. Jackal4 (talk) 01:27, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Freddy Garcia
Hey Jackal, I know you're having problems with User:Eugene Krabs, but you can't just revert every edit he makes, especially if his edits improve the article. Your version that you keep on reverting has a malfunctioned infobox. Thanks, -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 17:45, 25 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm reverting everything he vandalizes. What is wrong with the infobox? It looks fine. Jackal4 (talk) 17:47, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's a great idea, but he's not vandalizing the Freddy Garcia article. Look closely at your infobox and his infobox. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 17:57, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * That's better. I really don't care either way, but his version is as acceptable as yours. In any case, his version is for sure not vandalism. If he reverts you would have to leave it alone (for a while anyway) because your next revert will put you over 3rr. Best, -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 18:04, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm just making them all consistent.Jackal4 (talk) 18:06, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Rob and Robert Ellis
Heh...Rob Ellis (outfielder) was one of the very first pages I created, before I even knew there was such a thing as WikiProject Baseball, much less naming conventions for it. At the time, my first instinct was to do what you suggested, but given what I've seen, I think it might be more appropriate to move that page to Rob Ellis (baseball) and leave Robert Ellis (baseball) where it is. Feel free to bring it up over at the project talk page, though. -Dewelar (talk) 21:01, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Bobby Abreu
Please explain to me why you reverted the edit. The source I cited from MLB.com clearly states, "The Angels and free agent outfielder Bobby Abreu have struck a one-year agreement, according to a report by SI.com." I don't understand where there is any room for doubt or confusion here. MrShamrock (talk) 02:22, 12 February 2009 (UTC)


 * For the same reason JSRG32 did. If the deal is still pending a physical, then there is no way the signing is official. Jackal4 (talk) 02:24, 12 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Please show me where in that article it says anything about pending a physical. MrShamrock (talk) 02:33, 12 February 2009 (UTC)


 * It doesn't, but this does. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3899641 Jackal4 (talk) 02:39, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Korean baseball players
Re your message: According to the Naming conventions (Korean): Unless the subject is known to prefer otherwise, family name should be written first. So Bong Jung-Keun and Koo Dae-Sung is the correct names for the articles. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:41, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

March 2009
You have been blocked from editing for in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below.

WP:ANI
I've reported your behavior there, and suggested they come here to see what you have to say for yourself, if you care to comment. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 13:52, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I want epeefleche to stop posting on my talk page. Also, it's not about the comma, it's about consistency. I would rather all the baseball player articles be consistent with some minor MoS violation (like the comma or for that matter the birthplace in parenthesis after the birthdate) than some of the articles be correct according to wikipedia's MoS and others being nothing like other player articles. Jackal4 (talk) 16:09, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Changing them just to be changing them is a waste of everyone's time. Once your block is over, feel free to comment on the WP:BASEBALL talk page. Assuming anyone there cares enough to follow up. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 16:28, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * It is not a waste of time if you want them to be consistent and if it is a waste of time, then why do you keep changing them? Jackal4 (talk) 17:25, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Because, to be blunt, you're doing it the wrong way. Commas go after years. You want consistency? Change all of them to be correct. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 17:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Then why don't we remove the birthplaces like WP:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) says and that solves the comma issue. Jackal4 (talk) 21:32, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Go ahead. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 22:00, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I would, but that creates another problem. It wouldn't be a problem for big articles like Pujols or A-Rod, but for stubs and the like there would either be a short sentence at the beginning of every article stating "He was born in...", which I don't believe looks nice, or the article would not mention his birthplace and it would only be in the infobox. I would like to keep the birthplace somewhere in the text without the short sentence and putting it after the birthdate solved that problem. Jackal4 (talk) 23:04, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I understand the problem with a "stub", but that's just one of many problems with stubs, i.e. that they are basically "placeholders" until someone can flesh out the articles about all those cup-of-coffee, Moonlight Graham types. Those, you could just leave them alone for now, and focus on the players that have something resembling an actual article. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 05:37, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Tommy Watkins
I think that it is beyond dispute that Tommy Watkins is not a Major League Baseball player, and never has been, despite the fact that he is a part of the Minnesota Twins minor league organization.--Epeefleche (talk) 08:38, 13 March 2009 (UTC) Uhh...excuse me personal opinions don't help the encyclopedia. Tommy Watkins is NOT a Major League Baseball player yet, despite the fact that he is apart of the Minnesota Twins because he plays for AA. First there is A, AA, AAA, then Major Leagues. Please stop your disruptive editing.(Planecrash111 (talk) 05:08, 12 March 2009 (UTC))

Jackal4's continued disruptive editing; this time -- use of quotation marks
Jackal4 -- I must protest your continuing to make disruptive edits. It is especially galling when you do so after I have indicated to you that your edits are incorrect, as I have with your use of quotation marks. You are here, again, simply wrong. Please desist in your continued un-doing of the proper use of quotation marks, as in, where you undid my proper use of quotations ... to, as you have in the past, misuse them.

This is yet another of a long list of disruptive edits that you insist on making. It is a disservice to Wikipedia.--Epeefleche (talk) 08:44, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

March 2009
Please do not make personal attacks. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images, especially those in violation of our Biographies of living persons policy, will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.(Planecrash111 (talk) 14:20, 13 March 2009 (UTC)). Using the F word in the edit summary as you did to Tommy Watkins doesn't earn you any respect around here Jackal4.(Planecrash111 (talk) 14:20, 13 March 2009 (UTC))
 * WP:NOTCENSORED. — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  05:50, 14 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Jackal4's use of profanity here is not at all new. For example, see my request that he cease using profanity, which he deleted at .--Epeefleche (talk) 07:40, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

The Tommy Watkins Edit War
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. (Planecrash111 (talk) 14:23, 13 March 2009 (UTC))

You have been blocked from editing for in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for engaging in an  edit war. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below.


 * I've got to disagree with this block; it seems punitive. His last revert on that page was at 21:56 on 12 March 2009, his last edit on 22:45 on 12 March, and he was blocked at 15:32 on 13 March&mdash;more than 17 hours after the last revert. — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  16:02, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I somewhat agree (with you, not the block), though Jackal's pledge to continue the edit war ("I'm willing to fight over it") even in face of a consensus didn't help his case. In that light I would say it is preventative, but if he said he accept the consensus I would expect him to be unblocked. -- aktsu (t / c) 20:11, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't matter. He stil violated the three revert rule after several warnings from me, which he removed frim his page to remove evidence. He really deserves an indefinite block.(Planecrash111 (talk) 20:02, 13 March 2009 (UTC))
 * (@ 3RR) - in the heat of the moment, when they are extremely frustrated or feel cornered, people can make mistakes that they regret later.
 * (@ removing) - removing warnings is an acknowledgment that the person has read the warning. See also: WP:DTTR. — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  05:50, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Jackal4 has such a long history of disruptive edits (see my comments on his home page, which he deleted, for a smattering of examples), and has shown such little interest in complying with Wiki guidelines and rules, that I think one month is appropriate. I also note that he was blocked recently for a short period of time, and this didn't seem to improve his most recent behavior.--Epeefleche (talk) 07:31, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

In addition to my comments on his talk page detailing his disruptive editing, other examples (including his prior use of the word f*ck ... despite my request that he desist), at. I note that when I raised his used of profanity, aktsu speaking in support of Jackal4 expressed the view that he did not think it was such a big deal, but I differ and think that it is a clear (and here, continued) violation of a clear wiki guideline.--Epeefleche (talk) 07:51, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry Case
You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Suspected sock puppets/JustSomeRandomGuy32 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page.(Planecrash111 (talk) 20:44, 13 March 2009 (UTC))


 * I would like to add that I think that you have created a sockpuppet in Racingstipes, as discussed at --Epeefleche (talk) 09:55, 14 March 2009 (UTC)]--Epeefleche (talk) 10:17, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Closed as unrelated. -- aktsu (t / c) 11:52, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Lou Palmisano
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Lou Palmisano. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Lou Palmisano. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:10, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Jackal4! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 04:26, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Luis Saturria -

Nomination of Jeremy Griffiths for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jeremy Griffiths 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/Jeremy Griffiths until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. John from Idegon (talk) 00:41, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:05, 23 November 2015 (UTC)